By Bruno Lhopiteau

Some property developers favor foreign green certifications over local ones, despite their shortcomings

In a consumer climate where green certified products are not only considered ethically sound but also trendy, China’s property developers are eager to dress up construction projects in green wrapping paper. In the same way as foreign brand names such as Gucci, Nike, and Apple are often perceived as superior to local brands, foreign green building certifications are seen as more attractive.

The general perception is that the US standard is “better” than its local competitor. But when it comes to actual building operations, China’s Green Building Label (GBL or “Three Star”) may in fact be a superior choice over its popular Western counterpart, the LEED certification (US standard).

The GBL is designed, with its three levels, to allow for a cheaper and less ambitious entry into the world of sustainable design and energy efficiency. Still, GBL certified buildings are a major step beyond the average non-certified Chinese counterparts. LEED on the other hand, is more difficult to obtain – partly because it is based on US building codes and suppliers, which are not identical to those in China.

In the West, roughly 30% of LEED-certified buildings perform worse than an average building in terms of energy consumption. Presuming the design and construction were properly certified, this underperformance is related to operational factors. Although figures for the Chinese market are not available, we can only imagine the situation will be even more challenging, with a relative lack of qualified maintenance engineers and that poor practices are the norm. Problems include pervasive “run-to-failure” approaches to maintenance and “quick-fixes” with a view on reducing short-term costs. This generally results in rapidly aging buildings, early replacement of major systems and an impact on consistency of operations. Compromises in comfort and safety as well as operational downtime, lead to business losses.

The real difference

The Chinese GBL (Three Star) takes operation into account, with an entire category dedicated to best practices. The certificate is also awarded only after one year of operation. LEED, on the other hand, is exclusively concerned with design and construction. Companies interested in improving their operations have to apply for a separate “LEED Existing Buildings: Operation & Maintenance” certification.

Since image is the prime motivation for obtaining a green label in China, it is unlikely that a lesser-known, seemingly redundant, label will be worth the cost and hassle. And once again, the best practices defined in the LEED rating system are based on US market characteristics.

The main weakness of LEED in China is that it fails to leverage the powerful motivation effect of the label to achieve real improvement in operation and maintenance practices. It assumes a Western environment, where operation is less of an issue with an ample supply of qualified manpower. It fails to address the core needs of the Chinese market.

The Chinese GBL on the other hand, takes on the specific needs of buildings in China by offering a concrete tool for companies to work into their operation practices. The GBL rating system makes clear the link between construction and maintenance. Indeed, the impact of design and construction on the future life of a building is enormous. The earlier maintenance is performed, the better. This may already be integrated into practice in more developed property markets, but incentivizing adoption in China will go a long way to improving efficiency.

The aggressive certification objectives of China’s 12th five-year plan are a clear indication that the government is firmly driving this change, using its Three Star label as a tool. China is overtaking the rest of the world in construction, with nearly 3 billion square meters per year by some estimates, equivalent to the entire building stock of France. This is supported by government commitments to green buildings for its own use as well.

The design of the GBL label shows that authorities are keenly aware of the characteristics of their construction market. Many Western companies, builders, operators and service providers are influenced by their experience back home, and fail to take these “Chinese characteristics” into account. As they continue to apply Western recipes to Chinese problems, in the hope that China will become, as it develops, more “like the West”, they may find themselves increasingly marginalized and ultimately left behind in this rapidly expanding market.

Bruno Lhopiteau is general manager of Siveco, China's largest maintenance consultancy