Great post Elena, and always interesting to score ourselves...
1) Timeframe - agree there's no time boundary because the movement was set to re-define what is considered acceptable quality; for the owner, humans using it and the nature impacted by its development. I don't think this is a bad thing.
2) Outcome - dependent on the verification rating system being used, but there's been a concerted global effort to define a green building as one that meets a holistic range of considerations ranging from energy and water efficiency to location enabling low carbon transport to its impacts on human users as well as immediate and broader ecosystems. The promise is a better result in each of these areas than minimum code compliant building and this is progressing in some domains to demonstrably ecologically regenerative impact (in select areas).
3) Targeted Impact - I agree that the target is broad and picks up everyone from materials suppliers to land tract owners, from professional services consultants to university researchers. However, 10/10 gives us nowhere to go. I'll say 8.5/10 and we can continue to further our influence and reach across developed and developing economies.
4) Number of disparate people required - I again believe that all too often, I still meet people out and about who look confused when I mention my work. For our reach to be truly global, I judge this experience wouldn't be as common. 8/10. Let's continue our global education campaign!
Would you score the global green building movement differently against the 4 criteria? I am super curious!!
Great post Elena, and always interesting to score ourselves...
1) Timeframe - agree there's no time boundary because the movement was set to re-define what is considered acceptable quality; for the owner, humans using it and the nature impacted by its development. I don't think this is a bad thing.
2) Outcome - dependent on the verification rating system being used, but there's been a concerted global effort to define a green building as one that meets a holistic range of considerations ranging from energy and water efficiency to location enabling low carbon transport to its impacts on human users as well as immediate and broader ecosystems. The promise is a better result in each of these areas than minimum code compliant building and this is progressing in some domains to demonstrably ecologically regenerative impact (in select areas).
3) Targeted Impact - I agree that the target is broad and picks up everyone from materials suppliers to land tract owners, from professional services consultants to university researchers. However, 10/10 gives us nowhere to go. I'll say 8.5/10 and we can continue to further our influence and reach across developed and developing economies.
4) Number of disparate people required - I again believe that all too often, I still meet people out and about who look confused when I mention my work. For our reach to be truly global, I judge this experience wouldn't be as common. 8/10. Let's continue our global education campaign!