No abstract

The UK construction industry faces the daunting task of replacing and extending a significant proportion of UK infrastructure, meeting a growing housing shortage and retrofitting millions of homes whilst achieving greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions compatible with the UK's legally binding target of an 80% reduction by 2050. This paper presents a detailed time series of embodied GHG emissions from the construction sector for 1997-2011. This data is used to demonstrate that strategies which focus solely on improving operational performance of buildings and the production efficiencies of domestic material producers will be insufficient to meet sector emission reduction targets.Reductions in the order of 80% will require a substantial decline in the use of materials with carbon-intensive supply chains. A variety of alternative materials, technologies and practices are available and the common barriers to their use are presented based upon an extensive literature survey. Key gaps in qualitative research, data and modelling approaches are also identified. Subsequent discussion highlights the lack of client and regulatory drivers for uptake of alternatives and the ineffective allocation of responsibility for emissions reduction within the industry. Only by addressing and overcoming all these challenges in combination can the construction sector achieve drastic emissions reduction.

As is the case in a number of countries, the UK construction industry faces the challenge of expanding production whilst making ambitious greenhouse gas emission reductions. Embodied carbon constitutes a growing proportion of whole-life carbon emissions and accounts for a significant share of total UK emissions. A key mitigation strategy is increasing the use of alternative materials with lower embodied carbon. The economic, technical, practical and cultural barriers to the uptake of these alternatives are explored through a survey of construction professionals and interviews with industry leaders. Perceptions of high cost, ineffective allocation of responsibility, industry culture, and the poor availability of product and building-level carbon data and benchmarks constitute significant barriers. Opportunities to overcome these barriers include earlier engagement of professionals along the supply chain, effective use of whole-life costing, and changes to contract and tender documents. A mounting business case exists for addressing embodied carbon, but has yet to be effectively disseminated. In the meantime, the moral convictions of individual clients and practitioners have driven early progress. However, this research underscores the need for new regulatory drivers to complement changing attitudes if embodied carbon is to be established as a mainstream construction industry concern.

Companies are increasingly seeking to align their actions with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Over 1000 such companies have committed to the science-based targets initiative which seeks to align corporate carbon reduction targets with global decarbonisation trajectories. These ‘science-based targets’ are developed using a common set of resources and target-setting methodologies, then independently assessed and approved by a technical advisory group. Despite the initiative’s rapid rise to public prominence, it has received little attention to date in the academic literature. This paper discusses development of the initiative based upon a quantitative assessment of progress against each component of the science-based targets set by 81 early adopters, using information gathered from company annual reports, corporate social responsibility websites and Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) responses. The analysis reveals a mixed picture of progress. Though the majority of targets assessed were on track and, in some cases, had already been achieved, just under half of the companies assessed were falling behind on one or more of their targets. Progress varied significantly by target scope, with more limited progress against targets focused on Scope 3 emissions. Company reporting practices were highly variable and often of poor quality. This paper concludes with a range of recommendations to improve the transparency, consistency and comparability of targets within this key agenda-setting initiative.

No abstract