The economic downturn means that some organisations will hold off green development. The reason, a building consultant said, lay in the fact that green development had not shown any short-term benefits. The fact that going green had long-term benefits, such as cost efficiency that should attract investment did not seem to be enough for most organisations.
Peter Rawlings, who is a consultant at Environmental Resources Management, was baffled by the green development hold-off, as he determined that this was the best time to make green technology investments.
“When businesses are tight, it’s a very valuable experience,” Rawlings said.
Rawlings was pleased to note, however, that organisations that have already built green continued to build green. Singapore’s Building and Construction Authority (BCA), for example, had set up the Green Mark Scheme, a sign that there is still hope for green development. The Green Mark Scheme is a rating system that certifies and recognises green-friendly properties. The scheme had gained some local and regional popularity.
Still, there are many problems that need to be addressed before green development could overcome the road bump that is the economic crisis. The organisations holding off green development are the ones that are not yet committed to building green. Rawlings believed that their hesitations may either be because green development involves significant investment, and that none of these organisations have so far witnessed the benefits that green development has to offer.
Yet another problem connected to green development was that international property players prefer to use LEED (leadership in energy and environmental design) system to rate their buildings. This US property rating system is used as a strict international standard that many property developers like to use on all their projects. Considering the fact that green development projects take unique geography into consideration, this attitude towards standardisation is a big hurdle. A shift in paradigm is needed.