Climate change and the industry’s response

In developed economies there was a 'misalignment in trust': buyers were wary of developer “greenwash”, and lenders were unconvinced that new buildings were sufficiently resilient to climate change.

Measuring value and performance

Brooks cited the growing link between property value and green credentials: efficient buildings attracted higher rents let more quickly. Intensity metrics offered the best means of ensuring comparability of performance and emissions, and these in turn required consistent property measurement standards. Kapoor called for more research into the full value and impact of green investment.

Technology and leadership

Kapoor argued that we already have the technology necessary for a low carbon built environment, and that it needed to be applied more intelligently. Studies had suggested that better insulation was the key to emissions reduction, but this would not be true everywhere.

For example in Jakarta, where insulation would require 100 years to re-pay the investment, a more appropriate response was to ensure better shading. And did it make sense for buildings in hot climates to have large glass edifices?

Given that vast majority of buildings in the developed world already exist, and “70% of India has yet to be built”, a differentiated approach was appropriate. In particular, Kapoor called for better leadership in the sector to collect data, share best practice and develop capacity: a “knowledge leap” rather than a “technology leap.”