{jcomments off}With the opening of Expo 2010 Shanghai approaching, Professor Wu Jiang spoke about the master planning and architecture, and what the event will do for Shanghai.

As Former Deputy Director of the Shanghai Municipal Urban Planning Administration Bureau, Professor Wu Ziang was intimately involved in the master planning and approvals process for the Shanghai Expo Site.  An architect, urban planner, and educator, he is currently Vice President of Tongji Unversity. Catching up with him at the American Institute of Architects (Hong Kong) Vertical Density conference, we are bundled into a small coffee room to talk about what this year’s event will bring to the 150 year old tradition of Great Expositions.

Over a coffee and donut, he reveals insight his into the event that will bring the world to Shanghai, and Shanghai to the world. He is well placed to comment, given that during his six years with the Shanghai planning bureau he also approved all the permanent pavilions as well as many of the temporary pavilions including the national pavilions. So, with over 180 structures taking shape in the massive 5.28 sqm site, what are his expectations for the Shanghai Expo? “Every time the Expo boasts some architectural achievements that invariably become landmarks for the city. We also expect this for Shanghai. For the permanent projects we try to make them not only very efficient buildings during the event, but afterwards ensure they become very important public functional facilities for the city.”

Temporary Permanence
Under current plans, only four of the pavilions have been built as permanent structures, most notably the China Pavilion, the largest building at the Expo. Following the six month run of the Expo, it will become a exhibition and conference centre that will host public events and performances. However, Wu notes that some of the most successful pavilions may be kept in situ. These plans “don’t mean we will demolish all of the temporary pavilions after the Expo. Architecturally speaking, there are always pavilions that are so attractive, so well designed in terms of architecture, that some of them will be preserved.”

“What a waste?!”, some may cry. Especially architects, engineers and constructors charged with building the Expo facilities. However, the whole concept behind the Shanghai Expo is that the creators are encouraged to view their work as temporary, so that they break the mold in introducing technologies and materials that can be reused afterwards. This miniature life-cycle approach in itself will help advance the cause of sustainable design. Another important issue, Wu raises, is that even if some of the temporary pavilions are earmarked to remain in situ, they will have to be re-engineered to bring them in line with Shanghai’s municipal building and safety codes, which were not applied for the initial Expo designs.

Thematic Approach
The theme of Better City, Better Life is something intrinsic to how the Expo is being put together, Wu asserts. “This Expo will be very different from the past. For the past 150 years the Expo has always been about celebrating scientific and technology development. While Shanghai Expo 2010 will do this, the most important point is that it should give a totally new concept of urban development to the people, and not just show individual achievements.”

Thus instead of demonstrating about iconic architectural forms, the Expo aims to showcase “new ideas and new concepts of architecture and technology to the people of Shanghai and the world,” he says, Function and detail, rather than form will therefore be the metrics of success in 2010. Another important part of this huge opportunity is for Shanghai to interact with the world. “Visitors will get a chance to experience Shanghai’s unique history culture and architectural heritage. Shanghai has a very special architectural taste, so I’m sure this will also influence the architects and participants here.” Besides demonstrating their own design approach and knowledge, and bringing new ideas to Shanghai, Wu notes, participants from abroad will also help Shanghai to understand the value of its own culture, something that will be very helpful in encouraging people and even the government to preserve its own culture.” With that, it is time for Professor Wu to return to the conference, and continue the process of international engagement that will see Shanghai welcome the design world in 2010.

The drivers and methodologies behind space, and the importance of internal and external roles in the process of adapting space.

Physical space is the easy part. For a business focused on profit and loss, space densification can save money – perhaps 10 or maybe 20 percent of recurrent cost – but it is the staff that the space encloses that generate turnover.  How they are accommodated is, arguably, the true focus of space. Dealing with people is often referred to as the “soft issues”. Actually it’s the hard part. Perhaps instead of “real estate” it should be called “people estate”. Driving cohesiveness, efficiency, productivity, and business performance from people, is the key to effective real estate.

The delivery of space to staff falls under two categories: the ‘tell’ model and the ‘listen and sell’ model, here we explore the latter. When we think about office space in the broadest terms, we need to ask: what is the objective? Facing this question at initiation of a project is a sure way of aligning space to performance. By their very nature, management have different objectives to staff. The business unit may have different objectives to the overall group. Establishing management’s business objectives defines very quickly what any space will need to achieve. Often the first step of objective mapping is missed – frequently leading space towards a whimsical fashion show – however the question is relatively straight forward : “What are your business needs and goals, and how do these map against space?”.

Performance and Productivity
In a straw poll conducted at 2009’s Asia Office Space Congress in Hong Kong, 11 out of 96 attendees indicated that productivity or improved performance was a significant driver for decisions on office space. That translates to 12 percent of companies in the room identifying productivity or business performance as a key driver of space. Is it worth considering what other aspects of a business, apart from space, might reflect similar percentages in regard to cost and productivity?

A less straight forward question is: how can we focus on productivity as a driver for space? Measurement of productivity is an elusive goal. Sick days, meeting bookings, Engage analysis of software used by staff for how long and when, growth in profit or turnover – all form significant statistics. However, linking these specifically back to space as the driver is tenuous. To tell a business leader that space implemented by external consultants has upped productivity suggests the leader is incapable of growing and running a business themselves.

If productivity is the goal, then measuring the aspects that combine towards productivity is an effective methodology. The ability to meet, collaborate and concentrate in a comfortable and flexible setting impacts on the productivity model.

The Importance of Culture
A second straw poll at 2009’s Asia Office Space Congress asked the question “Is the place (in which) you perform your work of little consequence to you?” revealed that 96 percent of respondents care or have a view about where they work. This demonstrates, people care about the space they inhabit – not a surprise, given how much time people spend at work. Staff care, but typically they care most about what immediately affects them. Simply listening to staff by creating a structured listening environment geared towards the audience, including simple, structured interviews, surveys and focus groups can be a tremendous tool for getting all parties to participate in and support a project.

When we engage with groups, one thing that emerges is an idea of a certain culture within the office. Corporate culture is an elusive and complicated concept. A review by Verbeke et al. in 1998 identified 54 different definitions of the term within academic literature between 1960 and 1993. Although ‘corporate culture’ is a frequently used term, experience shows us that the differences between various groups, even within the same organisation, can be significant. So how can we tap into the culture of an organisation, and into the interest that staff have in their workplace? The answer lies in metrics. Ask the question, qualitatively, across the various levels of an organisation and measure and quantify the result. Overlay management aims and goals. Solidify the result into a quantified target outlining all aspects that need to be addressed.

Rules of Engagement
The exercise of measurement and engagement is not, however, a linear process. Current thinking suggests that the process of engagement follows a trajectory that experiences highs and lows. We see this pattern on every successful project. The ‘J’ curve of emotional engagement typically starts by going up as expectations are unrealistically inflated, then the curve heads sharply downwards as issues such as storage reduction or hierarchy come up against vested interests (‘Project B’, in the diagram below). Alternatively the curve may simply head straight downwards, as in the case of a group that has to move but doesn’t want to (‘Project A’, in the diagram below). Capturing a down curve and realigning it to an upward trajectory is an exercise requiring nuance. At the point when the emotional curve is at its lowest, the internal party trying to drive the initiative can be blamed, the project halts and recriminations fly.

One successful model is to have an external party own the territory until such time as the ‘slope of enlightenment’ (the upward trend on the ‘J’ curve) occurs. At this point a gradual transition of ownership can occur back to the business unit with credit, ultimately, to the corporate real estate group or project sponsor.

Understanding the Process
Metrics results in a client with an increasing understanding of the core issues, and when mapped against identified business objectives the result becomes a conclusion. Of course the process of measurement and engagement is non linear and reflects an iterative process, however we may compare this to a more traditional process where a series of new and clever ideas, reflected against sporadically identified need, occurs as a sequence of discrete events until such time as the construction schedule defines the conclusion and forces a decision to be taken.

The traditional model is, of course, a valid model. It works and has worked for a long time. But if you overlay staff engagement or alignment with business objectives against this model, then the result is probably haphazard and success is perhaps more a reflection of the skill and knowledge of the person designing the office. In terms of timing, the traditional model is set against a design/construction schedule based upon experience and perhaps squeezed by a client who is focused on delivery. By contrast, the timing of the metrics-based model is dictated by a movement through the ‘J’ curve mapped against momentum.

Contextualising the Discussion
So, how does this all map against the business environment of the past year? In some ways we have seen staff become increasingly malleable; they may be willing to accept more (or less, as may be the case). Upon improvement in the job market, however, history indicates the potential for exodus, especially with those who are eminently employable. Thus, actively engaging staff in the discussion is all the more important. In terms of how space projects are owned and driven, if we take the measurement and engagement process and map it against introducing other workplace initiatives such as hot-desking, mobility, or activity-based environments, then the risk profile against the importance of success increases exponentially. Concurrently, the importance of asking the hard questions, and perhaps butting up against the sacred cows, is elevated. Integrating management’s requirements, aligning them with the culture and having the ability to ask the right questions without fear, requires a symbiotic relationship between the internal and external parties.

When we look at the office as a reflection of business requirements, we can see how space can become the manifestation of the change drivers within the business. Saving space can have the consequence of saving money and over the past year one could say that anyone making decisions about allocation of Capital Expenditure has their head above the parapet. Table stakes on all projects is an immediate business case demonstrating savings, and perhaps this past year more than any other has reinforced the importance of this.

A Case in Point
One natural response to this could be referred to as the ‘do nothing’ model. Our Workplace team was once called into a group who identified the potential for something new. In reality there were some serious problems in the office. Staff had previously been asked what workstation they wanted. Of course the answer had come back: ‘L’ shaped workstations and high partitions. Safe and secure. When we visited the office, however, we were immediately confronted by two senior staff members on their knees in a workstation cubicle, whispering into a speaker phone. In the next cubicle a staff member was reading a report; his hands cupped over his ears and with a frown on his face, clearly unable to concentrate. The office was a disaster.

In fact, the key attributes of the group that we discovered were that they worked in teams of three or five and needed to maintain line-of-sight with each other to have quick, frequent conversations. No aspect of their interaction was supported by the office, yet personal space and visual privacy were their highest priorities. Effectively phrasing questions is critical. The group knew what they needed to do their job; management knew where they wanted the business to go; and when this was reflected back to them a dramatically different solution was agreed. The ‘J’ curve was, however, substantial and I suspect that an internal person wading into that exercise would have been buying a one-way ticket.

The Future
All of this does not even touch upon technology, so what about tomorrow? While recently shopping with Sam, my six year old son, he picked up an iPhone display model, scrolled through the menus, swiping his finger across the screen, selected a game and started playing it. Amazed, I asked if he had used an iPhone before. He continued to play whilst he answered me “no”. I asked him how he knew how to use it, and he turned at me with a look that said “Dad, everyone knows how to use things”. Apply that to how he is going to expect to function in an office. Perhaps in fifteen years he will say “Dad, why did some of you sit in tennis courts and some in chicken coops? What was that about?”

So what is the future of the office? I believe there will be increasingly two camps. First, businesses and offices are aligned; experimentation is accepted, measurement is key and flexibility of space to accommodate and reflect the dynamic of the business and productivity is simply table stakes. And the rest, who muddle through in increasingly redundant space, occasionally embracing new ideas like a coffee machine or bean bags. The divide between the two will become a chasm.{jcomments off}

Co-written by Michelle LaBrosse, MSME, PMP, Founder Cheetah Learning and Cheetah Power
and Erica Edmond, CAPM, Cheetah Green Team

When I think about what I love about being outside, it’s the calming effect of how Mother Nature has her own way of organizing.  So, when you’re getting ready to get your home in tip-top shape, think about how you can put a little green into your clean, and befriend Mother Nature at the same time.

At Cheetah Power, here’s how we combine an eco-friendly strategy with the Japanese 5 S philosophy when we spruce up our surroundings.

Sort (Seiri):  Go from room to room and group things together that belong together.

Ideas on ways to add some green:
- Re-use boxes or shopping bags to collect items and transport them from room to room. Store away for future sorting projects. Read more on Thinking Green When You Clean…

Having made her name in marketing, Joanne Ooi has turned her not inconsiderable strength of character to the challenge of solving Hong Kong’s air pollution. Ashford Pritchard speaks to a woman on a mission.

Hong Kong’s environmental NGO culture is, let’s be frank, a little staid. From the business suits of the industry bodies to the bureaucrats of the full time non-profit organisations, there’s a certain feeling of ennui with how things are done in the city. Joanne Ooi, the former Creative Director of Shanghai Tang and Chief Marketing Officer for local biotech firm Filligent, does not quite fit the mould. “I don’t bring any NGO baggage with me, which is a huge boon. NGO’s don’t touch people’s hot buttons. That’s my job – I’m a consumer marketing expert.” 

Grassroots
So how did a high-flying communications whiz end up leading a small team in a neat but tiny office in an old Sai Ying Pun building, launching a campaign to motivate and educate Hong Kong residents to do more about the quality of the air that we breathe? “My own son has been affected. He’s 11 and since he was seven he’s had some sort of chronic recurring cough because of the air pollution, especially in the winter months when its really bad.” Ooi explains. “In January 2009 I went to a Civic Exchange conference, called The Air We Breathe and was struck by the high quality of the people who attended. I assumed that there would be some fantastic online resource that would address the question that people were asking, which is essentially ‘how does it affect my health?’ I did a little bit of research and found there was nothing that addressed the everyday concerns, and I thought, Hong Kong needs something like this.”

Advised to contact Christine Lo, head of Civic Exchange by friend Professor Tony Hadley, Chair Professor in Community Medicine at Hong Kong University and a leading expert on air quality, Ooi found herself taking on the challenge of taking on the public messaging side. She began working on the issue full time late last year and now, just over one year after attending the conference, she finds herself helming one of the biggest NGO public health campaigns Hong Kong has ever seen. The situation, she explains, is grave. “The air is three times worse than New York, 2.7 times worse than London,1.7 times worse than Singapore and 1.3 times worse than Tokyo. Yet the governments air quality standards haven’t been revised for 20 years, they are based on really old research.” According to research conducted by Hong Kong based scientists, air pollution contributes to 1,115 avoidable deaths per year, over 81,000 hospital days, and HK$231,713,000 avoidable costs.

Through the Smokescreen
However, despite what is in effect a public health risis, there is still a basic understanding of air pollution both within the government and in the public sphere. Ooi says, “Sometimes the government says the majority of air pollution is from China. I want to make a very important point: the pollution which harms people the most is roadside emissions because they are hitting people in the face. Roadside pollution is far worse than the same tonnage being released 60 meters up in the air from the top of a smokestack on Lantau island or in Guangdong. What should we really worry about? It’s when you go out on the street and are breathing in gigantic spumes of smoke from the excessive number of empty buses out there at face level on the sidewalk.”

The Challenge
If there is going to be a change, explains Ooi,“the main driver has got to be the [Hong Kong government’s] Air Quality Objectives. It is like any kind of policy, you’ve got to have an offical target – that’s how government goes back to businesses and says “we have a new standard in place, now you’ve got to go and do something about it.” It all starts with the objectives themselves.” Once
these are in place, the government can use them to grab the low hanging fruit, to drive change within the two key sectors affecting air quality: transportation and shipping.

“The government already has a subsidy in place to enable replacement of pre-Euro 1 and pre-Euro class trucks and buses. But it had a really bad rate of uptake from the transport sector. It’s been considered a big failure, and the reason for this is primarily because the amount of the subsidy was too small. Now a new subsidy of HK$560 mil for pre-Euro 2 class vehicles has been launched, but really it’s a question of getting the amount of the subsidy right,” Ooi explains. Another major issue is shipping. “Ships are one of the biggest contributors of sulfur dioxide in Hong Kong, period. It’s important for Hong Kong to have green harbour measures. For example, to mandate the use of ultra-low sulfur diesel when they come into Hong Kong waters.”

Engagement
Hong Kong Clean Air Network is currently collecting signatures for a petition which it hopes will motivate the government to finally tackle air pollution. That alone will not be enough. “We all know that in Hong Kong business leads the government by the nose,” says Ooi with characteristic bluntness. Therefore engaging industry is one of her key challenges, and it is in this guise that she will address the facility management community at the IFMA Integrate conference in June this year. “There are a few messages that I have to share” she says. “The first is that the community is going to reward greener operation and sustainable practices. People should use it as an integral part of their brand value. We want usiness and government to bridge the gap in communication. Businesses need to communicate that they will acquiesce and be fine with the government pushing them to become greener. They don’t necessarily want to be the first to stick out their neck, but if the government proposes something they’ll be onboard.“

Other cities such as London have managed to turn around their air pollution problems, and their examples offer hope that a solution can be found if people pressure government and businesses to step up. “You need to have political will to really make a change,” she notes. Another hot issue which Ooi has just encountered is that of indoor air quality (IAQ). Ironically, the Hong Kong CAN’s office has its own IAQ issues following its recent fit-out. It has really driven home the point for Ooi. “There’s an ignorance of the toxicity of one’s own environment. Another part of it is the sense of utter civic helplessness. However, the MTR XRL process made a difference, the Soko island petition where they got 27,000 signatures made a difference. The government does care about public opinion.”

Ooi admits that a bizarre combination of roles has brought her to her current position. Her connections and experience has meant that she can rely on the support of some of the industry leaders, such as Glenn Frommer at the MTR, Link REIT CEO Ian Robins and Swire Pacific Group’s head of sustainability, as well as her numerous media connections. At the end of the day, she knows that in order to succeed in public engagement, as well as business, you have to wholly dedicate yourself to the endeavor. As we wrap up her interview, she is already tapping on her keyboard and checking her blackberry for messages. After all, the campaign has just begun. When it comes to being a sustainable champion, “You really have to live and breathe it.“

Joanne Ooi is CEO of NGO the Hong Kong Clean Air Network. She will speak at the IFMA Integrate 2010 conference on 2 June at the Hong Kong Convention and exhibition centre (ifma.org.hk/integrate2010).

Sign the petition and learn more about air quality in Hong Kong at hongkongcan.org.{jcomments off}

When it comes to understanding how economic analysis can help decision making in Hong Kong, there is more than meets the eye. Fiona Waters explains why.

Hong Kong has long aspired to be Asia’s world city, a place where East meets West. The government above all strives to ensure the SAR fosters business opportunities and economic growth. Over the past 50 years Hong Kong has witnessed unmitigated success in realising rapid economic and structural change. Our GDP per capita is now the eighth highest in the world, ten times what it was in 1960. The economy has developed from a manufacturing and trading base to one dominated by services. We are a regional and global financial hub, a favoured location for regional headquarters and the third most popular tourist destination in the Asia Pacific region.

Competitive Advantage
At the heart of economic growth is the concept of competitiveness. Hong Kong is rated by The Global Competitiveness Report as the world’s 11th most competitive economy and as the world’s freest economy by the Heritage Foundation. We have the world’s best skyline, according to the Emporis annual skyline ranking. Our prizewinning airport is backed up by a transport system that is envied the world over for its efficiency and accessibility.

Infrastructure development has been at the heart of Hong Kong’s emergence as an economic powerhouse. The next decade will see tens of billions of public dollars injected into a wide range of projects. These projects, grouped loosely into transport, cross boundary and new urban development, will not only be responsible for a direct economic stimulus, they will also determine how our city is shaped over the next 20 years.

In his 2007-2008 Policy Address, Chief Executive Donald Tsang outlined 10 major infrastructure projects, noting that “development can bring about huge economic benefits. Both employment opportunities and wages will increase during the construction stage, and upon completion, the infrastructure projects will boost economic activities and improve the living environment”. He added that a “rough estimate of the added value to our economy brought about by these projects, from commissioning to a mature stage, would be more than HK$100 bil annually, amounting to some seven percent of GDP in 2006. In addition, some 250,000 additional jobs would be created”. If he is correct, the magnitude of benefits is very high indeed.

Transport Infrastructure:
• South Island Line
• Shatin to Central Link
• Tuen Mun Western Bypass & Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Link

New Urban Development Areas:
• West Kowloon Cultural District
• Kai Tak Development Plan
• New Development Areas

Cross Boundary Infrastructure:
• Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link
• Hong Kong-Shenzhen Airport Co-operation
• Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge
• Hong Kong-Shenzhen Joint Development of the Lok Ma Chau Loop

Identifying the Problem
The motivation behind these infrastructure projects lies primarily in Hong Kong’s main economic and political dimension, enhancing our integration and connectivity with the mainland. Other transport infrastructure is being built to facilitate connectivity within Hong Kong, and develop new sites both in the core urban area and with the new development areas in the New Territories. Clearly there are efficiency, trade and other benefits from enhancing internal and external connectivity.

The challenge for Hong Kong is to ensure that our chosen investments are the right ones and that their implementation brings about the intended benefits. As Hong Kong’s economy has grown and changed over the recent decades, so have the needs and aspirations of our people and of the global economy in which we must compete. There is a danger that the focus on infrastructure will leave us neglecting other aspects of competitiveness that also need to be addressed.

After all, the question that seems to be on everybody’s lips, is: “do we really need more infrastructure?” Hong Kong’s infrastructure is already amongst the best in the world. International rankings place our road, railroad, port and air transport infrastructure all within the top five in the world, and the overall quality of our infrastructure is ranked fifth globally. Contrast this with Hong Kong’s performance in terms of quality of life, where out of 215 world cities we come a lowly 70th (according to the Mercer Quality of Life Index) and 15th in the Asia Pacific region. This has a real economic effect. As one executive search firm noted in a 2009 report, “environmental discomfort is generally given as the main reason why executives leave Hong Kong.” As Tsang himself said: “Hong Kong can only sustain its long term growth as a knowledge based economy. To develop this we need…talent. We need to nurture local talent [and] we have to attract talent from around the world.”

A Question of Value for Money
Clearly there are benefits to infrastructure provision. But given our relative strength is this area, the pertinent question is whether an extra dollar spent here will generate a greater return for the Hong Kong economy than an extra dollar spent on improving our quality of life. This is where the power of economics comes in useful. Economics is all about making the best use of finite resources. We only have so much money, so where should we be spending it?

Sadly in Hong Kong, too often economics is used to endorse rather than inform decision-making. Of the ten major infrastructure projects, only two economic impact assessments have been published. The information presented to LegCo always focuses on the quantifiable results of the cost benefit equation (expressed as a percentage economic return or a net present value). However, economic assessments are not just about whether the benefit to a chosen project outweighs the cost. Rather this calculation is just one part of a wider process of investigation and elimination used to determine if a project is justified. This preliminary process has four necessary steps. The first is to define the problem/opportunity that needs to be addressed. The second is to establish the counterfactual, i.e. to consider what would have happened anyway to the defined problem/opportunity if nothing were done. Given this counterfactual, an economic assessment should next determine whether the identified problem/opportunity really necessitates intervention. If the answer is yes, then the last step is to determine the best means of intervention through analysis of alternatives. Only once the economic rationale is established, are the results of the cost benefit equation truly valid.

In Hong Kong, too often economic analyses are limited to considering the cost benefit equation without examination of the fundamental economic rationale. This limitation clearly needs to be addressed. Having a clear rationale and sound explanation of why the chosen solution is the best solution is sometimes all the public is asking for when projects come under attack. A full economic analysis would surely help answer these questions.

In addition to these problems of limited scope, Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) calculations can also be limited, since techniques used elsewhere in the world to value intangible impacts are rarely used in Hong Kong. In fact GHK’s study of the value of the Hong Kong Harbour undertaken on behalf of the Harbour Business Forum applied one of these techniques called contingent valuation, for the first time.

A New Approach
Hong Kong needs to take a step back and decide what its priorities are for the coming decades, paying attention to liveability and quality of life, given their increasing importance to location decisions and ultimately our competitiveness. Greater use of economics in the early stages of the project cycle should be a key part of this process, including greater appreciation of the concepts of value for money and improving the way we incorporate the value of intangibles into decision making. If Hong Kong is to build upon its remarkable history of development, it needs to aim to be a great city to live in, not just one to travel around.

Fiona Waters is a Director at economic and management consultants GHK.

泰国一项突破性的研究将验证太阳阴影对写字楼的真正影响。

这起初只是个简单的想法，成型于 2008 年在意大利威尼斯举行的“建筑研讨会”上。

Dwp 泰国公司的董事总经理 Saeed Zaki认为，他位于曼谷、占据了 Dusit Thani 大厦整个顶层的办公室正受到热量交换的极大影响。办公室的全景露台——也是亚洲众多设计建筑事务所艳羡的对象——与自然环境进行着 360 度的全接触。他与 Somfy 商业楼宇解决方案部总监 Jean Guillaume Despature 共同提出了这一问题，并创立了这一独特研究理念的根基，以检测东南亚地区太阳光照射的益处。

该项研究是该地区首次专注于有效生态环境大楼的研究，由一支行业领先者组成的团队进行国际化的案例研究，旨在为该地区的楼宇可持续性研究设立标准。团队成员包括自动化系统专家 Somfy（法国）、外墙幕布材料供应商 Dickson（美国）、家庭自动化专家 iHome（泰国）、智能照明系统 Legrand（法国）、本地工程事务所 Songkit（泰国）以及业主 Dusit Thani（泰国）。这些成员将在dwp办公室共同对一套定制的遮阳系统进行安装、测试并评估。

保持简单
该项案例研究的核心在于大楼正面及外墙隔膜。大楼正面是室内外环境的交接处和融合处。在曼谷，气候状况随季节、天气以及每一个昼夜的变化而产生较大的变化。正如任何一名大楼工程师或设计师所知道的那样，居住环境必须尽可能地稳定、舒适，为用户提供最佳的工作及生活条件。遮阳系统将为包括泰国在内的热带地区提供众多益处：通过有效冷却安装过程、限制过热现象，以及防止楼宇受到炫目光照的负面影响。遮阳系统同时也允许自然光线的散布，增加视觉舒适度、提供更好的工作环境。利用自然光线的唯一办法就是灵活、机智地进行控制和监控。

为了满足舒适和能源节约这两个看似互相矛盾的要求，在这项可持续性项目中将重点研究几个参数，并最终运用于生态外墙的设计方案。该研究将重点放在每一名租户的健康、气候和微气候参数：不同季节、不同朝向楼宇的阳光率、周围楼宇及绿化。大楼内部及外部均将安装光热探测器。研究的初级阶段为期三个月，随后将对经特别安装在大楼中的探测器收集的热量、辐射和光照等气候数据进行模拟，最后基于这些结果对生态外墙展开设计。

具体细节
“当今世界，如果一幢大楼想要完全符合‘存在的理由’，就必须安全、健康和舒适，让居住其中的人们做事富有成效，产生最可能小的环境足迹（包括高能效），”Zaki 表示，“但现在很少有人意识到这一点，甚至在我们行业内部也同样如此。我们作为行业领先者，有责任教育广大民众。但是太多信息也会扼杀这一观点的传达。”于是，当涉及到数据时，该项研究着重于非常容易理解的两点：能源账单和租户对大楼的接受度（通过加拿大和美国的学院开发的问卷调查进行评估）。主要指标为能源节约、自然光管理以及对人的影响。

定制的系统将涵盖考虑周详的空间规划和室内设计、外墙百叶窗阳光控制特殊材料，以及可控制动态外墙管理的自动化系统Animeo。案例研究所面临的挑战是如何将技术方案和建筑方案整合起来。尽管实际的技术已经存在，但在曼谷将这些完全不同的元素和解决方案的运用整合起来才是引人注目的焦点。“每一幢楼都是一个独特的案例，”Zaki 解释道，“这个项目不仅是泰国首次使用 Somfy 的 Animeo 自动化系统，更是 dwp 首次采用 Somfy 产品。”

整体性研究
该研究认识到可持续设计意味着除生态外墙之外，还需提出一个整体性的解决方案；该研究同时在整个办公室中采用了智能光照系统。该智能光照系统可根据周围照明情况自动调整亮度，可预期的是，它将成为减少办公室能源消耗方案中不可或缺的一部分。该案例研究背后的项目团队希望，这套高效照明系统能与动态外墙一起节约大楼 30% 的能源消耗量。“总体目标是通过利用自然元素，如太阳的移动，来控制光和热，以达到减少维持大楼运作所需的能源消耗的目的，”Somfy 东南亚地区经理Vincent Dehan 表示，“这在亚洲仍然是一个新颖独特的概念，我们非常期待未来12个月中可能出现的结果。”

Dwp 希望，除了减少其碳足迹之外，该案例研究也能将设计事务所推向生态型大楼设计行业领先者的地位。“我们事务所的全部设计师都即将获得 LEED 认证，这将是我们成为可持续绿色设计事务所愿景的完美佐证，”Zaki 表示，“能参与如此独特的案例研究我们深感荣幸，我非常期待它将带给这个行业的积极影响。”{jcomments off}

Industry bodies are coming together across Asia to form Green Building Councils to educate, communicate and validate sustainable building measures. Deborah Erwin profiles their formation and objectives.

In 1999, eight national councils representing the US, the UK, Canada, Japan, Spain, Russia and the UAE, convened to establish the World Green Building Council (WGBC). Three years later, this overarching body was officially incorporated with a manifesto to “formalise international communications, help industry leaders access emerging markets, and provide an international voice for green building initiatives”. The Secretariat was formed thereafter in Toronto’s The Living City Campus to serve the international community as a central platform and channel for information dissemination.

In addition to acting as a global portal for percolating green ideas within the building industry, Tony Arnel, Chairman of the WGBC projects one central message: “This is what green buildings offer: they deliver lower operating costs from reduced energy and alternative resource consumption. Hence, they represent better life cycle value. They nurture better worker productivity and quality of life through improved indoor environment quality. They are equipped to meet the continuing community and government concern to address global sustainability issues, especially greenhouse emissions.” This is not news. Rather, building professionals have been reiterating a similar message for years. Some have dismissed the long-term gains of sustainable development, blinded by the perceived initial capital outlay and the extra expense of certification. Today, many of us have debunked this myth, understanding that a sustainable project’s initial capital expenditure on materials and systems is not necessarily higher than the budget for a typical energy-guzzling construct. Industry direction is clear, we’re moving into a more eco-conscious and energy-conserving stream. Those who do not follow will be left in the dust (literally).

So how is Asia faring, especially given most of the world’s current development is happening here? How influential are its green building councils? What are their targets? How are they actively promoting and regulating environment-friendly construction? And what are their constraints? Many architects, designers, facility managers and property owners working in the region are familiar with LEED, some have even attained LEED certification as professionals and can spout its various rating standards. But most of the Green Building Councils operating across Asia are still finding their footing and seeking a voice in their respective industries.

Australia (formed 2002)
As one of the founding members of the WGBC, the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) is one of the most active and successful bodies on the planet. Karen Jamal, Communications Manager at GBCA, says “A vital part of the Green Building Council of Australia’s (GBCA’s) role is to educate our members and the broader industry on new trends and technologies in green building, and to widen the pool of available green collar workers”. In 2008, Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) predicted that more than 251,500 green collar jobs will be created in Australia’s property and construction industry by 2025. “That’s 45 percent of the total number of new jobs, providing new opportunities and employment for many Australians,” enthuses Jamal. To date, the GBCA has trained almost 15,000 people in Green Star courses, with 4,700 Green Star Accredited Professionals. Romilly Madew, Chief Executive of the Green Building Council of Australia, says: “Since Green Star was launched in 2003, we have certified more than 220 buildings – or 3.5 mil sqm of green buildings. We have a further 460 buildings – 6.5 mil sqm – registered for Green Star certification. That’s around 10 mil sqm of building space impacted by Green Star.” She adds, “In the last six years, we’ve witnessed a fundamental shift in the way commercial building owners, investors and tenants all consider green buildings in Australia. In the commercial sector, green building is no longer seen as a niche market, a trend or a luxury. Today, green building is a business imperative”.

Targets for 2010-2012
Looking beyond single projects, the GBCA now seeks to create and foster sustainable communities that address social inclusion and place-making issues. These are guided by five principles involving liveability, economic prosperity, enhancing the environment, good design and effective urban governance.

Signs of Success
“We have a number of benchmarks to measure our success,” says Jamal, “One of those is the support of industry and the number of members who are committed to the GBCA. From a zero base in 2002, today the GBCA has more than 785 member companies who support the Council and its activities. Our membership base is drawn from a diverse cross-section of developers, local, state and federal governments, owners, professional services firms, investors, manufacturers, suppliers and distributors, facility and asset managers, universities, professional societies, utilities and contractors”.

Government Support?
The GBCA works with federal, state and local governments around the nation to advocate policies and incentives to drive the adoption of green building, says Jamal. “In 2009, we launched the Green Guide to Government Policy in partnership with the International Council on Local Environment Initiatives. This resource is an online one-stop-shop covering green building policies, incentives and subsidies across all federal, state and capital cities in Australia. This website (www.gbca.org.au) is the first of its kind in Australia, and has become an invaluable resource for any business looking to maximise support and funding for its green building initiatives.”

A Natural Leader
The GBCA endorses the Asia Pacific Network with the appointment of State Manager for Victoria and South Australia, Trudy-Ann King, who is now the WorldGBC’s Asia Pacific Regional Manager. “The philosophy behind the Asia Pacific Network is not to solve the building problems of other nations, but to support them in finding their own solutions”. Formulated in September 2009, “The Asia Pacific Network will enable established green building councils in the region, such as the GBCA, to help emerging councils to take action on global warming, improve urban environments and alleviate urban poverty,” she says. “The Asia Pacific Network is now being studied as a potential model for the rest of the world to adopt. The USGBC sent a representative to our recent Green Building Leadership Forum to observe our processes – and the UK and Germany are interested in using a similar strategy in Europe. We have even been approached by the United Nations Environment Programme to provide assistance with the development of an African Network. The connection of the right people at the right time is really the key to bringing about massive change in the way we do things.”

Hong Kong (formed 2009)
As the newest kid in the pack, the Hong Kong Green Building Council was inaugurated on 20 November 2009, an amalgam of the Construction Industry Council, Business Environment Council (BEC), the BEAM Society and the Professional Green Building Council (PGBC). Its mission includes promoting performance rating standards, such as the Building Environment Assessment Method (BEAM), benchmarking and enhancing the performance of Hong Kong’s built environment and facilitating ongoing educational outreach and research including training and seminars. To realise these goals, it will actively “recruit an active membership including private companies, business associations, professional bodies, academic institutions”, “serve as a resource centre, “operate awards, certification and labelling programmes for green building practices” and organise seminars, workshops and educational programmes in a non-profit capacity, as outlined on its website.

Targets for 2010-2012
The council has set out five chief objectives for the next few years. In addition to promulgating Green Building Certification, the council also aims to influence and advise the government on green building matters, popularise the subject of green building practices, protect the environment and reduce Hong Kong’s carbon emissions. The HKGBC is also introducing the BEAM Plus assessment method this year with higher environmental targets than previous guidelines.

Government Standing By?
In line with the Council’s mandate, the HKSAR Government has declared a number of initiatives for promoting a greener and more sustainable city. According to the HKGBC, “The Development Bureau and the Environment Bureau [have] jointly set out a comprehensive target-based green performance framework for government buildings. The framework specifies guidelines on energy efficiency standards, greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy, waste reduction, water management as well as indoor air quality”. Beyond civic buildings, the Legislative Council “aims to introduce a bill… by the end of this year to enforce mandatory compliance with the Codes”. However, experience has demonstrated how easily developers can strong-arm the Executive Council, the Legislative Council’s decision makers. So the fate of the Bill remains unknown. The HKGBC mentions, “Another government initiative is to encourage carbon audits for buildings”. But, bear in mind this will be done on a voluntary basis with no legal provisos in place.

Overall, Asia is fertile land for green growth but its councils will require much intellectual and professional support from the building industries, related organisations, the public and most of all, each of the state governments.