Akteursanalyse zur Entwicklung eines nachhaltigen Baustandards

Transcription

1 Akteursanalyse zur Entwicklung eines nachhaltigen Baustandards Dr. Ralf Resch (MBA) Nachhaltigkeitsberatung Mühlenbachstr Neuss Tel.: (02131) Oktober 2011

2

3 Abstract XI Abstract The network for sustainable building (Netzwerk Nachhaltiges Bauen) based in Verden (Germany) establishes the North German Centre for sustainable building (Norddeutsches Zentrum für nachhaltiges Bauen) in Verden. This centre will form the prerequisite and infrastructure to act as a certification institution for a sustainable building standard. This study serves to give an overview about existing sustainable building standards or labels, to identify stakeholders with a supraregional scope interested in such a standard in particular for single-family houses, to analyse the stakeholder map regarding influence and interest and to develop a stakeholder combination and an optimal strategic approach suitable for this project. There is no shortage in standards and labels for sustainable building. Regarding the criteria applied, a grouping can be made as follows: Focus on energy consumption during the usage phase of the buildings: Passivhaus, KfW- Effizienzhaus, RAL Gütezeichen 965, EnEV (all DE) Broad set of ecological criteria: naturereplus (DE/Europe), IBO (A), VDI-ZRE (DE) Broad set of ecological, economic and social criteria: DGNB (DE), LEED (US), BREEAM (UK) Assessment of the sustainability performance of the manufacturer/company: GRI (international), EMAS (Europe), SD-KPIs (DE) In view of the large number of existing standards and labels it seems not very promising to create a new standard by the network. If, like so far, a pure ecological focus is pursued, the acceptance of natureplus and/or IBO-Gütezeichen is recommended. For a broader set of sustainability criteria DGNB forms the de facto standard in Germany. The network should engage in it especially for office and commercial building projects. In any case, creating or demanding Environmental Product Declarations for the used components makes sense, as these EPDs are prerequisite to be awarded with the CE label (cf. EU regulation 305). The main ecological criteria to be accounted for, resulting from their frequency and relevance in existing standards and from the survey among representatives of the stakeholder groups. are: 1) Energy consumption during utilisation 2) Usage of renewable energies during utilisation 3) Carbon footprint during utilisation resulting from 1) und 2) 4) Usage of hazard-free, non-toxic and low emission construction materials

4 Ralf Resch XII 5) Consumption of primary energy and of greenhouse gas emissions during manufacturing of the materials and construction of the building 6) High percentage of materials from renewable sources Additional ecological criteria are of lower importance, in particular as the stakeholder survey showed a preference for a few core criteria. Various LCA databases exist, of general nature like Ecoinvent (CH) and GEMIS (DE) as well as focussed on the building materials like Ökobau.dat (DE), IBO (A) and ZRE (DE). A closer look at LCA methods and data sources is recommended to the network, e.g. through cooperation with scientific institutes. The economic criteria of lifecycle cost as well as stability of value have a high importance for clients/owners and for banks. Certain sociocultural factors like thermal comfort and quality of ambient air can be positively influenced by the above mentioned ecological criteria. The interests of the various stakeholder groups (clients/owners, banks, experts from the building sector, media and public or political bodies) were analysed with a web based survey among selected representatives. A solid majority of 85% considers an ecological building standard as important or very important and wants to use it primarily to obtain or grant favourable loan conditions (75%) as well as a primary decision criterion for a building project (58%). Regarding certification, a slight majority (58%) voted for several regional institutions vs. a central one. The selection and preference of criteria has been explained above. A sound majority of 83% likes to know the detailed results, not only a summary score. The analysis of the stakeholder situation showed that an expansion of the networks sphere of influence is needed. To this end, the following measures are proposed: Certification of the network members according to recognised sustainability and quality standards (ISO, CE, EMAS) to increase its legitimacy Become a certification body for existing standards and support existing labels, in particular Passivhaus, natureplus, IBO and DGNB, also to increase legitimacy Propagation of key figures and efficiency ratios to foster a fact based discussion on ecological and sustainable aspects and to support key figures of possible partners (e.g. national goals for sustainable development) Creation and propagation of sustainable innovations to lead the discussion on certain aspects of sustainability (e.g. usage of material from renewable sources like straw as construction material) and to acquire like-minded partners The selection and targeted approach of suitable partners serves to further increase the networks legitimacy and sphere of influence. To this end, it is suggested to win at least one part-

5 Abstract XIII ner in each stakeholder group and to form a cooperation considering the interests and targets of the respective partners: Professional associations: cooperation with VDI-ZRE, which has similar viewpoints and is open for such a cooperation Various networks for ecological building: search for partners to complement the own competencies (exchange of know-how, organisation of professional trainings etc.) Banks: approach banks with sustainability criteria, in particular Umweltbank, offer joint actions and promos Social Media: own presence and membership in relevant groups in order to find likeminded people and to inform potential clients Media: approach media with sustainability focus, e.g. Ökotest, publish successful own projects/case studies Other standards/labels: partnership with natureplus and/or IBO, DGNB membership Science, education: partnership with selected universities and research institutes, offer for joint actions to regional schools For these measures, a dedicated marketing/partner management role/job should be created within the network. For some of the proposed measures public funding from various regional, national and European programmes like e.g. CIP Ecoinnovation, GreenConServe and Regional Competitiveness is available. It is recommended to contact funding specialists so find the most suitable programme(s). Bei Interesse am Gesamttext dieser Studie wenden Sie sich bitte an Andreas Schmitt- Sattelberg (Andreas.Schmitt-Sattelberg@inkubator.leuphana.de).