UK Green Building Company - news

back to homepage

UKGBC - Is it necessary?

I asked seven UK organisations and businesses what they thought. Firstly would they join a UKGBC?

The answers weren’t that diverse. Those that answered said they were willing to sign up to UKGBC, but all were cautious, wanting more information before committing. I then asked whether they feel a united organisation is necessary or did they feel it is repeating the work of organisations already in existence? Most were more enthusiastic about this question saying it was a good way to coordinate and deliver a green message to the wider world.

Chris Twinn from ARUP, gave a lengthy answer saying, ‘Any organisation must be structured somewhat differently to the others round the world because we already have a plethora of organisations… there is a role needed for an umbrella representation body to provide a single voice for the industry to government and to the public. Secondly, as done by the USGBC it should also oversee the establishment of a baseline cross discipline accreditation/qualification for professionals. This latter aspect has been very powerful in the USA for getting sustainability into wider public circles...’

RIBA’s Brendan O’Conner, said that ‘A united, well-funded organisation with permanent staff would be a great asset to co-ordinate efforts in sustainable construction’, and that ‘being part of a global movement would similarly have great benefits.’

However, the NEA spokesman David Bootle, was a lot more negative, saying, ‘We're amenable to the whole concept of sustainable buildings, but at the moment we are more preoccupied with people that live in already established housing - often of an inadequate nature unfortunately.’ Their reluctance to commit in principle as most of the others have, shows that not all organisations feel that a UKGBC would add a significant element to the green building movement.

From the AECB Liz Reason says that ‘The evidence is not clear from other GBCs that there is any real improvement in practice as opposed to business as usual with a bit of green attached. The real gap in the UK market is the actual performance of buildings in operation.’

A multi layered green movement means that duplication of campaigns and roles, are a danger. The Micropower Council said ‘There is a significant risk that work of other organisations may be repeated’. But incoherence among the various organisations may well be solved by a UKGBC. The wider global movement doesn’t see the UK as a major player though. The World GBC seems more interested in encouraging growth countries like China, to sign up to the scheme. David Strong of BRE doesn’t even think that the organisation should be named in the same way as the others. He prefers a ‘coalition’, rather than a ‘council’. This underlines a suspicion that a UKGBC would be somewhat separate from the global schemes, currently being developed.

Organisations that were asked: Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE), ARUP, RIBA, Micropower Council, Green Register, NEA, AECB.
ICE did not respond to the survey.

back to homepage