• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
1
Sustainability Barriers and Barrier Breakers:A Resource Guide
Annie R. Pearce
1
and Corey L.J. Fischer 
2
 
Developed in 2002, this document presents the results of training conducted across the United States onsustainable facilities and infrastructure systems for federal project managers and facilities staff. Followingintroductory sustainability training, data were collected from over 500 professionals on what they perceived tobe the biggest barriers to implementing sustainability for federal facility projects and the most effective ways toovercome those barriers. Cluster analysis was used to group these barriers into ten major groupings of impediments, conveyed in the attached matrix. Barrier breakers were also clustered and linked to the barriersthey can be used to address, as indicated by the shaded areas in the matrix.The matrix represents the clustering of both barriers and barrier breakers that resulted from initial datacollection efforts. Brief descriptions of each barrier cluster are provided after the matrix. The remainder of thedocument includes a variety of resources associated with each barrier breaker in the matrix. These resourceswere identified by members of the Sustainable Facilities & Infrastructure research team at the Georgia TechResearch Institute through a series of case studies of Department of Defense facility projects, interviews withfederal project stakeholders, and review of best practice sustainability resources available at the time of development. Additional resources were identified by graduate students taking CEE 6120: EnvironmentallyConscious Design & Construction during Spring semester 2002 in Georgia Tech’s School of Civil &Environmental Engineering.The resources and links provided in this document were accurate at the time of development. The authors makeno warranty, implied or express, of the current accuracy of these resources. This document was intended as asupplement to classroom instruction on the topics included. For more information about the contents of thisdocument, contact Dr. Annie Pearce, corresponding author.
Citation
: Pearce, A.R. & Fischer, C.L.J. (2002).
Sustainability Barriers and Barrier Breakers: A ResourceGuide.
Sustainable Facilities & Infrastructure Program, SHETD/EOEML, Georgia Tech Research Institute,Atlanta, GA.
 
1
Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Myers-Lawson School of Construction, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061. Email:apearce@vt.edu (corresponding author)
2
Research Engineer, Sustainable Facilities & Infrastructure Branch, SHETD/EOEML, Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, GA,30332.
 
2
Sustainability Barriers and Barrier Breakers
Barriers and Barrier Breakers
   C  o  n   f   l   i  c   t  w   i   t   h   M   i  s  s   i  o  n   R  e  q  u   i  r  e  m  e  n   t  s   E  x   i  s   t   i  n  g  p  r  o  c  e   d  u  r  e  s   /  s   t  a  n   d  a  r   d  s   U  n  c   l  e  a  r  p  a  y  o   f   f  s   /  m  e  a  s  u  r  e  s  o   f  s  u  c  c  e  s  s   L  a  c   k  o   f   i  n  c  e  n   t   i  v  e  s   /  r  e  w  a  r   d  s   L  a  c   k  o   f  r  e  s  o  u  r  c  e  s   L  a  c   k  o   f  m  a  n  a  g  e  m  e  n   t   b  u  y  -   i  n   R   i  s   k  o   f   f  a   i   l  u  r  e   L  a  c   k  o   f  n  e  c  e  s  s  a  r  y   k  n  o  w   l  e   d  g  e   R  e  s   i  s   t  a  n  c  e   t  o  c   h  a  n  g  e   P  e  r  c  e   i  v  e   d  e  c  o  n  o  m   i  c   i  m  p  a  c   t  s
First cost offsets/solve multiple problems at once Free external resources Additional internal resources/piggybacking Rapid payback/high SLOS strategies True cost accounting/additional metrics Education/training Vision/mission development and focus Awareness enhancement Pilot projects/safe trial and error Explicit goals Resource center/more information New guidelines Add experienced personnel Specialty training Green team/Sustainability Functional Unit Process auditing/review/feedback Partnering/mentoring Manage penalties Incentive programs Positive publicity Emphasize policy trends Proactive alignment measures Policy change Documentation of decisions Multifunction team integration Problem reframing/spin doctoring 
 
3
Barriers
 Perceived economic impacts
Description: common perception that sustainability projects cost more up front, even though they mayoffer life cycle cost savingsRoot cause: lack of knowledge; external factors that will eventually go awayBarrier breakers: look for first cost offsets; see also lack of resources for ideas on leveraging “free”external resources; explicitly build in a cost factor to allow for learning curve items, premium products,etc.; begin with low or no cost solutions to establish a history of success, e.g., reuse of existingstructures, change paint colors, native plantings to eliminate irrigation requirements; seek projects withrapid payback; use true cost accounting and count all benefits!
 Resistance to change
Description: stake in the status quo; lack of appropriate trigger to drive change; perception of addedresponsibilitiesRoot cause: lack of motivation; lack of knowledgeBarrier breakers: Explicitly articulate costs and benefits – provide better information to encourageappropriate reactions; education; focus on the long term vision; top management support of key players;provide sufficient resources; focus on alignment; choose battles wisely to ensure short term victories;develop explicit goals; publicize via web site; emphasize existing sustainability successes; do pilotprojects; develop awareness and alignment with vision; get everyone talking about it
 Lack of necessary knowledge
Description: ties to risk of failure; lack of awareness of sustainability goals by all stakeholdersRoot cause: none (this is the ultimate root cause of unsustainability)Barrier breakers: more education and training; lunch and learns, case studies, field trips; establishing aresource center (product samples, reference materials); developing detailed guidelines for sustainabilityprojects; safe environment for trial and error (tie to trialability); add experienced personnel to projectteams; use mentors; develop a green team; get certain personnel trained deeply in specialty areas;periodic refresher training; give green team authority to audit projects and make changerecommendations; partnering and mentoring (add to RFQ for A/E)
 Risk of failure
Description: the caged guinea pig conundrum – products don’t perform as anticipated, expected returnson investment don’t materialize, and people lose credibilityRoot cause: lack of knowledge about likely outcomesBarrier breakers: Try new products in situations where no one
always
has to live with the consequencesand where different technologies can be compared to one another, e.g., showers in gyms, toilets indining facilities, etc. More information can lead to better decisions (raw data, case studies, analysistools) with lower risk of failure; manage penalties associated with failure, especially when failure resultsfrom innovation. Establish a knowledgeable core team that can review potential ideas and confirm theirreasonableness (distributing risk of failure across a team); partnering; mentoring
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...