Greenwashing
How can we discern genuine sustainability efforts from greenwashing? As Mohsen Mostafavi has noted, many private developers are now embracing sustainability due to both ethical and financial motivations. However, often the rationale behind these efforts is more focused on recognition and financial gain rather than true ethics. Within the architecture field, the pursuit of "green building certification," such as LEED Certification, has become a contentious topic. Research has shown that the energy efficiency of LEED certified buildings may be questionable and not worth the investment. Yet, we still push for it because it gives us a sense of contributing to sustainability, even though our own profession may have greenwashed us.
Mostafavi argues that we need to go beyond relying solely on new technologies and policies to combat sustainability challenges. Instead, we must approach sustainability through thoughtful design, considering not just individual buildings but also redefining the urban fabric as a whole. The question then arises: how can we genuinely address sustainability in our designs and actions, moving beyond superficial efforts and avoiding greenwashing?
I also think that greenwashing will not push truly sustainable efforts in the building industry, but trends in sustainable design are not necessarily a bad thing when many designers want to push the latest and greatest trends. As observers (until we are those designers), we can hope that it will spark a real interest in sustainability for some designers and clients.
ReplyDeleteYES ERIN. LEED IS NOT AS GREAT AS EVERYONE THINKS- WE ARE JUST FORCE-FED IT TO BELIEVE IT IS THE BEST AND ONLY OPTION. I personally dislike LEED- if you couldn't tell. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad people are trying to be more sustainable in their buildings since the world is ending and everything, but like you said, it's for all the wrong reasons like recognition and monetary incentives. There are numerous other sustainable building strategies that focus on the upfront costs AND lifecycle of the building, NOT TO MENTION HOW IT ACTUALLY IMPACTS THE USERS. LEED has one little scorecard but doesn't diligently continue to upkeep the sustainable strategies within the building once it is occupied. An example that comes to mind is my College of Design in undergrad. It is supposedly LEED Platinum, but a lot of the points it was supposed to get through LEED ended up not happening. All the toilets were supposed to be dual flush, didn't happen. The lights were supposed to be energy-saving and turn off without motion, couldn't happen because it was an emergency egress path. Etc, etc, etc. Plus, points for having a bike rack? Come on. If you haven't heard of the Living Building Challenge, it is my favorite sustainable building option and I think it does a much better job of implementing strategies that actually benefit the environment. This is officially an Anti-LEED account. Might go write my whole blog on this now actually- Thanks!
ReplyDelete