Sustainability literacy: The Future Paradigm for Construction

Education?

Paul E Murray BSc FRICS; Principal Lecturer, University of Plymouth; National

Teaching Fellow; Fellow UK Centre For Sustainable Futures

Alison J Cotgrave MEd BSc PGCE FCIOB MRICS FBEng, Head of Property and
Planning Studies, Liverpool John Moores University

ABSTRACT

This paper identifies the arguments that construction professionals, as key

decision-makers, are well-placed to reduce, or reverse, the negative impacts that
buildings and construction have on the environment and society. However, the
question arises whether construction professionals possess the appropriate
attributes that enable them to act, and take decisions, in a sustainable manner.
Sustainability literacy is the emerging term describing the combination of
knowledge, skill and value sets an individual requires to live and work
sustainably. Recent research has been examining the concept of sustainability
literacy in the context of construction education and identifies the drivers for
embedding sustainability at the heart of construction degree programmes.
Complementary research has also been exploring the attitudes of practising
professionals to the sustainability agenda and has been measuring the level of
environmental content within construction courses in the UK.
The work concludes that there are powerful professional and institutional drivers
for embracing sustainability within construction degrees and that there is
considerable scope to adapt and update UK construction courses to equip future
professionals with the right knowledge, the right skills and appropriate values to
reduce, avoid or reverse damage.

Introduction

Construction is a significant industry employing over two million individuals in the

UK alone and accounting for nearly 6% of Gross Domestic Product (around £60
billion) (Construction Skills 2003, pp2-3). The current paradigm or performance
framework for construction in the UK is reflected in Sir John Egan’s 1998 review,
Rethinking Construction which focuses on the need to:

 Reduce construction defects

 Reduce construction costs and
 Reduce construction time.
(NAO 2001, p3)

Following the Egan Review stress has been placed on promoting target-driven
improvements to processes and outcomes with a view to making the construction

1
industry more efficient and more profitable for the benefit of all its stakeholders.
However, laudable as these goals are, they underplay the significance of the
environmental impacts of the building industry, which organisations such as the
UK’s Building Research Establishment (BRE), the Construction Industry
Research and Information Association (CIRIA) and the US Green Building
Council have spent decades researching and documenting. Furthermore, there is
an increasing acceptance that effectively reversing the environmental damage
caused by humankind is inextricably linked to the need to address the social and
economic inequities that so commonly permeate human cultures. This
‘understanding’, typically described using the terms sustainability or sustainable
development, implies that a paradigm shift is needed in the way we live and work
if we are to reverse, or even slow the damage. Bearing this in mind and the size
and importance of the construction industry, there is, arguably, a growing
impetus for the industry to use the emerging ‘sustainability’ agenda as a lens
through which construction performance is measured. In this new paradigm
construction effectiveness would be measured as much by its contribution to
enhancing the environment and promoting social and economic equity as by
achieving the Egan targets. There are clearly major implications of such a shift
for construction educators. This paper explores the drivers for, and implications
of, using sustainability as the new paradigm for the education of future
construction professionals.

Sustainability, sustainable development and sustainability literacy

Sustainability as a term is often associated with issues around ‘keeping alive’,

‘continuing’, and ‘enduring’. In 1987 the UN Commission on Environment and
Development (The Brundtland Commission) used the term ‘Sustainable
Development’ to relate the concept of sustainability to human endeavour. The
ensuing Brundland Report then defined sustainable development as:

“Development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs”
(Source: WCED 1987)

This, the most commonly quoted definition of sustainable development, is entirely

appropriate in the context of construction works, as outlined by Prasad and Hall;

“The built environment provides a synthesis of environmental, economic and

social issues. It provides shelter for the individual, physical infrastructure for
communities and is a significant part of the economy. Its design sets the pattern
for resource consumption over its relatively long lifetime.”
(Prasad & Hall, undated, p8)

However, the problem with the Brundlandt definition is that it is vague and open
to individual interpretation. The meaning of sustainability and sustainable
development is evolving over time and commonly the terms are interchanged, as
they are in this paper, to broadly describe an approach that addresses the social,

2
economic and environmental challenges mankind faces. Clearly, understanding
of the notion of sustainability is important in the educational context (Jucker
2002, p16). The most common explanation of the components or pillars of
sustainability refers to economic sustainability, social sustainability and
environmental sustainability (Fig 1).

Environment

Economics
Equity
Sustainability

Figure 1 The Three Pillars Model of Sustainability

(Source: Goodhew 2003)

In this view, the social, economic and environmental components are inter-
related and need to be addressed ‘at the same time’ to make progress (Forum
for the Future 2004, p4). Some commentators suggest additional pillars, for
example ‘cultural sustainability’, while others have devised more complex models
for understanding sustainable development, such as the ‘Five Capitals model’:
social capital, natural capital, manufacturing capital, human capital and capital
(Forum for the Future 2004, p11). Notwithstanding these differing approaches,
the principles underpinning the Earth Charter, a post-Rio initiative backed by
UNESCO, usefully illustrate the underlying challenges of sustainability. The Earth
Charter declares that to move forward mankind has to live with:

(i) Respect and care or the community of life

(ii) Ecological integrity
(iii) Social and economic justice
(iv) Non-violence and peace
(Source: Blewitt & Cullingford (2004, p5)

Another way of explaining the sustainability agenda is to envision the type of

world we need to create:
“Imagine a society in which all present and future humans are healthy and have
their basic needs met. What if everyone had fair access to the world’s resources,
a decent quality of life, and celebrated cultural diversity. Imagine …restoring and

3
preserving the biologically diverse ecosystems upon which we all depend.
Imagine future scientists, engineers and business people designing technology
and economic systems that sustain rather than degrade the natural environment,
that enhance human health and wellbeing.”
(Cortese & McDonough 2001, p1)

This vision of an equitable, safe and healthy future for mankind and the planet
highlights the role that professionally qualified individuals can play in delivering
sustainable development. However, few professionals are likely to fully
comprehend sustainability issues or be equipped with the attributes that would
enable them to take decisions that sustain, rather then degrade the world around
them. Consequently, the need to equip them with sustainability-relevant
knowledge, skills and values comes into stark focus. An emerging term being
coined to describe these attributes is ‘sustainability literacy’, where a
sustainability literate person:

1. understands the need for change to a sustainable way of doing things,

individually and collectively
2. has sufficient knowledge and skills to decide to act in a way that favours
sustainable development
3. is able to recognise and reward other people’s decisions and actions that
favour sustainable development
(Source: Parkin et al 2004, p9)

However, as pointed out by Martin (2002, p20), professionals need guidance and
support if they are going to be able to live and work in a sustainable manner.
Thus, sustainability literacy is a useful concept for university educators to grasp,
not least because graduates are well placed to become influential professionals
and managers within businesses, governments and the voluntary sector (Parkin
et al 2004, p6). This is, of course, particularly true in the construction field. In the
UK alone there are over 60000 students enrolled in courses that can directly
leading to high level careers in the industry (Table 1).

Discipline Enrolled students

Civil /Structural Engineering 10905

Architecture 9575

Surveying 15425

Planning 5650

Mechanical / 22,240
ElectricalEngineering
Total 63795

Table 1 Enrolment to UK construction-related courses

(Source: Ernst & Young 2004, p79)

4
The significance of construction to sustainability

The International Council for Innovation and Research in Building and

Construction (CIB 1999) identified the significance of construction in achieving a
sustainable world within their report, Agenda 21 on Sustainable Construction:

“The pursuit of sustainable development throws the built environment and the
construction industry into sharp relief. This sector of society is of such vital innate
importance that most other industrial areas of the world society simply fade in
comparison”

Bordeau (1999, p354) reiterates this claim, stating:

“the built environment constitutes one of the main supports (infrastructure,

buildings) of economic development, and, on the other side, its construction has
significant impacts on resources (land, materials, energy, water, human/social
capital) and on the living and working environment. Hence the construction
industry has significant direct and indirect links with the various aspects of
sustainable development”

A useful method of demonstrating the links between construction and the

sustainability agenda is to examine the industry’s impacts in the context of the
three pillars of sustainable development.

Environment: In 1990 the BRE published its first evidence-based environmental

assessment for buildings (Baldwin et al 1990). Since then, a plethora of
publications have emerged describing the environmental impacts of buildings
and construction authored by professional bodies (CIOB 2004), academics,
(Edwards 1999), research institutions (CIRIA 1994; Halliday (1992), trade bodies
(Glass (2001); Eurofer 1995), practitioners (Johnson 1993) and charities (WWF
2003). Table 2 highlights the most commonly recognised environmental
impacts of buildings using impact categories first developed by the BRE.

Key impact Examples of impact criteria Headline indicators

categories
Energy Consumption in KWh/m2 Buildings cause 50% of CO2 emissions
CO2 emissions (Edwards 1999).
Global temperatures could rise by 6 C by
2100 (DTI 2004, p17)
Transport CO2 emissions Transporting between buildings accounts
Cycling facilities for 22% of national energy use in UK
Transport planning/public transport Total UK traffic increased 77% from 1980
proximity to 2002 (DTI 2004, p18)
Water M3/person per year Water consumption in UK has risen 70%
consumption Leak detection since the 1930’s
Construction/buildings account for 50% of
water use (Edwards 1999, pxv ).
Materials Avoidance of hazardous materials Construction uses 40% - 50% of all
Use Life-cycle environmental impacts resources (Edwards 1999, pxv ); (Du

5
 Storage for recyclable materials
Use of re-used materials
Reusability of materials
Use of sustainably managed timber
Pollution Ozone depletion
NOx emissions from boilers mg/KWh
delivered
Health & Minimising legionnella risk
Wellbeing Natural ventilation
Internal air pollution
Artificial lighting
Light levels/daylighting/glare control
View from workstation
Thermal comfort
Internal noise
Land Use Use of brownfield site
issues Decontamination of contaminated land
Ecology Using land with low ecological value
issues Changes in site ecological value
Protection of existing trees
Preventing adverse biodiversity impacts
Plessis et al 2001, piv).
Construction accounts for up to half of all
resources taken out of the earth’s crust
(CICA 2002, p7),
UK construction consumes around 366
million tonnes of materials per annum
98% of temperate timber used in
construction is imported
250-300 million tonnes of aggregate are
extracted annually in UK
70 million tonnes of waste(29% of UK
waste) is generated by construction
activities annually. (Edwards 1999 p.193).
p.193).
13 million tonnes of waste is generated
from materials delivered to site and not
used
Construction accounts for 50% of ozone
depleting chemicals (Edwards 1999, pxv)
12% of the 300 (approximate) annually
reported cases of legionnaires disease in
UK are fatal
By 2016 12% of England is expected to
be in ‘urban use’.
Construction accounts for 80% of all land
lost to agriculture (Edwards 1999, pxv ).

Table 2 Environmental Assessment Criteria developed by the BRE for Offices

(Source: Baldwin et al 1998, except where indicated)

The headline indicators in Table 2 become more worrying when the prediction
that the world economy is expected to quintuple in size over the next 50 years is
taken into account (World Resources Institute 2000, p6). Bearing in mind that the
construction industry is commonly seen as a barometer of the economy,
construction output may then be set to rise at the same rate. Construction is
likely, therefore, to impose increasing adverse impacts on the environment and
well being of people around the world (Ofori 1997, p144), underpinning the need
for building professionals to develop a better understanding, not only of the
environmental effects of construction, but its social and economic effects too.

Social and economic effects:

When the construction industry is examined from a global context, its socio-
economic significance becomes obvious. The industry is the world’s largest
industrial employer (111 million employees) and in most countries it accounts for

6
more than half of capital investment and as much as 10% of GNP. (Du Plessis
2002, pp15-16) Any industry of this magnitude inevitably has significant social
and economic influences, yet these are generally harder to document than an
industry’s environmental impacts.

‘Sustainable Construction’ is a term increasingly being adopted to align the

building industry with the sustainable development agenda. However, as Table 3
demonstrates, interpretations of the term tend to be either vague,
environmentally focused, or both.

Source Interpretation of sustainable construction

Academic “The creation in a responsible manner of a healthy built

Charles Kibbert. University environment based on resource efficient and ecological principles”
of Florida (Kibbert 1994)

Construction Industry “The contribution of the construction process, built environment

improvement body
Construction Best Practice
Programme CBPP (2002)
UK Government
Department of Trade &
Industry (2001)
and construction industry to Sustainable Development”
“The construction industry:
 being more profitable & competitive
 delivering greater satisfaction, well-being & value
 respecting/treating stakeholders more fairly
 enhancing/protecting natural environment
 minimising resource consumption”

Overseas Government “A way of building which aims at reducing (negative) health and
Netherlands environmental impacts caused by the construction process or by
CIB (1999), p45 buildings, or by the built-up environment.”

Table 3 Four interpretations of the term Sustainable Construction

The CIB acknowledges that in many countries the official context of sustainable
construction emphasises ecological aspects and more or less ignores issues
such as poverty, under-development and social equity (CIB 1999, p119).
Nevertheless, the Confederation of International Contractors’ Associations
(CICA) has attempted to articulate the broader dimensions of sustainable
construction for the UN in terms of its potential to:

Combat poverty through generating employment

Change consumption patterns through efficient design and management
Promoting and protecting human health
Promote sustainable human settlements by providing shelter, infrastructure
and employment 7
Contribute to social cohesion and regional economic development
 Figure 2 The socio-economic dimensions of sustainable construction
(source CICA 2002, pp10-16)

The CICA commentary is helpful, but still lacks a clear ‘big picture’ global focus,
perhaps because of a dearth of hard and available supporting data. Similarly, in
Prasad and Hall’s work on sustainable construction, the significance of poverty is
recognised (Prasad & Hall, undated p7) yet their interpretation of construction’s
role focuses rather more on producing environmentally benign buildings than
exploring how construction can contribute more broadly to social equity, for
example by employing and training local labour.

Overall, if construction can be viewed as a highly damaging industry, it can also

be argued that, by default, it has a lot to contribute to the sustainability agenda.
Construction has the potential to enhance rather than degrade the environment
and to promote rather than exasperate social and economic equity. If this
potential is to be realised, everyone within the industry will need to attain some
level of sustainability literacy. Indeed, if the sustainability agenda gains more
momentum, construction professionals will increasingly be expected to possess
sustainability-relevant knowledge, skills and values. Consequently, there is a
strong rationale, from the point of view of base need, for embracing sustainability
within construction degree courses to ensure that future entrants bring with them
the levels of sustainability literacy that the industry will need. There are also a
range of industry-led and external drivers that are poised to move this agenda
forward.

Education for sustainability literacy – drivers from the professions

Construction education in the UK is monitored, and in some cases controlled by

professional bodies covering disciplines such as Architecture, surveying,
Construction Management, engineering, and development planning. The
Sustainable Development Education Panel (SDEP) has proposed that all
professional bodies embed sustainable development within their course
accreditation criteria (Perdan et al 2000, pp267-279). The response from the
UK‘s construction-related professional bodies is summarised in Table 4.

Discipline/ professional body Undergraduate Sustainability focus

8

Architecture
Royal Institute of British
Architects (RIBA)
Members: 30000 (RIBA 2005)
Construction Management
Chartered Institute of Building
(CIOB)
Members: 40000+ (CIOB 2006)
Engineering
Institution of Civil Engineers
(ICE); Members: 80000 (ICE
2006)
Institution of Structural
Engineers; Members: 20000
(IStructE 2006)
Chartered Institution of Services
Engineers
Members: 17000; (CIBSE 2006)
Surveying
Royal Institution of Chartered
Surveyors; Membership 110000
(RICS 2004)
Planning
Royal Town Planning Institute
(RTPI); Members 18000+ (RTPI
2006)
curriculum influence
Outcome based “Criteria 2002 Criteria includes design-
for Validation” in specific social, cultural and
conjunction with environmental learning outcomes,
departmental and specific skills requirements
accreditation visit (RIBA 2002, p5-6)
Requirement to comply Framework refers to environment
with 80% of outcome aspects and broad social, ethical
based Education and cultural issues. Some specific
Framework; with skills requirements relate to
accreditation visits sustainability. (CIOB 2005)
Curriculum expectations Need for sustainable
for ICE/CIBSE/IStructE development delivery in degree
published by ‘Joint Board programmes with detailed lists for
of Moderators’, with peer knowledge, skills and attitude
review through development published July 2005
departmental visits (JBM 2005)
Curriculum expected to RICS announces need to
broadly support address education for
development of surveying sustainability (RICS 2005, p17).
competencies. No formal requirements.
2001 Education Policy Sustainability, social, economic
Statement issues as and environmental contexts and
guidance to universities. development of appropriate
Revised 2004 (RTPI knowledge specifically referred to
2001; 2004). (RTPI 2004, p3, p9).

Table 4 Key construction-related professional bodies – input to education for sustainability literacy

Table 4 demonstrates a mixed response to the SDEP’s proposal. Furthermore, a

detailed review of the curriculum requirements of the CIOB, CIBSE and RIBA
reveals how they allow for a relatively high level of interpretation. Consequently,
universities that have little or no relevant expertise, or intention, to integrate
sustainability into the curriculum can get their courses accredited. Clearly,
without detailed requirements for embedding sustainability elements in
accredited courses, the influence of professional bodies in the UK will be weak
and patchy. Nevertheless, the engineering institutions, and to a lesser extent the
RTPI, are taking a lead and, over time, may well prove influential and
inspirational to other similar bodies.

The attitudes of practising professionals in the workplace are of obvious

significance to educators. Research at the Liverpool John Moores University has
been investigating the attitudes of construction professionals in the UK’s local
authority sector. Local Authorities were chosen as the subject of the research
because they act as both client and contractor for major building works, they are
major clients for publicly funded construction work and they are likely to have in
place relatively advanced environmental policies and procedures, bearing in
mind that the adoption of Local Agenda 21 strategies has become prevalent.

9
Questionnaires were used to collect data as there is relatively little competition
between Local Authorities and the results therefore should not be tainted by fear
of other authorities gaining competitive advantage if results become public. 73 of
102 questionnaires sent out to Local Authorities in England and Wale were
returned (a response rate of just under 72%). 68% of the respondents were
Architects, Building surveyors, Structural Engineers or Services Engineers.
The remaining 32% consisted of Building Control Officers, Project Managers and
Quantity Surveyors who are differentiated because they have less involvement in
the design and specification stages of building projects.

The research questions were designed to assess, amongst other things, the
respondents’ understanding of sustainable construction and the role that
universities can have in the education of future professionals.

Figure 2 Liverpool survey results to question:

Sustainable construction integrates low energy design with materials
that have a minimum environmental impact. Does your LA consider
this during the design and construction phase of a project?

3%
20% 25%

Yes - Always
Yes - Occasionally
No - Not Often
No - Never

52%

10
 Figure 3: Liverpool survey results to question:
During the design phase of a project, when specifying a building
material how important do you consider the factors given?

60

50

40
% of responses

Cost
Aesthetics
30 Sustainability
Buildability
Other
20

10

0
Most Important Important Neutral Not Important Least Important

The responses to the questions illustrated in Figures 2 and 3 suggest that most
Local Authority professionals always or sometimes consider sustainable
construction when designing and constructing buildings, even if when the final
decisions are made, cost takes precedence. This reinforces a 2003 survey on the
sustainability performance of the UK construction industry carried out by
Sponge‘, an online network of construction professionals with an interest in
sustainable development. The Sponge survey identified affordability as one of
the key barriers to sustainable construction (Sponge 2004, p3). Sponge also
identified that one of the key barriers to developing a more ‘sustainable’ industry
was a lack of understanding of key issues (Sponge 2004, p1) and many of its
respondents stated that sustainability should be a “cornerstone in education for
construction” (Sponge 2004, p5). Sponge’s conclusions that academic
institutions need to improve their sustainability coverage (Sponge 2004, p6) are
echoed in the Liverpool survey ,where 87% of respondents believed that the
universities have a key role to play in educating the Local Authority workforce in
relation to environmental sustainability issues. Although the remaining 13%
believed that education of this nature is the responsibility of employers, there is a
clear consensus is that university education needs to embrace sustainability.

Policy drivers

11
A strong international momentum for promoting education for sustainability is
building. Bodies such as the Association for University Leaders for a Sustainable
Future (ULSF) strongly promote education for sustainability. The Talliores
Declaration’, overseen by USLF, has been signed by over 300 higher education
institutions in more than 40 countries to demonstrate their commitment to
embrace sustainability and environmental literacy (USLF 2006). The Copernicus
Charter, a European follow-up to Talloires, has 320 signatories from 38
countries, (Copernicus-Campus 2006). In addition, the UN has declared 2005 to
2015 the “Decade for Education for Sustainable Development” (UNESCO 2003)
to build on the educational aspirations of the Earth Charter, which embraces the
need to cultivate the “knowledge, values, and skills needed for a sustainable way
of life” (Earth Charter International 2006). The direct impact of these international
initiatives on UK higher education is difficult to measure. Only nine UK
universities have signed the Talliores Declaration, of which just four offer
construction-related degree programmes (USLF 2006) and 32 UK institutions
have signed the Copernicus Charter. Nevertheless, within the UK, the policy
agenda to promote education for sustainability literacy has a long history (Table
5).

Organisation Initiative Year

Department for Establishment of the Council for Environmental Education, 1968 -

Environment, Food to place sustainable development at the heart of education policy 2005
and Rural Affairs and practice (CEE 2002), CEE closed in 2005
(DEFRA)
Committee on Environmental Responsibility: An Agenda for Further and 1992,
Environmental Higher Education published in 1993 (Toyne 1993). reviewed
Education in Further 1996
and Higher Education
UK Government Sustainable Development Education Panel established 1998
(ODPM/DfES)
Higher Education Three year project with 18 universities and sustainable 2000-
Partnership for development charity Forum for the Future, to promote 2003
Sustainability (HEPS) sustainability performance in universities (Parker et al 2004)
Forum for the Future Launch of sustainability in the curriculum toolkit 2002
(Forum for the Future 2002)
Department for Launch of “Sustainable Development Action Plan for 2003
Education and Skills Sustainability and Skills (DfES 2003)
(DfES)
Higher Education Launch of consultation document on Sustainable 2005
Funding Council for Development in higher education (HEFCE 2005b)
England (HEFCE)
Office of the Deputy Launch of the Academy for Sustainable Communities to 2005
Prime Minister promote the development of knowledge and skills needed
(ODPM) to create sustainable communities
Higher Education Monitoring research in education for sustainability. Launch 2006
Academy of initial report on ESD in Higher Education (HEA 2006)

Table 5 Initiatives relating to education for sustainability literacy in the UK

12
Table 5 points to an ongoing commitment from UK governments to promoting
education for sustainability. This commitment is emphasised in the UK’s official
sustainable development strategy, which asks educators “to make sustainability
literacy a core competency for professional graduates” (HMG 2005, p39).
Independent bodies like the Forum for the Future mentioned in Table 5 have the
role of providing badly needed support and guidance to academics wishing to
respond to this agenda.

The response from construction educators

The response from UK’s construction educators to the national and international
policy drivers has been mixed. In England it might be expected that the
sustainability agenda would influence the national subject ‘Benchmark
Statements’, which are devised by panels of discipline-based ‘experts’ to guide
curriculum design nationally. Construction is affected by three benchmark
statements, Building/surveying, Architecture and Engineering. The reality is that
although these statements are potentially influential, they tend to be vague and
little reference can be found within them to sustainability issues. The
Architecture statement refers to environmental design, culture and the
“development of a sustainable future” (QAA 2000a). The Engineering statement
includes an outcome relating to the understanding of the global, social and
ethical contexts of their profession (QAA 2000b, p14). The ‘Building and
Surveying’ statement is particularly vague with only brief mention of ethics, socio-
political issues and sustainability (QAA 2002). The statements are currently
under review and may well emerge with a much stronger emphasis on
sustainability.

Two important institutional level developments occurred in 2005 with the

establishment of two centres of excellence in teaching and learning dedicated to
education for sustainability. The Centre for Sustainable Communities Achieved
Through Integrated Professional Education (C-Scaipe), is a five year project
based at the University of Kingston with the aim of deepening understanding of
sustainable development within the built environment professions (HEFCE
2005b). The goal of C-Scaipe is to equip Kingston’s built environment graduates
with the vision and innovation to address future needs. The Centre’s work is
initially focused on embedding sustainability principles within the university’s built
environment curriculum. The second centre of excellence has been created at
the University of Plymouth. The Centre for Sustainable Futures (CSF) has five
year funding to transform Plymouth into a model of excellence in education for
sustainability. Plymouth’s Architecture, construction/surveying subject areas, all
of which have proven excellence in environmental education, are core disciplines
within the CSF (Dyer & Selby 2004, p5). Both disciplines are actively engaged in
transforming their curricula to embed sustainability and disseminating
sustainability to external audiences.

13
At the time of writing both centres of excellence are still in the early stages of
development, however their potential to influence and disseminate excellence in
sustainability education for construction is considerable. While these
developments are significant, they are focused on two isolated institutions and
the question that emerges is: ‘what is happening elsewhere in the sector?’
Researchers at Liverpool John Moores University have also been exploring this
question in relation to the focus on environmental sustainability in Britain’s
construction degrees.

Data was collected through interviews with course leaders and by submitting
questionnaires to their final year students. 22 programme leaders were
interviewed and 155 questionnaires returned. The research revealed significant
diversity in curriculum content with ten of the programmes claiming to be highly
environmentally focussed whilst four appeared to have little or no environmental
content. The environmental content of the other eight programmes was present,
but did not represent a significant element of the curriculum. Interestingly, the
perception of course leaders about the environmental content of their
programmes differed from that of responding students. For example, when
programme leaders stated they had little environmental content, their students
claimed otherwise. These same students also appeared, from their responses, to
be as knowledgeable as other students who were studying on degrees where the
course leader believed the programme to have a high environmental content.
Overall, student attitudes to the environment were found to be positive, and their
degree curriculum appeared to be a key influence in the development of these
attitudes. Controversially however, the level of environmental research
undertaken by staff appeared from the research to have little identifiable
influence on student learning, perhaps because at least in some cases, those
most highly engaged in research tend to have low contact with students. The
inference from this research is that construction educators are not yet embracing
sustainability in a way which will lead to sustainability literate graduates

Sustainability in construction education at the University of Plymouth

The University of Plymouth has been unique since the mid 1990s in offering
overtly environmentally-themed built undergraduate surveying and construction
degrees. The curriculum of these degrees emphasises the development of
profession-specific environmental knowledge and skills such as energy efficiency
and environmental construction practice. Currently, a full curriculum review is
underway to update the content generally and to enhance the sustainability
content of the courses (Murray et al 2006 pending). This review is being informed
by research undertaken at Plymouth to identify the knowledge and skills that a
‘sustainability literate’ built environment professional would ideally display,
categorised as:

Discipline-specific sustainability knowledge

Discipline-specific sustainability skills

14
 Generic sustainability knowledge
Generic sustainability skills
Sustainability relevant values

These research outcomes underpinned a paper-based sustainability audit of the

degree curriculum to identify gaps in provision, which, it is intended, the course
review might fill, at least in part.

As reported in Murray et al (2006 pending), it was found that although the

curriculum is delivering discipline-specific environmental aspects well, for
example by providing an environmental theme to otherwise routine projects (
Figure 4) , very few generic aspects of sustainability like citizenship, basic
ecology, poverty are being covered and there is no mention of values at all.

Figure 4 Eco house design - 1st year project for Plymouth construction students,

The audit result is unsurprising bearing in mind that construction courses tend to
have a very full curriculum. An initiative leading from these findings is underway
to help students (and staff) deepen their understanding of broader sustainability
issues and to cultivate the values and attitudes that motivate sustainable
behaviour. This work centres on offering experiential voluntary workshops which
enable participants to elicit and reflect upon their core values and attitudes and
relate these to key aspects of sustainability and their profession. The workshops
have thus far proved valuable and popular (All 36 student participants
recommended that the workshops are integrated into the formal curriculum),
although, in the short term at least, they are most likely to continue as a voluntary
addition to the formally taught provision

15
Conclusions

The rationale for embedding sustainability in construction degree programmes

emanates from the growing impetus to improve the environmental performance
of the construction industry within the UK and globally and the momentum for
embracing education for sustainability generally within higher education.

The sustainability agenda embraces the inter-relationship between social and

economic wellbeing and environmental degradation; however, the significance of
these issues is as yet poorly reflected in construction’s current focus on targeting
efficiencies in terms of cost, quality and time. Yet few commentators are likely to
argue that sustainability is set to become a declining issue; clearly it is a major,
emerging concern as evidenced by the national and international focus it is being
afforded. Thus the challenge ahead, not only for construction educators but for
professionals too, will be the need to promote and to personally develop:

1. a clear understanding of sustainability generally and in the context of the

social, economic and environmental perspectives of construction.

2. a deeper understanding of their individual role in developing their own and

others’ attitudes to issues relating to social and economic equity and the
environment. Educators in particular will be looked to, to promote more
sustainability-responsible behaviour from the professionals of the future.

The research from Liverpool and elsewhere records the increasing interest
amongst building professionals and stresses that the industry appears to see
Higher Education as the major provider of sustainability-focussed construction
education. However, the research also indicates a patchy response thus far to
the sustainability agenda from construction educators. This is understandable as
levels of available expertise and enthusiasm for the required shift will vary.
Professional bodies can clearly play an important role in forcing the pace
however it may be better to allow institutions to make small, steady and
incremental changes to their curricula to provide with the time they need to
develop the expertise, awareness and motivation of their own staff. The
Plymouth experience demonstrates that widespread integration of environmental
issues is certainly achievable and the process of identifying the appropriate
knowledge and skills and then seeking ways of integrating these into core
subjects and, if needed, into one or more new environment/sustainability units
might provide a helpful model for others to adapt.

Individuals and groups interested in learning more about the research and
developments described in this paper are invited to contact the authors by email:
pmurray@plymouth.ac.uk
a.j.cotgrave@ljmu.ac.uk

16
References
Baldwin R. Leach S. Doggart J. Attenborough M. (1990) Building Research
Establishment Environmental Assessment Method Version 1/90. An
Environmental Assessment for New Office Designs; BRE, Watford, UK
Blewitt, J., Cullingford, C. (2004) The Sustainability Curriculum. The challenge
for Higher Education, Earthscan, London
Bourdeau L. (1999) Sustainable Development and the Future of Construction: A
comparison of Visions of Various Countries, Building Research and Information,
27:6:355-367
CBPP (2002) Sustainable Construction, Construction Best Practice Programme,
www.cbpp.org.uk/themes/sus.jsp
CEE (2002) About CEE; http://www.cee.org.uk Accessed May 2006
CIB (1999) Agenda 21 on Sustainable Construction. CIB Report Publication 237,
July 1999, Rotterdam
CIBSE (2006) About CIBSE, www.cibse.org Chartered Institute of Building
Services, London
CICA (2002) Industry as a Partner for Sustainable Development; Construction.
Report for the United nations Environment programme, Confederation of
International Contractors Associations, Washington
CIOB (2004) Sustainability and Construction. Chartered Institute of Building,
Ascot
CIOB (2006) CIOB membership; http://www.ciob.org.uk/home Accessed May
2006
CIRIA (1994) Environmental Impacts of Materials, Special Publication 116
Volumes A to F; Construction Industry Research and Information Association,
London
Construction Industry Council (2006) What is CIC?
http://www.CIC.org.uk/about/whatis_cic.shtml Accessed May 2006.
Construction Skills (2003) Construction Skills Foresight Report 2003; CITB-
Construction Skills, Kings Lynn, England http://www.citb-
constructionskills/pdf/research/skills_foresight_2003.pdf Accessed July 2006
Copernicus-Campus (2006) http://www.copernicus-
campus.org/sites/list_index.html Accessed June 2006
Cortese A. Mcdonough W. (2001) Education for Sustainability. Accelerating the
Transition to Sustainability through Higher Education; Second Nature Inc, Boston
DfES (2003) Sustainable Development Action Plan for Education and Skills,
Department for Education and Skills, London
DTI (2001) Building a Better Quality of Life - a strategy for more sustainable
construction; Department of Trade and Industry, London
DTI (2004); Sustainable Construction Brief 2; Department of Trade and Industry,
London; http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file13939.pdf
Du Plessis C. (2002) Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing
Countries. A discussion document. Report for the CIB and UNEP-IETC. CSIR
Building Construction and Technology, Pretoria
Dyer A. & Selby D. (2004) Centre of Excellence for Teaching and Learning.
Education for Sustainable Development: Stage 2 Bid; University of Plymouth

17
Earth Charter International (2006) The Earth Charter, Earth Charter International,
Stockholm, www.earthcharter.org/files/charter/charter.pdf Accessed June 2006
Edwards B. (1999) Sustainable Architecture: European Directives and Building
Design, 2nd Edition, Architectural Press, Oxford pp.xiv, xv, xvi, 229
Ernst & Young (2004) Evidence Base Review of Skills for Sustainable
Communities; Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London
Eurofer (1995), Ecobuild in Steel; British Steel Redcar, UK
Forum for the Future (2002) Learning for Sustainable Development. A
Curriculum Toolkit; Forum for the Future; London
Forum for the Future (2004) Taking It On. Sustainability Literacy: Knowledge and
Skills for the future. Report from the consultation workshop July 2004. Forum for
the Future; London
Glass J. (2001) Ecoconcrete - The Contribution of Cement and Concrete to a
More Sustainable Built Environment; British Cement Association, Crowthorne
UK.
Goodhew S. (2003) Sustainability in Construction. Student Learning Package 1,
Student-centred Learning in Construction Education, University of Plymouth,
Plymouth
Halliday S. (1992) Environmental Code of Practice for Building Services;
Building Services Research and Information Association, Bracknell, UK
Heywood A. (2005) Green light for Sustainability; RICS Business, June 2005
pp16-17; Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, London
HEA (2006) Sustainable Development in Higher education. Current Practice and
Future Developments. A Progress Report for Employers, Unions and the
Professions. Higher Education Academy; York
HEFCE (2005a) Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, Higher
Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE); Bristol.
HEFCE (2005b) Sustainable Development in Higher Education. Consultation on
a support strategy and action plan, Higher Education Funding Council for
England (HEFCE); Bristol.
HM Government (2005) Securing the Future: Delivering UK sustainable
Development Strategy, http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/index.asp
Accessed March 2006
ICE (2006) About ICE; http://www.ice.org/about_ice/aboutice_history.asp
Accessed May 2006
IStructE (2006) About IStructE, Institution of Structural Engineers, London,
www.IStructE.org
Johnson S. (1993) Greener Buildings – The Environmental Impact of Property;
MacMillan, London
Jucker R. (2002) Sustainability – Never Heard of it. Some basics we shouldn’t
ignore when engaging in education for sustainability; International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol 3 No 1; pp8-18; January 2002. Emerald
Publishing Group
Kibbert C. 1994) 1st International Conference on Sustainable Construction;
Tampa, 1994

18
Langston C. Dingk C. (Ed) (2001) Sustainable Practices in the Built Environment
2nd Edition Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford
Martin S. (2002) Sustainability, Systems Thinking and Professional Practice,
published in PLANET Special Edition 4; December 2002 LTSN Subject Centre
for Geography Earth and Environmental Sciences, p20-21
Murray P. Goodhew S, Turpin-Brooks S (2006) Environmental Sustainability:
Sustainable Construction Education – a UK case study. International Journal of
Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability 2006 pending
NAO (2001) Modernising Construction, National Audit Office, London,
www.nao.gov.uk
Ofori G. (1998) Sustainable Construction: Principles and a Framework for
Attainment-comment. Construction Economics and Management (1998) 16, 141-
145
Parkin S; Johnson A; Buckland H; White E; (2004) Learning and Skills for
Sustainable Development: Developing a sustainability Literate Society, HEPS,
London
Perdan S., Azapagic A., Clift R.(2000) Teaching Sustainable development to
engineering students, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,
Vol.1 No.3 pp.267-279
Prasad D. Hall M. (undated) The Construction Challenge: Sustainability in
Developing Countries; RICS, London
QAA (2000a) Architecture, Architectural Technology and Landscape
Architecture Subject Benchmark Statement; Quality Assurance Agency for
Higher Education, Gloucester, England
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/
QAA (2000b) Engineering Subject Benchmark Statement; Quality Assurance
Agency for Higher Education, Gloucester, England
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/
QAA (2002) Building and Surveying Subject Benchmark Statement; Quality
Assurance Agency for Higher Education, Gloucester, England
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/
RIBA (2005) About RIBA; http://riba.org/go/RIBA/About/About_1.html
Accessed May 2006
RICS (2004) Annual Review 2003-2004. Developing the Profession; Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors, London
RTPI (2001) The Education of Planners. Policy Statement and General
Guidance for Academic Institutions Offering Initial Professional Education in
Planning; Royal Town Planning Institute.
RTPI (2004) Policy Statement on Initial Planning Education;
http://www.rtpi.org/resources/publications/education-commission/policy.pdf
RTPI (2006) http://wwww.rtpi.org/about-the-rtpi/stats/statistics.html Accessed
May 2006
Toyne P. (1993) Environmental Responsibility: An agenda for further and Higher
Education; HMSO, London

19
UNESCO (2003) UN Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (2005-
2015) Framework for a Draft International Implementation Scheme; UNESCO
July 2003.
USGBS (2006) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED);
http://www.usgbc/LEED; accessed May 2006.
USLF (2001) What is the Talliores Declaration?;
http://www.ulsf.org/programs_talloires.html Accessed May 2006
USLF (2006) Talloires Declaration Institutional signatory List; March 2006.
http://www.ulsf.org/pdf/td_signatories.pdf Accessed May 2006
World Resources Institute (2000) A guide to the world’s Resources 2000-2001,
World Resources Institute, Washington. www.wri.org
WCED (1987) Our Common Future, World Commission on Environment and
Development, Oxford University Press
WWF (2003) Building Sustainably How to plan and construct new housing for the
21st Century; WWF UK, London

20