A framework for 1.5°c-aligned GHG budgets in architecture

Betti, G (2025) A framework for 1.5°c-aligned GHG budgets in architecture. Buildings & Cities, 6(1), pp. 996-1009. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

A methodological framework is presented for integrating 1.5°C-aligned greenhouse gas (GHG) budgets into architectural practice. Responding to the urgent need to decarbonise the built environment, this practice-oriented approach is based on the Carbon Risk Real Estate Monitor (CRREM) and the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi). The framework enables GHG budgets to be set early, requiring only a functional brief and target completion year as inputs. It establishes absolute GHG budgets per m2 and completion year for eight core building usage categories, allowing the early integration of climate targets in design processes. Mixed-use buildings are addressed through the area-weighted allocation of usage-specific budgets. Although developed for the European context, the framework can be adapted to other countries. The proposed 1.5°C-reduction pathways are compared with national frameworks such as France's RE 2020 and Denmark's BR 18, as well as with 20 recent mixed-use projects from a large German architectural practice. Achieving 1.5°C alignment will require halving GHG budgets roughly every seven years, highlighting the need for transformative change in architectural design and construction. Limitations include the use of global embodied carbon benchmarks and the assumption of functional stability over a 50-year reference study period.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: architectural practice; building projects; carbon budgets; climate targets; climate-aligned design; embodied carbon; life-cycle assessment; operational carbon; science-based targets
Index terms: mixed-use project, architectural practice, science, Denmark, France, integration, architectural design, design process, built environment, real estate, stability, operational carbon, greenhouse gas, embodied carbon
Subjects: climate science, business, infrastructure and transport systems, structural engineering, construction type, environmental impact, real estate economics, design methods, organizational analysis, specialized education, design practice, Geography
Topics: Urban Studies, Education, Geographical Context, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Sustainability
Descriptive scope: 2 PC

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here