| dc.description.abstract | Learning across BREEAM Communities and ZEN definition
A significant effort in ZEN has been put into defining what to measure to define a neighbourhood as ‘zero emission’ through the identification of assessment criteria and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), whose final version will be published in 2024 in the ZEN Definition and guideline reports. Less was said, beyond the pilot projects, in terms of how to achieve the goals that the ZEN criteria and KPIs represent. Thus, it is now important to define some process recommendations in this sense. This is a reason why, in this memo, we investigate the similarities and differences between BREEAM (i.e., BREEAM Communities, named BREEAM-C) and ZEN (i.e., ZEN Definition) to understand how the BREEAM thinking can help us in doing so and what would it take for the industry, which is very familiar with BREEAM, to align with ZEN Definition vision.
Through this memo, after presenting the two schemes in their most recent publicly available forms, we learn that the BREEAM-C and ZEN Definition show both similarities and differences. They are both structured as several issues (in BREEAM-C) or criteria and KPIs (in ZEN) grouped into 6 categories, which are areas of performance to be addressed. They both have a system of credits/points to rate communities/neighbourhoods. However, unlike BREEAM-C, ZEN will not have one score, but rather a rate per each category (i.e., ‘Emissions’, ‘Energy’, ‘Power’, ‘Mobility’, ‘Urban form and Land use’, ‘Economy’). While BREEAM-C specifies when the issues should be addressed (among 3 steps, namely principle’s establishment, layout’s definition, and detailed design), ZEN defines the scale of application of the KPIs (building, district or both) and KPIs are not finally and systematically allocated to specific project steps, but most of them are defined as valid for both strategic planning, implementation, and operational phase, which can be targeted for performance assessments. However, as the ZEN Definition is still in progress, there is no final indication of by whom and in which project steps the KPIs must be addressed.
When comparing the schemes at the individual issues and KPIs level, we observed that half of the BREEAM-C issues show similarities with ZEN KPIs in terms of their motivation or scope/focus. The similarity is rarely one to one. This is both because BREEAM-C issues have broad scope and because ZEN KPIs are specific in saying what to measure, and the actions that a BREEAM-C issue suggests are directly reflected in more than one quantitative metric. Indeed, ZEN generally focuses more on saying what to measure and how, while BREEAM-C tends to describe subsequent actions to take and document to ensure that the aims are secured. This approach is also reflected in the way the credits/points are awarded.
More BREEAM thinking in ZEN would translate into the definition of practical actions to ensure that the objective that ZEN criteria and KPIs advocate can be operationalized. For instance, actions that BREEAM-C issues similar to ZEN KPIs entail can be grouped into 3 areas: ‘Anticipate’, ‘Plan and Manage’, and ‘Secure’ actions.
More ZEN thinking would require the industry players to be more focused and specific about environmental impacts. Indeed, in ZEN, a huge focus is on quantifiable environmental impacts. Methodological guidance is important, and in ZEN the LCA methodology is the backbone. A great ambition that makes ZEN, as a district-level assessment scheme, special is the possibility to target the operational phase as one of the stages where ZEN criteria and KPIs are assessable, which is not currently within the scope of BREEAM-C.
In essence, the creation of Zero Emission Neighbourhoods is a collaborative effort that requires both precise definitions and flexible toolkits. The ZEN definition, with its focus on specific KPIs, and the BREEAM-C certification, with its broad scope and systematic allocation of issues, together build a synergy that will be instrumental in driving progress towards more sustainable communities. | en_US |
