Green noise or green value? Measuring the price effects of environmental certification in commercial buildings

This paper investigates the price effects of environmental certification on commercial real estate assets. It is argued that there are likely to be three main drivers of price differences between certified and non-certified buildings. First, certified buildings offer a bundle of benefits to occupiers relating to business productivity, image and occupancy costs. Second, due to these occupier benefits, certified buildings can result in higher rents and lower holding costs for investors. Third, certified buildings may require a lower risk premium. Drawing upon the CoStar database of US commercial real estate assets, hedonic regression analysis is used to measure the effect of certification on both rent and price. We first estimate the rental regression for a sample of 110 LEED and 433 Energy Star as well as several thousand benchmark buildings to compare the sample to. The results suggest that, compared to buildings in the same metropolitan region, certified buildings have a rental premium and that the more highly rated that buildings are in terms of their environmental impact, the greater the rental premium. Furthermore, based on a sample of transaction prices for 292 Energy Star and 30 LEED-certified buildings, we find price premia of 10% and 31% respectively compared to non-certified buildings in the same metropolitan area

SPICE: a business process diagnostic tool for construction projects

The construction sector is under growing pressure to increase productivity and improve quality, most notably in reports by Latham (1994, Constructing the Team, HMSO, London) and Egan (1998, Rethinking Construction, HMSO, London). A major problem for construction companies is the lack of project predictability. One method of increasing predictability and delivering increased customer value is through the systematic management of construction processes. However, the industry has no methodological mechanism to assess process capability and prioritise process improvements. Standardized Process Improvement for Construction Enterprises (SPICE) is a research project that is attempting to develop a stepwise process improvement framework for the construction industry, utilizing experience from the software industry, and in particular the Capability Maturity Model (CMM), which has resulted in significant productivity improvements in the software industry. This paper introduces SPICE concepts and presents the results from two case studies conducted on design and build projects. These studies have provided further in-sight into the relevance and accuracy of the framework, as well as its value for the construction sector.

The research productivity of the AIB Farmer Award finalists

Purpose – This paper aims to analyze the research productivity and impact of the finalists of the AIB best dissertation award, now titled the Buckley and Casson Award, but from 1987 to 2012 the Farmer Award. Specifically, this paper examines whether there is a relationship between winning the best dissertation award and subsequent publication productivity and impact. Relationships between academic institution and institutional geographic location and finalists are also examined. Design/methodology/approach – The paper examines 25 years of citation counts and the number of publications in Google Scholar of Farmer Award winners and finalists of the AIB best dissertation award from inception in 1987 to 2009, with cited publications as a measure of productivity and citations as a measure of impact. Top performers in productivity and impact are identified, and the averages of winners and non-winners are analyzed in aggregate, over time and per year. Data on finalists' institution and geographic location of institution are analyzed to describe the importance of location and institution to the award. Findings – It is found that the overall average citations of the winners of the award is less than that of the non-winners, and that in the large majority of years the non-winners have an average citation count higher than that of the winners. However, taking averages in five year increments shows more mixed results, with non-winners performing better in two periods and winners performing better in two periods, with the remaining period being split as to research productivity and impact. Originality/value – Aggarwal et al. in this journal summarized a variety of data on Farmer Award finalists from the 1990s to gain insights on institutions represented by finalists, the publication record of finalists, and content of dissertations, among other characteristics. This paper updates some of the insights from that paper by examining data on award winners from 1987 to 2013, and adds further insight by examining for the first time cited publications and citation counts winners and non-winners for the same period excluding the last two years.