BREEAM’s Evolution and Impact: A Critical Analysis of its Role in Shaping Sustainable Built Environments

Abstract

BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) has played a pivotal role in driving sustainability within the built environment since its inception in 1990. This research report delves into the complexities of BREEAM, extending beyond a basic overview of its schemes, assessment processes, and comparative analyses with other certification systems. It explores the evolution of BREEAM from a relatively simple checklist to a more sophisticated, performance-based framework. It critically examines the inherent strengths and weaknesses of BREEAM, considering aspects such as its adaptability to diverse contexts, the influence of its weighting systems on design decisions, and the ongoing debate surrounding its true impact on building performance and environmental outcomes. Furthermore, the report assesses the influence of BREEAM on policy-making and market transformation, analyzing its impact on fostering innovation in sustainable building practices. It addresses the challenges of verifying real-world performance against predicted assessments and explores the role of post-occupancy evaluation in bridging the gap between design intent and operational reality. Finally, it considers the future trajectory of BREEAM in a rapidly evolving landscape of environmental challenges and technological advancements, examining its potential to contribute to a truly sustainable and resilient built environment.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

1. Introduction: BREEAM – Genesis and Development

BREEAM, launched in 1990 by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) in the UK, holds the distinction of being the world’s first environmental assessment method for buildings. Its genesis was rooted in a growing awareness of the environmental impact of the construction industry and a need for a structured approach to evaluate and improve building sustainability. Initially conceived as a simple checklist, BREEAM aimed to provide a framework for designers and developers to consider environmental factors throughout the building lifecycle, from design and construction to operation and demolition (BRE, 2023). The early versions of BREEAM focused primarily on energy efficiency and resource use but gradually expanded to encompass a wider range of environmental and social considerations, including water efficiency, indoor environmental quality, waste management, and ecological impact. This evolution reflects a deepening understanding of the multifaceted nature of sustainability and the interconnectedness of environmental, social, and economic factors.

The development of BREEAM has been iterative, with regular updates and revisions to incorporate new research, technologies, and best practices. The introduction of different BREEAM schemes, such as BREEAM New Construction, BREEAM Refurbishment & Fit-Out, and BREEAM In-Use, demonstrates its adaptability to diverse building types and project stages. Each scheme is tailored to address the specific challenges and opportunities associated with the project type, ensuring that the assessment is relevant and appropriate (BRE, 2023). This ongoing evolution and diversification have been crucial to BREEAM’s continued relevance and its adoption in over 80 countries worldwide.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

2. BREEAM Schemes: A Taxonomy of Applications

The strength of BREEAM lies in its modular design, facilitating the creation of schemes tailored to specific building types, construction phases, and regional contexts. These schemes are not static; they undergo periodic revisions to reflect advancements in building technology, regulatory updates, and evolving understanding of sustainability principles. A detailed examination of some prominent BREEAM schemes follows:

• BREEAM New Construction (NC): This is arguably the most widely recognized BREEAM scheme. It assesses the environmental performance of new buildings across a range of categories, encompassing energy, water, materials, waste, land use, ecology, pollution, health and wellbeing, and management (BRE, 2018a). The NC scheme is designed to encourage sustainable design practices from the outset of a project, influencing decisions related to site selection, building design, material selection, and construction processes. Its impact is significant in shaping the future of the built environment, encouraging innovation, and establishing benchmarks for sustainable construction.

• BREEAM Refurbishment and Fit-Out (RFO): Recognizing the importance of existing buildings in achieving sustainability goals, the RFO scheme focuses on the environmental performance of refurbishment and fit-out projects. This scheme acknowledges the unique challenges associated with retrofitting existing buildings, such as dealing with existing building fabric, adapting to site constraints, and minimizing disruption to occupants (BRE, 2014). The RFO scheme promotes sustainable renovation practices, encouraging the use of recycled materials, energy-efficient upgrades, and improved indoor environmental quality.

• BREEAM In-Use (IU): This scheme targets the operational performance of existing buildings. Unlike the NC and RFO schemes, which focus on design and construction, the IU scheme assesses the actual environmental impact of a building in operation, considering factors such as energy consumption, water usage, waste management, and occupant satisfaction (BRE, 2020). BREEAM In-Use is particularly valuable for building owners and managers who want to improve the sustainability performance of their existing building portfolio. It provides a framework for identifying areas for improvement and tracking progress over time.

• BREEAM Communities: This scheme takes a broader, more holistic approach to sustainability, assessing the environmental, social, and economic performance of large-scale development projects. It considers factors such as access to public transport, availability of green spaces, community engagement, and economic viability (BRE, 2012). BREEAM Communities aims to create sustainable and thriving communities that minimize environmental impact, promote social equity, and support economic growth. This scheme is a departure from the building-centric focus of other BREEAM schemes, recognizing the importance of integrated planning and design at the community level.

These schemes, while distinct, share a common framework of assessment criteria and a scoring system that rewards sustainable design and operational practices. The adaptability of these schemes has been pivotal to BREEAM’s global appeal, allowing it to be customized to suit local regulations, environmental priorities, and cultural contexts.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

3. The BREEAM Assessment Process: Rigor and Complexity

The BREEAM assessment process is a structured and rigorous procedure designed to ensure consistency and objectivity in the evaluation of building sustainability. The process typically involves the following stages:

• Pre-Assessment: Before embarking on the formal assessment, a pre-assessment is often conducted to identify potential challenges and opportunities, estimate the likely BREEAM rating, and develop a strategy for achieving the desired level of certification. This stage helps the project team to understand the requirements of the BREEAM scheme and to prioritize areas for improvement.

• Design Stage Assessment: This assessment is conducted during the design phase of the project. It involves the submission of design documentation to a licensed BREEAM assessor, who evaluates the proposed design against the BREEAM criteria. The assessor identifies areas where the design meets the BREEAM requirements and areas where improvements are needed. The design stage assessment provides an opportunity to make changes to the design to improve the building’s sustainability performance.

• Post-Construction Assessment: This assessment is conducted after the building has been constructed. It involves a site visit by the BREEAM assessor to verify that the building has been constructed in accordance with the design and that the BREEAM criteria have been met. The assessor also collects evidence to support the assessment, such as photographs, test reports, and commissioning data.

• Certification: Once the post-construction assessment is complete, the assessor submits a report to BRE Global, who reviews the assessment and issues a BREEAM certificate. The certificate confirms the BREEAM rating achieved by the building, ranging from Pass to Outstanding. The certification process provides independent verification of the building’s sustainability performance.

A critical aspect of the BREEAM assessment is the role of the licensed BREEAM assessor. Assessors are independent professionals who have undergone specialized training and are accredited by BRE Global. Their role is to guide the project team through the assessment process, provide expert advice on sustainable design and construction practices, and conduct the formal assessment of the building’s performance. The integrity and competence of BREEAM assessors are crucial to the credibility and reliability of the BREEAM certification process. Concerns have been raised in the past about the potential for conflicts of interest, particularly if assessors are employed by the same company as the developers or contractors. However, BRE Global has implemented measures to mitigate these risks, such as requiring assessors to declare any potential conflicts of interest and conducting regular audits of assessors’ work.

The rigor and complexity of the BREEAM assessment process can be both a strength and a weakness. On the one hand, it ensures that buildings are thoroughly evaluated against a comprehensive set of sustainability criteria. On the other hand, the process can be time-consuming and costly, potentially discouraging smaller developers or those with limited resources from pursuing BREEAM certification. Furthermore, the complexity of the assessment process can make it challenging for project teams to navigate the requirements of the BREEAM scheme and to understand how their design decisions will impact the building’s BREEAM rating.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

4. BREEAM Criteria and Weighting: Shaping Design Decisions

BREEAM assesses buildings across a range of environmental and social categories, each with its own set of credits. The relative importance of each category is reflected in its weighting, which influences the overall BREEAM score. This weighting system is a critical aspect of BREEAM, as it shapes design decisions and incentivizes developers to prioritize certain sustainability strategies over others.

The core categories typically include:

• Energy: Assessing energy efficiency, renewable energy use, and carbon emissions.
• Water: Evaluating water consumption, rainwater harvesting, and water-efficient fixtures.
• Materials: Encouraging the use of sustainable materials with low environmental impact.
• Waste: Promoting waste reduction, recycling, and responsible waste management.
• Land Use and Ecology: Protecting biodiversity and minimizing the impact on the surrounding environment.
• Pollution: Reducing pollution from construction activities and building operations.
• Health and Wellbeing: Improving indoor air quality, thermal comfort, and access to daylight.
• Management: Promoting sustainable management practices throughout the building lifecycle.
• Transport: Encouraging sustainable transportation options, such as cycling and public transport.

The weighting of each category varies depending on the BREEAM scheme and the specific project context. For example, energy efficiency may be given a higher weighting in regions with high energy costs or strict carbon emission targets. Similarly, water efficiency may be prioritized in regions with water scarcity issues. The weighting system is designed to reflect the most pressing environmental challenges in each region and to incentivize developers to address those challenges effectively.

However, the weighting system is not without its critics. Some argue that the weighting system can be arbitrary and may not accurately reflect the relative importance of different sustainability issues. For example, some stakeholders argue that the weighting given to health and wellbeing is insufficient, given the significant impact of indoor environmental quality on occupant health and productivity. Others argue that the weighting system can create perverse incentives, encouraging developers to focus on achieving credits in categories with high weighting, even if those credits have limited environmental impact. Furthermore, the complexity of the weighting system can make it difficult for project teams to understand how their design decisions will impact the building’s overall BREEAM score and to prioritize the most effective sustainability strategies.

The BRE regularly reviews and updates the weighting system to address these concerns and to ensure that it reflects the latest scientific evidence and best practices. However, the weighting system remains a subject of ongoing debate and refinement. The challenge is to strike a balance between providing clear guidance to developers and allowing for flexibility to address the unique sustainability challenges of each project context.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

5. BREEAM vs. Other Sustainability Certifications: A Comparative Analysis

BREEAM is not the only sustainability certification system available. Other prominent systems include LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), WELL Building Standard, and Green Star. Each system has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of certification system often depends on the project context, client preferences, and regulatory requirements.

• BREEAM vs. LEED: LEED, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), is the most widely used green building rating system in the world. While both BREEAM and LEED aim to promote sustainable building practices, they differ in their approach and focus. BREEAM is generally considered to be more flexible and adaptable to different project contexts, while LEED is more prescriptive and emphasizes innovation. BREEAM also has a stronger focus on operational performance, while LEED is more focused on design and construction. BREEAM is primarily used in Europe, while LEED is more prevalent in North America and other parts of the world (Fowler & Rauch, 2006).

• BREEAM vs. WELL: WELL Building Standard, developed by the International WELL Building Institute (IWBI), focuses specifically on the health and wellbeing of building occupants. While BREEAM also includes credits related to health and wellbeing, WELL provides a more comprehensive and rigorous framework for assessing and improving indoor environmental quality. WELL addresses aspects such as air quality, water quality, lighting, acoustics, thermal comfort, and access to healthy food. WELL is often used in conjunction with BREEAM or LEED to create buildings that are both environmentally sustainable and health-promoting (IWBI, 2023).

• BREEAM vs. Green Star: Green Star, developed by the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA), is the leading sustainability certification system in Australia. Similar to BREEAM and LEED, Green Star assesses buildings across a range of environmental and social categories. Green Star has a strong focus on addressing the specific environmental challenges of the Australian context, such as water scarcity and bushfire risk. Green Star is also known for its emphasis on innovation and its commitment to promoting sustainable design practices throughout the Australian building industry (GBCA, 2023).

The choice of certification system often depends on the project’s specific goals and priorities. If the primary goal is to reduce environmental impact, BREEAM or LEED may be the most appropriate choice. If the primary goal is to improve occupant health and wellbeing, WELL may be the preferred option. If the project is located in Australia, Green Star may be the most relevant certification system. In some cases, project teams may choose to pursue multiple certifications to demonstrate a commitment to both environmental sustainability and occupant wellbeing. Furthermore, the regional context and recognition of each scheme within that area will impact the decision process. A client may choose to use the certification scheme that will provide the greatest value to that geography.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

6. The Costs and Benefits of BREEAM Certification: A Value Proposition

Pursuing BREEAM certification involves costs, including assessment fees, consultant fees, and potentially increased construction costs due to the implementation of sustainable design strategies. However, BREEAM certification also offers a range of benefits, including reduced operating costs, improved building performance, enhanced market value, and positive public image.

The costs associated with BREEAM certification can vary depending on the size and complexity of the project, the chosen BREEAM scheme, and the level of certification sought. Assessment fees are typically based on the floor area of the building and the complexity of the assessment. Consultant fees can range from a few thousand dollars to tens of thousands of dollars, depending on the scope of work and the expertise of the consultants. Increased construction costs may be incurred due to the use of sustainable materials, energy-efficient equipment, and other green building features. However, these increased costs can often be offset by long-term savings in operating costs.

The benefits of BREEAM certification can be significant. Studies have shown that BREEAM-certified buildings typically have lower energy and water consumption than non-certified buildings, resulting in reduced operating costs. BREEAM certification can also improve building performance, enhancing indoor environmental quality, and creating a more comfortable and productive environment for occupants. BREEAM-certified buildings often command higher rents and sale prices than non-certified buildings, enhancing their market value. Furthermore, BREEAM certification can enhance a company’s reputation and public image, demonstrating a commitment to environmental sustainability.

A critical consideration is the life-cycle cost analysis of BREEAM-certified buildings. While initial investment costs may be higher, the long-term benefits of reduced operating costs, increased asset value, and improved occupant productivity can outweigh the initial costs. However, a robust life-cycle cost analysis is essential to demonstrate the economic viability of BREEAM certification. This analysis should consider factors such as energy and water consumption, maintenance costs, replacement costs, and potential revenue streams from green building features, such as solar panels or rainwater harvesting systems.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

7. BREEAM’s Influence on Policy and Market Transformation

BREEAM has played a significant role in shaping building regulations and promoting sustainable building practices worldwide. Many countries and regions have incorporated BREEAM standards into their building codes or have used BREEAM as a benchmark for developing their own sustainability standards. BREEAM has also influenced the development of green building policies and incentives, such as tax breaks, grants, and density bonuses for BREEAM-certified buildings.

The influence of BREEAM extends beyond the regulatory sphere. BREEAM has also contributed to market transformation by raising awareness of sustainable building practices and creating a demand for green buildings. Developers and building owners are increasingly recognizing the value of BREEAM certification, both in terms of reduced operating costs and enhanced market value. This increased demand for green buildings has driven innovation in sustainable building technologies and materials, creating a virtuous cycle of continuous improvement.

However, the influence of BREEAM is not without its limitations. In some regions, the adoption of BREEAM has been slow due to a lack of awareness, a lack of resources, or resistance from the construction industry. Furthermore, the complexity of the BREEAM assessment process can be a barrier to entry for smaller developers or those with limited resources. The effectiveness of BREEAM in driving market transformation depends on a number of factors, including government support, industry collaboration, and public awareness.

The evolution of BREEAM towards a more performance-based approach is crucial to its continued influence on policy and market transformation. By focusing on actual building performance rather than prescriptive design requirements, BREEAM can provide a more accurate and reliable measure of building sustainability. This shift towards performance-based assessment requires the development of robust monitoring and verification systems, as well as the collection of high-quality data on building performance. The integration of smart building technologies and data analytics can play a key role in facilitating this transition. Furthermore, the development of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) methodologies is essential to bridge the gap between design intent and operational reality, ensuring that buildings are performing as intended and that lessons learned are incorporated into future projects.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

8. Challenges and Criticisms of BREEAM: A Critical Perspective

Despite its success, BREEAM has faced several challenges and criticisms. Some of the common criticisms include:

• Cost and Complexity: The cost and complexity of BREEAM certification can be a barrier to entry for smaller developers or those with limited resources. The assessment process can be time-consuming and requires specialized expertise.

• Prescriptive Nature: While BREEAM has evolved towards a more performance-based approach, it still relies on prescriptive design requirements in some areas. This can stifle innovation and limit the flexibility of designers.

• Weighting System: The weighting system used in BREEAM can be subjective and may not accurately reflect the relative importance of different sustainability issues. This can lead to perverse incentives, encouraging developers to focus on achieving credits in categories with high weighting, even if those credits have limited environmental impact.

• Regional Adaptability: While BREEAM is designed to be adaptable to different regional contexts, some stakeholders argue that it is still too focused on the UK context and that it does not adequately address the specific environmental challenges of other regions.

• Performance Gap: There is a growing concern about the performance gap between predicted building performance and actual building performance. BREEAM certification is based on design predictions, which may not accurately reflect real-world performance. This can lead to buildings that are certified as sustainable but that do not actually achieve the expected energy or water savings.

Addressing these challenges and criticisms is essential to ensuring the continued relevance and effectiveness of BREEAM. This requires a commitment to continuous improvement, ongoing stakeholder engagement, and a willingness to adapt to changing circumstances. The development of more robust monitoring and verification systems, the integration of smart building technologies, and the adoption of POE methodologies are crucial steps in bridging the performance gap and ensuring that BREEAM-certified buildings are truly sustainable.

Furthermore, a critical examination of the weighting system is necessary to ensure that it accurately reflects the relative importance of different sustainability issues and that it does not create perverse incentives. The BRE should consider involving a wider range of stakeholders in the weighting process, including building owners, occupants, and environmental experts. The weighting system should also be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect the latest scientific evidence and best practices.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

9. The Future of BREEAM: Adapting to a Changing World

The future of BREEAM depends on its ability to adapt to a rapidly evolving landscape of environmental challenges and technological advancements. Several key trends are likely to shape the future of BREEAM:

• Increased Focus on Performance: BREEAM is likely to continue its evolution towards a more performance-based approach, focusing on actual building performance rather than prescriptive design requirements. This will require the development of more robust monitoring and verification systems, as well as the integration of smart building technologies and data analytics.

• Integration with Smart Building Technologies: Smart building technologies, such as sensors, data analytics, and building automation systems, are becoming increasingly prevalent. BREEAM is likely to integrate these technologies into its assessment process, using them to monitor building performance, identify areas for improvement, and verify compliance with BREEAM standards.

• Emphasis on Resilience: As climate change impacts become more severe, there will be an increasing emphasis on building resilience. BREEAM is likely to incorporate resilience criteria into its assessment process, encouraging the design and construction of buildings that can withstand extreme weather events, such as floods, droughts, and heatwaves.

• Focus on Circular Economy: The concept of the circular economy is gaining increasing attention. BREEAM is likely to incorporate circular economy principles into its assessment process, encouraging the use of recycled materials, the design for deconstruction, and the development of closed-loop systems for waste management.

• Greater Emphasis on Social Equity: There is a growing recognition of the importance of social equity in sustainability. BREEAM is likely to place a greater emphasis on social equity considerations, such as access to affordable housing, community engagement, and the creation of healthy and inclusive environments.

• Digitalization and Automation: The BREEAM assessment process itself will likely become more digitalized and automated, leveraging technologies such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning (ML) to streamline the assessment process, reduce costs, and improve accuracy.

BREEAM’s success in the future will depend on its ability to embrace these trends and to remain at the forefront of sustainable building practices. This requires a commitment to innovation, collaboration, and continuous improvement. The BRE must work closely with industry stakeholders, government agencies, and research institutions to develop and implement cutting-edge sustainability standards that address the most pressing environmental and social challenges.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

10. Conclusion

BREEAM has played a crucial role in promoting sustainability within the built environment for over three decades. Its evolution from a simple checklist to a sophisticated assessment framework reflects a growing understanding of the complexities of sustainability and the interconnectedness of environmental, social, and economic factors. While BREEAM has faced challenges and criticisms, it remains a leading sustainability certification system, influencing building regulations, driving market transformation, and encouraging innovation in sustainable building practices. The future of BREEAM depends on its ability to adapt to a rapidly evolving landscape of environmental challenges and technological advancements. By embracing a performance-based approach, integrating smart building technologies, emphasizing resilience and circular economy principles, and prioritizing social equity, BREEAM can continue to play a vital role in shaping a truly sustainable and resilient built environment. However, this requires a commitment to continuous improvement, ongoing stakeholder engagement, and a willingness to adapt to changing circumstances. The challenges are significant, but the potential benefits are enormous. The future of our planet depends on our ability to create a built environment that is both environmentally responsible and socially equitable, and BREEAM has a key role to play in achieving that goal.

Many thanks to our sponsor Focus 360 Energy who helped us prepare this research report.

References

BRE. (2012). BREEAM Communities 2012. Building Research Establishment.

BRE. (2014). BREEAM Refurbishment and Fit-Out 2014. Building Research Establishment.

BRE. (2018a). BREEAM New Construction 2018. Building Research Establishment.

BRE. (2020). BREEAM In-Use 2020. Building Research Establishment.

BRE. (2023). BREEAM. Retrieved from https://www.breeam.com/

Fowler, K. M., & Rauch, E. M. (2006). Sustainable building rating systems summary. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

GBCA. (2023). Green Star. Retrieved from https://new.gbca.org.au/green-star/

IWBI. (2023). WELL Building Standard. Retrieved from https://www.wellcertified.com/