S u s t a i n a b l e C o n s t r u c t i o n R e l a t i v e t o a C o n c e p t u a l A n a l y s i s
547
Institutional / status quo interpretation of sustainable construction
The construction industry can be generally characterised as having an unwavering
commitment to continued growth, an aversion to fundamental change and only a dim
perception of hard limits to natural resource consumption. All of these features are
consistent with an institutional / status quo view of sustainable development. Moreover,
although representative bodies espouse ‘green’ rhetoric that somewhat acknowledges
the severity of the environmental crisis and express a techno-positive surety that the
attendant issues will be timeously resolved, there is little evidence to suggest that the
required actions are being undertaken at a sufficient pace. For example, consider the
acknowledged slow rate of and somewhat piecemeal approach to the refurbishment for
low energy operation of the UK’s existing housing stock, estimated as of 2011 to be
approximately 25 million homes (ONS 2011). Based on this figure, the Existing Homes
Alliance calculate that 600,000 whole-house refurbishments per annum from 2010
onwards (Honour 2010) are required in order to substantively contribute towards the
government-imposed target of an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
compared with 1990 levels by 2050 (The Climate Change Act 2008). Recent
announcements in the UK pertaining to the ‘Green Deal’ (DECC 2010) offer some
encouragement that the extent of the problem is beginning to be understood in practical
terms by both government and industry. Under this scheme, due to launch in October
2012, energy efficient improvements to buildings are facilitated by low interest loans tied
to the properties the upgrades are performed on rather than the loanees. However,
critics of the Green Deal claim that more still needs to be done (Carrington 2011),
particularly with regard to alleviating fuel poverty (Monbiot 2012, Guertler 2012).
Instruments of transition have had mixed or, due to the complexity of sustainability
issues, unintended results. In addition, as recently witnessed in the UK through
reductions in feed-in tariffs relating to electricity generated from photovoltaic panels
(Press Association 2012; Pitt 2012), such measures can be subject to undermining
political intervention and revision as well as the vagrancies of the market. Methods
endorsed by the construction industry and its clients as the primary means of driving
sustainability, including BEAMs and product labelling schemes, are criticised for being
devised and controlled by vested and commercial interests (Ball 2002) and for having
overly prescriptive formats that fail to facilitate necessary innovation (Cole 2005).
Furthermore, evidence is emerging to suggest that a convincing business case for
ecological modernisation has still to be made to small and medium-sized construction
firms (Revell 2007). Crucially, there is an increasing realisation that a solution platform
that focuses almost exclusively on technology (e.g. in a construction context, micro-
generation technologies), oblivious to its inherently uncertain development trajectory, is
unlikely to yield the desired results (Huesemann and Huesemann, 2012).
Complementary measures, such as the promotion of behaviour change and institutional
reform, will almost certainly be required in order to induce sufficient change.
Academic / reform interpretations of sustainable construction
The existence of associations between academic / reformist notions of sustainable
development and contemporary construction practices are less easily inferred but
nonetheless do exist. Clearly, sustainable construction exhibits a pro-technology bias
and, through the support and employment of BEAMs, attempts to go beyond the
regulatory requirements governing construction such that new ‘reformed’ norms are
established (Burnett 2005). As with institutional / status quo perspectives, commercially
disadvantageous, doom-laden visions of the future are avoided. Furthermore,
construction organisations are increasingly forging partnerships with academic
institutions in order to develop solutions that fulfil perceived corporate social responsibly
