Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An analysis of North American green building strategies : factors that contribute to ecological comprehensiveness… Woolliams, Jessica 2001

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2001-0296.pdf [ 10.21MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0089944.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0089944-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0089944-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0089944-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0089944-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0089944-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0089944-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0089944-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0089944.ris

Full Text

AN ANALYSIS OF NORTH AMERICAN G R E E N BUILDING STRATEGIES : F A C T O R S THAT CONTRIBUTE TO E C O L O G I C A L C O M P R E H E N S I V E N E S S AND MAINSTREAMABILITY by Jessica Woolliams B.A., The University of British Columbia, 1998 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE R E Q U I R E M E N T S FOR THE D E G R E E OF M A S T E R OF A R T S (Planning) in THE FACULTY OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES School of Community and Regional Planning We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THff"JfdlVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 2001 © Jessica Woolliams U B C S p e c i a l C o l l e c t i o n s - T h e s i s A u t h o r i s a t i o n F o r m P a g e 1 o f 1 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agree t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by t h e head o f my department o r by h i s o r her r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n ot be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver, Canada Department h t t p : / / w w w . l i b r a r y . u b c . c a / s p c o l l / t h e s a u t h . h t m l 2 0 0 1 / 0 4 / 1 8 Abstract This thesis explores two questions. First, it asks which green building strategies are both ecologically comprehensive and have the ability to mainstream green building practices. Secondly, it seeks to understand the factors that contribute to this success. These are important questions because every year the construction, renovation and operation of buildings worldwide devours more of the planet's resources than any other economic sector. At a time when many of the world's most respected scientists are claiming that there is an environmental crisis at hand, there is an urgent need to build buildings in a more ecologically responsible way. No other sector of the world economy has the potential to make such a large reduction in its impact on the environment. The thesis questions are addressed through the exploration of a variety of largely North American green building strategies case studies, including: ° Guidelines, certification systems and rating systems (from Austin; Colorado; Santa Monica; the US Green Building Council; Pennsylvania; and New York City) ° Government building pilot projects and policies (from the US Navy; Seattle; Minnesota; USHUD; the APA; Hannover; German, Germany; and Sydney, Australia) ° Economic incentives (from FCM; Toronto; Texas; USDOE; NRCan; Fannie Mae and New York State). Two tiers of criteria were developed to explore these case studies. The primary criteria address the first half of the thesis question; the secondary criteria address the second half. There are three major findings from this thesis. The first major finding is that it is possible to create green building strategies that are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable: this is seen in many of the green building strategies that were examined. This finding suggests that there should be greater use of green building strategies in British Columbia as solutions to many ecological problems. It also points to the need for greater research and development in the area of environmental building strategies, practices and technologies. The second major finding is that in many of the case studies examined, the principle barrier to the implementation of an ecologically comprehensive green building strategy that is truly mainstreamable is clearly the exclusion of ecological factors in the mandate of building codes. Complete market transformation is only achieved in those case studies in which green building standards are mandated. This points to the need for changes to the mandate of Canadian and British Columbian building codes to allow them to regulate the environmental damage done by buildings. The third and final major finding is that non-governmental organizations can bring much needed leadership, knowledge and skills to the task of creating mainstreamable and ecologically comprehensive green building strategies. This finding suggests that these groups should be included to a greater degree in the development of green building strategies in British Columbia and Canada. Table of Contents A B S T R A C T ii T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S M T A B L E O F T A B L E S VII A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S Vl'\\ L I S T O F A C R O N Y M S »* C H A P T E R 1 — I N T R O D U C T I O N 1 1.1. W H Y IS THIS IMPORTANT AND WHAT Is A GREEN BUILDING STRATEGY? 2 1.2. PURPOSE OF THE THESIS AND DEFINITION OF K E Y TERMS 2 1.3. OTHER STUDIES OF THIS KIND 4 1.4. THESIS SCOPE 5 1.5. THESIS OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS 8 1.6. THESIS METHODS 10 1.7. THESIS ORGANIZATION 14 C H A P T E R 2 — P R O B L E M S , A N D C R I T E R I A T O A S S E S S S O L U T I O N S 15 2.1. CHAPTER STRUCTURE 16 2.2. T H E WORLD ACCORDING TO THE WORRIED: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS 16 2.2.1. The Scientific Community Speaks Up 17 2.2.1.1. World Scientists'Warning to Humanity 17 2.2.1.2. World Scientists'Call for Action at the Kyoto Climate Summit 17 2.2.1.3. Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE) 19 2.2.1.4. Summary: Major Issues of the Ecological Crisis 19 2.2.2. How Buildings Contribute to the Problem and Solution 20 2.3. CRITERIA 21 2.3.1. Principles to Guide the Development of Criteria 21 2.3.2. How the Criteria Are Organized. 21 2.3.3. Criteria to Assess Ecological Comprehensiveness 22 2.3.3.1. Primary Criteria: Which Strategies are Ecologically Comprehensive 22 2.3.4. Criteria to Assess Mainstreamability. 25 2.3.4.1. Primary Criteria: Which Strategies are Mainstreamable 25 2.3.5. Criteria to Assess Factors That Contribute To Ecological Comprehensiveness and Mainstreamability 27 2.3.5.1. Secondary Criteria: Which Factors Contribute To This Success 27 2.3.5. Combined Criteria List 29 2.4. T H E CASE STUDIES 31 2.4.1. The Literature Reviewed for the Case Studies 31 2.4.2. Organization of the Green Building Strategy Case Studies 31 2.4.3. How the Organization of the Case Studies Helps Frame the Thesis Question 33 2.4.3.1. Guidelines, Certification Systems and Rating Systems 36 2.4.3.2. Pilot Projects and Regulations 37 2.4.3.3. Economic Incentives 39 2.4.4. Summary of the Case Studies 40 C H A P T E R 3 — A N A L Y S I S O F S T R A T E G I E S B Y P R I M A R Y C R I T E R I A 42 3.1. CHAPTER STRUCTURE 43 3.2. CRITERIA TO ASSESS ECOLOGICAL COMPREHENSIVENESS >.. 43 3.2.1. Primary Criteria: Strategies Which are Ecologically Comprehensive 43 3.2.1.1. L E E D ' 43 iii 3.2.1.2. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy and City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy 47 3.2.1.3. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines 47 3.2.1.4. The Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide ; 48 3.2.2. Strategies Which Partially Meet the Criteria 49 3.2.2.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program 49 3.2.2.2. Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program 50 3.2.2.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines 51 3.2.2.4. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Performance Buildings 52 3.2.2.5. Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District 53 3.2.2.6. Sydney Olympic Village 54 3.2.3. Strategies Which Are Less Than Comprehensive 57 3.2.3.1. PATH—Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing 57 3.2.3.2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado 57 3.2.3.3. A P A , AIA, and AIBC Policy Guides on Sustainability 59 3.2.3.4. The Energy-Based Economic Incentives 60 3.3. CRITERIA T O A S S E S S M A I N S T R E A M A B I L I T Y 60 3.3.1. Primary Criteria: Strategies Which are Mainstreamable 61 3.3.1.1. Austin's Residential Green Building 61 3.3.1.2. Green Builder Program of Colorado 62 3.3.1.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines 62 3.3.1.4. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 62 3.3.1.5. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy 63 3.3.1.6. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 63 3.3.1.7. PATH—Partnership for-Advancing Technology in Housing .' 64 3.3.1.8. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy 66 3.3.1.9. Hannover Ecological District and Sydney Olympic Village 66 3.3.1.10. Texas Veterans Land Board Green Building Guidelines 66 3.3.2. Strategies Which Partially Meet the Criteria 67 3.3.2.1. Pennsylvania and New York's High Performance Guidelines " 67 3.3.3. Strategies Which Failed to Meet the Criteria 69 3.3.3.1. A P A , AIA, AIBC Sustainability Policies 69 3.4. S T R A T E G I E S W H I C H A R E E C O L O G I C A L L Y C O M P R E H E N S I V E A N D M A I N S T R E A M A B L E 69 CHAPTER 4—ANALYSIS OF STRATEGIES BY SECONDARY CRITERIA 72 4.1. C H A P T E R S T R U C T U R E 73 4.2. CRITERIA T O A S S E S S PARTICIPATION: M E A N I N G F U L PARTICIPATION A N D S T A K E H O L D E R DIVERSITY 73 4.2.1. The Arguments for Public Participation 75 4.2.1.1. Changing Buildings Will Require Changing Perceptions 74 4.2.1.2. Harness the Power of the Market 75 4.2.1.3. Democracy, Human Rights, and The Public's Right to Know 75 4.2.2. Overview of the Strategies 76 4.2.3. Strategies Which Meet the Criteria 76 4.2.3.1. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines 76 4.2.3.2. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 77 4.2.3.3. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines 78 4.2.4. Strategies Which Partially Meet the Criteria 79 4.2.4.1. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 79 4.2.4.2. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy 80 4.2.4.3. P A T H ; '. : 81 4.2.5. Strategies Which Failed to Meet the Criteria 81 4.2.5.1. Green Builder Program of Colorado 81 4.2.5.2. The Professional Policies and Guides 81 4.2.6. Difficult Strategies to Categorize: The Role of Non-Profit 82 4.2.6.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program 82 4.2.6.2. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy 83 4.2.6.3. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High Performance Buildings 84 4.2.6.4. Sydney Olympic Village 84 4.3. C O M M U N I C A T I O N A N D ACCESSIBILITY CRITERIA: U N D E R S T A N D A B L E A N D A C C E S S I B L E 85 4.3.1. Strategies Which Meet the Criteria 85 4.3.1.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program 85 4.3.1.2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado 86 4.3.1.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines 87 4.3.1.4. L E E D (and the Seattle and Naval Policies) : .' 87 4.3.1.5. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines 87 4.3.1.6. Sydney Olympic Village 88 4.3.1.7. Texas Veterans Land Board Green Building Mortgage 89 4.3.2. Strategies Which Fail to Meet the Criteria 89 4.3.2.1. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High Performance Buildings 89 4.3.2.2. The Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 89 4.3.2.3. The A P A , AIA, AIBC Policies and Guidelines 90 4.3.3. Noteworthy Strategies Not Included In the Case Studies 90 4.4. E C O N O M I C E Q U I T Y CRITERIA: E Q U I T A B L E A C C E S S 93 4.5. P O L I T I C A L SUPPORT THESIS CRITERION: SUPPORT A C R O S S POLITICAL L I N E S A N D A M O N G D I V E R S E G R O U P S 96 4.5.1. Those Strategies That Met The Thesis Criterion 96 4.5.1.1. Austin Green Building Program 96 4.5.1.2. Santa Monica 97 4.5.1.3. L E E D 97 4.5.1.4. New York Guidelines 97 4.5.1.5. The US Naval Sustainable Building Policy 97 4.5.1.6. Seattle Sustainable Building Policy 98 4.5.1.7. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 98 4.5.1.8. PATH—Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing 98 4.5.1.9. A P A / AIA / AIBC Policies and Guidelines 98 4.5.2. Those Strategies That Did Not Meet the Thesis Criterion 98 4.5.2.1. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High Performance Buildings 99 4.6. CRITERIA T O A S S E S S P R A C T I C A L I T Y : A F F O R D A B L E A N D E A S Y TO I M P L E M E N T 99 4.6.1. Affordable Because They Paid For Themselves 100 4.6.1.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program 100 4.6.2. Practical Because They Had To Build Buildings Anyway: Adopt-A-Standard. 101 4.6.2.1. Seattle Sustainable Building Policy 101 4.6.3. Practical Because They Had To Build Buildings Anyway: Develop Your Own 702 4.6.3.1. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 103 4.6.4. Difficult and Costly to Develop and Implement But Worth It 103 4.6.4.1. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design '. 104 4.7. S U M M A R Y : S E C O N D A R Y CRITERIA S E E M E D T O SUPPORT P R I M A R Y CRITERIA 105 C H A P T E R 5 — T H E F I N D I N G S A N D T H E I R I M P L I C A T I O N S F O R P O L I C Y . 107 5.1. C H A P T E R S T R U C T U R E 108 5.2. L E A R N I N G F R O M T H E C A S E STUDIES: T R A N S F E R A B L E S U C C E S S E S 108 5.3. M A J O R FINDINGS A N D T H E I R P O L I C Y IMPLICATIONS 110 5.3.1. Findings From Ecological Criteria Ill 5.3.1.1. Major Ecological Comprehensiveness Finding: Ecological Comprehensiveness Not Opposed to Mainstreamability 111 5.3.1.2. ' Policy Implications: Ecological Comprehensiveness Not Opposed to Mainstreamability 112 5.3.1.3. Other Findings: Some Ecological Issues Often Ignored 113 5.3.1.4. Policy Implication: Green Building Research and Curriculum 114 5.3.1.5. Other Findings: Few Strategies Were Truly Ecologically Comprehensive 115 5.3.1.6. Policy Implication: British Columbia Should Contribute To Green Building Research and Development 1 16 5.3.2. Findings From Mainstreaming Criteria 77(5 5.3.2.1. Major Mainstreamability Finding: Codes As Major Barrier to Mainstreamability 116 5.3.2.2. Policy Implication: Broaden Building Code Mandate 117 5.3.2.3. Other Findings: Even Strategies That Were Not Mainstreamable Can Support Others That Are 118 5.3.2.4. Policy Implication: Encourage Professional Organizations To Adopt Guidelines 118 5.3.3. Secondary Criteria 118 5.3.3.1. Major Finding: Participation Of Non-Profits Often Brought Leadership and Crucial Knowledge 118 v 5.3.3.2. Policy Implication: Broaden The Table 119 5.3.3.3. Other Findings: FearofThe Public 119 5.3.3.4. Policy Implication: Broaden The Table Again, Consider Inviting The Public 119 5.3.3.5. Other Findings: Communication May Influence Ecological Comprehensiveness 120 5.3.3.6. Policy Implication: Note The Importance Of Accessible Communication 121 5.3.3.7. Other Findings: Almost Complete Avoidance of Equity Issues 121 5.3.3.8. Policy Implication: Research Ways To Integrate Social and Economic Priorities 122 5.3.3.9. Other Findings: Political Support Associated With Primary Criteria 122 5:3.3.10. Policy Implication: Recognize The Importance O f Broad Based Political Support 123 5.3.3.11. Questions Raised: Is There A Need for an Industry Standard? 123 5.4. S U M M A R Y 126 5.4.1. Further Research Needed: Public Participation 128 WORKS CITED OR CONSULTED 130 APPENDIX A: INITIAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS 147 APPENDIX B: FINAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS 148 APPENDIX C: LIST OF KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWEES 149 APPENDIX D: PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR GBBC PILOT PROJECTS 152 APPENDIX E: THE CASE STUDIES 153 1.0. G U I D E L I N E S , CERTIFICATION S Y S T E M S A N D R A T I N G S Y S T E M S 153 1.1. Austin Green Building Program (1991) 153 1.2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado (1995) 155 1.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines (1996) 156 1.4. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (1997) 157 1.5. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Performance Buildings (1999) 158 1.6. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines (1999) 159 2.0. G O V E R N M E N T B U I L D I N G PILOT PROJECTS A N D POLICIES 161 2.1. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy (1993) 767 2.2. Seattle Partnership for Resource Efficient Schools (1996) 163 2.3. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide (1997) 164 2.4. PATH—Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (1998) 165 2.5. APA Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability (2000) 766" 2.6. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy (2000) 767 2.7. Hannover World EXPO Model Ecological District (2000) 765 2.8. Sydney Olympic Village (2000) 169 3.0. E C O N O M I C INCENTIVES 170 3.1. FCM's Affordability and Choice Today (ACT) Program (1990) 770 3.2. Toronto's Better Buildings Partnership Program (1996) 777 3.3. Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program (1996) 772 3.4. FREE—Financing Renewable Energy and Efficiency (1997) 173 3.5. Natural Resources Canada Energy Incentive Programs (1998) 174 3.6. Environmental Mortgage Partnership (1999) 775 3.7. New York State's Green Building Tax Credit (2000) 776 T a b l e o f T a b l e s TABLE 1: MAJOR ISSUES OF THE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS 1 9 TABLE 2: PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA 21 TABLE 3: CRITERIA TO EVALUATE ECOLOGICAL COMPREHENSIVENESS 2 4 TABLE 4 : THE PRIMARY CRITERIA 2 9 TABLE 5: T H E SECONDARY CRITERIA 3 0 TABLE 6: G R E E N BUILDING C A S E STUDIES ORGANIZED INTO THREE CATEGORIES 3 4 TABLE 7: APPLICATION OF ECOLOGICAL COMPREHENSIVENESS CRITERIA TO L E E D 4 4 TABLE 8: C A S E STUDIES THAT MET THE PRIMARY CRITERIA 6 9 TABLE 9: RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CRITERIA 105 TABLE 10: BASIC FINDINGS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE RAW DATA 108 vi/ A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s First, I would like to thank my thesis advisors Penny Gurstein and Freda Pagani. They offered me endless invaluable advice and encouragement, challenged me to do more with the research and offered all this help on often very tight time deadlines. I am very grateful for your help and support. Thanks to all the people that gave generously of their time and answered my many questions. Thanks to Kim Drury at the Office of Environmental Management, City of Seattle; Hillary Brown, then the Assistant Commissioner, Office of Sustainable Design and Construction, New York City; Bob Kobet, lead consultant on the Pennsylvania guidelines; Peter Hurley, then Sustainable Building Project Manager at Seattle City Light; Dean Kubani at the City of Santa Monica; Susan Munves, Energy and Green Building Program Coordinator, City of Santa Monica; Richard Morgan, Residential Specialist, Austin Green Building Program; Terrel Emmons, then Chief Architect, Naval Facilities Engineering Command; Peter Templton, US Green Building Council; Paul Kroening, Hennepin County Environmental Services; and Ian Theaker, lead consultant for the Santa Monica Guidelines. I am very grateful to you for taking the time to speak with me. Thanks to mom, dad, christian, alun, dana, zael, aidan, ian, and grant for a lifetime of hugs that lasted me through the solitude of writing this long rant. Thanks for the born-again-cowboy for funding my education; I can never repay you (and I never will). Thanks to mom and ari for being such great editors. Thanks to kirn for the currie (chutzpa), lena for the beans, suzie for the Q, sally for the sunshine and maggie for the insight into muggles. Thanks to the dust mites on the shelves of bureaucrats and academics: whatever I say before or after, know that this is for you above all others. And, finally, thanks to the principe for being, you know, a prince. viii" List o f A c r o n y m s Organizat ions and Programs: AIA: American Institute of Architects AIBC: Architectural Institute of British Columbia A P A : American Planning Association ASMI: Athena Sustainable Materials Institute A S T M : The American Society for Testing and Materials B C S D : Business Council for Sustainable Development B E P A C Building Environmental Performance Assessment Criteria (Can.) B R E E A M : Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (UK and Can.) CHBA: Canadian Home Builders' Association C H R A : Canadian Housing & Renewal Association C M H C : Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation C M P B S : Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (USA) C S A : Canadian Standards Association CSI: Construction Specifications Institute E B N : Environmental Building News F C M : Federation of Canadian Municipalities F R E E : Financing Renewable Energy and Efficiency Savings Program G V R D : Greater Vancouver Regional District HBA: Home Builder Association ICLEI: International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives IES: Illuminating Engineering Society of North America ISO: International Standards Organization IUCN: World Conservation Union LEED: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating (USA) MSTL: Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour (BC, Can) MMA: Ministry of Municipal Affairs (BC, Can.) M M A B S B : Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Building Standards Branch (BC, Can.) M N E C B : Model National Energy Code for Buildings (Can.) NAHB: National Association of Home Builders (USA) N A P C C : National Action Program on Climate Change (Can.) N A V F A C : Naval Facilities Engineering Command (USA) NRCan : National Resources Canada N R S B A P : Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan N Y S E R D A : New York State Energy Research and Development Authority O E E : NRCan's Office of Energy Efficiency RAIC: Royal Architectural Institute of Canada RMI: Rocky Mountain Institute S E F C : Southeast False Creek (Vancouver) TVLB: Texas Veterans Land Board UBC: University of British Columbia U C S : Union of Concerned Scientists UDI: Urban Development Institute Pacific Region UN: United Nations U S D O E : United States Department of Energy I X U S E P A : U S G B C : United States Environmental Protection Agency United States Green Building Council Concepts: AMI: Area Median Income C C P : Comprehensive Community Plan C F C : Chlorofluorocarbons E E M : Energy Efficiency Mortgage EF : Ecological Footprint E M : Environmental Mortgage EMFs : Energy Management Firms E P M : Environmental Preference Method ESCo ' s : Energy Servicing Companies IAQ: Indoor Air Quality IPM: Integrated Pest Management L E M : . Location Efficient Mortgage NGO: Non Governmental Organization O C P : Official Community Plan PV: Photovoltaic Solar Panels TOD: Transit Oriented Development V O C : Volatile Organic Compound CHAPTER 1—Introduction What would it be like if developments produced more energy than they consumed? What if they increased habitat and biodiversity, produced food and clean water? What would they be like if they were deeply woven into the social and economic fabric of a community? Amory B. Lovins, Green Development, 1998. The global environment has continued to deteriorate and significant environmental problems remain deeply embedded in the socio-economic fabric of nations in all regions. ... Internationally and nationally the funds and political will remain insufficient to halt further global environmental degradation and to address the most pressing environmental issues - even though the technology and knowledge are available to us. United Nations Environment Programme, Global Environment Outlook, 1996. 1.1. Why Is This Important and What Is a Green Building Strategy? Every year the buildings that we build use as much as 40 percent of all of the raw materials and energy used on the planet (ASMI 1999). Buildings consume 40 percent of the raw stone, gravel, and sand, 25 percent of the virgin wood, 40 percent of the energy, and 16 percent of the water used (PTI 1996). The construction, renovation and operation of buildings worldwide devours more of the planet's resources than any other economic sector. This translates into millions of tonnes of liquid and solid waste, toxic air pollution, and greenhouse gases. However, no other sector of the world economy has the potential to make such a large reduction in its impact on the environment. The notion of green buildings is a relatively new one. If the "Green Builder" program created in Austin, Texas, in 1991 (Austin 1999) is counted as inaugurating North American public policy in this area, then North American governments' relationship with green buildings is less than a decade old. This is an area of public policy that is growing quickly, and this is creating many opportunities for the public, governments, and the building industry to change how buildings are built. For the purposes of this thesis, a green building strategy is any strategy or method used by government, citizens, a professional group, private industry, NGO's (or a combination of those groups) to encourage builders, developers, home owners, or renters to build, buy, live in or renovate their building in such a way that it causes less environmental degradation than a standard building of the same type (i.e. residential, commercial, etc.) in North America. 1.2. Purpose of the Thesis and Definition of Key Terms The purpose of this thesis to identify green building strategies that are both ecologically comprehensive and have the ability to mainstream green building practices, and to ask: Which factors contribute to their success in these areas? Two terms need to be defined: "ecologically comprehensive" and "the ability to mainstream green building practices." An ecologically comprehensive green building strategy will be defined as a strategy that encourages buildings to be built in a way that 2 significantly reduces their impact in a comprehensive set of ecological 1 issue areas. A "comprehensive" set of ecological issues is a set that will include al of the major ecological impacts of a building. This shall be fully detailed and defined through the process of developing criteria to assess ecological comprehensiveness, and it will include assessing a building's impact on ecological resources such as energy, water, waste, landscape and air. The definition of "significant" is also important. Given that research has demonstrated that resource consumption and waste generation can generally be reduced by between 35% 2 and 50% 3 , a significant reduction shall be one over 30%. The second term to be defined is "mainstreaming" green buildings. This does not simply mean having an impact on the mainstream building industry. Simply having an impact might mean only influencing the mainstream building industry to accept one green building measure—like using less energy or planting more trees. Rather, mainstreaming green buildings—or having a green building strategy that is "mainstreamable' 4—is defined in this thesis to mean that the green building strategy has the ability to make green building products and practices into standard practice, or at least a broadly accepted alternate practice. The goal of this thesis is to identify green building strategies that are both "ecologically comprehensive" and "mainstreamable." Simply asking which factors lead to an ecologically comprehensive green building strategy would not be as useful—it would not identify factors needed to create a strategy that was able to make green building products and practices into standard practice. Likewise, if one were to only ask which factors are necessary to mainstream green building practices, one might end up with information that led to development of a green building strategy that was able to be adopted by the mainstream building industry, but did not have far-reaching ecological benefits. Throughout this thesis the word environmental shall be use interchangeably with the word ecological. 2 Haughton and Hunter 1994; Rydin 1992 3 MacKinnon 2000 4 This term will be used throughout this thesis to act as shorthand for "the ability to make something into mainstream practice"—which becomes tedious to repeat. 3 1.3. Other Studies of This K ind To date, there has been nothing written in either Canada or the USA that can act as a comprehensive analysis of a variety of North American green building strategies. Certainly there is no study that assesses a variety of green building strategies with the goal of determining which ones are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable, and what may have attributed to this success. The best explanation for this gap in the literature is that green building policy is a relatively new field of study. There have, however, been several books that provide important information and analysis of some portion of the spectrum of green building strategies. These books include: the Rocky Mountain Institute's Green Development (1998); Mark Roseland's Toward Sustainable Communities (1998); Hawken, Lovins and Lovins' Natural Capitalism (1999); and CMHC's Changing Values-Changing Communities: A Guide to the Development of Healthy, Sustainable Communities (1995). Each of these books anecdotally examines a variety of strategies that can and have been used to encourage more sustainable built form. However, none provides a comprehensive analysis of a full spectrum of green building strategies. One of the most comprehensive surveys of green building strategies and policies is contained in the book Sustainable Building Technical Manual (Public Technology et al 1996). Chapter 25, entitled "The Future of Green Buildings" by David A. Gottfried examines building rating systems, including BREEAM, BEPAC, ISO 14000, and the U.S. Green Building Council's then proposed (now formalized) national rating system, LEED. It examines product certification systems like Green Seal and the Scientific Certification Systems. However, in examining sub-components of green buildings, like product certification systems, it leaves its broader goal of examining green buildings strategies, which often broadly encompass the use of sub-components like product ratings. In addition, this source is far from exhaustive, in part because it is out of date and many important and innovative green building policies and strategies have been created since it was written. Finally, it is worth mentioning that one source of information on a full range of strategies that can be used to encourage more sustainable buildings is the "Excellence for Sustainable Development" website produced by the United States Department of 4 Energy. The Green Buildings portion of this website contains an extensive collection of general information on the areas of: building principals; building programs; rating systems; US building efforts; affordable housing; success stories; codes and ordinances; publications; educational materials; and other resources. This information is updated and expanded regularly and is a useful resource. However the information is not analyzed or presented as a whole and therefore does not contribute to the academic literature. This thesis, then, is intended to fill a gap in both the academic literature and the literature used by practicing planners. 1.4. Thes is Scope The scope of this thesis is defined in at least five different ways. First, the geographical area in which these strategies were developed and implemented; second, the definition of green building; third, an emphasis on whole building solutions; fourth, an emphasis on strategies in which government can assist and fifth, an emphasis on strategies capable of being both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. First, geography: only strategies that have been used in North America will be examined. Further research should be done in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and South America. It would be particularly interesting to do research in the so-called second and third world countries. Vernacular architecture and development patterns may be useful in designing buildings that are more respectful of the environment. However, research in these countries is beyond the scope of this thesis. Secondly, this thesis will focus on strategies that foster more environmentally responsible buildings, rather than more sustainable buildings. Sustainability is more broadly defined to include not only ecological issues but also economic and social issues (UNWCED 1987; Roseland 1998; Robinson and Tinker 1998). Throughout this thesis, strategies will be analyzed that describe themselves as "Sustainable Building" strategies. However most of these do not address crucial economic or social sustainability issues, and therefore are better described as "environmental building" strategies or green building strategies. 5 There will be some examination of basic equity issues with respect to the question of whether or not the inclusion of basic equity issues has any impact on the mainstreamability of a project. At this point in the thesis, there will be some examination of the extent to which equity issues may be missing from green building strategies. However, in general the focus of this thesis is on the environment, not on the much broader question of sustainability. Third, this thesis will focus on whole building strategies. These are strategies that encompass a broad range of green building components. For example, the million solar roofs program in the United States, which encourages the use of photovoltaic solar cells, will not be used as a case study because it focuses solely on one aspect of green building. In a few cases, programs that encourage one aspect of green buildings will be used if they are useful to elucidate some factor that may assist in enabling a strategy to mainstream green building practices. Several programs that reap the financial benefits of energy savings are examined, even though they focus almost exclusively in energy issues. These are the programs that could, if they were modelled after a program like Austin, be supporting a whole range of environmental innovations on the savings accrued from energy. In the case of the US Financing Renewable Energy and Efficiency (FREE) Savings Program, it will award the largest set of energy efficiency contracts ever—over $5 billion in energy efficiency contracts are designed to cut energy and operating costs by $10 billion over the equipment's life. It is an example of how quickly even a large government can make changes. The US federal government is the single biggest user of energy in a country which uses more energy than any other, spending $4 billion every year on its 500,000 buildings (USDOE 2000). Therefore this becomes an important example of mainstreaming one aspect of green buildings that may be useful to assist whole building strategies. In the case of NR Can's Energy Incentive Programs and Toronto's Better Buildings Partnership, I wanted to show what Canada is doing to directly encourage owners and designers to adopt more environmentally sustainable principles. There are very few 6 whole-building strategies being employed in Canada. There is the Green Buildings B C program, but this shall not be analyzed here because I am involved with its creation and management. Three other major green building strategies in Canada should be identified: (1) the Green Building Challenge conference that originated in Canada, (2) B R E E A M Canada rating system, and (3) B R E E A M Green Leaf rating system. The Green Building Challenge is briefly discussed for its power as a communication strategy. However, neither of the B R E E A M rating systems were selected for reasons explained at the end of this section. The fourth major characteristic that defines the scope of this thesis is an emphasis on strategies that can be spearheaded by local, regional or provincial governments. While the thesis will analyze strategies created by the public, academia, federal government and the building industry, a stronger focus will be given to those strategies that can be instigated by local, regional or provincial governments. This is in part because there have been more programs instigated by local, regional or provincial governments. However more importantly it is because, as noted by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives in the Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, sustainable development "must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis" (1996). Finally, the scope of the thesis is limited by the kinds of green building strategies that were selected to be case studies. After several of my interviews, particularly after the interview in New York, I realized that there seemed to be a pattern emerging: there seemed to be a correlation between those green building strategies that: ° were developed with extensive stakeholder input; ° were communicated in a clear, simple, and accessible way; ° garnered broad based political appeal and those that: 0 were the most ecologically comprehensive and ° had the greatest ability to mainstream green buildings. The strategies with comprehensive stakeholder input, with accessible, clear communication, with the ability to get acceptance from all sides of the political spectrum—these were also the ones that tended to be the most ecologically comprehensive, and had the greatest ability to mainstream green buildings. Therefore, 7 from that point on, case studies were chosen to meet as many of these criteria as possible. B R E E A M Canada and B R E E A M Green Leaf were not selected as case studies for this thesis because they did not met basic requirements for being freely accessible. 1.5. Thesis Objectives and Questions This thesis has the following objectives, and asks the following questions. The objectives are framed within the goal of the thesis: thesis To identify green building strategies that are both ecologically goal comprehensive and have the ability to mainstream green building practices, and to discuss which factors may contribute to this success. thesis Which factors may contribute to the creation of a green building question strategy that is both ecologically comprehensive and can mainstream green buildings? The next questions involve unpacking the first question by defining it terms: What is meant by ecologically comprehensive? What is meant by a strategy that can mainstream green buildings? I. objective To establish the validity of the environmental problem and identify relevant environmental issues. question Which environmental issues are the most important to the health of the global ecosystem today? II. objective To develop criteria to assess the ecological comprehensiveness and mainstreamability of green building strategies. question Ecological criteria to assess which strategies are ecologically comprehensive : How do buildings (the design, construction, use and deconstruction of buildings) contribute to the ecological problems established above? How can a building's impact on the environment be assessed, and what are the appropriate criteria to assess whether or not a green building strategy is encouraging buildings that minimize these potential environmental impacts? Mainstreamability criteria to asses which strategies are mainstreamable: How is it poss ib le to measure the extent to wh ich a green building strategy has inf luenced the market? C a n the number of bui ldings and the market share be used to represent the extent to wh ich a program has inf luenced the mainst ream building industry? A r e other criteria needed as we l l? Criteria to Assess Factors That Contribute To Ecological Comprehensiveness and Mainstreamability: Wha t are the bas ic soc ia l , economic , and political factors that may contribute to a eco log ica l ly comprehens ive and mains t reamable green building s t ra tegy? H o w important is meaningful s takeholder part icipation, polit ical support , and pract ical i ty? Is the clarity of the communicat ion important? Wha t other criteria can be used to a s s e s s the factors that contr ibute to the deve lopment of a green building strategy that is eco log ica l ly comprehens ive and ma ins t reamab le? III. objective T o a s s e s s the ecolog ica l comprehens i veness and mainstreamabi l i ty of the se lec ted green building strategies using the criteria deve loped . question W h i c h green building strategies: ° are ecological ly comprehens i ve? ° have the ability to make green bui ldings into either s tandard pract ice or accep ted alternate pract ice (which can mains t ream green bui ld ings)? ° meet bas ic s tandards of equi ty? 0 have been deve loped with comprehens ive s takeholder input? ° are communica ted in a clear, s imple, and access ib l e w a y ? ° garner broad based political appea l? IV. objective To answer the thesis quest ion and recommend pol icy opt ions that could be used to build a f ramework in Brit ish Co lumb ia for encourag ing more environmental ly responsib le bui ldings in B C . 9 question Which green building strategies are both ecologically comprehensive and have the ability to mainstream green building practices? Which factors contribute to their success in these areas? What kinds of policy options could be used to build a framework in British Columbia for encouraging more environmentally responsible buildings? 1.6. Thes is Methods The methodology of the thesis is outlined below. However, each of the basic steps in the methodology was iterative. Most of the steps were revisited two or three times as more information was discovered, or as patterns became evident that required a second look at the research or a second or third question to the interviewee. I. method Literature review. There were four major bodies of literature to review: 1. the literature that examined environmental problems and issues, 2. the literature that examined the environmental impact of buildings (to be used to develop criteria to assess how "ecologically comprehensive" any green building, or green building strategy was), 3. the literature that covered the principles to guide the development of criteria, and 4. the literature that examined green building strategies. iterative The literature review to establish the validity of the environmental loops problem and identify relevant environmental issues had two iterations, the second of which developed into another stage of the methodology, the development of criteria. In the first iteration, I examined the environmental crisis from a very general perspective.5 Environmental issues were roughly sketched out and identified. \ 5 This literature review included: Carson 1962; Carter and Dale 1974; UNWCED 1987; World Resources Institute 1994; Seager 1995; IPCC 1995; Wackernagel and Rees 1996; Robinson and Tinker 1998; DSF 1998; Pimentel 1998. 10 The second literature review area was the literature that assesses the environmental impact of buildings.6 To help me digest this information and understand it, I wrote an article that is to be published in an undergraduate textbook called Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters. What Really Works edited by David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott, published by Oxford U Press (2001) in New York. Once I understood the environmental impact that buildings have on their environment, this led to developing a set of criteria to assess whether or not a building or green building strategy was ecologically comprehensive in its approach to reducing its impact on the environment. The literature review of green building strategies began with a paper that was written for the City of Vancouver and published under the title: "Strategies to Encourage More Sustainable Buildings: A Typology." As explained in Chapter 2, many of the green building strategies studied there were not studied in this thesis. The list of strategies covered in the case studies can be seen in Appendix E. II. method Organization of green building strategy case studies. The case studies needed to be classified in a way that was useful to the overall goals analyzing which factors lead to the creation of green building strategies that are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. The case studies also needed to be organized in a way that was simple and yet showed the fundamental differences in the strategies. iterative The case studies were classified into three basic types of strategies7: loops I. Guidelines, Certification Systems and Rating Systems II. Government Building Pilot Projects and Policies III. Economic Incentives 6 This literature review included: Perks and Van Vliet 1993; Lyle 1994; CMHC 1995; Walker 1995; UNEP 1996; PTI 1996; Smith 1996; Cole 1996; EC 1996, 1998; Walker and Rees 1997; BCEAC 1997; Rees 1997, 1998; RMI 1998; Roseland 1998; Sheltair 1998; Brown and Flavin 1999ASMI 1999; Rogers 1999. 7 For more description of the reasoning behind this organization, see Chapter 2 and Appendix E. 11 III. method Developing criteria. The first step in developing criteria was to create a set of principles by which to choose and establish them. This was done through a review of the literature on indicators.8 Then criteria were established. iterative First, criteria were needed to define and operationalize the term loops "ecologically comprehensive." These were created through synthesizing the literature on environmental issues, environmental impacts of buildings, and green building strategies. Criteria were developed by assessing which environmental issues are significantly influenced by the design, construction, use and deconstruction of buildings.9 Second, criteria were needed to define and operationalize the notion of mainstreamability. These were created through assessing the variety of ways in which the green building strategies (analyzed in the case studies) were able to influence the mainstream industry. Third, criteria were needed to clarify and operationalize the factors that might impact or contribute to the creation of strategies that were both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. IV. method Key informant interviews. These were conducted through two distinct iterations. The first stage of the interviewing process was shortly after doing research for the City of Vancouver. At that time, I used the structure that I had created for the City of Vancouver study. In addition, at this point my research question was simply to: "identify, compare and analyze a variety of North American green building strategies in an effort to propose possible strategies for British Columbia." I asked simple questions to understand the development of the various programs, their history, goals, function, structure, demonstration projects, connections with broader policies, and communications strategies. ' This is more fully described in Chapter 2. Chapter 2 contains the full detailed description of the methodology involved—it is too long to be included here. 12 However, after doing several interviews, I realized that I might be seeing a pattern in my findings. Responses from several key informant interviews and research into the case studies suggested that including a diverse range of participants in the development of a green building strategy seemed to assist in creating a strategy that was both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. This was, perhaps, counterintuitive, as in many processes where a diverse group of interests come together to create solutions, there is not much which they can agree upon. I had also noticed that the programs that were communicated in a way that was accessible to the general public, clear, and easy to understand seemed to have a greater ability to break through to the mainstream market. I needed to analyze my data in this light, and ensure that I asked questions to bring these factors out. I went back to the previous methodological stage of developing criteria. Two of the interviewees were asked the questions in Appendix A. The rest of the interviewees were asked the questions in Appendix B, unless the review of the literature had revealed the answers already, which it usually had not. The questions in Appendix B correspond to the criteria. Interviews ranged from 15 minutes to 2 hours, and were usually roughly 20 or 30 minutes in length. Interviews took place in New York, Philadelphia, Seattle, Vancouver and on the phone to places throughout North America. Two lists appear in Appendix C. The first is the list of those people who were key informant interviews. The second is the list of people to whom I directed supplementary questions—one or several questions used to gather basic information on a green building strategy rather than analysis. 13 V . method Methods of analys is. The information on the case studies, derived from key informant interviews and research, was analyzed by using the criteria, and by comparing the case studies to each other. The relationships between various criteria (like, for example, the relationship between ecological comprehensiveness and participation) was analyzed by comparing how different case studies met or did not meet the criteria. The final step in the thesis was to explore the policy implications of the findings. 1.7. Thes is Organizat ion The first chapter introduces the thesis. It explains why it is an important area of research and defines key terms: green building, green building strategy, ecologically comprehensive, mainstreamable. It presents the purpose of the thesis, states the thesis question, sets out the objectives, and details the methodology used throughout the thesis. The second chapter examines key environmental challenges, and how buildings contribute to them. Criteria are developed to assess green building strategies. The final section of the second chapter presents an overview of the case studies of green building strategies that were selected and analyzed. The third chapter conducts an analysis of the case studies using the primary criteria, and creates a list of strategies that are ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. These strategies are then the focus of the next chapter, which analyses them using the secondary criteria, in order to understand the factors that contribute to ecological comprehensiveness and mainstreamability. The fifth and final chapter summarizes the findings and their policy implications. 14 CHAPTER 2—Problems, and Criteria To Assess Solutions Save this house, the party's gotta end The welcome mat's worn out The roof will never mend The furniture's on fire This house is a disgrace Someone change the locks Before we trash this place. Spirit of the West, "Save This House," 1989 2.1. Chapter Structure This chapter has three major sections: the problem, the development of criteria to assess the solutions, and the case studies that are examples of some of the solutions possible. It begins by examining the evidence that there is an ecological crisis. This includes an exploration of the ways in which buildings contribute to the key ecological problems, and the ways in which they could contribute to solutions. The second section includes a discussion of the criteria that need to be developed to assess the green building strategies. The foundations are laid for how criteria should be selected. Two tiers of criteria are then developed to assess the building strategies. The third and final section of this chapter gives an overview of the case studies which were selected and analyzed for this thesis. 2.2. The World According to the Worried: Global Environmental Crisis Although there have been environmental problems in the past, the scale and speed with which humanity has altered and is still altering its environment in the last 50 years is unprecedented. Hawken, Lovins and Lovins sum up some of our environmental woes (2000): In the past half-century, the world has lost a fourth of its topsoil and a third of its forest cover. At present rates of destruction, we will lose 70 percent of the world's coral reefs in our lifetime, host to 25 percent of marine life. In the past three decades, one-third of the planet's resources, its "natural wealth," has been consumed. We are losing freshwater ecosystems at the rate of 6 percent a year, marine ecosystems by 4 percent a year. There is no longer any serious scientific dispute that the decline in every living system in the world is reaching such levels that an increasing number of them are starting to lose, often at a pace accelerated by the interactions of their decline, their assured ability to sustain the continuity of the life process. What is the worst that could happen? A careful examination of history reveals that many great civilizations that did not respect their environments perished (Carter and Dale 1974). The people of ancient Mesopotamia, for example, were left hungry and the civilization was greatly handicapped by salinization of the soil, which was a result of over-irrigation. Environmental degradation certainly assisted in Mesopotamia's fall (UNDP et al 2000). We rely on the natural world for everything from our next breath of air to the weather conditions that allow humanity and its life-supporting ecosystem to exist. 16 This first section examines joint statements, declarations and agreements put together by scientists and the government. These statements, declarations and agreements each respond to the environmental crisis and they are used later to inform the development of criteria. 2.2.1. The Scientific Community Speaks Up 2.2.1.1. World Scientists' Warning to Humanity In 1993, 1,680 scientists from all over the world—including 104 Nobel prize winners— wrote a "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity." In it they stated that: Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about. (UCS 1993) This urgent call outlines the following six areas of concern. In the atmosphere it identifies problems of stratospheric ozone depletion and air pollution. In the area of water resources there are the problems of groundwater depletion and pollution. The oceans are being degraded through exceeded or near-exceeded sustainable marine yields and pollution. Soil productivity almost everywhere is dropping. In the world's forests there is destruction of tropical rain forests, tropical and temperate dry forests, and the resulting habitat destruction. Finally, these scientists predict that one third of all species living in 1993 may be lost by 2100. 2.2.1.2. World Scientists' Call for Action at the Kyoto Climate Summit Four years later the U C S made another statement to the world community and the world's government leaders. Before the climate talks in Kyoto began 1 0 the Union of Concerned Scientists issued its "Call for Action at the Kyoto Climate Summit." This was signed by more than 1,500 scientists from over 63 countries—104 of them were Nobel Prize winners in the sciences. The scientists noted that since the 1993 "Warning:" ...over four years have passed, and progress has been woefully inadequate. Some of the most serious problems have worsened. Invaluable time has been squandered because so few leaders have risen to the challenge (UCS 1997). More information on the Kyoto Protocol is given in the section "Governments" below. 17 The "Call for Action" noted that there was a consensus among the world's climatologists that there is a "a discernible human influence on global climate." The "Call for Action" first described the potential impacts of global warming: rising sea levels could impact coastal populations and ecosystems; warmer temperatures could infuse the hydrological cycle with more energy, bringing more intense rain and flooding in some areas, droughts in others. Health impacts would include exposure to tropical diseases at higher latitudes and exposure to droughts and heat waves. 1 1 The U C S "Call for Action," however, went further to describe global climate change as "one of the most serious threats to the planet and to future generations." Like the first "Warning," which outlined seven broad areas of environmental concern, this "Call for Action" described a potentially damaging "web of environmental effects." It explained that global climate change was exacerbating—and being exacerbated by—this fragile network of problems. Deforestation of tropical and other forests, for example, reduces the carbon storage and thus contributes to global climate change. It also exacerbates species extinction, soil erosion and water wastage. Use of fossil fuel energy is increasing, thereby increasing the carbon in the atmosphere. Climate change would also exacerbate already existing problems of regional water scarcity and food security. 1 2 Lastly in the web of environmental effects, the "Call for Action" noted that climate change will accelerate the pace of species extinction. It noted the appalling fact that, at the time of writing in 1997, one quarter of all known mammal species was threatened. They projected that within a decade, fully one half of these species might be gone. They echoed the statement made in the first "Warning" that by the end of the next century it is possible that one third of all species would be extinct.13 1 1 Although they cannot be explored at length here, many other sources have in the past and continue to verify the UCS's concerns (UNEP 1994; IPCC 1996; Pimentel 1998; DSF 1998; CNN 1998; Flavin 1998; Brown and Flavin 1999; Gore 2000; Stevens 2000; UCS 2000). 12 Again, it is important to note that many other sources verify these problems. They state that global water tables are falling; global fisheries are collapsing; soil, water and food are contaminated by agricultural and other chemicals; soils are eroding due to overuse; tropical rainforests are being grazed. (Wackernagel and Rees 1996; Wackernagel 1997a,b; Robinson and Tinker 1998; Brown and Flavin 1999). 1 3 Other sources validate the crisis in species extinction, acknowledging that it is at the highest rate it has been in 65 million years (Seager 1995, Hayes 2000, Wilson 2000). New evidence comes out daily showing the impact that climate 18 2.2.1.3. Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE) In what is being hailed as the most comprehensive study of global ecosystems to date (Linden 2000), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), World Bank (WB), and World Resources Institute (WRI) have come together to create the Guide to World Resources 2000-2001: People and Ecosystems the Fraying Web of Life. It is also known as P A G E , or Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems. The first aim of this study is to assess the health of global ecosystems (UNDP et al 2000). The 175 scientists involved report disturbing ecological assessments that mirror the results discussed by the U C S . 2.2.1.4. Summary: Major Issues of the Ecological Crisis The chart below summarizes the major issues of the ecological crisis as discussed in the above sources. Table 1: Major Issues of the Eco log ica l Cr is is Natural Area Problem 1. Atmosphere • Climate change • Stratospheric ozone depletion bringing enhanced ultraviolet radiation • Air pollution 2. Freshwater • Groundwater depletion and pollution systems • Freshwater species loss 3. Ocean • Exceeded or near exceeded sustainable marine yields systems • Pollution 4. Soil • Dropping productivity from soil degradation, desertification, salinization, erosion, and pollution 5 Forests • Destruction and disruption of forests 6. Living species • Habitat destruction resulting in species loss These issues need to be translated into building-related criteria if they are going to be able to analyze green building strategies. Many green building materials and practices influence these ecological areas. change will have on species extinction, like the research recently out of Dartmouth College and Tulane University that shows that global climate change could greatly reduce the ability of songbirds to survive and reproduce (ENS 2000). 19 2.2.2. How Buildings Contribute to the Problem and Solution The construction, renovation and operation of buildings worldwide devours more of the planet's resources than any other economic sector (ASMI 1999) 1 4. Every year the buildings that we build and inhabit use as much as 40 percent of all of the raw materials and energy used on the planet (ASMI 1999). This means millions of tonnes of liquid and solid waste, toxic air pollution, and greenhouse gases. But what this means is that no other sector of the world economy has the potential to make such a large reduction in its impact on the environment. As architect Richard Rogers notes (1999): The principal objective currently facing humanity is to allow a continued growth in living standards world-wide within diminishing resources. Architects have an important part to play, as they influence up to 75% of total energy use (50% in buildings, 25% in transport). At a time when the World Bank is warning that the wars of the next century will be waged over access to fresh water supply, North America and most "developed" nations are literally flushing their resources down the toilet. Canada has the lamentable position of having the second largest domestic water consumption in the world, second only to USA. This waste of water reflects our values about our natural world and the creatures with which we share it. Our consumption of energy also reflects our environmental values. The use of energy is arguably more significant because it dictates the rate at which other resources are consumed, as well as having an impact on greenhouse gases. Energy use per capita in Canada is roughly 500 percent more than world average. Clearly one way to reduce Canada's morally and logically offensive overuse of resources and energy and its incredible production of waste and pollution is to green our built environment. Policies and strategies that encourage more sustainable built form have a role to play. A green building or "high performance" building has a lighter impact on the environment, and it also encourages users to have a lighter impact on the environment. It usually addresses at least some of the following areas: energy, water, landscape, materials, waste, construction management, and indoor environmental quality. The.three paragraphs in this section are adapted from an article that I wrote that is to be published in an undergraduate textbook called Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters. What Really Works edited by David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott, published by Oxford U Press (2001) in New York. 20 2.3. Criteria 2.3.1. Principles to Guide the Development of Criteria The methodology of this thesis is intended to be transparent so that other researchers are able to use the methods and replicate all or part of this study. Therefore, the principles used to select the criteria are given here. The criteria used to assess the green building strategies need to be simple, easy to understand, and result in measuring the appropriate information. There are many authors that discuss the principles that can be used to develop criteria, including Lafferty and Eckberg (1998) and C M H C ' s "Measuring Urban Sustainability: Canadian Indicators Workshop" (1996). The indicators below have been developed with the assistance of the above sources. Table 2: Principles to Guide Development of Criteria Comprehensive: Assess the green building strategy as a whole—from its creation to its administration, etc. Unambiguous: Be clear, simple, and easily communicated, so that their meaning cannot be misunderstood. Practical: Be focused on concepts that can be implemented feasibly. Quantifiable: Be able to be measured in some way. Transferable to other studies: Be reflective of values found in the broader society, and must be suitable for use on other projects. Comprehensible to the community at large: Be able to be understood by all members of society, young and old, of all different languages and abilities—certainly not just by members of the building industry or the academic community. 2.3.2. How the Criteria Are Organized The criteria have been developed to explore the two major areas of inquiry: (.1) ecological comprehensiveness and (2) mainstreamability. Within this, however, there are two major questions to be asked: I. First, which green building strategies are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable, and, II. Second, what are the factors that contribute to this success? 2 1 Therefore, a two-tiered set of criteria has been created to explore the thesis question. The primary criteria seek to answer the first question of which strategies are ecologically comprehensive and or mainstreamable; the secondary criteria seek to answer the second questions of which factors contribute to this success. The primary criteria will assess whether or not a particular strategy is ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable (according to the definitions and limitations described in this thesis). When a group of strategies has been assessed as having these qualities, these strategies will become the focus of the secondary criteria, which seek to understand which factors may have contributed to this success. 2.3.3. Criteria to Assess Ecological Comprehensiveness 2.3.3.1. Primary Criteria: Which Strategies are Ecologically Comprehensive The first step in developing criteria to assess whether a certain strategy is ecologically comprehensive is to decide how to categorize the environmental impacts of buildings. There are several reasonable ways of categorizing these environmental impacts. These include: 1. Using the established method of categorizing building products and functions, developed by the Construction Specifications Institute. This method has 16 divisions, including Div 1 General Requirements, Div. 2 Sitework, Div 3 Concrete, Div 4 Masonry etc. 2. Developing a method that outlines the process of building, which would start at site selection and program planning, and advance into envelope design, landscape design, water systems design, all the way to construction, habitation, and demolition or reconstruction. 3. Developing a method that traces the environmental impact of buildings to the major environmental issues of the environmental crisis (discussed above, these categories include: atmosphere, freshwater systems, ocean systems, soil, forests, and living species. 4. Developing a method that reveals the major environmental resource issues involved in buildings. The categories would be water, waste, energy etc. This method is often used in green building guidelines like those developed by LEED, Santa Monica, Austin, New York and others. 22 The first method, the 16 established divisions, is useful because it would relate environmental impact to buildings in a way that made sense to building professionals and the building industry that was familiar with the 16 divisions. However, it-does not highlight the environmental impacts themselves. More important than giving the building industry something it is comfortable with is creating a system that communicates the environmental criteria in a way that makes it obvious how to reduce those impacts. The second method—one that would parallel the process of designing and constructing a building—can also be criticized in this way. It would make things easier for the building industry but it would not highlight the major environmental impacts. 1 5 The third method— tying building impacts to global environmental issues—would make things somewhat more focused on the environmental issues of concern. However, some issues like ocean systems would simply not be relevant. The final method was chosen because it makes it immediately clear to the user what should be done to reduce the environmental impact of the building. The criteria below were developed assessing the environmental issue areas identified in the first part of this thesis and examining parallel categories created in a variety of green building guidelines, including those developed by Austin, Colorado, Santa Monica, U S G B C , Pennsylvania, New York City, and Minnesota. Similar ecological resource categories kept coming up repeatedly: energy, waste, landscape or site, transportation (which is more an energy concern, so is included there in the criteria), construction practices, and water. Air and light16 were also ecological resource categories that came up frequently, under various different titles (such as indoor environmental quality, indoor air quality, etc.). 1 7 1 5 In addition, the methods that are based on existing industry standards reinforce today's standard practices. Specifically, many green building architects and experts note that a design process that integrates an interdisciplinary design team from an early stage is more likely to produce significant environmental design features (Marques, Pagani and Perdue 2001; Cole 1996b; Larsson 1995). This has also been our experience at the Green Buildings BC. 1 6 These categories are actually concerned with human health rather than ecological impact, and are the notable exception to the rule that generally, green building strategies ignore social sustainability issues. 1 7 The general environmental resource categories that best describe a building's major resource flows and their impact on the environment have been selected for the criteria. The process of selecting these criteria is very similar to the process that I used to create Performance Targets for the Green Buildings BC Pilot Projects. Therefore, the below list of criteria is also partially based on the list that I created for the BC provincial government's Green Buildings BC initiative (included in Appendix D). Each of the sub-categories (like "select site close to transit, walking and biking routes") is created by compiling the guidelines of many green building programs, rating systems and strategies and accumulating a list of the actions that could reduce a building's impact on the environment. The question to ask for each of these criteria is, "Does 23 Table 3: Sub-Criteria to Evaluate Ecological Comprehensiveness Energy Select site in dense area Select site close to transit, walking and biking routes Reduce energy use Use renewable or alternate energy sources Encourage clean energy transport Water Reduce water use Ensure site water filtration Use alternate treatment for human waste with minimum resource use and pollution Recharge ground wafer Landscape Protect vegetation and watercourses Reuse topsoil Use integrated pest management Maximize green space Maximize native plantings and wildlife habitat Materials Avoid ecologically damaging materials Use recycled materials Use materials efficiently Use salvaged materials Use local materials Use durable and low maintenance Waste Supply recycling facilities Supply composting facilities Minimize construction waste Air Minimize air pollutants Ensure adequate fresh air to occupants Light Ensure adequate daylight to all inhabitants For the purposes of this thesis, if a green building strategy or policy significantly addresses each of these sub-criteria, they will be seen as meeting the criteria of being ecologically comprehensive. Therefore the criteria to assess which strategies are ecologically comprehensive are: => Does the strategy encourage buildings to incorporate a comprehensive set of ecological issues (in such categories as: energy, water, landscape, materials, waste or equivalent, as defined above by the sub-criteria)? => Does it encourage a reduction in resource consumption and waste generation of 30% or more? 1 8 the green building strategy encourage the owner, designer or other individuals responsible for the building to choose the following green building strategies:" 1 8 This 30% will be based on a reduction in two major areas: first, energy, as it is usually measured in percentage reductions; and second, water, as low-water fixtures should allow reductions of between 30 and 50%. Other areas are much more difficult to quantify in percentages: reductions in landfill waste, for example, and increases in wild life habitat or green space, are dependant on the very specific regional'use levels. 24 2.3.4. Criteria to Assess Mainstreamability 2.3.4.1. Primary Criteria: Which Strategies are Mainstreamable How can the "mainstreaming" of green building practices be measured? The Green Builder Program of Colorado and the Austin Green Building program are good examples of green building strategies that mainstream green building practices, and do so in a way that can be measured, at least to some extent. Twenty-six percent of new home shoppers in metro Denver are aware of the Colorado Green Builder program. There have been between 2,500 and 3,000 "Green Built" homes built between 1995 and 1998. In Austin, the residential component of the program rates roughly 31% of all homes built in the jurisdiction of the guidelines. Thus, in both the Austin and Colorado programs there exists a clear, numeric measure of the extent to which green buildings have become mainstream. This seems to suggest that the market saturation of a certain green building program might be the clearest and most effective way to measure the mainstreaming of green buildings in that area. 1 9 However, while market saturation and the number of buildings built is an interesting and important measure, it only shows part of,the picture. There are several reasons why market saturation and the number of buildings built cannot be seen to completely describe whether a strategy has the ability to mainstream green building practices. Austin illustrates the limitations of market saturation and numbers of buildings built as a measure for mainstreamability. In Austin, the impact of the green building program is felt outside of the area of its jurisdiction (outside of the area in which the numbers are gathered and the program is administered). One of the key informants knowledgeable about Austin noted that the program was used extensively outside its jurisdiction in surrounding regions, and often the most ecologically innovative buildings were built in a certain neighborhood just outside of the jurisdiction of the program. Additionally, the Texas Veterans Land Board program used the Austin program as a model, so the 3,799 were green building loans given in Texas in the year 2000 would likely not be given out if it were not for the influence of the Austin program. These relationships cannot be quantified: it would not, for example, make sense to add the TVLB numbers to the Austin numbers. The important thing to note is that the Austin 25 program does have this influence on mainstreaming not just local buildings but the broader industry. Even if market saturation of more environmentally responsible buildings were the ultimate goal of a green building program, this theoretical goal would have to define saturation of the market as including both new and retrofit programs, and including all building types (residential, commercial; institutional, industrial, etc.). Simply saturating the market with new residential green buildings will not solve the problem of the aging building stock that continues to have the same or greater environmental impact as it ages, and it will not solve the problems inherent in other building types. In practice, a green building program often covers only new, or only retrofit, and only one or two types of buildings. Most programs deal only with retrofit, or commercial buildings, or new residential buildings—all measures that do not adequately represent the theoretical goal of greening buildings across the board. There are further examples of strategies whose usefulness cannot be measured by market saturation. Pilot projects that test green building products and processes and prove their utility to government, the public and industry can go a long way to changing assumptions about buildings. The Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District and the Sydney Olympic Village clearly have the ability to make green building ideas mainstream as they spread these ideas to an international audience. The Hannover World E X P O built half of the eventual 6,000 model ecological housing units for E X P O 2000 (the other half are yet to be built) and the Sydney Olympic Village is the world's largest solar suburb, containing 650 homes whose main source of energy is the sun. For both Hannover and Sydney Solar Village, the audience was the world, and it would be impossible to quantify the impact they have had on the building industry all over the planet. Both green projects have the potential to be the seed idea that germinates into many and various green building strategies throughout the world. Yet it is also possible that, if its successes are poorly communicated, politically unacceptable, impractical, non-transferable, or otherwise unable to be replicated in other places—they will not have much impact at all. 19 T h i s i s , o f c o u r s e , to s e t a s i d e for the m o m e n t t he q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r o r not a n y pa r t i cu la r g r e e n bu i l d i ng p r o g r a m m e e t s c e r t a i n e c o l o g i c a l c r i te r ia . F o r the p u r p o s e s of th is a r g u m e n t , it is a s s u m e d that a l l g r e e n bu i l d i ng p r o g r a m s a r e 2 6 Yet even with all of the above registered limitations, the mainstreamability of the Sydney Olympics is impossible to quantify beyond the 650 buildings built. The number of buildings built is the only concrete information concerning mainstreamability that is available. Therefore, the market saturation or number of buildings built will be used as one of the primary criteria. The other primary criteria will assess whether or not the strategy has the ability to-make green building products and practices into standard practice, or at least abroadly acceptable alternate practice. This less quantitative assessment will be made with reference to the interviewees' responses to this question. Other factors like political acceptability and practicality should begin to suggest the degree of mainstreamability in other places beyond what can be gathered from the numbers. However, these secondary criteria explain more about why the particular strategy became mainstreamable than whether or not it actually became mainstreamable, and therefore will inform the development of the secondary criteria. The primary criteria to assess which strategies are mainstreamable are: => Does the strategy have the ability to make green building products and practices into standard practice, or at least a broadly acceptable alternate practice? => What percentage of the market is built using the green building program, or, alternately, how many buildings have been (or are expected to be) built? 2.3.5. Criteria to Assess Factors That Contribute To Ecological Comprehensiveness and Mainstreamability 2.3.5.1. Secondary Criteria: Which Factors Contribute To This Success There are many factors which may contribute to the creation of a green building strategy that is ecologically comprehensive. For example, in researching environmental problems for the first part of this thesis, it became clear that there were a large number of joint statements, declarations and agreements that have been issued by a variety of groups (scientists, governments, universities, religious leaders and planners) that were good sources of information to the general public about environmental problems. These include documents like the Union of Concerned Scientists' "Warning to Humanity," the Montreal Protocol, the Kyoto Protocol, A P A Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability e q u a l l y g o o d w h e n j u d g e d a g a i n s t e c o l o g i c a l c r i te r ia . 27 and the ICLEI Local Agenda 21 Declaration. These documents contained information that was reliable and relevant, and therefore useful for the literature review of this thesis. However, the documents were also useful for a different reason. It seemed that each of these joint statements, declarations and agreements followed a similar pattern of communication. They: ° - Acknowledge the environmental problem. 0 Are written (at least in one version) in simple, easily understood language for a broad public audience. ° Are communicated to the public through a variety of mediums (i.e.: press releases, publications, pamphlets and / or websites). 0 Are authored by a number of individuals or groups in partnership. As I did research into the green building strategies, I realized that there appeared to be a similarity between the successful strategies and many of the joint statements, declarations and agreements that I had used as part of my literature review. Those green building strategies that: => were developed with meaningful input from diverse groups; => were communicated in a clear, simple, and accessible way to a broad public audience; => garnered broad based political appeal also tended to be the ones that: => were the most ecologically comprehensive and => had the greatest ability to mainstream green buildings. Therefore, creating secondary criteria that could assess social variables like participation of diverse stakeholders, communication, and political appeal is crucial to investigating this idea. 2 0 m A number of authors have developed indicators of community sustainability that were useful in developing these criteria. See CMHC 1996; Hart 1996; Pandey etal 1996; Kline 1997; Winnipeg 1997; Pierce County 1997; Sheltair 1998; Carely 1998; Global Cities Online 1999. Many of these sources identify common issues, which parallel many of those listed above, including; • Public or stakeholder participation, or the need for policies to allow public or stakeholder participation; • Clear communication, or the need to communicate policies in a way that everyone in society can understand and be involved; • Political feasibility, or ensuring that any policy is politically viable; • Social equity, or creating equal opportunity for all members of society regardless of income. The importance of incorporating these principles into public policy is discussed in Hillier 1993; Forester 1989, 1992; Renn, Weblerand Wiedemann 1995; Roseland 1997, 1998; Healy 1992, Keeney 1992; Thomas 1995; Nader 2000. 28 Below is the list of criteria that have been developed with these concerns in mind. 2.3.5. Combined Criteria List Table 4: The Primary Criteria The issue being addressed Criterion How the criterion is measured Is the green building strategy ecologically comprehensive? Ecologically => Does the strategy encourage buildings to comprehensive incorporate a comprehensive set of ecological issues (in such categories as: energy, water, landscape, materials, waste or equivalent, as defined by the sub-criteria)? Meaningful => Does it encourage a reduction in resource resource consumption and waste generation of 30% or reduction more? 2 1 Is the green building strategy mainstreamable? Industry impact => Does the strategy have the ability to make green building products and practices into standard practice, or at least a broadly acceptable alternate practice? 2 2 Market => What percentage of the market is built using saturation / the green building program, or, alternately, buildings built how many buildings have been (or are expected to be) built? n This 30% will be based on a reduction in two major areas: first, energy, as it is usually measured in percentage reductions; and second, water, as low-water fixtures should allow reductions of between 30 and 50%. Other areas are much more difficult to quantify in percentages: reductions in landfill waste, for example, and increases in wild life habitat or cjreen space, are dependant on the very specific regional use levels. " This is the only measure on the criteria list that is discretionary. It defies a strict measurement like market saturation (although that should be used as part of the measure) as there are strategies like pilot projects whose impact on the mainstream building industry cannot be measured through simple saturation. This core discretionary criterion will be assessed with reference to the responses from the interviewees. 29 Combined Criteria List (Continued) Table 5: The Secondary Criteria The issue being addressed Criteria How it is measured What are the factors that contribute to ecological comprehensiveness and mainstreamability? Meaningful => Does the green building strategy encourage stakeholder meaningful stakeholder participation in participation policy formation and implementation? => Is there a diverse group of stakeholders participating, beyond government and industry groups and including NGO's and the public? Communication => Is it communicated in simple, easily and understood language for a diverse accessibility audience? => Does everyone (government, industry, the public) have free access to information explaining the strategy? Economic => Does the green building strategy enable equity equitable access to green buildings (housing and other types of buildings) for all income groups, especially the most vulnerable? => Does it significantly raise the price of buildings? Political support => Does the green building strategy have the support of parties and groups on opposite political spectrums? Does it have the support of a large variety of groups, like, for example, citizens groups, environmental groups, professional organizations and industry? Practicality => Is the green building strategy affordable? (i.e. is there a cheaper way to deliver the same services?) => Is it easy to implement? 30 2.4. The Case Studies 2.4.1. The Literature Reviewed for the Case Studies The literature review of green building strategies began with a paper that I wrote for the City of Vancouver and published under the title: "Strategies to Encourage More Sustainable Buildings: A Typology." In this document, I gathered information on the following strategy types: ° Assessment programs, including ISO 14000, E P M , B R E E A M England, B E P A C , and B R E E A M Canada. 0 Guidelines programs included Austin, LEED, Santa Monica, and Colorado. ° Policies included the US Navy's policy. 0 Incentive programs included NRCan programs, F C M programs, TVLB Mortgage program, and Fannie Mae's proposed mortgage program. ° Partnerships included N R S B A P , PATH, Virginia's Institute for Sustainable Design, and the Better Buildings Partnership. This report contained very little analysis of the information gathered, except to point out that if the City of Vancouver, UBC, the G V R D or the Provincial Government wanted to do something to reduce the impact of buildings, there were lots of examples to follow: it was time to get on board. Next, I selected strategies that would be useful for the thesis. The assessment programs of the City of Vancouver study were eliminated for a variety of reasons. As stated above, the B R E E A M programs and B E P A C were rejected for further research as they were not freely accessible to the general public. Other strategies were selected that showed some promise of mainstreaming green buildings and being ecologically comprehensive. These included: 1) Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Performance Buildings, 2) New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines, 3) Partnership for Resource Efficient Schools, 4) Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide, 5) A P A Policy Guide, 6) City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy, 7) Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District, 8) Sydney Olympic Village, 9) New York State's Green Building Tax Credit, and 10) FREE-F inanc ing Renewable Energy and Efficiency. 2.4.2. Organization of the Green Building Strategy Case Studies The case studies and their organization shall be briefly discussed here. The full details on the case studies are included in Appendix E, which is divided into three sections. 31 There are many ways in which these strategies can be categorized. The categories have been chosen because they are easy to understand and because they divide the large and diverse number of green building strategies into theme areas. Previously, in my study for the City of Vancouver, I divided the green building strategies into the following five categories: assessment programs, guidelines, policies, incentive programs, and partnerships. However, I found on re-examination for this thesis that assessment programs like B R E E A M and B E P A C were more usefully described as rating systems or certification systems. This is because they didn't just "assess" green buildings, they were designed to give a rating and, usually, certify a building as "green." In addition, previous categories of rating systems and guidelines programs overlap, and often a rating system like L E E D also act as guidelines. Thus, it makes sense to categorize rating and certification systems with guidelines. The previous category of "policies" needed to be restructured to be more useful. Some of the strategies classified as "policies" are used to adopt guidelines, some to create incentive programs, and some to do pilot projects. However, the previous category of "incentive programs" was useful, and is here used again but clarified and further defined under the new title: "Economic Incentives." Finally, government buildings built green as pilot projects were not examined separately in the report to the City of Vancouver. These projects act as examples to change perceptions and are given their own category in this thesis. Policies like the US Navy's that mandate green building standards are similar in nature as they result in models of development sponsored by government. Thus the category: Government Building Pilot Projects and Policies. These additions, deletions, and restructuring have allowed a much more useful categorization of the green building strategies. Three models or types of green building strategies are examined: I. Guidelines, Certification Systems and Rating Systems II. Government Building Pilot Projects and Policies III. Economic Incentives 32 2.4.3. How the Organization of the Case Studies Helps Frame the Thesis Question This reorganization of the case studies is particularly useful because it highlight two major trends that are present within the range of green building strategies. These two trends will be useful in answering the thesis question. The vast majority of the guidelines, certification systems and rating systems have been developed to be used voluntarily. 2 3 These strategies were designed to use the power of the market to mainstream green buildings. Of the three major categories of green building strategies covered, the development of these types of strategies predates the development of many government building pilot projects and policies or economic incentives. The government building pilot projects and policies that historically followed on the heels of the guidelines, certification systems and rating systems, also used the tools developed by the guidelines, certification systems and rating systems, but used them in a very different way. Where the guidelines, certification systems and rating systems tended to be used voluntarily, and used the power of the market, the government building pilot projects and policies in many cases take guidelines like L E E D or develop their own and mandate or encourage their use on government buildings or even private buildings. 2 4 The most significant of these precedents for municipalities is the adoption of the "Required" practices of the Santa Monica guidelines in the local building code. 2 5 The economic incentives category presents strategies that have been developed parallel to the above two major trends: there have been incentives developed to assist in both the market-based and government-based green building strategies. One of the crucial questions that will be explored is which of the two above approaches (market power and government intervention) has the greatest ability to create green building programs that are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable? Perhaps both strategies working together will have the greatest ability to mainstream green buildings. This is seen in case studies in which governments adopt policies like L E E D for their own buildings. Yet, if green buildings are going to be mainstreamed 2 3 This is the case in Austin's residential program, the Green Builder Program Colorado, LEED, Pennsylvania's Guidelines, NYC's Guidelines, BC Environmental Guidelines for Post Secondary Institutions, and some portions of Santa Monica's Guidelines. It is interesting that the programs that were developed later have some aspects of the "government building pilot projects and policies" group: the Pennsylvania and NYC guidelines are used voluntarily on government buildings. These distinctions are not intended to be water-tight; rather they are intended to shed light on patterns. 2 4 Examples include: the US Navy Policy, the Seattle Policy, PATH, Sydney, and Hannover. 33 beyond government-owned buildings, they may need to be adopted into building codes, which in Canada are presently not mandated to regulate environmental issues. This thesis will examine the green building strategies in the case studies in order to understand the main factors that influence the key characteristics of mainstreamability and ecological comprehensiveness. The following chart shows the organization of the green building case studies in these three models. Table 6: Green Building Case Studies Organized into Three Categories Type of strategy Sub-Type Example 1. Guidelines, certification, and rating systems a) Guidelines system 0 Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines ° Pennsylvania's High-Performance Buildings Guidelines ° New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines ° BC Environmental Guidelines for Post Secondary Institutions ° Seattle's Partnership for Resource Efficient Schools b) Rating and Certification system ("green building" labelling) ° B E P A C , B R E E A M UK, B R E E A M Canada, G B TOOL cj Combinations of guidelines, rating and certification systems ° Austin Green Building Program ° Green Builder Program Colorado ° LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ° Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 2. Pilot projects and regulations a) Blanket Green Building Policy— government policy requiring a green standard for all buildings ° Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy ° City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy It is c l a s s e d w i th the g u i d e l i n e s in th is t h e s i s but it h a s qua l i t i es of both c a t e g o r i e s a n d c o u l d b e p l a c e d w i th in the " g o v e r n m e n t p o l i c y " s e c t i o n a s w e l l . T h e c a t e g o r i e s a r e i n t e n d e d to b r ing out pa t t e rns , but c a n n o t c o m p l e t e l y a p p r o p r i a t e l y d e s c r i b e the c o m p l e x i t y w i th in e a c h s t ra tegy . 34 b) Government Pilot Projects— government (often in partnership with other groups) creates a model of development ° PATH-Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing ° Sydney, Hannover, PATH c) Professional Green Building Policy—a professional group agrees to encourage green building 0 A P A Policy Guide ° AIA Green Building Policy 3. Economic incentives a) Financial incentives for regulatory reform ° FCM's Affordability and Choice Today (ACT) Program b) Energy performance contracts to reduce energy consumption of present building stock 0 Toronto Better Buildings Partnership Program 0 Financing Renewable Energy and Efficiency (FREE) US Federal Savings Program ° B C B C ' s Green Buildings B C Retrofit Program c) Energy efficiency incentives to owners of energy efficient buildings ° Natural Resources Canada Energy Incentive Programs d) Built Green Mortgages that give better rates to certified green buildings ° Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program ° Environmental Mortgage Partnership (Fannie Mae and USNAHB) e) Tax credit for those who build green ° New York State's Green Building Tax Credit Each case study will have the following information: I. Central Organization II. Dates III. General Description 35 The general description includes an analysis of the importance of the particular green building strategy in relation to the others—if the program developed the first green building guidelines, for example (Austin), or if it has the potential to make green buildings accessible to all income levels (Fannie Mae's mortgage program). However, the more nuanced, in-depth analysis using the criteria will take place in the next two chapters. 2.4.3.1. Guidelines, Certification Systems and Rating Systems This group of case studies includes green building strategies whose central tool is guidelines, certification systems, or rating systems. Although they can be quite varied, in all cases these systems are intended to guide buildings towards lower environmental impacts in set areas, like energy, waste, and landscape. 2 6 Guidelines can be detailed, 150 page documents that give designers a great deal of practical information. The New York Guidelines, for example, include information describing in detail various environmental objectives, technical strategies, performance goals, along with resource information and other tips about how to build a green building in a certain jurisdiction. However, guidelines can also be much shorter documents. L E E D , for example, is 25 pages, but is then accompanied by additional resource information, and is expected to be used in conjunction with L E E D courses. Guidelines can also act as certification systems—meaning that they can certify buildings with a title of "green building." Guidelines can also be rating systems, which rate buildings and give them a score that indicates their environmental impact. There are several guidelines that are simultaneously rating systems and certification systems: Austin, Colorado, L E E D , and Minnesota. The guidelines, certification and rating systems examined here include: 1. Austin Green Building Program (1991): This is a municipal building program that includes combined guidelines, rating systems and certification programs for residential, municipal, and commercial. The program was the first green guidelines program in North America. There are many voluntary, market-based guidelines / certification / rating systems that could not be included here, including green residential programs in: Wisconsin, Scottsdale, Arizona; Central New Mexico HBA; Kitsap County HBA; Suburban Maryland Building Industry Association; Clark County HBA; and the Good Cents Environmental Home Program. 36 2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado (1995): This program is centered around the state building guidelines, which also act as a rating system and certification program for residential buildings. These were the first residential guidelines to be state-wide. 3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines (1996): These are municipal building guidelines applicable to all buildings except singe family residential. These are the first green guidelines to be partially incorporated into a local Building Code. 4. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (1997): This is a voluntary, market-based set of guidelines that also acts as a rating and certification program for new and existing institutional, commercial, and high-rise residential buildings. These are the first guidelines to position themselves as an industry standard. 5. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Performance Buildings (1999): These are state building guidelines that offers case studies and comprehensive green building information. 6. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines (1999): These are municipal building guidelines developed for use in the New York City capital construction process. The guidelines present a particularly comprehensive selection of practical information and strategies. See Appendix E for a more detailed description of these programs. 2.4.3.2. Pilot Projects and Regulations This group of case studies includes green building strategies whose central tool is a pilot project, series of pilot projects, or regulations that mandate all of its buildings to be built to a certain environmental standard. 2 7 Policies like the Navy's (in which government mandates green building standards) are similar to pilot projects because they act as models of best practices. Because government buildings account for a large amount of overall construction, these green building strategies have potential to transform the market in which they exist. If a national or international approach is taken (as is beginning to be taken now with many US government bodies adopting LEED), the impact could transform the national or international industry. 37 One of the potential benefits of requiring green standards for public buildings is that private industry would not have to carry the costs of breaching much of the learning curve. In addition, private industry would be stripped of any excuses that such buildings are not possible if there are many examples already in the public domain. When the buildings are built, they have the opportunity to educate the public that uses them about the environmental issues that they addressed. Finally, another potential benefit of the government testing a green building standard would be that government standards should be more likely to be created to meet not just financial goals (as may be present with most companies) but also broader ecological and social goals. However, political battles and bureaucratic inertia can bog down government programs. Through examining and analyzing these case studies, it is hoped to gain understanding of what contributes to a program that is both ecologically comprehensive and able to mainstream green buildings. Perhaps it will be found that government pilot projects do not offer the best way of proceeding towards this goal. The analysis should reveal what the important criteria are, and the relationship between the criteria that combine to create the desired characteristics of ecological comprehensiveness and mainstreamability. The government building policies and pilot projects examined here include: 1. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy (1993): The first blanket government policy requiring all buildings (totalling $5 billion annually: roughly one percent of all US construction) to adhere to a recognised standard (LEED). 2. Partnership for Resource Efficient Schools (1996): A partnership between City of Seattle Public Utilities and Seattle Public Schools to build schools according to tailor-made green building guidelines. 3. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide (1997): These are guidelines that have the ability to rate and certify buildings. It is weighted to reflect regionally important issues and is used to build government pilot projects. 4. Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (1998): A comprehensive Government-initiated partnership with federal departments and private enterprises to speed market acceptance of innovative (green) technologies. 2 7 U n f o r t u n a t e l y p r i va te l y f u n d e d pi lot p ro jec t s c o u l d not b e i n c l u d e d in the s c o p e of th is t h e s i s . A l t h o u g h c l e a r l y t h e y h a v e the po ten t ia l to m a k e a p o s i t i v e i m p a c t , the i r i m p a c t is m u c h m o r e diff icult to a s s e s s u n l e s s t h e y u s e a ra t ing s y s t e m o r 38 5. A P A Policy Guide (2000): A policy guide that encourages American planners to engage in variety of alternative development choices. 6. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy (2000): A blanket government policy requiring all buildings to adhere to a recognized standard (LEED). 7. Hannover (2000): A comprehensive pilot project in which the city of Hannover created the Kronsberg urban district, consisting of 6,000 units of environmentally sensitive housing for roughly 15,000 people. 8. Sydney Olympic Athletes Village (2000): Another comprehensive pilot project in which the world's largest solar suburb was built, containing 650 houses whose main source of energy is the sun. See Appendix E for a more detailed description of these programs. 2.4.3.3. Economic Incentives There are many economic incentives and financial measures that can be used to encourage more sustainable buildings. These include such strategies as changing price signals to reflect the true value of resources, e.g.: charging true costs of waste disposal and water use. In a broader sense, they include taxing pollution, like carbon or V O C s , and taxing energy. As people have to pay the real price for resources and pay for their pollution and wastes, the argument goes, the market will change to make better use of natural resources. Other strategies include giving incentives, like municipal research funds or tax credits for using renewable energy, as in New York's tax credit. Most of the economic incentives that impact green buildings in North America have, to date, been focused on reaping financial savings from energy efficiency measures. Energy is expensive, and getting to be more so, therefore there is a great deal of interest in conserving it. However, most of the other resources used by buildings (water, air, landscape, the surrounding ecosystem and the various materials used) are undervalued in the marketplace. The environmental problems associated with them are considered to be an economic externality, so that conserving them is not rewarded financially. For this reason, 4 of the 8 case studies detailed here are focused either exclusively or almost exclusively on energy savings. The economic incentives examined here include: cer t i f i ca t ion s y s t e m , in w h i c h c a s e they wi l l b e i n c l u d e d in th is t h e s i s u n d e r that c a t e g o r y . 39 1. FCM 's Affordability and Choice Today (ACT) Program (1990): This program gives grants of up to $20,000 to builders, developers; non-profit organizations, and municipalities to engage in multi-stakeholder regulatory reform, including (but not limited to) sustainable building practices. 2. Better Buildings Partnership Program (1996): This program brings together the City of Toronto, energy utilities, and the building sector to conduct comprehensive energy retrofits and some water retrofits with a payback of between three and ten years. 3. The Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Program (1996): The first environmental mortgage program in North America, this program made 5,757 housing loans total in 2000, and of that, 3,799 (66%) were Greenbuilding loans. 4. Financing Renewable Energy and Efficiency (FREE) Savings Program (1997): This US federal government program will contract private companies to install energy efficient technologies in federal buildings at no cost to the taxpayer using a standard energy contract. 5. Natural Resources Canada Energy Incentive Programs (1998): four programs, together worth $60 million over 3 years from 1998 to 2001, focus on improving the energy efficiency of Canada's existing and emerging building stock. 6. Environmental Mortgage Partnership (1999): This initiative includes working with lending agencies, home builders, and community partners to establish a set of mortgage financing products that are intended to encourage environmentally sensitive building. 7. New York State's Green Building Tax Credit (2000): This tax credit legislation awards between 5% and 7% of eligible costs for green buildings (that meet the state's requirements) as tax credits. These case studies are more fully detailed in Appendix E. 2.4.4. Summary of the Case Studies The case studies listed above form the raw material to be analyzed in the next two chapters. Chapter Three will use the primary criteria to analyze which of the green building strategies in the case studies are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. The findings may contradict what may be expected at a first glance at the case studies. A simple program like the Santa Monica Guidelines may appear at first glance to be less interesting than programs like LEED, green building mortgage programs, or large models of green development like Sydney Solar Village in Australia 40 or the model ecological district in Hannover, Germany. However, the choice to include ecological issues in a building code may be, in its quiet way, more revolutionary. Chapter Three will present the development,of a list of strategies that are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. In Chapter Four, these strategies will be analyzed using the secondary criteria, in an effort to understand the factors which may contribute to the successful creation of strategies that are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. 41 C H A P T E R 3—Analys is of Strategies by Primary Criteria We, of the world's architectural and design professions, commit ourselves to: • Place consideration for environmental and social sustainability at the core of our design work. • Develop innovative practices, procedures, products, services and standards that will enable us to implement such sustainable design. • Educate our fellow professionals, our clients, and the general public about the value and critical importance of sustainable design. • Work to change policies, regulations, and standard practices in government and business so that sustainable design will become the fully supported standard practice in the building industry. • Work to bring the existing built environment up to sustainable design standards. "Declaration of Interdependence for a Sustainable Future," signed at the 1993 World Congress of Architects by AIA, AIBC, and many other architects and institutions from around the world. 3.1. Chapter structure This chapter analyses the green building strategies using the primary criteria in order to address the first part of the thesis question: which green building strategies are both ecologically robust and mainstreamable? The criteria are applied individually to the case studies to maintain emphasis on the criteria, which are more at the heart of the thesis question than the case studies. It is the qualities of ecological comprehensiveness and mainstreamability that are crucial to the thesis question, rather than the case studies. The research and key informant interviews will be drawn on to analyze the case studies using the primary criteria. 3.2. Criteria to Assess Ecological Comprehensiveness The criteria used to assess the ecological comprehensiveness of the green building strategies described in the case studies are: => Does the strategy encourage buildings to incorporate a comprehensive set of ecological criteria (in such categories as: energy, water, landscape, materials, waste or equivalent)? 2 8 => Does the strategy encourage a reduction in resource consumption and waste generation of 30% or more? 3.2.1. Primary Criteria: Strategies Which are Ecologically Comprehensive This section will discuss those strategies that completely met the primary criteria for ecological comprehensiveness. How or why these green building strategies were able to be developed in a way that was ecologically comprehensive is a question that will be asked later in the secondary criteria section. 3.2.1.1. LEED L E E D ( U S G B C ' s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Guidelines Rating system) uses the following resource categories (USGBC 2000a): ° Sustainable Sites ° Water Efficiency ° Energy and Atmosphere ° Materials and Resources ° Indoor Environmental Quality F o r t he ful l l ist o f s u b - c r i t e r i a s e e the " E c o l o g i c a l C r i t e r i a " s e c t i o n . 43 Through these areas, L E E D meets the ecological criteria set for this thesis, as shown in the chart below. The L E E D guidelines are the only case study strategy in which this criteria-by-criteria analysis shall be done. It is done here to show the steps that are taken to test whether every thesis criterion is present, but it would be too lengthy to include it for each case study. Table 7: Application of Ecological Comprehensiveness Criteria to LEED Thesis criterion and sub-criterion established for this thesis to test the ecological comprehensiveness of green building strategy: Environmental design issues present in the LEED guidelines that meet the intent of the criteria and sub-criteria established: Energy Select site in dense area ° Sustainable Sites Credit 2: Urban Redevelopment Select site close to transit, walking and biking routes 0 Sustainable Sites Credit 4: Alternative Transportation Reduce energy use ° Energy and Atmosphere Prerequisite 1: Fundamental Building Systems Commissioning ° Energy and Atmosphere Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance 0 Energy and Atmosphere Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance 0 Energy and Atmosphere Credit 3 : Additional Commissioning ° Energy and Atmosphere Credit 5 : Measurement and Verification Use renewable or alternate energy sources 0 Energy and Atmosphere Credit 2 : Renewable Energy 0 Energy and Atmosphere Credit 6: Green Power Encourage clean energy transport ° Sustainable Sites Credit 4: Alternative Transportation Water Reduce water use 0 Water Efficiency Credit 1: Water Efficient Landscaping ° Water Efficiency Credit 3: Water Use Reduction Ensure site water filtration ° Sustainable Sites Credit 6: Stormwater Management Use alternate treatment for human waste with minimum resource use and pollution 0 Water Efficiency Credit 2: Innovative Wastewater Technologies Recharge ground water ° Sustainable Sites Credit 6: Stormwater Management 44 Application of Ecological Comprehensiveness Criteria to L E E D (Continued) Criteria and sub-criteria established for this thesis to test the ecological comprehensiveness of green building strategy: Environmental design issues present in the LEED guidelines that meet the intent of the criteria and sub-criteria established: Landscape Protect vegetation and watercourses ° Sustainable Sites Credit 1: Site Selection Reuse topsoil ° Sustainable Sites Prerequisite: Erosion and Sedimentation Control Use integrated pest management ° n/p (Innovation Credits) Maximize green space 0 Sustainable Sites Credit 7: Landscape and Exterior Design to Reduce Heat Islands Maximize native plantings and wildlife habitat ° Sustainable Sites Credit 5: Reduced Site Disturbance Materials Avoid ecologically damaging materials ° Materials and Resources Credit 6: Rapidly Renewable Materials ° Materials and Resources Credit 7: Certified Wood ° Energy and Atmosphere Credit 4: Elimination of H C F C ' s and Halons ° Energy and Atmosphere Prerequisite 3: C F C Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment Use recycled materials ° Materials and Resources Credit 4: Recycled Content Use materials efficiently ° n/p (Innovation Credits) Use salvaged materials 0 Materials and Resources Credit 3: Resource Reuse Use local materials 0 Materials and Resources Credit 5: Local/Regional Materials Use durable and low maintenance ° n/p (Innovation Credits) Waste Supply recycling facilities ° Materials and Resources Prerequisite: Storage & Collection of Recyclables Supply composting facilities 0 Materials and Resources Prerequisite: Storage & Collection of Recyclables Minimize construction waste 0 Materials and Resources Credit 1: Building Reuse ° Materials and Resources Credit 2: Construction Waste Management 45 Application of Ecological Comprehensiveness Criteria to LEED (Continued) Criteria and sub-criteria established for this thesis to test the ecological comprehensiveness of green building strategy: Environmental design issues present in the LEED guidelines that meet the intent of the criteha and sub-criteria established: Air Minimize air pollutants 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Prerequisite 2: Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 1: Carbon Dioxide (co2) Monitoring 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 3: Construction IAQ Management Plan 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 4 : Low-Emitting Materials 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 5: Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control Ensure adequate fresh air to occupants 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Prerequisite 1: Minimum IAQ Performance 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 2: Increase Ventilation Effectiveness Light Ensure adequate daylight to all inhabitants 0 Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 8: Daylight and Views The criteria that are not covered by the guidelines are: (1) the use of integrated pest management, (2) the efficient use of materials, and (3) the use of durable and low maintenance materials. In addition, although there is passing mention of composting, it is offered only weak support, as there are no points offered for it. Composting is one of the areas that will come up repeatedly throughout the green building strategies as being either ignored or classed with recycling. Each of these are important ecological issues, but as LEED includes so many other equally important issues not covered by the criteria, it shall be regarded as meeting all the criteria. The environmental issues present in LEED that are not included in the criteria list include: a "Sustainable Sites Credit" for ecologically sensitive site selection that comprises avoiding choosing sites that are (quoted from LEED): 0 Prime agricultural land as defined by the Farmland Trust 0 Land whose elevation is lower than 5 feet above the elevation of the 100-year flood as defined by FEMA 0 Land that provides habitat for any species on the Federal or State threatened or endangered list 46 ° Within 100 feet of any wetland as defined by 40 C F R , Parts 230-233 and Part 22, OR as defined by local or state rule or law, whichever is more stringent. ° Land which prior to acquisition for the project was public parkland, unless land of equal or greater value as parkland is accepted in trade by the public land owner. (Park Authority projects are exempt.) It also includes a "Sustainable Sites Credit" that encourages development of brownfield sites, a "Sustainable Sites Credit" that encourages light pollution reduction, an "Indoor Environmental Quality Credit" for "thermal comfort" and for "controllability of systems." These all address significant ecological issues, but are not likely to be included in any other guidelines or green building strategies, as most are not as sophisticated as this one. The second part of assessing ecological comprehensiveness includes seeing if the strategy clearly encourages significant reductions (30% or more) in environmental impact using energy, water and other resources as litmus tests for the whole strategy.2 9 L E E D very clearly encourages energy reductions of between 20% and 60% in new buildings and between 10% and 50% in existing buildings. In addition, L E E D clearly encourages water reductions of between 20% and 30% from standard practice. 3.2.1.2. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy and City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy Because L E E D meets the ecological criteria, the Navy and Seattle Policies meet them because they use LEED. 3.2.1.3. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines New York's Guidelines was also found to be ecologically comprehensive under the definition of this thesis. In the area of the technical assistance, the N Y C guidelines give practical information for designers in the following areas: ° Site Design and Planning ° Building Energy Use ° Indoor Environment ° Material and Product Selection ° Water Management 2 9 This 30% will be based on a reduction in two major areas: first, energy, as it is usually measured in percentage reductions; and second, water, as low-water fixtures should allow reductions of between 30% and 50%. Other areas are much more difficult to quantify in percentages: reductions in landfill waste, for example, and increases in wild life habitat or green space, are dependant on the very specific regional use levels. 47 ° Construction Administration ° Commissioning ° Operations and Maintenance. Unlike L E E D , there is not a gap in the following areas: (1) the use of integrated pest management, (2) the efficient use of materials, and (3) the use of durable and low maintenance materials. There is strong encouragement to use composting. In addition, these guidelines do encourage at least a 30% reduction in energy use and water. 3.2.1.4. The Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide The Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide presents "sustainable" building strategies, which give practical methods of achieving certain levels of ecological performance in the following areas: ° Site ° Water ° Energy ° IEQ ° Materials ° Waste. The Minnesota Guidelines include all of the environmental issues encompassed in the criteria and sub-criteria except any encouragement of Integrated Pest Management (IPM). In addition, there is little useful information on the composting. As with LEED, food waste is included under the title of recycling and is dealt with in a way that is confusing. However, these are very minor differences, and the guidelines are very close to meeting all of the criteria and sub-criteria. The Minnesota program does encourage a reduction in resource consumption and waste generation of 30% or more compared to standard practice. From the projects completed so far, the energy reductions have been the most significant results (Personal Interview 2001). Generally the guide is shooting for reduction between 20% - 30% from code. Previously the buildings in Hennepin County were designed simply to meet the energy code (Personal Interview 2001). 48 3.2.2. Strategies Which Partially Meet the Criteria This section discusses those strategies that do not meet all of the ecological criteria, but cover enough that they can be seen to be adequate in meeting the ecological criteria overall. 3.2.2.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program Austin's residential "Green Guidelines," used in combination with the "Sourcebook" cover a comprehensive set of ecological issues equivalent to the following criteria: 0 Energy 0 Materials ° Water ° Health and safety ° Community (from Austin 1998). Every thesis criterion and sub-criterion on the expanded ecological criteria list was met by this program except there was little or no encouragement of the following four criteria: 1. First the thesis criterion: "Treat human waste with minimum resource use and pollution." Although the original Green Builder program had composting toilets as one option, this was not popular and therefore was not included on the present version. A key informant knowledgeable about the Austin program explains the Austin decision this way: At some point a program such as ours has to decide if we are going to spend our energy working with a very limited number of designers and builders on a few buildings that are exceptionally green and individually have a high impact but collectively have almost no impact or if we are going to work to incrementally change the industry and have a real impact. Omission of composting toilets reflects our decision to focus our attentions on the builders who are responsible for 99.9% of the homes built in our area. Certainly the intent to impact the mainstream building industry and try to achieve market transformation is a laudable goal. The informant produces strong arguments for focusing on those green building practices that have the. broadest possibility of adoption. However, it is not clear that the qualities of being ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable are mutually exclusive. It seems possible to tackle this problem by 49 dedicating the largest portion of energy and resources to the tasks that will have the largest adoption in the market. Guidelines like LEED and NY include information on a full range of more difficult, controversial or experimental green building strategies. To punish those builders that do want to try innovative things by not even providing them with information resources seems to be an unnecessary extreme. Other criteria that were not represented by Austin's residential guidelines include the following: 2. Reuse of topsoil: This is not mentioned because it is standard practice for residential builders (Personal Interview 2001). 3. Maximizing green space and maximizing native plantings and wildlife habitat: While it is encouraged to keep "existing vegetation" there is no mention of native plants and wildlife habitat. The points for xeriscaping and retaining at least 50% existing natural vegetation cover this to some degree. However, they do not expressly encourage maximizing green space, as "existing" vegetation may need enhancement to be restored back to its previous level of native plants and wildlife habitat. 4. Ensuring adequate daylight and views to all inhabitants: This is not mentioned in the rating system, but it is promoted as part of the program by staff members (Personal Interview 2001). However, despite these few omissions, the program still covers a most of the ecological criteria and encourages a significant reduction in energy and water use. Whether or not Austin's program can encourage significant resource reduction when it could be seen as legitimizing low-density housing (that is intrinsically less environmentally sound) 3 0 could be questioned. However, low-density housing is fueled by consumer demand, and, as one of the key informant interviewees noted, Austin does all it can to both promote multi-family green buildings and "promote people building within the urban core." Therefore this strategy will be seen as adequately meeting the ecological criteria overall. 3.2.2.2. Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program The TVLB Mortgage was developed using the Austin guidelines as a model. Therefore, the TVLB program is lacking in many of the areas mentioned for Austin, but also a few more. It does not deal with wildlife habitat issues, or transportation issues, or the 50 importance of being placed in an urban community. However, overall, it makes an attempt to be comprehensive and encourage significant reductions in environmental impact. 3.2.2.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines Santa Monica's guidelines are structured by the following topic areas (SM 1999b): => Site and Form => Landscape => Transportation => Envelope => Materials => Water Systems => Electrical Systems => HVAC Systems => Control Systems => Construction Management These guidelines are different from others in that they are made up of "required" and "recommended" practices. They are the first in North America to have some of their practices (the required practices) incorporated into the municipal code. While this is significant in terms of the impact that it will have on industry, there is no incentive or certification given for the industry to go beyond the required measures. Therefore, if it is argued that not many builders will exceed the requirements if there is no incentive to do so, then those criteria listed below are the omissions from the "required" practices (even if they are present in the "Recommended" practices): ° Select site in dense area ° Select site close to transit, walking and biking routes ° Use renewable or alternate energy sources ° Use alternate treatment for human waste with minimum resource use and pollution ° Use integrated pest management ° Maximize green space ° Maximize native plantings and wildlife habitat 0 Avoid ecologically damaging materials ° Use recycled materials ° Use materials efficiently ° Use salvaged materials ° Use local materials ° Use durable and low maintenance materials ° Supply composting facilities 0 Minimize air pollutants For analysis of this point, see: Walker 1995; Walker and Rees 1997; EN 1998. 51 ° Ensure adequate fresh air to occupants ° Ensure adequate daylight to all inhabitants The above omissions show that if only the "Required" practices are counted the program should be considered to not meet the criteria for ecological comprehensiveness. However, if the "Recommended" practices are also included then almost all of the criteria have representation in the guidelines. If both recommended and required practices are counted, only those below are missing: ° Select site in dense area 0 Select site close to transit, walking and biking routes ° Use alternate treatment for human waste with minimum resource use and pollution ° Avoid ecologically damaging materials 0 Use local materials Most of the guidelines studied have some incentives in place to encourage builders to achieve a certain level of performance in a variety of environmental areas, like accreditation as a "green building." However most of the other guidelines—like New York and Pennsylvania—do not have a way of requiring that their design guidelines are used. Therefore it makes sense to give Santa Monica the benefit of the doubt and assume for the sake of argument that they will create an incentive for their builders to cover the "Recommended" practices. Analyzing the guidelines this way, they meet the criteria for ecological comprehensiveness. Finally, the guidelines meet the thesis criterion for encouraging significant ecological change. Santa Monica requires between 20% and 30% less energy use than California's Title 24 regulations. The water practices should reduce water use between 30% and 50%. 3.2.2.4. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Performance Buildings Pennsylvania's Green Design Systems covers: ° Green Team Building and Goal Setting 0 Site ° Enclosure ° Mechanical ° Interiors ° Materials Although most of the major criteria areas (energy, water, landscape, materials, waste, air, light) are referred to at least obliquely, these guidelines are wordy and lack the punchy, pithy character that most guidelines strive for and guidelines like L E E D manage to achieve. These guidelines are written in paragraph form, and no measureable 52 performance targets are suggested anywhere. Most of the recommendations fail to be operationalized. Although these guidelines did not have difficulty touching on solutions like composting, alternate sewage treatment, and alternate site water treatment, the fact that they are written in very abstract language almost ensures that these strategies will not be well understood by the reader. A key informant interviewee who worked to develop the guidelines noted that there was political pressure to deliberately obscure the more controversial green building practices like composting, composting toilets and green roofs. Significantly, the guidelines point designers to L E E D or other "ratings systems" or "checklists" to assist in the design process. 3.2.2.5. Hannover World EXPO Model Ecological District The Kronsberg houses have the following features (from E X P O 2000): ° C O 2 emissions reduced by 60% through: => efficient local district heating => co-generation power stations => energy-saving programs :=> wind and solar power 0 Groundwater is conserved though: => percolation channels that filter water back to ground 0 Potable water is conserved through: => technical measures => water savings information ° Construction site waste is reduced through: => programs that helps construction companies sort waste into categories 0 Domestic waste is reduced through: => composting programs in district gardens => sorted waste programs 0 Site soil will be reused on site for: => sound barriers => sight screens => viewing embankments => landscaping features This seems to indicate that the strategy has incorporated every criteria and sub-criteria of the expanded ecological criteria list except the following: => Select site in dense area => Select site close to transit, walking and biking routes 53 =>. Use alternate treatment for human waste with minimum resource use and pollution => Protect vegetation and watercourses => Use integrated pest management => Maximize green space => Maximize native plantings and wildlife habitat In addition to the entire materials, air and light criteria and sub-criteria were not present. However, it is very difficult to know without visiting the area if these are standard practice there or if they were actually omitted3 1 For example, European cities tend to develop closer to transit and pedestrian links, and it may be taken for granted that the site should be close to these amenities. Overall, the development seems to meet the majority of the ecological criteria. 3.2.2.6. Sydney Olympic Village Each of the 650 homes in Sydney Olympic Village has the following features: => Energy => solar power cells, which turn the house into a mini-power station and feed power back into the grid => optional 'Green Power' from renewable energy that is now available throughout most of Australia => solar water heaters, with a back-up of gas => passive solar design to capture appropriate levels of heat and light (using sunroofs and light corridors) and block excess heat => native plants and fabric coverings provide shading to keep out excess heat => insulation keeps out extreme temperatures high efficiency lighting and appliances => location that is near public transit, shops and community amenities => energy use will be reduced 50% from standard practice => Water => water-saving faucets and fixtures to save energy and water => a dual water system which allows recycled water use for toilets and gardens after the Games => water use will be reduced by 30% from standard practice => Landscape => native plants used => Materials => an up to 80% reduction in the use of the toxic plastic PVC 3 2 for plumbing, cabling and other fixtures B e c a u s e m o s t of t h e d e t a i l e d in fo rmat ion o n th is pro jec t w a s in G e r m a n , it w a s diff icult to d o m o r e e x t e n s i v e r e s e a r c h . 3 2 T h e r e a s o n for a v o i d i n g P V C (po lyv iny l ch lo r i de ) is that its m a n u f a c t u r e , u s e a n d d i s p o s a l r e l e a s e s h a z a r d o u s c h e m i c a l s i n c l u d i n g d i o x i n . D i o x i n h a s b e e n l i nked to bir th d e f e c t s , c a n c e r a n d h o r m o n e d i s rup t i on ( G r e e n p e a c e 2000). 54 => vinlyl / P V C flooring was avoided and ceramic tiles and timber were used instead => Australian plantation timber and Forest Stewardship Council certified "sustainable" timber => Waste => approximately 92% of construction waste was redirected from the landfil through the construction waste recycling => Air => Reduced use of automobile transport wil reduce air pollution in this area Light => 90% of homes are oriented for optimal solar gain The results of these green building measures at the Solar Village are that: => Roughly 7,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will be avoided every year => One million kilowatt hours of renewable and non-polluting energy will be generated every year on site => Roughly $800 in annual savings on energy bills will be created for each Solar Village unit (Greenpeace 2000). On first glance through the material, it appears that the only areas which might meet the criteria for being ecologically comprehensive are energy and water. It is difficult, however, to compare a built project with guidelines. The buildings that will be built under any given set of guidelines will certainly not include all of the ecological design issues covered in the guidelines. This is the case at the Athletes' Village as well. Greenpeace's Environmental Guidelines for the Summer Olympic Games, adopted by the Sydney Olympic Committee, focused on the following seven key issues: • toxic contamination • energy use • refrigeration & airconditioning • alternatives to P V C • timber use • water use • transport In addition, it is clear from Greenpeace's Environmental Assessment Of The Sydney 2000 Olympics that there were extensive efforts in a variety of environmental areas that did not translate into reality. For example, Greenpeace used the Guidelines to lobby for grey water and black water collection systems, which were not used. The plan was to produce green electricity from bio-gas and to use the waste product to form nutrient-rich fertilizer. In addition, Greenpeace used the Guidelines as a basis from which to lobby for 55 the inclusion of a much larger number of bicycle lock-up facilities throughout the Olympic site. However, this was not implemented. In addition to the problem of comparing a built product with guidelines, there is the added complication at the Sydney Olympic site that many of the initiatives taken there were taken throughout the site, and not focused on one site in particular. Therefore an examination of the environmental initiatives taken on the broader site reveals that the information above gives only part of the picture. The initiatives below reveal programs and design features that cover a broader selection of the ecological criteria: 3 3 => Where feasible, existing buildings were recycled and renovated instead of being torn down to create newer buildings. This was the case in one-third of the sport venues: 9 of 28 buildings were held in already-existing venues. => The wider Homebush Bay site, host to the Olympics, has historically been the site of massive dumping of domestic, industrial and commercial wastes, including hazardous wastes. The remediation technology to clean up the site was innovative because it did not release toxic emissions. It was remediated and changed from wasteland to parkland. => Over 320 fridges with environmentally safe refrigeration chemicals were used throughout the site (although not specifically at the Athletes' Village). => A network of cycleways was created throughout the Olympic site. => Extensive public transit infrastructure included an Olympic rail loop that moves 50,000 people / hour, thousands of buses, and rail links to both international and domestic airports. => Over 500 solar and electric buggies (with the facilities to recharges them made available in the buildings) were provided through the games for officials and athletes. => A water reclamation and management scheme (WRAMS) was implemented throughout the Olympic site which treats stormwater and sewage to be recycled for non-potable uses. => All stormwater on site is treated naturally through a series of water quality control ponds, which also act as habitat for waterfowl and other species. => One of these ponds provides habitat for the endangered green and golden bell frog species. => After being treated naturally, the stormwater is moved to the Water Treatment Plant for final treatment before it is reused for non-potable purposes such as toilet flushing and irrigation. => The innovative wastewater reclamation plant uses microorganisms to biologically treat up to 2.2 mega litres of sewage per day. Given the relatively ecologically comprehensive nature of the overall features included on the Olympic site combined with the features in the homes, the Sydney Solar village should be considered to meet the ecological criteria. 56 3.2.3. Strategies Which Are Less Than Comprehensive This section discusses those strategies that do not meet enough of the ecological criteria to be considered ecologically comprehensive. 3.2.3.1. PA TH-Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing The only two measurable ecological goals of this program that are (1) energy efficiency (the goal being to cut energy use of new housing by 50% and reduce energy use in 15 million existing homes by 30%) and (2) durability (the goal being to reduce maintenance costs by 50%). Overall, PATH estimates that by 2010, the technologies that have been used in the PATH program will prevent 39 million tons of carbon from entering the atmosphere every year and collectively save consumers approximately $18 billion annually (PATH 1999). However, the demonstration projects do respond to a considerably broader spectrum of ecological issues. Unfortunately, though, they include other environmental features in what seems to be a random fashion, so that it is hard to analyze the inclusion of these other environmental features in a systematic way. Most of the PATH projects studied in the case study appear to have basic energy and water reduction features, and air quality features. Beyond that, there is a great deal of variation in whether or not they incorporate further environmental features. 3.2.3.2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado The Green Builder Program of Colorado gives a designation of a "Built Green" home if a building has certain energy efficiency requirements and a minimum number of green features selected from the following checklist categories (HBAMD 1999b): energy requirement, land use, waste management, energy use, materials, and water. At first glance, compared to the ecological criteria, the entire categories of landscape, air and light seem to be omitted. However on closer inspection, all of the ecological criteria and sub-criteria are represented in the guidelines except the following: => Energy => Select site in dense area => Select site close to transit, walking and biking routes => Encourage clean energy transport => Water 3 3 The below information is from the following sources: Buzacott 1996; Spooner 1998; Greenpeace 2000a,b; Pacific Power 2000; Posbic and Rever 2001. 57 => Use alternate treatment for human waste with minimum resource use and pollution => Landscape => Use integrated pest management => Maximize green space => Maximize native plantings and wildlife habitat => Materials: although there are some of the following categories encouraged, these guidelines specifically asks for certain materials (like recycled content underlayment) that might help assist the designer in finding recycled materials, but is also likely to stop creative solutions. In addition, there are almost no salvaged products encouraged. The following is a list of those criteria that have no corresponding ecological issues represented in the guidelines: Avoid ecologically damaging materials => Use materials efficiently => Use salvaged materials => Use local materials => Use durable and low maintenance => Waste => Supply composting facilities => Light: There are no requirements for daylighting => Ensure adequate daylight to all inhabitants The above omissions demonstrate that the program does not cover a diverse range of the ecological criteria, and it does not go far enough in encouraging significant reductions. One major criticism of this program is the prescriptive nature of its green building checklist—it runs the risk of stifling creativity and allowing engineers and designers to come up with solutions that are totally new, and use much less resources. There may also be further ecological problems with the Colorado program. It is significant that an ecological footprint analysis of housing in Canada revealed that an R2000 detached house (at 1.26 ha/capita) had a larger ecological footprint than either a townhouse (at 1.18 ha/capita), a walk-up apartment (at 0.96 ha/capita), or a high-rise apartment (at 0.90 ha/capita) (Walker 1995). Therefore, it may be argued that despite the broad application of this program, it may in fact be doing some damage in that it may 58 be legitimizing a housing form that is typically more resource- and waste-intensive. Unlike the Austin program that actively promotes a multi-family component to its green building program, and actively promotes living in the urban core, Colorado may in fact be promoting a housing type that is encourages sprawl and is ecologically destructive. 3.2.3.3. APA, AIA, and AIBC Policy Guides on Sustainability All three of these policies are ultimately able to be categorized as less than comprehensive because they do not encourage significant reductions (reductions of 30% or more) in resource consumption and waste generation. However, the A P A policy is also not particularly ecologically comprehensive, in part because it is focused on development in general, and not building development in particular. The A P A Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability encourages all of the thesis sub-criteria in the energy and water categories, several from landscape and waste, and covers several other ecological criteria that are more focused on community development than building development. Overall, it is a fairly broad range of ecological issues that is covered. However, there is no target given for reduction of environmental impact, so it fails on the second part of the criteria. The A lA 's Guide to Environmentally Sustainable Architecture is more focused on buildings. It is also a more ecologically comprehensive guide to environmentally sensitive buildings (AIA 2001). Between the AIA Guide and the AlA's "Declaration of Interdependence for a Sustainable Future," most of the major criteria (energy, water, landscape, materials, waste, air, light) are covered in at least some minor way. These guides are both written in generalities and do not point to all of the individual ecological thesis sub-criteria established for this thesis. Significantly, the A lA 's Guide suggests more significant reductions in energy use than most of the strategies examined here. It states that: "A goal of reducing energy costs by 60 percent through innovative design is achievable in most cases." However, it does not include performance targets for any other environmental issues, which implies that any change would be enough. This means that it does not encourage significant change in the whole range of environmental features. 59 T h e Hannove r pr inc ip les—adopted by the Architectural Institute of Brit ish C o l u m b i a — a r e e v e n more genera l a n d abstract . They do not cover the major eco log ica l criteria c reated for this thes is , and they do not encourage signif icant reduct ions in env i ronmenta l impact. 3.2.3.4. The Energy-Based Economic Incentives A s d i s c u s s e d previously, a disproport ionate number of the economic incent ives dea l with energy sav ings a lone, and therefore they tend not to be ecolog ica l ly comprehens ive . Thus , they fail not b e c a u s e they do not require signif icant reduct ions—but b e c a u s e they only encou rage envi ronmental change in the single a rea of energy, or energy plus one or two other a reas like water and indoor air. Of the energy -based strategies that offer s o m e potential of being ecologica l ly comprehens ive , the Fann ie M a e Mor tgage program holds part icular potential for taking the s u c c e s s e s of the T V L B even further. Unfortunately, it is s o far underdeve loped. That is not to s a y that the eco log ica l benefits are not great from these programs. S o far, for examp le , the Better Bui ld ings Partnership in Toronto has avo ided 72,000 tonnes of CO2 every year ; created roughly 3000 person years of employment ; saved roughly $6 mil l ion in energy and other costs every year; and 155 bui ldings within the Ci ty of Toronto have undergone improvements. However , the 72,000 tonne CO2 reduct ion that has so far been ach ieved only t ranslates into 4 % of the former Ci ty of Toronto 's target. It is expec ted that the fu l l -scale program, which has been in operat ion s ince M a y 4 t h , 1999, has the potential of avoid ing 3 mill ion tonnes of CO2 (Toronto 1999, 2000 ; Tay lo r 1999). 3.3. Criteria to Assess Mainstreamability T h e s e c o n d set of primary criteria are those that a s s e s s the mainstreamabi l i ty of the g reen bui lding strategies. T h e intent of the these criteria is to a s s e s s whether or not the strategy has the ability to mains t ream green bui ldings. Th is is measu red by ask ing the fol lowing quest ions : => D o e s the strategy have the ability to make green building products and pract ices into s tandard pract ice, or at least a broadly acceptab le alternate p rac t i ce? 3 4 => W h a t percentage of the market is built us ing the g reen bui lding program, or, alternately, how many bui ldings have been (or are expec ted to be) built? 3 4 This measure is somewhat discretionary. It defies a strict measurement like simply the use of market saturation and will therefore be assessed with reference to the responses from the interviewees. 60 3.3.1. Primary Criteria: Strategies Which are Mainstreamable 3.3.1.1. A ustin's Residential Green Building One of the key informant interviewees experienced with the Austin program explained that he believes that the biggest success of the Austin residential program "is the way that the construction industry has evolved over the ten years that this program has been in place." He. points in particular to the fact that the green building program has changed industry standards, not just for sophisticated architects and builders but for production builders who build in the lower price ranges. There have been solid increases in the numbers of buildings assessed under the program, particularly the residential program: => In 1996 400 homes were rated => In 1997 nearly 600 were rated => In 1998, the program rated 19% of all homes built in Austin (Personal Interview 1999) => For the year Oct 1 s t 1999 to Sept 30 t h 2000, 688 of the 2,200 homes built in the Austin Energy Area were rated by the program—that is 31% (Personal Interview 2001) However, the program has also had a large impact on surrounding municipalities. Builders that use the rating system in Austin use the same specs (specifications for things like recycled countertop), products and practices outside of the area. One of the key informants noted that most of the 4 or 5 star (higher) rated homes are outside of the service area, as the service area is in the inner city where people are less interested, and less able to pay for more sophisticated housing. In addition, the nearby Texas Veterans Land Board Mortgage program should be seen as a testament to the leading role that the Austin, Texas Program has played and the kind of impact that such an important and well-orchestrated program can have on the culture of an entire state. The TVLB Mortgage program developed its rating system with assistance from Austin (TVLB 2001) and it relies on much of the Austin Green Building Program's resources. The Austin Green Building program meets both of the mainstreamability criteria. It has already achieved significant market transformation. If the percentage of market share continues to rise as it has done over the last few years, the program seems able to continue to transform the market at an increasing rate. 61 3.3.1.2. Green Builder Program of Colorado The Green Builder Program of Colorado built almost 3,000 "Green Built" homes between 1997 and 2000. One quarter of new home shoppers in metro Denver are aware of the Green Builder program (HBAMD 1999a, 2001). 3.3.1.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines As of March 1 s t, 2001, all buildings built in Santa Monica that qualify (this is in effect all buildings except single-family housing) will be mandated to use the guidelines' "Required" practices. Therefore, these guidelines will influence 100% of these buildings built in the city. As noted by the key informant for Santa Monica, the City is in the process of building the first two buildings that will use these guidelines. One is a single room occupancy affordable housing project, which far exceeds the requirements of the guidelines. The other is a city police headquarters. 3.3.1.4. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design L E E D is the only system in existence today that has the potential to become a North American industry standard in the near future. L E E D is now the required standard for all buildings built by the US Navy and the City of Seattle. In addition, L E E D is used as an acceptable alternate to the in-house guidelines in Austin's commercial program, and is being considered for adoption as a standard by many cities, including New York City ("Green" 1999), Santa Monica (Personal Interview 1999) and many more. If the guidelines continue to be adopted by building owners, organizations and even whole cities across North America, then they may become the industry standard. L E E D Guidelines have already been used and assessed in over 30 pilot projects (Cole 1999). Like no other green building strategy, L E E D seems to have the ability to transform the entire North American market. While complete market transformation is the goal, to measure this would require the establishment of a baseline of present buildings, which is difficult due to the fact that there is so little reliable research available on the existing market (Personal Interview 2001). A larger impediment to true transformation of the market to an environmental standard is that fact that L E E D presently covers only commercial and high-rise residential new buildings. With the future development of low-rise residential guidelines, operations and maintenance guidelines, and commercial interiors and renovation guidelines, LEED will be better able to effect complete market 62 transformation. However, the challenges to the possibility of LEED becoming an industry standard will be discussed further as this analysis progresses and in the concluding chapter of this thesis. 3.3.1.5. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy In the ecological criteria section, the Navy's policy is considered to be ecologically comprehensive because LEED is. However, in this section, the Navy is not considered to be mainstreamable simply because LEED is mainstreamable—they are each successful for very different reasons. The LEED guidelines are a voluntary, market-based rating system, while the Navy's policy is a mandatory policy for all buildings built by the Navy. The U S Navy's policy is considered to have the ability to mainstream green buildings essentially because of the size of the market that it commands. The N A V F A C policy is the first blanket government policy in North America requiring all buildings—totalling $5 billion annually: roughly one percent of all US construction—to adhere to a recognized green standard. N A V F A C administers domestic construction for the Marines, the Air Force, the Navy and also does some Army construction. N A V F A C builds everything from homes to schools and hospitals. This policy amounts to extensive support for more environmentally responsible buildings (NAVFAC 1998, 1999a,b; U S D N 1999). 3.3.1.6. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide Hennepin County, Minnesota, is presently using the Minnesota Design Guide to build six buildings, one of which is complete. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has used it to build four or five buildings, the University has used it to build four or five, and the state has used it to build three or four buildings (Personal Interview 2001). In all there are between twelve to fifteen buildings built by the institutions that participated in its creation (Personal Interview 2001). There are already six on the "Case Study" section of the website, which includes details on all of the strategies that the buildings used. In addition, there are numerous private groups that are using the design guide informally to guide their designs. Private individuals do their own rating; there is at present no certification program. It is used on an honour system. This is interesting as it is very different from Austin, where concern over private companies using the rating system 63 improperly—and without the necessary training that the Austin program offers—led to Austin taking its rating system off the website (Personal Interview 2001). A manager of the Minnesota Guide noted that because of the extensive input of the local design, engineering and building community in the creation of the guidelines, he does not expect to have the problems experienced in Austin. Hennepin County, which is a regional body made up of municipalities, is committed to using the design guide for five years, of which they are in the second year (Personal Interview 2001). It is expected that the use of the guide will be renewed after the five-year limit is over. The guide has already changed some of Hennepin County's standard practices, like the designer selection process, which now includes a request for information about the ability and background of the designer to do sustainable design. It is to be used on all projects over $100,000, both new buildings and renovations. Almost all of the construction that is done in Hennepin County is over that limit, so almost everything will have to use the guide. Hennepin County is also promoting the guide to its member municipalities. Market transformation of the whole state is a goal of the program (Personal Interview 2001). Given its use so far, it is very likely that it will be able to either mainstream green building practices or at least make them into an acceptable alternate practice—not just for institutional buildings but for the building industry throughout Minnesota. Therefore, it meets the criteria for mainstreamability. 3.3.7.7. PA TH--Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing Through its extensive demonstration projects, in many ways, PATH, like Austin, has already built so much that it has, to some degree, already at least made green building practices an acceptable alternate practice. There are three stages of testing technologies: "field evaluations," "demonstrations," and "national pilot projects." Field evaluations, the first step, evaluate technologies on a small scale and compile comprehensive information on the technologies to assess whether or not they meet PATH 'S goals. Demonstrations are projects consisting of 25 or more homes. These projects assess how green building practices and technologies work at a community scale. National pilot projects consist of hundreds or thousands of homes, and they are 64 intended to serve as models of excellent practice (PATH 2000). They are taken as examples of both building construction and planning principles. There are five national pilot projects underway (which consist of hundreds or thousands of homes): Village Green, LA; Playa Vista, LA; Civano, Tucson; Stapleton Airport, Denver; and Summerset, Pittsburgh. Village Green, Los Angeles is an affordable housing development where 180 of the 186 units will use photovoltaic panels for as much as 90% of their electrical needs. Added to other energy efficiency features this will mean 40% utility bill reductions. The development is located near the Transit Station, making alternate transport possible. Playa Vista, Los Angeles is a joint PATH project and Energy Star demonstration project. This brownfield redevelopment/urban infill project will build as many as 13,000 residences that have improved energy efficiency, good indoor air quality and reduced waste. As of 1999, Civano, in Tucson, Arizona, has started selling homes. Features of this development include passive solar, rain harvesting, photovoltaics and solar hot water to achieve energy savings of as much as 50%. Water-saving technologies achieve water reductions of as much as 65% compared to the average residence in this area (Smith 1998; Civano 1999; P P A 1999). Civano is also a demonstration project for the American Lung Association's Health House Project, which targets demonstrations of good indoor air quality (PPA 1999). Stapleton, Denver, Colorado is a new, mixed use, model sustainable community. The Stapleton Plan calls for a neo-traditional, pedestrian-oriented community featuring renewable energy, energy efficiency, recycled material, affordability, and natural resource conservation (PPA 1999; Hill 1998; Knack 1996). Summerset, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania will build 336 single family homes, 121 townhouses, and 256 apartments in a brownfield redevelopment/urban infill project. The homes will use energy and water efficiency measures, recycled materials, and renewable energy sources (Former 1999). 65 3.3.1.8. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Rolicy This policy mandates that all of the City's buildings will be built to L E E D , and therefore has the ability to make green building into at least an acceptable alternate practice, as major designers and developers will have to develop expertise in this area. There are two buildings under construction that are using the Seattle policy, and more in the design phase. With the rising costs of energy it is also likely to have increasing appeal to both the government and the private sector (Personal Interview 2001). The City of Seattle recently passed a resolution that states that because of the "current volatility in the regional energy market" and the "low water reservoirs on rivers that feed Seattle hydro-electric projects" there is an increase in energy cost at the same time as the City needs to buy energy. The Mayor and Council have created a resolution calling for acceleration of the City of Seattle's Green Building actions (City of Seattle 2001). City council is interested in possible code changes that would encourage more energy efficiency measures in the private sector as well. With this new development, it looks like this policy's ability to mainstream green buildings will be even greater. 3.3.1.9. Hannover Ecological District and Sydney Olympic Village Both of these large demonstration projects have the ability to prove that green building practices, materials and technologies are viable. In addition, the world exposure that both of these received will help. Although it is impossible to measure the success that these kinds of pilot projects have on mainstreaming green buildings beyond the buildings that they actually build, it is undeniable that their impact can potentially go much further. Even if either of these were simply judged on the buildings built in their individual project, it would be significant enough to mainstream green building practices in the region. However, of course the impact is international. 3.3.1.10. Texas Veterans Land Board Green Building Guidelines The TVLB program is interesting and significant because it is the first mortgage program created in North America to tie environmental building features beyond energy features to reduce interest rates (EBN 1997). The TVLB (1998) reports that many homes have gone through the program and that the program is a success. One measure of this 66 success is the fact that in 1998 the TVLB wanted to use the program's guidelines to design four new long-term care facilities that it funded. Another is that the green building program will save one specific homeowner over $20,000 in interest and up to $10,000 in energy savings over the years (TVLB 1998). Finally, and most significantly, a senior manager at TVLB noted that in 2000, the total housing loans made by TVLB were 5,757. Out of that total, 3,799 were Greenbuilding loans. Therefore, Greenbuilding loans account for roughly 66% of the total number of loans made in 2000. 3.3.2. Strategies Which Partially Meet the Criteria The strategies in this section are here because it is difficult to say whether or not they will be able to be mainstreamed. However, even if it is possible that the strategy will make green building products and practices into standard practice, or at least a broadly acceptable alternate practice, it will be a much more difficult task than with the other case studies. 3.3.2.1. Pennsylvania and New York's High Performance Guidelines Both of these guidelines are adopted voluntarily. The process of getting government agencies interested in using the guidelines is, then, a process of marketing them, and is, therefore, subject to the political wind and the individual in charge. In both places, there are only one or two full-time equivalents on the job. The process of marketing something new to governments can be slow, as governments are notoriously bureaucratic and prone to entrenched inertia. A key informant who is involved with the implementation of the Pennsylvania guidelines noted that in Pennsylvania, there are 2600 local municipalities, 502 school districts, and 128 colleges and Universities and all of this makes coordination and marketing of green buildings very difficult. Another informant who worked in developing the Pennsylvania guidelines blamed the resistance and inertia on the conservative political climate present in Pennsylvania. In New York, many of the schools were interested in using the guidelines, but a key informant noted that many of the uniformed services like police and fire departments were very resistant. r In N Y they have built several buildings and presently have 14 projects in different phases of design and construction. In Pennsylvania, they have built two buildings using the guidelines, and awarded one lease of a green building. In both New York and 67 Pennsylvania, there seems to be some possibility that these programs will be watered down or cut before they have much effect. This is not a large possibility—the greatest possibility is that they will live on to mainstream green buildings. However, this fate does not seem as sure as the case studies assessed above. The other reason that the New York and Pennsylvania Guidelines can not be seen as fully meeting the two criteria that asses mainstreamability is to acknowledge the impact of guidelines / rating systems like LEED. Without guidelines / rating systems like L E E D , guidelines like Pennsylvania's and NY's would be less likely to receive the political support that they presently enjoy. Without the continued existence of L E E D , which is the backbone of the very influential policies at the Navy, at Seattle, and is used as back-up by many institutions (New York and Pennsylvania included) the NY and Pennsylvania programs would be less able to point to a coherent trend of successful, affordable, politically attractive green buildings. Therefore these programs cannot be understood to have the same ability to mainstream green buildings as programs like L E E D , and proven programs like Austin. In Pennsylvania, there is already one building built to environmental standards, the Department of Environmental Protection's Southcentral Regional Headquarters. Several other State agencies are in the process of using the guidelines to design their buildings (Personal Interview 2000). This policy does have the potential to at least make green building an acceptable alternate, if not to mainstream green buildings. There is some concern that due to political nervousness and lack of support, the program may never get off the ground. In New York, the program started small but now there is some involvement with most new buildings and major renovations. The key informant interviewee who works,with the implementation of the guidelines noted that a central part of the job is outreach to about 20 client groups (the DDC administers buildings for various city agencies). About half to three quarters of these groups have expressed interest in building with these new guidelines. The key informant noted that the most important tool is the outreach into agencies that build through the DDC. The major task, then, is to build a broad base of support and legitimacy for the project. 68 3.3.3. Strategies Which Failed to Meet the Criteria 3.3.3.1. APA, AIA, AIBC Sustainability Policies Although professional policies and guides have the potential to have a large impact on the building industry in combination with other government policies and guidelines, voluntary professional guidelines and the adoption of general principles necessitates no action on anyone's part. These professional guides can even contribute, at worst, lead to a sidelining of the issues. Whatever they do, their potential to mainstream green building practices by themselves is minimal. At best, however, they can act as a statement of what the profession intends to do which supports broader actions and changes. The adoption of guidelines by a large professional organization has the potential to influence the thoughts and actions of an entire profession. Given that there are, for example, 30,000 A P A members across the USA, 65% of whom work for state and local government agencies (APA 2000), and many others directly for development companies, a policy like this can have a large impact. However, voluntary professional guides and policies are also easily ignored. In addition, because the A P A , AIA and AIBC guides are very general, they are not focused on implementation and are more complicated and less user-friendly than most of the guidelines, certification systems and rating systems that outline precise actions to be taken. Perhaps it would be more useful for professional organizations to adopt measurable and more practical guidelines like LEED. 3.4. Strategies Which are Ecologically Comprehensive and Mainstreamable The criteria that assess ecological comprehensiveness were more challenging than the criteria that assess mainstreamability. Therefore the strategies that both met and partially met the ecological criteria shall be included, while only the strategies which met the mainstreaming criteria will be included. This is necessary in order to have enough strategies to explore. Using the criteria, the following green building strategies are both ecologically comprehensive and have the ability to mainstream green building practices: Table 8: Case Studies That Met the Primary Criteria 69 Those that met the criteria for being Those that also met the criteria for ecologically comprehensive being mainstreamable L E E D yes Naval Facilities yes Seattle Sustainable Building Policy yes New York City's Guidelines -The Minnesota Design Guide yes Austin's Residential Program yes TVLB Mortgage Program yes Santa Monica's Guidelines yes Pennsylvania's Guidelines Hannover World E X P O Model yes Ecological District Sydney Olympic Village yes The creation of this list requires drawing lines between strategies that are mainstreamable and those, like NY and Pennsylvania, that seem to be more reliant on the overall mood swings of the market and political wind, may seem arbitrary. However, these lines must be drawn in order to create a group of strategies that are, for the most part, ecologically comprehensive and have the ability to mainstream green building practices and products. The above list presents a conservative assessment of those strategies that are most assured of being ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. There may at first glance seem to be other strategies that are too important not to be included with the selected list. For example, not including programs like PATH and F R E E may also seem too conservative. 3 5 While programs like PATH and F R E E are certainly not ecologically comprehensive, it could be argued that they represent an important statement to the world community of the scale of changes that are possible. It is likely that either of these programs has already saved more CO2 than the Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide will save over the next five years. If global climate change is the most pressing environmental issue (as was established by the research in earlier chapters) then clearly a project that displays such significant reductions in CO2-producing energy must be important precedents. " One of the interesting outcomes of having analyzed programs like P A T H and F R E E is that they potentially chart the extent to which it is possible to save money on environmental energy features. This is useful to note, as the financial 70 However, the research into environmental issues in the first half of this thesis showed that ecological comprehensiveness is a crucially important thesis criterion because ecological systems are so interconnected. There is a danger in considering these projects with the others as they could potentially legitimize building forms that are, except in the area of energy, just as detrimental to the environment as today's standard buildings. Therefore, the New York, Pennsylvania, F R E E and PATH strategies may be occasionally discussed in the following chapters if they contribute to an understanding of the primary or secondary criteria. However, they will not receive the comprehensive analysis afforded those strategies included in the above list. Chapter 4 will focus on those case studies in the list above which are considered to be both ecologically comprehensive and masintreamable. savings from programs like FREE and PATH could contribute to the creation of a more holistic green building program, as is the case in Austin, where the energy savings to the utility supply the vast majority of the funding. 71 C H A P T E R 4—Analysis of Strategies by Secondary Criteria ./..WHEREAS, increasing energy costs may significantly improve the cost- N 4ffectiveness evaluation of conservation and renewable resources development; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE, THE MAYOR CONCURRING, THAT: Acceleration of Incentives, Enforcement, and Opportunities for Green Building Development of Non City-Funded Facilities. "A RESOLUTION calling for acceleration of the City of Seattle's Green Building actions." City Council, City of Seattle, 2001 The one thing that has surprised me—when you bring it to someone—everyone sees the advantage to doing it. People ask, why weren't we doing this before? It is really a concept whose time has come. Manager, Hennepin County Environmental Services, 2001, speaking about the Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide 4.1. Chapter Structure This chapter analyses the green building strategies :using the secondary criteria in order to address the second part of the thesis question: which are the factors that contribute to the creation of green building strategies that are both ecologically robust and mainstreamable? The criteria are applied individually to the case studies so that their various impacts can be explored separately. The research and key informant interviews will be drawn on to analyze the case studies using the secondary criteria. 4.2. Criteria to Assess Participation: Meaningful Participation and Stakeholder Diversity The intent of the criteria to assess participation is to assess whether or not the green building strategy encourages meaningful stakeholder participation in policy formation and implementation. The criteria used to assess the ecological comprehensiveness of the green building strategies described in the case studies are: => Does the green building strategy encourage meaningful stakeholder participation in policy formation and implementation? => Is there a diverse group of stakeholders participating, beyond government and industry groups and including NGO's and the public? The secondary criteria are intended to assess whether citizens groups, environmental groups, non-profits, research groups and others were invited to the table. There is particular interest in whether or not these groups were invited to develop the strategy as these parties have the ability to be what John Ralston Saul (and many humanists before him) calls disinterested. Saul (1995) notes: I believe that our ability to reassert the citizen-based society is dependent on our rediscovery of the simple concepts of disinterest and participation. To clarify, there is special interest in the participation of groups who are not there because their livelihood depends on it, as can be argued to be the case with governments 3 6, industry, universities, and for-profit research groups and labour groups. 4.2.1. The Arguments for Public Participation As it has become politically expedient to have some form of at least perfunctory, token citizen participation, what is meant by the criteria is a meaningful role in the development Even though government officials are responsible for broader social goals, individuals can be susceptible to the fact that their jobs are at stake. 73 and / or implementation of the strategy. What is implicitly being argued here is that groups like citizens groups, individual citizens, environmental groups, non-profits, and non-profit research groups are stakeholders. This is certainly not the opinion of many individuals and groups who designed and implemented green building strategies without including the public and NGO's . Indeed, several key stakeholders expressed great hesitation at the thought of working with groups like these, others expressed frustration when they did have to work with these groups, and still others simply expressed no interest. Clearly the creators of many of the green building strategies studied here may have thought that these groups simply did not have anything important to contribute to the creation of green building strategies. Yet, there are at least three very compelling reasons for believing that the public, in all its many forms, should be considered a stakeholder in the development of green building strategies. 4.2.1.1. Changing Buildings Will Require Changing Perceptions First, the public needs to be on board, because if major changes are to be made, they can only be made with public support. If it is true that the western world will have to reduce its consumption of resources and creation of wastes by 90% to be sustainable (Brown and Flavin 1999), many of the environmental building practices that will need to be adopted to achieve this goal will require environmental design features that are presently controversial or unknown to the general pubic. There will have to be significant changes in the public's perception of what a building is, what landscape should be, and what transportation is in order for there to be support for these environmental design features. In order for buildings to be equipped with facilities that encourage more biking, car-pooling, busing, walking and tele-commuting, for example, there has to be broad public acceptance of these measures. In order for buildings to be built to support vegetative swales instead of concrete storm drains that (among other things) erode stream banks and eliminate fish habitat—there needs to be public understanding and support for landscape that is not manicured, mowed or made of concrete. These are just a few of the measures that will need broad public acceptance. 74 A reasonable counter-argument would be that if the public's understanding of these measures is what is needed, then surely education is what is needed and not public participation in policy development. Indeed, education would have to be an important part of any participation process. Yet, education by itself does not seem likely to motivate individuals to learn about, accept, or embrace the fundamental changes that need to take place. There is nothing that educates more than participation, and there is nothing like a "public education program" to turn an exciting, important debate into a patronizing, sleep-inducing lecture. Other counter arguments would include the fact that public participation is an awkward process that very often turns negative. Indeed, these are strong arguments. Democracy is a messy process. However, as Winston Churchill once famously noted, democracy is terrible "but it is the best we have." 4.2.1.2. Harness the Power of the Market Many of the green building strategies examined in this thesis that have created the greatest market transformation are voluntary certification programs using guidelines or mortgage programs to sell green buildings to consumers. If the public is not involved in the development of these guidelines, how can the guidelines be expected to meet the public's needs? As was shown in the Minnesota's Sustainable Design Guide, the users that are involved have an influence over the results of the strategy, and are more likely to create a program that meets their needs. 3 7 In addition, getting the public to participate would be the best way to get buy-in for the changes. Many of the same counter arguments from above can be made with respect to education rather than involvement being what is needed. However, market-based green building strategies are to be used and if the green building strategies are to surpass the 30% limits seen at Austin or the 66% limits seen at the Texas Veterans Greenbuilding Mortgage program, then the general public needs to be involved to a greater extent. 4.2.1.3. Democracy, Human Rights, and The Public's Right to Know In a civil society, allowing the public to participate in important policy decisions fosters a more democratic environment. 3 8 This is an issue that potentially impacts the human The Minnesota Guide was developed with architects, engineers and the building industry as a primary stakeholder. The resulting Guide is particularly useful for the building industry, as it outlines various potential green design strategies at each stage of the conventional design process. It is notable for translating green design into the conventional language of the development community. 3 8 For more discussion of this see: Habermas 1984, Hillier 1993; Forester 1989, 1992; Renn, Webler and Wiedemann 1995; Roseland 1997, 1998; Healy 1992, Keeney 1992; Thomas 1995; Nader 2000. 75 rights of every person on the planet. If changes are not made to how North Americans build buildings, the ecological destruction could be felt the world over, and it could be severe. International human rights law, for example, protects water both implicitly and explicitly as a human right. Yet the way we in North America are building our buildings is impacting the ecological viability of the world's water systems. Already there is a precedent of children in the Philippines suing on behalf of future generations for infringing on their "right to a balanced and healthful ecology" (SEA-SPAN 1999). Those responsible for buildings in North America have a moral and legal imperative to inform the general public of the potential dangers of continuing to build buildings the way they are presently built. These issues will be further discussed in the conclusion. 4.2.2. Overview of the Strategies It is clear that of the policies that actually met the criteria, there is a wide variation in how meaningful the participation of citizens groups, environmental groups, non-profits, research groups and others was. Santa Monica and LEED, for example, encouraged significant participation throughout. In contrast, New York, Minnesota, PATH, and Seattle Sustainable Building Policy had much lesser degrees of participation by the public, civic associations, environmental non-profits, non-profit research groups, and other groups that might qualify as "disinterested" under this thesis's definition. Significantly, it appears that those strategies that break new ground—like Santa Monica, being the first municipality in North America to incorporate green practices into its codes; and LEED, creating the first guidelines that can be used as an industry standard—these are the strategies that involve what I have termed "disinterested" participants to a great degree. That is, they involve participants from non-profits or citizens groups or the general public in a way that genuinely affords them the power to shape the policy. The final section of analysis of the participation criteria will show further support for this trend. 4.2.3. Strategies Which Meet the Criteria 4.2.3.1. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines The following groups were the City's partners in development: => Community stakeholders => City staff => Technical advisory committee => Consultant group 76 Throughout the process, the City solicited input from the public, the City Staff, a Technical Advisory Committee, and stakeholders that included local developers, .designers and concerned citizens. As one example of the ongoing public involvement, in October 1997, a paper entitled "A Framework for Sustainable Building Development Guidelines" was made available to Council, staff and the public for their input. Their feedback was used in the guidelines, and subsequent drafts were also made available for input (Personal Interview 1999; 2001). 4.2.3.2. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design The US Green Building Council makes decisions through consensus processes that rely on input from its members. The U S G B C has over 250 members, including public and • private organizations, universities, utility companies, manufacturers, building owners, and research bodies. Representatives of the financial industry, like the Bank of America, sit alongside environmental institutions like the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Rocky Mountain Institute, and the Audubon Society. The U S G B C has created partnerships and programs with the US Department of Energy, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, the US General Services Administration (GSA) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USGBC 2000b). The broad participation of members was an intentional decision to bring together owners, architects, environmentalists, the public, financial institutions, and the building industry to define a standard that is agreeable. It also allows the organization to be seen as an independent, non-partisan group, as it represents the views of many different organizations and groups. Participation of everyone impacted is the goal, and it has proved to be an effective way of creating a standard that has the support of a broad number of diverse and even traditionally combative groups (Personal Interview 2001). The importance of the meaningful participation of a diverse groups seems to be key to LEED 's ability to create a mainstreamable green building strategy. The U S G B C is a consensus-based group that develops tools like LEED with input from committees on which members sit, and having buy-in from these diverse groups may be at least one reason for the broad acceptance of the guidelines. 77 4.2.3.3. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines One of the principal architects and administrators of these guidelines attributes the success of this program to the involvement of a broad range of actors (Personal Interview 2000). The interviewee at the DDC claimed that the collaboration and interdisciplinary work with many partners are ultimately what made the project work (Personal Interview 2000). This interviewee believes that one of the most important project decisions made was to decide not to bring in an outside advisor but to use someone from in-house. This in-house person worked with a local facilitator who was familiar with development in New York. In addition, they put the naysayers on the team, which nearly killed the project at the beginning. However, according to the interviewee at the DDC in New York, this ensured its success in the end as everyone got on board. The partners in development (with the Office of Sustainable Design and Construction and the Department of Design and Construction New York City) were: ° N Y C Agencies Interagency Steering Committee ° N Y C Office of Management and Budget 0 N Y C Mayor's Office of Construction ° N Y C Office of Energy Conservation ° Design Trust for Public Space (grant-giving body) ° Robert Sterling Clark Foundation (grant-giving body) ° Energy Foundation (grant-giving body) ° New York State Council on the Arts ° New York State Energy Research Authority ° Outside consultants ° Design and construction industry Financial support for the project came through the Design Trust for Public Space from the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, the Energy Foundation, and the New York State Council on the Arts. The DDC and the Trust were helped throughout by a N Y C Green Buildings Task Force Steering Committee made up of members from the Office of Management and Budget, Mayor's Office of Construction, the Office of Energy Conservation, and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority underwrote the expenses incurred by Steven Winter Associates, who were a source of technical expertise for the guidelines. The Mayor's Office of Grants aided in securing financial support. 78 In addition to the internal steering committee and the financial partners, there was an interdisciplinary academic team from the University Consortium, which is a coalition of seven N Y C technical universities, including Columbia University's Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, & Preservation, and the Earth Engineering Center; City University's Hunter College, Center for Applied Studies of the Environment; the City College of NY's School of Architecture; and Polytechnic University. Workshops were held with the design and construction industry, and guidelines were peer reviewed across the country. 4.2.4. Strategies Which Partially Meet the Criteria 4.2.4.1. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide The main partners in development with Hennepin County include the following: 0 Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (financial support) ° Design Institute at the University of Minnesota (financial support) ° Interdisciplinary Project Team (7 people from U of Minnesota, Sustainable Design Resources, and Hennepin County) ° Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum Architects The process of involving stakeholders was important to the development of guidelines that met the needs of the design community (Personal Interview 2001). A manager of the Guide states that: The important groups to bring in are the building design community and industries within it—it is these people that have to ultimately use the design guide and apply it. We did not want to create a system that was another thing for them to do—we wanted to make it parallel to what they already do. (2001) The developers of these guidelines have worked closely with AIA and other groups within the building industry. In addition, the Key informant interviewee for the Minnesota Guide notes that the University has been a close partner. He notes that they were lucky "because the University came to us." The program will be relying on the University to have training in the field. The Colleges of Architecture and Landscape Architecture are looking at formally providing consulting services on sustainable design based around the guide (Personal Interview 2001). Although this constitutes meaningful participation from various levels of government and industry, and although the University constitutes participation from outside the sphere of government and industry, there does not seem to have been any participation from the 7 9 broader community. This strategy does not meet the criteria as the general public and groups like non-profit environmental groups were not extensively involved. These are technically strong guidelines, offering advancements on the guidelines that came before them in providing the information in a more practical way to the design and building industry. However, the technical strength of these guidelines is not surprising considering that it was the architectural and engineering community that is the group that participated most extensively in the creation of this green building strategy. Minnesota was not breaking ground in requiring the green standards to be incorporated into all County buildings. By the time, in 2000, that Minnesota started building its County buildings using these guidelines (Personal Interview 2001), it had been seven years since N A V F A C started the development of its policy (1993), and two years since N A V F A C officially mandated all its buildings to be built using LEED. By the time the Minnesota guidelines were in use, Greenpeace was working with the Sydney Olympic bid committee to create the world's largest solar village; Santa Monica had begun the process of creating its guidelines for all Santa Monica buildings (1996); and Austin had been developing its municipal green guidelines to govern its municipal buildings since 1993. Therefore the act of using guidelines on civic buildings remains an important green building strategy, but Minnesota was not the first to do this. 4.2.4.2. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy The Seattle policy was developed with the help of the City of Seattle's Green Building Team, which included representatives from: ° Seattle City Light ° Seattle Public Utilities ° Executive Services Department 0 Lighting Design Lab ° Department of Design, Construction, and Land Use ° Office of Environmental Management There was also an oversight panel, which included representatives from interest groups and the public. The proposal to adopt this policy went to council and Mayor, and there was no opposition. This strategy does not meet the criteria for having meaningful participation of such groups as the public and NGOs in the development of the strategy. 80 4.2.4.3. PATH It is hard to get extensive information on PATH. However, according to its own description, the following groups were involved in its development: 1) US Federal Agency Partners: Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, Department of Labor, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Science Foundation, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy 2) Private Sector Partners: representatives from the building industry including designers, developers, manufacturers, utilities, and financial institutions 3) Other Partners: Universities, research institutions, labour organizations The above groups represent a broad range of interests. However, it is significant that the general public and groups like environmental organizations do not appear to have been involved. 4.2.5. Strategies Which Failed to Meet the Criteria 4.2.5.1. Green Builder Program of Colorado There was meaningful stakeholder participation, if the stakeholders are taken to be the government, the homebuilders association and the utility. The groups involved in the development of the program are as follows: => Home Builders Association of Denver => Colorado State Governor's Office of Energy Conservation (OEC) => E-Star Home Energy Rating Program (E-Star) => Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) => Home Builders Association of Metro Denver => Boulder Home Builders Association This does not meet the criteria, as it appears that it was just government and industry that was participating. 4.2.5.2. The Professional Policies and Guides None of the professional policies examined (by the APA, AIA, and AIBC) were developed with extensive outside participation. 81 4.2.6. Difficult Strategies to Categorize: The Role of Non-Profit There were several strategies that, after close consideration, had interesting similarities in that each of them was hard to categorize using the participation criteria because of the participation of a non-profit environmental group that acted as a consultant to a government or business. Typically, one would assume that a consultant to a government or industry would represent its employer. However in the case where the consultant is a representative of a non-profit or environmental group, it seems unclear which organization they represent. Significantly, in most of the case studies discussed here in which it appeared to have this ambiguity at first glance (including Austin and NAVFAC) it seems that the non-profit represented an impetus to get the project moving. The NGO's in all of these cases provided much needed research, ideas, and skills (Personal interviews 1999; 2000; 2001). After noting the pattern of the consultant / non-profit role ambiguity, a larger pattern became clear. There were many strategies that had had participation of non-profits and in almost all of these, the non-profits seemed to be playing a leadership role, in that they brought skills, ideas, and creativity that was needed. These strategies included Austin (with the Center for Maximum Potential Building Materials playing a leadership role), N A V F A C (with the Rocky Mountain Institute playing a leadership role) Sydney Solar Village (with Greenpeace playing a leadership role), and the Pennsylvania's Guidelines (with the Green Building Alliance playing a leadership role). 4.2.6.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program The development and implementation of this program were achieved by the following government, grant-giving and research groups listed below, and industry groups like realtors and the local home builder organization: ° Austin City Council and staff ° Austin Energy Star Residential Energy Rating System ° Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (Non-profit research body) ° Urban Consortium Energy Task Force (granting agency) At first glance, it seems debatable whether or not Austin meets the criteria for participation. This is because it may seem questionable whether or not there was representation from more than just government and industry. Certainly, the public appears not to have been extensively consulted, and if they were consulted at all, this 82 consultation did not use their knowledge and opinions to steer the development and implementation of the strategy. This lack of extensive participation from the public is common amongst green building programs, which tend to consider their programs, at least in the development stage, as too technical for the general public. The ambiguity of whether of not Austin meets the criteria lies with the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (a non-profit research body focussing on environmental building research), which is not a traditional non-profit in that it cannot be assumed that it represents abroad public membership. In addition, it was acting as a consultant on this project. However, it clearly was not simply acting as a servant of government. It is significant that it was the Center that was a major impetus for the development of the green building program (Personal Interviews 2000; 2001). This is similar to the role played by Greenpeace at the Sydney Olympics in that it is a non-profit group with an interest in the environment that helps lead the way to a solution. 4.2.6.2. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy The development of the policy began with the goals created by the President's Council on Sustainable Development, which formed the basis for NAVFAC 's policy (NAVFAC 1998). The involvement began with a series of regional charrettes, the ideas from which were developed into a series of pilot projects. Workshops for senior officials defined the policy's goals and direction, the Rocky Mountain Institute came to speak to N A V F A C , and Navy personnel were trained in sustainable design. All of these steps reveal that there was meaningful participation from: ° Naval Environmental Performance Standards Quality Management Board 0 Process Action Team (senior officials from the Navy's major departments) ° Representatives from design firms, professional groups, and the building industry 0 Rocky Mountain Institute However, whether or not the RMI is classed as an environmental group or a consultant decides whether or not the Navy meets this criteria. Consultants are generally understood to be representing the interests of their employer. Yet it is clear that in this case the RMI was not acting as one or the other but as a hybrid of both. That does not mean that either roles—as consultant or non-profit—should be minimized. It simply means both were significant roles. Because this split role included a significant role as an environmental non-profit, the Navy policy meets the criteria. 83 The fact that this strategy was created with the assistance of the Rocky Mountain Institute, a non-profit environmental group, is significant. It falls in line with the theory that the participation of diverse groups is an important factor in the creation of ground-breaking strategies with the ability to mainstream green buildings. 4.2.6.3. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High Performance Buildings It is interesting to note that in Pennsylvania, the non-profit group, the Green Buildings Alliance, is credited with providing the impetus for the creation of the guidelines (Two Personal Interviews 2000). As this case study is not both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable, it will not be the focus of further analysis; however, it is significant that it is another example of a non-profit environmentally-focused group being the impetus for the creation of a green building strategy. 4.2.6.4. Sydney Olympic Village The partners involved in the development of the Sydney Olympic Village (with S O C O G : the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games administered the Sydney Games) include: ° Greenpeace Australia, which helped create Environmental Guidelines calling for solar energy, won design competition for Sydney Olympic Village 0 Green Games Watch 2000, a dedicated watchdog organisation that was founded in 1993 with the beginning of the development of the Olympic site. This group was funded by state and federal governments to monitor Sydney's adherence to the Environmental Guidelines ° N S W State Government, which supported alternative and solar power 0 The Olympic Coordination Authority, which administered all Olympic construction 0 MIRVAC Lend Lease Village Industry Consortium, which was the group of companies that won the tender to build the Olympic Athletes' Village 0 B P S O L A R , which provided the solar panels ° S E D A , which is the Sustainable Energy Development Authority is a government body whose goal is to reduce greenhouse gases 0 Energy Australia, which is a green energy provider 0 Solahart Industries, which provided solar water heating systems This case study adds another example to the growing list of case studies that are led by environmental non-profits. In the words of an architect for the Games: Greenpeace deserves to be congratulated for setting the agenda. If green issues hadn't been part of the mix from the beginning, we wouldn't have the buildings that are there now. And Sydney 84 constructors have benefited greatly from the experience of building what is possible. David Oppenheim, architect who worked on Sydney's 2000 Olympic Games The role that Greenpeace played is important and it is well recognized by the endorsement of the Greenpeace Environmental Guidelines. It is also recognized by the testimonials of people such as then Minister Bruce Baird, responsible for the Olympic bid when he notes that Greenpeace's role in the development of the Sydney Olympic Environmental Guidelines was "very significant." He notes that they are "to be congratulated for their leadership on this issue" (Greenpeace 2001). 4.3. Communication and Accessibility Criteria: Understandable and Accessible The intent of these criteria is to assess whether or not the strategies that have met the primary criteria also met the following two secondary criteria: => Is it communicated in simple, easily understood language for a diverse audience? => Does everyone (government, industry, the public) have free access to information explaining the strategy? Most of the strategies examined met this criteria to some extent, partially because strategies like B R E E A M Canada, GBTool, and others that were very difficult to understand and not available to the public were deliberately selected out of the thesis. However, there is still a great deal of variation in how simple and easy to understand the information is and how accessible it is. I did not find enough information on the Hannover District in English, and so it is left out. 4.3.1. Strategies Which Meet the Criteria 4.3.1.1. A ustin's Residential Green Building Program Austin's program provides a great deal of information available freely on the internet and through the program staff that acts as a resource about green building products and practices. This information is free, and written in simple, easily understood language for a broad public audience. This program relies on a combination of resources. The Green Building Sourcebook, for example, is used with the rating system, and neither of these can be taken out of context of the program, as: 85 These are really only tools and the majority of our impact results from the daily interaction between the staff members and the builders and designers who are members of our program (Personal Interview 2001). It is interesting to note that the rating system is not on the website or freely available in Austin due to the fact that home builders were using it improperly and claiming to be building environmental buildings. The way that the program is administered, therefore, is never completely communicated by one single "tool." This focus on human interaction may be an important component of the program, but it is significant that it makes the communication somewhat less straightforward. Thus although the program has a lot of information that is easily understood, it would take an in-depth study of Austin's system and the way in which the staff choose to administer various tools to know clearly how well the program is communicated day to day. However, regardless of the fact that the rating system is somewhat less easy to access and somewhat less easy to understand than other rating systems, it is only one part of the larger program. In addition, the basic principles of green building and of the program are very clearly communicated and the program goes out of its way to ensure that all Austin citizens have access to the information. If, for example, a builder called the program and wanted to learn more about the residential rating system, they would be invited to take free courses about the program. Therefore, the case study meets the communication criteria. 4.3.1.2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado Although this case study was not found to be ecologically comprehensive, the communications strategy is interesting and may be connected to the case study's clear success in mainstreaming the program. Much of the information about the program is simple, easy to understand and accessible through a variety of forms—internet, paper, and news releases that keep the community informed about what the program is doing. These are standard practices, and enough to meet the criteria. In addition, however,, this program communicates, like the Austin program, through a variety of mediums. It gives classes, it markets "Built Green" homes, and it has a Parade of Homes, which will be the way over 125,000 people will learn about the program (HBAMD 2001). This "Parade" shows several homes, and demonstrates the "latest in Built Green recommended technologies, practices and products" and it educates the public to the benefits of the program (HBAMD 2001). 86 4.3.1.3. Santa Monica's Greer) Building Design and Construction Guidelines The guidelines and other resource materials are freely available and relatively easy to understand. The City has developed: 0 Compliance tools ° Software to calculate energy performance 0 General green building information resources 0 Green Building Design Advisor ° Seminars for the design community The guidelines are long and not as simple and easily understood as some guidelines. However, they go into greater detail about strategies for compliance, which should make them more user-friendly for the building industry. Overall, they can be considered easy to understand and easy to access. 4.3.1.4. LEED (and the Seattle and Naval Policies) The L E E D guidelines bring complex issues like wildlife habitat and alternate wastewater strategies into simple, easily understood language. However, they remove much of the hard work from the guidelines themselves. It refers to best practice regulations for almost every item, forcing the reader and user to find and refer to another document, which makes L E E D slightly less easy to understand and access. Everyone (government, industry, the public) has free access it. L E E D was created with the goal of being shared as widely as possible (Personal Interview 2001). This clarity of communication is another feature that seems necessary to LEED ' s success in being able to mainstream green building practices. It is logical that because the document makes it easy to understand what to do, designers, developers and builders will be more likely to use it, and consumers will be more likely to understand it and create a demand for it. The individual policies of both Seattle and the Navy rely on L E E D as their green building standard so that in these criteria, an assessment of their communicability is really an assessment of L E E D ' s communicability. The policies themselves are both moderately simple and easy to understand, though somewhat bureaucratic at certain points. 4.3.1.5. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines These guidelines are longer and more comprehensive than most, including L E E D . This may be an advantage to building professionals as they provide so much practical information. A key informant knowledgeable about both the Philadelphia and NY 87 guidelines explained that the authors of the Philadelphia guidelines had wanted to create something more akin to the NY guidelines, as the NY guidelines are so filled with practical information, specific suggestions and strategies to achieve environmental objectives. However, several Vancouver-based building industry professionals interviewed informally suggest that a longer document like this would be unwieldy and difficult to use. It is possible to argue that this large amount of information might be overwhelming. However, in a climate where it is easy to access a shorter, simpler document like LEED, having a resource like the NY guidelines that communicate the practical advice needed by the building industry is invaluable. This more detailed practical information has not been available within the actual guidelines for most of the guidelines covered in the case studies. In addition, the more comprehensive format of the NY document has allowed it to cover more complex issues. As discussed in the ecological criteria section, unlike LEED, there is not a gap in the following areas: (1) the use of integrated pest management, (2) the efficient use of materials, and (3) the use of durable and low maintenance materials. In addition, there is strong encouragement to use composting. These guidelines were created to be used by every building that is administered by the New York City Department of Design and Construction. Its technical complexity is suited to that audience. Therefore, while it is a useful document for that audience, more could be done to create a document that is more accessible for the general public as everyone lives in or uses buildings in some way. 4.3.1.6. Sydney Olympic Village Information on the Sydney Olympic Village was made clear throughout the process in a number of ways. First, because the project was part of the high-profile Olympic Games, information about the Sydney Olympic Village was made public through all the parties involved: the governments, Olympics officials, Greenpeace, and the Green Games Watch 2000 (the dedicated watchdog organization). Greenpeace had many publications, including the Environmental Guidelines, and the Olympics Report Card, which were widely circulated and intended to be read and understood by a broad audience, that 88 explained the intention of the Sydney Solar Village and kept watch on the development's progress. r 4.3.1.7. Texas Veterans Land Board Green Building Mortgage A green building mortgage has the potential to be an effective tool to communicate with the general public. This is because unlike most guidelines whose primary audience is the building industry and secondary audience is the consumer—a mortgage is targeted at the consumer first. The motivation for compliance for most other guidelines rests first with the builder or architect and any incentives are directed towards this group. Significantly, then, it is also the builder or architect who is the recipient of the education process that occurs when a person learns about any of these green building programs. In the case of the TVLB Green Building Program, on the other hand, the motivation to comply with the green building guidelines comes from the veteran who wants to achieve a full percentage point lower interest rate on their loan. This provides a unique and potentially powerful way to educate the public directly. 4.3.2. Strategies Which Fail to Meet the Criteria 4.3.2.1. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High Performance Buildings These guidelines offer readers information on design systems and design processes through the use of paragraphs, summarizing checklists, case studies of green buildings in Pennsylvania and pictures. While the checklists, pictures and case studies are useful and make the communication clearer, they cannot make up for the fact that the presentation is wordy, vague, and overly complex, which makes the information hard to access. It does not offer measurable performance targets for those wanting to use the document to actually build green buildings and is difficult to understand. 4.3.2.2. The Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide There is not yet a print version of this guide. This means that everyone (government, industry, the public) has free access to information explaining the strategy, given that they have access to a computer. This may create equity problems, as those without computers will not have access to it. Some libraries charge for access to the internet, and some people do not have access to a library. In addition, there may be a charge in the future if a paper copy is created and distributed (Personal Interview 2001), which would further cause equitable access problems. While the goal is to keep it in the public 89 domain (Personal Interview 2001), the present limited distribution of the guidelines on the internet and the plans for future costs result in these guidelines not meeting the criteria. However, there are other interesting characteristics of the communication strategy used in Minnesota. Although these guidelines were not designed to be a North American standard, they may act as a model for other jurisdictions because of the user-friendly way in which they present the material to the building industry. They go through the ecological resource areas (site, water, energy, IEQ, materials, waste) and itemize which actions and information resources are needed at each phase of the design, construction and commissioning in order to achieve the goal . 3 9 This is essentially a benefit of communicating the information in a way that is more accessible for the design team, builder and developer. It is most likely the result of having broad participation from the design, engineering, and building industry community in the creation of the guidelines. 4.3.2.3. The APA, AIA, AIBC Policies and Guidelines These policies tend to be relatively easy to understand. However, guidelines like L E E D and Santa Monica provide short lists of what should be done, and communicate this in a way that is practical for the building industry and simultaneously understandable for the general reader. Compared to this level of communication that is simple and accessible for a broad audience, these policies are significantly less easy to understand and less accessible for the general reader. The language could be significantly more measurable, practical and simple. The Pennsylvania chapter of the AIA, for example, has adopted the L E E D guidelines as the standard to which it wants its members to strive. This is much more accessible to the general public and also to the building industry. 4 .3 .3 . Noteworthy Strategies Not Included In the Case Studies Although they were not included in the case studies, there are two green building strategies that should be mentioned here because of the important work they do in communicating the importance of green building issues. Both the Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan, in Seattle and Portland, and the Green Building 90 Challenge, and international conference originating in Canada, did a great deal to foster dialogue about green building issues. They both communicated the great potential for more environmentally sensitive buildings to reduce the enormous burden that buildings presently have on the planet, and the practical possibilities for establishing green building programs. The Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan (1997) was developed with the following partners: ° U.S. Department of Energy's Northwest Regional Support Office ° Seattle City Light & Public Utilities ° City of Portland Energy Office 0 Northwest Energy Efficiency Council ° Pacific Northwest Economic Region ° Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance ° Business and Industry Recycling Venture of the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce 0 King County Solid Waste Division ° Sellen Construction ° The Boeing Company ° Continental Savings Bank In 1997 there was a Sustainable Building Northwest Conference, and also in 1997 there was the first draft of Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan which aimed to develop a regional framework to mainstream "sustainable building" practices (UCETF 1999; U S D O E et al 1999; BEST 1999; Personal Interview 1999; Seattle 1999). Over two years, the Action Plan intended to meet its stated goals through the execution of seven strategies, listed below (printed from source): 1. Shared Vision. Develop a vision of sustainable building for the citizens of the Pacific Northwest that includes a definition and goals. 2. Regional Guidelines. Develop regional guidelines for sustainable design and construction that will serve as a benchmark and design tool for the marketplace. 3. Analytical Models. Identify and promote the use of analytical models that will encourage, guide and assess the financial and performance comparisons of sustainable design and construction. 4. Financial Incentives. Research, adopt, and develop financial incentives in the public and private sectors to encourage sustainable building. 5. Awards Program. Develop an awards program that focuses on sustainable, holistic approaches to building projects. 6. Industry Education. Develop a curriculum and conduct training to educate key sectors of the building industry on sustainable building and the shared vision for the Pacific Northwest. Interestingly, we are adopting this approach at the Green Buildings BC program. 91 7. Public Education. Develop a comprehensive public education and communication program, based on the shared vision, to build support for sustainable building with the general public (USDOE et al 1999). These seven strategies give a useful road map or recipe list for those wanting to design a green building program. There have been many developments in the area of green building strategies in this region, with the City of Portland and the City of Seattle both adopting L E E D for City-owned facilities, and with the partnership between schools in Seattle to create more environmentally sensitive schools. In the words of one of the managers of the N W R S B A P (Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan): Sustainable building work resulting from the N W R S B A P is being implemented by a variety of organizations, from Seattle Public Utilities and the Portland Energy Office to the Cascadia Chapter of the US Green Building Council. Cascadia is probably the organization working most closely from the original plan, but I suspect it is general guidance rather than strict adherance. I feel the Plan was definitely a major catalyst for sustainable building in the Seattle and Portland areas. The plan showed many professionals that there was a critical mass of interest in the subject and led to such projects as the Sustainable Building Certificate Program. A key informant who was involved in the development and implementation of the N W R S B A P in Seattle notes that the N W R S B A P ' s greatest contribution is its creation of momentum in a variety of communities. This was done by first, bringing professionals together four times which strengthened what existing network there was and helped to enlarge it; and second, by supporting sustainable buildings with the presentations and courses that were offered. The kinds of courses that were offered were things like the Sustainable Building Advisor Certificate Program. The Program, co-sponsored by Seattle City Light, Seattle Public Utilities and Seattle Central Community College, was a "nine-month professional training program designed to enable graduates to advise employers or clients on strategies and tools for implementing sustainable building" (Personal Interview 2000). They also published a sustainable Building News Letter, and offered courses like Sustainable Products Training. The Green Building Challenge is an international conference that invite countries from all across the world to come and enter their best "green buildings" to be rated by the GBTool . Its role internationally is similar to that of the N W R S B A P ' s in the North West Region: it gets people together to talk about their challenges, solutions and strategies. Both the N W R S B A P and the G B Challenge are worthy of further study for the role they 92 play as catalysts to green building strategies by enabling people to communicate about these issues. 4.4. Economic Equity Criteria: Equitable Access The intent of the economic equity criteria is to assess whether or not the green building strategy enables equitable access to housing for all income groups, especially the most vulnerable. The criterion used are: => Does the green building strategy enable equitable access to green buildings (housing and other types of buildings) for all income groups, especially the most vulnerable? => Does it significantly raise the price of buildings? Almost all of the strategies have no mechanism in place to ensure equitable access for the most vulnerable. The A P A policy is an exception to this: it makes considerable strides in the direction of including a broad range of social sustainability indicators and measures into its policy. It is the lone green building strategy that is charting a path towards policies that embrace the whole range of sustainability issues (significantly, it is not truly a green building strategy but rather a green development strategy). The PATH program also makes significant efforts to reduce both the first cost of housing and maintenance costs. PATH has a well-developed approach to equity, in that it has the goal of affordability. The goal is stated: "Reduce the monthly cost of new housing by 20 percent or more." This goes further than most programs, and the combination of social and ecological goals is crucial to overall sustainability goals. Residential maintenance costs could be reduced by as much as 50%-an average of $470 more in the pockets of homeowners. Energy costs could also potentially be cut by 50%, leaving $750 more in the pockets of homeowners every year. Overall, PATH estimates that by 2010, the technologies that have been used in the PATH program will prevent 39 million tons of carbon from entering the atmosphere every year and collectively save consumers approximately $18 billion annually (PATH 1999). However, having said this, all of the programs, because they promote green buildings, have the potential to be creating buildings that are less expensive to build, operate and 93 maintain (RMI 1998; Personal Interview 1999; Hawken Lovins and Lovins 1999). Reduced energy needs can reduce the need for expensive HVAC equipment and offset the cost of better than average envelopes and efficient equipment. Recycled and salvaged materials can save money, and natural landscaping can also save money. Yet green buildings are not always less expensive. At least in the short term, the cost of climbing the learning curve is significant: at Minnesota the design costs are roughly 10% higher (Personal Interview 2001); in Seattle, total building costs are roughly 3% higher, and this is in line with results elsewhere (Personal Interview 2000). While the overall costs of building using the New York Guidelines went up usually only by 1% or 2%, the design costs often went up 15% to 20% above conventional designs (Personal Interview 2000). In addition to these increases in design and overall costs, there is the increased cost for simply using some of these programs. LEED, for example, is a very expensive system to use if building certification is the goal (Personal Interview 2001). One of the largest challenges of implementing LEED in Seattle may be its cost (Personal Interview 2001). The key informant interviewee at the City of Seattle notes that LEED is really a third-party certification process which requires substantial documentation by the design team, and therefore adds costs (2001). These include: 0 the costs to register a building to be LEED-certified costs ($350/$500 for members / non-members), ° the costs to have the building certified by the US Green Building Council costs ($1200/$1500 for members / non-members) ° the costs of increased designer time (needed to learn how to use new practices and technologies), ° the voluntary cost of becoming a member (between $250 and $10,000) of the U S G B C ° the voluntary cost of becoming a LEED-certified professional (between $295 and $450 for the workshop, and between $250 and $300 for the exam) In addition to the above, there is the cost of documenting the information needed for accreditation, which Seattle officials estimate could be as much as $20,000 or $30,000 for a commercial office building. While Seattle is eager to have its buildings recognized as LEED Silver, the costs of completing the documentation are of concern (Personal Interview 2001). In response to questions about the costs of LEED, a key informant interviewee noted that LEED is assessing the feasibility of scale trades, so that smaller 94 buildings would not have to pay the same fee as larger buildings. However, clearly that is a long way from ensuring equitable access for the most vulnerable. Another case study strategy in which costs went up is Minnesota. There have been cost increases noted with the pilot projects that the County is presently developing. Because the utility in the region has a program that gives rebates for those who include certain energy efficient appliances, fixtures etc., the up-front costs are only a few percent higher than standard practice (Personal Interview 2001). At most, this would represent a two- or three-year payback (Personal Interview 2001). The primary cost increase is the additional design work that is needed because of the learning curve of sustainable design. Hennepin County is working with consultants, engineering firms, etc.—to some extent footing the bill for this learning curve. However, in many case studies, there is no increase in building costs, and Austin is a typical example of this. As with Santa Monica, Pennsylvania, Seattle, and other places, there are no extra fees to use the guidelines, resource materials or technical help, which should assist in keeping the price of the buildings down. Therefore, the program does not have a mechanism for equitable access but it does not significantly raise the cost of housing. Austin's residential program has a philosophy of ensuring that it can achieve market transformation through reaching out to all sectors of the market, including the lowest price ranges. Beyond that, the program does not have any formal mechanisms to ensure that there is equitable access for all income groups or for the most vulnerable. However, the City of Austin's housing development department—the department that builds social housing—now requires that all of their houses are built to meet an Austin Green Building rating of at least one star. This is not formally part of Austin's Green Building program, rather, the social housing policy makers have reached out to include ecological issues in with their vision of community health. It is time for green building strategies to do some of that reaching out and connecting. Even in the best case, as with most of these green building strategies, the price of the building is the same as a standard building and the building owner enjoys reduced operating costs due to reduced energy and water use. However, this alone does not constitute a significant effort towards equitable access to these buildings for all income groups, and it certainly does not ensure or even encourage equitable access to housing 95 for all income groups, especially the most vulnerable. All it is close to is ensuring that green buildings do not become the sole domain of the elite. 4 .5 . Political Support Thesis Criterion: Support Across Political Lines and Among Diverse Groups The intent of this thesis criterion is to assess whether the strategies had the support of parties and groups on opposite political spectrums. The thesis criterion is as follows: => Does the green building strategy have the support of parties and groups on opposite political spectrums? Does it have the support of a large variety of groups, like, for example, citizens groups, environmental groups, professional organizations and industry? In many ways, this thesis criterion overlaps with the participation criteria, as participation in the creation and implementation of a strategy often lead to support of that strategy. Therefore, the analysis of this thesis criterion will focus especially on the overtly political support or lack of it, meaning the support of political people (like the president of the US) and groups (like a City Council). This thesis criterion is relatively simpler than the others, and all of the strategies that were ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable met it. Not enough could be found out about both the Hannover District and the Texas Veterans Land Board Green Building Mortgage Program for them to be assessed by this thesis criterion. 4.5.1. Those Strategies That Met The Thesis Criterion The following green building guidelines (with the focus on those that have been found to be both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable) had significant support from the relevant political bodies: 4.5.1.1. Austin Green Building Program This program had support from Council and citizens (Personal Interview 2001). A manager at the Austin program notes that the program has been able to grow and flourish due to political support from citizens and government. Austin citizens are environmentally conscious, and one of the main reasons people move to Austin is for the 96 standard of life and the beautiful environment. This program is important to the people who live in Austin. 4.5.1.2. Santa Monica Support from the public and City Council was crucial in its development. These issues are not controversial in Santa Monica, and are likely to be increasingly embraced with rising energy prices (Personal Interview 2001). 4.5.1.3. LEED L E E D has extensive support from the following: industry, financial support from government bodies like DOE, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the US EPA, and adoption by municipalities like Seattle, Portland, and government bodies like the Navy, the US Department of General Services Administration and the US Office of Real Property (the US's and in fact the world's largest leasing landlord) ( U S G B C 1999; U S G B C 2001; Personal Interview 2001) 4.5.1.4. New York Guidelines The following quote exemplifies the kind of support that this program received from the City's Mayor: New York City not only is a leader in the use of 'green building' principles, its work helps set standards implemented by other municipalities and private sector firms. Integrating these high performance features in the City's capital projects demonstrates our commitment to environmentally responsible design and construction features. Mayor Giuliani, June 30, 1999, on the release of The High Performance Building Guidelines, published by the City of New York Department of Design and Construction (DDC). 4.5.1.5. The US Naval Sustainable Building Policy This policy has political support right up to the highest office in the US. In 1993, then-President Clinton created the President's Council on Sustainable Development. The goals created by this group formed the basis for NAVFAC 's policy (NAVFAC 1998). Further executive orders made the President's support for this kind of policy even more evident (Personal Interview 1999). 97 4.5.1.6. Seattle Sustainable Building Policy The City Council and Mayor, in addition to the building industry and the public support this policy (Personal Interview 2001). 4.5.1.7. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide Personal Interview notes that: "political support has been driving it [the development of the design guide]. The County board is very supportive. If anything, it is their expectation to see the results that is driving the initiative forward." The Minnesota guidelines meet the thesis criterion as it has political support from various groups throughout the industry, from the County, and from the University. 4.5.1.8. PA TH—Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing This program grew from a goal-setting process (the National Construction Goals process) organized by the White House, in 1994. Then-President Bill Clinton officially inaugurated the PATH National Demonstration Program at the opening of the Village Green affordable housing demonstration site in Los Angeles. Clearly, this program had powerful political support behind it. It will be interesting to see if it will be maintained under President Bush. This would raise the question of whether political support is always constructive in mainstreaming these strategies. If it is seen as Clinton's program, Bush may be more likely to cut it so that he can make his own mark. It seems to also have the support of the various industry, governmental, university, research, and labour organizations involved; however, this support may not be enough if the new president sees it as a remnant of another presidency. 4.5.1.9. APA /AIA/AIBC Policies and Guidelines These policies appear to have support from their memberships. However, policies like these, because they are voluntary guides, do not need to gather a great deal of support to create or maintain, and certainly do not need to garner support from outside their organizations. 4.5.2. Those Strategies That Did Not Meet the Thesis Criterion The following program did not receive much political support. Although Pennsylvania's Guidelines were not assessed as being both ecologically comprehensive and 98 mainstreamable, their lack of success in meeting this thesis criterion shows something interesting and suggests possible reasons that the guidelines failed in other criteria. 4.5.2.1. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High Performance Buildings Lack of, or waivering political support was cited as one reason that these guidelines failed to be as comprehensive as the nearby New York guidelines (Personal Interview 2000). Governor Tom Ridge was, in the eyes of an interviewee in Pennsylvania, elected by the conservative development community, so that the development of these environmental guidelines was a risk for him to take. The task of creating the guidelines was highly politically charged, and the state changed its mind many times about what it wanted (Personal Interview 2000). There was "political nervousness" about many of the issues that the consultant saw as necessary, like composting toilets, bio-remediation of brownfield sites, semi-impervious surfaces, green roofs, and many other things (Personal Interview 2000). The result is guidelines that lack practical, operationalized suggestions of how to build green buildings. 4.6. Criteria to Assess Practicality: Affordable and Easy to Implement The intent of these criteria is to assess whether or not the strategy is practical. The measures of this are: => Is the green building strategy affordable? (i.e. is there a cheaper way to deliver the same services?) => Is it easy to implement? Because hard numbers were often not available, the question of how much any program cost to develop and implement is left to estimates and is, therefore, at best a ball park measure. In assessing these criteria, it became clear that often strategies were affordable but difficult to implement. Therefore, each of these criteria did not necessarily support the other. Furthermore, the analysis of the case studies using these criteria showed that while all of the case studies could be argued to be practical in different ways, none of them met the measures proposed in the criteria for a host of different reasons. Therefore, the analysis of the criteria shall be discussed under the following headings: ° Affordable because they paid for themselves 99 ° Practical because they had to build buildings anyway ° Practical because they accomplish huge tasks Again, here, as always, there will be more emphasis in assessing those case studies that have been found to meet the criteria for being both ecologically comprehensive and able to mainstream green buildings as that is the central focus of this thesis. There will be an examination of strategies that did not meet these criteria if it seems possible to learn something about why they did not meet these criteria by assessing their practicality. It may also be examined if it may reveal useful information that could apply to a program that is both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. 4.6.1. Affordable Because They Paid For Themselves This group of strategies include Toronto's Better Buildings Partnership Program, Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program, FREE-F inanc ing Renewable Energy and Efficiency, Colorado Green Builder Program, and Austin's Green Building Program. These programs pay for themselves through major transfers from utilities (Austin) or energy efficiency agencies (Colorado), through minor transfers from government bodies which regulate water and landfill waste (Austin). However, these programs are not necessarily easy to implement as they require a relatively large labour force. 4.6.1.1. Austin's Residential Green Building Program Austin's Program deserves a bit more attention because it meets the criteria of ecological comprehensiveness and mainstreamability. Overall, the residential program saves the local utility money, even after the utility pays the largest portion of the funding for the program. In other words, this program more than pays for itself. Every kWatt costs the utility company $450 to create, and the residential Green Building Program saves the utility 6.8 mWatts. The Green Building program, then, would save the utility over 3 million dollars, except for the fact that it also costs them roughly one million dollars in reduced income. Because it only costs the Green Builder Program $185 for every kW reduced, its budget (funded by the utility) is less than the utility saves. Although the utility company funds the largest part of the budget, there are also small transfers from the both the water conservation department and construction waste management department. Therefore, this program 100 meets the criteria for being cost effective. However, the implementation of this program could not be called easy. The whole Austin Green Building program employs 13 staff. 4.6.2. Practical Because They Had To Build Buildings Anyway: Adopt-A-Standard These strategies were practical because as the organization had to build buildings anyway, it might as well build them in an environmentally friendly way that might cost it marginally more up-front but will cost less to run and payback quickly. This group of strategies is divided into two camps: those who simply adopted an already-created policy from outside (in all cases LEED was adopted), and those who developed their own policy. The first included the following case studies and examples of the following jurisdictions adopting L E E D : the Naval Facilities Policy, the City of Seattle, the City of Portland, US Department of General Services, and the US Office of Real Property. This adoption of L E E D was practical because it cost little to adopt a policy (just the time it takes to research which policy is appropriate). The administration and management of this adopted policy can be brought into everyday building management for little extra cost except what is required to train staff, but that can be considered general educational upgrading, and a normal part of a policy. The buildings built under this policy tend to be the same cost as standard buildings or less expensive (Personal Interview 1999) or, if they cost more, it is only marginally more (Personal Interview 2001). 4.6.2.1. Seattle Sustainable Building Policy This is an interesting case study to examine in light of the practicality criteria because it is practical but not necessarily easy to implement, even though it is adopting a ready-made standard rather than creating its own standard. The buildings built under this policy may have marginally higher capital costs (they expect around 4% higher (Personal Interview 2000)), but they are expected to have lower overall costs once operations and maintenance savings are accounted for (Seattle 1998, 2000). Some of the additional money needed for the increased first costs came from general revenue, some of it came from Seattle City Light, the municipally owned electric utility. There may be some minor additional costs of training City capital project managers to use LEED. However, ongoing training of staff is a normal part of 101 operations, and its additional costs could be seen in this light. No extra jobs were created, although it may have increased the workload of those already employed. There have been some unexpected complications with implementing the Seattle policy. Shortly after the City of Seattle adopted the policy, the US Green Building Council came out with its new, updated rating system (version 2) of LEED which was considerably different from the earlier version. This caused some policy questions, as Version 2 required fewer points to reach a Silver rating. Ultimately the City decided to retain the Silver Rating as the target since so many design teams were reporting that the higher point scale may be beyond what they could incorporate into their designs without substantial cost implications. Other problems stem from the fact that there is more ambiguity in L E E D than may appear on the surface. In addition, there is a problem with making renovations achieve a L E E D rating system when it is not always possible. For example, although the policy directs that renovations are subject to the policy, it can be difficult for a department to interpret that directive. A library, for instance, that is being renovated with new washrooms and reception area cannot update the whole building to a L E E D silver rating without a large increase in cost. 4.6.3. Practical Because They Had To Build Buildings Anyway: Develop Your Own The second group of green building strategies that can be classed under the title: "practical because they had to build anyway" included the following case studies and examples: the City of Austin, the Minnesota Guide, New York, Pennsylvania, Santa Monica, Sydney Olympic Village and Hannover World Expo Model Ecological District. This strategy was practical because although there was often a significant cost to developing the policy, this was often gathered from outside funding agencies or grants. These costs could be considerable. In the case of New York, the development of the guidelines cost at least $150,000, in two stages of development (Personal Interview 2000). Minnesota had similar costs (Personal Interview 2001). Even when it was not funded by a outside agency, and the developer of the guidelines had to shoulder the burden of the development costs, the process of bringing people together and creating knowledge and expertise about green buildings allowed the programs to function more easily. Both of these strategies (adopting or developing a green building standard for buildings that are going to be built anyway) are practical because they are simply adding 102 an ecological goal to the process of building buildings. They are expanding the definition of a good quality building to include basic environmental standards. 4.6.3.1. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide The original design guide used $75,000 from Minnesota State. Hennepin County matched that, and now the University has added money also. It costs between $100,000 and $125,000 annually to keep it going—some of this money is from the County, some from the University, and some from the State of Minnesota (the Environmental Office). Funding is uncertain for the future, but there are various places to look, including the University, private donations, industry or foundation sponsorships, and funding from the utility (Personal Interview 2001). Researching and creating a guide can be expensive, and so can collecting case studies afterward. However, the information gained may more than make up for the increased costs and complications, as the information describes which design strategies are working and which are not. This will inform financial choices and should result in savings in the long term, and perhaps also in the short term. Several interviewees responsible for administering other green building programs commented on the importance of collecting post-occupancy information (Personal Interview 2000), and agreed that it would be worthwhile, so although this is clearly a more complicated task, it should not disqualify the program from being regarded as "practical." In fact, in the medium or long term, collecting this case study information makes it significantly more practical, as those who administer the guidelines are not blindly setting design standards. 4.6.4. Difficult and Costly to Develop and Implement But Worth It Finally, there was another important category that cannot be listed with those above. That is the category of those strategies that were difficult and costly to develop and implement, but were practical in the end because of the results that flowed from them. Included in this category are L E E D and PATH. Both of these programs are enormously complex and expensive. However, both have already managed to transform the market considerably, and have the possibility of transforming the entire North American market if they are sustained. Only L E E D will be discussed here as PATH does not meet all o the primary criteria. 103 4.6.4.1. LEED—Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design The development of L E E D has been expensive and complex. The U S G B C is a nonprofit coalition that was formed in 1993. Its mission is to "accelerate the adoption of green building practices, technologies, policies, and standards" ( U S G B C 1999a). The U S G B C has worked extensively with its members, which include public and private organizations, universities, utility companies, manufacturers, building owners, and research bodies. Members include members of the financial industry, like the Bank of America, as well as environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Rocky Mountain Institute, and the Audubon Society. The U S G B C has created partnerships and programs with the US Department of Energy, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, the US General Services Administration (GSA) and the US Environmental Protection Agency. In 1997, the U S G B C put forward an initial version of the L E E D guidelines. In 1998, funding from DOE was put towards the development of a manual to help assist in building design, the creation of parallel computer software, and the development of a marketing plan for LEED. In 1999, LEED issued its Pilot Version of L E E D 1.0. Every version of L E E D goes through an extensive ballot process through which U S G B C members can give their comments and influence the development of the policy. Now they have a version 2 of LEED and are coming out with a version 3. However, they recognize that the present LEED, focused on commercial and high-rise residential buildings is limited, and so they also have the following guidelines in development: ° Commercial Interiors ° Low-rise residential ° Operations and Maintenance ° Renovation As with L E E D Commercial (the present version of LEED) each of these guidelines will need to go to membership to get their input and they will be pilot tested (Personal Interview 2001). Therefore, the development of L E E D can by no means be seen as simple or easy to implement. However, the benefits of transforming the building industry are enormous, and include rectifying much of the environmental destruction which buildings presently cause, which was discussed earlier in this thesis. 104 4.7. Summary: Secondary Criteria Seemed To Support Primary Criteria The green building strategies listed on the left met the primary criteria. The table shows that they also tended to meet the secondary criteria.4 0 Table 9: Relationships Between Primary and Secondary Criteria Ecological and Industry Impact Participation Communication Political Support Practical L E E D y y y y Naval Facilities y (due to the Navy) y (due to LEED) y y City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy y (due to Seattle) y (due to LEED) y y The Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide y n y y Austin's Residential Green Building Program y y y y Texas Veterans Land Board Green Building Mortgage Program ? y ? y Santa Monica's Green Guidelines y y y y Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District ? ? ? ? Sydney Olympic Village y y y y The case studies that did not meet the primary criteria tended to be more likely not to meet the secondary criteria either. This was not always true, but tended to be true. The Pennsylvania policy, for example, did not meet either primary criteria, and it also did not meet the communication or political support criteria. As the interviewee explained, the political pressure that he felt as the author of the guidelines forced him to be more vague about some of the ecological features, and to omit some of the ecological practices that were seen by the state to be too non-traditional. These characteristics compounded on Equity is not included here as the vast majority of strategies did poorly on the overall equity thesis criterion. 105 each other: the lack of political support leading to the lack of clear communication leading to the lack of ecological comprehensiveness. Many of the energy-focused strategies have little information available to the general public, seemed to have no inclusion by groups that were not either government or industry. Almost all of the strategies studied had some level of political support and practicality. However, the degree of these was an interesting factor to measure in relation to the other criteria, as has just been discussed above with respect to Pennsylvania. Similarly, the criteria (or, more specifically, the qualities that they represent, like meaningful participation, clear communication etc.) seemed to build on themselves in a positive way as well. It is impossible to find causality, but having several of the secondary criteria seemed to make it more likely that the strategy met the primary criteria. Several possible reasons for this include: ° if a large number of diverse interests are invited to take part and offered a meaningful role, the resulting strategy may be more likely to receive broad support (and therefore have the potential to mainstream green buildings); ° if the strategy is communicated clearly, more people will understand it and the strategy will gain broader support that if it was not accessible for many people; ° if a green building strategy has political support it will be better able to garner funds and approvals. It is significant that the programs that were considered to be ecologically comprehensive and to have the ability to mainstream green building practices also tended to be the ones that met the criteria for participation, communication, political support, and practicality. This indicates that the criteria were appropriate measures to assess factors that contribute to ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable strategies. However, it does not indicate anything other than this association. The ways in which these criteria impact the strategies is assessed in the criteria-by-criteria analysis. , 106 C H A P T E R 5 — T h e Findings and Their Implications for Policy 'Greenpeace has played a very significant role in the development of the [Sydney Olympic Environmental] Guidelines and they are to be congratulated for their leadership on this issue. Then Minister Bruce Baird, responsible for the Olympic bid The International Olympic Committee is resolved to ensure that the environment becomes the third dimension of Olympicism, the first and second being sport and culture." IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch Greenpeace deserves to be congratulated for setting the agenda. If green issues hadn't been part of the mix from the beginning, we wouldn't have the buildings that are there now. And Sydney constructors have benefited greatly from the experience of building what is possible. David Oppenheim, architect who worked on Sydney's 2000 Olympic Games 5.1. Chapter Structure This concluding chapter summarizes the main findings of the thesis. The first section is devoted to presenting the key, transferable lessons from the case studies. The rest of the chapter presents the findings from the analysis of the case studies presented in the last two chapters, and the policy implications of these findings. Finally, there will be suggestions of areas that need further research. 5.2. Learning From the Case Studies: Transferable Successes At the most fundamental level, this thesis found a number of successes in other jurisdictions that are transferable to Vancouver, the G V R D , the B C Provincial government, and to Canada. The following is a checklist of the most basic findings of those case studies that met the primary criteria. Table 10: Basic Findings and Policy Implications of the Raw Data What Has Been Done The Actors Within BC and Canada That Could Achieve Similar Successes, in Partnership Or Individually => The Austin residential green building program has captured roughly 30% of the residential market. => Any BC municipality or regional district that developed a green building program => B C Housing (the agency responsible for delivering the provincial government's social housing programs) => Greater Vancouver Regional District => City of Vancouver, False Creek Model Ecological Development => The Austin residential green building program pays for itself through energy reductions, water reductions and landfill reductions. => Any B C municipality or regional district that developed a green building program where utility companies are interested in reducing their loads and where green building programs can guarantee reduced energy use. => Greater Vancouver Regional District => City of Vancouver, False Creek Model Ecological Development => Through their communications / marketing strategy (which includes the "Parade of Green Buildings") the Green Builder Program of Colorado has ensured that at least 25% of the residential market group (the home-buying public) knows about a green building program => Any BC municipality or regional district that develops a green building program. => Public Works Canada => B C Ministry of Finance (approves funding for all B C Ministry buildings) => Green Buildings BC , British Columbia Building Corporation => Greater Vancouver Regional District 108 through a series of marketing techniques. => City of Vancouver, False Creek Model Ecological Development => All of these places have made green building standards mandatory for government buildings: City of Austin (municipal program), US Navy, Minnesota, City of Seattle, City of Portland, US Department of General Services, US Office of Real Property, US Postal Service. => Any BC municipality or regional district. => Public Works Canada => BC Ministry of Finance (approves funding for all BC Ministry buildings) => Green Buildings BC, British Columbia Building Corporation => Greater Vancouver Regional District => City of Vancouver, False Creek Model Ecological Development => The federal, provincial, regional and municipal governments in Canada could come together to develop or adopt a green building standard that can be adopted for government buildings. => The following places have voluntary green building standards or guidelines for government buildings: New York, Pennsylvania. => Any BC municipality; => Federation of Canadian Municipalities. => The Pennsylvania chapter of the national AIA has adopted a green building standard as the standard to which its members should strive. => The American Planning Association has adopted broad sustainability guidelines that include economic and social sustainability issues as well as ecological ones. => All professional groups involved in the building industry, including but not limited to: => Architectural Institute of BC; => Royal Architectural Institute of Canada; => Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation; => Building Owners and Managers Association of BC and Canada; => Urban Development Institute, Pacific Region and other regions; => Canadian Home Builders Association; => The Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC. => British Columbia Real Estate Agents, Property Appraisers and Home Inspectors => Santa Monica has incorporated green building practices into its building code. => Canadian Building Code => British Columbia Building Code => Section 740 of the Municipal Act, dealing with the Building Regulations of British Columbia, could be updated to allow the BC Building Code to deal with environmental issues. The mandate of federal and municipal building codes could be updated to include regulating buildings to minimize their impact on the environment. => PATH links and supports medium and large-scale model green developments. => National Resources Canada => Public Works Canada => BC Ministry of Finance (approves funding for all BC Ministry buildings) 109 => G r e e n Bui ld ings B C , B C B C => Greater V a n c o u v e r Reg iona l District => City of Vancouve r , F a l s e C r e e k Mode l Eco log ica l Deve lopment => Federat ion of C a n a d i a n Munic ipal i t ies => Envi ronmenta l groups, industry, research groups, universit ies, and others that are involved in creat ing such model g reen deve lopments . => S y d n e y So la r V i l lage and Hannove r Eco log i ca District have created large demonstrat ion projects that adopt a comprehens ive set of eco log ica l features. => City of Vancouve r , Fa l se C r e e k Mode l Eco log ica l Deve lopment => Any of the above organizat ions, part icularly with respect to the Whis t ler 2010 O lymp ic B id => T V L B Mor tgage program g ives better rates to those who follow a green building s tandard. => Any or all C a n a d i a n mortgage b roke rs . 4 1 => In the examp les of strategies deve loped by Aus t in , San ta M o n i c a , Toronto B B P , Seat t le , F R E E and N R C a n ' s , energy sav ings from retrofit and new bui ld ings programs can be signif icant, and not only can pay for g reen building programs but can be the polit ical and market a rgument for them to be imp lemented. => Interested governments , industr ies, environmental groups and c i t izens can use the regional inc reases in energy pr ices, the potential energy sav ings , and the energy aspec t of g lobal warming to popular ize a broader range of envi ronmental i s sues . T h e s e easy-se l l i ssues should be used to support the adopt ion of an eco log ica l ly comprehens ive green building program. 5.3. Major Findings and Their Policy Implications There are three major f indings from this thesis, and a number of minor f indings. T h e first major f inding is that it is poss ib le to create green building strategies that are both eco log ica l ly comprehens i ve and mains t reamable : this is s e e n in many of the g reen bui lding strategies that were examined . The greatest rate of market saturat ion s e e n in any of the strategies studied is 100% in a number of c a s e s in wh ich g reen bui lding s tandards were mandated . T h e next h ighest (measurab le) rate of market saturation is found at the T V L B program, wh ich u s e s its g reen building mortgage on 66% of the mor tgages it g ives out. T h e next 41 Many mortgage lenders in the Austin area advertise on the Austin Green Building Program website that they give better interest rates for those who rate their building using the Austin program (Austin). Therefore, simply the adoption of a set of guidelines or a standard may encourage mortgage-lenders to cater to this new market. 1.10 highest rate is seen at the Austin residential green building program, which has 31% of the market share after 10 years of a resource-intensive program. This leads to the second major finding, which is that in many of the case studies examined, the principle barrier to the implementation of a green building strategy that is mainstreamable and ecologically comprehensive appears to be the exclusion of ecological factors in the mandate of building codes. The third and final major finding was that non-governmental organizations could bring much needed leadership, knowledge and skills to the task of creating mainstreamable and ecologically comprehensive green building strategies. 5.3.1. Findings From Ecological Criteria The list of green building strategies found to be both ecologically comprehensive and able to mainstream green buildings is found in Table 8, above. 5.3.1.1. Major Ecological Comprehensiveness Finding: Ecological Comprehensiveness Not Opposed to Mainstreamability One interesting and significant finding is that green building strategies that were ecologically comprehensive were not less likely to be mainstreamable, and in fact there were many cases studies in which green building strategies were both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. The idea that ecological complexity is at odds with mainstreamability because it would be more difficult to use, more complex and less practical came up in a number of interviews and research. Several times, interviewees explained that a certain program was not more ecologically comprehensive because it needed to be practical and able to transform the market. As one example, a manager at the Austin residential green building program explains why Austin chooses to keep certain more controversial or complex environmental design choices out of its rating program: 4 2 It s h o u l d b e m e n t i o n e d h e r e that t he A u s t i n p r o g r a m d id l a rge l y m e e t t he cr i te r ia that a s s e s s e d e c o l o g i c a l c o m p r e h e n s i v e n e s s , but t he re w e r e a f e w a r e a s that it d i d not c o v e r . T h e r e f o r e th is q u o t e is u s e d s i m p l y a s a n e x a m p l e of t he c o m m o n p e r c e p t i o n that e c o l o g i c a l c o m p r e h e n s i v e n e s s is o p p o s e d to m a i n s t r e a m a b i l i t y . I l l You could argue that it could be a more stringent program. However, the goal is not to provide a rating system for sophisticated builders or owners. It is to provide a program that is doable for volume builders. The goal is to achieve true market transformation. Certainly creating a program that is elitist in content or requirement would be counter to any goal of mainstreaming green buildings. Yet, while the goal of creating a practical, simple program that affects the majority of the builders is laudable, it is clear from many of the green building strategies examined in this thesis that it is possible to have a strategy that is both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. Both Minnesota and L E E D completely met this thesis' criteria for being ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. The presence of these two programs alone is enough to prove that an ecologically comprehensive strategy can also be mainstreamable. In addition, however, in the following case studies completely met the criteria for being mainstreamable and partially met the criteria for being ecologically comprehensive: LEED, Naval Facilities, Seattle Sustainable Building Policy, the Minnesota Design Guide, Austin's Residential Program, TVLB Mortgage Program, Santa Monica's Guidelines, Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District and the Sydney Olympic Village. Each of the sub-criterion listed in the definition of the ecologically comprehensive criteria was present in one or more of these programs, showing that they are all possible. 5.3.1.2. Policy Implications: Ecological Comprehensiveness Not Opposed to Mainstreamability The first implication of the above finding is that green building programs do have the potential to address a comprehensive set of ecological problems. The implication for British Columbia policy is that the green building programs should be embraced at a broad scale. For preliminary suggestions of first steps to take in this direction, refer to Table 9, above. The importance of this finding should not be underplayed. This is a very significant finding that effectively means that green building strategies should be developed as a way to address some of the pressing environmental issues that the world is facing. The resulting implication of the recommendation to proceed with the development of green building strategies is that more research and development in both (1) green 112 buildings and (2) green building strategies will be needed to ensure that these policies are addressing ecological issues in the appropriate way. As noted by several building energy experts (Segrist, 1991; Zimmerman and Martin unpub) the building industry lacks the focus on research and development that is seen in many industries. In 1991 in the USA, building industry research and development was estimated at below 0.4% of the annual of total construction revenue, compared to the automotive and oil industries which devoted between 1.9% and'2.9% of revenue, respectively (Segrist, 1991). Even if ecological comprehensiveness were to make it much more difficult to transform a market, it would be important to do further research to link the ecological problems that result from buildings to the building practices that cause them, and to research solutions. This is because, as this thesis shows, (1) the ecological problems are significant and (2) buildings' contribution to these problems is also significant. However, as ecological comprehensiveness does not limit the ability of a program to transform a market, there is every reason to put greater emphasis on environmental building research and development. 5.3.1.3. Other Findings: Some Ecological Issues Often Ignored Some ecological issues were simply more difficult or more of a break from traditional practice and often ignored. These included: ° integrated pest management ° facilities to compost food waste ° alternate wastewater treatment facilities or composting toilets 0 alternate and natural stormwater management techniques ° efficient use of materials (through any number of techniques, including using the structure for the finish), ° durable and low maintenance materials. There are, of course, regulatory and perception barriers to many of these practices. For example, in NY they had experienced difficulty with greywater reuse on one of their buildings. The Department of Design and Construction (DDC) employees were still in the process of working with the authorities on the building in question when I spoke with them. 113 5.3.1.4. Policy Implication: Green Building Research and Curriculum The finding that some ecological issues are often ignored brought up the need with green building strategies to foster continued innovation, to continually go back to first principles and tie ecological issues with building problems. If this is not done, green building guidelines could simply become the new standard that could not be moved aside. The above list of practices that are commonly ignored by green building guidelines would represent a starting point for research to: 1. ensure that the technologies and practices are feasible, reliable, and adequately respond to the environmental problems that they are aiming to alleviate and, 2. ensure that this green building research is received by industry professionals and professionals-in-training. Universities and governments need to begin to research the crucial link between buildings and their enormous environmental impact on the planet. This is needed so that green building guidelines can legitimately say, for instance, that yes, alternate, natural storm water designs are needed so that urban runoff does not continue to destroy salmon and other habitat. In addition, the universities, colleges and other institutions that train building industry professionals need to begin to teach these new, more environmentally responsible methods of building. This would include but is not limited to: architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, environmental science, urban planning, geography, ethics, building technologists, spec writers, real estate agents, estimators, and other related professions. One important area of further research for British Columbia is research into weighing green building issues within green building guidelines or strategies to represent global and regional environmental priorities. The criteria to assess ecological comprehensiveness was not weighted and neither were any of the strategies studied. For example, in the lower mainland, mobile sources (light-duty, heavy duty and off-road) account for the largest contribution to regional emissions of the five common air contaminants (CO, V O C s , NOx, SOx, and PM)—comprising 73% of the total common air contaminants in 1997 (GVRD 1997). However, mobile sources account for 41% of the region's green house gas emissions, while space heating accounts for only 27.5%. The environmental issues that a green building strategy covers could be weighted to 114 represent the relative contributions of various building components and the importance of the issue. If global climate change, as discussed in this thesis' introduction, is broadly taken to be the world's most pressing environmental problem, it could be ranked as more important, and given more weighting or points than regional air quality. Then within this, the building components contributing to greenhouse gas emissions (here shown to be transportation and heating components) could be weighted accordingly. The practice of weighting environmental issues could ensure that the green building program deals with regional issues in an appropriate way. It is important to note that the monitoring of global and local issues would require dedicated funds and staff. This is merely one example of an important area for regional research and development. 5.3.1.5. Other Findings: Few Strategies Were Truly Ecologically Comprehensive Most of the green building strategies covered dealt with new buildings. Even in those cases where the mandate of the green building strategy was broader than new buildings, most of the strategies were developed for a niche building market: either new buildings, renovations, residential buildings, commercial, government, or some other niche. 4 3 Austin's program is unusual as it has four sub-programs: residential, municipal, commercial, and multi-family. More research could be done at Austin to find out if in fact it could act as a model. In addition, future development of L E E D will include renovations, low-rise residential, interiors, and operations and maintenance guidelines. This is a necessary development to achieve holistic coverage of the building market. There should be future research and development into such issues as the behaviour changes that will be necessary to reach ecological sustainability. Many groups could take part in this important research, including universities (in the areas of environmental studies, health, law, ethics, planning, engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, and others), research institutions, non-profit groups, government ministries, and interested citizens. The criteria to assess ecological comprehensiveness did not include an assessment of these issues, as there was some indication after preliminary research had begun that the strategies would not to be able to meet them. 115 5.3.1.6. Policy Implication: British Columbia Should Contribute To Green Building Research and Development The policy implication of the above finding is that British Columbian researchers and policy makers need to contribute towards a more holistic definition of green buildings. While some B C cities are preparing to adopt American-created rating systems such as L E E D , we should assist in developing the tools needed to assess: ° a broader group of buildings, ° a broader definition of environmental impact (aiming towards sustainability), and ° a broader range of solutions (including behavioural and perceptual changes as well as building technologies and designs). If we do not begin research and policy development into these areas, we will only have the option of adopting American standards that are not necessarily created with British Columbians' values and goals. If there are differences in Canadian and American commitments to greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets, wetland conservation targets, or endangered species policies, for example, these differences need to be reflected by the green building strategies used. This issue is clearly highlighted in the recent Bush administrations' decisions on CO2 emissions that differ from the Canadian stance. 5.3.2. Findings From Mainstreaming Criteria 5.3.2.1. Major Mainstreamability Finding: Codes As Major Barrier to Mainstreamability The second major finding is that complete market saturation is only approached when green building standards are mandated. What is most significant is the differences between the voluntary and market-based programs and the mandatory programs. The voluntary and market-based programs that had received extensive resources and staff over long periods did not approach complete market saturation, even after 10 years of development, whereas the mandatory programs achieved almost complete market saturation within a year or two of the creation 0 the policy. The Austin residential green building program had captured only 31% of the market after 10 years of a resource-intensive program. The related TVLB Greenbuilding Mortgage program achieved greater overall numbers and percentages (3799 bldg. in 2000 v. 688 at Austin; 66% in 2000 v. 31% in Austin), which may be attributable to its lesser degree of ecological comprehensiveness and lesser degree of difficulty. Regardless, either program pales in 116 comparison to the complete market transformation seen in cases where green building standards were mandated. Therefore, it is clear that the principle barrier to the implementation of green building strategies that are mainstreamable and ecologically comprehensive is the exclusion of ecological factors in the mandate of building codes. 4 4 The market-based programs do not appear able to reach anywhere near the same levels of market transformation that were possible when green building standards were mandated, and would be possible with fundamental changes of building codes. 5.3.2.2. Policy Implication: Broaden Building Code Mandate The policy implication of the above finding is that there should be fundamental changes to Canadian and British Columbian building codes, electric codes, and plumbing codes. Ecological goals could be introduced into building codes in two ways. Either ecological problems could be recognized as both short and long term health risks or they could be recognized as a new regulatory mandate. The National Building Code of Canada, published by the National Research Council through its Associate Committee on the National Building Code, is adopted and amended by the cities ad municipalities throughout Canada. It regulates public health, fire safety and structural sufficiency and presently has no mandate to regulate for environmental issues. Either of the suggested changes to code mandates would need to be made at the national, provincial, and municipal levels. At the provincial level, section 740 of the Municipal Act, dealing with the Building Regulations of British Columbia, could be updated to allow the B C Building Code to deal with environmental issues. The mandate of federal and municipal building codes could similarly be updated to include regulating buildings to minimize their impact on the environment. 44 The Municipal Act (otherwise known as the Local Government Act) empowers municipal governments to adopt building bylaws to supplement the BC Building Code as long as they are consistent with the BC Building Code. The bylaws may cover such issues as health, safety and the protection of property (Ministry of Municipal Affairs 2001). The Building Code, then, is the principle regulation that influences buildings. It is the regulation that needs to have its mandate expanded: expanding the Building Code mandate would by definition in law expand the building bylaw mandate. In cases such as Vancouver where the Vancouver Charter allows the municipality to create its own building by-law instead of using the BC Building Code, the bylaw is based on the National Building Code of Canada. All of this points to the National and Provincial Building Codes as the places to effectively impact building development. 117 5.3.2.3. Other Findings: Even Strategies That Were Not Mainstreamable Can Support Others That Are Even those green building strategies that do not meet the criteria to assess mainstreamability can be crucial in supporting the need for green building practices. For example, even if policies adopted by professional bodies could not, by themselves, have the ability to mainstream green building practices, they certainly could create an atmosphere in which other policies are more supported, and in which more people are learning about green buildings. In combination with other actions taken by government or private industry, these professional guides to practice can help a great deal to foster an environment in which green buildings may become the mainstream. 5.3.2.4. Policy Implication: Encourage Professional Organizations To Adopt Guidelines See section 5.2: Learning from the case studies. 5.3.3. Secondary Criteria 5.3.3.1. Major Finding: Participation Of Non-Profits Often Brought Leadership and Crucial Knowledge The analysis of the case studies using the participation criteria made it clear that of the strategies that were both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable, several that were the most ground-breaking also had the most extensive and meaningful participation from NGO's or the public. The key case studies that I am referring to here are: 0 Austin, considered ground-breaking in terms of mainstreaming green buildings because it was the first green building program in North America, and has developed into one that is both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable; ° L E E D , ground-breaking because it is the first strategy to put itself forward as an industry standard; 0 Santa Monica, 4 5 as it was the first to adopt green practices into the municipal code; ° Sydney Olympic Village, considered ground-breaking because it created such a large, ecologically comprehensive demonstration project. 4 5 While Santa Monica is included in this list, it is the only case study that encouraged broad and meaningful public participation. It is included with the findings of the role of NGO's because I believe that the same kinds of forces are at work in both, though further research needs to be done to examine this idea. It was citizen agitation that was a key 118 In addition, the Pennsylvania guidelines used the knowledge of the non-profit group, Green Building Alliance, and this group was cited as a leader in their development. This is an interesting and important finding because the bureaucrats and politicians creating and administering these policies are often very wary of non-profit groups and environmental groups. 5.3.3.2. Policy Implication: Broaden The Table The above finding suggests that there might be a great deal of benefit in involving non-profits in the development and implementation of green building strategies in British Columbia. Non-profit environmental groups, citizens organizations, the public non-profit research groups have a great deal to contribute to the creation of green building strategies. 5.3.3.3. Other Findings: Fear of The Public The analysis of the case studies using the participation criteria revealed that none of the green building strategies seemed to invite the general public to the table in a way that allowed them a meaningful role except Santa Monica and, depending on how you assess it, LEED. The US Green Building Council, with its L E E D program, encourages some of the broadest participation seen in any of the strategies and should be lauded for its inclusiveness and consensus-style of organization generally. However, even the U S G B C does not invite individuals to be members: they must be part of a group or industry. Granted, they can be part of a citizen's group, but the prices of membership bring up equitable access issues. The prices are cost-prohibitive to most individual citizens who might want to participate. Given that the public are usually the people for whom these buildings are built, and the people that have to buy, live, work and die in them, perhaps greater consideration should be given to their inclusion. 5.3.3.4. Policy Implication: Broaden The Table Again, Consider Inviting The Public The implications of the above finding is that the public may have a great deal to contribute to the creation of green building strategies. Research needs to be done on the question of inviting the public to the table in a positive and meaningful way. However, instigating force for the development of the Santa Monica guidelines: citizens were lobbying for the city to clean up its act environmentally (Personal Interview 1999; 2001). 119 consideration should be given to inviting them to the table when any green building strategies are being developed and implemented in British Columbia. 5.3.3.5. Other Findings: Communication May Influence Ecological Comprehensiveness Clear, accessible communication can have a positive impact on the implementation of ecologically comprehensive building strategies. Greenpeace (2001) notes the importance of making the Greenpeace Environmental Guidelines accessible to be read by the public: Lillehammer, Atlanta, Nagano and other Olympic cities made efforts to include environmental protection in some of their venues and in some issue areas. Lillehammer's efforts in particular were significant. However, no other Olympic host city has attempted to incorporate environmental protection into all stages of the planning and development of its Olympic site in the way that Sydney has. The city has taken a risk unlike any other Olympic host city - to make its environmental commitments public in the form of official Environmental Guidelines prior to the construction of its Olympic site. These Guidelines allow organisations such as Greenpeace, companies tendering for Olympic contracts, local communities and the general public to know exactly what these commitments are up front. Sydney will be held accountable to these Guidelines (emphasis added). Greenpeace argues that allowing the strategy to be clearly communicated to the general public was a deciding factor in Sydney's ultimate ecological successes. On the other side of this, if a strategy did not communicate its approach to dealing with ecological issues well, this could mean that in practice, the strategy was less ecologically comprehensive. If some of the ecological issues had been covered in a way that most people would not understand, they would not be translated into practice. In this way, lack of clarity could directly influence the ecological comprehensiveness of a strategy. For example, lack of clarity in explaining what alternate sewage treatment is and where it can be used suggests that the reader will not be able to use the information at all. The Pennsylvania strategy, which appeared to cover most if not all of the ecological criteria, did not present them in a way that was practical and useful to the reader, and so could not be expected to be used. In the Pennsylvania guidelines, although most of the ecological criteria areas (energy, water, landscape, materials, waste, air, light) are referred to at least obliquely, these 120 guidelines are wordy and lack the punchy, pithy character that most guidelines strive for and guidelines like L E E D manage to achieve. Because the guidelines are written in long prose form, and no measurable performance targets are suggested anywhere, it is difficult to use. Although these guidelines do touch on solutions like composting, alternate sewage treatment, and alternate site water treatment, the fact that they are written in very abstract language almost ensures that these strategies will not be well understood by the reader. Significantly, the guidelines points designers to L E E D or other "ratings systems" or "checklists" to assist in the design process. Similarly, in the AIA guidelines, the goals are not operationalized, made into practical, measurable goals. Therefore, they are more difficult to use and understand, and less likely to actually translate into practice. 5.3.3.6. Policy Implication: Note The Importance Of Accessible Communication The policy implication of the above finding is that all green building strategies created in British Columbia should be transparent, accessible and communicated clearly. 5.3.3.7. Other Findings: Almost Complete A voidance of Equity Issues The analysis of the case studies using the equity criteria revealed that overall, green building guidelines have, until now, been regarded as almost entirely technical documents, which solve technical problems in a technical way. Some social and economic issues are covered by the green building strategies studied in this thesis, but these issues are rarely covered in a comprehensive way. Most of the green building strategies here are entirely removed from social issues—even basic social issues over which they clearly have an important impact—like equitable access to housing or buildings. In order to move towards a more holistic vision of sustainability, and to recognize the interconnectedness of ecological, economic and social problems and solutions, the inclusion of basic equity issues into green building strategies is a vitally important next step in both research and policy development. However, there were several case studies that did expressly include some social issues and these can act as models to pave the way for others that would incorporate social issues into their green building strategies. The A P A policy guide on sustainability, for example, incorporates social sustainability issues in a comprehensive way. P A T H has affordability as one of its central goals, and this seems like a useful goal for any green 121 building program. If the claims that green buildings can be created for the same cost or less than standard buildings is to be taken seriously, then the goal of reducing the costs of buildings to the users (both first costs and operation and maintenance costs) should be an achievable goal. However, in addition to the A P A and PATH green building strategies that overtly address equity issues, there were many strategies that, due to their policies of not increasing green building costs, effectively address the most basic of equity concerns, those being that the cost of green buildings are not above standard buildings. This step should be thought of as a bare minimum for an equity policy. However, the goal should be not just business as usual but to make green buildings accessible for people of all income groups. 5.3.3.8. Policy Implication: Research Ways To Integrate Social and Economic Priorities The policy implication of the above finding is that there is a need to research ways to integrate social and economic priorities. Clearly, green building strategies that make buildings less accessible for those in need will be creating problems. Beyond this, however, there are connections between the various aspects of sustainability that need to be researched and developed. 5.3.3.9. Other Findings: Political Support Associated With Primary Criteria The findings of the interviews and research showed the programs that were both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable always had political support. There were many programs that had political support that were not ecologically comprehensive (many of the programs that focus on achieving the financial benefits from energy savings, for example, had great political support). This finding makes sense: political support was necessary green building programs to achieve the ability to influence the market. Often environmental groups and even bureaucrats spend all their time on getting the technical features of their policies correct. They do not learn to communicate the benefits of their policies in a way that will garner support from the public, industry and political 122 groups. What was shown here was that those groups that could garner broad based political support tended to have better results. It is interesting to note also that in some cases political support may reduce the chances of mainstreamablility. In the case of PATH the support of the highest office in the US may not be enough to keep the program running (and therefore to mainstream the green building practices within the program) once the president has moved on and the next president feels like cutting it. Rather, broad based support from a variety of different places, as seen in almost all the strategies found to meet the primary criteria seemed to be necessary to ensure the success of a program in terms of both ecological comprehensiveness and industry impact. 5.3.3.10. Policy Implication: Recognize The Importance Of Broad Based Political Support The implications of the above research is that for those groups interesting in developing a green building policy, it is important to create political support from a variety of different groups and people: NGO's , the public, industry and politicians. 5.3.3.11. Questions Raised: Is There A Need for an Industry Standard? As more and more municipalities and government agencies adopt the use of the L E E D guidelines 4 6 it raises the question: is there a need for an industry standard? Some of the benefits of a standard are clear. It allows a fair playing field for industry and consumers, so that everyone knows what they are getting. It allows consumer confidence, which should increase the new standard's ability to transform the market—to mainstream green buildings. Finally, one standard, as with LEED, can have minor variations that accommodate a particular region's climate and regulations and needs. Mortgages are one area where the existence of an industry-wide standard would clearly be useful. It is interesting to note that the lack of consistent, industry-wide standards in Energy Efficiency Mortgages developed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the 1980s led to confusion about the value of these mortgages. As a result of this confusion, these Energy Efficiency Mortgages have never been recognized by traditional banks and mortgage companies. Green building guidelines are several times more complex than 123 the most complex energy efficiency guidelines. Therefore, there would seem to be a lot of benefit to having an industry standard. However, there are also some very compelling reasons to resist a standard. This industry is young, and the development of green building materials and techniques is also young. If the standards of today are somehow formalized, they may end up creating more ecological damage than good. Consider the following: The U.S. standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number. Why is that gauge used? Because that's the way they built then in England, and the U.S. railroads were built by English expatriates. Why did the English people built them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used. Why did they use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that were used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing. Okay! Why did the wagons use that odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing the wagons would break on some of the long distance roads, because that's the spacing of the old wheel ruts. So where did these old rutted roads come from? The first long-distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for the benefit of their legions. The roads have been used ever since. And the ruts? The initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagons, were first made by Roman war chariots. Since the chariots were made for or by Imperial Rome, they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. Thus we have the answer to the original question. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches derives from the original specification for Imperial Roman army war chariots. Specs and bureaucracies live forever. So the next time you are handed a specification and wonder what horse's ass came up with it, you may be exactly right—because the Imperial Roman chariots were made to be just wide enough to accommodate the back-ends of two war horses. (RMI 1998) A senior Pennsylvania official (2001) notes that there is a regulation in Pennsylvania that requires all buildings to burn coal. There is a way to get around it, but it is still there. Clearly, green building standards should be tied to research that directs the standards in This list includes: the US Navy, Seattle, Portland, US Department of General Services, and the US Office of Real 124 solving environmental problems rather simply passed into law, and left to become redundant. Because the environment and our impacts on it are such dynamic factors, standards need to be updated regularly with fresh research to ensure that they are addressing present environmental problems in the most effective way. In addition, any green building standard should be based on performance regulations (e.g.: use a maximum amount of energy or water per person hour per year) rather than prescriptive regulations (e.g.: use low-flow toilets, burn coal). Performance targets are clearly linked to the fundamental intent of the regulation, which is to reduce water or energy use, and thus are easier to understand, and allow innovation. Prescriptive regulations are much more difficult to update as time passes, because the reasons for them are less obvious, and the technology prescribed (like coal or low-flow toilets) is much more likely become standard practice without anyone understanding why. In the year 2001, when there is a plethora of different standards concerning green building guidelines, it is interesting to note that if there were simply one standard adopted, there would be considerably fewer people working towards the goal of creating and understanding green building standards. This might mean fewer people critically examining the ecological problems and dreaming up potential solutions. In addition, it seems possible and even likely that the success that L E E D has had in establishing itself as a green building standard may be the cause of its demise. Its success—its impact on industry, its inclusion of diverse groups in meaningful participation, its transparency and clarity in communicating its new environmentally-motivated building standard—all these qualities may enable its new standard of green building to be quickly and genuinely integrated into the building industry. Once that happens, L E E D itself could be redundant, or it could tie itself to ongoing basic research into environmental problems and their solutions, and it could evolve over time. There is, however, the separate but related question of whether L E E D goes far enough towards ecological sustainability. It certainly meets the criteria for ecological comprehensiveness. However, whether or not it meets the higher goal of being ecologically sustainable is another question completely. The answer is almost certainly no, as reductions of closer to 90% in consumption by those in the monetarily wealthier Property. 125 northern countries are closer to what seems to be necessary for sustainability (Brown and Flavin 1999). The question of sustainability is beyond the scope of this thesis, except to say that most likely none of the strategies covered could be described as encouraging sustainable building design. The creation of a new standard may actually get in the way of the kinds of changes that need to be made to achieve true sustainability. The new standard may legitimize a standard that should be continually challenged. In addition, it may be effective in quashing the seemingly far-flung ideas that may be necessary to achieve true sustainability. For all these reasons, in addition to the high cost of administering L E E D that is a real barrier to its adoption as a true certification system (Several Personal Interviews 2001), what is needed is to tie a green building standard clearly and transparently to environmental problems and solutions in the context of ecological sustainability, not simply greater environmental responsibility. What is needed is a frame through which the latest research on global and regional ecological problems and their solutions can be tied to building codes. This would ensure that the government paid part of the expense of the certification process. Training programs for architects, builders and other processionals should accompany the code changes. All of this should be paid for easily from the resulting energy savings, as seen in Austin. This kind of broad scale program could be implemented perhaps five years after the City of Vancouver (through its South East False Creek neighbourhood), the G V R D , the British Columbia Building Corporation and the province of B C through Green Buildings B C all adopted L E E D or a similar guideline / rating system that would allow the government time to adapt to the new practices and create the new building code structure. 5.4. Summary Over the next fifty years, there will be more buildings built than ever before in human history (Orr 1999). Given that, as discussed in this thesis, buildings have a greater impact on the environment than any other sector, it is crucial that humanity learns to build and live in them differently. 126 This thesis found that it is possible to create green building strategies that are both ecologically comprehensive and mainstreamable. The following green building strategies supported this finding: LEED; the US Naval Facilities Policy; Seattle's Sustainable Building Policy; The Minnesota Design Guide; Austin's Residential Program; TVLB Mortgage Program; Santa Monica's Guidelines; Pennsylvania's Guidelines; Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District; and Sydney Olympic Village. This finding suggests that there should be greater use of green building strategies as solutions to the many ecological problems created or exacerbated by buildings. It also points to the need for greater research and development of environmental building products and strategies. The second major finding is that in many of the case studies examined, the principle barrier to the implementation of ecologically comprehensive green building strategies that are truly mainstreamable is clearly the exclusion of ecological factors in the mandate of building codes. Complete market transformation is only be achieved where green building strategies are mandated, as was the case in the City of Austin (municipal program), the US Navy, Minnesota, City of Seattle, City of Portland, US Department of General Services, US Office of Real Property, US Postal Service, and at the Sydney Olympic Village. Even after ten years and tremendous successes, the Austin Residential Green Building program has achieved 31% of the market share, and the associated TVLB Mortgage program achieved 66%. Both of these are herculean achievements, and the result of dedication and genius on the part of those involved. However, this rate of market acceptance is nothing like the complete market transformation achieved in those cases where green standards were mandated. It is nothing close to what would be possible if environmental standards were part of the building code. This points to the need for changes to the mandate of building codes to allow them to regulate reductions in the environmental damage done by buildings. Many of the voluntary green building programs (LEED, Austin, Colorado, etc.) are responsible for bringing broad support to green building practices and concepts since the early 1990s. The programs that mandate the use of green building standards in many ways achieve their great successes because of the crucial, ground-breaking work done by programs like Austin and LEED. However, now that green building products and 127 practices have become much more acceptable, it is possible to begin to speak about making a certain basic level of respect for the environment a prerequisite for having the right to build, not a frill. At a time when we are witnessing the largest species extinction rates since the dinosaurs, it is time to take the environmental impacts of buildings just as seriously as the health impacts that building codes are presently mandated to regulate. The third and final major finding was that non-governmental organizations could bring much needed leadership, knowledge and skills to the task of creating mainstreamable and ecologically comprehensive green building strategies. Even more, the participation of environmental NGO's was associated with the development of green building strategies that are particularly innovative. This is seen clearly in the cases of Sydney, Austin, the US Navy, and LEED. This finding suggests that these groups should be included to a greater degree in the development of green building strategies in British Columbia. 5.4.1. Further Research Needed: Public Participation More research needs to be done to address the question of how the public could be further brought in to assist in the development of green building strategies. Whether or not it is believed that the public could contribute to the development of strategies to lessen the environmental impact of buildings, the fact is that if changes are not made now to the way we in North America build buildings, the ecological destruction could be severe. In a democratic society, the public has a right to know about these risks, and a right to give their input on potential solutions. International human rights law that regards access to environmental resources as a basic human right provides the legal motivation for those responsible for building buildings in North America to learn to reduce their environmental impact. Yet, surely there is also an imperative—legal, moral or other—to communicate these problems with the general public and allow them to participate in their solution. If there were one single incident (like an oil tanker leak or large fires) that promised to wipe out clean water or air for great portions of the world's population, it would be news. If there were a single incident that threatened wildlife habitat or forests, it would be news. The public would 128 have a right to know. That is what the building industry is as it presently stands. It is a time bomb that threatens the ecological health of the planet. 129 Works Cited or Consulted Aitken, Donald. 1999. Turning Down the Heat. National Film Board and David Suzuki Foundation. Altshuler, Alan. 1965. "The Goals of Comprehensive Planning." The View From Below. 1972. Eds Fainstein and Fainstein. Boston: Little, Brown. American Institute of Architecture (AIA). 2001. "Guide to Environmentally Sustainable Architecture." Committee of the Environment (COTE). Website: http://www.e-architect.com/15 February, 2001. American Planning Association (APA). 2000. "APA Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability." American Planning Association: Current Issues In Planning. Web Site. http://www.planning.org/govt/sustdvpg.htm 3 October, 2000. American Planning Association, Planning Advisory (APAPA). 1998. The Principles of Smart Development: Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program. Chicago: American Planning Association. Andereck, Kelly Jon and Richard Shoen. 1999. "A Comparison of Performance Rating Systems and Tools." Mainstreaming Green Sustainable Design for Buildings & Communities. Conference. AIA Committee of the Environment. Web Site http://www.e-architect.com/pia/cote/ Anderson, Walter Truett. 1998. "The Human Factor." adapted from The Future of the Self: Inventing the Postmodern Person. UTNE Reader. 85:49-54. Anink, David, Chiel Boonstra and John Mak. 1996. Handbook of Sustainable Building: An Environmental Assessment Method for Selection of Materials for Use in Construction and Refurbishment. London: James and James Science Publishers. Artibise, Alan, c.1994. "Metropolitan Organization in Greater Vancouver: 'Do-It-Yourself Regional Government.'" Unpublished article; Plan 502 article binder. Asmus, Peter. 1999. "Sustainable buildings'save big bucks." San Francisco Examiner. 14 May: A 23. Online: http://www.sfgate.com/examiner/ 13 July, 1999. Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (ASMI). 1999. Web Site, http://www.athenasmi.ca/ Austin, City of. 1998. Green Building Program Residential Rating Application. Austin: Austin. Austin, City of. 1999. Austin City Connection-Green Building Program. Web Page. http:www.ci.austin.tx.us/greenbuilder/ 23 May, 1999. Baggs, Sydney and Joan. 1996. The Healthy House: Creating a Safe, Healthy and Environmentally Friendly Home. Hong Kong: HarperCollins. Barfield, Owen. ???? Saving the Appearances. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. Barton, Hugh. 1998. "Eco: Neighbourhoods: A Review of Projects." Local Environment. 3:2: 159-177. Baumgartner, Mark. 1999. "Share a Car, Save a Dollar: Hourly Auto Rentals Catch On in Portland, Oregon." ABC NEWS. 12, February. Online: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/DailyNews/carshare990209.html Benedick, Richard Elliot. 1991. Ozone Diplomacy: New Directions in Safeguarding the Planet. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Berdyaev, Nicholas. 1962. The Meaning of History. Cleveland, 1962. Berlin's StattAuto (BSA). 1999. http://flora.org/afo/afz/issue9-11.html Berman, Morris. 1978. Social Change and Scientific Organization: The Royal Institution, 1799-1844. Toronto: Heinemann. Berman, Morris. 1981. The Reenchantment of the World. Ithica: Cornell University Press. Binole, Gina. 1999. "Buckman Heights makes asphalt an ecology lesson." [Portland] Business Journal. 16 April. Bion, Howard. 1999. Listserve letter. Greenbuilding-Digest: greenbuilding-request@crest.org. 2:620. 12 June. Blais, Andre, et al. 2000. "Unsteady State: The 1997 Canadian Federal Election." Catholic New Times. April 16. 130 Blake, William. 1794. "TheTyger." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 1993. Ed. Abrams et al. 6th ed. Vol. 2. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Blake, William. 1804. "Jerusalem." William Blake. 1996. Ed. Peter Butter. London: Everyman. Boulder (City of). 1999. Green Points Building Program of Boulder, Colorado. Web Page. http://environmentalaffairs.ci.boulder.co.us/residential/gp_overview.html British Columbia Building Code (BCBC). Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Building Standards Branch. 1992 with 1995 Revisions and Errata. British Columbia Buildings Corporation. 2000. "Green Buildings BC—Retrofit Program." Web Site, http://www.greenbuildingsbc.ca British Columbia Energy Aware Committee (BCEAC). 1997. A Tool Kit for Energy Planning in BC. Vancouver: BCEAC. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks (BCMELP). 1995a. "Protecting the Air We Breath: A BC Action Plan For Cleaner Air." Information Pamflet. Vancouver: BCMELP. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks (BCMELP). 1995b. Clean Vehicles and Fuels for British Columbia: A Policy Paper. Vancouver: BCMELP. Brower, Micheal, and Warren Leon. 1999. The Consumer's Guide To Effective Environmental Choices: Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists. Three Rivers Press: New York. Brown, Lester, and Christopher Flavin. 1999. "A New Economy for a New Century." State of the World 1999: A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. New York: WW Norton & Company. Business Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD). 1993. Getting Eco-Efficient. Report of the BCSD: First Antwerp Eco-Efficiency Workshop. Geneva: BCSP. Businesses for an Environmentally Sustainable Tomorrow (BEST). 1999. Web Page. http://www.ci.portland.or.us/energy/bestmain.html/ 20 July, 1999. Buzacott, Stephen. 1996. Architecture Australia. "Olympics Preview" Sydney: Architecture Media Australia. Callicott, J . Baird. 1996. "Environmental Philosophy is Environmental Activism: The Most Radical and Effective Kind." Environmental Philosophy and Environmental Activism. Don Marieta and Lester Embree, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Reprinted in Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters. What Really Works. David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott, Eds. Oxford University Press. Calthorpe, Peter. 1993. The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Cambridge. 1997. Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Canada and the World Backgrounder (CWB). 1996. "The second safety net." Canada and the World Backgrounder. 62:2. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) and Natural Resources Canada: Canmet C-2000 (NRCan). 1994a. Ideas Challenge: Better Building-A Guide to Innovation in the Design and Construction of High-Rise Residential Buildings. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) and Natural Resources Canada: Canmet C-2000 (NRCan). 1994b. Ideas Challenge: Introduction. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), Natural Resources Canada: Canmet C-2000 (NRCan), Hydro Quebec, Ontario Natural Gas Association, Ontario New Home Warranty Program. 1994c. Ideas Challenge: Integrated, Durable, Energy Efficient, Affordable, Solution-Regional Finalists. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1992. Environmental Impact Study: Phase 1 -Development of a Database on Housing Characteristics Representative of a Canadian Housing Stock. Scanada Consultants Limited. Star-Housing Database. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1995a. CMHC's Healthy House in Toronto. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1996. Healthy Housing: A Guide to a Sustainable Future. Ottawa: CMHC. 131 Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1998. Innovative Residential Water and Wastewater Management. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1999. CMHC's Healthy House Program. Web Page. http://www.cmhcschl.gc/HealthyHousing/Toronto/e_works.htm Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1999a. "CMHC's Healthy House in Toronto." Web Site. http://www.cmhc.ca/HealthyHousing/Toronto/index.html/ 7 June, 1999. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1999b. "Healthy Housing." WebSite. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/ June 7, 1999. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1999c. "Housing Research: Current Housing Technology Initiatives." Web Site, http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/Publications/CHTI/chtien01.htm/ 7 June, 1999. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1999d. "Highrise and Multiples Innovation Group." WebSite. http://www.cmhc.ca/Research/HighRise/index.html/ 7 July, 1999. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1996. "Measuring Urban Sustainability: Canadian Indicators Workshop." Workshop Proceedings. Prepared by David Dilks, Lura Group. State of the Environment Directorate, Environment Canada, and Centre for Future Studies in Housing and Living Environments, CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1995a. Changing Values-Changing Communities: A Guide to the Development of Healthy, Sustainable Communities. Ottawa: CMHC. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). 1995b. Changing Values-Changing Communities: A Guide to the Development of Healthy, Sustainable Communities. Ottawa: CMHC. Canadian Cohousing Network. 1999. WebSite, http://www.cohousing.ca/ 11 August, 1999. Canadian Council for Health and Active Living at Work (CCHALW). 1998. Walk and Roll: A Guide to Active Transportation to, From, and at the Workplace. Ottawa: CCHALW. Canadian Earth Energy Association (CEEA). 1999. Web Page, http://www.earthenergy.org/ Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute (CFLRI). 1995. Physical Activity Monitor. Ottawa: CLRFI. Canadian Home Builders Association (CHBA). 1999. Web Page, http://www.chba.ca/ 20 July, 1999. Canadian Housing and Renewal Association (CHRA). 1999. Web Page. http://www.web.net/~chra 20 July, 1999. Canadian Press (CP). 1999. "B.C. set to vote in municipal elections." Capra, Fritjof. 1982. The Turning Point: Science, Society and the Rising Culture. Toronto: Bantam Books. Carely , Michael, and Philippe Spapens. 1998. Sharing the World: Sustainable Living and Global Equity in the 21st Century. London: Earthscan. Carpet and Rug Institute (CRI). 1999. WebSite, http://www.carpet-rug.com/ 5 August, 1999. CarSharing Portland (CSP). 1999. WebSite, http://www.carsharing-pdx.com/links.html Carter, Vernon Gill, and Tom Dale. 1974. Topsoil and Civilization. Rev. ed. New York: University of Oklahoma Press. Carter, Vernon Gill, and Tom Dale. 1974. Topsoil and Civilization. Rev. ed. New York: University of Oklahoma Press. Centre for Sustainable Transportation (CST). 1998. The Sustainable Transportation Monitor. 1:1, March. WebSite. http://www.cip-icu.ca/cst/monitor.html#WHY Chicago To Try Roof Gardens." 1999. Lincoln Star Journal. 19 May. Online: http://www.journalstar.com/archives/ Chicago, City of. 1999. Urban Heat Island Initiative. WebSite, http://ci.chi.il.us/ City Considers Green Building Ordinance." 1999. Green Building News. Online: http:www.oikos.com/news/1999/ 19 May, 1999. City of Santa Monica Task Force on the Environment (CSMTFE). 1996. Sustainable City Progress Report: Initial Progress Report on Santa Monica's Sustainable City Program. Civano. 1999. WebSite, http:www.civano.com/ 20July, 1999. 132 CNN. 1998. Internet News. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9810/02/warming.trend/index.html. 4 October. Cole + Associates Architects, Inc. 1999. WebSite, http://www.intranet.ca/~dcole/index.html Cole, Raymond, Walton Chan, Philip Hastings, Gary Helps, Catherine McGuire and David Roppel. 1996. BEPAC: Building Environmental Performance Assessment Criteria: Version 1: Office Buildings, British Columbia, 1993. Vancouver: Environmental Research Group. Cole, Raymond. 1994. "Building Environmental Performance Assessment Criteria, BEPAC", U.S. Green Building Conference-1994, National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 863. Gaithersburg, Md.: National Institute of Standards and Technology. Cole, Ray. 1996s. How Rather Than What: Environmentally Responsible Building Design. Third International Green Building Conference and Exposition. Gaithersburg: United States Department of Commerce Technology Administration and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Cole, Raymond. 1996b. "Green Buildings: In Transit to a Sustainable World." Canadian Architect. 41.7: 13-19. Cole, Raymond. 1998. "Preliminary Analysis of the GBC Assessment Process." Green Building Challenge '98: Conference Retrospective. Vancouver: Natural Resources Canada and Canmet Energy Technology Centre. Green Building Information Council Home Page. (www.greenbuilding.ca/gbc98cnf/) Cole, Raymond. 1998. "Preliminary Analysis of the GBC Assessment Process." Green Building Challenge '98: Conference Retrospective. Vancouver: Natural Resources Canada and Canmet Energy Technology Centre. Green Building Information Council Home Page. (www.greenbuilding.ca/gbc98cnf/) Cole, Raymond. 1999. Personal Interview. 6 August, 1999. Conniff, Ruth. 2000. "On The Road with Ralph Nader." The Nation. Online: http://www.thenation.com/ Conservation Coop - A Solid Achievement." 1996. Advanced Buildings Newsletter. Royal Architectural Institute of Canada. 1: 14. Online: http://greenbuilding.ca/abn/abncoop.htm Conservation Coop Homes. 1999. WebSite, http://www.conscoop.ottawa.on.ca/ Cornell University. 1997. "Ecovillage Cohousing Cooperative." Online. http://www.cfe.cornell.edu/ecovillage/evcc.html/ 4 October, 1997. Crespin, Robert. 1999. City of Denver Building Department employee. E-mail communication. 26 May. Crest. 2000. "Legislative Funding Authorities." http://www.crest.Org/efficiency/pboosters/ohio/html/:q Crosbie, Michael. 1994. Green Architecture: A Guide to Sustainable Design. New York: Rockport. Crosbie, Michael. 1995. "A Maturing Green Architecture." Progressive Architecture. 76:1:31-34. Crow, Brian. 1999. City of Vancouver. Water Conservation Department employee. Phone interview. 19 July. David Suzuki Foundation (DSF). 1998. Taking Our Breath Away: The Health Effects of Air Pollution and Climate Change. Vancouver: David Suzuki Foundation. David Suzuki Foundation (DSF). 1998. Taking Our Breath Away: The Health Effects of Air Pollution and Climate Change. Vancouver: David Suzuki Foundation. Davidoff, P. 1965. "Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning." Journal of the American Institute of Planners. Reprinted in Readings in Planning Theory. 1996. Scott Campbell and Susan Fainstein, Eds. Massachusetts: Blackwell. Denver, City of. 1999. Denvergov: Communications, Access, Service. WebSite. http://www.denver.gov.org/ 24 May, 1999. ' Development the Easy Way." 1999. Los Angeles Times. 6 June, 1999. Di Giulio, Susan. "Architect, Mayor, Environmentalist: An Interview with Jaime Lerner." Progressive Architecture July (1994): 84-85,110. 133 Doggart, John. 1996. "Foreword." Handbook of Sustainable Building: An Environmental Assessment Method for Selection of Materials for Use in Construction and Refurbishment. By David Anink, Chiel Boonstra and John Mak. London: James and James Science Publishers. Doxsey, Laurence. 1998. "The History of the City of Austin Green Building Program." Austin City Connection-Green Building Program. Web Page. http:www.ci.austin.tx.us/greenbuilder/ 23 May, 1999. Dreamworks and Developer Agree to Terms for Movie Studio." 1998. New York Times. 148: 51288: A24. Drury, Kim. 2000. Personal communication. 23 October. ECD Energy. 1999. BREEAM Canada. Web Page, http://www.breeamcanada.ca/ 31 May, 1999. Ed Ayres. 1999. God's Last Offer: Negotiating for a Sustainable Future. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows. Ekins, P. 1993. '"Limits to Growth' and 'sustainable development:' grappling with ecological realities." Ecological Economics. 8: 269-288. Ekins, P. and M. Jacobs. 1994. Are environmental sustainability and economic growth compatible? Energy-Environment-Economy Modelling Discussion Paper No. 7. Cambridge, UK: Department of Applied Economics, University of Cambridge. Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design (ECIAD). 1999. Web Page, http://www.eciad.bc.ca/ 1 June, 1999. Emmons, Terrel. 1999. Telephone interview. 5 August, 1999. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Network (EREN). 1999. "Geothermal Energy." Web Site. http://www.doe.gOv/eren/15.html Environment Canada. 1996. The State Of Canada's Environment 1996. Ottawa: Environment Canada. Environment Canada. 1998. National Environmental Indicator Series: Energy Consumption. Ottawa: Indicators and Assessment Office. Environment Canada. 1998. National Environmental Indicator Series: Energy Consumption. Ottawa: Indicators and Assessment Office. Environmental News Service (ENS). 2000. "Climate change could wipe out migrating songbirds." Online: http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jun2000/2000L-06-16-06.html. 16 June. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2000. Ozone Depletion Home Page. http://www.epa.gov/docs/ozone/ 27 July, 2000. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1999. Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines. Web Page, http://www.epa.gov./cpg/products.htm/ 11 August, 1999. European Partners for the Environment (EPE). 1999. "EPE Sourcebook 1995-1996." 3.18 Car-sharing and Charterway. Online: http://www.epe.be/epe/sourcebook/sb_contents.html Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN). 1996. "On the Care of Creation" Web Site: http://creationcare.Org//index.html, July 3, 2000. Expo. 2000. Hannover Expo 2000 Website. "Kronsberg ecological optimisation." http://www.hannover.de/english/tourist/weltauss/welt_han/exponate/oeko_kro.htm 22 August, 2000. Fannie Mae. 2000. "Colorado Association of Home Builders, 'Built Green' Program of Colorado and Fannie Mae Announce New Environmental Mortgage Pilot." Web Page: http://www.fanniemae.com/news/pressreleases/0495.html Fannie Mae. 1999. Web Site, http://www.fanniemae.com/ 22 July. Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). 1999. Web Page, http://www.fcm.ca/ 20 July, 1999. Ferry, Jon. 1998. "United we plan: why don't we merge the Lower Mainland's 22 distinct and often warring communities into one big mega-city?" B.C. Business Magazine. 26:7:26-34. Fisher, Susan. 1995a. "Conservation Co-Op: An Energy Efficiency Update." Peace and Environment News. March, 1995 Online: National Capital FreeNet. http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/ 7 June, 1999. 134 Fisher, Susan. 1995a. "Water Conservation At Conservation Co-Op." Peace and Environment News. March, 1995 Online: National Capital FreeNet. http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/June 7, 1999. Florida Sustainable Communities Center (FSCC). 1998. World/National News. "Portland Program Can Work in Florida." Online: http://www.state.fl.us/fdi/fscc/news/world/car.htm/ 22 July, 1999. Forester, John. 1989. Planning in the Face of Power. Berkley, CA: U of California Press. Forester, John. 1992. "Critical Ethnography: On Fieldwork in a Habermasian Way." Mats Alvesson and Hugh Wilmott (eds.). Critical Management Studies. Newbury Park: Sage. Former Steel Mill Site To Become Affordable Housing." 1999. Green Building News. 2 June, 1999. Online: http:www.oikos.com/news/1999/ Freddie Mac. 1999. Web Site, http://www.freddiemac.com/ 22 July. Friedmann, John, and Clyde Weaver. 1979. Territory and function: The evolution of regional planning. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gatti, Maria D. 1997. Growth management: the Toronto and Seattle experiences. Master of Community and Regional Planning. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 1997. GeoExchange Information Centre (GEIC). 1999. "Case Study: Condo/Commercial Development, British Columbia." The Geothermal Heat Pump's Consortim's Web Site. http:www.geoexchange.org/ 1 June, 1999. Get Rid Of Your Car-And Have It Too! A German Car Co-op." 1993. In Context. Context Institute. 34. Online: http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC34/Statauto.htm Global Cities Online. 1999. Web Page. "Indicators of Sustainability." March 18, 1999. http://www.globalcities.org/intropg/demo/PGI/indicat.html Good Cents. 1999. WebSite, http://www.goodcents.com/ 22 July. Gore, Al. 2000. Earth in Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit. 2 n d Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Grady, Wayne. 1993. Green Home: Planning and Building The Environmentally Advanced House. New York: Camden House. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) and British Columbia Environment (BCE). 1993. "Clearing the Air: How You Can Help." Pamflet. Vancouver: GVRD and BCE. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1993a. A Long Range Transportation Plan for Greater Vancouver. Transport 2021 Report. Burnaby: GVRD and Province of British Columbia. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1993a. A Long Range Transportation Plan for Greater Vancouver. Transport 2021 Report. Burnaby: GVRD and Province of British Columbia. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1993b. The Cost of Transporting People in the British Columbia Lower Mainland. Transport 2021 Technical Report 11. Burnaby: GVRD and Province of British Columbia. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1993b. The Cost of Transporting People in the British Columbia Lower Mainland. Transport 2021 Technical Report 11. Burnaby: GVRD and Province of British Columbia. • Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1994. Let's Clear the Air: The GVRD Air Quality Management Plan. Burnaby: Air Quality Department Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1996a. "Creating Our Future." Vancouver: GVRD Strategic Planning and Minister of Municipal Affairs. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1996a. "Creating Our Future." Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1996b. Livable Region Strategic Plan. Vancouver: GVRD Strategic Planning and Minister of Municipal Affairs. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1996b. Livable Region Strategic Plan. Vancouver: GVRD Strategic Planning and Minister of Municipal Affairs. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1997. 1997 Emissions Inventory for the Lower Fraser Valley Airshed. Burnaby: Policy and Planning Department GVRD. Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 1998. 1998 Annual Report: Livable Region Strategic Plan. Burnaby: Policy and Planning Department GVRD. 135 Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD). 2000. Website: http://www.gvrd.bc.ca/ 6 July, 2000. Green Buildings Tax Credit Proposed for New York." 1999. Environmental Building News. 8: 5. Greene, J.C. 1981. "Darwinism as a World View. Science, Ideology and World View. Berkeley: University of California Press. Greenpeace. 2000a. Website. Sydney Olympics. "How Green the Games?" http://www.greenpeace.org/ Greenpeace. 2000b. Greenpeace's Environmental Assessment Of The Sydney 2000 Olympics: How green the Games? Sydney: Greenpeace International & Greenpeace Australia Pacific. Greenpeace. 1999. "Greenpeace Olympic Reports 600 Days to the Sydney 2000 Olympics." Greenpeace Australia Home Page. http://www.greenpeace.org.au/Olympics/27.123.html Greider, William. 2000. "Nader: A Personal View." The Nation. 271: 3 Habermas, Jurgen. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. London: Heinemann. Habermas, Jurgen. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Cambridge: Polity Press. Habermas, Jurgen. 1987. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hall, Peter. 1996. Cities of Tomorrow. Cambridge: Blackwell. Hansen, Shirley, and James Hansen. 1995. "Escos Guarantee Energy Savings." Energy & Environmental Management. Harcourt, Michael. 1999. "Managing Growth and Land Use in British Columbia: Human Settlement Aspects." Sustainability in the Pacific Rim Planning Lecture. University of British Columbia, School of Community and Regional and Planning, Vancouver. Harris, Mark. 1999. Environmental News Network (ENN). "Earth-Friendly Living: Car sharing is way to go for eco drivers." 4 March, 1999. Online: http://enn.com/features/1999/03/030499/carshare_1966.asp Hart, Maureen. 1996. Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators. Ipswich: QLF/Atlantic Center for the Environment Web Site. March 19, 1999. http://www.subjectmatters.com/indicators/HTMLSrc/lndicators.html, Haughton, Graham, and Colin Hunter. 1994. Sustainable Cities. Regional Policy and Development Series 7. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Hawaii, State of. 2000. "Energy Performance Contracting, State of Hawaii." http://www.hawaii.gOv/d bedt/ert/ perf_con. html Hawken, Paul, Amory Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins. 1999. Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution. New York: Little, Brown and Company. Hayden, Dolores. 1981. The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighbourhoods, and Cities. Cambridge: MIT Press. Hayes, Denis. 2000. The Official Earth Day Guide to Planet Repair. Island Press: Washington. Hayward, Steven. "Suburban Legends." Cover story. National Review. 51:5:35-38. Healy, Patsy. 1992. "Planning Through Debate: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory." Town Planning Review, 63:2. Herbst, Kris. 1992. "Brazil's Model City: Is Curitiba Too Good To Be True?" Planning, 58:9. Herman, Edward, and Noam Chomsky. 1988. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon. Hill, David. 1998. "Developers making their play for gigantic infill in Denver." Architectural Record. 186: 5: 82. Hillier, J . 1993. To Boldly Go Where No Planners Have Ever...." Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 11:1. Hobsbawm, E.J. 1969. "The Human Results of the Industrial Revolution." Industry and Empire. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Hodge, Gerald. 1991. Planning Canadian Communities: An Introduction to the Principles, Practice, and Participants. 2nd Ed. Scarborough, Ontario: Nelson Canada. Hodge, Gerald. 1994. "Regional Planning: The Cinderella Discipline." Plan Canada Special Edition. Ottawa: Canadian Institute of Planners. 136 Home Builders Association of Metro Denver (HBAMD). 2001. Built Green: The Green Builder Program of Colorado. Web Page, http://www.builtgreen.org/ 02 Feb, 2001. Home Builders Association of Metro Denver (HBAMD). 1999a. "Built Green Homes Strikes Wedge into Northern Colorado Market." Press Release. Built Green: The Green Builder Program of Colorado. Web Page, http://www.builtgreen.org/ 23 May, 1999. Home Builders Association of Metro Denver (HBAMD). 1999b. Built Green: The Green Builder Program of Colorado. Web Page, http://www.builtgreen.org/ 23 May, 1999. Home Builders Association of Metro Denver (HBAMD). 1999c. "Colorado's Built Green Homes First of its Kind in the US." Press Release. Built Green: The Green Builder Program of Colorado. Web Page, http://www.builtgreen.org/ 23 May, 1999. Housing and Urban Development, US Department of (HUD). 1992. "Energy Performance Contracting for Public and Indian Housing." http://eber.ed.ornl.gov/ESPC.html Howe, Deborah. "Growth Management in Oregon." Growth Management: The Planning Challenge of the 1990s. Ed. Jay Stein. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Hurley, Peter. 1999. Phone interview. 20 July, 1999. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1996. Climate Change 1995: IPCC Second Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). 2000. Web Site. http://www.iclei.org/ 5 October. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). 1997. "Local Implementation of International Environmental Accords—The Case of Local Climate Action Planning in Hannover & Saarbrucken, Germany." Local Government Implementation of Agenda 21. http://www.iclei.org/la21/la21lgov.htm 22 September, 2000. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), International Development Research Centre (IDRC), and United Nations Environment Program. 1996. The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide. Toronto: ICLEI. Jamal, Mehdi. 1999. Personal Interview. 2 May, 1999. Janecky, Rich. 1999. "Case study: conserver society: Conservation Co-op, Ottawa." Canadian Architect. 44: 1: 16-19. Jodido, Philip. 1998. Contemporary American Architects. Volume IV. London: Taschen. Johnston, David. 1999. Declarations for Sustainable Development: the Response of Universities. Web Page, http://iisd1.iisd.ca/educate/declare.htm/ 30 January, 1999. Kasian Kennedy Design Partnership (KKDP). 1995. Design Smart: Energy Efficient Architectural Design Strategies. BC Hydro: Vancouver. Kearney, Hugh. 1971. Science and Change 1500-1700. Toronto: McGraw-Hill. Keats, John. 1819. "Ode to a Nightingale." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 1993. Ed. Abrams et al. 6th ed. Vol. 2. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Keeney, Ralph. 1992. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking. Cambridge: Harvard University Press: 1-38, 49. Kenneth Kruckemeyer. 1999. Research Associate, Traffic Planning, MIT. Keynes, J . 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. London: MacMillan. Kline, Elizabeth. 1997. "Sustainable Community Indicators: How To Measure Progress." Eco-City Dimensions: Healthy Communities, Healthy Planet. Ed. Mark Roseland. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers. Knack, Ruth. 1996. Stapleton redevelopment plan. Planning. 62:4:8. Knight, Michael. 1997. "Statement To Parliament." http://www.magna.com.au/~knight/970417.html Knight.PS. 1995. Electrical Code Simplified: Residential. B C B o o k l . Altona: Friesen. Kubani, Dean. 1999. Personal E-mail. 7 June. Lafferty, William, and Katarina Eckerberg, eds. 1998. From the Earth Summit to Local Agenda 21: Working Towards Sustainable Development. London: Earthscan. Land and Building Services (LBS). 1999. A Legacy and Promise: Principles for Physical Planning at UBC. Vancouver: University of British Columbia. Larsson, Nils. 1995. "The C-2000 Experience: Process v. Technology." Linking and Prioritizing Environmental Criteria: Proceedings. CIB TG-8 International Research Workshop. Toronto, Canada, November 15. 137 Larsson, Nils. 1999. C-2000 Program - Executive Summary: Achieving High Performance Through Better Technologies and Changes in the Design Process. Online at Green Building Information Centre: http://www.greenbuilding.ca/ Lavoie, Louis. 1998. "Voter turnout at federal general elections in Canada [1867-1997]." Canadian Parliamentary Review. 21:4. Lehner-Lierz, Ursula. 1999. "A Interview with Harry Owen: The Penicillin of the Next Century has two wheels." The European Cycling Federation. Web site, http://www.dcf.dk/ecf/html/ Lemann, Nocholas. 1996. "Kicking in groups." Atlantic Monthly. 277:4 Leonard, John. 2000. "How a Caged Bird Learns to Sing, Or, my life at the New York Times, CBS and other pillars of the media establishment." The Nation. 26 June, 2000. Lewis, C.S. 1964. The Discarded Image. London: Cambridge University Press. Light, Andrew. 2000. "Restoration or Domination?" Restoring Nature: Perspectives from the Social Sciences and Humnanities. Paul Gobster and Bruse Hall, Eds. Washington: Island Press. Revised and reprinted in: Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters. What Really Works. David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott, Eds. Oxford University Press. Lindblom, C.E. 1959. "The Science of'Muddling Through.'" Public Administration Review. Reprinted in Readings in Planning Theory. 1996. Scott Campbell and Susan Fainstein, Eds. Massachusetts: Blackwell. Linden, Eugene. 2000. "Earth Day 2000: Condition Critical," Time, Web Site http://www.time.com/time/reportcs/earthday2000/assessment03.html. 15 June, 2000. Logie, Richard (Project Officer, Renewable Energy Deployment Initiative). 1999. Phone conversation. Lowe, Robert. 2000. "Carbon Taxes To Improve Building Performance?" Building Research & Information. May. Luccarelli, Mark. 1995. Lewis Mumford and the ecological region: The politics of planning. New York: Guilford. Lyle, John. 1994. Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons. MacKinnon, Mark. 2000. "Reduction does not mean economic disruption, study argues." Parliamentary Bureau. Globe and Mail. Tuesday, 18 April. Manes, Christopher. 1990. Green Rage. "Radical Environmentalism and the Unmaking of Civilization." Toronto: Little Brown. Marques, Jorge, Freda Pagani and Joanne Perdue. 2001. "Process Makes Product: The C.K. Choi Building for the Institute Of Asian Research at the University Of British Columbia." UBC Campus Sustainability Website: http:www.sustain.ubc.ca February 23. McCamant, Kathryn, and Charles Durrett. 1994. Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves. 2nd Ed. Berkley: Ten Speed Press. McDonnell, Linda. 1999. "Developer among winners of Toeclips bicycle awards." Portland Daily Journal of Commerce. 9 March. McKibben, Bill. Hope, Human and Wild. Toronto: Little, Brown and Company, 1995. McLean, Jennifer. 1998. "Ask not what your building can do for you." Building: The Magazine for Canada's Development Industry. 48:3. Online: http:www.building.ca. Merchant, Carolyn. 1992. Radical Ecology: The Search for a Livable World. New York: Routledge. Ministry of Municipal Affairs. 2001. "Toward A Modern, Stable And Understandable System For Setting Building Standards: A Technical Review." Online: http://www.marh.gov.bc.ca/LGPOLICY/link.html Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MMA). 1995. "An Explanatory Guide To B.C.'s Growth Strategies Act." Victoria: Province of British Columbia. Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Building Standards Branch (MMABSB). 1992. British Columbia Building Code (BCBC). With 1995 Revisions and Errata. Victoria: MMABSB. Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour (MSTL). 1995. Environmental Guidelines: British Columbia University, College and Institutional Facilities. Victoria: MSTL. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide (MSDG). 2000. Website: http://www.sustainabledesignguide.umn.edu/. 18 October, 2000. 138 Moore, Jennie Lynn. 1994. What's stopping sustainability?: examining the barriers to implementation of clouds of change. Vancouver: University of British Columbia School of Community and Regional Planning. Thesis. M.A:1 ' Morgan, Richard. 2000. Green Building Program Staff: Personal Communication. 7 June. Morrison, Douglas R. O. 1997. "Bad Science, Bad Education." Rev. of Connected Knowledge: Science, Philosophy, and Education, by Alan Cromer. Scientific American. 277:114-117. Mumford, Lewis. 1938. "The Regional Framework of Civilization." The Culture of Cities. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Muoio, Anna. 1998. "This 'Green Dean' Has a Blueprint for Sustainability." Fast Company. 15: 70-71. Nader, Ralph. 2000. Ralph Nader for President. Website: http://www.votenader.com/issues.html 25 July, 2000. Naess, Arne. 1972. "The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. A Summary." Inquiry. 16: 95-100. National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). 1999. WebSite, http://www.nahb.com/ 22 July. National Association of Home Builders Research Center (NAHBRC). 1999. Guide to Developing Green Building Programs. Washington: United States Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Solid Waste and Office of Policy Development. National Parks Service (NPS). 1994. Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design. Denver: NPS. Online: http://www.nps.gov/dsc/dsgncnstr/gpsd/ 23 July, 1999. Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 1998. Conference Proceedings. Green Building Challenge '98: Case Studies: An Internatoinal Conference on the Performance Assessment of Buildings. Ottawa: Natural Resources Canada. Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 1999. Commercial Building Incentive Program (CBIP). Web Site, http://cbip.nrcan.gc.ca/cbip.htm/ 20 July, 1999. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC). 1998. Planning and Design Policy Statements. Online: Environmental Building News. 7:10. Web Page. http://www.ebuild.com/ 23 June, 1999. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC). 1999a. Criteria Office and Engineering Innovation Division (Code 15) of the Atlantic Division. Web Page. http://www.efdlant.navfac.navy.mil/Lantops_15/home.htm/ 11 August, 1999. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC). 1999b. Whole Building Design Guide. Online, http://www.efdlant.navfac.navy.mil/lantops_15/home.htm Navy at the Leading Edge of Green Design." 1998. Environmental Building News. 7: 10. Web Page. http://www.ebuild.com/23June, 1999. New commercial building are targeted as design opportunities to reduce energy costs and also greenhouse gas emissions." 1998. Building: The Magazine for Canada's Development Industry. 48:1. Online: http:www.building.ca/July 18, 1999. New Mixed-Income Apartments First In Nation To Offer Car Sharing Program: Buckman Heights Apartments Accepts Delivery Of First Vehicle." 1998. The Portland Observer. Housing Section. A7 24 June. New Residence Hall Combines Sustainable Living and Learning.". 1998. Oikos Green Building Source Library. Project Showcase. Online: http://www.oikos.com/library/index.html/ 8 June, 1999. New York State (NY). 1999a. Bill A06277. Green Buildings Tax Credit. New York: State of New York Ways and Means Committee. New York State (NY). 1999b. Bill S5549. Green Buildings Tax Credit. New York: State of New York Senate Finance Committee. North American CarSharing Organization (NACSO). 1999. http:www.carsharing.net Northland College. 1999. WebSite. Environmental Living and Learning Center. http://www.northland.edu/studentlife/ELLC/index.html NTUC. 1999. NTUC Income Car Co-operative Limited. "Introduction to Car Co-op in Singapore." Web Site, http://www.income.com.sg/car-coop/ Oberlin College Center for Environmental Studies (OCCES). 1999. Web Site. http://www.oberlin.edu/newserv/esc/Defauit.html/ 2 June, 1999. 139 Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology Advancement (OCETA). 1999. "OCETA Environmental Technology Profile: Waterloo Biofilter." Web Site. http://wvvw.oceta.on.ca/profiles/wbsi/biofilter.html/ 7 July, 1999. Ontario Physical and Health Education Association (OPHEA). 1998. "Just the Facts"on Physical Activity and Health. WebSite, http://www.ophea.org/facts.htm Orr, David. 1999. "Ecological Design and the Challenges of the 21st Century." Keynote Speaker. HOPES Conference. Eugene: University of Oregon. Pacific Power. 2000. "The World's Largest Solar-Photovoltaic Suburb." Online: http://www.environment.about.com/newsissues/environment/library/weekly/aa082200.ht m Feb, 2001. Paloheimo, Rolf and Bob LeCraw. 1996. "Reusing Treated Wastewater in Domestic Housing: The Toronto Healthy House Project." Conference Paper. Disposal Trenches, Pre-treatment and Re-Use of Wastewater Conference. Waterloo Centre for Groundwater Research and the University of Waterloo. Online: http://mha-net.org/msb/html/papers-n/palo01/wastewa.htm/ July 7, 1999 Panayotou, Theodore. 1993. Green Markets: The Economics of Sustainable Development. San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press. Pandey et al. 1996. "Measurement of socio-economic inequalities". Social Indicators Research. 39(2): 187-202. Parkin, Andrew C. 1996. "On the practical relevance of Habermas's theory of communicative action." Social Theory & Practice. 22: 3. Parsons, Kermit C. 1994. Collaborative genius: The Regional Planning Association of America. Journal of the American Planning Association 60, 4: 462-82. Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH). 1999. Web Site. http://www.pathnet.org/ 20 July, 1999. Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH). 2000. Web Site. http://www.pathnet.org/ Path Programs in Action (PPA). 1999. Web Site, http://www.pathnet.org/inaction/pilotsites.html/ . 20 July, 1999. Patient, Michelle. 1998. DreamWorks signs on to Playa Vista. Architecture. 87: 11: 55-58. Patton, William (TVLB Information Center). 1999. Personal e-mail. 3 June. Pearson, David. 1989. The Natural House Book. New York: Simon and Schuster, Fireside. Perks, William T., and David R. Van Vliet. 1993. "Sustainable community design: Restructuring and demonstration." Plan Canada. November: 30-36. Perks, William, and David Van Vliet. 1993. Assessment of Built Projects For Sustainable Development. Ottawa: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Pierce County. 1997. "Pierce County Quality of Life Benchmarks", Annual Report, 2nd ed., Pierce County: Department of Community Services. Pimentel, David. 1998. "Ecology of Increasing Disease: Population Growth and Environmental Degradation." Ithica: Cornell University Press. Playa Vista. 1999. Playa Vista Residential Sustainable Performance Guidelines: March 18, 1999. Los Angeles: Playa Vista. Pliny the Greener." 1998. Architecture. 87:6:55-59. Pliny the Greener." 1998. Architecture. 87:6:55-59. Posbic, Jean P., and William B. Rever. 2001. "Economic Optimization of Building Integrated Photovoltaic Systems." Online: http://www.environment.about.com/newsissues/environment/library/weekly/aa082200.ht m Feb, 2001. Post, Nadine. 2000. "NY State Tax Incentive to Spur Green Building." The New York Times. 29 May. Prendergast and Associates (P&A). 1999. Project Description: Buckman Heights. PRNewswire Online News Service (PRN). 1999. WebSite. http://www.prnewswire.com/comp/305450.html 10 June. Public Technology Incorporated (PTI), United States Green Building Council, United States Department of Energy, United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. 140 Sustainable Building Technical Manual: Green Building Design, Construction, and Operations. New York: Public Technology. Putnam, Robert D. 1993. "The Prosperous Community." The American Prospect. Spring. Putnam, Robert. 1995. "Bowling Alone: America's declining social capital." Journal of Democracy 6:1. ' Quayle, Moura. 1996. "The spirit of Lewis Mumford (City of Vancouver Urban Landscape Task Force)." Urban planning Conference, Vancouver. New City Magazine. 17:2:30-32. Rabinovitch, Jonas. "Curitiba: Towards sustainable urban development." Environment and Urbanization. 4.2(1992): 9-32. Rajan, S.C. 1996. The Enigma of Automobility: Democratic Politics and Pollution Control. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Rawles, Kate. 1995. "The Missing Shade of Green." Environmental Philosophy and Environmental Activism. Don Marieta and Lester Embree, Eds. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Reprinted in Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters. What Really Works. David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott, Eds. Oxford University Press. Reed, Maureen. 2000. "Planning for Sustainability: A Gender Perspective." Planning a Sustainable Millenium. Canadian Association of Planning Students Conference. UBC, Vancouver. February 9. Rees, William. 1996. Preface. Our Ecological Footprint. Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers. Rees, William. 1997. "Is 'Sustainable City' an Oxymoron?" Local Environment: 2:303-310. Rees, William. 1997a. "Is 'Sustainable City' an Oxymoron?" Local Environment: 2:303-310. Rees, William. 1997b. "Ecological Footprints and urban transportation-The bicycle path to urban sustainability." Velo-City Conference 1997. Barcelona: Velo-City. Rees, William. 1998. "The Coming Age of the'Built Environment.'" Green Building Challenge '98: Conference Retrospective. Vancouver: Natural Resources Canada and Canmet Energy Technology Centre. Green Building Information Council Home Page. (www.greenbuilding.ca/gbc98cnf/) Register, Richard. 1987. Ecocity Berkeley: Building Cities for a Healthy Future. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books. Renn, Ortwin, Thomas Webler, and Peter Wiedemann, eds. 1995. Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. Boston : Kluwer Academic. Renner, M. 1988. Rethinking the Role of the Automobile. Worldwatch 84. Washington: Worldwatch Institute. Richard Rogers Partnership. 1999. "The Environment." Richard Rogers Partnership Web Page. http://www.richardrogers.co.uk/ 20 January, 1999. RMNO. 1994a. Sustainable Resource Management and Resource Use: Policy Questions and Research Needs. Publication No. 97. Rijswijk, The Netherlands: Advisory Council for Research on Nature and Environment. RMNO. 1994b. Toward Environmental Pedormance Indicators Based on the Notion of Environmental Space. Publication No. 96. Rijswijk, The Netherlands: Advisory Council for Research on Nature and Environment. Roberts, M. 1995. "Blazing Saddles and Appropriate Technology: The Bike Path to a Green Economy." Beyond the Car: Essays on the Auto Culture. S. Zielinski and G. Laird, eds. Toronto: Steel Rail Press. Robinson, John, and Jon Tinker. 1998. "Reconciling Ecological, Economic, and Social Imperatives." UBC Sustainable Development Research Institute (SDRI) Discussion Paper Series. Vancouver: SDRI. Robinson, John. 1998. Development of Environmental Thought: Winter Session Lecture. University of British Columbia, Geography Department, Vancouver. Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI). 1998. Green Development: Integrating Ecology and Real Estate. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons. Rose, Michael. 1998. "We share bus seats and colds, so why not a car? [Portland] Business Journal. 21 August. 141 Roseland, Mark, ed. 1997. Eco-City Dimensions: Healthy Communities, Healthy Planet. Gabriola: New Society. Roseland, Mark. 1998. Towards Sustainable Communities: Resources for Citizens and their Governments. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers. Rosellini, Lynn. 1997. "How far should you go to stay fit?" US News and World Report 123:18: 95-96. Rosenblatt, Roger. 1999. "Heros for the Planet: The Man Who Wants Buildings to Love Kids." Time. 153:7:70-74. Roszak. 1973. "Romantic Perversity." Where the Wasteland Ends. New York: Doubleday. Rydin, Y. 1992. "Environmental Dimensions of residential development and the implications for local planning practice." Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 35: 1: 43-61. Sancton, Andrew. 1994. Governing Canada's City-Regions: Adapting Form to Function. Ed. France St-Hilaire. Ottawa: The Institute for Research on Public Policy. Santa Monica (City of). 1999. Green Buildign Development Guidelines: 80% Draft. Santa Monica Powered by 100 percent Green Energy." 1999. Green Building News. 2 June. Online: http:www.oikos.com/news/1999/ Santa Monica Pursues Sustainable Development." 1996. Environmental Building News (EBN). 5:5. Santa Monica, City of (SM). 1999a. Green Building Development Guidelines: 80% Draft. Santa Monica, City of (SM). 1999b. Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines: Draft. Santa Monica, City of (SM). 1999c. City of Santa Monica Environmental Programs Division. Santa Monica Sustainable City Program. Web Page, http://www.ci.santa-. monica.ca.us/environment/policy/ 23 May, 1999. Saul, John Ralston. 1995. The Unconscious Civilization. Ottawa: Anansi. Saunders, Todd. 1996. "Ecology and community design." Alternatives. 22.2: 24-29. SEA-SPAN (Southeast Asian Science Policy Advisory Network). 1999. "Standing To Sue in the Philippines: A Victory for Future Generations." Online: http://www.icsea.or.id/sea-span/0399/RG0420LL.htm Segrist, P.J. 1991. "New Technology Advances Depend on Building Owners." Energy User News, 16(6):13-17. Schmid-Bleek, F. 1993. MIPS revisited. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin. 2:407-412. Schmid-Bleek, F., et al. 1997. "Statement to Government and Business Leaders." Wuppertal Germany: Wuppertal Institute. Schumaker, W. 1992. "Now, if I ruled the world..." Sierra. 77: 3: 114. Skolleerhorn, Erland. 1998. "Habermas and nature: The theory of communicative action for studying environmental policy." Journal of Environmental Planning & Management. 41: 5 Scottsdale, City of. 1997. Scottsdale's GreenBuilding Program: Sustainable Living in the Desert. Web Site, http://www.ci.scottsdale.az.us/environmental/greenbuilding/ June 11,1999. Seager, Joni. 1995. The New State of the Earth Atlas. 2nd Ed. Toronto: Simon and Schuster. Seattle, City of. 1998. Sustainable Building Action Plan: Recommendations to Promote Sustainable Design and Construction Efforts. Seattle: City of Seattle. Seattle, City of. 1999. WebSite, http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/ 20 July, .1999. Seattle, City of. 2000. Web Site. http://www.cityofseattle.net/util/reSCONS/susbuild/policy.htm 23 October, 2000. Second Nature (SN). 1999. Web Page, http://www.2nature.org/2 June, 1999. Sheltair Group Inc. 1998. Visions, Tools, and Targets: Environmentally Sustainable Development Guidelines for Southeast False Creek. Vancouver: Central Area Planning, City of Vancouver. Siricon. 1999. " Projets de SIRICON." Web Site, http://www-siricon.concordia.ca/projets.htm Small is Beautiful - Supplementary Information." 1999. Environmental Business News (EBN). 8: 1. Smith, Mark. 1996. "Ecologically Accountable Building." Urban Land. 55:6:50-53,65. Smith, Mark. 1998. "Civano: A Report From the Field: Integrating Sustainable Design and Programming into Mainstream Real Estate Development." Environmental Design and Construction. May/June. 142 Solstice Web Network. 1999. "Geothermal Energy." http://solstice.crest.org/rene... e-kiosk/geothermal/index.shtml South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD): 1999. Web Page. http://www.aqmd.gov/ 11 August, 1999. Spooner, Ted. 1998. "Sydney Olympic Village: 2nd World Conference and Exhibition on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion." Parer presented at the 2nd World Conference and Exhibition on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion. Vienna, 6-10 July. State of Colorado (SC). 1999. Governor's Office of Energy Conservation. WebSite. http://www.state.co.us/oec/ 24 May, 1999. Statement by Religious Leaders at the Summit on Environment." 1991. The Web of Creation Ecumenical Web-Site: http://www.webofcreation.org/advocacy/policystatements/summit.htm, July 3, 2000. Stein, Jay. "Preface." Growth Management: The Planning Challenge of the 1990s. Ed. Jay Stein. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Stevens, W.K. 1997. "The Value of Nature." New York Times. Reprinted in Vancouver Sun. 27 May, 1997: G9. Success Stories: Renew America Success Stories-Good Cents Environmental Home." 1999. Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development. Web Site. http:www.sustainable.doe.gov/success/best.htm Sustainable Development Research Institute (SDRI). 1999. Home Page, http://www.sdri.ubc.ca/ Tarnas, Richard. 1991. 77?e Passion of the Western Mind. New York: Ballantine Books. Taylor, Charles. 1989. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Taylor, Ron. 1997. "First Canadian Place First To Join Better Building Partnership." Press Release. Toronto: O&Y Properties. Texas Veterans Land Board (TVLB). 1997. "The Greenbuilding Checklist: Texas Veterans Greenbuilding Program Checklist." Online: Veterans Housing Assistance. Web Page. http://red.glo.state.tx.us/vlb/gbcklstg.html/28 May, 1999. Texas Veterans Land Board (TVLB). 1998. Veterans Voice: A Publication of the Texas Veterans Land Board. 12: 2. Texas Veterans Land Board (TVLB). 1999. Veterans Housing Assistance. Web Page. http://red.glo.state.tx.us/vlb/gbcklstg.html/ 28 May, 1999. The Geothermal Education Office (GEO). 1999. WebSite, http://geothermal.marin.org/ The Natural Step Takes a First Step in the US." 1996. Environmental Building News (EBN). 5: 2. Online: http://www.ebuild.com/ 20 July, 1999. Theaker, Ian. 1999. Personal interview. 25 May, 1999. Thermie. 1999. Directorate General XVII for Energy; The European Commission. Web Page. http://erg.ucd.ie/thermie.html Thomas, John Clayton. 1995. Public Participation in Public Decisions: New Skills and Strategies for Public Managers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Todd, John and Nancy Jack Todd. 1994. From Eco-Cities to Living Machines: Principles of Ecological Design. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books. Tomiyama, Rob. 1999. E-mail communication. 21 June, 1999. Toronto, City of. 2000. Better Building Partnership. WebSite, http://www.torontobbp.on.ca/27 October, 2000. Toronto, City of. 1999. Better Building Partnership. WebSite, http://www.torontobbp.on.ca/ Tynan, Kelly. 1998. "Green building tenants avoid heat bill blues." Capital News Online. Ottawa: Carleton School of Journalism and Communication. Web Site. http://www.carleton.ca/Capital_News/20111998/f4.html Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). 1993. World Scientists'warning to humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). 1997. "World Scientists'Call for Action." UCS Web Site. http://www.ucsusa.org/warming/gw.worldsci.html. 15 June, 2000. Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). 2000. "Global Warming at UCS." UCS Web Site. http://www.ucsusa.org/warming/gw.worldsci.html. 15 June, 2000. 143 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); World Bank (WB); World Resources Institute (WRI). 2000. A Guide to World Resources 2000-2001: People and Ecosystems the Fraying Web of Life. Washington, D.C: World Resources Institute. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1994. "Understanding Climate Change: A Beginner's Guide to the UN Framework Convention." UNEPA/VMO Information Unit on Climate Change, Web Site: http://www.unfccc.de/resource/beginner.html , 28 July, 2000 United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1991. Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living. Gland, Switzerland: World Conservation Union (IUCN), United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF). United Nations World Commission on the Environment and Development (UNWCED). 1987. "From One Earth to One World: An Overview." Our Common Future. Gro Harlem Bruntland, Chair. New York: Oxford University Press. United Nations. 1998. Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization. New York: United Nations. United States Catholic Bishops. 1992. "Renewing the Earth." Social Development and World Peace, National Conference of Catholic Bishops I United States Catholic Conference Web Site, http://www.nccbuscc.org/sdwp/ejp/publicpolicy/climate.htm United States Department of Energy (USDOE), Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, King County Solid Waste Division, Sellen Construction, City of Portland Energy Office, The Boeing Company, Continental Savings Bank, Northwest Energy Efficiency Council, Pacific Northwest Economic Region, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, Seattle City Light & Public Utilities. 1999. Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan: Strategies to Mainstream Sustainable Design and Construction Practices in the Pacific Northwest. Seattle: Seattle City Light. Online: http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/light/conserve/sustainability/ United States Department of Energy (DOE). 2000. "Super Energy Savings Performance Contracts (Super ESPC)." Website, http://www.eren.doe.gov/aro/femp.html United States Department of Energy (USDOE). 1999. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Network (EREN)- Million Solar Roofs. Web Page. http://www.eren.doe.gov/millionroofs/actionplan.html United States Department of Energy (USDOE). 1999a. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Network (EREN)-- Million Solar Roofs. Web Page. http://www.eren.doe.gov/millionroofs/actionplan.html\ United States Department of Energy (USDOE). 1999b. Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development. Web Site, http:www.sustainable.doe.gov/ United States Department of the Navy (USDN). 1999. Whole Building Design Guide (WBDG). Web Site. http://www.uscost.netA/VBDG/ United States Green Building Council (USGBC). 2000a. LEED Green Building Rating System 2.0: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. Version 2.0, March 2000. San Francisco: LEED. United States Green Building Council (USGBC). 2000b. UBGBC Web Page. http://www.usgbc.org/ 26 September, 2000. United States Green Building Council (USGBC). 1999a. LEED Green Building Rating System 1.0: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. Pilot Version, January 1999. San Francisco: LEED. United States Green Building Council / United States Department of Energy / United States Environmental Protection Agency (USGBC / USDOE / USEPA). 1996. Sustainable Building Technical Manual: Green Building Design, Construction, and Operations. New York: Public Technology. University of British Columbia (UBC). 1997. "Memorandum Of Understanding Between The Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) And The University Of British Columbia (UBC) Concerning Implementation Of The Official Community Plan For The UBC Area." Appendix 3: July 25, 1997. Vancouver: UBC. Online: http://www.ocp.ubc.ca/ocp/appendix3.html/ 144 University of British Columbia (UBC). 1998. Trek 2000: A Vision For The 21st Century. Vancouver: UBC. University of British Columbia (UBC). 1999a. Policy #5.~'Sustainable Development. Online: http://wvvw.policy.ubc.ca/policy5.htm University of British Columbia (UBC). 1999b. GVRD/UBC Official Community Plan: OCP for Part of Electoral Area 'A': The University of British Columbia and Part of Pacific Spirit Regional Park, http://www.cpd.ubc.ca/ocp/index.htm University of British Columbia Institute for Resources and Environment. 1997. Fraser Basin Ecosystem Study Final Report-Prospect for Sustainability. Vancouver: UBC. University of British Columbia TREK Program (UBCTP). 1999. UBC Strategic Transportation Plan (STP). First Draft. Appendix A: Recommended Policies. University of Virginia Institute for Sustainable Design (UVISD). 1999. Web Site. www.virginia.edu/~sustain/ 2 June, 1999. University Presidents for a Sustainable Future (UPSF). 1999. The Talloires Declaration. Online: http://iisd1.iisd.ca/educate/declare.htm/ 30 January, 1999. Urban Consortium Energy Task Force (UCETF). 1999. Web Page. http://pti.nw.dc.us/task_forces/energy/energy_rfppage.html Urban Development Institute (UDI). 1993. "Back to the Future: Redesigning Our Communities." UDI Density Workshop. Videocassette. Vancouver: British Columbia Real Estate Foundation and Urban Development Institute. Van der Ryn, Sim, and Peter Calthorpe. 1986. Sustainable Communities: A New Design Synthesis for Cities, Suburbs, and Towns. New York: Sierra Club Books. Van der Ryn, Sim, and Stuart Cowan. 1993. Ecological Design. Washington: Island Press. Van Vliet, David. 1999. Demonstration Project As Pathway. Internal Thesis Defense. Vancouver: School of Community and Regional Planning, University of Britsh Columbia. 12 November. Veterans'Green Building Program Lowers Mortgage Rates." 1997. Environmental Building News. (EBN). 6: 1. Wackernagel, Mathis, and William Rees. 1996. Our Ecological Footprint. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers. Wackernagel, Mathis, et al. 1997. "Ecological Footprints of Nations: How Much Nature Do They Use?—How Much Nature Do They Have?" Rio de Janeiro: The Earth Council. Wackernagel, Mathis. 1997a. Framing the Sustainability Crisis: Getting from Concern to Action. UBC Sustainable Development Research Institute (SDRI) Discussion Paper Series. Vancouver: SDRI. Wackernagel, Mathis. 1999b. "Calculation of the Canadian's Average Ecological Footprint." Unpublished, updated spreadsheet obtained through personal e-mail communication. Wagner, Conrad and Richard Katzev. 1996. "Car Sharing Takes Off in Europe." Urban Ecologist. 3. "Guiding Global Urban Growth Issue." Online: http://www.best.eom/~schmitty/uebkart.htm#1996n3/ 27 July. 1999. Wald , Matthew. 1997. "Contractor-Financed Energy Improvements." The New York Times. 22 May. Walker, Lyle, and William Rees. 1997. "Urban Density and Ecological Footprints-An Analysis of Canadian Households." Eco-City Dimensions: Healthy Communities, Healthy Planet. Ed. Mark Roseland. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers. Walker, Lyle. 1995. The Influence of Dwelling Type and Residential Density on the Appropriated Carrying Capacity of Canadian Households. Thesis. Vancouver: UBC Master of Community and Regional Planning. Wall, Derek. 1994. Green History: A reader in environmental literature, philosophy and politics. New York: Routledge. Weaver, Clyde. 1984. "The Precursors of Regional Planning: Utopians, Anarchists, Geographers." Regional Development and the Local Community: Planning Politics and Social Context. Chichester, England: John Wiley and Sons. Weber, Max. 1930. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. 1993. Trans. Talcott Parsons. New York: Routledge. 145 Weitz, Jerry and Ethan Seltzer. 1998. "Regional planning and regional governance in the United States 1979-1996." Journal of Planning Literature. 12:3:361-393. Weyrich, P and W. Lind. 1997. Free Congress Foundation. White, Lynn. 1967. "The historic roots of our ecological crisis." Science. 155:1203-1207. Whitehead, Alfred North. 1929. Process and Reality. • William McDonough Architects (WMA). 1992. "The Hannover Principles." Reprinted in: Architectural Institute of British Columbia (AIBC). 1999. Web Page. http://www.aibc.bc.ca. 9 May, 1999. Williams, Daniel George. 1994. Cohousing: An Alternative Approach To Dwelling in British Columbia. Diss. UBC. Wilson, Alex. 2000. "Perspective: Green Building Tax Credits? No, Thanks!" Environmental Building News. 9: 6. Wilson, Edward. 2000. "Biodiversity: Vanishing Before Our Eyes," Time. April - May. Windsong Cohousing Community. 1999. Web Page. http://www.cohousing.ca/cohsng4/windsong/ 11 August, 1999 Winnipeg, City of. 1997. "Draft Indicator Framework Survey". Winnipeg: Indicator Development Team, Strategic Planning Division, Corporate Services Department. Wise, James A. 2000. Big Green Digest Listserve. biggreen@forurh.oikos.com 8 August, 2000. Woolliams, Jessica. 1999. Strategies to Encourage More Sustainable Built Form: What Is Appropriate For British Columbia? Vancouver: City of Vancouver. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford:xford University Press. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. World Resources Institute. 1994. World Resources 1994-95. New York: WRI. Worster, Donald. 1994. Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas. 2nd Ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Zelov, Chris. 1997. Design Outlaws on the Ecological Frontier. Cape May: Knossus. Alex Zimmerman and Mark Martin, unpublished. "Post Occupancy Evaluation: Benefits and Barriers." British Columbia Buildings Corporation Zovanyi, Gabor. 1998. Growth Management For A Sustainable Future: Ecological Sustainability As The New Growth. Westport: Praeger. 146 Appendix A : Initial Interview Questions S T R E N G T H S / W E A K N E S S E S OF THE P R O G R A M 1) How could the program be improved? If you were to do it again, what would you do differently? 2) What design suggestions in the manual presented the greatest difficulty in terms of resolving design or regulatory reservations? (EG: Health Board concerns with greywater use.) Was there a procedure set up to deal with these kinds of concerns? 3) What elements were critical in terms of getting the project rolling? (Examples might include: political champion, senior staff commitment, citizen involvement, public consultation, other?) 4) What were the opportunities and barriers to selling the concept to the following groups: staff, politicians, citizens, and the building industry? P R O G R A M D E V E L O P M E N T / B U D G E T 5) Did your organization have experience in green buildings previous to the guidelines? If so, what were the lessons learned from these? 6) How long did it take to create the Guidelines, from first gleam in the eye to final publication & ordinance revisions? 7) What did the program cost to develop? 8) What does the program cost to administer? 9) What impact will the Guidelines have on capital cost of the buildings? a) On operating costs? b) On pollutant emissions? c) How does the policy relate to other policies within the organization—either environmental or economic? ENVIRONMENTAL G O A L S 10) What are the major indicators with which you can gage the success of the environmental aspirations of this program? 11) Is the program meeting the environmental goals you set out? 12) Can this environmental success be measured? If it can, is it being measured? Is this measurement being reported to the taxpayer or advertised? 147 A p p e n d i x B: F i n a l Interv iew Q u e s t i o n s Most of the interviewees were asked the questions in Appendix B, unless research had revealed the answers already, which it usually had not. Research was often used to verify and understand what the interviewees said. The ecological criteria, for example, were often researched (through examining green building guidelines or rating systems, for example), in addition to asking the interviewees questions about these issues, to ensure that I had understood correctly. For those who were asked questions from Appendix A, either follow up research or follow up thesis questions revealed the answers to the questions presented below, so that the questions below can be seen to have been answered either through interview or through research for each of the case studies that were established as critical. The questions in Appendix B correspond to the criteria. 1. Does the strategy encourage buildings to incorporate a comprehensive set of ecological issues (in such categories as: energy, water, landscape, materials, waste or equivalent)? 2. Does it encourage a reduction in resource consumption and waste generation of 30% or more? 4 7 3. Does the strategy have the ability to make green building products and practices into standard practice, or at least a broadly acceptable alternate practice? 4 8 4. Does the green building strategy encourage meaningful stakeholder participation in policy formation and implementation? Is there a diverse group of stakeholders participating, including NGOs and the public? 5. Is it communicated in simple, easily understood language for a diverse audience? Does everyone (government, industry, the public) have free access to information explaining the strategy? 6. Does the green building strategy enable equitable access to green buildings (housing and other types of buildings) for all income groups, especially the most vulnerable? Does it significantly raise the price of buildings? 7. Does the green building strategy have the support of parties and groups on opposite political spectrums? Does it have the support of a large variety of groups, like, for example, citizens groups, environmentai groups, professional organizations and industry? 8. Is the green building strategy affordable? (I.e.: is there a cheaper way to deliver the same services?) Is it easy to implement? This 30% will be based on a reduction in two major areas: first, energy, as it is usually measured in percentage reductions; and second, water, as low-water fixtures should allow reductions of between 30 and 50%. Other areas are much more difficult to quantify in percentages: reductions in landfill waste, for example, and increases in wild life habitat or green space, are dependant on the very specific regional use levels. This is the only measure on the criteria list that is discretionary. It defies a strict measurement like market saturation, as there are strategies like pilot projects whose impact on the mainstream building industry cannot be measured. 148 A p p e n d i x C : L ist o f K e y In formant I n t e r v i e w e e s Name Title Role in a Strategy (if not explained by title, left) Date and Place of Interview Kim Drury 206-684-3214 Program Manager Seattle's Environmental Management Program Office of Environmental Management City of Seattle Manager, City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy April 17, 2000 in-person interview Seattle, WA, USA, and follow up on phone and e-mail Feb 2001 Hillary Brown Hillary Brown, AIA Assistant Commissioner Office of Sustainable Design and Construction Department of Design and Construction New York City Manager, New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines May, 2000 in-person interview New York, NY, USA and follow up on phone and e-mail Feb 2001 Bob Kobet Bob Kobet, AIA, A S H R A E Director, Green Design Services Conservation Consultants, Inc. 64 South 14th Street Pittsburgh, PA 15203-1548 Key Author, Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Pefformance Buildings May 6, 2000 in-person interview Philadelphia, PA, U S A Peter Hurley 206-298-9338 presently Executive Director Transportation Choices Coalition P O Box 131 Seattle, WA 98111 206-298-9338 phone 206-298-9304 fax previously Sustainable Building Project Manager (Northwest Regional Sustainable Building Action Plan) Seattle City Light April 17, 2000 in-person interview Seattle, WA, USA, and follow up on phone and e-mail Feb 2001 Susan Munves Energy and Green Building Program Coordinator City of Santa Monica 310-458-8229 February 2001, phone interview 149 Richard Morgan Residential Specialist Austin Green Building Program (512)499-3469 February, 2001, phone, and follow up on phone and e-mail Terrel Emmons Terrel M. Emmons, FAIA Chief Architect Naval Facilities Engineering Command Washington Navy Yard 1322 Patterson Avenue S E Washington, DC 20374-5065 202/685-9170 Manager, Naval Facilities Sustainable Design Policy July 1999, phone interview Peter Templton US Green Building Council 1015 18th Street, NW, Suite 805 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202/82-USGBC (828-7422) Fax: 202-828-5110 February 6, 2001 phone interview Paul Kroening Hennepin County Environmental Services 417 North Fifth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1397 Phone (612) 348-6509 | Fax (612) 348-8532 | Manager of Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide February 2001, phone interview List of Peop le To W h o m 1 Directed S u Dplementary Quest ions: Name Title Role in a Strategy (if not explained by title, left) Date and Place of Interview Ian Theaker Environmental Design i Lead Consultant with Ray Consultant i Cole, Integral Design / i Santa Monica's Green Engineering i Building Design and #204 - 55 East 10th I Construction Guidelines Ave. Vancouver, BC Canada June, 1999 Vancouver, B C in-person interview Dean Kubani I Dean Kubani June, 1999, and 150 City of Santa Monica Environmental Analyst, Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines (310)458-2227 follow up on phone and e-mail February 2001 Bill Patton Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program TVLB Information Center 2000-2001 ongoing e-mail Raul Gonzales Director of Outreach Marketing for the Texas Veterans Land Board April 2001 e-mail commnuication James Toothacre Pennsylvania High Performance Buildings April 2001 Phone interview Wendy Powers Associate, Green Building Services Conservation Consultants Consultant, Pennsylvania High Performance Buildings March 2000, Vancouver in-person interview 151 Appendix D: Performance Targets for G B B C Pilot Projects (Created for the G B B C program by Jessica Woolliams) A: Ecological Performance Energy E1 ENERGY USE E2 ENERGY SOURCE E3 CLEAN ENERGY TRANSPORT Water Wa1 WATER USE Wa2 WATER FILTRATION Wa3 HUMAN WASTE Wa4 GROUND WATER RECHARGE Landscape L1 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT L2 GREEN SPACE L3 NATIVE PLANTINGS AND WILDLIFE HABITAT Materials M1 RECYCLED MATERIALS M2 EFFICIENT MATERIALS M3 SALVAGED MATERIALS M4 LOCAL MATERIALS M5 DURABLE AND LOW MAINTENANCE Waste W1 RECYCLING FACILITIES W2 COMPOSTING FACILITIES Construction Management C1 CONSTRUCTION WASTE C2 REUSE TOPSOIL C3 VEGETATION AND WATERCOURSE PROTECTION B: Human Health and Comfort Indoor Environmental Quality IEQ1 AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IEQ2 MINERAL AND GLASS FIBRE IEQ3 OUTDOOR AIR INTAKE IEQ4 VENTILATION EFFECTIVENESS AND AIR FILTRATION IEQ5 SYSTEM COMMISSIONING AND CLEANING IEQ6 DAYLIGHTING C: Economic Performance EC1 LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT EC2 CAPITAL COST ACCOUNTING Appendix E: The C a s e Studies These case studies are organized into the following three models or types of green building strategies: IV. Guidelines, Certification Systems and Rating Systems V. Government Building Pilot Projects and Policies VI. Economic Incentives 1.0. Guidelines, Certification Systems and Rating Systems to. 1.1. Austin Green Building Program (1991) I. Central Organization II. Dates III. General Description City of Aust in, Texas (United States) 1991 - present The Aust in Program is important because it lead the way by establ ishing the first environmental building rating sys tem in the North Amer i ca . The City was a founding member of the U S G r e e n Building Counc i l , today a large and influential body (Austin 1998). Today the number of U S cities with environmental building rating sys tems is large and growing, and this is at least in part due to first example set by Aust in . The purpose of Aust in 's Green Building Program is to encourage building professionals (architects, builders and developers) to use more environmentally responsible building pract ices in their buildings and to encourage consumers to value these buildings. The program involves training the industry, marketing green ideas and professionals to consumers , and certifying Green Bui ldings with a rating of between one and five stars. The free "Green Building Member Program" is open to architects, builders, developers and contractors; suppl iers and 1 5 3 the building industry may become assoc ia te members . Membersh ip consists of at tendance at orientation, a "G reen Building Bas i cs " course and at least two technical lectures. Members receive marketing ass is tance, ongoing educat ion and networking opportunities. Aust in 's program has four sub-programs: residential, municipal , commerc ia l , and multi-family. Th is analysis focuses on residential. 154 1.2. The Green Builder Program of Colorado (1995) I. Centra l Organ izat ion II. Dates III. Genera l Desc r ip t ion Home Bui lders Assoc ia t ion of Denver, Co lorado State (United States) 1 9 9 5 - P r e s e n t 1998 - Expanded from Metro to statewide The Green Bui lder Program of Colorado is significant because it is the first to establ ish a state-wide (or province-wide, for that matter) green building program. The state-wide nature of the program, and the fact that it is compr ised of a broad coalit ion of organizat ions, is beneficial as it al lows a considerable amount of market security for both developers and consumers . A n important difference from the Aust in program is that a non-governmental body is primarily responsible for its administration: the Metro Denver Home Bui lders Assoc ia t ion . It is a revenue-neutral program, with most of its funding coming from the Governor 's Office of Energy Conservat ion ( O E C ) , and a portion of the funding coming from fees charged for sponsorsh ip, builder enrollment, and home registration ( H B A M D 1999 a,b,c). Th is Colorado program has a membership program like Aust in 's which is a central tool around which builders and des igners prepare to market to residential buyers. However, in contrast to Aust in 's free membership and seminars (given by the municipality), the even more explicitly market-based Co lorado program charges fees and dues. Enrol lment is $150 / year; building registration is between $20 and $50 per home; and sponsors pay $500 to have products registered as in compl iance with the program. Five percent of all certified buildings are randomly inspected. 155 1.3. Santa Monica's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines (1996) I. Centra l Ci ty of San ta Mon ica , Cal i fornia (United States) Organ izat ion II. Dates 1 9 9 6 - F i r s t d r a f t 1999 - Completed Guidel ines 2001 - In effect March 1 III. Genera] The Santa Mon ica Guidel ines are significant for at least two Descr ip t ion reasons: first, because they are the first to incorporate s o m e requirements into the local building code, and second , because they are tied clearly and directly into the numerical targets of the Susta inable City Program. This c lear linking to the overal l goals of the city program is in keeping with the principle of t ransparency, and should help to encourage ci t izen participation and dialogue. San ta Mon ica 's program is appl icable to all buildings except single family residential. The Guidel ines encourage the building sector to contribute to the goals of the Susta inable City Program ( S M 1999a,b,c). The program has no built-in certification sys tem unless they use the L E E D guidel ines, which they are consider ing (Personal Interview 1999). The Susta inable City P rogram has a set of measurab le targets including the following areas that relate to buildings ( C S M T F E 1996): ° Energy Usage (non-mobile sources) (Btus/year), ° Water U s a g e (gallons / day) ° Landfil l So l id Was te (tons / year) ° Wastewater F lows (gallons / day) 0 Dry Weather Stormdrain Discharges to O c e a n (gallons / dy) 156 1.4. LEED-Leadersh ip in Energy and Environmental Design (1997) I. Centra l Organ izat ion II. Dates III. Genera l Descr ip t ion United States Green Building Counc i l ( U S G B C ) 1 9 9 3 - U S G B C formed 1 9 9 7 - L E E D version 1.0 2000 - L E E D version 2.0 The U S G B C ' s L E E D guidel ines represent the first ser ious attempt to create a North Amer ican industry-wide standard. Th is is an interesting model that has engaged a d iverse group of institutions, individuals, bus inesses, and government offices in the development of user-friendly, widely-adopted, comprehens ive guidel ines. At least in part due to its s u c c e s s e s , it has attracted much attention, not all of it good. Cr i t ic isms include its expense; its lack of design ass is tance; its lack of explicit, consc ious environmental prioritizing; and its a l leged use as a marketing tool for its bus iness members rather than a tool for scientif ic measurement (Wise 2000). L E E D is a voluntary, market driven combined guidel ines / rating sys tem / certification sys tem that is des igned for new and existing institutional, commerc ia l , and high-rise residential buildings. Certif ication is given to buildings that meet certain non-negotiable prerequisites (like a certain minimum level of energy efficiency) as well as choose among different opt ions to receive a minimum number of credits for a range of pract ices. 157 1.5. Pennsylvania's Guidelines for Creating High-Performance Buildings (1999) I. Centra l Organ izat io n s II. Dates III. Genera l Desc r ip t ion Governors Green Government Counc i l and the Pennsy lvan ia Department of Environmental Protection Commonwea l th of Pennsy lvan ia 1999 - Design Guidel ines published The Guide l ines are written "to famil iarize dec is ion-makers and others involved in the design, construction and development of communit ies and buildings with the concept of sustainabil i ty." Like Co lorado, these guidel ines are administered at the state level. However, unlike Colorado it was not developed to be a voluntary, market driven program. Instead it was intended to be a program that was used to encourage government agenc ies to build their buildings in a more environmentally sensit ive fashion. It is voluntary, and there are no plans to make it mandatory. T h e s e Guidel ines give practical information in four general a reas : 1. G r e e n Design Sys tems 2. G r e e n Design P rocess 3. C a s e Studies 4. Resou rces Al l of this information could be used for buildings outside of Pennsy lvan ia . 158 1.6. New York City's High Performance Building Guidelines (1999) I. Centra l Organ izat ion II. Dates III. G e n e r a l Descr ip t ion Office of Susta inable Design and Construct ion Department of Design and Construct ion New York City Apri l 1999 - Des ign Guidel ines publ ished T h e s e guidel ines make a contribution to the growing body of green building guidel ines because, like San ta Mon ica 's Guide l ines, they go beyond a minimalist list of performance targets (as in Aust in, Co lorado, or L E E D ) . Both San ta Mon ica and N Y C have measurable performance goals or targets but in addition include clearly-written and detailed practical information about how to achieve the targets. The N Y C Guide l ines are written for use by those involved in the N e w York City capital construct ion process: architects, engineers, contractors, t radespeople, building custodians, building owners, public agency officials, elected officials, and the public. E a c h of N Y C s technical a r e a s 4 9 are organized into ten sect ions: ° Object ives (e.g.: minimize the use of domest ic water) ° Benefi ts (e.g.: reduced operating expenditures) ° Techn ica l Strategies (ways of achieving the objective) ° Examp le (a case study building) ° Building Integration (some notes on integrating this objective with the whole building) 0 Per formance Goa l s 0 Tools (tools that can be used to achieve the objective, like computer simulation software to a s s e s s projected energy use) ° Del iverables ° Regulatory Constraints ° References This structure al lows the guidel ines to present a great deal of information, but it may be overwhelming for some users. A technical area would be, for example, energy use or water management. These shall be further discussed in reference to the criteria of ecological robustness in the analysis chapter. 159 160 2.0. Government Building Pilot Projects and Policies 2.1. Naval Facilities Sustainable Design.Policy (1993) I. Centra l Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) (United Organ izat ion States) II. Dates III. Genera l Desc r ip t ion 1993-present This policy represents a watershed for the mainstream endorsement of green buildings. The United States Department of the Navy was the first Federal department to create policy requiring that all new construction must be built according to certain green building standards ("Navy" 1998). N A V F A C has an annual construction budget of roughly $5 billion—roughly one percent of all US construction. NAVFAC administers domestic construction for the Marines, the Air Force, the Navy and also does some Army construction. NAVFAC builds everything from homes to schools and hospitals. This policy amounts to extensive support for more environmentally responsible buildings (NAVFAC 1998, 1999a,b; USDN 1999). The Sustainable Development Program is made up of three Planning and Design Policy Statements. The first describes "sustainable design" and defines the integrated design approach. This approach evaluates the building as a whole, not as individual components. The second policy statement effectively adopts the U S G B C LEED guidelines for N A V F A C construction (Personal Interview 1999). The third policy statement effectively requires that any Architect-Engineer that is hired for the construction of a NAVFAC building has experience with "sustainable design principles." It asks for demonstrated experience with everything from daylighting, energy efficiency, 161 low V O C materials, natural ventilation, minimizing off-site storm runoff and the U S G r e e n Building Counc i l ' s L E E D Program. 162 2.2. Seattle Partnership for Resource Efficient Schools (1996) I. Centra l City of Seatt le Publ ic Utilities O r g a n i z a t i o n s Seatt le Publ ic Schoo ls ' ( S P S ) II. Dates 1996 - present III. G e n e r a l Th is is a program created for schools in the Seatt le a rea , that Descr ip t ion Cou\d potentially be a model for schools in other a reas . There are 19 schools to be renovated under Seatt le Schoo l District's "Bui lding Exce l lence Program" (Seattle 2000). This policy uses a handbook, cal led the "Best Management Pract ices Handbook" that g ives des ign advice to those involved with designing, constructing and operating the schools in the program. This handbook gives guidel ines for designing, constructing and operating more resource-efficient schools . Like the City of San ta Mon ica 's guidel ines, these guidel ines set out some pract ices that are "required" and others that are " recommended. " It a lso provides case studies, sample specif icat ions, and var ious resources. 163 II. Dates IV. G e n e r a l Descr ip t ion 2.3. Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide (1997) I. Centra l Hennepin County Organ izat ion 1997, 1998 - Minnesota Susta inable Des ign Gu ide 1999, 2000 - Creat ion o f resource and educat ional materials This design guide acts as a policy because it was created to ensure the best use of Hennepin County 's $30 million annual facilities budget ( M S D G 2000). The design guide and rating sys tem is intended to be used by planners and architects of Hennepin County facilities. However, it is a lso intended to be a resource for anyone who wants to use it, including the North Amer i can building industry and the general public. There are four major areas in which the Des ign Gu ide offers help: 1) P rocess : offers advice on negotiating the stages of the building life cyc les, from predesign to des ign to construct ion and occupancy. 2) Strategies: gives practical methods of achieving certain levels of ecological performance. 3) Document: g ives users a Scor ing Form and Project History Report. 4) C a s e Studies: encourages all users to send in their documents to be used as a case study. Th is rating system is weighted to reflect regionally important issues: issues that are seen as more important regionally are given more points in the rating sys tem. These design guidel ines have been tested on pilot projects built for Hennepin County , the Minnesota Department of Natural Resou rces , R a m s e y County and Carver County. 164 JSffBIWiSpfi iillSiitiSli 2.4. PATH-Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (1998) I. Centra l Organ izat ion II. Dates III. G e n e r a l Descr ip t ion U S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 1 9 9 8 - p r e s e n t This is a comprehensive model linking and supporting major demonstrat ion projects. There is nothing equivalent in C a n a d a . The purpose of this public/private partnership is to bring together federal departments and the building sector (home building, product manufacturing, insurance, f inancial and regulatory communit ies) to speed the market acceptance of innovative technologies that further the program's goals (listed below): ° Affordability: Reduce the monthly cost of new housing by 20 percent or more. ° Energy-eff ic iency and environmental protection: Cut the environmental impact and energy use of new housing by 50 percent or more and reduce energy use in at least 15 million existing homes by 30 percent or more. ° Durability: Improve durability and reduce maintenance costs by 50 percent. ° Disaster resistance and safety: Reduce by at least 10 percent the risk of loss of life, injury, and property destruction from natural hazards and dec rease by at least 20 percent residential construction work i l lnesses and injuries, (from: P A T H 2000) The P A T H program suppl ies technical ass is tance to developers who agree to a s s e s s these technologies in their residential development. 165 2.5. A P A Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability (2000) I. Centra l Organ iza t ion II. Dates III. G e n e r a l Desc r ip t ion Amer ican Planning Assoc iat ion Created and Instituted - 2000 This policy is similar to the Amer ican Institute of Architecture (AlA) 's "Gu ide to Environmental ly Susta inable Archi tecture" and Architectural Institute of British Co lumbia (AIBC) 's adoption of the Hannover Pr inciples. Change within professional institutions may be one of the most effective ways to change mainst ream development practice. However, the policies may need to be more practical and easi ly understood than these to create the biggest change. The purpose of the A P A Pol icy Gu ide is to encourage Amer ican Planners and the Amer ican public to be aware of and to choose a variety of alternative development cho ices. The guide a lso includes background information. It g ives "Globa l Indications of Unsustainabil i ty" which include global warming, soil degradat ion, deforestation, spec ies extinction, decl ining f isheries, and economic inequity. Its " U . S . Indications of Communi ty Unsustainabil i ty" includes: suburban sprawl , segregat ion/unequal opportunity, loss of agricultural land and open space , depletion and degradation of water resources, loss of wet lands, traffic congest ion and air pollution, and disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards. Finally, there is a lengthy and detailed list of the A P A Pol icy 's "Speci f ic Pol icy Posi t ions," which list planning pol icies and legislation that the Amer ican Planning Associat ion and its Chapters support. 166 2.6. City of Seattle Sustainable Building Policy (2000) I. Centra l City of Seatt le Organ izat ion II. Dates February 2000 - present III. Genera l Th is policy represents the least expensive, lowest maintenance Descr ip t ion moc\e\ for governments that want a green building policy but do not want to create the guidel ines or rating sys tem. In addit ion, using an industry standard should have the benefits of being able to share information and exper iences with others ac ross the country that are also using the same standard. However, using an already-created policy and using its training sess ions may encourage the government body as well as industry, ci t izens and consumers to accept it rather than creating their own definition of what is environmentally responsible and appropriate. Seatt le 's policy, incorporated into the City's Environmental Management Program, requires all of the City 's new construct ion and major retrofits over 5,000 gross square feet of occupied space to be constructed to qualify for a minimum of L E E D Si lver Rat ing. The principle audience, then, is every department at the City of Seatt le and all those involved with constructing and running Ci ty-owned facilities (Seattle 2000). The L E E D Guide l ines are used as a "design and measurement tool" (Seatt le 2000). S e e above description of L E E D for detai ls. Facil i t ies that achieve a L E E D rating higher than Si lver are eligible for a "Mayor 's Award. " 167 2.7. Hannover World E X P O Model Ecological District (2000) I. Centra l City of Hannover, Ge rmany Organ izat io n II. Dates 1 9 9 ? - p r e s e n t III. Genera l The city of Hannover, Ge rmany (population 514,000) created its Descr ip t ion | o c a ( c | j r n a t e a c t j o n p | a n j n 1994, which outlined its goals of reducing total C 0 2 emiss ions by 2 5 % (of 10.8 million tonnes) by 2005 (ICLEI 1997). Roughly 8 3 % of total C 0 2 emiss ions c o m e s from the energy used in heating, cool ing, and providing electricity to buildings; the rest (17%) comes from transport (ICLEI 1997). Major initiatives taken up to 1997 include expanding combined heat and power plants; creating a "green pricing" utility rate for wind-generated electricity; altering energy prices to make retrofitting buildings more financially viable; and retrofitting public buildings. Between 1990 and 1997, these kinds of measures brought C 0 2 reductions of only 1.8% (ICLEI 1997). In the year 2000, the city of Hannover created the new Kronsberg urban district that is located in the vicinity of the Wor ld E X P O site. The new district consists of 6,000 units of housing for roughly 15,000 people (Expo 2000). Half of the units are expected to be ready for the E X P O (Expo 2000). Like the Sydney solar vi l lage built for their "Green G a m e s " , Kronsberg district is used to showcase a country's vis ion for the future and their competit ive edge in the new field of environmental building. The new district w a s an exhibit at E X P O 2000. 168 I. Centra l Organ izat ion II. Dates III. G e n e r a l Descr ip t ion 2 .8. Sydney Olympic Village ( 2 0 0 0 ) S O C O G : the Sydney Organis ing Commit tee for the Olympic G a m e s administered the Sydney G a m e s 1 9 9 2 - 2 0 0 0 From 1992 to 2000 Greenpeace both worked with, lobbied, and acted as a watchdog for the New South W a l e s ( N S W ) State Government and Olympic officials. The result of G reenpeace ' s vision and pro-active leadership is the Sydney Olympic Athletes Vi l lage, which is the world's largest solar suburb. G r e e n p e a c e envis ioned the Olympic Vi l lage as a model for the world of "what can be done when there is a commitment to environmental protection and cost-effective energy sys tems and the global need to phase out fossil fuels." It contains 650 buildings whose main source of energy is the sun (Greenpeace 2000). T h e s e houses will go up for sa le to the general public after the Olympic games , and government will provide a rebate to encourage their sa le. In addition to the measures taken at the So la r Vi l lage, solar panels were also used at the main Olympic Stad ium, Supe rDome, Sydney Entertainment Cent re , O lympic Ferry Terminal and Regatta Centre (Greenpeace 2000). So la r power was used for lighting, s igns, security gates, environmental controls and maritime equipment. 169 3 .0. Economic Incentives 3.1. FCM's Affordability and Choice Today (ACT) Program (1990) I. Centra l Organ izat ion II. Partners in D e v e l o p m e n t III. Dates IV. G e n e r a l Desc r ip t ion Federat ion of Canad ian Municipali t ies ° Canad ian Home Bui lders Assoc ia t ion ° Canad ian Housing and Renewal Assoc ia t ion ° C a n a d a Mortgage and Housing Corporat ion (funding) 1 9 9 0 - p r e s e n t This program provides grants of up to $20,000 to builders, developers, non-profit organizat ions, and municipalit ies to engage in mult i-stakeholder regulatory reform. A C T is des igned to facilitate changes in residential building approval p rocesses , planning regulations, and building regulations. The full amount of $20,000 can be awarded for demonstrat ion projects; up to $10,000 can be awarded projects that work towards streamlining approval p rocesses ; and up to $5,000 can be awarded to compi le information on previously completed c a s e studies. The program creates an information exchange for success fu l examples of regulatory innovations from across C a n a d a ( C H B A 1999; C H R A 1999; C M H C 1999). This program will be in effect until 2002, providing grants for roughly 40 more projects ( F C M 1999). 170 3.2. Toronto 's Better Bui ld ings Partnership Program (1996) I. Central Organization II. Partners in Development III. Dates IV. General Description The City of Toronto Energy Efficiency Office (EEO) ° The Toronto Atmospheric Fund (TAF) 0 Consumers Gas ° Toronto Hydro 0 Ontario Hydro 0 Enbridge Consumers Gas 0 Energy Management Companies 0 International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). ° financial institutions, environmentalists, community groups, the building industry, building owners and managers, trade unions, energy and water efficiency consultants 1996-present This program brings together the City of Toronto, energy utilities, and the building sector to conduct comprehensive energy retrofits and some water retrofits with a payback of between three and ten years (Toronto 2000). The utility companies (Enbridge Consumers Gas and Toronto Hydro) provide technical training for energy efficiency retrofits and facilitated access to funding options; the energy management firms (or ESCos) provide engineering, project management and general contracting expertise; and the City brings the various actors together. The program is aligned with the City of Toronto's CO2 reduction target, which is to reduce emissions from 1990 levels by 20% by the year 2005. 171 3.3. Texas Veterans Land Board Greenbuilding Mortgage Program (1996) I. Centra l Texas Veterans Land Board (TVLB) Organ izat ion II. Partners in Austin Green Builder program D e v e l o p m e n t III. Dates 1996-present IV. G e n e r a l The TLVB is a housing assistance program that furnishes Descr ip t ion below-market loans to eligible Texas Veterans. Starting in 1996, they offered to further reduce the interest rate charged to veterans by up to one percentage point if the building complied with the Greenbuilding Program requirements. This checklist gives certain point values to prescribed features or practices in the following areas: water, energy, building materials, solid waste, other. A minimum of 30, 50, 70, or 100 points are required to achieve an interest rate reduction of (in corresponding order) 0.30, 0.50, 0.70, or 1.00. This percentage is then subtracted from the standard present rates charged by the TVLB to find the interest rate of your loan. Both the builder and the veteran must sign the checklist and hand it in with the loan application. A Greenbuilding Completion Certificate is awarded when the loan is closed (TVLB 1998a,b; TVLB 1999; Personal Interview 1999; "Veterans'" 1997). 172 3.4. F R E E - F i n a n c i n g Renewab le Energy and Eff ic iency (1997) I. Centra l Organ iza t ion II. Partners in D e v e l o p m e n t III. Dates IV. G e n e r a l Descr ip t ion U.S . Department of Energy S ix energy service companies: C E W / W a y International Duke Solut ions, Inc. Energy Masters , Corp . ERI Serv ices Honeywel l , Inc. Home & Building Controls Johnson Controls, Inc. 1 9 9 7 - 2 0 0 5 The U S federal government is the biggest single user of energy, spending $4 billion every year on its 500,000 buildings ( U S D O E 2000), in a country that uses more energy than any other on the planet. This program will contract private compan ies to install energy efficient technologies in federal buildings at no cost to the taxpayer. Through the energy contract, the private compan ies will reap part of the energy sav ings that result from their technology. The U S Department of Energy will use a standard contract and list of vendors that will al low greater e a s e in bidding for the contracts (Wald 1997). 173 3.5. Natural Resources Canada Energy Incentive Programs (1998) I. Centra l O r g a n i z a t i o n s II. Dates III. Genera l Descr ip t ion Natural Resou rces Canada ' s ( N R C a n ' s ) Off ice of Energy Eff iciency N R C a n ' s Renewab le and Electr ical Energy Division 1998 - present There are four programs, together worth $60 million over 3 years from 1998 to 2001, that focus on improving the energy eff iciency of Canada ' s existing and emerging building stock and increasing the use of renewable energy ( N R C a n 1999; "New" 1998): ° Commerc ia l Building Incentive Program (CBIP) ° Energy Innovators P lus (EIP) 0 Renewab le Energy Deployment Initiative (REDI) ° EnerGu ide for Houses ( E G H ) C B I P provides financial incentives to building owners who des ign and construct new commerc ia l and institutional buildings that are 2 5 % more energy efficient than the Model National Energy C o d e for Bui ldings. E IP is a program to encourage upgrading existing commercia l buildings. REDI provides financial incentives for the installation of solar air heating sys tems, solar hot water sys tems, and high eff iciency/low emiss ions b iomass combust ion sys tems. The main target audiences are bus inesses and federal facil it ies, however other projects such as municipal or University demonstrat ion projects could be considered through submitting a proposal (Logie 1999). The E G H program encourages increased energy efficiency of res idences. 174 3.6. Environmental Mortgage Partnership (1999) I. Centra l O r g a n i z a t i o n s II. Partners in D e v e l o p m e n t III. Dates IV. G e n e r a l Descr ip t ion Fannie M a e National Assoc iat ion of Home Bui lders (United States) Home Bui lder Assoc ia t ions Ac ross the United States, including: ° At lanta, G A ° Los Ange les , C A ° Co lumbus , O H ° Seatt le, W A ° Albuquerque, N M ° Colorado 0 Denver, C O 1999 - Announced This initiative will include working with lending agenc ies , home builders, and community partners to establ ish a set of mortgage f inancing products that would encourage environmental ly sensit ive building. G reen building initiatives will be deve loped in 6 pilot cities: Atlanta, G A ; Co lumbus , O H ; Albuquerque, N M ; Denver, C O ; Los Ange les , C A ; and Seatt le, W A ( P R N 1999; B ion 1999; Freddie M a c 1999; N A H B 1999; N A H B R C 1999). In these cit ies, local builder associat ions, lending agenc ies , and community partners will work with the N A H B and Fannie M a e to develop and test a set of mortgage f inancing options based on environmental ly responsible criteria (Fannie M a e 1999, 2000). In October 1999, the Colorado Assoc ia t ion of Home Bui lders, "Built G r e e n " Program of Colorado and Fannie M a e announced a Environmental Mortgage Pilot (Fannie M a e 2000). 175 3.7. New York State's Green Building Tax Credit (2000) I. Centra l O r g a n i z a t i o n s II. Partners in D e v e l o p m e n t III. Dates IV. Genera l Desc r ip t ion N e w York State Energy Resea rch and Development Authority New York State Office of the Governor (George Pataki) Rea l Estate Board of New York Natural Resou rces Defense Counci l ( N R D C ) Environmental Bus iness Assoc ia t ion of New York State M a y 15 t h , 2000 - present This tax credit legislation is intended to encourage both building owners and their tenants to use energy-efficient and environmental ly sensit ive technology in their buildings by offsetting the additional first cost of certain technology. Between 2001 to 2009, $25 million will be avai lable as income and franchise tax credits (Post 2000). Between 5 % and 7% of eligible costs for green buildings that meet the state's requirements will be awarded as tax credits. In addit ion, buildings that use fuel cel ls and photovoltaic panels are eligible for extra credits, and credits can be received for up to 1 0 % of the cost of air conditioning equipment that uses ozone-fr iendly refrigerants, and buildings (Post 2000). The minimum requirements set for the program so far would ensure that the new buildings built under the program are 3 5 % more efficient than the state energy code al lows, and the rehabilitated buildings are 2 5 % more efficient. Cri t ics argue, however, that tax credits can artificially inflate a market (in this case the solar P V cell and fuel cell market), and if funding is cut in another political regime, the market is more fragile than it was in the beginning (Wilson 2000). 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0089944/manifest

Comment

Related Items