Competing for Green: JLL’s Big Move

Earlier this year, I posted about how the big players in commercial real estate were under enormous pressure to figure out how to deal with the mass greening of their real estate portfolios.

You can see in this linked story that the major investment management firms are not being shy about making big moves in order to stay ahead of the curve on this developing area of real estate practice.

And those moves now include acquiring the consultancies who are responsible for developing the green buildings ratings system tools. Case in point: Jones Lang LaSalle’s purchase of ECD Energy and Environment Canada, Ltd., the developer of the Green Globes rating system.

The Co-Star story plays up a USGBC LEED vs Green Globes competition.  However, I didn’t see much of that competitiveness within the quotes from USGBC’s Mark Heisterkamp and JLL officials. They all politely downplay that aspect.

The Green Journey Take
Acquiring a consultancy is not a new thing, I know. Buying the folks responsible for developing the key technology used to assess a property’s greenness represents a new milestone on the path to
sustainability that deserves watching.

Think about it: what if a major global real estate investor-manager, or even a Microsoft-like tech
giant bought the entire development team of Argus, but left the Argus software itself intact and separate with a non-profit? What would “the rest of us” think? While Green Globes is not as prolific as LEED (or Argus) here in the U.S., it has been relevant to the groups who, for some reason or another, have not been able to embrace LEED. The Co-Star story focuses on the potential competitiveness between the two ratings systems, but it is missing the broader competitiveness issues sustainability is triggering among real estate investors.

The move by JLL underscores sustainability’s credibility with top-tier investor-managers: the fact that major commercial real estate investors are putting serious dollars into enterprise technologies to green their assets, even though much of the evidence about NOI and valuation benefits is still anecdotal and technically inconclusive about the exact benefits these investors will ever realize. The investment community has already decided and are not waiting around for the “real” proof.

What is also interesting is that this particular type of move — buying the particular consultancy which developed a ratings tool, also highlights the point of pain (and value) in our industry. That’s the enormous unfilled demand within commercial real estate for new talent, best practice and structured, efficient approaches to transitioning the modern property operation into a sustainable one.

In other words, professionals who already “get it”and have embedded “sustainable intelligence” into their treasure chest of commercial real estate talents are probably in hot demand.

Future-proofing Tip: Use Green Building Rating System Critiques

I have posted before about future-proofing being the hot buzzword for industry pacesetters. Property owners now dedicate an increasing amount of time to (re-)positioning their teams and portfolios for the expectations of a sustainability-conscious world.

But while everybody gets the catchy phrase, how does ‘everyday future-proofing’ actually happen?

I recently met with a group of executives, who detailed their process of moving their firm towards being a socially responsible corporate citizen. They talked about how sustainability has injected elements of excitement and risk into today’s real estate industry. They were happy about ‘going green’, but also expressed frustration about being on a ‘hamster wheel’, since the good green building initiatives they were currently implementing could easily be superceded by “bigger, better, faster” improvements to building science and the regulatory environment.

Fortunately for many firms with this type of anxiety, the American Institute of Architecture has just published “Quantifying Sustainability”, a report in which they have issued new position statements about the Green Globes, LEED NC-v2.2 and SBTool 07 rating systems. It’s a not-too-dense ten pager and a quick read – if you can squint through the 6 point font they are using.

Here are the Cliff Notes from the AIA report:

• On Green Globes: the AIA recommends that Green Globes ratings systems adopt more specific and stringent requirements for energy reduction and building operational performance since these are the two most important dimensions of carbon production. Green Journey Notes: Making recommendations about requiring items which are at the heart of carbon production is a slap.

• On LEED NC-v2.2: The AIA calls for more implementation of Life Cycle Analysis, and would like to see the greater use of renewable energy and a requirement for greater carbon reduction for certified projects. Green Journey Notes: While the report says that the AIA is neutral about all ratings systems, they did take the time to refer to LEED as “providing a measure of environmental achievement” and said that the recommended changes would “continue to make this system an effective resource for architects”. None of the other rating systems evaluated received this level of praise. Second of all, the USGBC has already announced, and we’ve already posted here,  that the next upgrades to the LEED rating system incorporates all of these suggestions in some form of another. I am guessing that this paper was written before the USGBC’s announcement of the changes.

• On SBTool 07: The AIA recommends that this system would be a stronger tool if there was an increase in the number of required items vs those that are simply encouraged and if project documentation were required. Green Journey Notes: Ouch!

So how can this intel improve “everyday future-proofing”?

• Rating system weaknesses can contain clues: revealed by the critiques are direct pointers to the most likely changes that you will see to those ratings systems. They are also a comment about what will define good industry practice in the near future. So there’s your content for potential future proofing. Here’s the core of where you can mine your ideas about staying ahead of the curve in a sustainable world.

• Beware of minimum compliance: Just trying to achieve the minimum certification level leaves your firm open to the risk that your buildings could easily fall outside the newer standards of acceptability, once any ‘tweaks’ are made to the rating system.

• The endgame is low and no carbon: Understand the difference between a single asset checklist process and achieving concrete energy and operational performance targets across your portfolio that are tied to quantifiable carbon reductions. As you can see from the AIA’s position on ratings systems, this is the tough measure that they are applying which means that this the the industry standard they are driving towards, even if the current ratings systems might not reflect it.