Implementation of a Building Sustainability Rating Tool: a Survey of the New Zealand Building Industry

<p>Building Sustainability Rating Tools (BSRTs) are being developed worldwide with considerable success. As a result their implementation has created the awareness necessary to cement their role in creating positive change. With the release of New Zealand's own BSRT, Green Star New Zealand (Green Star NZ), and the establishment of the New Zealand Green Building Council (NZGBC) this awareness was expected to strengthen. The NZGBC has stated that the implementation of Green Star NZ can only be successful if the selected tool is widely accepted, and meets the requirements of the building industry. To date, little research has been carried out into the correct implementation of a BSRT despite this being a fundamental part of a tool's overall success. Therefore, the overall aim of this research was to investigate the requirements of stakeholders and end-users including their understanding of sustainability, BSRT's and the NZGBC. The research also intended to provide a 'sustainability snapshot' of the New Zealand building industry and of the current New Zealand market, establishing a base point for future measurement. The specific objectives of the research were to investigate: -The building industry's level of awareness and the level of involvement regarding sustainability, sustainable building and BSRTs -The building industry' s existing knowledge and experience with BSRTs -How different groups within the building industry anticipate using Green Star NZ and if they are likely to seek formal certification -The building industry's understanding of the NZGBC, and its likely impact in the production of more sustainable buildings in New Zealand -The drivers, triggers, obstacles and reasons for sustainable building -The requirement for sustainable building information and the corresponding level of satisfaction regarding this information -How international research compared with the current study, allowing trends, differences and similarities to be discussed. To meet these aims and objectives a survey was developed in collaboration with the NZGBC, with the intention of acquiring a wide building industry response (e.g. property developers, building contractors, and architects). The participants were canvassed from several associated building organisations which agreed to assist in the distribution of the survey. The survey was conducted between 19 February and 12 March 2007 and ultimately received 476 responses which approximated to a response rate of 3% with a confidence interval of 95% and margin of error of plus or minus 4%. Significantly, the analyses identified a substantial difference between the level of interest and level of involvement regarding sustainability, sustainable buildings and BSRTs. This result emphasised that the building industry is much more willing to participate, and be part of a sustainable building community than may be currently perceived. Anecdotal evidence suggests BSRTs are often used primarily as 'design guides', with no intention to seek a formal rating. According to the results, using Green Star NZ as a 'design guide' was still reasonably high, however a good proportion of the industry anticipated seeking a certified rating for both 'design' and 'performance'. According to experience of the respondents, the client was considered the single most important person to drive sustainable building. Clearly, as the main financial source, the client has the final say on any proposed design, although they may not have the necessary knowledge to propose sustainable design options or even be aware of them. For this reason, a further question explored who rather 'should' be the main driver for sustainable building. The results showed rather than a single person being responsible for driving sustainable building, it should be 'an integrated process where responsibility is shared'. The main reason for sustainable building was 'rising energy costs' and emphasised the importance and increasing demand on energy production. The biggest obstacle for sustainable building was 'perceived higher upfront costs', which indicated confusion and the requirement for better information and the need for organisations such as the NZGBC to be a 'vehicle' to provide the building industry with direct and reliable information. Even though, at the time of the survey the NZGBC and Green Star NZ were in their infancy, there was a significant demand for Green Star NZ related material, such as Green Star NZ certified case study buildings, accreditation procedures and building professionals. In terms of satisfaction, the participants were clearly not content with the current level of information regarding sustainable building. Again, this lack of information reinforced the requirements for more sustainable building information, and the need for better education procedures. While aspiring to assist in the facilitation of more successful BSRT for New Zealand, the results from the research could serve to enhance the potential of Green Star NZ's success and smooth the period of transition for implementation. Furthermore the results could reinforce the relationship between the NZGBC and the wider building industry, encouraging dialogue to help develop the tool and ultimately lead to the construction of more sustainable buildings in New Zealand.</p>

Implementation of a Building Sustainability Rating Tool: a Survey of the New Zealand Building Industry

<p>Building Sustainability Rating Tools (BSRTs) are being developed worldwide with considerable success. As a result their implementation has created the awareness necessary to cement their role in creating positive change. With the release of New Zealand's own BSRT, Green Star New Zealand (Green Star NZ), and the establishment of the New Zealand Green Building Council (NZGBC) this awareness was expected to strengthen. The NZGBC has stated that the implementation of Green Star NZ can only be successful if the selected tool is widely accepted, and meets the requirements of the building industry. To date, little research has been carried out into the correct implementation of a BSRT despite this being a fundamental part of a tool's overall success. Therefore, the overall aim of this research was to investigate the requirements of stakeholders and end-users including their understanding of sustainability, BSRT's and the NZGBC. The research also intended to provide a 'sustainability snapshot' of the New Zealand building industry and of the current New Zealand market, establishing a base point for future measurement. The specific objectives of the research were to investigate: -The building industry's level of awareness and the level of involvement regarding sustainability, sustainable building and BSRTs -The building industry' s existing knowledge and experience with BSRTs -How different groups within the building industry anticipate using Green Star NZ and if they are likely to seek formal certification -The building industry's understanding of the NZGBC, and its likely impact in the production of more sustainable buildings in New Zealand -The drivers, triggers, obstacles and reasons for sustainable building -The requirement for sustainable building information and the corresponding level of satisfaction regarding this information -How international research compared with the current study, allowing trends, differences and similarities to be discussed. To meet these aims and objectives a survey was developed in collaboration with the NZGBC, with the intention of acquiring a wide building industry response (e.g. property developers, building contractors, and architects). The participants were canvassed from several associated building organisations which agreed to assist in the distribution of the survey. The survey was conducted between 19 February and 12 March 2007 and ultimately received 476 responses which approximated to a response rate of 3% with a confidence interval of 95% and margin of error of plus or minus 4%. Significantly, the analyses identified a substantial difference between the level of interest and level of involvement regarding sustainability, sustainable buildings and BSRTs. This result emphasised that the building industry is much more willing to participate, and be part of a sustainable building community than may be currently perceived. Anecdotal evidence suggests BSRTs are often used primarily as 'design guides', with no intention to seek a formal rating. According to the results, using Green Star NZ as a 'design guide' was still reasonably high, however a good proportion of the industry anticipated seeking a certified rating for both 'design' and 'performance'. According to experience of the respondents, the client was considered the single most important person to drive sustainable building. Clearly, as the main financial source, the client has the final say on any proposed design, although they may not have the necessary knowledge to propose sustainable design options or even be aware of them. For this reason, a further question explored who rather 'should' be the main driver for sustainable building. The results showed rather than a single person being responsible for driving sustainable building, it should be 'an integrated process where responsibility is shared'. The main reason for sustainable building was 'rising energy costs' and emphasised the importance and increasing demand on energy production. The biggest obstacle for sustainable building was 'perceived higher upfront costs', which indicated confusion and the requirement for better information and the need for organisations such as the NZGBC to be a 'vehicle' to provide the building industry with direct and reliable information. Even though, at the time of the survey the NZGBC and Green Star NZ were in their infancy, there was a significant demand for Green Star NZ related material, such as Green Star NZ certified case study buildings, accreditation procedures and building professionals. In terms of satisfaction, the participants were clearly not content with the current level of information regarding sustainable building. Again, this lack of information reinforced the requirements for more sustainable building information, and the need for better education procedures. While aspiring to assist in the facilitation of more successful BSRT for New Zealand, the results from the research could serve to enhance the potential of Green Star NZ's success and smooth the period of transition for implementation. Furthermore the results could reinforce the relationship between the NZGBC and the wider building industry, encouraging dialogue to help develop the tool and ultimately lead to the construction of more sustainable buildings in New Zealand.</p>

U.S. Cattle Producer Adoption of Secure Beef Supply Plan Enhanced Biosecurity Practices and Foot-and-Mouth Disease Preparedness

The prospect of a foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreak in U.S. livestock populations has motivated the development of the Secure Beef Supply (SBS) Plan, which includes a comprehensive list of enhanced biosecurity practices that aim to prevent FMD transmission and facilitate continuity of business during an outbreak. While FMD poses a serious threat to livestock production in the United States, little is known about producers' uptake of the enhanced biosecurity practices included in the SBS Plan. In this study, we benchmark adoption and feasibility-of-adoption perceptions for U.S. cattle producers. Our results show adoption of the 13 enhanced biosecurity practices is generally low. Especially concerning is the low adoption of the three strongly-recommended pre-outbreak practices—having a biosecurity manager, having a written operation-specific enhanced biosecurity plan, and having a line of separation. Adoption of the pre-outbreak practices is likely low because the benefits of adopting the practices depend on a low probability, uncertain event. That said, producers who have adopted the pre-outbreak practices are more likely to have higher feasibility ratings for the remaining enhanced biosecurity practices, suggesting that adoption of the strongly recommended practices is associated with adoption of all enhanced biosecurity during an FMD outbreak. Complementarity is examined and shows that adoption of the pre-outbreak practices coincides with adoption of the outbreak-specific practices. Taken together, our results suggest that adoption of the strongly recommended pre-outbreak practices could help facilitate a quicker and more effective U.S. cattle industry response to an FMD outbreak in the United States.

Food and beverage industry interference in science and policy: efforts to block soda tax implementation in Mexico and prevent international diffusion

Mexico is the largest soft drink market in the world, with high rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes. Due to strains on the nation’s productivity and healthcare spending, Mexican lawmakers implemented one of the world’s first public health taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in 2014. Because Mexico’s tax was designed to reduce SSB consumption, it faced strong opposition from transnational food and beverage corporations. We analysed previously secret internal industry documents from major corporations in the University of California San Francisco’s Food Industry Documents Archive that shed light on the industry response to the Mexican soda tax. We also reviewed all available studies of the Mexican soda tax’s effectiveness, contrasting the results of industry-funded and non-industry-funded studies. We found that food and beverage industry trade organisations and front groups paid scientists to produce research suggesting that the tax failed to achieve health benefits while harming the economy. These results were disseminated before non-industry-funded studies could be finalized in peer review. Mexico still provided a real-world context for the first independent peer-reviewed studies documenting the effectiveness of soda taxation—studies that were ultimately promoted by the global health community. We conclude that the case of the Mexican soda tax shows that industry resistance can persist well after new policies have become law as vested interests seek to roll back legislation, and to stall or prevent policy diffusion. It also underscores the decisive role that conflict-of-interest-free, peer-reviewed research can play in implementing health policy innovations.

Young Women’s Experiences With Technology-Facilitated Sexual Violence From Male Strangers

Stranger-perpetrated harassment was identified decades ago to describe the pervasive, unwanted sexual attention women experience in public spaces. This form of harassment, which has evolved in the modern era, targets women as they navigate online spaces, social media, texting, and online gaming. The present research explored university-aged women’s experiences (n = 381) with online male-perpetrated sexual harassment, including the nature and frequency of the harassment, how women responded to the harassment, and how men reportedly reacted to women’s strategies. Trends in harassment experiences are explored descriptively and with thematic analysis. Most women reported receiving sexually inappropriate messages (84%, n = 318), sexist remarks or comments (74%, n = 281), seductive behavior or come-ons (70%, n = 265), or unwanted sexual attention (64%, n = 245) in an online platform, social media account, email, or text message. This sexual attention from unknown males often began at a very young age (12-14 years). The harassment took many forms, including inappropriate sexual comments on social media posts, explicit photos of male genitalia, and solicitations for sex. Although most women reported strong negative emotional reactions to the harassment (disgust, fear, anger), they generally adopted non-confrontational strategies to deal with the harassment, electing to ignore/delete the content or blocking the offender. Women reported that some men nevertheless persisted with the harassment, following them across multiple sites online, escalating in intensity and severity, and leading some women to delete their own social media accounts. These results suggest the need for early intervention and education programs and industry response.

Advances in Global Industry Response Capability for Source Control

ABSTRACT Within a two-year period from 2009 through 2010, two major loss of containment incidents were experienced by the industry - Montara and Deepwater Horizon/Macondo. The reputation of the industry and its ability to self-regulate were questioned. Proposing a relief well as the primary recovery option was challenged, and after the failures of initial recovery efforts at Macondo, the US Dept. of Interior imposed a drilling moratorium to allow for the development of more effective response technologies. Several operator-led initiatives were commissioned: ExxonMobil initiated the establishment of the Marine Well Containment Company (MWCC) with Shell, Chevron and ConocoPhillips as founding members. MWCC was initially configured for large companies with multi-disciplined resources to support a full-scale response.Noble Energy and other operators, together with Helix Energy Solution Group (HESG), established an alternate option to MWCC that was built around the mutual aid model. Helix Well Containment Group (HWCG, and later just HWCG, LLC) was better adapted to the needs of small to mid-sized companies.The International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP) established the Global Industry Response Group (GIRG), consisting of its worldwide membership of oil and gas producers, and tasked it with developing a plan to address the response deficiencies discovered during the Macondo incident. The initial GIRG report (May 2011) launched the Subsea Well Response Project (SWRP), which was charged with developing a design basis for subsea capping and containment systems.The GIRG report also founded the Wells Experts Committee and its Subsea Well Source Control Response Sub-committee which now acts as an industry center for knowledge and sharing.The SWRP was founded and led by nine of the world's largest oil & gas operators and upon project completion, Oil Spill Response, Ltd. (OSRL), was selected to manage the capping and containment equipment.In addition, some operators and multiple well control organizations developed a variety of additional capping stacks and debris removal equipment packages. During development, response equipment and systems were risk-assessed and tested via tabletop exercises. Knowledge was shared across the industry, and as the new equipment packages became physically available, a range of full-scale exercises were conducted which included physically loading aircraft and vessels and deploying equipment on abandoned wells. This paper steps back through the careful forethought in the development of these systems and shares some insights and strategic thinking behind the rationale of different response options and how they are strategically located to provide a global response.

Industry strategies in the parliamentary process of adopting a sugar-sweetened beverage tax in South Africa: a systematic mapping

Background In 2016, the South African government became the first in the African region to announce the introduction of an SSB tax based on sugar content as a public health measure to reduce obesity. This tax was introduced against the backdrop of South Africa having a large sugar production and SSB manufacturing industry, as well as very high unemployment rates. The introduction of fiscal measures, such as a SSB tax, has been met with well-coordinated and funded opposition in other countries. Methods The aim of this study is to describe and analyse the arguments and strategies utilised by industry during policymaking processes to oppose regulatory actions in LMIC. This study analyses arguments and strategies used by the beverage and related industries during the public consultation phase of the process to adopt the South African SSB tax. Results Industry opposition to the SSB tax was comprehensive and employed several tactics. First, industry underscored its economic importance and the potential job losses and other economic harms that may arise from the tax. This argument was well-received by policymakers, and similar to industry tactics employed in other middle income countries like Mexico. Second, industry discussed self-regulation and voluntary measures as a form of policy substitution, which mirrors industry responses in the US, the Caribbean and Latin America. Third, industry misused or disputed evidence to undermine the perceived efficacy of the tax. Finally, considerations for small business and their ability to compete with multi-national corporations were a unique feature of industry response. Conclusions Industry opposition followed both general trends, and also introduced nuanced and context-specific arguments. The industry response experienced in South Africa can be instructive for other countries contemplating the introduction of similar measures.

Maintaining the fight for equality through and beyond COVID-19: a focus on the build back better report and ambidextrous leadership

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the Diversity Project’s Build Back Better report, which considers leadership practice while maintaining the fight for equality through and beyond COVID-19, through the lens of ambidextrous leadership. Design/methodology/approach The authors succinctly present findings from the Build Back Better report that explores an industry response of investment and savings practitioners to managing diversity and inclusion through and beyond COVID-19. Ambidextrous leadership is applied to the discussion to offer greater theoretical discussion and practical consideration for HR leaders and their strategic approaches to the subject at hand. Findings The Build Back Better report offers numerous recommendations for leadership practice within these unprecedented times. An ambidextrous leadership approach can assist in supporting many of the recommendations, as they are complex and potentially paradoxical. Originality/value The Build Back Better report offers a practitioner’s immediate response to supporting business leaders shape their strategies as national lockdown periods ease while also ensuring the fight for equality is not lost within the COVID-19 crisis.