The case for Centres of Excellence in sustainable building design

Low carbon construction skills
Low carbon skills survey
In 2010, Ipsos MORI was commissioned by The Royal Academy of Engineering to
establish the range and depth of low carbon design and construction skills available
in the UK construction industry that would enable it to deliver against targets
for low carbon buildings (Appendix 3). The research was carried out by telephone
interviews with a range of firms and supported by a postal survey of opinions.
This research revealed that while the majority of respondents felt that their firms
had sufficient skills to address low carbon issues, they still revealed ignorance in
relation to some of the broader aspects of sustainability and carbon policy. The
fact that the majority of survey respondents reported that they had sufficient
skills in low carbon may be a result of the recent downturn in the economy
and a lack of demand from clients. This tendency to report skills sufficiency in
the current climate, despite acknowledged skills shortage in previous years, is
reflected in the annual surveys “Skills And Training In The Construction Sector”
[CITB 2009, 2011] (see box).
The skills referred to by respondents often related to high-technology solutions
such as micro-generation installations, but rarely to passive energy conservation
features. This is confirmed by the fact that many respondents, contractors and
consultants alike, referred to manufacturers as their principal source of information
on low carbon, rather than universities, professional institutions or other research
organisations. It is also interesting to note that, despite being largely confident in
their own skills, most respondents criticised the lack of skills in others, revealing a
wide diversity in the understanding of their basic skills requirement.
Few respondents in the survey were able to identify their future business and
skills needs in response to the known direction of UK climate policy. The majority
of respondents are simply responding to changes in legislation as they happen.
This leads to the continuing drive towards a minimum cost approach for training
and skills development, rather than identifying and preparing for future business
opportunities presented by low carbon policy.
The survey revealed widespread concern about the lack of recognition for
suitable qualifications and experience in low carbon design. Respondents noted
the large number of new entrants claiming specialist expertise in low carbon
design, perhaps without the experience to justify these claims. This means that it
becomes harder for clients and building owners to identify those with genuine
experience and expertise in the field.
In particular, respondents felt that graduates were inadequately prepared for the
role that they are now expected to play in the construction industry, particularly
in relation to low carbon design.
Achieving recognised qualifications can be very costly and even of questionable
value. The number of conflicting training schemes for proprietary rating systems
such as BREEAM and LEED, and even the need to undertake repeated training
for different accreditations within the same scheme appears to be putting many
businesses off undertaking the training.
There is the need for a nationally recognised accredited mark of competence
in low carbon and sustainable design, with appropriate training, initial and
continuing professional development, such as Chartered Engineer status, for
those working in the low carbon design sector.
A clear need was identified for the collation and sharing of building performance
information relating to energy efficiency and low carbon design. However, the
The case for Centres of Excellence in sustainable building design 25