Challenges ahead: Making the UN's Building Breakthrough a reality
Usha Iyer-Raniga (RMIT University) explains why a systemic and systematic approach is urgently needed to put the built environment on the right path to decarbonization, whilst recognizing countries are at different levels of progress. The UN’s Building Breakthrough agenda for a whole life cycle approach to the built environment and decarbonization is a game changer. This can place buildings and construction in a critical pathway towards decarbonisation and align with the long-term impact of decisions made today.
The planetary crisis trifecta facing humanity today are pollution, loss of biodiversity and a rapidly changing climate, mainly caused by increasing resource consumption (UNEP 2024a). Calls for decarbonisation and associated action is needed NOW, more than ever, to ensure well-being, minimize impact and promote net nature-positive outcomes. The UNEP report states it is possible to reduce resource use while growing economies, reducing inequality, improve well-being, and reducing environmental impacts. However, bold action is needed to phase out unsustainable activities, catalyse responsible and innovative opportunities while promoting social acceptance.
In 2020,
55% of all global material demand was associated with the built environment and
mobility. In 2022, buildings were responsible for global energy demand of
approximately 34% and 37% of energy and process related CO2 emissions (UNEP
2024b). Most of this is demand is from high income countries and is not slowing
down.
Material use has grown by an average of 2.3% per year and increased by a factor of 3 over the past 50 years. If not checked, material resource extraction could further increase by almost 60% from 2020 levels by 2060 (UNEP 2024a).
Globally, a collaborative effort is required to quickly decarbonise, which involves sustainability and circularity. The pressure on emerging economies where rapid infrastructure construction and important amenities such as housing need to be delivered quickly offers an opportunity, but policies for sustainable buildings and construction are still evolving. The EU’s Energy Performance Buildings Directive (EPBD 2024) requires member states to have emission reductions targets for buildings which include plans to phase out fossil fuel-based appliances in buildings, building renovation passports and renewable energy generated onsite.
All over the world nations are acting, though countries are at different levels of progress. For instance, India and Indonesia are setting up new stringent standards, recognizing the importance of the built environment to decarbonise society (Raina 2023) and so are only at the start of their journey to decarbonisation (DEA 2022), with road maps to focus on liveable cities and eventually smart cities by 2045 (DEA 2022).
Under the Paris Agreement, countries are expected to commit to Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) every five years. As of December 2023, 194 countries and the EU have submitted NDCs and 48 countries have updated or reaffirmed this commitment. Only 11 countries have however, considered buildings and the built environment as part of these updates (UNEP 2024b). Likewise, climate action roadmaps for buildings and construction do not exist with 161 nations still having to make a commitment to develop one. It is reasonable that nations should be at different levels of readiness, however when taken as a whole, the Global Buildings Climate Tracker (GBCT) (Kockat et a.l 2020) has shown that the global buildings and construction sector is not on track to realise whole-life carbon net zero new buildings by 2030 and an operational net zero building stock by 2050.
To support international action on reducing the impact of the built environment, Buildings Breakthrough (BT), part of the Breakthrough Agenda was established, which sets a framework for all parts of society to strengthen their actions in key emitting sectors including the built environment, launched at COP28 in 2023. This year (2024) as part of BT, 10 Whole Life cycle (10WLC) recommendations have been launched, driven by the Materials Hub of the GlobalABC (GlobalABC et al. 2024). The framework was developed with input from over 100 academic, policy and industry professionals from over 42 countries in a consensus-based exercise. The ten recommendations are:
1. Definition of near zero emissions
and resilient buildings
Clarity and consistency in definitions are needed so stakeholders are
clear on the terms being used. Terms such as whole life carbon, net zero, near
zero and such others are not always clear across the different stakeholders of
the buildings and construction industry.
2. Alignment of whole life carbon standards
Standards, certification and attendant tools and methodologies underpinning
the actions to drive circularity in the built environment need to be clear,
transparent and consistent.
3. Accessible and high-quality data
Evidence-based data needs to drive and support decision making across
all stakeholders in the building and construction industry.
4. Benchmarks for building emissions
A ‘cut and paste’ approach does not work for the industry. Context-based
or place-based approaches, combined with monitoring and evaluation to close
feedback loops enables a diversity of approaches to be used and supports effective
decision-making. Voluntary measures may be used to engage the industry to
embrace change before increasing stringency or changing to mandated legislative
or regulatory options.
5. Interoperable product standards
Putting such standards in place supports accounting for the environmental impacts of materials and
products. The use of consistent metrics across all markets ensures decision-making
is based on performance, rather than intent.
6. Common language and diverse context
The use of a common language in diverse contexts enables a consistent
and coordinated approach to support all actions to decarbonise buildings.
7. Drive investment
Driving investment to near zero sets the framework to support market
demand with procurement policies. Financing near zero supports greater
investment, promotes international cooperation, and with appropriate tracking
tools for monitoring and evaluation, formal and informal construction (an issue
in developing countries) are also provided with the right feedback loops to
continuously reduce environmental footprint arising from construction
activities.
8. Prioritise retrofitting
Valuing the extension of the life of the existing building stock and
building retrofits is needed to serve changing needs of space function whilst
improving efficiency and reducing life cycle emissions.
9. Material circularity
Focusing on material circularity through sustainable circular building
materials, components, products, and appliances when constructing, dismantling,
renovating or refurbishing buildings linked with data, procurement, policy
tools and market instruments are needed.
10. Design for circularity
This approach promotes long service life of new buildings and sets the
tone for building circularity and reducing resource use across the whole life
cycle. New buildings should become the material banks of the future backed by
robust and transparent data sets to support decision making.
Putting these recommendations into practice presents a challenge, but also an opportunity. ISO Standards released in 2024 (ISO 59004:2024 on vocabulary, principles and guidelines for implementation; ISO 59010:2024 on guidance on the transition of business models and value networks and 59020:2024 measuring and assessing circularity performance) present a level playing field for the industry. It also supports the industry to engage in establishing high quality data using life cycle approaches through the value chain of the industry, whilst ensuring transparency to support decision making.
Financing mechanisms in emerging markets will provide the impetus to change the industry and the market to consider new ways across the whole life cycle associated with the planning, design, construction, operation and deconstruction of the built environment. Going forward, it is critical to assure the sustainability and circularity of new building stock where building life can always be extended, lean design is the norm, lightweight buildings are designed and built, building materials include recycled content, and bio-based materials such as timber are used. Retrofitting of existing building stock retains value of the space and materials, and it also needs to respond to energy efficiency requirements. Buildings need to be used more intensively, and we need to use urban mining as material banks for future design and construction.
This pathway needs to be strategically planned as, presently, the building and construction industry is too fragmented. The fragmentation needs alignment; vertical integration at local, national, regional, and global levels supported by robust policy, legislative and regulatory frameworks across nations. In addition, new ways of thinking and operating the built environment is needed, so reskilling, retraining, and new educational programs need to be developed for all the disciplines associated with the built environment. The 10 WLC arising from the buildings BT presents an opportunity to not just place the importance of buildings and construction in a critical pathway towards decarbonisation but also to align with the long-term impact of decisions made today.
DEA (2022). Roadmap for an energy efficient, low-carbon buildings and construction sector in Indonesia. Danish Energy Agency. https://globalabc.org/sites/default/files/2022-08/Roadmap%20for%20an%20Energy%20Efficient%2C%20Low-Carbon%20Buildings%20and%20Construction%20Sector%20in%20Indonesia.pdf
EPBD. (2024). Energy Performance of Buildings Directive. https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-buildings/energy-performance-buildings-directive_en
GlobalABC, Whole Llife Cycle Policy Coalition for the built environment [WLCP.Co], RMIT University, Ministry of Environment Finland, Life Cycle Initiative, One Planet Network. (2024). 10 whole life cycle recommendations for the buildings breakthrough. https://globalabc.org/news/10-whole-life-cycle-recommendations-buildings-breakthrough
Kockat, J., Zuhaib, S. & Rapf, O. (2020). A methodology for tracking decarbonisation action and impact of the buildings and construction sector globally. Buildings Performance Institute Europe. https://www.bpie.eu/publication/a-methodology-for-tracking-decarbonisation-action-and-impact-of-the-buildings-and-construction-sector-globally-developing-the-globalabc-building-climate-tracker/
Raina, Gurvinder Pal Singh (2023).Decarbonising the built environment in India: addressing operational and embodied carbon. RICS Policy paper. https://www.rics.org/content/dam/ricsglobal/documents/reports/rics-cop28-policy-paper-india.pdf
UNEP (2024a).: Bend the trend: pathways to a liveable planet as resource use spikes. United Nations Environment Programme, International Resources Panel. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/44902
UNEP (2024b). Beyond foundations: mainstreaming sustainable solutions to cut emissions from the buildings sector. United Nations Environment Programme. https://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/45095
Spatiotemporal evaluation of embodied carbon in urban residential development
I Talvitie, A Amiri & S Junnila
Energy sufficiency in buildings and cities: current research, future directions [editorial]
M Sahakian, T Fawcett & S Darby
Sufficiency, consumption patterns and limits: a survey of French households
J Bouillet & C Grandclément
Health inequalities and indoor environments: research challenges and priorities [editorial]
M Ucci & A Mavrogianni
Operationalising energy sufficiency for low-carbon built environments in urbanising India
A B Lall & G Sethi
Promoting practices of sufficiency: reprogramming resource-intensive material arrangements
T H Christensen, L K Aagaard, A K Juvik, C Samson & K Gram-Hanssen
Culture change in the UK construction industry: an anthropological perspective
I Tellam
Are people willing to share living space? Household preferences in Finland
E Ruokamo, E Kylkilahti, M Lettenmeier & A Toppinen
Towards urban LCA: examining densification alternatives for a residential neighbourhood
M Moisio, E Salmio, T Kaasalainen, S Huuhka, A Räsänen, J Lahdensivu, M Leppänen & P Kuula
A population-level framework to estimate unequal exposure to indoor heat and air pollution
R Cole, C H Simpson, L Ferguson, P Symonds, J Taylor, C Heaviside, P Murage, H L Macintyre, S Hajat, A Mavrogianni & M Davies
Finnish glazed balconies: residents’ experience, wellbeing and use
L Jegard, R Castaño-Rosa, S Kilpeläinen & S Pelsmakers
Modelling Nigerian residential dwellings: bottom-up approach and scenario analysis
C C Nwagwu, S Akin & E G Hertwich
Mapping municipal land policies: applications of flexible zoning for densification
V Götze, J-D Gerber & M Jehling
Energy sufficiency and recognition justice: a study of household consumption
A Guilbert
Linking housing, socio-demographic, environmental and mental health data at scale
P Symonds, C H Simpson, G Petrou, L Ferguson, A Mavrogianni & M Davies
Measuring health inequities due to housing characteristics
K Govertsen & M Kane
Provide or prevent? Exploring sufficiency imaginaries within Danish systems of provision
L K Aagaard & T H Christensen
Imagining sufficiency through collective changes as satisfiers
O Moynat & M Sahakian
US urban land-use reform: a strategy for energy sufficiency
Z M Subin, J Lombardi, R Muralidharan, J Korn, J Malik, T Pullen, M Wei & T Hong
Mapping supply chains for energy retrofit
F Wade & Y Han
Operationalising building-related energy sufficiency measures in SMEs
I Fouiteh, J D Cabrera Santelices, A Susini & M K Patel
Promoting neighbourhood sharing: infrastructures of convenience and community
A Huber, H Heinrichs & M Jaeger-Erben
New insights into thermal comfort sufficiency in dwellings
G van Moeseke, D de Grave, A Anciaux, J Sobczak & G Wallenborn
‘Rightsize’: a housing design game for spatial and energy sufficiency
P Graham, P Nourian, E Warwick & M Gath-Morad
Implementing housing policies for a sufficient lifestyle
M Bagheri, L Roth, L Siebke, C Rohde & H-J Linke
The jobs of climate adaptation
T Denham, L Rickards & O Ajulo
Structural barriers to sufficiency: the contribution of research on elites
M Koch, K Emilsson, J Lee & H Johansson
Life-cycle GHG emissions of standard houses in Thailand
B Viriyaroj, M Kuittinen & S H Gheewala
IAQ and environmental health literacy: lived experiences of vulnerable people
C Smith, A Drinkwater, M Modlich, D van der Horst & R Doherty
Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU
M Lehner, J L Richter, H Kreinin, P Mamut, E Vadovics, J Henman, O Mont & D Fuchs
Disrupting the imaginaries of urban action to deliver just adaptation [editorial]
V Castán-Broto, M Olazabal & G Ziervogel
Building energy use in COVID-19 lockdowns: did much change?
F Hollick, D Humphrey, T Oreszczyn, C Elwell & G Huebner
Evaluating past and future building operational emissions: improved method
S Huuhka, M Moisio & M Arnould
Normative future visioning: a critical pedagogy for transformative adaptation
T Comelli, M Pelling, M Hope, J Ensor, M E Filippi, E Y Menteşe & J McCloskey
Nature for resilience reconfigured: global- to-local translation of frames in Africa
K Rochell, H Bulkeley & H Runhaar
How hegemonic discourses of sustainability influence urban climate action
V Castán Broto, L Westman & P Huang
Fabric first: is it still the right approach?
N Eyre, T Fawcett, M Topouzi, G Killip, T Oreszczyn, K Jenkinson & J Rosenow
Social value of the built environment [editorial]
F Samuel & K Watson
Understanding demolition [editorial]
S Huuhka
Data politics in the built environment [editorial]
A Karvonen & T Hargreaves
Latest Commentaries
Systems Thinking is Needed to Achieve Sustainable Cities
As city populations grow, a critical current and future challenge for urban researchers is to provide compelling evidence of the medium and long-term co-benefits of quality, low-carbon affordable housing and compact urban design. Philippa Howden-Chapman (University of Otago) and Ralph Chapman (Victoria University of Wellington) explain why systems-based, transition-oriented research on housing and associated systemic benefits is needed now more than ever.
Unmaking Cities Can Catalyse Sustainable Transformations
Andrew Karvonen (Lund University) explains why innovation has limitations for achieving systemic change. What is also needed is a process of unmaking (i.e. phasing out existing harmful technologies, processes and practices) whilst ensuring inequalities, vulnerabilities and economic hazards are avoided. Researchers have an important role to identify what needs dismantling, identify advantageous and negative impacts and work with stakeholders and local governments.