Identifying Barriers to Certification for LEED Registered Projects

Introduction

The green/sustainable building movement constitutes a change in the way construction is performed. It affects the methods and materials used and also the process in which buildings are constructed, from planning stages through the warranty.  Many in the industry have made claims of building green or using sustainable practices but have had no way to validate this achievement.  In an effort to set a standard for what constitutes a green building, the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) developed The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification (U.S. Green Building Council, 2000). The authors of a Rocky Mountain Institute publication have called the LEED rating system a “definitive standard” for what constitutes a green building (Rocky Mountain Institute, 2002).  Many stakeholders in the construction industry have chosen to employ this certification process to validate their achievement of building green.  This trend is evidenced by the growing number of projects that have registered for LEED Certification. As of October, 2005, approximately 2200 projects had been registered. Yet, it appears that a number of project teams stop short of LEED certification. This study investigated some of the reasons that projects register for LEED certification and some of the barriers to achieving certification. Additionally the study examined some differences that exist between LEED registered projects that become certified and those that do not.

The Need

Given the increasing world population and the subsequent industrialization of nations, environmental stewardship has become an important global issue. Because of the significant impact of buildings on the environment, implementing the LEED rating system can play an important role reducing the negative impact that buildings often have on the environment. Following are a few ideas presented to make a case for green building.

Resource consumption

Buildings are a major source of resource consumption. This consumption has been estimated to be 40% of raw materials globally, which calculates to three billion tons annually (Roodman & Lenssen 1995).  Not only are resources being consumed by our buildings, but the construction industry generates large amounts of waste.  In the U.S. in 1996, it was estimated that 136 million tons of construction and demolition waste was generated, which equals approx. 2.8 lbs/person/day (U.S. EPA 1998).  Green building techniques attempt to help solve these problems by employing practices such as using materials that are sustainable (able to be regenerated as fast, or faster than they are used), and by recycling, which reduces waste and raw materials usage (Barnett & Browning, 1995).

Energy consumption

Buildings alone account for 65.2% of total U.S. electricity consumption and greater than 36% of total U.S. primary energy use (U.S. Department of Energy, 2001).  The largest portion of this energy is used to heat and cool  buildings.  Electricity used for lighting and to run equipment such as refrigerators, clothes dryers, and office equipment make up another large portion (Lovins & Browning, 1992).  Saving one unit of electricity saves three or four units of fuel at the power plant.  Power plants use one-third of all fuel, thus producing one-third of the resulting carbon dioxide (CO2), one-third of nitrogen oxides (NOx), and two-thirds of the sulfur oxides (SOx) (Lovins & Browning, 1992 ).  Green building practices can greatly reduce the environmental impact that buildings have on the environment by reducing the amount of energy needed to operate and maintain buildings

Economics

There are economic reasons for building green.  The two predominant economic factors associated with green buildings are reduced energy costs and increased productivity. In their article, Greening the building and the bottom line, Romm and Browning (1994) present eight case studies that illustrate that certain green building practices (efficient lighting, heating, and cooling) increase worker productivity, decrease worker absenteeism and/or improve the quality of work performed.  These benefits, which positively affect a company’s economic bottom line, are all in addition to saving money and resources through energy efficient design.

Research Questions

The questions addressed by this research project are as follows:

What are the motivations for LEED registered projects to become registered and eventually certified?

What are some of the encountered barriers for LEED registered projects to become certified?

What are some of the observed differences between registered buildings that receive certification and those that do not?

Methodology

The population

The purpose of this study is to examine some aspects of the LEED certification process.  Only Projects registered before January 1, 2002 were included in this study. This date was chosen because it was assumed that projects registered later than this date may not have had sufficient time to complete either the project or the LEED certification process by the time of data collection.  Because several of these projects had the same contact person, the population for this study became LEED project contacts for projects registered with the USGBC before January 1, 2002. These contact persons were asked to answer the survey about the earliest, non-certified LEED project for which they were the contact person.

Procedures

Using the information on the USGBC website, the researchers identified 236 projects that registered before January 1, 2002.  Additionally, a contact person for each project was identified.  Because several contact persons had more than one project that met these criteria, the subjects were asked to answer the survey questions for only the earliest project for which they were the official contact person.  This was done so that no one person would be asked to complete more than one survey.  This reduced the number of projects to 207.  A total of 184 correct addresses were found and surveys were sent to each.  A total of 43 completed surveys were returned.

Because of the relatively small population, all members of the population were sent the survey.    

For a portion of the analysis, the respondents were divided into two groups.  One group consisted of the surveyed projects that had been certified (n=20).  The other group consisted of surveyed projects that had not, and were not planning to become certified (n=8).  This was done to compare groups and help analyze the reasons for, and barriers to certification. 

Instrumentation

A survey developed specifically for this project was the main instrument employed in data collection for this study.  The survey was sent to each identified contact person as outlined previously.  To increase the content validity of the survey, a pilot survey was sent to persons not included in the research population but currently working on LEED certification for other projects.  Feedback was elicited from these individuals and the survey was changed based upon the feedback received.  Additionally, early versions of the survey were reviewed by persons with experience concerning the LEED certification process, and changes were made based upon suggestions from these persons.

Results

This study was exploratory in nature and was a mixed method design that included both qualitative and quantitative analysis.  Because of the small population and the small number of respondents, no inference was made to the population. The researchers used the data to answer the research questions for the group of projects for which surveys were collected.

Characteristics of Respondents and Projects

Twenty of the respondents worked in an architectural firm; nine were owners or worked for the owner; six worked in a green building consulting firm; and four worked for government agencies. The three remaining respondents worked in engineering related firms.  Twenty-seven of the respondents indicated that they were “responsible for LEED documentation”, fourteen indicated that they “participated in LEED documentation, and two were “not involved in LEED documentation”.  Thirty one of the respondents indicated that they were LEED Accredited Professionals, and twelve indicated that they were not.

The data showed that 20 of the 43 surveyed projects had achieved certification.  The time from project completion to certification ranged from 0 to 852 days, with a mean of approximately 300 days. Of the 23 projects that had not achieved certification, 14 indicated that certification was still a goal, 8 indicated that it was not, and one gave no indication.

The majority of the projects (25) were smaller than 75,000 SF, 16 were 75,000 to 300,000 SF in size, and only 2 were larger than 300,000 SF.  The end use for the majority of the projects was educational, office space, and governmental (11, 9, and 8 respectively).  Other uses included retail, manufacturing, mixed use, medical, and “other”.  The surveyed projects were located in 26 different states within the United States.  Seven of these 26 states had more than one surveyed project.

The organizations initiating certification for the majority of the projects were the owner and the architect (26 and 15, respectively).  The organizations in charge of documentation for the majority of the projects were the architect and green building consultants (21 and 12, respectively).  All projects had at least one LEED Accredited Professional (AP) working on the project with 19 having only one, 11 having two, 9 having three, and the rest having more than three accredited professionals.  The organizations that had the majority of the LEED APs were the architects and consultants with 32 and 17 respectively.  Sixteen of the surveyed projects had no organizations that had worked on a previous LEED project, 11 had one, 7 had two, 6 had three and the rest had more than three LEED APs. 

Research Question One

From an open ended question concerning reasons for LEED registration, two major themes emerged, environmental stewardship and owner-driven goal.  Environmental stewardship (mentioned 19 times) was the most often stated reason.  Many project contacts stated that the idea of environmental stewardship was part of the core values the organization. Another frequently mentioned reason (16 respondents) was that the owner had the desire to achieve certification.  The next two most frequently mentioned reasons were to establish a standard / set an example (6 respondents) and to save money through life cycle-costs (5 respondents).  Table 1 shows the response codes for this question and the number of times each was mentioned.

Table 1

Stated Reasons for Working Toward LEED Certification

Survey respondents were asked to rate several researcher-listed reasons for working toward LEED certification.  On a coded scale from 1 to 5, the highest ranked reason for working toward LEED certification was environmental stewardship, M = 4.33.  The next two highest ranked reasons were “to keep green building a project priority”(M = 3.88) and “validate achievement through third party review”( M = 3.21).  The listed reasons and their average rankings can be seen in Table2. 

Table 2

Reasons for Working Toward LEED Certificaton

Research Question Two

A Likert scale question asked the respondents to rate a list of researcher-assumed barriers to achieving certification on a scale from 4 to 0 with 4 being ”Most challenging” and 0 being “Not a challenge”.  It was found that the “Costs of documentation /other indirect costs”,  ranked the highest ( M = 2.33).  Not far behind in rank were the barriers of “Team members lack of experience with LEED certification” ( M = 2.17), and the “Costs of green building practices or design” ( M = 2.05).  Table 3 shows each of the barriers that were ranked and their average ranking.

Table 3

Barriers to LEED Certification Ranked in Likert Scale Question

Three open ended questions asked specifically about the barriers to certification.  The questions ranged from general to more specific.  The general question asked respondents to state “the most challenging difficulty or barrier encountered as part of the LEED certification process.”  Two main barriers were identified from the responses to this general question.  The most frequent barrier mentioned (16 respondents) was the difficulty of the documentation process for LEED certification. The second most frequently mentioned barrier (13 respondents) was the cost associated with certification, including direct certification fees, and the costs of green building practices and/or design.  The third and fourth most frequently mentioned barriers were lack of project team education concerning the certification process and lack of communication and/or misunderstanding with USGBC (7 and 6 respondents respectively).  Table 4 shows the barriers mentioned in this open ended question and the frequency that they were mentioned.

The other two open ended questions asked respondents to identify external (“outside of your company”) and internal (“within your company”) barriers that made the certification process difficult.  The external barrier that was mentioned the most (15 respondents) was a lack of awareness, education, or experience on the part of project personnel including contractors, owners, architects, engineers, subcontractors, and/or material suppliers.  Two additional external barriers that were mentioned were the difficulty of documentation (9 respondents) and lack of commitment or buy-in from the project team (8 respondents).  The internal barriers did not seem to be as much of an issue with 18 respondents choosing not to answer this question or stating “none” as the response.  There were, however, a couple of internal barriers that were mentioned often enough to be noted.  These barriers were cost (9 respondents), and education of company personnel/learning curve because these were some of the first LEED projects (8 respondents). 

Table 4

Barriers to Certification Mentioned in the Open Ended Question

An open-ended question that asked respondents how the LEED certification process could be improved yielded one common suggestion.  Sixteen respondents suggested that the USGBC improve the documentation process. Another suggestion (8 respondents) was to improve communication between the USGBC and project team.

Research Question Three

For this portion of the analysis, the certified group (CG) and the non-certified (NCG) group were compared on several variables.    There were no differences apparent for any of the ranked reasons for working toward certification.  The second comparison was made concerning the ranked barriers to certification.  For barriers the NCG ranked all but one of the barriers higher than the CG.  The two that were ranked considerably higher were the barriers that the owner would be unable to recover up front costs and the direct cost of certification.  The results of this comparison of ranked barriers can be seen in Table 5.

The open-ended questions compared by group, gave some additional insight into research question three.  For the question concerning reasons for working toward certification, it was found that 45% of the respondents in the CG stated that certification was owner driven.  No respondents in the NCG stated this as a reason. 

Table 5

Ranked Barriers Compared by Groups

For the question that asked respondents to state “the most challenging difficulty or barrier encountered as part of the LEED certification process”, a higher percentage of the NCG mentioned costs associated with LEED requirements and green building practices as a barrier.  For the question concerning external barriers, a higher percentage of the CG mentioned a lack of awareness, education, or experience as a barrier.  No differences were found concerning internal barriers. 

For the question concerning suggestions for improvement, a higher percentage of the NCG suggested a specific change to a LEED credit or the certification process.  Additionally, a higher percentage of the CG suggested improving communication with the USGBC.  No other significant differences were found concerning suggestions for improvement. 

Discussion

Based upon the responses from the two survey questions concerning reasons for LEED certification, the idea of being good environmental stewards is an overriding theme.  For both of these survey questions, environmental stewardship was the highest ranked and most mentioned reason for working toward LEED certification.  The next highest ranked reason, “to keep green building a project priority”, and the second most often mentioned reason, that the owner required LEED certification, are certainly consistent with this notion.  It seems reasonable to believe that the reasons of “owner required” and “to keep green building a project priority” may be linked; LEED certification may be required by the owner to keep green building a project priority.  It may also be the case that an owner required LEED certification to keep green building a project priority because the owner desired to be a good environmental steward.

For the research question concerning barriers to LEED, there were several common barriers that tied the five survey questions together.  One of these barriers was the idea that the documentation portion of the certification process was problematic.  Some cited the cost associated with documentation as a problem.  Others mentioned the difficulty of getting the needed documentation from project team members, another mentioned the difficulty associated with the standard forms provided by the USGBC. At any rate, the documentation process was consistently listed as an important barrier. 

Another common barrier was the general lack of education concerning the LEED certification process.  A suggestion was made that a contractor’s guide to LEED be published.  Another respondent suggested that several case studies be documented outlining the LEED certification process for others to follow.  It should be noted that because this research project collected information from early LEED projects, little education or previous experience would have been gained prior to these projects.  This barrier may gradually be eliminated as more publications are available and more building professionals become educated about and experienced with the certification process.

Three additional barriers identified were cost, communication, and project team buy-in/commitment.  There are many costs associated with LEED certification. Some costs mentioned as barriers were: the cost of registration/certification fees paid to the USGBC, the costs of managing and employing green building practices, and the cost of document collection.  The communication barrier involved the communication difficulties that respondents had with the USGBC.  The barrier concerning the lack of project team buy-in/commitment revealed itself in active and passive resistance to green concepts.  Many respondents also mentioned that it was often difficult to collect the required documents from the project team.  This could potentially be interpreted as a lack of cooperation because of a lack of buy-in.

As mentioned earlier, one of the greatest barriers to LEED certification centers around the problems associated with the documentation process.  It was also mentioned earlier that 27 of the 43 respondents were responsible for LEED documentation and 14 participated in LEED documentation.  It is possible that since many of the respondents were heavily involved in documentation, they rated documentation as a major barrier.

The group comparison yielded several interesting results.  It is interesting to note that the non-certified group ranked all but one of the barriers given in the Likert scale question higher than the certified group.   It seems reasonable that project personnel would rate barriers higher if these barriers actually prevented them from achieving certification.  It is also interesting that the two barriers that ranked the highest in comparison were both associated with cost.  The open-ended question concerning barriers also yielded a higher percentage of NCG members mentioning cost associated with certification as a barrier.  This seems to indicate that cost was a bigger issue for those projects that did not certify, and were not planning to. 

Another interesting difference between the groups was the fact that 45% of the CG stated as a reason for certification that LEED certification was owner-driven.  None of the NCG mentioned this as a reason for certification, even though 75% of the NCG projects had owners that initiated the idea to become LEED registered and certified.  Seventy percent of the CG projects stated that the owner initiated the idea to become LEED registered and certified.  From the open-ended questions, it was also found that the CG group in comparison seemed to be more interested in improving the education and communication pertaining to the certification process.

The top two highest ranked reasons for working toward LEED certification were “environmental stewardship” and “to keep green building a project priority”.  These results, along with the growing number of LEED registered projects, are indicators to the researchers that many in the building industry are trying to make a difference in the way that projects are built in an attempt to lessen impacts that buildings have on the environment.  It is also evidence that many building professionals and owners believe that the LEED rating system is a good way to validate the achievement of building green. In spite of this evidence, it is interesting that as of October 2005, of the approximately 2200 registered projects, less than 300 had been certified.  Certainly there will be a lag in the numbers because of the time necessary to construct and certify projects, but there appears to be some significant barriers for projects to become certified.  As identified in this research, the significant barriers for the surveyed projects were related to documentation, cost, and communication with the USGBC.  These barriers along with other perceived problems have caused some to question the validity of the LEED rating system (Schendler & Udall, 2005).  In response to these criticisms, some professionals have stated the fact the LEED is still in its infancy and will continue to mature ( Brown, 2005).    The researchers believe that it is important to continue to research and improve the certification process to ensure that the process itself is not hindering the overriding goal of building green. In fact, in the recent version of LEED (2.2), released in November 2005, the USGBC stated ease of documentation and ease of communication as two major goals of the system changes (Aragon, Diianni, Gottfried, Hicks, 2005).

This exploratory research produced several interesting results concerning each of the three research questions. The most compelling reasons listed for working toward LEED certification were; environmental stewardship, to keep green building a project priority, and owner required/driven.

The most significant barriers to LEED certification listed were: problems with LEED documentation, a lack of education or experience with or about LEED certification, costs associated with LEED certification and green building, communication barriers with the USGBC, and a lack of project team buy-in.

The major differences between the certified projects and those that no longer have certification as a goal were found in the fact that the non-certified group ranked all of the barriers higher than the certified group.  The barriers ranked significantly higher by the NCG were those barriers associated with costs.  Additionally, many of the CG stated “owner driven” as a reason for certification while none of the NCG stated this as a reason (stated in the open-ended question).

References

Aragon, P., Diianni, I., Gottfried, D., Hicks, T. (2005). LEED:  Streamlined, refined, and ready to go.  Proceedings of GreenBuild 2005, Atlanta, GA. U.S. Green Building Council.

Barnett, D. L., & Browning, W. D. (1995). A Primer on Sustainable Building. Snowmass CO: Rocky Mountain Institute.

Brown, S.  October, 2005.  Constructive criticism.  Grist Magazine.  http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2005/10/26/leed/#null

Lovins, A. B., & Browning, W. D. (1992). Negawatts for Buildings. Urban Land.

Rocky Mountain Institute.. Green Development: Why Build Green. Retrieved November 2, 2002, from http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid174.php

Romm, J. J., & Browning, W. D. (1994, December). Greening the building and the bottom line: increasing productivity through energy efficient design. Retrieved October 24, 2002, from http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid174.php

Roodman, D. M., & Lenssen, N. (1995). A Building Revolution: how ecology and health concerns are transforming construction, worldwatch paper 124 [Brochure]. Washington D.C.: Worldwatch Institute.

Schendler, A. & Udall, R.  October, 2005.  LEED is broken; Let’s fix it.  Grist Magazine.  http://www.grist.org/comments/soapbox/2005/10/26/leed/index1.html

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1998). Characterization for Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States (EPA No. 530R98010).

U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.. March 2001 Monthly Energy Review [Brochure].

US Green Building Council. (2000). LEED Reference Guide Version 2.0. Washington D.C.: U. S. Green Building Council.