barriers and drivers within large architectural practice to low and zero carbon architecture

8/9/2019 Barriers and Drivers Within Large Architectural Practice to Low and Zero Carbon Architecture

1/342

Barriers and Drivers within Large Architectural Practice to Low and Zero Carbon Architecture

BARRIERS AND DRIVERS WITHIN LARGE ARCHITECTURAL

PRACTICE TO LOW AND ZERO CARBON ARCHITECTURE

Kate Stewart

0629468

Masters of Science: Architecture: Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies

July 2009

Graduate School of the Environment

Centre for Alternative Technology

Machynlleth

Powys

Wales

SY20 9AZ

Tel: 01654 705981

And:

School of Computing and Technology

University of East London

Docklands Campus

4-6 University Way

London

EI6 2RD

Tel: 0208 2233000


2/342


PREFACE

The purpose of this thesis is to identify the barriers and drivers to a large architectural

practice achieving the governments low and zero carbon building targets. A mixed mode

approach was employed to obtain quantitative and qualitative information from a large,

medium, and small architectural practice, and industry stakeholders and actors from within

the construction industry for comparative analysis. Due to the lack of coherent zero carbon

definition as yet defined by government and industry the author adopted the zero carbon

definition for housing as the blanket definition for zero carbon throughout this research.

Whilst the intention of this thesis was to define the barriers and drivers to large architectural

practice with regards to the government low and zero carbon building targets the findings

from this research significantly showed, amongst other more controversial conclusions, thatthe familiarity with the governments targets is varied within all architectural practice size

types. Therefore, action is required within those practices to ensure that such factors are

addressed. The thesis concludes with observations and recommendations.


3/342


4/342


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to thank all those who contributed their experience to this thesis. The

author would like to thank the staff from Willmore Iles Architects, Capita Architecture and

Quattro Architects for completing the online questionnaire. The author is also grateful to the

following people for either agreeing to be interviewed or for providing invaluable contacts

and advice (and on a number of occasions both):

Celia Beeson - Bristol City Council

Jamie Bull - Carbon Plan

Colin Campbell Capita Architecture

Paul Davis - Wates Group

Dave Farebrother - Land Securities

Bill Gething - Fielden Clegg Bradley

Bobby Gilbert - Bobby Gilbert and Associates

Gavin Harper Author of relevant environmental texts

Karl Hutchison White Design

Ian Mawditt - Building Sciences

Hugh Nettelfield - Quattro Architects

Rob Scot McLeod Building Research Establishment

Rebecca Tregarthen Capita Architecture

Martin Wiles University of Bristol

The author would also like to thank the other interviewees who chose to remain anonymous.

Finally, the author would like to thank Melissa Taylor for her advice and patience as my

tutor, and Daniel Bellerby and Mr and Mrs Stewart for their incredible support and

assistance.


5/342


CONTENTS PAGE NO.

Preface........................................................................................................................................2

Copyright ...................................................................................................................................3Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................4

List of Figures............................................................................................................................7

List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................8

1 Chapter 1: Introduction.....................................................................................................10

1.1 Chapter Introduction ................................................................................................10

1.2 Research Questions..................................................................................................10

1.3 Research questions context to the environmental debate ........................................10

1.4 Aims and Objectives................................................................................................111.4.1 Aims.....................................................................................................................11

1.4.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................11

1.5 Ethics and the thesis.................................................................................................12

1.6 Thesis Structure .......................................................................................................12

1.7 Chapter summary.....................................................................................................13

2 Chapter 2: Literature Review ...........................................................................................14


2.2 Large Architectural Practice ....................................................................................142.3 Historical Context ....................................................................................................15

2.4 Legislative Context ..................................................................................................16

2.4.1 UK Change in Legislation ...................................................................................16

2.4.2 Building Regulations ...........................................................................................17

2.4.3 Planning...................................................................................................................19

2.5 Low and Zero Carbon Definitions ...........................................................................21

2.5.1 Definitions............................................................................................................21

2.5.2 Housing and New Build Bias...............................................................................23

2.5.3 Non-domestic.......................................................................................................24

2.5.4 The Zero Carbon Debate .....................................................................................24

2.6 Building Standards and Trends................................................................................26

2.6.1 BREEAM.............................................................................................................26

2.6.2 Code for Sustainable Homes................................................................................28

2.7 Limitations of Literature ..........................................................................................30

2.8 Chapter summary.....................................................................................................30

3 Chapter 3: Methodology...................................................................................................30


6/342



3.2 Case Study ...............................................................................................................31

3.2.1 The Case Study Method.......................................................................................31

3.2.2 Case Study ...........................................................................................................31

3.2.3 Large Practice Context.........................................................................................33

3.3 Mixed Mode Method ...............................................................................................34

3.3.1 Triangulation........................................................................................................34

3.3.2 Quantitative..........................................................................................................34

3.3.3 Qualitative............................................................................................................35

3.3.4 Limitations of Quantitative and Qualitative Research.........................................37

3.4 Chapter summary.....................................................................................................37

4 Chapter 4: Results Analysis and Discussion ....................................................................37


4.2 Data set.....................................................................................................................38

4.3 Analysis 1 Familiarity with government statement ..............................................39

4.4 Analysis 2 Ability to achieve government statement ...........................................41

4.5 Analysis 3 Frequency of design criteria undertaken.............................................44

4.6 Analysis 4 Use of BREEAM ................................................................................47

4.7 Analysis 5 Barriers and drivers.............................................................................49

4.8 Analysis 6 Methods for training and support........................................................55

4.9 Analysis 7 Large Practice mission statement........................................................58

4.10 Analysis 8 Collaborative working ........................................................................61

4.11 Analysis 9 Knowledge sharing .............................................................................61

4.12 Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................62

5 Chapter 5: Conclusion ......................................................................................................63


5.2 Limitations of thesis.................................................................................................64

5.3 Implications for existing Orthodoxy........................................................................65

5.4 Implications for future research...............................................................................65

References................................................................................................................................67

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................72

Appendix 1 Copies of questionnaires .................................................................................75

Appendix 2 BREEAM and CSH comparison table ............................................................92

Appendix 3 Questionnaire Results .....................................................................................96

Appendix 4 Interview transcripts .....................................................................................114

Appendix 5 Transcription coding .....................................................................................322


7/342


LIST OF FIGURES PAGE NO.

Figure 1 Timeline to zero carbon .......22

Figure 2 BREEAM categories .......27

Figure 3 BREEAM ratings ....27

Figure 4 CSH categories .......29

Figure 5 CSH star ratings ..........29

Figure 6 Familiarity with government statement ..40

Figure 7 On target to government statement .42

Figure 8 Criteria for design briefs .45

Figure 9 BREEAM standards achieved .47

Figure 10 Barriers to low and zero carbon ..49

Figure 11 Drivers to low and zero carbon ...53

Figure 12 Training methods ....55




Figure 16 Large practice familiarity with statements .....58

Figure 17 Large practice target to achieve statements ....60


8/342


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BRE Building Research Establishment

BREEAM Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CSH Code for Sustainable Homes

CIC Construction Industry Council

CIH Chartered Institute of Housing

CLG Department for Communities and Local Government

CPRE Campaign to Protect Rural England

DC Development Control

DEC Display Energy Certificate

EMAS Eco Management and Audit Scheme

EPBD Energy Performance of Buildings Directive

EPC Energy Performance Certificate

GHG Green House Gas

IET Institute for Engineering and Technology

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

LDF Local Development Framework

NCM National Calculation Methodology

PPA Planning Performance Agreement

PPS Planning Policy Statements

SAP Standard Assessment Procedure

SBEM Simplified Building Energy Model


9/342


SPD Supplementary Planning Document

TCPA Town and Country Planning Association

TER Target Emissions Rate

UK GBC UK Green Building Council

UNEP United Nations Environmental Program

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

WHO World Health Organization


10/342


1 CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION

1.1 CHAPTER INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this chapter is to set the research questions, aims, objectives, contexts, andstructure of this thesis in a clear and concise introduction. From the thesis the reader can be

lead into a full and defined understanding of the scope and depth that this thesis offers to the

development of the abilities of large architectural practices to design low and zero carbon

buildings.

1.2

RESEARCH QUESTIONSThe purpose of this thesis is to identify what the barriers and drivers are within a large

architectural practice to producing the low and zero carbon architecture as committed to by

the UK governments sustainability agenda.

Therefore this thesis asks: What are the barriers and drivers for large architectural practices

(such as Capita Architecture) to designing low and zero carbon buildings and can

comparisons and lessons be drawn from medium and small practices?

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS CONTEXT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEBATE

The thesis is concerned with large architectural practices. To maintain clarity a single large

architectural practice was selected. Capita Architecture is currently the fifth largest

architectural practice in the UK, taking approximately 32.8 million in fees in 2008

(Architects Journal 2009). With 465 architectural staff across ten UK offices, Capita

Architecture is currently a specialist in 14 sectors (aviation, cultural, defence, education,

healthcare, industrial, leisure, rail, remand, residential, retail, science, technology, and

workplace) (Capita Architecture 2009). Residential only accounts for a small portion of their

work whilst commercial development dominates the work undertaken (ibid). A commitment

to sustainable architecture by Capita Architecture could result in a significant reduction in the

UK's CO2 emissions whilst strongly influencing others within the construction industry.


11/342


1.4 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1.4.1 AIMS

The aims of the research project and this thesis were:

To compare large architectural practice requirements to achieve low and zero carbonarchitecture to those of medium and small architectural practices, as well as suggestions

from industry stakeholders and actors.

To show that there are barriers and drivers to designing low and zero carbon buildings forlarge architecture practices in comparison to medium and small scale architectural

practices.

To ascertain if there are differences in staff aspirations and attitudes in large architecturalpractice to those of medium and small architectural practices towards UK government

low and zero carbon non-domestic building targets and the relevance of those targets to

job roles.

To see whether there are methods for improving large practice staff knowledge andability in low and zero carbon building design will differ to methods utilised within

medium and small architectural practices.

1.4.2 OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the research project and this thesis were:

Undertake a literature review to clarify historic/current legislative policies and standardsthat large architectural practices are currently required to design to.

Undertake a mixed method approach including; a case study of Capita Architecture as alarge architecture practice; surveys; and interviews with industry stakeholders and actors.

Identify what is required for a large architectural practice to commit to the UK'ssustainability agenda and produce low and zero carbon buildings.


12/342


1.5 ETHICS AND THE THESIS

Research that aims to challenge and possibly lead to the initiation of change within current

working methods of existing companies, such as Capita Architecture, and contributes to

knowledge through the collection and analysis of primary data will have to work within

acceptable ethical parameters. As well as fulfilling ethics requirements the author will also

have to establish acceptable research methods for when engaging with stakeholders and

actors, sensitive material, and industrial knowledge.

Whittaker (2009) and McGivern (2006) identify that though different ethics committees (e.g.

University of East London ethics committee) have different practices and priorities, the core

issues that ethics committees expect to be addressed are:

Non-malevolence the author should take all responsible steps to protect participantsfrom foreseeable harm or liable action.

Informed consent the author should provide written information to participants toenable them to make informed choices on being involved and non-disclosure policy.

Ethical data management the author will maintain anonymity and redact data wherenecessary or requested by participants. Reasonable steps will be taken by the author toprevent loss or circulation of data.

Realistically the ethical risks of being a respondent is usually minimal (Fowler 2001).

1.6 THESIS STRUCTURE

Following this introductory chapter the author will undertake a literature review of secondary

data and information in order to provide the reader with a sound understanding of the subject

and research themes of this thesis. The literature review will also clarify the value to which

this thesis contributes to existing knowledge.

The following methodology chapter will clarify the research methods carried out by the

author and justify why these methods were chosen. A discussion chapter which also includes

results and analysis will encapsulate the data collected in a debate centred around the research

question, aims, and objectives of this thesis.


13/342


Finally, a conclusions chapter will summarize findings as well as make suggestions for future

working methods within a large architectural practice. Furthermore limitations, implications

for existing orthodoxy, and implications for future research will be provided.

A list of references as well as appendices will also be provided at the end of the thesis.

1.7 CHAPTER SUMMARY

In this chapter the context, research question, aims, objectives, structure and ethics where set

out.


14/342


2 CHAPTER 2:LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION

This chapter will undertake a literature review of secondary data and information in order toprovide the reader with a sound understanding of the subject and research themes of this

thesis. The literature review will also clarify the value to which this thesis contributes to

existing knowledge.

2.2 LARGE ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE

As has been shown throughout this literature review and later in this thesis there is a focus on

large architectural practice. There are three key factors for justifying this focus:

Industry and government bias There is currently a bias in policy towards domesticbuildings (as discussed in section 2.4.2) whilst non-domestic is deficient in focus,

despite being the main work stream for large architectural practice (The Fees Bureau

2008)

Academic - an investigation of the literature available appears to confirm that there islittle peer reviewed research undertaken with regards to the barriers and drivers within

large architectural practice to producing the low and zero carbon buildings.

Professional interest - the author is currently employed within a large architecturalpractice and is concerned that levels of knowledge and experience are not sufficient to

achieve the governments low and zero carbon building targets.

It is likely that there is a relationship between all three factors and therefore warrants the

attention of the research undertaken in this thesis.


15/342


2.3 HISTORICAL CONTEXT

The architecture industry is going through a turbulent period. A change in public attitude and

a raft of legislation requirements is placing pressure on architectural practice to change the

type of architecture they deliver and the way they design. The way that this change has

developed is important to this thesis and its context, as by looking back at the historical

context one may see the source and development of barriers and drivers.

Although international concern for the environmental impact of global development was

originally headlined with the First World Summit in 1972, it wasnt until the Second Earth

Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 that the issue of climate change sparked a catalyst for

change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was formed by the United

Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and World Health Organization (WHO) in 1987 and

issued the report in August 1990 which made the connection between human activity and the

rise in global temperature (Pew Centre 2009). This was the basis of discussion at the Second

Summit and as a result the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC) was formed and drafted an international response that would ensure the

stabilization and reduction of a number of Green House Gas (GHG) emissions to a level

that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system (ibid).

However, with many countries failing to meet the original voluntary targets, it became

apparent that binding targets were required. The Kyoto Protocol in December 1997 set out to

do exactly this, and was finally entered into force in February 2005 (UNFCCC 2008).

The advantage of the Kyoto Protocol was that it acknowledged emissions levels were

proportionate to the level of a countrys development and therefore set emissions targets

accordingly. A collective target in emissions reductions of 5% below 1990 levels by 2012

was set, with the EU required to reduce emissions to 8% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012

(UNFCCC 2008).

From this as a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, the UK is obliged to fulfill a certain level of

criteria. However, it is keen to be seen to be taking steps beyond the minimum International

and European requirements and has set a number of legislative benchmarks above the

minimum required (this will be covered in more detail in Section 2.3).


16/342


2.4 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT

2.4.1 UKCHANGE IN LEGISLATION

In 1998 the UK government produced the first White Paper which looked into existing and

predicted energy use and reserves available. This was then preceded by the White Paper in

2003 called Our Energy Future Creating a Low Carbon Economy which focused on

renewable sources and energy efficiency (REA 2008). The purpose of the 2003 review was

to promote the security of energy supply by reducing the dependency on imports whilst

promoting renewable energy sources and cutting carbon dioxide emissions.

Alongside climate change concerns the UK is facing increasing pressure over energy

security. Driven by the decline in north sea oil and gas reserves and that UK nuclear power

stations are rapidly approaching the end of their operational life, the UK has become

increasingly dependent on imported oil and gas (Winstone et al 2007).

Buildings account for 8% of GHG emissions and 20% of GHG emissions if upstreamemissions associated with electricity and heat are included (HM Treasury 2009). The UK

government acknowledged this correlation and has subsequently sought to reduce energy

demand through building efficiency. This has obvious impacts on the industries and

organizations associated with the design and development of the built environment, such as

large architectural practices.

The EU introduced the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) 2002/91/EC in

January 2003 (Europa 2008). The purpose of the directive, which is mandatory to all member

states, is to encourage the energy efficiency of buildings through cost effective means. The

main initiatives include:

Standard methodologies for calculating the energy performance of buildings. Minimum energy performance standards for all new buildings and consequential

improvements to the energy performance of existing buildings over 1000m2

undergoing refurbishment.

The energy performance measurement of all buildings when they are being offered forsale or rent. This information is then recorded in an Energy Performance Certificate

(EPC). Where the buildings are occupied by a public authority or institution, are open


17/342


for public use and are over 1000m2 (CLG 2009a) they require a Display Energy

Certificate (DEC) which must be visible for public viewing.

Informed by the UK government 2003 Energy White Paper a draft Climate Change Bill was

produced proposing a reduction in UK carbon emissions by up to 32% below 1990 levels by

2020 and 60% below 1990 levels by 2050 (UNFCCC 2008). However, upon review of

additional scientific research and advice the UK government sought to further raise the

emissions targets.

Subsequent to this, whether due to political or environmental reasons, the UK Prime Minister

Gordon Brown stated:

"The EU view is that to stand a chance of keeping the temperature increase below the 2

degrees centigrade target, and as part of a multilateral agreement, emissions from

industrialised countries like Britain should be cut by 60-80% by 2050...evidence now

suggests that as part of an international agreement developed countries may have to reduce

their emissions by up to 80%. So we will put this evidence to the Committee on Climate

Change, ask it to advise us as it considers the first three five-year budgets on whether our

own domestic target should be tightened up to 80%." (Number10 2008).

When the Bill was finally passed in November 2008 the targets were increased to 42% below

1990 levels by 2020 and the 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, resulting in the UK becoming

the first country to make long term carbon emissions targets legally binding. Crucially, for

large architectural practices this requires changes in design and working methods to not only

meet these targets, but also to stay in competition with peer organizations and to maintain

market position.

2.4.2 BUILDING REGULATIONS

The UK Building Regulations are the main form of legislation governing the performance of

buildings and therefore key design criteria for buildings. In order to meet the energy

efficiency requirements set out by the EPBD a number of changes to the existing Building

Regulations were made in April 2006.

The main changes included the introduction of a National Calculation Methodology (NCM)

which standardizes the calculation of carbon dioxide emissions and minimum energy

performance standards in new buildings and existing buildings (where applicable). This is


18/342


modeled using either the thermal simulation software Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP)

or Simplified Building Energy Model (SBEM) (BRE 2009).

UK Building Regulations PartL1A 2006 requires all new air conditioned buildings to reduce

their emissions by 28% over the previous 2002 Part L requirements and all naturally

ventilated buildings to reduce their emissions by 23.5% (Planning Portal 2008). And whilst

the previous 2002 Part L specified minimum U-Values for each building element, the revised

Part L encourages the consideration of the building as a whole, including the building

services, and its resulting performance with regards to CO2 emissions (ibid).

The Building Regulations will undergo a re-issue in 2010, improving carbon emissions by

25%, an issue in 2013 to achieve a further 44% reduction in carbon emissions, followed by

the target of zero carbon in 2016 (CLG 2008a). Two mechanisms developed to achieve these

goals, for example, are the EPC and DEC.

As previously described an EPC is required by all buildings on offer for sale or rent and a

DEC is required by all buildings open for public use and over 1000m2. Both certificates

became a legal requirement as of October 2008. The purpose of the certificates is to reduce

the carbon emissions from buildings through a commercial incentive as well as encouraging

energy efficiency.

Wilkins (2004) stated:

"People arent going to change their buying habits overnight - the heart rules the head. But if

you have two similar properties and one has a higher rating than the other, it may have an

effect in terms of a decision.

The EPC confirms the buildings energy performance rating from A to G, with A being the

most efficient, in similar vein to the energy performance rating of a number of white goods.

The certificate is also required to provide a series of recommendations on how to improve the

buildings energy performance within realistic economic parameters (CLG 2009a).

DECs confirm the buildings actual energy use based on previous fuel use documentation

(e.g. bills). Again, the certificate is provided with a list of economic energy performance

suggestions. Unlike the EPC the DEC is required to be on display at all times and clearly

visible to the public (CLG 2009a).


19/342


2.4.3PLANNING

Though there is a singular planning system in England the framework is fairly complex.

Under the title The system in brief the website Planning Help, a project of the Campaign to

Protect Rural England (CPRE), provides the following description of the planning system in

England (CPRE 2009):

The structure of influence is laid out below, starting with:

European directives and laws National planning legislation Primary acts of Parliament Secondary (regulations) National planning policy Planning policy guidance notes and minerals planning guidance notes

Guidance notes are progressively being replaced by

Planning policy and minerals policy statements Government circulars Government white papers Ministerial statements

These in turn influence

Regional plans and guidance

Regional planning guidance notes, progressively being replaced by

Regional spatial strategies, including regional transport strategies (which influences) Other regional strategies Regional economic strategies Regional sustainable development frameworks (or equivalent)


20/342


Others, such as cultural strategiesRegional plans then influence

Higher tier (county and unitary council) plans

Saved policies from county structure plans and unitary development plans (part I),being progressively replaced by regional spatial strategies

Saved policies from minerals and waste local plans, progressively replaced byminerals and waste development framework

Which then influences

Local development plansSaved polices from existing local plans and unitary development plans (part II), being

progressively replaced by local development frameworks, which are made up of

Statutory development plan documents Non-statutory supplementary planning documents.

Other 'material considerations' can be such things as changed circumstances, new

information and overriding need.

Whilst there has been no direct change to the planning system as a result of global or

European agreements, commitments such as Agenda 21 and the Kyoto Agreement have

contributed to changes in planning policy with the emphasis being on strategic policy

makers and planners at a regional and local level quickly responding to the step change in

government thinking (TCPA 2008).

The Merton Rule, for example, is the London Borough of Mertons response to the Planning

Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development and its supplement Planning and

Climate Change (PPS1). Whereas PPS1 sought to address climate change through the

planning process with the integration and increase of renewable energy, the London Borough

of Merton acknowledged the difficulty in providing large scale renewable energy systems

within their suburban borough. It therefore created a supplementary policy in 2003 requiring


21/342


new developments to reduce their predicted CO2 emissions by 10% through onsite renewable

energies (Merton 2008).

Whilst a number of Local Authorities have already adopted a local response to planning

policy or are in the process of producing a response it is anticipated that it will be a few

years yet before the dust settles (Cottrel 2009).

2.5 LOW AND ZERO CARBON DEFINITIONS

2.5.1 DEFINITIONS

The definition of a zero carbon home is one that produces zero net emissions of carbondioxide (CO2) from all energy use in the home (Hewitt and Telfer 2007)over a year. With

reference to Figure 1 the UK government has also confirmed the target of zero carbon for

schools in 2016, zero carbon public buildings from 2018 and a zero carbon target of 2019 for

all other non-domestic buildings in England. Wales have set their target for zero carbon

housing for 2011 (Planning Portal 2007).

There is, however, no definition of zero carbon for non-domestic buildings as yet and no

specific carbon emissions guide equivalent of the CFSH for non-domestic buildings.


22/342


Figure 1. UK GBC current timeline to zero carbon within the UK demonstrates the targetfor architectural practices over the next ten years. Source: UKGBC 2008


23/342


In December 2008 the UK Government issued the paper Definition of Zero Carbon Homes

and Non-domestic buildings for industry consultation. As well as seeking a response on the

amended zero carbon housing proposals it requires feedback on what it describes as the

Governments ambition that new non-domestic buildings should be zero carbon from 2019

(CLG 2008b). The government had intended to issue a summary of responses in June 2009,

followed by a further policy statement on zero carbon homes within the summer of 2009 and

conduct a further consultation in the same year to agree the zero carbon definition for non-

domestic buildings, however, at the time of writing the responses were delayed until 16th

July

2009 (CLG 2009b).

Furthermore the CLG (2008b) stated that the primary objective of the zero carbon homes

policy is to reduce carbon emissions from homes so as to help meet our long-term emission

reduction targets.

At present it is the governments aspiration for a zero-carbon house to be connected to

mains electricity and gas but needs to have sufficient additional renewable power to cover

the average consumption of a house over a year. In order to achieve this, the fabric of the

building will have to be insulated and built to very high standards and the house will need to

incorporate renewable energy technologies(DirectGov 2009).

Since Building a Greener Future was published, the European Union has agreed its

Renewable Energy Directive15. The Directive sets the UK a challenging target that 15% of

energy consumption should be met from renewable sources by 2020 (Europa 2009).

Therefore, taking into account this information, particularly the view on zero carbon from the

EU and UK government, for the purposes of this thesis zero carbon will be defined as no net

carbon emissions from all energy use over the course of the year as referred to by CLG in

Towards A Zero Carbon Future (CLG 2006). For the purposes of this thesis this definition

will be used in reference to non-domestic buildings.

2.5.2 HOUSING AND NEW BUILD BIAS

The CLG (2008a) document states that the housing sector was responsible for 27% of the

UKs overall CO2 emissions. Taking into account this high contribution and the

governments aspiration to build a further 240,000 additional homes a year by 2016 it is

understandable that domestic housing has attracted much of the focus for low and zero carbon

as new build offers more straight forward solutions.


24/342


However, it has been predicted that approximately two thirds of the building stock in 2050

will be made up from buildings existing today (Energy Saving Trust 2009) and therefore

there has been much criticism of the lack of progression with regards to existing housing

stock and non-domestic buildings.

In the Institute of Engineering and Technologys (IET) responding letter to the CLGs request

for consultation on the paper Building a Greener Future: Towards Zero Carbon Development

the IET criticized the consultation papers lack of relation to existing buildings suggesting that

while the consultation talks about new housing leading the way to low-carbon and zero-

carbon housing, it offers no clear linkage between the two (IET 2007).

Whilst domestic buildings typically only represent ?? (fee bureau for info) of work

undertaken by large architectural practices their dominance in the zero carbon building debate

makes them relevant to the discussion.

2.5.3 NON-DOMESTIC

Commercial buildings account for 16% of the UKs CO2 emissions (Carbon Trust 2008) and

it has been estimated that the floor area of non-domestic buildings will increase by

approximately 25% between 2002 and 2020 (CAT 2007). Whilst Zero carbon research has

been predominantly domestic new build biased (e.g. Codes for Sustainable Homes (CSH) 1-6and Ecohomes design tools) the UK GBC has recently been "commissioned [by the

Government] to add to the understanding of whether similar targets in the non-domestic

sector can be set and achieved and on what timescale" (CLG 2007a).

2.5.4 THE ZERO CARBON DEBATE

There is much debate in the industry as to whether the UK governments definition of zero

carbon is the best method of reducing CO2 emissions from buildings or whether there are

more efficient methods available.

In the IET (2007) responding letter to the CLG request for consultation it was suggested that

the zero carbon target for 2016 should be viewed realistically as an aspiration, and be

rewarded through incentives. The IETs reasoning for the predicted failure of legislation to

achieve the 2016 zero carbon targets is that electrical and electronic equipment is not

covered [and] the majority of the housing stock will continue to consist of old buildings

(ibid).


25/342


Both the lack of integration between building legislation and the energy efficiency of

consumerables and the new housing bias has been raised as a concern by significant industry

stakeholders such as the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) (CIH 2007). The CSH, for

example, includes the calculation of cooking, washing and electronic entertainment

appliance at CSH Level 6 (zero carbon) despite house hold occupancy behavior being

unregulated (IET 2007).

The current definition of zero carbon also calls for carbon reduction through the provision of

onsite renewable energy. Again there is serious debate as to whether this is achievable.

The UK GBC modelled a number of scenarios for both domestic and non-domestic buildings.

A number of amendments were made to the scenario such as removing the option for onsite

biomass, which it believes is being installed at an unsustainable rate, and providing a

recalculation of the carbon intensity of grid imported energy on the basis that there will be

efficiency improvements. Results suggested that the percentage of domestic buildings that

would fail to meet the zero carbon target would rise from the predicted 10% to 80%whilst the

majority of non-domestic buildings would fail to address their energy requirements without

significant heat dumping or connection to a local heat network on-site (UKGBC 2008).

They recommended, therefore, that the renewables supply parameters be widened to includenear-site and off-site renewables. This has been echoed by other stakeholders in the industry

including CLG who suggested that a target percentage of the energy to be used in new

development to come from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy sources where

it is viable. The target should avoid prescription on technologies and be flexible in how

carbon savings from local energy supplies are to be secured (CLG 2007b).

However, following the advice of the UK GBCs Zero Carbon Definition Task Group, the

Zero Carbon Hub, and the Building Regulations Advisory Committee the government has

amended the definition within the consultation paper Definition of Zero Carbon Homes and

Non-Domestic Buildings to include the following considerations (CLG 2008b):

Energy efficiency through the building fabric Minimum carbon reduction targets achieved through the combination of energy

efficiency methods, onsite energy supply and where applicable directly connected low

carbon or renewable heat supply.


26/342


Choose from a range of (mainly offsite) solutions for tackling the remainingemissions.

There is also criticism that the zero carbon definition fails to take into account the embodied

energy and lifecycle of a buildings materials and the context of the buildings location. In the

CLG (2007a) document they suggest that accountability of a buildings carbon footprint,

which could include the links between the building and transport networks, logistics, water

use, embodied energy and construction energy use for example, would present a more

holistic picture of the carbon emissions associated with non-domestic buildings". In defense

of the UK government, however, these areas are all touched upon by both the Building

Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) and CSH. Planning

Policy Statements also require planning authorities to prepare regional spatial strategies. The

basis of these spatial strategies are to ensure sustainable rural and urban development and

minimize transport requirements especially by car (CLG 2007b).

Due to the lack of a coherent definition of the zero carbon term within various government

policies, the government instructed the UK GBC to use the housing definition in its paper for

Report on Carbon Reductions in New Non-Domestic Buildings (UK GBC 2008).

In 2000 the UK government announced that it aimed to produce 10% of its energy fromrenewables sources by 2010

(BERR 2006). In response to the EUs aim for the EU to produce

20% of its energy from renewables, the UK undertook the Renewable Energy Strategy

consultation in 2008 and it has been confirmed that the UKs renewable energy target is

likely to rise to 15% by 2020 (RAB 2008).

2.6 BUILDING STANDARDS AND TRENDS

2.6.1 BREEAM

BREEAM is a tool designed by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) for assessing a

buildings sustainability performance. First introduced in 1990 to assess the criteria of offices

it now also caters for a number of specific building types (e.g. courts, education, industrial,

healthcare, retail and prisons). BREEAM is also offered for building types that do not fall

within any of their existing categories (e.g. Bespoke, International and Ecohomes). BREEAM

has become a common tool but from the authors experience it can sometimes be applied at


27/342


too late a stage in the design processes; the use of BREEAM is sometimes a last minute point

scoring tool rather than an aid to design.

Based on a series of nine categories the BREEAM methodology awards points against

criteria within each category (refer to Figure 1). Whilst each category is weighted with points

in accordance with its priority there are a number of mandatory points (called Minimum

BREEAM Standards) which are required.

Figure 2. The table shows BREEAM categories weightings in accordance with its priority.Source: HEEPI 2008

Following confirmation of points they are totaled and a rating benchmark of Pass, Good,

Very Good, Excellent or Outstanding is awarded (refer to Figure 3).

Figure 3. The table shows BREEAM categories rating benchmarks. Source: HEEPI 2008


28/342


One of the mandatory requirements is the SBEM calculated EPC CO2 index which becomes

incrementally harder in line with the rating benchmark (a new build BREEAM Excellent

requires an EPC CO2 index of 40, for example, whilst a new build BREEAM Outstanding

requires a EPC CO2 index of 25) (Gilbert 2009). Unlike the CSH (as discussed in section

2.5.2) BREEAM does not have a rating which achieves zero carbon.

The aspiration of the BREEAM methodology is to encourage the improved environmental

performance of buildings in a cost effective way. BRE also state that performance levels are

based on scientific evidence wherever possible and where specific targets cannot be set

using hard science or research, sensible practical measures are recommended to minimise

environmental impact or enhance the environment of the building and its users. (BRE 2008).

The BREEAM tool is increasingly requested by clients and therefore its understanding has

become of importance architectural practice. The significant relevance to this thesis is

whether staff within large architectural practice are versed in the nuances of the BREEAM

tool and how these compare to medium and small architectural practice.

2.6.2 CODE FOR SUSTAINABLE HOMESIn the CLG (2008c) document Greener Homes for the Future it is stated that our homes

account for around 27% of the UKs carbon emissions, a major cause of climate change.

The CSH is also a BRE designed tool. Based on their BREEAM Ecohomes it has been

adapted for the CLGfor new housing in England. Like BREEAM Ecohomes it also uses aseries of categories weightings (Energy/CO2, Water, Materials, Surface Water Runoff,

Waste, Pollution, Health and Wellbeing, Management and Ecology) and mandatory points in

order (refer to Figure 4). However, the resulting benchmark is confirmed via a hotel-style

star rating system and sets minimum energy and water standards at each level (refer to Figure

5).


29/342


Figure 4. The table shows CSH categories weightings and mandatory points. Source: CLG

2008d

Figure 5. The table shows the CSH star rating system. Unlike BREEAM CSH achieves a

zero carbon target. Source: CLG 2008c

Unlike the BREEAM EPC CO2 index system the CSH sets minimum incremental standards

based on a models percentage improvement of its Target Emissions Rate (TER) over Part L.


30/342


A CSH Level 6 house is required to obtain over 90% of the points available and produce zero

carbon net emissions over the first year of operation (CLG 2008c).

Originally intended to be a mandatory rating for all new homes, the mandatory requirement

was eventually reduced to government funded housing projects only which, as of May 2008,

were required to achieve a minimum CSH Level 3. The government has announced, however,

that by 2010 all new homes will require a minimum CSH Level 3, rising to CSH Level 4 in

2013 and zero carbon (CSH Level 6) in 2016 (CLG 2008c).

2.7 LIMITATIONS OF LITERATURE

The literature review highlighted and critically analysed secondary information from as

robust sources as possible in order to demonstrate the direction of current research. Due to the

lack of peer reviewed literature on large architectural practices the author looked to

professional institutes and official government department sources where possible.

2.8 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter performed a literature review of secondary data and information relating to the

research question, aims and objectives outlined in Chapter 1, and placed these in context with

this literature. As shown there are opportunities for this thesis to add to knowledge as well as

change professional working methods for large architectural practice.

3 CHAPTER 3:METHODOLOGY



31/342


The purpose of this thesis is to identify what the barriers and drivers are within a large

architectural practice to producing the low and zero carbon architecture as committed to by

the UK governments sustainability agenda, as show through the literature review (Chapter

2). As an analysis of all large architectural practices within the UK would constitute too

large a research topic, only one case study has been investigated as part of these works. In

order to provide context to the case study, however, the results have been compared with

other architectural practices (medium and small) and stakeholders and actors from within the

industry. All primary data has been collated through a mixed mode approach.

3.2 CASE STUDY

3.2.1 THE CASE STUDY METHODThe purpose of the case study is to gain a detailed understanding of the large architectural

practice in order to develop causal explanations (McGivern 2006) to the research problem

defined. However, McGivern (2006) warns of making generalizations of the subject area on

the basis of a singular case study and suggests that, if applicable, a case study can be formed

from a number of cases, rather than just one. Therefore, in order to provide context to the

large architectural practice the author has compared results with architectural practice types

(e.g. medium and small) and stakeholders and actors from within the industry.

3.2.2 CASE STUDYCapita Architecture is a UK based large architectural practice and is a trading division of

Capita Symonds. Capita Architecture was formed in 2007 following the acquisition and

merger of the architectural practices Capita Percy Thomas, Capita Ruddle Wilkinson and

Capita Norman Dawbarn (Capita Architecture 2009). They have 10 studios across the UK

and work in 14 key sectors (Aviation, Cultural, Defence, Education, Health, Industrial,

International, Justice, Leisure, Rail, Residential, Retail, Science & Technology and

Workplace) (Capita Symonds 2007). They employed a total of 394 architectural staff in 2008

(Capita Architecture 2009). Although there were a number of redundancies in early 2009

employment figures for 2009 were not available at the time of writing.

In the Architects Journal (2009) table of the UKs top 100 largest architectural practices

Capita Architecture ranked twelfth in 2007 and fifth in 2008. However, Capita Architecture

rank third for total UK income for 2008 with 253 million (ibid).


32/342


In 2007 Capita Architecture formed the Environmental Research Group (ERG), the purpose

of which was to encourage the research and design ofgreener buildings and assist practice

staff in their every day design activities. In the same year the company announced its

sustainability plans to both staff and the media. Capita Architectures sustainability mission

statement is as follows:

Develop and implement techniques and systems to ensure 70% of our buildings are carbon

neutral by 2012. To achieve this we have implemented a standard across

Capita Architecture which addresses three key areas influencing CO2 emissions;

ENERGY: +25% on current building regulations RENEWABLES: +5% on Planning Policy (PPS22) MATERIALS: 70% of all construction materials to be specified from sustainable

sources (Capita Architecture 2008).

The initial intention was for the mission statement and a set of toolkits to be rolled out to all

of the studios but this was never realised. As an employee of Capita Architecture from

February 2007 and a representative of the ERG since February 2007 the author has observeda lack of cohesion between the aspirations of the mission statement and the work produced by

the practices architectural staff.

Initial observations within the workplace led the author to reach the following hypotheses:

A high percentage of staff are not familiar with the mission statement. Those who are familiar with the mission statement think it is too aspirational and

therefore do not think it is remotely obtainable or applicable to them personally.

Personal interest in sustainability issues amongst staff is low. Many staff do not see acorrelation between the governments low and zero carbon targets and their job role.

Capita Architecture has many opportunities for collaborative working with a varietyof disciplines (e.g. Mechanical and electrical), however these relationships are not

explored to their full potential.


33/342


The majority of staff are computer literate and would be inclined towards onlinelearning.

The intention of the investigation, therefore, is to identify causal explanations (McGivern

2006) for lack of interest and uptake of Capita Architectures mission statement and the

governments low and zero carbon targets. It was the aspiration of the author to also identify

ways of overcoming the barriers within a large architectural practice to producing the low and

zero carbon architecture and identify drivers.

As Capita Architecture do not yet have a reputation for environmentally responsible

architecture they are referred to as a Large Architectural Practice Non Specialist for the

purpose of this study.

In order to provide context to the large architectural practice the author has compared results

with a medium and a small architectural practice and stakeholders and actors from within the

industry.

The medium practice is Quattro Design Architects. Whilst, at 35 architectural staff they are

defined as a large practice in the Fees Bureau (see Chapter 2) the author will refer to them as

a medium sized practice for the purposes of this research. As Quattro have a reputation within

the construction industry for socially and environmentally responsible architecture

(Nettlefield 2009) they will be classed as a specialist practice for the purposes of this study.

The small practice is Willmore Iles Architects. They are a small practice of 6 architectural

staff. As they do not have a reputation for environmentally responsible architecture they will

be referred to a non specialist practice.

3.2.3 LARGE PRACTICE CONTEXTAs the focus of this thesis is large architectural practice the following will also be

investigated to provide context:

Compare large architecture practice requirements to those of medium and smallarchitectural practices, as well as suggestions from industry experts.

Ascertain if there are differences in staff aspirations and attitudes of largearchitectural practice different to those of medium and small architecture practices

toward UK government low and zero carbon non-domestic building targets and the

relevance of these targets to job roles.


34/342


Investigate whether methods for improving large architectural practices staffknowledge and ability in low and zero carbon building design will differ to methods

utilized within medium and small architecture practices

3.3 MIXED MODE METHOD3.3.1 TRIANGULATION

The intension of using a mixed method approach is to obtain the benefits of both the

quantitative and qualitative approach to research whilst allowing for comparative analysis.

Ideally the systematic triangulation (Denzin and Lincoln 2003) of the quantitative and

qualitative research will provide sufficient diversity of perspective and reaffirm each others

results. The author also viewed the thesis as an 'apprenticeship' for academic research

(Harper 2009) and therefore sought to maximize their knowledge of appropriate methods

available.

3.3.2 QUANTITATIVE

The quantitative method used was a questionnaire and in order to develop this a focus group

and pilot questionnaire were undertaken.

Whilst the Gillham (2000) suggests that the authors brain storming of the research themes is

useful following a literature review, he does advise that it is common for an author to assume

understanding particularly if the researcher is personally familiar with the area of study. As

the author is employed by a large architectural practice assumptions were tested by

conducting a focus group with the small non specialist architectural practice.

The staff from the small non specialist architectural practice were introduced to a number of

areas for discussion. Although there were a selection of predetermined questions provided by

the author the focus group were allowed to explore the themes whilst noting any variations

and the range of views and opinions that are voiced (Gillham 2000).

As the author had no previous experience of writing quantitative survey questions a review of

existing questionnaires within the research area available on the internet was undertaken. By

observing the wording and structure of existing questionnaires the author was able to identify

questions conducive to the type of results required.


35/342


A number of draft questionnaires were constructed following Gillhams (2000) principle of

three main question areas:

Fact Opinions, beliefs and judgments Behavior

The initial pilot questionnaire and a number of subsequent redrafts (paper and electronic)

were piloted by two people with architectural backgrounds and experience and one person

from outside the architectural industry.

As determined by the pilot the majority of questions included in the final questionnaire were

closed questions. However, a select number of questions allowed the respondent to expand

upon their reply where appropriate. Respondents were also give the opportunity to comment

on any areas that they felt had not been considered within the survey. The use of similar

questions was employed as a way of cross checking results.

Questions relating specifically to the Capita Architecture mission statement were housed

within the Capita Architecture questionnaire. From the pilots the author found that the

response rate was more likely to be successful if the questionnaire was limited to two A4

pages and therefore the questionnaire was altered accordingly (see Appendix 1).

As the response rate had the potential to be in the hundreds (there were a total of 115

respondents) the online survey distribution and collection tool Surveymonkey.com was

advised by the authors academic supervisor.

During consultation with Capita Architecture they emphasized an interest in the relationship

between the design process undertaken by their staff and low and zero carbon. As a vast

amount of research and consultation into low and zero carbon architecture has already been

undertaken by both private and government groups, and due to time constraints, the re

definition of low and zero carbon criteria was not considered relevant. Analysis of both the

BREEAM and CSH criteria led to the identification of key areas (see Appendix 2) for use

within the questionnaires.

3.3.3 QUALITATIVE


36/342


McGiven (2006) recommends that the sample group is determined to some extent by the

interviewers judgment. Within this thesis the interviewer (which in this case is also the

author) used a combination of snowball sampling and purposive sampling (Whittaker 2009).

There were a number of instances of snowballing when the interviewer was recommended a

suitable case sample from an interviewee and was then successful in going on to interview

them. In the majority of cases, however, the interviewee used the purposive sampling method

to select a range of suitable case samples which were judged to be reflective of the population

in mind.

A semi-structured interview method was employed by the interviewer (Denzin and Lincoln

2003) and interview questions were based upon the questionnaire. A pilot interview was

conducted to test the clarity of the questions and interview structure. Following this the

interview questions and structure were amended accordingly where required. However, on

completion of the research it was observed that the pilot interview format and results were of

sufficient quality to be included within the main results.

Interviewees were provided with an interview guide prior to interview recording.

Interviewees were informed that the guide consisted of a number of main subject questions

and that they would be asked additional sub questions depending on the answers they

provided. Whilst a number of sub questions were pre defined by the interviewee, the semi-

structured interview method allowed for exploration of additional subject areas if considered

relevant by the interviewer. It was also intended that the structured element of the interview

would provided comparable analysis.

It was the intention of the author to use these thesis findings to make business strategy

recommendations and instigate changes to Capita Architectures working methods. Therefore

staff from both Capita Architecture and its parent company Capita Symonds were informed

that they would automatically remain anonymous. However, interviewees from outside the

Capita companies were given the option of anonymity. Interviews were arranged by

telephone or email and consent obtained for the interviews to be recorded. The Interviewer

took additional written notes where considered relevant. This included notes of verbal

dialogue, visual interviewee behavior and interview process interruptions. Redacted

transcripts are included in Appendix 4. A copy of the interview transcripts was provided to all

interviewees, with the exception of one participant who refused a copy.


37/342


Results in the form of transcripts were analysed via QSRs XSight 2 software tool. Thematic

analysis (Whittaker 2009) was undertaken through the employment of data coding in order to

identify themes within the results.

3.3.4 LIMITATIONS OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Whilst a number of social study authors such as Gillham (2000) and McGivern (2006)

recommend that the semi-structured interview is typically undertaken to provide subject

clarification following the literature review and prior to the quantitative research, time

constraints led to the questionnaire being formulated and issued prior to the interviews.

The disadvantage of both a pre structured questionnaire and interview is that the subject area

scope is restrained and therefore the answer range is to some extent predetermined.

Questionnaires are also particularly subject to bias as the data is determined by self-selection

and response rates.

Originally there was a medium specialist practice selected to participate in the questionnaire

on the basis of their reputation. However, due to very poor response rates a second medium

specialist practice agreed to participate in the questionnaire.

As literature texts suggest (e.g. Denzin and Lincoln 2003, Gillham 2000) the success of

interview results depends on the interviewers competence and experience, and with

questionnaires it is difficult to correct misunderstandings.

3.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter clarified the research methods selected by the author to identify the barriers and

drivers within a large architectural practice to producing the low and zero carbon architecture.A mixed mode research method was used to provide comparative analysis of the case study.

4 CHAPTER 4:RESULTS ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION



38/342


This chapter offers the results and discussion from the mixed mode research approach as

proposed in Chapter 3. Results and discussion are presented theme by theme to aid the

narrative and structure for the reader.

Results and discussion are typically presented as separate chapters where quantitative data

alone has been sought (Whittaker 2009). However, as a mixed mode research approach has

been conducted the author has combined both results analysis and discussion and presented

them as themes within a single chapter to aid narrative and structure of the findings for the

reader, as suggested by Pitchforth et al (2005).

4.2 DATA SET

The data set to be discussed within this chapter consists of the following:

Questionnaire responses from an Architects Practice Large Non Specialist Questionnaire responses from an Architects Practice Medium specialist Questionnaire responses from an Architects Practice Small Non Specialist Interviews with staff from the Architects Practice Large Non Specialist Interviews with staff from specialist practices

Architects Practice Large Specialist Architects Practice Medium Specialist

Interviews with stakeholders and actors from within the construction industry Architects Practice Clients Architectural Industry Consultants Engineering Practice Large Non Specialist Local Planning Authority

For the purposes of this thesis the author will refer to the Architects Practice Large Non

Specialist, Architects Practice Medium Specialist and the Architects Practice Small Non

Specialist as Large Practice, Medium Practice and Small Practice correspondingly.


39/342


There were a total of 115 respondents to the questionnaire (see Appendix 3): 94 respondents

from the Large Practice, 17 respondents from the Medium Practice and 4 respondents from

the Small Practice. There were also a total of 23 interviews (see Appendix 4): 10 from the

Large Practice and 12 key stakeholders and actors from within the construction industry.

The governments low and zero carbon statement and the Large Practice mission statement

can be found in Chapter 2. The Large Practice questionnaire included a number of additional

questions specific to the company mission statement and therefore the author will

differentiate between them by putting the question number for the Small Practice and

Medium Practice in square brackets after the Large Practice questionnaire number (all three

questionnaires can be found in Appendix 1). The interview data coding analysis can be found

in Appendix 5.

4.3 ANALYSIS 1FAMILIARITY WITH GOVERNMENT STATEMENT

The results shown in Figure 6 are drawn from question 4 [4] of the questionnaire. The

question is How familiar are you with the following Government statement? a) Zero

carbon means that, over a year, the net carbon emissions from all energy use [in buildings]

would be zero.

41% of staff from the Medium Practice are Very Familiar with the government zero carbon

statement and 41% are Familiar. Whilst 53% of staff from Large Practice are Familiar with

the statement, in contrast only 15% of staff are Very Familiar. 100% of the Small Practice

staff are Familiar with the government zero carbon statement.

Even before reasoning is applied, these results indicate that action is required to make more

staff from the Large Practice more familiar with the government statement a statement that

is important to the design of architecture within all practice sizes.


40/342


Figure 6. The three pie charts are the Large Practice, Medium Practice and Small Practice

familiarity with the government statement


41/342


As the majority of Small Practice respondents were involved in the focus group study

undertaken by the author prior to the formulation of the questionnaire and interview questions

it is likely that this has influenced their response.

It was apparent during interviews that the staff from the Large Practice were lacking in a

detailed understanding of the governments targets (see Appendix 5). For example, when

asked what the practice were doing to work towards the governments low and zero carbon

building targets one interviewee responded:

We recycle all our paper, car sharing, obviously using alternative means of transport i.e.

trains. That sort of thing. Theres no trying to avoid as much travel as possible to do

obviously all the carbon things. Theres all the recycling stuff off the top of my head thats

all I can think of (See Appendix 4; Interviewee ID A10).

4.4 ANALYSIS 2ABILITY TO ACHIEVE GOVERNMENT STATEMENT


question is Do you think your company is on target to achieve statement? Zero carbon

means that, over a year, the net carbon emissions from all energy use [in buildings] would be

zero.

53% of staff from the Medium Practice reported that they think their company is on target to

achieve the government statement, contrasting with only 3% of staff from Large Practice.

Also in the Large Practice 45% of staff think the company is not on target to achieve the

governments zero carbon targets, while this view is shared by only 18% of staff from the

Medium Practice and a significant 75% from the Small Practice.

In interview the negative comments regarding the governments targets far outweighed the

positive comments, from both architectural practice staff and other stakeholders and actors

from within the construction industry (see Appendix 5). All of the Large Practice

Management staff made negative comments whilst only two of the Large Practice

Management staff made positive comments.

Proportionally the interviewees that made the most negative comments regarding achieving

the government statement were from a large specialist architectural practice, a local planningauthority as well as a number of industry consultants.


42/342


Figure 7. The three pie charts are the Large Practice, Medium Practice and Small Practicestaff response to whether their company is on target to achieve the government statement


43/342


However, it can be observed that their responses were typically more detailed than those from

the Large Practice. This would suggest that both the Management and Non-management staff

from Large Practice have a more basic level of understanding of the governments statement.

The interview data would also suggest that those with a higher level of knowledge and

experience of the government targets are able to be more critical of them:

I think theyre well intentioned, somewhat misguided. Particularly things like the

requirements for onsite renewable, thats by far not the best way to be meeting targets.

Secondly, if theyre not looking at the existing stock, theyre not looking at the problem.

Thats where attention really does need to be focused (See Appendix 4; Interviewee ID

A20).

From the questionnaire results it is difficult to ascertain whether the 45% of Large Practice

staff (Figure 7) who do not think that the company is on target to achieve the governments

targets are basing their decision on knowledge and experience or on their lack of them.

However, from interviews the author observed that only four members of staff from the

Large Practice were conversant with the details of the governments statement (all

Management) (see Appendix 4). Therefore if generalizations of Large Practice staff are to be

made then there is a lack of understanding of the importance and relevance of government

statement to their job roles.

When asked in interview if interviewees thought that architects generally have the sufficient

level of knowledge required to achieve low and zero carbon buildings the majority of

responses were negative (see Appendix 5). Those who provided a positive response tended to

suggest that at present there is a mixture of abilities amongst architects. Negative responses,

however, tended to confirm that both Large Practice and the stakeholders and actors within

the construction industry believe that at present not all architects have the sufficient level of

knowledge to achieve the low and zero carbon buildings.

Not in the UK! Or at least not without making a lot of costly mistakes (See Appendix 4;

Interviewee ID A23).

In interview the positive comments regarding large practice size and the production of zero

carbon architecture (Appendix 5) slightly outweighed the negative comments. Positive

comments (Management weighted) from the Large Practice staff tended to emphasize the


44/342


benefits of scale that a large practice can provide, such as access to mechanical and electrical

engineers and financial support:

Its big enough to really grapple with the big issues. Weve got a little bit of slack space to

do the R and D thats necessary (See Appendix 4; Interviewee ID A04).

Also the stakeholders and actors from within the construction industry felt that a large

practice size was not necessarily an inhibitor to service:

In terms of the technical ability it really cuts across all levels (See Appendix 4;


The negative comments from Large Practice staff (equally weighted between Management

and Non-Management) were focused on communication issues, suggesting that practice size

hinders the effective communication of information:

Its a bit more of a juggernaut that you have to slowly steer round (See Appendix 4;


The stakeholders and actors from within the construction industry, however, hold the belief

that large practices will probably defer to specialists for sustainable and carbon

management issues (See Appendix 4; Interviewee ID A01). It is likely that the stakeholders

and actors view this negatively as it detracts from architectural staff assuming responsibility

and ownership of these issues.

4.5 ANALYSIS 3FREQUENCY OF DESIGN CRITERIA UNDERTAKEN


question is "Which of the following do you typically undertake as part of your design brief?

(criteria: Improve energy efficiency through building's fabric and services, Low or zero

carbon technologies, Green Travel Plan, Water use minimisation/recycling, Reduce

environmental impact of building's fabric and services, Waste reduction in construction and

building use, Optimization of building performance through site analysis/building

orientation, Future proofing and lifecycle analysis, Stake Holder consultation (building

design and use), Site ecology conservation and enhancement).


45/342


Figure 8. Criteria typically undertake as part of architectural design briefs


46/342


Out of the ten listed criteria (required by the BREEAM and CSH design tools as described in

Chapter 2 and 3) only two criteria are frequently considered by the Large Practice staff as

part of the design brief (Improve energy efficiency through building's fabric and services at

78% and Optimization of building performance through site analysis/building orientation at

72%). The other eight criteria are only considered (approximately) half of the time.

In contrast all ten of the criteria are frequently considered by the Medium Practice staff and

seven of the criteria are frequently considered by the Small Practice staff. Low or zero carbon

technologies are always considered as part of the brief by the Small Practice staff.

The Large Practice results suggest that the company is either failing to undertake the majority

of the listed design criteria as part of their design brief approximately half of the time or that

staff structure and standard company procedure is limiting the responsibility of these criteria

to certain roles e

barriers and drivers within large architectural practice to low and zero carbon architecture

Documents