Construction costs comparison between green and conventional office buildings

Rehm, M and Ade, R (2013) Construction costs comparison between green and conventional office buildings. Building Research & Information, 41(2), pp. 198-208. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

The actual construction cost of certified green office buildings in New Zealand is compared with conventional buildings. Although a large body of research exists on the financial and environmental benefits of green buildings, there is little evidence on capital cost implications for building green. This study serves as the first empirical study to analyse detailed cost plan data in New Zealand to quantify the impact of green building on construction cost. Data from 17 Green Star NZ v1-certified office buildings were paired with a set of modelled cost estimates derived from the Davis Langdon Blue Book and the Rawlinsons New Zealand Construction Handbook (the authoritative published sources for New Zealand construction cost data). The paired data were analysed across five panels using the non-parametric Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed ranks test. When benchmarked against the modelled costs, green building construction costs were higher on average, but the difference was not statistically significant. This was true across all five panels tested: the entire green building dataset, mid-rise buildings, high-rise buildings, 4 Green Star-rated buildings, and 5 and 6 Green Star-rated buildings. Each panel featured buildings that were above comparative costs as well as several whose actual costs were below modelled estimates.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: capital cost; construction; cost; green building; green star; office buildings; sustainability
Index terms: construction cost, office building, capital cost, New Zealand, actual cost, dataset, high-rise building, estimate, cost estimate, empirical study, green office, green building, evidence
Subjects: accounting and finance, research methods, design practice, Geography, data management, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, financial and cost management
Topics: Digital Applications, Design Practice, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Construction Technology
Descriptive scope: 3 PCA

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