Leiringer, R; Gottlieb, S C; Fang, Y and Mo, X (2022) In search of sustainable construction: The role of building environmental assessment methods as policies enforcing green building. Construction Management and Economics, 40(2), pp. 104-122. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Over the past 20 years, building environmental assessment methods (BEAMs) have been promoted as a means to achieve more sustainable and environmentally friendly (green) buildings, as well as more sustainable practices in the building process at large. These schemes have come to be considered as effective mechanisms to transform building markets and are seen to play a significant role in the mainstreaming of green building practices. In many countries, BEAMs are now used as policy instruments and are increasingly being mandated across a variety of public, but also private, sector projects. In this paper, we examine BEAMs as policy instruments and explore their potential to affect change in construction. Drawing on the theory of strategic action fields, and using the case of HK-BEAM, we discuss the origins, development and application of BEAMs and the limited impact that their mandate has on construction practice. The paper concludes with reflections on the need to further our understanding of how the construction sector works and who has the power, and the will, to make changes in construction practice happen.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building environmental assessment methods; construction reform; industry self-regulation; policy instruments; sustainable construction |
| Index terms: | reflection, beam, markets, sustainable practice, environmentally friendly, building environmental assessment, self-regulation, green building, policy instrument, construction sector, building process, sustainable construction, mandate, mainstreaming, drawing, construction reform |
| Subjects: | political science, behavioral psychology, industry analysis, sustainable practices, building construction, sustainable construction, professional development, sustainable design, structural engineering, sustainability assessment, design practice, economic analysis, technical documentation, policy studies, business |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Site Management, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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