Developing World Sustainable Building Practices: A Look at Buildings in Impoverished Locales
Master’s Report
Jesse Steinert
University of Colorado at Boulder Civil, Environmental, Architectural Engineering Department Construction Engineering and Management Advisors: Keith Molenaar Jim Diekmann Bernard Amadei
July 2, 2008
1
Table of Contents 1.0 Summary ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Introduction: Sustainable Construction in Developed vs. Developing Locales........ 4 1.2 Research Question..................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 6 2.0 Background and Point of Departure.............................................................................. 7 2.1 First World Sustainable Construction ....................................................................... 7 2.1.1 Sustainable Building Defined............................................................................. 7 2.1.2 History of Sustainable Building ......................................................................... 8 2.1.3 Sustainable Building Rating Systems ................................................................ 9 2.1.4 Benefits of Sustainable Building...................................................................... 11 2.1.5 Aspects of Sustainable Building (First World) ................................................ 12 2.2 Developing World Sustainable Building ................................................................ 18 2.2.1 Developing World Defined .............................................................................. 18 2.2.2 Sustainable Building Defined (Developing World) ......................................... 19 2.2.3 Developing World Challenges and Issues........................................................ 21 2.3 Point of Departure ................................................................................................... 25 3.0 Research Methodology................................................................................................ 26 4.0 Data Synthesis and Analysis ....................................................................................... 30 4.1 Sustainable Aspects................................................................................................. 30 4.2 Unsustainable Aspects............................................................................................. 32 4.3 Inapplicable Aspects ............................................................................................... 34 5.0 Results and Conclusions ............................................................................................. 35 5.1 Sustainable aspects in the Developing World ......................................................... 35 5.2 Unsustainable aspects in the Developing World..................................................... 37 5.3 Point of Application of Sustainable Ideas ............................................................... 38 5.4 Opportunity for a Developing World Guideline ..................................................... 39 5.5 Research Limitations............................................................................................... 43 5.6 Future Research....................................................................................................... 44 6.0 Bibliography................................................................................................................ 46 7.0 Appendices .................................................................................................................. 48 Appendix 1: Interview Questions.................................................................................. 48 Appendix 2: Interview Notes ........................................................................................ 49 Appendix 3: LEED New Construction V2.2 Check List .............................................. 60
2
List of Tables and Figures Figure 1: Developing Economies Map
19
Table 1: Literature Topics and Authors
26
Table 2: Interview Respondents
28
Table 3: Project Key
31
Table 4: Developing World Sustainable Practices: Moderate to Very High Levels of Sustainability
31
Table 5: Developing World Unsustainable Practices: Low Levels of Sustainability or Inapplicable
33
Table 6: Developing World Inapplicable LEED Credits
34
Table 7: Developing World Guideline: Overarching Principles
41
Table 8: Developing World Guideline: Proof of Concept
42
3
1.0 Summary 1.1 Introduction: Sustainable Construction in Developed vs. Developing Locales Sustainable construction has gained currency in the last decade, particularly in the developed world (White Paper on Sustainability, 2003). Some of the many positive impacts seen from sustainable construction are increasing the efficiency of resource consumption and reducing the impact of buildings on human health and the environment (Office of Federal Environmental Executive, 2003). Other benefits from sustainability include: the extended lifespan of a project, the lifecycle cost savings, and improved indoor environment quality. In the developed world, initiatives have been started to promote sustainable construction, and standards have been created with which to measure sustainability. On the other hand, due to a lack of published research it can be concluded that the developing world has typically not been concerned with being wholly sustainable. Yet, the time is opportune, as the developing world strives to establish itself the possibility exists to improve sustainable construction practices in order to avoid many of the problems experienced in developed countries (Du Plessis, 2007). “The developing world is still largely under construction and every minute means the construction of a building, road or dam that will in all likelihood not be sustainable. The pressures on resources in these countries mean they cannot afford to make mistakes and have to make sure that what is being constructed now will be sustainable (Agenda 21, 2002).” To jumpstart a focus on sustainable construction, a knowledge base about the developing world and sustainable construction practices needs to be generated to aide locals, nongovernment agencies, and non-profit organizations. Several aspects of the sustainable building knowledge base require exploration: the portions of projects in the developing 4
world that are currently sustainable, the areas that need improvement, and the aspects of sustainability as defined by the first world that are inapplicable to the developing world. Each of these aspects will be explored in this research within the context of building construction in the developing world.
1.2 Research Question The primary question studied is: What is the current state of sustainable construction of buildings in the developing world? Several sub-questions are: How are developing world construction practices currently sustainable? How are construction practices unsustainable/what areas need improvement?
1.3 Purpose The purpose of this research is to describe the current practices of sustainable construction of buildings in the developing world. Sustainable construction in the developing world is a field that is intrinsically embedded in many cultures throughout the developing world, but it is not applied to the fullest extent possible. Therefore, there is potential for future improvement, in particular in overall sustainable practices. Establishing a baseline of the current practices is the principal reason for this research, providing a launching point for future building projects. This study is meant to be descriptive of the current state of sustainable construction of buildings in the developing world, particularly on village development and redevelopment projects. It is not intended that this research will improve the practice of sustainable construction in the developing world. Instead, it is hoped that improvement can be accomplished by ongoing and future research.
5
1.4 Conclusions Numerous interviews with construction and design professionals who have worked on developing world projects revealed that certain facets of the projects examined were sustainable, while other aspects were overwhelmingly unsustainable. Sustainable aspects of the project included site selection, community connectivity, the use of waterefficient landscaping, the use of regional materials, and the use of controllable systems for lighting and thermal comfort, and ample daylighting. Each of these aspects of developing world projects were sustainable because they were intrinsically used in the construction methods of each culture. Low budgets, the need to use as few resources as possible, and the use of easily available resources were the most common drivers in decision making on the projects in the developing world. Some aspects of developing world buildings were not sustainable for any project. The unsustainable facets of the projects were construction pollution prevention, reducing the heat island effect, light pollution, minimum energy performance, on-site renewable energy, green power, storage and collection or recyclables, construction waste management, materials reuse, use of recycled content, increased ventilation, and construction indoor air quality management. Another conclusion derived from the interviews was the fact that implementation or thought of sustainable practices during design and preconstruction typically did not occur. By and large, the projects in the developing world only considered sustainable features during the physical construction. Some of the reasons for not considering sustainability during the preconstruction and design phases were: there was no formal design process or drawings on many of the projects, and the inherent use of the sustainable aspects within the cultures.
6
The findings also indicate there is an opportunity to create a sustainable standard or guideline for the developing world (See Developing World Guideline for a proof of concept). The guideline uses a similar format to the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard, but it does not have detailed criteria that would need to be met to achieve the standard. Detailed criteria make a standard less useful in each of the individual developing world contexts. Each culture uses different technologies, methods, and materials, which provide each project different opportunities to achieve better sustainability for each criterion within the guideline.
2.0 Background and Point of Departure 2.1 First World Sustainable Construction 2.1.1 Sustainable Building Defined In recent years, ‘green’ and ‘environmentally friendly’ have become catchphrases throughout the developed world. There has been a movement toward being better stewards of the resources available on earth. A few aspects of the drive toward living greener include: more environmentally friendly cars and buildings, wiser consumption of resources, and recycling of waste, among many others. The manner in which people construct buildings is a large part of being good stewards. The office of the Federal Environmental Executive defines green building as the practice of increasing the efficiency with which buildings and sites use resources, reducing building impacts on human health and the environment, through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and removal - the complete building life cycle (Office of Federal
7
Environmental Executive, 2003). Another definition of sustainable is “that which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (White Paper on Sustainability, 2003).”
2.1.2 History of Sustainable Building In order to provide background for sustainability, the history of sustainable buildings will briefly be examined. According to David Gissen, curator of architecture and design at the National Building Museum, Washington, D.C., green building harkens back more than a century (Gissen, 2003). London’s Crystal Palace (1851) and the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele (1865) in Milan both used passive solar heating systems and under ground air-cooling chambers to moderate the indoor temperature. Buildings such as the New York Flatiron Building (1902) and New York Times Building utilize deep-set windows to shade the sun (1913).
Many buildings dating to the 1920’s initiated
retractable awnings and other window shading devices. In the 1930’s, air conditioning, structural steel and reflective glass made glass and steel high-rise construction possible. High rise construction promoted more dense use of land. Rockefeller Center, constructed in 1932, has operable windows and sky gardens (Gissen, 2003). A large number of buildings of the steel and glass style were constructed after the world wars because of the availability of fossil fuels and relatively cheap cost to build larger buildings. This building style became the symbol for the booming American cities (Gissen, 2003). After the energy crisis in 1973, many people started to consider different options for heating and cooling buildings. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) started the AIA Committee on Energy, which looked at passive systems, as well as technological innovations for materials and equipment. Other people around the world were also
8
looking to build green after the energy crisis. The English architect and designer Norman Foster has used innovative green designs in many of his designs, starting in the 1970’s with grass roofs, daylight atria, and mirrored windows. In 1977, the Department of Energy was created in the US government to address energy usage and conservation (White Paper on Sustainability, 2003). Also, during 1977 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, CO was established to study alternative energy technologies, such as solar panels. Currently, NREL is studying wind power as well. During the 1980’s and 1990’s many proponents of sustainable design and construction experimented with prefabricated energy-efficient wall systems, water-reclamation systems, and modular construction units to reduce construction waste (White Paper on Sustainability, 2003). Many government buildings around the world have been used as examples to the public for the different improvements that can be made to existing buildings and newly designed buildings. A notable building that underwent major sustainable renovation in the U.S. was the White House in Washington, D.C. To provide energy conservation ideas many people participated in energy audits and design charettes for the White House. After all of the ideas were implemented to the 200-year old residence, nearly $300,000 have been saved annually in energy, water, landscaping and solid-waste costs, and the White House has reduced its carbon emissions by approximately 845 tons (White Paper on Sustainability, 2003).
2.1.3 Sustainable Building Rating Systems The growth and implementation of sustainable rating systems has been a beneficial part of the sustainable movement in the last ten to fifteen years. The developed
9
world uses several different rating systems, such as the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental and Design (LEED) rating system and the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM). According to the usgbc.org website, the LEED Green Building Rating System encourages and accelerates global adoption of sustainable green building and development practices through the creation and implementation of universally understood and accepted tools and performance criteria. The LEED rating system, mostly used in the U.S., gives points based upon several different categories, such as Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Environment Quality, and Innovation in Design (www.usgbc.org). Each category has a number of different prerequisite points that must be earned, followed by additional points for going above the prerequisites for that particular category. Theoretically, the more points a building earns the more sustainable the building is. Another rating system, the BREEAM assessment process was created in 1990 with the first two versions covering offices and homes. Versions are updated regularly to remain up to date with the UK Building regulations and versions for various building types have been created. The BREEAM rating system, mostly used in the UK and Europe, is similar to LEED, but has different rating categories, such as Management, Energy Use, Health and Well-Being, Pollution, Transport, Land Use, Ecology, Materials, and Water (www.breeam.org). Although, LEED and BREEAM are two of the most commonly used rating systems in the U.S. and U.K., there are also a number of computer software programs that aide people in the life-cycle cost analysis of different sustainable technologies. Several of these programs are Energy Plus, Visual DOE-2, Life Cycle Analysis Eco-Quantum,
10
Project Regener, and Eco-Invent 2000. Life cycle cost analysis aides in the decisionmaking process between sustainable alternatives by establishing a cost for each alternative. Even though no rating system can perfectly rank the sustainability of a building, both LEED and BREEAM, along with life-cycle cost/analysis, can help both the designer and builder be aware of different issues involved with improving the sustainability of a project.
2.1.4 Benefits of Sustainable Building As previously mentioned, some of the many benefits of sustainable construction are using resources more efficiently, reducing building impacts on human health and the environment, and providing better working, living, and learning environments. Other benefits from sustainability include: the extended lifespan of a project, the lifecycle cost reductions, and others. “Green buildings use resources like energy, water, materials, and land more efficiently than buildings that simply are built to code. Sustainable buildings also create healthier work, learning, and living environments, with more natural light and cleaner air, and contribute to improved employee and student health, comfort, and productivity. Sustainable buildings are cost-effective, by reducing operations and maintenance costs, as well as by lowering utility bills (Kats, 2003).” By using resources more efficiently, operational costs are less, and there is a reduction in the use of materials necessary to construct the building. Design and construction techniques that include passive heating and cooling, ample daylight and other sustainable techniques allow a building to use more energy from the sun and less electrical cooling, heating and lighting. Therefore, constructing a healthier and better building is accomplished by using more daylight, ample fresh air, good ventilation of occupied spaces, and control of the inside 11
environment by the user. Sustainable design and construction of a facility can impact all of these seemingly small aspects of buildings, resulting in large benefits. The financial benefits of green buildings include: lower energy costs, waste disposal costs, and water costs; lower environmental and emissions costs; lower operations and maintenance costs; and savings from increased productivity and health. These benefits range from being fairly predictable (energy, waste, and water savings) to relatively uncertain (productivity, and health benefits) (Kats, 2003).
2.1.5 Aspects of Sustainable Building (First World) In the developed world, there are a number of different criteria that are considered sustainable for a building project. In order to establish the different aspects of a sustainable building, the LEED standard, a standard used by many people in the U.S. for sustainable buildings, will be used as a guideline. Because this research examined new buildings in the developing world, this paper utilizes the LEED for New Construction version 2.2 (LEED NC 2.2) to set a baseline of sustainable practices in the first or developed world (See Appendix 3 for the LEED NC 2.2 credit checklist). Some of the different aspects of sustainable building projects include: the manner in which the site is used, the building and site water efficiency, emissions into the atmosphere, the amount and type of energy consumed by the building, the materials and resources that are used to construct and maintain the buildings, the indoor environment quality, as well as the innovative sustainable technologies used in the building. A number of different design and construction aspects that can be sustainable pertain to the site of the building. One of the primary concerns with site sustainability is developing land appropriately, meaning the building and site reduce impacts to the
12
surrounding environment. Some of the considerations for a sustainable site (SS), are the site does not use prime farmland, is not in a flood plane, does not use land that consumes habitat for endangered species, and does not use land near bodies of water in a manner that contaminates the water source (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credit 1). To be sustainable, it is recommended that the development is built in a higher density area, preventing urban sprawl (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credit 2). Rehabilitating contaminated sites is a method which reduces building on undeveloped land and is regarded as sustainable use of land (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credit 3). Another major aspect that makes a site sustainable is the site’s access to public transportation, the availability of bicycle storage, access for alternative fuel vehicles, and appropriate parking capacity (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credits 4.1-4.4). Providing public transportation and bicycle access reduces the site’s dependence on vehicles and the resources necessary for those vehicles. Having access for alternativefuel vehicles and appropriate parking capacity promote less use of standard fuel vehicles. It is also important for a site to contain ample amount of open or park space for its users, and, if possible, to restore damaged open space (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credits 5.1-5.2). This space allows the users to escape from the building, and it promotes a diversity of plant and animal life around the site. Similar to building in a manner that does not contaminate wetlands, a sustainable site reduces the amount of storm water runoff, erosion, and waste water use (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credits 6.1-6.2). Thus, sustainable sites have proper stormwater drainage on the site and allow a large amount of the water to be absorbed into the site. Also considered is the differential between the heat reflecting off of the site compared to the surrounding sites (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credits 7.1-7.2). Reducing the reflection of heat to other sites allows the environment of the other sites to
13
remain in their original condition. Similar to reducing the amount of heat reflecting from a newly developed site, a sustainable site reduces the amount of light pollution escaping from its boundaries (LEED NC 2.2 SS Credit 8). Clearly, there are many different aspects to consider for a site to be sustainable, most of which are caused by constructing a new building, but are not directly caused by the building itself. Other design and construction considerations that affect the sustainability of a building relate to water usage and the efficiency of water use (WE). A sustainable building considers the water use inside the building as well as the landscaping and surrounding environment’s use of water. Water efficient landscaping contributes to the overall building’s water efficiency by using less or no potable water for irrigation (LEED NC 2.2 WE Credits 1.1-1.2). Another aspect of a water efficient building is the use of innovative wastewater technologies (LEED NC 2.2 WE Credit 2), like wastewater reclamation systems, or grey water recycling systems. Finally, water efficient buildings reduce potable water usage for sewage conveyance and typical water use through water conserving fixtures, rainwater recycling, waste water treatment, or recycled grey water use (LEED NC 2.2 WE Credits 3.1-3.2). Many sustainable buildings focus on reducing energy use and emissions into the atmosphere through the Energy and Atmosphere (EA) credits in LEED for new construction. One large step to reducing energy use is ensuring all of the building’s energy related systems are performing according to their design and specifications (LEED NC 2.2 EA prereq 1, Credit 3). When a building’s systems are not performing adequately, they often use more energy than necessary. These systems can also lose quality runtime at the end of their lifespan if they run improperly. Reducing or removing
14
the use of refrigerants that use Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) is important to reduce emissions that affect the ozone, and can cause health issues (LEED NC 2.2 EA prereq 3, Credit 4). Sustainable buildings also minimize the amount of energy used throughout the building (LEED NC 2.2 EA prereq 2). Aside from attempting to minimize the amount of energy used, a sustainable building optimizes its energy performance by reducing energy costs for the building as much as possible (LEED NC 2.2 EA Credit 1). There are a number of methods to reduce the energy costs for a building, such as using renewable energy sources (LEED NC 2.2 EA Credits 2, 6) like wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower or bio fuels, or using fixtures and appliances that use less energy. Another major part of sustainable construction is the use of materials and resources (MR) in a sustainable manner. When a building is being constructed, many of the necessary materials are shipped to the job from distant locations, and more often than not, the materials are manufactured from raw materials. To be sustainable, building projects are encouraged to reuse as many materials from previously demolished buildings as possible (LEED NC 2.2 MR Credits 3.1-3.2). Most demolished buildings have materials that can be recycled and reused, so LEED encourages resource reuse. If a building was demolished on the construction site, it is sustainable to reuse parts of the demolished building’s structural or envelope elements and its interior finishing materials (LEED NC 2.2 MR Credits 1.1-1.3). Similar to using resources from demolished buildings, sustainable construction methods can use materials that are made of post consumer recycled content (LEED NC 2.2 MR Credits 4.1-4.2). When new materials are needed for a project, LEED encourages those materials to come from a sustainably certified source, or from rapidly renewable resources, like bamboo, wool, and
15
wheatboard (LEED NC 2.2 MR Credits 6 & 7). The overall goal in LEED is to use materials and resources reclaimed from demolished sites, recycled from post consumer use, or from rapidly renewable sources to reduce the demand for new resources. Another part of a sustainable construction project is diverting construction, demolition and land clearing waste from landfills (LEED NC 2.2 MR Credits 2.1-2.2). During construction and after completion of the building, LEED encourages access to recycling bins for different materials. Reducing the amount of waste created on the jobsite and in the building after occupancy (LEED NC 2.2 MR prereq 1) and diverting recyclable resources back to manufacturing reduces the need for and overfilling of landfills. Finally, sustainable resources can also originate near the project (LEED NC 2.2 MR Credits 5.15.2). When the materials come from nearby, it helps the local economy, and it reduces the use of fuel to transport the materials. According to LEED, the final chief portion of a sustainable building is the quality of the indoor environment (IEQ).
For a building to have a quality indoor environment,
there are three major needs: ample lighting, comfortable air temperature, and clean air. A main contributing facet of sustainable indoor environments is the amount of lighting, in particular daylight (LEED NC 2.2 IEQ Credits 8.1-8.2). Providing ample lighting in a space allows people to work better, and it typically raises their productivity. Adding daylight to the space, gives users a connection with the outdoors, as well as provides a less harsh and free light source. Using the free light from daylight reduces the building’s demand on grid-provided electricity. The second major need for IEQ, regards several points for LEED that are oriented toward clean air. Primarily, a building must replenish the fresh air its users consume. This is accomplished by providing proper ventilation and
16
introducing appropriate amounts of outside air (LEED NC 2.2 IEQ prereq 1, Credits 1 & 2). Beyond replenishing clean air, the indoor environment needs to prevent air contamination from smoke, chemicals or emissions from building materials (LEED NC 2.2 IEQ prereq 2, Credits 4.1-4.1, 5). In most developed world buildings, smoking has been banned, and smokers must move a specified distance away from entrances in order to prevent other building occupants from inhaling the smoke. More recently, a focus has been put on reducing the emissions of building materials, such as adhesives, sealants, paints, other coatings, carpet systems, and composite products. Reducing the emissions from such aforementioned products provides the occupants with a healthier, less toxic indoor environment. Another aspect of LEED is designing a thermally comfortable environment that can be monitored. Similar to adequate lighting, thermally comfortable environments increase productivity and reduce occupant discomfort and anxiety (LEED NC 2.2 IEQ Credits 7.1-7.2).
Lastly, LEED encourages buildings to allow for occupant
control of the lighting and thermal comfort systems (LEED NC 2.2 IEQ, Credits 6.1-6.2). When occupants can control the amount of light they need, the temperature, and the amount of air flow in their own environment, it promotes occupant satisfaction, wellbeing, productivity and comfort. As seen in the IEQ section, a significant part of a sustainable building pertains to the users’ comfort and the quality of the environment which they use.
17
2.2 Developing World Sustainable Building 2.2.1 Developing World Defined In order to find a baseline for sustainable building practices in the developing world, a definition of what constitutes a developing country must be established. The UN uses several different criteria to establish the definition for a least developed country: a criterion for low income, a human capital status criterion, and an economic vulnerability criterion. The criteria from the UN Office for the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries, and Small Island Developing States (UN-OHLLS) can be seen below: 1. a low-income criterion, based on a three-year average estimate of the gross national income (GNI) per capita (under $745 for inclusion, above $900 for graduation);
2. a human capital status criterion, involving a composite Human Assets Index (HAI) based on indicators of: (a) nutrition: percentage of population undernourished; (b) health: mortality rate for children aged five years or under; (c) education: the gross secondary school enrollment ratio; and (d) adult literacy rate; and
3. an economic vulnerability criterion, involving a composite Economic Vulnerability Index (EVI) based on indicators of: (a) population size; (b) remoteness; (c) merchandise export concentration; (d) share of agriculture, forestry and fisheries in gross domestic product; (e) homelessness owing to natural disasters; (f) instability of agricultural production; and (g) instability of exports of goods and services.
18
A country’s economy is underdeveloped when its people face severely constrained choices. ‘Economic development’ can be thought of as the relaxation of the constraints on people’s material standards of living, or alternatively, as the enlargement of people’s choice sets and the expansion of their capabilities (Fields, 2001). Below is a map of Developing Economies illustrating the world as defined by the criteria mentioned above.
Figure 1: Developing Economies Map
2.2.2 Sustainable Building Defined (Developing World) As discussed previously, ‘green’ and ‘environmentally friendly’ have become buzzwords throughout the developed world, but in many developing world locations, people merely focus on subsisting. The movement to save energy, money, and resources is a major part of the lives of a majority of the world’s population. In the developing world, saving these things is not done merely to leave the world a better place for future generations, but out of necessity. Those who live in the developing world, in particular in
19
impoverished areas, must attempt to save resources and money in order to provide for their families and to survive. Part of trying to survive intrinsically requires humans in the developing world to use some sustainable practices (Alexander, 2008). On the other hand, many people in the developing world are unaware of the developed world’s impetus toward sustainability, and they are not striving to find different or more sustainable lifestyles. Because of the conundrum of naturally using some sustainable practices and in other cases just doing what is necessary to survive, the developing world requires a different definition for sustainable building practices. Some building practices that are considered sustainable in the first world are often a necessity in the developing world. Using local resources is one example of such building practices. Also, it is critically important for sustainable construction in the developing world to strive to provide clean water, improved sanitation, energy, adequate shelter, healthcare, and food security (Du Plessis 2007). Sustainable construction in the developing world could be defined similarly to the developed world, but with some additions. Building sustainably in the developing world would include increasing the efficiency with which buildings and sites use resources, reducing building impacts on human health and the environment through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and removal- the complete building life cycle (Office of Federal Environmental Executive, 2003). Equally necessary in the definition for developing world sustainability are practices that promote sustainable use of the local labor force and well-being of the people, allowing locals to sustain their health and livelihood. Such practices include clean water, proper sanitation, and adequate shelter, as mentioned above.
20
Sustainable development is about providing for human needs and protecting the integrity of the environment (Du Plessis, 2007). The construction sector is a prime vehicle for improving quality of life and the factor that determines the environmental and social sustainability of development. Therefore, there is a real need for urgency to introduce sustainable construction practices into the developing world. The level of underdevelopment in these countries provides an opportunity to avoid the problems experienced in developed countries, but it is also imperative not to waste scarce resources by making sure that what is being constructed now will be sustainable in every sense of the world (Du Plessis, 2007). The challenge, and thus the definition, for developing world sustainability for the construction sector is not just to respond to the development challenges of adequate housing, rapid urbanization and lack of infrastructure, but to do it in a way that is socially and ecologically responsible (Du Plessis, 2007).
2.2.3 Developing World Challenges and Issues Construction in the developing world is happening at a rapid rate. There are an ample number of buildings being built according to first world standards, mostly in larger developing world cities. Unfortunately, there are also many buildings that are not being built to any standards what so ever. In many of the developing world countries, a huge urgency exists to build shelter for the homeless, affordable housing for the masses migrating to the cities, and numerous other buildings for the many needs of humans. As mentioned above, the developing world needs a different definition for sustainable construction, and this is due to the fact that there are many challenges and issues unique to the developing world. Developing countries face a number of systemic problems, such as rapid rates of urbanization, lack of affordable housing, deep poverty, lack of
21
governance, and environmental degradation (Du Plessis, 2007). Other problems exist at the interface between first world aide and local cultures. Rapid urbanization has increasingly become more of a problem in the last several decades. Many people are moving from the rural setting where generations of their family had lived to the city in search of work, money, better opportunity, better access to infrastructure and amenities, among a plethora of other reasons (Reents 2008). The levels of poverty in rural areas have forced many to move into cities. With urbanization come issues of housing shortages, inadequate infrastructure and societal friction (Bugliarello, 2007). Rural regions are woefully under-serviced, particularly in basic medical and schooling facilities because much of the government resources are targeted toward urban areas (GCA, 2001). This challenge is difficult for people focused on building because there is such a huge need for housing, medical clinics, and schools in both the rural setting and in the city. In regard to sustainability, it is hard to decide if it is more sustainable to aide the people in rural settings, trying to prevent urbanization, or if it is better to help those moving to the cities that need housing and shelter. The wider the gap between rural development and infrastructure and city development and infrastructure, the more likely it is that rural people will abandon their homes for the city. Another major systemic problem in the developing world is the lack of governance and weak leadership. Many of the nations in the developing world have had significant turnover of leadership, preventing any positive change from moving quickly. The governments also have to deal with a number of problems caused by war, natural disasters, and other problems that drive the country into survival mode (GCA, 2001). Societies and governments faced with the extreme survival issues prevalent in the
22
developing world tend to adopt a crisis-management approach to development, with little regard for the long-term impact their actions will have on both the environment and society (Agenda 21, 2002). It is difficult for a country in survival mode to think about sustainability and quality building. The intense pressure to build infrastructure and shelter often prevents anyone in government or leadership from thinking about providing a sustainable final product. At the interface between first world companies and organizations and the developing world other issues exist. It is difficult for outsiders to work with locals because of the large number of cultural barriers. Developing countries have strong traditions of cooperative society and have developed sophisticated methods of conflict resolution and reaching common agreement (Agenda 21). Understanding that cultures interact and function differently in their methods of communication and decision making is crucial to understanding the needs in the developing world community (Parsons, 1996). Another important part of providing a sustainable building or project is ensuring the locals have buy-in and participation (Alexander, 2008). By using methods such as participatory planning, aide workers, companies, and locals can understand the needs of the culture and the problems that must be overcome to ultimately achieve a sustainable project. Participatory planning does not mean that the community as a whole plans, but that it gets heard and involved in the planning process. Despite its importance, this is a powerful, often inadequately used, mechanism for avoiding costly solutions or solutions that fail to satisfy the needs of the population and for enabling the users of the solutions to acquire a sense of ownership (Bugliarello, 2007).
23
Many outsiders who come into the developing world often do not have an understanding of the resources that are available to the locals. Often the developing world communities have sufficient resources made locally that can be used to complete a building, and other times the communities lack necessary materials. Similar to materials, the resource of human labor is widely available in some places and not available in others. Both of these issues create opportunities that outsiders must consider in the solution that they intend to provide for any building or infrastructure project. There are strong grassroots abilities for innovation of building materials, settlement development, and institutional structuring, which is one of the most important resources in developing countries (Agenda 21, 2002). Being able to use the grassroots abilities of each community can promote more sustainable building practices and can also provide a source of jobs and work. Without the empowerment of local people, engineering and construction projects in developing countries are bound to fail. First world construction workers and engineers must learn to listen to local populations, and work within the social, environmental and economic context of their projects. Listening to the people who are being served is of utmost importance; they are often the best teachers in determining the most appropriate application of skills (Parsons, 1996). The biggest challenge for the construction sector in developing countries thus lies in finding a holistic approach to making sure that its contribution to the physical, economic and human development of these countries meets the requirements of sustainable development as defined by locally identified needs and value systems (which may differ from the needs and values of the economic elite in these countries) (Du Plessis, 2007).
24
2.3 Point of Departure There are many articles and publications that discuss sustainable practices from design to construction for the developed world. A large amount of research has been done to raise the level of knowledge about sustainable construction and the methods, standards, materials and technologies that aide in sustainable practices. Also, some investigation has been completed in the area of economic feasibility of sustainable practices, especially the implications of investments and the long term return associated with them. Papers have been published about appropriate technologies and methods for the developing world context. Other publications deal with the issues and problems faced in the developing world and implementing sustainable construction. Finally, other research attempts to develop the framework necessary to promote sustainability in the developing world and the enablers needed to jumpstart the development of sustainable awareness, knowledge, and practices. However, after reviewing the background information about sustainable building, it became apparent that there is a lack of depth in knowledge pertaining to sustainable practices in the developing world. See the Literature Topics and Authors table below to see a sample of the papers and topics. The table shows the need for research pertaining to current sustainable practices of the developing world.
25
Literature Topics and Authors
Author Building Design & Construction USGBC LEED rating System David Gissen Greg Kats Agenda 21 Sustainable Construction in the Developing World Habitat for Humanity Jonathan Lash Jill Wells Echeverry, Anzellini, Rubio Laura Brigitte Parsons Mehta, Bridwell Vanessa Gomes Chrisna Du Plessis Georege Bugliarello Gary S. Fields
Topics History of International Developing Current DW Sustainable LEED Green Sustainable World (DW) DW DW Sustainable Construction Basics Building Benefits Challenges Needs Methods Practices x x x x x x x x x
x x
x
x x
x x x
x x x x
x
x x x x x x
x x x
Table 1
3.0 Research Methodology In order to create the knowledge base about developing world sustainable construction, a qualitative research approach was used. The main objective of the qualitative research approach was to describe the current state of sustainable construction in the developing world. The descriptive research followed the research design set forth by Creswell in Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (Creswell, 2003). Interviews were used as the primary data gathering technique, with a pseudo structured exploratory interview framework. According to Oppenheim, “the purpose of the exploratory interview is essentially heuristic: to develop ideas and research hypotheses rather than to gather facts and statistics. It is concerned with trying to understand how ordinary people think and feel about the topics of concern to the research (Oppenheim, 1992).” Because of the lack of information about the field
26
of sustainable construction in the developing world, interviews with knowledgeable professionals aided in ascertaining a baseline of current construction practices in the developing world. Interviews allowed for a wider focus on the overall state of the projects being studied. The interviews were based on the LEED sustainable standard in order to use an established launching point for what was considered sustainable. In the first world, a sustainable standard used on many projects is the USGBC LEED certification system. Participant selection was a key part to ensuring the interviews provided quality information. The interviewees were limited to people knowledgeable about the research question, through the process of purposeful selection. Purposeful selection is a strategy that particular settings, persons or activities are selected deliberately in order to provide information that cannot be obtained as easily from other methods (Maxwell, 2005). As Miles and Huberman said, “It is important to line up people, settings, events and processes, with the research questions, and to consider whether your choices are doing a representative, time efficient job of answering them (Miles and Huberman, 1984).” The interviews were done with organizations and people who were industry professionals; technically savvy people who also had experience building in the developing world were interviewed. An American construction company owner, building engineers, earthen building instructors, and an industry consultant, were representative of the industry professionals who were interviewed. Many of these people also lived and worked in the developing world. Using people who had an understanding of the construction process was preferred. This eliminated frivolous data acquired from people who merely participated on a project in the developing world as a volunteer, but who had little
27
understanding of the construction process or sustainability. The interview process was completed when a reasonable level of saturation was obtained in the data. Generally, the interviews were done until they reached a point where no new ideas emerged. Quality, rather than quantity was the determinant of the number of interviews (Oppenheim, 1992). See the Interview Respondents table below for a list of interviewees. Interview Respondents Respondent Mick Veach Todd Huguenin Mike Timmer Tom Alexander Steve DeLisle Peggy Reents Kevin Rowell Loren Funk John Linquist
Organization or Company World Hope International World Hope International International Orphanage Union GML Performance Consulting Heart to Honduras Pun Pun Project Kleiwerks International Nicolas Construction, Rafiki Foundation Engineering Ministries International
Project Locations Baku, Azerbaijan (multiple projects) Baku, Azerbaijan (multiple projects) Cochabomba, Bolivia & Chapare, Bolivia Sumatra, Indonesia Honduras (multiple projects) Thailand (multiple projects) Laos (multilple projects), Thailand Malawi, Rwanda, Mexico Haiti, Costa Rica, Guatamala
Qualifications Project Manager Construction Manager Project Manager Consultant Project Manager Earthen bldg Instructor Earthen bldg Instructor Owner, Project Manager Lead Engineer
Table 2 Data analysis was done using a coding system to help organize the data into understandable categories. According to Maxwell, “coding is to ‘fracture’ the data and rearrange them into categories that facilitate comparison between things in the same category and that aid in the development of theoretical concepts (Maxwell, 2005).” Several organizational categories were established prior to gathering the data, which were based on the LEED sustainability rating system. The different organizational categories were Sustainable, Not Sustainable, and Inapplicable to the Developing World. Using these different organizational categories allowed the responses about different projects from respondents to be quickly broken down into aspects of a specific project that fit into each category. After the data was divided into organizational categories, it was further broken down into substantive categories, which essentially became subcategories to the organizational categories mentioned above.
28
To ensure that the data and analysis had validity, an attempt was made to gather “rich data,” and to use triangulation of respondents. “Rich data” is detailed and varied enough that it provides a full and revealing picture of the situation (Becker, 1970). Interviewing a number of different respondents and respondents who worked on projects in different parts of the developing world allowed for more thorough gathering of data, which created a better understanding of current sustainable practices in the developing world. Collecting information from a diverse range of individuals and settings, considered triangulation, reduces the risk of chance associations and biases (Maxwell, 2005). Similar to the methods used to gather “rich data,” triangulation was accomplished by interviewing a variety of people from different countries, projects, and backgrounds. Some of the interviewees were from construction backgrounds, some from consulting, and some from sustainable awareness non-profit/ non-government organization backgrounds. Also, projects from Central America, Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and the Indonesian Islands were examined, and people who had worked on those projects were interviewed.
29
4.0 Data Synthesis and Analysis After synthesizing the data from the interviews several aspects of the projects appeared to be sustainable for all or most of the projects studied. Also, there were a number of different aspects of sustainability, as defined by the USGBC in LEED for New Construction, that were not sustainable for a number of reasons.
4.1 Sustainable Aspects When looking at the aspects of the projects there were sustainable, a rating of the general level of sustainable achievement across all the projects was given to each LEED credit, as seen in the table Developing World Sustainable Practices: Moderate to Very High Levels of Sustainability. The table indicates a rating of Very High, High and Moderate for each LEED credit. Any credit that received below a moderate rating was deemed as unsustainable for all or most of the projects or inapplicable to the developing world. A Very High rating indicated that out of all the projects and locations examined, an overwhelming number of the interviewees responded that the projects were sustainable in those areas. Some aspects of a sustainable project that were consistently sustainable for all of the respondents were the use of regional materials, connecting to the local community, using water-efficient landscaping, controlling the lighting systems, and providing ample daylighting and views. A High rating indicated that out of all the projects examined, only one or two of the respondents mentioned their projects were not sustainable in that area or did not comment about that aspect of sustainability. The aspects of projects that were highly sustainable throughout most of the projects were selecting the site appropriately and allowing for control of the thermal comfort system. A moderate rating indicated that half or more of the respondents indicated that their projects
30
were sustainable in that area. Credits from LEED that were moderately sustainable on a typical developing world project were controlling the quantity of stormwater, using no potable water for landscaping, using innovative wastewater technologies, using rapidly renewable materials, preventing smoke from entering the indoor environment, and controlling chemical and pollutants from
Project Key Azerbaijan Bolivia Indonesia Honduras Thailand Sub-Saharan Africa (M alawi, Rwanda) Central America (Guatemala, Costa Rica) Laos
AZ BO IN HO TH SSAF CA LA
entering the building.
Table 3
Developing World Sustainable Practices: Moderate to Very High Levels of Sustainability LEED Credit Sustainable Site 1 Sustainable Site 2 Sustainable Site 6.1 Water Efficiency 1.1 Water Efficiency 1.2 Water Efficiency 2 Materials & Resources 5.1 Materials & Resources 5.2 Materials & Resources 6 Indoor Environment Quality Prereq 1 Indoor Environment Quality 5 Indoor Environment Quality 6.1 Indoor Environment Quality 6.2 Indoor Environment Quality 8.1 Indoor Environment Quality 8.2
Description Site Selection Community Connectivity Stormwater Design, Quantity Control Water Efficient Landscaping, reduce 50% Water Efficient Landscaping, no potable Innovative Wastewater Technologies Regional Materials 10% Local Regional Materials 20% Local Rapidly Renewable Materials Environmental Smoke Control Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Control Controllability of Systems, Lighting Controllability of Systems, Themal Comfort Daylight & Views, 75% of spaces Daylight & Views, Views for 90%
Table 4
31
AZ BO X X X
Project General Level of Sustainability IN HO TH SSAF CA LA X X X X X High X X X X X X Very High
X
-
X
-
X
-
X
X
Moderate
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Very High
-
-
X
X
X
-
-
X
Moderate
-
X
-
X
X
-
-
X
Moderate
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Very High
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Very High
-
X
-
-
X
-
X
X
Moderate
-
X
-
X
X
-
X
X
Moderate
-
X
-
X
-
X
X
X
Moderate
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Very High
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
High
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Very High
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Very High
4.2 Unsustainable Aspects The remaining credits not listed in the Developing World Sustainable Practices: Moderate to Very High Levels of Sustainability table were either not sustainable or not applicable to the developing world context. The credits that were not sustainable are noted in the Developing World Unsustainable Practices: Low Levels of Sustainability or Inapplicable table below in the column General Level of Sustainability with a score of Low or Very Low. The credits that were inapplicable for any reason are noted with N/A in the Developing World Unsustainable Practices: Low Levels of Sustainability or Inapplicable. A rating of Very Low signified that none respondents said their projects were sustainable for that credit. Some of the LEED credits that were rated as Very Low were construction pollution prevention, reduction in the heat island effect, light pollution, minimum energy performance, on-site renewable energy, green power, storage and collection of recyclables, construction waste management, materials reuse, use of recycled content, increased ventilation, and construction indoor air quality management. Although the credit for Energy and Atmosphere on-site renewable energy and green power were marked in the table below for Honduras, they were rated as Very Low because the typical project in Honduras did not meet the criteria. A rating of Low signified that only one or more of the interviewees mentioned their projects were sustainable in that area. Some aspects of the projects that were rated as Low for sustainability were alternative transportation (a project in Bolivia was within ¼ mile of a bus route), site development (some of the projects in Guatemala and Costa Rica attempted to restore native plant habitat), and building reuse.
32
Developing World Unsustainable Practices: Low Levels of Sustainability or Inapplicable LEED Credit Sustainable Site Prereq 1 Sustainable Site 3 Sustainable Site 4.1-4.4 Sustainable Site 5.1-5.2 Sustainable Site 7.1-7.2 Sustainable Site 8 Water Efficiency 3.1-3.2 Energy and Atmosphere Prereq 1 Energy and Atmosphere Prereq 2 Energy and Atmosphere Prereq 3 Energy and Atmosphere 1 Energy and Atmosphere 2 Energy and Atmosphere 3 Energy and Atmosphere 4 Energy and Atmosphere 5 Energy and Atmosphere 6 Materials and Resources Prereq 1 Materials and Resources 1.1-1.3 Materials and Resources 2.1-2.2 Materials and Resources 3.1-3.2 Materials and Resources 4.1-4.2 Materials and Resources 7 Indoor Indoor Indoor Indoor Indoor Indoor
Environment Quality Prereq 1 Environment Quality 1 Environment Quality 2 Environment Quality 3 Environment Quality 4 Environment Quality 7
Description Const. Pollution Prevention Brownfield Redevelopment Alternative Transportation Site Development Heat Island Effect Light Pollution Water Use Reduction Fund. Commissioning Minimum Energy Performance Fundamental Refrigerant Management Optimize Energy Performance On-Site Renewable Energy Enhanced Commissioning Enhanced Refrigerant Management Measurement & Verification Green Power Storage and Collection or Recyclables Building Reuse Construction Waste Management Materials Reuse Recycled Content Certified Wood Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Outdoor Air Monitoring Increased Ventilation Constr. IAQ Management Low-Emitting Materials Thermal Comfort
Table 5
33
AZ BO X -
Project General Level of IN HO TH SSAF CA LA Sustainability Very Low Very Low N/A and Low X Low Very Low Very Low N/A N/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Very Low
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N/A
-
-
-
X -
-
-
-
-
N/A N/A and Very Low N/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N/A
-
-
-
X
-
-
-
-
N/A N/A and Very Low
-
X
-
-
-
-
-
-
Very Low Low
-
-
X -
-
-
-
-
-
N/A and Very Low Very Low Very Low N/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N/A N/A Very Low Very Low N/A N/A
4.3 Inapplicable Aspects Each of the credits that were inapplicable in any manner are listed in the Developing World Inapplicable LEED Credits table below. A note about why each credit is inapplicable to the developing world context is listed in the table.
Developing World Inapplicable LEED Credits LEED Credit
Sustainable Site 4.1-4.4 Water Efficiency 3.1-3.2 Energy and Atmosphere Prereq 1
Energy and Atmosphere Prereq 3 Energy and Atmosphere 1 Energy and Atmosphere 2 Energy and Atmosphere 3 Energy and Atmosphere 4 Energy and Atmosphere 5 Energy and Atmosphere 6 Materials and Resources 2.1-2.2 Materials and Resources 7 Indoor Indoor Indoor Indoor
Environment Quality Prereq 1 Environment Quality 1 Environment Quality 4 Environment Quality 7
Description
Notes about Inapplicable
General Level of Sustainability
Less car ownership, and purchase of cheap cars, less access to fuel efficient Alternative Transportation N/A and Low vehicles Less access to technologically advanced fixtures, can do low tech Water Use Reduction solutions with grey water N/A No commissioning agencies, use fewer powered systems Fund. Commissioning N/A Less access to refrigeration systems Fundamental Refrigerant with low CFC, low budgets require Management N/A affordable equipment Optimize Energy Access restricted to specific types of Performance N/A building materials and systems Restricted by cost of systems, and On-Site Renewable Energy access to systems for locals N/A and Very Low Enhanced Commissioning No commissioning agencies N/A Enhanced Refrigerant Less access to refrigeration systems Management N/A with low CFC, and less A/C use Restricted access to simulation software Measurement & Verification and M&V technology N/A Green Power N/A and Very Low Restricted by cost and access Construction Waste Create much less waste, more use of Management N/A and Very Low waste on site Certified Wood N/A Less access to certified forests Minimum Indoor Air Quality low use of powered systems, and few Performance requirements in building codes N/A Outdoor Air Monitoring N/A Less access to technology, and mats. Low-Emitting Materials N/A Less access to mats. & use least $ Thermal Comfort N/A few requirements in codes
Table 6
34
5.0 Results and Conclusions 5.1 Sustainable aspects in the Developing World The data above indicated that several aspects of projects were sustainable in most locations. The most sustainable aspects of the projects were site selection and community connectivity for the Sustainable Sites, the use of water efficient landscaping for Water Efficiency, the use of regional materials for Materials and Resources, and the use of controllable systems for lighting and thermal comfort and ample daylighting for Indoor Environment Quality. These were sustainable because of the intrinsic use in each of the different cultures. In the developing world most projects are driven by low budgets, the need to use as few resources as possible, and the use of resources that were easily available (All Interviewees, 2008). The use of daylighting and controllable systems is a huge part of staying warm or cool in the developing world because people want to use as little energy or power as possible because of its expense, or unavailability. Many of the projects did not have constant power available to them, promoting the use of day lighting or passive thermal comfort systems. The local power sources were inconsistent and required people to provide as much thermal comfort and lighting as possible without the use of power (Hugeunin, 2008). The use of water efficient landscaping was partially due to the nature of the available plants that required less water and was also due to the lack of intentional landscaping. Overall, most of the LEED criteria that would be met by a typical developing world building project were intrinsically embedded in the cultures. Each culture accomplished these sustainable aspects in a different manner, but the end result for each project was similar.
35
There were a few LEED criteria that approximately half of the projects met: management of stormwater, innovative wastewater technologies, environmental smoke control, and indoor chemical and pollutant source control. Yet, meeting each of these criteria was not consistent across any of the different projects. Instead the projects that met these criteria were different for each of the criteria, making an assessment of the developing world’s general use of any of these criteria difficult.
For stormwater
management, a number of the projects attempted to divert water away from the buildings and prevent erosion, where other projects may not have considered the stormwater or may not have needed to deal with rainwater. The use of innovative wastewater technologies ranged from diverting grey water to water landscaping in Laos and parts of Thailand, to providing a pila (wastewater storage unit) containing a washing basin, sink, toilet and a shower in Honduras and Bolivia (Timmer, DeLisle, 2008). The use of an exterior washing basin and sink also helped prevent the use of chemicals and air pollutants inside the buildings. Any harsh chemicals would be used outside the building in the separated washing basin. The use of these technologies were innovative for the different regions where they were applied, but they were not used throughout the developing world. Environmental smoke control was another criterion that was not used consistently in any region, but Laos, Thailand, Guatemala, Costa Rica and Honduras all attempted to remove the kitchens from the main house. By removing the kitchens from the main building, it prevented any wood-burning smoke from entering the house and contaminating the air. Each of these criteria was sustainable in certain regions, but no conclusion could be drawn from the data in regards to a typical developing world building project.
36
5.2 Unsustainable aspects in the Developing World As mentioned above in the Data Analysis, there were LEED credits that would not be met by a typical developing world construction project. The credits that were not met by any of the projects were construction pollution prevention, reducing the heat island effect, light pollution, minimum energy performance, on-site renewable energy, green power, storage and collection of recyclables, construction waste management, materials reuse, use of recycled content, increased ventilation, and construction indoor air quality management. In many developing world countries, there are no standards regarding pollution, light pollution, waste management, energy performance, indoor air quality, or any others (Alexander, Huguenin, Timmer, 2008). The lack of standards indicates unawareness or lack of care regarding many of the issues. Many developing world building projects are not built with a code or standard; they are completed primarily based on the knowledge of what has worked previously (DeLisle 2008). Some of the LEED credits that were not met were due to a lack of available technology or resources. Reducing heat island effects in many locations was difficult because the decisions regarding the materials used for roofing and other exposed surfaces were based on the materials that were available nearby and the cost of those materials. Using on-site renewable energy and green power were difficult because the cost of renewable energy technology was much higher than most developing world citizens could afford, and if they were used it was primarily by the rich (DeLisle 2008). Green power is not available to most grid users in the developing world, let alone a constant source of regularly produced power (Huguenin 2008). Materials reuse was typically not an option a developing world project. In one instance a project reused a structure and interior finish
37
materials. The materials were reused on an orphanage building in Bolivia where the building was renovated and an addition was built (Timmer 2008). Most of the existing building was reused, and only a small part of the existing building became waste. Using recycled content did not occur on any of the projects that were discussed. The primary reason for not using recycled materials is based on the availability of quality recycled materials in the developing world market place. As mentioned previously the decision regarding materials were based on cost and availability (DeLisle, Funk, Timmer 2008).
5.3 Point of Application of Sustainable Ideas After completing the interviews nearly all of the respondents indicated that sustainable practices were not implemented or thought of during design and preconstruction. They were only used during the physical construction. One reason for not using sustainable ideas and practices during design and preconstruction was many of the projects (Thailand, Laos, Bolivia, Honduras, Indonesia) did not use formal drawings or a formal design process. These projects may have used some sketches or informal drawings, but the primary design was known by the owner and constructors and completed based on methods that had worked before. Another reason for only considering sustainability during the construction process was due to the intrinsic use of the sustainable aspects mentioned above. The people in Thailand, Laos, and Central America maintained a good relationship with their surrounding environment and were very aware of the sun, the winds and available materials (Rowell, Reents, Linquist 2008). Because the locals were aware of the environment, they would build their projects with more windows oriented toward the wind for better ventilation, fewer windows oriented directly toward the harsh sunlight, and other design decisions that were made on the
38
jobsite during construction (Reents, Rowell 2008). The final reason for not considering sustainability during design and preconstruction is the lack of a formal design process (Rowell 2008). The primary focus on sustainability in the developing world is within non-government organizations and non-profit organizations because most of those organizations come from developed countries where a formal knowledge of sustainability exists along with a formal design process (Alexander, 2008).
5.4 Opportunity for a Developing World Guideline After interviewing each of the respondents, all of them mentioned a desire and need for a sustainable standard or guideline for the developing world. Based on the overwhelming response from the respondents it appears as though a guideline or standard for sustainable practices in the developing world could be feasible. Because of the lack of a standard or guideline for people working in the developing world, there is an opportunity to create a sustainable guideline or standard. All of the interviewees mentioned that the standard would need to be based contextually for each of the projects. Kevin Rowell from Kleiwerks International stated that the standard or guideline would be most useful if it were oriented toward non-government organizations, non-profit organizations, and funding agencies (Rowell, 2008). With the NGO’s and funding agencies as the main target the standard or guideline could be used to raise the level of awareness of sustainable practices among people from peer groups in the developed world who work in the developing world. The non-government organizations would then be able to promote sustainable practices with the local people within the context of each individual culture that they have contact with. If funding agencies adopted a guideline or
39
standard for sustainable practices on the projects they fund in the developing world the long term impact on the built environment could be substantial. A standard for the developing world could use a similar format to the LEED standard, but not focus on details or how to meet the criteria. Creating detailed criteria makes a standard less useful in each of the individual developing world contexts where it would be applied. Each context uses different technologies, methods, and materials which could be used to achieve the same standard or guideline in a different manner. See the Developing Word Guideline: Proof of Concept below for an idea of a guideline that could achieve more sustainable buildings in the developing world. Several differences exist between the Developing World (DW) guideline and the LEED NC standard. Two of the main variations between the DW guideline and the LEED NC standard are the use of overarching principles that should be considered for each developing world project, and less detailed criteria in the DW guideline. The overarching principles should be considered before for each aspect of the project, and are intended to be a guideline for appropriate solutions (See Developing World Guideline: Overarching Principles below). Some of the principles that should be considered are: how well the project paves the way for a better future; if the solution is affordable; if the solution meets the needs of the community; if the project protects the environment; and if the solution uses local skills and material (Coupe, 2008). The LEED NC standard used in the developed world uses detailed criteria with reference to a number of different standards, where as the DW guideline reduces the level of detailed criteria that must be met. Less detailed criteria are used in the guideline, because the intent of the guideline is to provoke thought about sustainability. By attempting to achieve a higher level of
40
sustainability in any of the areas mentioned in the guideline would improve buildings in the developing world. As more and more projects attempt to improve the sustainability of their buildings, then a future, more detailed criteria could be established. Another difference between the LEED NC criteria and the DW guideline is the removal of any standards that were found to be inapplicable in the developing world as deemed by the results shown above. A guideline for promoting cleaner drinking water is included. The intent of the clean drinking water guideline is to prevent washing, urinating, and defecating in the same water source used for drinking and cooking. The other primary addition is a guideline for promoting more sustainable use of the local labor force, which would boost the local economy and provide much needed jobs in many of the developing world locations. The guideline focuses on using the local labor force whenever it is available, in lieu of machinery. Developing World: Overarching Principles
Better Future Local Needs Local Empowerment Local Economy Environmental Protection Affordability Survey Conditions Survey Needs
Overarching Principles Social Concerns The building solution paves the way for a better future Ensure the solution meets the community's needs Help the locals help themselves The whole process from design to occupancy boosts the local economy & provides jobs Building Concerns Ensure the solution protects the environment The building uses affordable materials, methods, and practices Existing Conditions Before Starting establish what exists, compared to what is needed Establish what the community needs
Table 7
41
Developing World Guideline: Proof of Concept Section
Sustainable Sites
Credit Description Construction Activity Pollution SS 1 Prevention
SS 2
Site Selection
SS 3
Public Transportation Access
SS 4
Community Connectivity Site Development: Protect Habitat/Maximize Open Space Stormwater Design: Quantity Control
SS 5 SS 6
WE 2
Light Pollution Reduction Water Efficient Landscaping: Reduce by 50% Water Efficient Landscaping: Not Potable Use
WE 3
Prevent drinking water contamination
WE 4
Innovative Waste Water Technology
EA 1
On-Site Renewable Energy
MR 1
Building Reuse Material Reuse or Recycled Content Use
SS 7 WE 1 Water Efficiency
Energy and Atmosphere
Materials and MR 2 Resources MR 3
Regional Materials
MR 4
Rapidly Renewable Materials
IEQ 1 Environmental Smoke Control IEQ 2 Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Control Indoor Enivronment Quality
Labor Innovation in Design
IEQ 3 Controllability of Systems: Lighting Controllability of Systems: Thermal IEQ 4 Comfort IEQ 5 Daylighting and Views Replace mechanized use with local labor L1 Maximize local labor use L2 ID 1
Innovation in Design
Table 8
42
Intent Control erosion, sedimentation and dust creation Avoid development of inappropriate sites and reduce the impact on local environment from the building Locate project within walking distance of public transportation Construct building near residential neighborhood, within close proximity to some basic services Conserve existing natural areas, or repair damaged open space Limit disruption of natural hydrology Minimize light trespass from building and site Limit use of potable water irrigation Eliminate use of potable water for irrigation Use of toilets, sinks, wash basins, septic tanks, leech fields, etc. to prevent drinking water source contamination Grey Water recycling for wastewater, or irrigation Use solar, wind, hydro power, etc. Reuse structural elements, walls, roof, floor, and finish elements from an existing or demolished building Use salvaged or reused materials, or materials with recycled content Use building materials that have been extracted, harvested or manufactured within 500 miles Use materials that are harvested within a 10 year life cycle Prevent any type of smoke from entering the building Minimize exposure of occupants to harsh chemicals or particulates Provide a high level of lighting system control Provide a high level of thermal comfort system control Provide daylighting and and a connection with the outdoors for a significant portion of the building Replace a major mechanized process with local workers Use maximum number of local laborers Exceptional Performance in any other credit, or innovative sustainable practice
5.5 Research Limitations The primary limitation to this research was only looking at a representative project from most developing world regions. If more projects from each region could have been examined, it would have provided a clearer picture of how each region did or did not accomplish sustainability. The interviewees often had knowledge of more than one project from each of the regions, which added more data about each region. In spite of this, the data was still limited to a few respondents for each region, and in the case of Central Asia, and Africa, there was only one respondent. In addition, only examining the regions through interviews also limited the depth of data and knowledge that could be acquired. Other data acquisition methods, such as case studies or field experiences, would have provided more data from which to draw conclusions about the whole developing world and, more specifically, about regions or countries. Although, looking at different regions was useful to establish a baseline of how a typical developing world project was sustainable, the research was still limited to regions, and it may have been more useful to examine each developing world country. By looking at each country, the differences within a region would have also been noted, and this would have allowed for a greater exploration of the cultural and contextual affects on sustainability. Similar to the challenges discussed in the Background a number of barriers to the implementation of this research exist. There is a huge urgency to build shelter, so people in the developing world may disregard standards or guidelines because they need to build as quickly as possible. Another barrier is the lack of governance and weak leadership, which prevents positive change from moving quickly. It is difficult for a country in
43
survival mode to think about sustainability and quality building. The intense pressure to build infrastructure and shelter often prevents anyone in government or leadership from thinking about providing a sustainable final product. Finally, the barrier between western ideas and local cultures could also prevent this research from being implemented. People who would use this research must respect the local context where they would work and they must also focus on empowering the locals to move forward on their own.
5.6 Future Research There are several topics which require future research that directly correlate to the research presented in this paper. More research needs to be done to further establish a baseline of the sustainable practices in the developing world. A more in-depth look at each region or country would be useful to further validate or refute the results found here. Research could be done on a broad, whole developing world scale, or other research could more narrowly look at regions or countries. Another topic which requires further research is the applicability of a developing world standard or guideline. The guideline could be used on several projects to validate how well each project accomplished the goal of becoming more sustainable. If the standard or guideline were used to aide nongovernment agencies in their work or by people who have direct contact with local developing world communities, then further research could determine how the projects were improved from previous methods and practices. Research needs to be done regarding each region’s or country’s use of standards and requirements within the building codes, safety codes, materials regulations, and others. It would be useful to have a greater understanding of what standards and codes
44
are required by the governments in each location. There is a need for further research to explore how well the standards and requirements are being enforced. Many of the papers read for the literature review recommended that the developing world governments needed to create and enforce standards regarding construction. It would be beneficial to understand how many countries have standards in place or in the creation phase, as well as what the standards require from builders. Along the same lines with exploring the use and implementation of the standards, research about appropriateness of the standards that currently exist needs to be done. Future research needs to continue to promote appropriate technologies that aide all facets of life in the developing world. In correlation with the research regarding sustainability, research needs to be done about appropriate technologies that would improve water use reduction, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and any other sustainability-driven technology. Similarly, research about the availability of recycled content and reusable materials in each marketplace would help to establish what locations could use more sustainable practices surrounding building materials use. Finally, more social research needs to be done pertaining to the interface between locals and the developed world person. Appropriate methods of empowering locals and aiding with the local knowledge base about sustainable methods and practices need to be explored. A deeper understanding is needed of the interface between developed world people helping locals improve the sustainability of their buildings, but still remaining aware of the developing world cultures and lifestyles where they are working.
45
6.0 Bibliography “Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries.” (2002). United Nations Environment Program. International Council for Research and Innovation in Building Construction. CSIR Building and Construction Technology, Pretoria. Alexander, Tom [GML Performance Consulting, Indonesia]. Personal Interview. 27 March 2008. Becker, H. S. (1970). Sociological Work: Method and Substance. Chicago: Aldine. Bugliarello, George. (2007). “Megacities and the Developing World.” The Bridge, National Academy of Engineering. Volume 29, #4. Coupe, Stewart. (2008). “Poverty and Technology.” 19 June 2008. . Creswell, John W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications DeLisle, Steve [Heart to Honduras]. Telephone Interview. 8 May 2008. Du Plessis, Chrisna. (2007). “A Strategic Framework for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries.” Construction Management and Economics, 25:1 pg 67-76 Fields, Gary S. (2001). Distribution and Development: A New Look at the Developing World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Funk, Loren [Rafiki Foundation]. Personal Interview. 25 March 2008. Gissen, David. Big and Green: Toward Sustainable Architecture in the 21st Century. London: Princeton Architectural Press. 2003. Global Coalition for Africa (GCA). (2000). “Urbanization in Sub-Saharan Africa: Policy Issues and Implications.” Huguenin, Todd [World Hope International]. Telephone Interview. 27 May 2008. Kats, Greg, et al. (2003) “The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings.” Massachusetts Technology Collaborative. LEED for New Construction. (2005). USGBC.org Linquist, John [Engineering Ministries International, Central America]. Telephone Interview. 27 May 2008.
46
Maxwell, Joseph A. (2005). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Oppenheim, A.N. (1992). Questionnaire Design, Interviewing & Attitude Measurement. London: Continuum. Parsons, Laura Brigitte. (1996). “Engineering in Context: Engineering in Developing Countries.” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice. Reents, Peggy [Pun Pun Project, Thailand]. Telephone Interview. 14 May 2008. Rowell, Kevin [Kleiwerks International]. Telephone Interview. 27 May 2008. “The Federal Commitment to Green Building: Experiences and Expectations.” (2003). Office of the Federal Environmental Executive Timmer, Mike [IOU Boliva, International Teams]. Personal Interview. 28 January 2008. UN-OHLLS. (2002-2005). http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/related/59/. United Nations, Room UH-900, New York, NY 10017, U.S.A. Veach, Michael [World Hope International]. Telephone Interview. 27 May 2008. “White Paper on Sustainability.” (2003). Building Design and Construction, Oak Brook, IL.
47
7.0 Appendices Appendix 1: Interview Questions 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? 2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? 4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) 5. What could have been improved? 6. Familiarity with LEED? no 7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, or a standard for the DW? Value? 8. Who else would you recommend I interview?
48
Appendix 2: Interview Notes Tom Alexander 3-27-08 Contact Info:
[email protected] 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? Job (Public): Performance Business management consulting. GML Performance Consulting. GML does work in Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, etc, with clients like Central Bank of Indonesia, Nestle, Austrocar, Nike, etc. Performance measurement, performance management, risk management, business planning. Assess business plan, strategic plans, help assess, mitigate, and find new risks. Risk and decision analysis for companies. Job (Humanitarian/Missions) Church planting, work with Indonesian organizations to help children with education, after school programs, Computer training for children and adults, Radio programming (short commercials, to educational messages/programs) Tutoring the locals with what ever they need for school. After Tsunami- Housing and village redevelopment. Mostly not implementing any projects, just aiding the locals get things done (village decision making, getting materials, giving input and guidance). Main methodology based on community participation. The design was influenced by town hall meetings; architects would draw up the ideas and then get feedback from the locals. They brought in a Field Engineer to oversee the construction of all the houses to ensure they were being built according to the drawings, but other than that everything was local. Goals: Want to provide the communities with their own empowerment to achieve and accomplish the same things. They are trying to cultivate the capacity at the local level to help the locals be more efficient and effective, so they can still do the same things when the NGOs leave. They are trying to do sustainable and reproducible, in order to reduce the community’s dependency on the NGOs. Now focusing a lot on disaster preparedness, and reducing vulnerability. 2. First world (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Smattering among the village redevelopment from NGO’s to locals. Saw some houses being built completely with local technologies, and methods. Some houses being built with a mix of 1st world and Indonesian technologies, materials, etc. Some houses were built completely with 1st world technologies, methods, materials. Saw a mix of reinforced concrete pillar construction (structure) with fire baked brick (infill), with concrete (plaster like) smooth finishes, with sheet metal roofing (sometimes galvanized). Some NGO’s came with prefab framework, with metal infill, prefab concrete walls and floors which could be bolted together. Some mix of concrete base with wood frame above. Some were entirely wood. Tom worked with locals from their separate villages and they built wood stick frame buildings (similar to balloon frame), 1 meter stilt frame above ground. All of the technology, methods, labor was local. Main goal was to help the locals come up with houses that were reproducible on all levels, and understanding that what the locals said was actually what they wanted. 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? Most of the aspects of the projects that were sustainable, were sustainable because of the intrinsic nature of the local methods. Materials and labor were mostly from the region. Lumber typically came from well over 500 miles away, but other materials (Portland, bricks, steel) were all easily accessible locally. There was no direct thought process into sustainable practices. The community wanted wood because of the proximity to the forest, and how easily they would be able to get materials to repair and maintain their
49
homes. Intrinsically the locals had an understanding of local materials because of the ease of access, and cost. Currently they do not have a value of stewardship, it is not something that is taught, appreciated by the locals. In Indonesia, and across the Developing world the conversation about sustainable takes place at the NGO, UN level. 4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality? Not much was considered or used in the projects in terms of sustainability. The intensity to replace shelter after the Tsunami was very high. They did not consider day light, orientation, water efficiency etc. 5. What could have been improved? With the housing product not much should have been done differently. They were unable to slow the entire process down to change the approach. There were major issues and challenges on the social science side. Managing the relationships between the local communities and the other NGO’s was one issue that could have been done better. A couple issues with the houses done with wood were maintenance, termites, painting, etc. Many of these issues could be treated with education about termites, and how the sun affects the wood. At the village level, there was a huge issue of comparison between the housing their village was getting to the housing the next village over was getting. Many of the villagers were comparing their wood homes to the concrete or brick homes that the neighboring villages were getting. Not a ton that the NGO’s could have done differently, because the Indonesian government assigned NGO’s to the different villages and each NGO provided a different product. The problem with local dissatisfaction is that it can lead to improper or little use of the product that each community received. It leads to a waste of $ and resources. 6.
Familiarity with LEED? Yes, some
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, or a standard for the DW? Value? Not as much use in disaster relief, because of the intensity to replace lost shelter, and aide. It will be implemented by the NGOs because they realize the need and see the benefit. A check list of sustainable aspects, or guideline would be very helpful. I would want to create a check list in a fashion that is relevant to the host community. It is not effective to use the US or developed world methods. Could use something similar to the Sphere Guide (UN) 8. Who else would you recommend I interview? Samaritan’s Purse, Tearfund, Exfame, World Relief (more economic), World Vision, GTEK, UNDP
Steve DeLisle Interview 5/8/08 Contact Info:
[email protected] 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? Central Honduras- Heart To Honduras, build houses, Widows Project. He coordinates groups going down to Honduras to help build, see the whole project, and has input into all phases. Approximately 50 this year, 30 last year 30 this year will have some help from US groups, and 20 will be mostly built with local materials.
50
They build 2 types of houses. Concrete floor with CMU full wall. More durable, longer life, sealed up better. Concrete floor, 3-4 courses of CMU the wood framing above. Usually cheaper, can have more help from US groups. 2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Most of the methods are done with Honduran skills, and methods. The foundations, concrete floors, and CMU walls are all down by locals. Mix concrete on site, and locals are very good at getting the proper quality. Groups from US help build the wood walls, roofs, etc. Use straight forward hammer and nail method, consistent across around the world. 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? Local materials are used for most of the project. Local wood is used for the framing, CMU are manufactured and purchased locally, concrete comes from nearby. The roofing materials are galvanized metal (not sure if they are shipped in from Honduras or outside the country) Try to promote healthy sanitation, and cooking. They don’t intentionally use sustainable practices, mostly they focus on what works best for the locals. Use designs and ideas that are similar to what the locals are used to, some aspects the locals wouldn’t use because it is not familiar. Designs are based on cost and conserving cash. Consider location of building on site. For drainage, creek or water location, sanitation, etc. 4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) All houses were sustainable in the local materials and labor use. Ventilation of houses, with vaulted roofs, and lots of windows. Move the kitchen to another location outside of the house. This prevents smoke from filling the houses, because the main source of heat for cooking comes from burning wood. Also build for most homes, a PILA, separate toilet, shower, scrub board, and wash basin. Will hook them up to local water if it is available, allowing for flushing and running water. PILA is the biggest area that makes a difference in the health of the people, because it prevents them from going to the bathroom in the creek, or in a pile in the yard. It also help prevent people from cleaning clothes, body etc in the creek, using the creek as a bathroom, and drinking from the same creek. Main compound in Conchias, uses 30000 W hydroelectric dam to power the compound. It is rare in Honduras and unlikely for the locals to know how to use it or maintain it. Rich Hondurans will use PV panels on their homes, but only the rich. The panels are delicate, harder to maintain than most locals would like. Also, most locals wouldn’t be able to plug anything into the power if they had it because they can’t afford appliances or small gadgets. 5. What could have been improved? Locals don’t have resources or money to fix things if they are broken so they will live with them. They also don’t pay for water, so they will let it leak or drip. Could put in gutters to help with erosion around the house. There are a lot of steep sites, and sites with elevation changes. These sites could use more thought about drainage off of the houses. Some thought is put into draining the water off of the site, but not from the houses.
51
Would like to install high efficiency stoves. Help reduce the smoke, and wood use. Part of the problem is in the US we want the latest and greatest technologies, but the locals only want what they know has worked for them in the past. Locals are resistant to changing their habits and methods, because they only want to subsist. Another issue with the stoves is the extra cost. 6.
Familiarity with LEED? Not really
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, or a standard for the DW? Value? A check list of the different aspects of a project that could be sustainable, that would improve the projects, would be useful as a guideline. People would like to see a standard or checklist. The main concern is HTH wants to provide what is best for the long term. There is not the same urgency or intensity to provide housing in Honduras now as there was with the Hurricane a while back, or the Tsunami in Indonesia. The main issue with the houses is the financial constraint. 8. None
Who else would you recommend I interview?
Loren Funk Interview 3/25/08 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? Malawi and Rwanda- Built orphanages, has been several times since 2000 with Rafiki-Foundation.org Mexico-School (less input about this than Africa) 2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Africa-He went into the projects thinking he could build with portable concrete mixers and backhoes, etc. First day arrived and the word had spread that an American was coming to help build the orphanages, and 100’s of people had lined up hoping to get work. Used the lines of people to excavated for the foundations, and slabs. It is a better approach to see how the locals do the work, ask why, and then see if there is a way that you can help out. It doesn’t work to go in thinking that you can do anything with the first world methods, doing so will leave you humbled. They need technology, to help in there processes, but there methods work. Slab in Rwanda, started by chipping huge boulders out of a local rock wall, then had 10-15 women chip the boulders to 1-1/2” aggregate. They dug the sand out of a sand bar in the local river bed. Zambian Portland cement was purchased, because the cement from Rwanda was not as good (Bough cement from Zambia for Malawi project too). Concrete blocks, they bought a brick maker locally and then mixed the bricks onsite, let them sun dry. Mexico-bought the block from nearby 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? Rock, sand and other materials came from nearby. Only some items were purchased from other countries (typically in Africa).
52
The primary driver to using sustainable practices is economics. Another main driver was building orphanages as fast as possible, because of the need for orphan housing. The site was not chosen with consideration to farmland. No stormwater detention was used. There is no such thing as a certified forest, until recently most people have just cut down the forest for necessity. They do not use wind or hydro. Many of the decisions are made in order to quickly provide orphanages, and some of the decision makers do not have knowledge of sustainable practices. 4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) Very little of these projects were sustainable other than the use of local materials and labor. 5. What could have been improved? Durability of the blocks, longevity- The materials used could have been improved. Use of Green Bricks? Reinforcing steel- cost a fortune, 1 #5 bar= >1 years wages fro a Malawian, could bamboo or something similar be used? Energy from grid is inconsistent, cost approx $250,000 just to bring the power to the site. Solar, wind, hydro, any of these would be hugely beneficial, to reduce the reliance on the grid power system. Natural lighting, increased ventilation, etc- could be improved. Currently no heating or cooling is used other than passive solar, and ambient air, but these projects could be improved. Water, it would be useful to catch the rainwater, to recycle, there is no consideration for low flow fixtures. 6.
Familiarity with LEED? Yes
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, or a standard for the DW? Value? Due to economic and time limitations it is difficult to promote the use of sustainable. Having Design Charettes would be immensely beneficial. Getting all of the construction, design, decision makers on the same page, for a day or two, would provide the opportunity to greatly improve the entire product. An aspect of which would be improving the sustainability. A check list of the different aspects of a project that could be sustainable, that would improve the projects, would be useful as a guideline. 8. Who else would you recommend I interview? Rafiki-Foundation.org Richard Walenta-CM Rafiki Projects 210-244-2600 19001 Huebner Rd-2 Chris Moyer- Architect San Antonio, TX 78258
John Linquist Interview 5/27/08 Contact Info:
[email protected] 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (design, construction, turnover, the whole project)? Central America, Guatemala, Haiti, Costa Rica Building projects, school, hospital, meeting hall. 2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Mix of both, but primarily developing world techniques.
53
Most construction used reinforced concrete with block infill. Often build block walls, leave a space for the columns, beams and floor system. Then pour concrete in the floor system allowing the curing to draw it all together and make it stronger. Use all local labor on some projects, and some American teams occasionally. Labor $ 1/3 vs. Materials $ 2/3 in Central America. A lot of the work is done by hand. Back hoe used rarely, instead use men digging a hole. Concrete is mixed by hand on the ground. Sometimes have concrete mixer on site and will run the mixer nonstop and run concrete in buckets to necessary location. Columns used concrete pump and ready mix truck. Floors and beams (steel/conc composite) lay across wall or port beam. Prop up beams with sticks-lay brick between beams. Add steel perpendicular to the beams below and a mesh above. Pour concrete from pump onto mesh to make floor. Make rebar cages, and stirrups on site. Use stucco finish with 3 layers. Roofs are corrugated steel, sometimes with a mylar finish to protect it from the acidity in the rain. Roof is often concrete for flat roofs. -water proof the roof with a concrete and latex mix. Railings, window bars and other misc metal made on site with welder and saw. Plastic piping used for conduit and plumbing, and always need to ensure locals are using a better grade pipe. Electrical is non-grounded typically and 3 wire grounded if Americans design it. Windows and doors are all custom made-get what you want. Commonly have fixed, sliding or jalousie windows. Often locals don’t understand the design as much so they will do it the way they are used to building. This leaves out features that were originally designed into the buildings. Electrical and plumbing are the 2 systems that get hurt the most because of a lack of standard in the developing world. 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? Not typically concerned with sustainable, mostly concerned with affordability and raising the level of safety. Central America they typically use unsafe practices in buildings. Often the locals say they have built this way before and it worked so they will do it again. In structures, they used cold rolled steel for trusses and structural elements. Have no way to ensure quality control- it is hard to find strength data for the materials. Reinforcing steel they would use less deformed bars. Use local materials because they are closer and cheaper. It often is dictated by what it available.
4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) Concern with site design goes toward growing plants to keep the top soil around. Also, keeping trees to provide shade for the building and the site. Little is done for erosion control because it is not usually a huge problem. Sometime retaining walls are built. Often the buildings are infill projects on flatter lots, so concern about runoff is less of a problem. Waste water locals usually use a seepage pit approx. 40’ deep. Designers encourage them to use a septic tank (Plastic or concrete) connected to either a leach field or a seepage pit. Septic works well in Central America because of the temperature, all of the solids breakdown pretty easily. Water they use wells or the local water system. In most countries people don’t trust the water. Costa Rica has good city water. Most people don’t worry about wasting water, but they also use less water than Americans. Central Americans use 60 gallons/person/day. Have used urinals with quick shutoff to prevent wasting water, but not much thought about low flow fixtures. Pressure and water storage are a bigger issue. If the city water stops or pressure drops they need water to last several days and also a manner in which to provide pressure. Usually they will put storage tanks on the roof, or cisterns in the ground. Materials come from nearby hardware stores, often carrying only some materials. Can look at a number of stores before you get what you need. Lighter block comes from directly nearby, and stronger compressive
54
strength block is manufactured in country by same companies that make floor systems. Steel is delivered from local stores in small parcels. Often they are concerned about theft, so they don’t want too much material lying around the site. All the sites have a guard watching. Energy is super expensive so they try everything they can to prevent using it. Try to use day light, or fluorescent lighting. Use cross ventilation to prevent the need for forced air. Use passive cooling and avoid heating with only exception being patient rooms in a hospital. Try to orient east-west if possible, and use shade and natural ventilation as much as possible. Also, they try to use as much day light as possible because it is free. A few places have used solar power for the lighting systems, but the solar systems are substandard and cost a lot up front. All of the power systems and air moving systems are designed based on availability and cost. 5.
What could have been improved?
6.
Familiarity with LEED? Not really
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, or a standard for the DW? Value? Desire is to push good design which incorporates a lot of the sustainable ideas. A standard or guideline would be good information to have, but they don’t have the time necessary to put it together. Main concern is balancing availability and cost with the design. 8. Who else would you recommend I interview? Former director in Guatemala CM Side of EMI- Henry Watts
[email protected]
Peggy Reents 5-14-08 with Pun Pun project in Thailand Contact Info:
[email protected] 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? Pun Pun project in Thailand-started with seed saving for farmers, trying to get locals into seed saving and grow their awareness. Now the focus on building with Earthen Materials. 2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Building with earthen materials is not native. After doing a number of workshops and training courses at the Pun Pun center, and else where, earthen building has become more popular, especially since 2001. Most people over the years have built with hard wood or bamboo. Now bamboo and hardwood forests are depleting so people are looking for other methods. It is becoming more expensive to get wood, and earthen methods are a good alternative for people with less money. In Thailand earthen construction is not native, although there were some simple earthen methods used, mostly by immigrants. A resurgence of earthen techniques has come from adapting American techniques. Initial ideas started with research here in the US, locals in Thailand now use earthen methods. The locals have started to adapt the methods for their materials, and resources, so the buildings are more their own style. Other aspects of buildings, such as thatch roof systems, custom windows, and doors are all local methods and styles. In India earthen methods are native. 3. other?
Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases,
55
It mostly depends on who the owner of the building was, and who was designing the building. Not much sustainable thought is used with drawings. Most projects are designed on site just before construction starts. The locals are pretty aware of protecting their environment, and they think of the lighting, rainwater capture, drainage, ventilation issues as they stand on the site. Then they build, and are good at integrating many sustainable issues into the final project. When architects do drawings the buildings are not as sustainable because the architects usually use commercial products and techniques and it is harder to integrate natural earthen technologies. The architects don’t know the characteristics of local design or materials, and often will add unnecessary features. Thai’s think of many sustainable aspects, such as septic systems, removed bathrooms, and cooking areas, rainwater collection. Many of these ideas the locals have adapted over the years through their own experiences.
4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) Mentioned above, but try to be efficient with rain water, not contaminating water. They use local materials on pretty much everything. The locals try to provide the best daylight and ventilation as possible. Not much comment on energy, site selection or usage, energy usage, etc. 5. What could have been improved? There is a vast difference between city and country. The people in the country are nearly as sustainable with their homes as possible. In the city a lot more could be considered, especially COOLING. There could be a larger use of natural cooling methods, trying to get away from A/C. City in particular, but Country as well, are starting to use a lot more concrete. (Comment) 6.
Familiarity with LEED? Yes, somewhat, mostly familiar with idea of it.
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, standard for the DW? Value? It could be beneficial to have a standard or guideline if it is locally based, most issues are local, or place to place. It depends on the type of application, where it is general for the whole DW or just for an area. Many areas have less regulation-building happens easily, which allows the old-school way to prevail. The old school way in Thailand is pretty sustainable, using rainwater collection, good ventilation, most aspects are already good. People are knowledgeable and conscience about land use and materials use and would maybe consider more recommendations to be better at sustainable. 8. Who else would you recommend I interview? Kevin at Kleiwerks Last Straw Journal-Dude in Thailand, maybe give different perspective of Thailand.
Kevin Rowell – Kleiwerks – 5/27/08 Contact Info:
[email protected] 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? Southeast Asia, Laos and Thailand in rural villages. Buildings schools and shelters. The village had 3 different ethnic groups: low land Laos, Northern Chinese, and Cambodian. Noticed how locals took ideas of earth building and ran with what they thought was appropriate. Kleiwerks gives info to local collaborators and they spread the info to the locals.
56
2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Each ethnic group had a different cultural knowledge of building methods. Chinese had earthen block building knowledge, and Cambodians had bamboo mat wall, woven and smeared with straw and mud knowledge. Locals have a nice relationship with the environment around them. They are very conscious of windows placement, orientation, ventilation, an overall large understanding of sustainable without a vernacular. Overall the breadth of info about earthen building and sustainable was intrinsic in the cultures. Americans typically brought ideas and knowledge about how to obtain better strength, more scientific and technological info. Americans brought ideas about buttresses to add more strength, larger overhangs to protect more of the walls and openings, etc. Americans brought ideas about how to finish the earthen buildings with local mineral aggregates, helping homes go from mud to a work of art. 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? Most of the rural projects were done in the construction phase and sustainable was accomplished from the intrinsic knowledge. The stage of implementation and use of sustainability ranges, and was related to level of education and type of culture. Educated societies, and educated people would include sustainable ideas into design and they understood the terminology and ideas better. Educated architects used design and construction phases, and would use some sustainability in their designs. We need to be able to let go of our preconceptions of our process and ideas, and work with the locals, in the manner that they work. 4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) IEQ-air quality was destroyed by cooking, whether the kitchen was in the home or detached. NGO’s are all bring in stoves and trying to improve the air quality. People also sleep close to the ground on unstable floors. Dust come up like crazy and causes air problems. There was a noticeable difference in health if people slept above the floor. Water-where is the bathroom? Waste water management was a problem. Trying to prevent urinating and defecating in the drinking water. NGO’s are trying to encourage composting toilets. Grey water was used in some places to water the gardens or trees. Planted fruit trees near well, so run off water could be used by the trees. 5. What could have been improved? Surfacing of floors, and waste water management. Preventing contamination of drinking water. Food- project in Thailand where they built 15 homes and community center, the main issue that continued to resurface was the need for food. Food production, and access. Food will be the largest necessity above shelter over the next decades. 6.
Familiarity with LEED? A lot, familiar with most of the points
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED, standard for the DW? Value? Ecological building network, predominate force behind building, have made standards with flyash, earth, other materials. Say attack an ASTM standard for materials first, something someone can use in the developing world and ensure they have a quality material. Guidelines are made for ourselves. They affect your peer group. Guideline that speaks to aide workers, funding agencies would help to bring them on board and help them to realize how important, and successful many of these thoughts are.
57
8. Who else would you recommend I interview? Nathaniel Corrum- Architects for Humanity
[email protected] Build here now Builders without Borders
Mick Veach 5/25/08 &Todd Huguenin 5/27/08 –World Hope International Contact Info:
[email protected] 1. Projects in Developing World: Where, when, what type of project? What aspects of these projects did you see (only a few, the whole project)? Todd- Azerbaijan, schools in different locations. Largest constraints were time and amount of $ from government contracts. With more money would liked to have done some other things to get better quality heating systems. Schools were contracts with the US DOD with strict guidelines and deadlines to meet time and $ wise. Not much time so had to get to the site and build as quickly as possible. 2. First World (outsider) or Developing World (insider) methods? Mick-Everything was stone-from Russia-they would drive it down in trucks. The standards depended on who the builder was. Most of the country used standards from the Soviet era for existing buildings. New buildings, high rises in particular, used Turkish standards. Turks are notorious for shoddy buildings. The schools would take 9-12 months and they would use local materials and local employees. The schools were something that they created for their children Todd- Local engineer used local workers and methods, a lot of the methods before Todd came on board were old soviet methods. Todd wanted to change things to get better quality and save money. Tried to do as much “value engineering” as possible. Locals were using chandeliers in the classrooms hanging from plywood ceiling. The chandeliers didn’t give much light and the ceilings were wearing down. He added drop down plastic ceiling with down lights. Cost less and was better quality lighting and ceiling system. A lot of methods were primarily Azeri with new technologies and systems coming into the country all the time. 3. Were sustainable practices used in the design/preconstruction phases, construction phases, other? Todd- Not much was considered in general for sustainable. The primary concern was building the schools quickly and under budget. 4. Sustainable aspects of projects? (Sustainable site, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environment quality) Todd- SS-did consider rain-installed down-spouting and locals would use cut stone around the perimeter with concrete, packed dirt and asphalt on top, to push water away from building. Orientation-was considered based on the site, often the sites were small and constrained any decisions about orientation. The locals used a system with a single loaded corridor. Class rooms were all down one side with a hallway connecting them all. The hallway had a lot of windows to give as much daylight as possible. Had a lot of trouble with inconsistent power; outages would last 8-12 hrs sometimes. EA-not much used, would use double pane windows to give better insulation from sunlight. IEQ-Daylighing was used a lot, and the main indoor quality consideration. They did try to ventilate the rooms as well as possible, but limited finances prevented too much technology from being used. Some schools had a problem with mildew and the walls would sweat, tried to keep them as dry as possible. MR-very little was recycled, no intentional use of recycled materials. Would use materials that were available locally; they wouldn’t have anything shipped in for the projects. A lot of times $ was the primary driver, inflation of materials often would be incredible and threatened to stop the projects several times.
5. What could have been improved? Todd-Combi-heating and cooling systems. Were expensive, but could use the heating or cooling systems with gas or electricity. The units were very efficient and could run with little gas or electricity.
58
Wanted to build automatic water systems. Put pump and tank in the ground to store water from city system. Then also have a tank on the roof to use for the building. When the tank on the roof set off an electronic sensor water from the underground tank would be pumped up to it. Problem with corruption. They didn’t want to put anything nice in the schools that would be stolen by the teachers or directors. It was always an issue trying to keep the things that were given to the school at the school. Mick-Corruption often cut back on the materials. Most of the time the locals would take out earthquake protection from the buildings. They would buy cheaper stone, with water still in it, so walls wouldn’t dry. Electrical was a disaster because they would do only enough to make it look like they did a good job, and leave. There was not std. Bldg permits, bigger buildings cost more; tough to read the law and so it is interpreted by whoever administers the law. Their buildings would be very public, with plaque saying “gift from US” trying to cut down on corruption. They need to be more efficient with their money. 6.
Familiarity with LEED? no
7. Do you see a use for something like LEED or a standard for the DW? Value? Yes it would be useful. Developing countries are similar in a lot of ways but the std would have to depend on the country and context. Where you are changes the materials and methods that are used, so the std would have to be adjusted for the context. 8. Who else would you recommend I interview? World Hope International
59
Appendix 3: LEED New Construction V2.2 Check List
Project Checklist Sustainable Sites 14 Possible Points Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Credit 1 Site Selection Credit 2 Development Density & Community Connectivity Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment Credit 4.1 Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access Credit 4.2 Alternative Transportation, Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation, Low Emitting & Fuel Efficient Vehicles Credit 4.4 Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacity Credit 5.1 Site Development, Protect or Restore Habitat Credit 5.2 Site Development, Maximize Open Space Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design, Quantity Control Credit 6.2 Stormwater Design, Quality Control Credit 7.1 Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof Credit 7.2 Heat Island Effect, Roof Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction
Required 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Water Efficiency 5 Possible Points Credit 1.1 Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50% Credit 1.2 Water Efficient Landscaping, No Potable Use or No Irrigation Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies Credit 3.1 Water Use Reduction, 20% Reduction Credit 3.2 Water Use Reduction, 30% Reduction
1 1 1 1 1
Energy & Atmosphere 17 Possible Points Prereq 1 Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems Required Prereq 2 Minimum Energy Performance Prereq 3 Fundamental Refrigerant Management Credit 1 Optimize Energy Performance Credit 2 On-Site Renewable Energy Credit 3 Enhanced Commissioning Credit 4 Enhanced Refrigerant Management Credit 5 Measurement & Verification Credit 6 Green Power
Required Required 1–10 1–3 1 1 1 1
Materials & Resources 13 Possible Points Prereq 1 Storage & Collection of Recyclables Credit 1.1 Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof Credit 1.2 Building Reuse, Maintain 95% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof Credit 1.3 Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements Credit 2.1 Construction Waste Management, Divert 50% from Disposal Credit 2.2 Construction Waste Management, Divert 75% from Disposal Credit 3.1 Materials Reuse, 5% Credit 3.2 Materials Reuse, 10% Credit 4.1 Recycled Content, 10% (post-consumer + 1/2 pre-consumer) Credit 4.2 Recycled Content, 20% (post-consumer + 1/2 pre-consumer) Credit 5.1 Regional Materials, 10% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regionally Credit 5.2 Regional Materials, 20% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regionally Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials Credit 7 Certified Wood
60
Required 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Indoor Environmental Quality 15 Possible Points Prereq 1 Minimum IAQ Performance Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Credit 1 Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring Credit 2 Increased Ventilation Credit 3.1 Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction Credit 3.2 Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy Credit 4.1 Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives & Sealants Credit 4.2 Low-Emitting Materials, Paints & Coatings Credit 4.3 Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems Credit 4.4 Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood & Agrifiber Products Credit 5 Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control Credit 6.1 Controllability of Systems, Lighting Credit 6.2 Controllability of Systems, Thermal Comfort Credit 7.1 Thermal Comfort, Design Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort, Verification Credit 8.1 Daylight & Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces Credit 8.2 Daylight & Views, Views for 90% of Spaces
Required Required 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Innovation & Design Process 5 Possible Points Credit 1.1 Innovation in Design Credit 1.2 Innovation in Design Credit 1.3 Innovation in Design Credit 1.4 Innovation in Design Credit 2 LEED Accredited Professional
1 1 1 1 1
Project Totals 69 Possible Points Certified 26–32 points points
Silver 33–38 points
Gold 39–51 points
61
Platinum 52–69
![[PDF] Download Best Practices in Sustainable Building ... - Google Sites](https://m.moam.info/img/260x300/pdf-download-best-practices-in-sustainable-buildin_64778539097c474d228c21d6.jpg)
![World Green Building Trends 2016, Developing Markets Accelerate ... [PDF]](https://m.moam.info/img/260x300/world-green-building-trends-2016-developing-market_650615f7098a9e0c4d8b45f2.jpg)
