As a direct result of this overuse and dilution, many people still don’t see the true benefits of being more sustainable. The worry is that greenwashing itself offers more benefits for businesses than actually adopting sustainable practices. It could also be argued that most construction professionals simply see it as an extra cost and a hoop jumping exercise, or they just don’t really know how to harness its potential.

So how can we ensure those working at the sharp-end understand not only its importance, but the potential it holds for improving processes and building performance in the long term?

The last Government might not have been the greenest ever as promised, but our industry made significant progress over the last five years to reduce environmental impact across all aspects of our work. Now for continued improvements under the new administration, we need a collaborative effort that involves the Government, construction professionals and users themselves to help the green agenda climb back up the pecking order.

Changing mentalities

We must not kid ourselves; sustainability will never be at the top of many company agendas. Construction is and always will be driven by cost, with individuals and organisations only acting on the measures that are being forced upon. And across the length and breadth of the industry there has been a lack of incentive when it comes to building sustainably.

We must build a link to financial incentives. By offering stamp duty or council tax discounts or exemption – sustainability will soon become a key consideration. Achieving high sustainability standards need not be difficult or expensive but it does require an understanding of the interrelationships between costs, risks and benefits.

With no obvious advantages to inputting sustainability measures, will they be given the attention they deserve?

We must work to change learned behaviour and a deeply ingrained herd mentality. For example, 49% of UK drivers admit to flouting road regulations – with half of those saying they did so deliberately because they thought they could get away with it or did not agree with the laws. And the construction industry is no different. With no clear reward for obeying the ‘rules’, and little punishment for breaking them, we will continue to drive 10mph over the speed limit until we reach a speed camera or hit traffic – because it’s all about getting to where you want to be as quickly as possible.

The UK Green Building Council was pushing for a new code for sustainable buildings that would require existing buildings to undergo an ‘MOT’ to monitor energy performance and environmental impact. In New York City, a similar scheme has been launched that forces owners to comply with strict requirements and make improvements every ten years – dependent on the results.

However, with the Government announcing that it “does not intend to proceed with the zero carbon Allowable Solutions carbon offsetting scheme, or the proposed 2016 increase in on-site energy efficiency standards” – this seriously questioned how we are ever going to reduce the carbon footprint of the UK’s building stock.

Driver for change

Elements of the Code have been incorporated into Building Regulations, which have been retitled as “the new national technical standards” and set at the equivalent of a Code level 4. But instead of encouraging disruptive innovation and a culture of sustainability, we are becoming ever more reliant on Building Regulations to be the main driver for change – which in reality are quite limited.

Building Inspectors are primarily responsible for checking compliance, by relying on a certificate or identifying something so we must consider whether they are technically minded enough, or have the time and expertise, to perform this task. In 2014, the Sustainability Champion was introduced into the UK building level schemes as part of BREEAM’s continuous drive to encourage greater sustainability. If a ‘sustainability champion’ worked closely with the Building Inspector or this was included into domestic builds then surely standards would improve, as they can focus on the key sustainable issues rather than general structural and safety performance.

It’s also hugely important to simplify processes where possible and set targets and standards that customers actually understand. In the building industry, clients, contractors and end users alike will always see the true benefits of sustainability if it is explained to them in a language they understand – how much will it cost, and how much money will it save? It really can be that simple.

A mark of quality

In a bid to address our inefficient housing stock, the BRE recently launched the new Home Quality Mark (HQM), a voluntary scheme for house builders which will ultimately give prospective homeowners a stamp of approval when it comes to choosing a place to set up home.

As a replacement option for the Code for Sustainable Homes, which was generally not understood by people outside the construction industry (and even some within the industry), the HQM is a massive step in the right direction and takes the principles of code further as it will impact and effect homeowners in terms of the value and desirability of properties. It’s also good to see an alternative to other assessment methods, such as BREEAM and LEED developed by the US Green Building Council.

This new stamp of approval has potential to give confidence to people when choosing homes and house builders the differentiation and a step up in the marketplace. Through a simple 1 to 5 star rating, homebuyers will gain a picture on the quality of the property – “Knowledge Sharing, Our Surroundings and My Home” – through an independent assessment from BRE Home Quality Mark Assessors. The backbone to the ‘My Home’ section will be the energy efficiency and thermal comfort of a home.

According to BRE consumer research, 97% of people said they would buy a home that was more energy efficient and sustainable if they had better information. The Home Quality Mark clearly seeks to address this and will provide some indication of the green credentials of a home as well its desirability.

As with any new approval system, there will be sceptics with house builders no doubt thinking it will be another costly exercise but the BRE will need to stress the value that will be added by the HQM. The BRE will also need to promote the HQM and ensure that local authorities, lenders and insurance companies are up to speed and fully understand the new sustainability standard.

Making a difference

In order to achieve true sustainability, business efficiency must be improved at all levels and to do this we have to get the basics right and implement best practice, common sense and innovative, practical working from the ground up. If we make sustainability a core element, more buildings will deliver what they promise.

One way to do this is by keeping the contractor or designer involved after project completion. The Government’s ‘soft landings’ process certainly helped to bridge the performance gap – but this could go a whole lot further. If end users really understood how sustainable buildings work efficiently, they could perform even better.

A more comprehensive approach would include better briefing, realistic performance benchmarking and reality checking of design and procurement decisions to bridge the performance gap. And it would encourage sustainable assessment methods that reward outcomes and not inputs – an approach that has sadly been lacking in the past. Overcomplicated design and build processes means sustainability has been lost in translation. It’s up to us to simplify what ‘sustainability’ actually means to our industry and our customers, if it is to be a real success now and in the future.