A New Triple Bottom Line
There are many different definitions of sustainability from straightforward recycling and conservation to not cramping the style of future generations. For the business world, the triple bottom line – people, profits, planet – has been the rallying cry. This approach acknowledges the importance of profits in a consumer society, while still maintaining that decision-making be balanced by consideration of the wellbeing of people and the planet’s environment. This philosophy, characterized by the three-legged stool, revolves around balance and compromise.
Capitalism is important in our culture and in our industry. Buildings rarely get constructed unless they are going to make a profit for someone. And we, of course, expect to get paid for the knowledge and experience that we bring to the consulting work that we do with respect to green buildings.
As the cost of construction increases, labor becomes more scarce and regulations become more stringent, the economics of sustainability are in peril. “That green stuff” can seem like a luxury for projects struggling to pencil out. One thing we have learned is that basic needs must be met for people or firms to be able to make choices about anything beyond their own survival.
People need access to clean drinking water, non-toxic air and food that contains nutrients to survive. Those things aren’t a given when profits are at stake, so in the past five decades we have passed numerous laws to ensure that the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat remains safe and uncontaminated. And when it became clear that laws alone wouldn’t be enough to dissuade folks from cutting those money-saving corners, we established agencies like the Food & Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency to make sure that these protections were enforced.
Now we have arrived at a moment when these resources that we all need to survive are again at risk, as the mechanisms put in place to support them are removed one by one. Not out of ignorance of their importance but rather out of frustration with the barrier they present to amassing profits.
So where do we go from here? Perhaps we need to refine our definition of what it means to be sustainable. At its heart, sustainability is about quality of life. So perhaps we need to start there. What characteristics foster quality of life?
I would like to propose three for consideration – resilience, value and community.
Resilience
Resilience means to be able to adapt to changing conditions, to be able to spring back from adversity, to be flexible. It takes a willingness to learn new ways to navigate circumstances, old and new. In people, it is often an ability to perceive challenges as opportunities for growth and development. In buildings, resilience connotes a design for flexibility of use, while being durable enough to not only withstand an emergency but continue to shelter and operate. Community buildings are often used as designated places of respite or safety during difficult local or regional conditions like extreme heat or power outage or flooding.
Value
Value is not just about what something is worth, but also what people place value on. Clean air and water have a value way beyond whatever dollar amount one assigns them. People spend 90% of their time inside, so buildings that contribute to the wellbeing of their occupants add value far beyond a real estate portfolio asset. Community is formed not just by a group of buildings or services. It’s an orientation toward common values and team effort.
Community
The connections people make living and playing and working together are essential to their wellbeing, and likely their livelihood. Relationships can form for all kinds of like-minded reasons across immense distance between people from vastly different cultures. Numerous studies of health and wellness point to the importance of a personal network, connection to nature and engagement with community. Buildings can contribute positively to the ways that people interact with each other and their environment.
Humans are not the only creatures on this planet that will join in community to help each other to survive. But we are the only creatures that can make judgements about the relative importance of goals beyond survival, like quality of life, for ourselves and our communities.
Ultimately, we face the same choices as any other animal once we have exhausted our resources – die off, move to new resource rich territory or change the way we live. Why not proactively change the way we live and build before we have exhausted our resources?