What are the forces and narratives that have given international legitimacy to the development of net-zero building standards? And what are the paradoxes and limitations of these initiatives, which may not be sufficient to actually transform the building sector?
These are among the questions that Lisa Hasan addresses in her doctoral dissertation, co-directed by two Université de Montréal professors, Gonzalo Lizarralde of the School of Architecture and Erick Lachapelle of the Department of Political Science.
Hasan's research was recently published in the academic journal Construction Management and Economics.
Focusing on the World GBC
Her analysis primarily focuses on the World Green Building Council (WorldGBC), which stemmed from the merger of a number of national entities in the 1990s.
"Initially, there were several Green Building Councils, including the one in the U.S. that launched the LEED [Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design] certification program back in 1998," recalled Hasan.
"To boost their credibility and take part in international forums, these councils joined forces under the WorldGBC banner."
In 2015, at the COP21 climate conference in Paris, the WorldGBC developed and promoted a program called Advancing Net Zero (ANZ) that aims to achieve carbon neutrality for all new buildings by 2030 and all existing buildings by 2050.
ANZ has three key goals: to maximize the reduction of operational energy-related CO2 emissions, to produce and use renewable energy both on and off site, and to offset incompressible residual emissions.
To reach these ambitious decarbonization goals, ANZ provides certifications, tools and assistance to local Green Building Councils. But there is no consensus on the definition of decarbonization, nor on the specifics of how it should be achieved.
"The discussions and misunderstandings in this regard are ongoing and may be unending," Hasan said.
"For WorldGBC, the problem is building-related: it is easier for the organization to sell certifications to property developers than to governments. However, such a business-oriented approach favours piecemeal change instead of an in-depth transformation of the sector."
Hasan doubts that this segmented approach will actually end up reducing society's dependence on fossil fuels.
110 documents, 22 interviews
In her study, which analyzed 110 WorldGBC documents and information from 22 interviews with individuals who helped develop the organization's standards, Hasan sheds light on a sophisticated legitimation strategy involving six main narratives.
The first positions the building sector as a legitimate actor within the global climate governance system, while the second integrates decarbonization in the broader framework of sustainable development. The third redefines decarbonization as a market transformation, the fourth presents WorldGBC standards as precursors to future public policies, the fifth focuses on responsible investment, and the sixth links net-zero buildings to post-pandemic recovery.
"I discovered that these narratives call for incremental, segmented approaches," said Hasan. "In other words, ANZ standards set out a more limited course of action than the broader sustainable development narrative with which they are associated. Segmented approaches are thus positioned within a more holistic narrative, upon which their legitimacy is grounded."
She identifies three mechanisms that limit the transformative potential of these standards.
"The vertical interlinking of these narratives presents segmented solutions as if they were systemic in nature," she said.
"The ambivalence of these narratives enables actors to tailor the standards to their specific contexts while sidestepping any conflicts that might undermine ANZ's legitimacy.
"And the elimination of disclosure requirements obscures differences between the standards and the performance of the projects that implement them. This creates the impression of a broad consensus on the net-zero building solution."
A crucial distinction
In her study, Hasan focuses on the process of legitimizing net-zero building standards, rather than on their actual legitimacy. This distinction is a crucial one, she said, because it sheds light on how, despite the best intentions of their authors, today's standards could actually stand in the way of a genuine transformation of the sector.
"I found that the current standards do not allow us to imagine or bring about an actual post-carbon reality," she said. "By focusing on technical and business-oriented solutions, we've been neglecting more fundamental changes in how we design, and live in, our built environments.
"My findings thus call for a deeper reflection on how we view decarbonization and for the identification of practices that may actually enable transformative change."
About this study
"The legitimation of private net zero emission building standards in the context of global decarbonization goals," by Lisa Hasan, Gonzalo Lizarralde and Erick Lachapelle, was published in the December 2024 edition of Construction Management and Economics.
