Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Standards and Exemplars in Consolidating Labels for Sustainable Construction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Labelling the Economy

Abstract

Drawing on a category perspective, this chapter examines the role of standards and exemplars in consolidating labels for sustainable construction. We analyze in a Danish context how the confluence of mandatory and voluntary standards associated with the Danish Building Regulations encourages construction actors to build exemplars that consolidate labels for sustainable construction. We suggest that the combination of voluntary and mandatory standards stimulates the construction of exemplars and increases the social status of construction actors, both of which, in turn, consolidate labels for sustainable construction. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the wider implications of these processes for the category of sustainable construction in the contemporary economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Since then, the EU has taken a number of other measures that have affected the development of sustainable construction, such as initiatives on resource efficiency (2011) and raw materials (2011) as well as a waste management directive (2008) and construction products declarations (2011).

  2. 2.

    BREEAM, the first comprehensive, commerical certification system, was orginally introduced as a voluntary tool for self-regulation within construction. UK policymakers included it on their list of strategic tools in 2000 and later adopted it as a ‘mandatory mechanism’ for government procurement (Schweber 2013).

  3. 3.

    LEED, designed to ease the process of implementing legislation, focused initially on the creation of universally understood and accepted standards, tools, and performance criteria for buildings (U.S. Green Building Council, 2009). This certification system encourages the integration of design and electricity sources, reflecting the concepts of net-zero-energy and zero-carbon-emissions, both of which seek to integrate alternative energy sources (e.g., photovoltaic technologies) with materials and architecture that lower the need for electrical light (e.g., high reflection paint) and air conditioning (e.g., slap radiant cooling) (Lewers 2008).

  4. 4.

    CASBEE, launched by the Japanese Sustainable Building Consortium, aims to measure the environmental quality and performance (e.g., thermal comfort) of buildings and to compare this measure with the building’s environmental load (e.g., energy efficiency, contribution to global warming, etc.) (Giama and Papdopoulos 2012).

  5. 5.

    This work is documented in Reijonen and Pinheiro-Croisel (2017), Boxenbaum et al. (2010), and Boxenbaum (2012).

  6. 6.

    Available http://energycodesocean.org/code-information/danish-building-regulations-br-08-section-7. The issue of energy efficiency has a long history in Denmark, dating back to the repercussions of the oil crisis in the 1970s. At this point in time, the Danish government began to prioritize energy efficiency as a means to ensure (energy) self-sufficiency (Danish Energy Policy 1976).

References

  • Boxenbaum, E. (2012). Value Driven Processes: Standardization of New Design Templates for Sustainable Construction (Denmark). Research Report to Plan Urbanisme Construction Architecture (PUCA), Direction Générale de l’Aménagement, du Logement et de la Nature, Ministère de l’Égalité des Territoires et du Logement, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boxenbaum, E., Georg, S., Garza de Linde, G., Reijonen, S., Aggeri, F., Acquier, A., et al. (2010). Innovation in Sustainable Construction: Eco-cities and Social Housing in France and Denmark. Paper presented at International Conference “Constructions Matter—Managing Complexities, Decisions and Actions in the Building Process”, Frederiksberg, Denmark, May 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., & Hendry, C. (2009). Public Demonstration Projects and Field Trials: Accelerating Commercialisation of Sustainable Technology in Solar Photovoltaics. Energy Policy, 37, 2560–2573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BR08—Danish Building Code. (2008). Available: http://www.bygningsreglementet.dk/tidligerebygreg/0/40. Accessed 15 January 2013.

  • BR10—Danish Building Code. (2010). http://bygningsreglementet.dk/. Accessed 15 January 2013.

  • Brunsson, N., & Jacobsson, B. (2000). A World of Standards. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson, N., Rasche, A., & Seidl, D. (2012). The Dynamics of Standardization: Three Perspectives on Standards in Organization Studies. Organization Studies, 33(5–6), 613–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burshell, J., & Mitchell, W. C. (2014). Label Emergence in a Nascent Market Category: Environmental Influence on Producers’ Label Use. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, August 1–5, Philadelphia, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., Méadel, C., & Rabeharisoa, V. (2002). The Economy of Qualities. Economy and Society, 31(2), 194–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, G. R., & Swaminathan, A. (2000). Why the Microbrewery Movement? Organizational Dynamics of Resource Partitioning in the U.S. Brewing Industry. American Journal of Sociology, 106(3), 715–762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copenhagen Economics. (2014). Betydning af lavenergiklasserne for byggebranchen [The Effect of Low Energy Classes for the Construction Sector]. Danish Energy Agency. Available: https://ens.dk/sites/ens.dk/files/Energibesparelser/copenhagen_economics_2014_-_betydningen_af_lavenergiklasserne_7_november.pdf. Accessed 18 November 2018.

  • Croidieu, G., Rüling, C., & Boutinot, A. (2012). Mythification and the Emergence of Exemplars: Penfolds Grange and the Australian “Fine Wines”, 1951–2010. Paper presented at the 28th EGOS Colloquium, July 5–7, Helsinki, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Energy Agency. (2012). National Plan for Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings: Danish Compliance with Article 9 of Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the Energy Performance of Buildings. Copenhagen, Denmark: Klima, Energi og Bygningsministeriet (Ministry of Climate, Energy and Buildings).

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Energy Policy. (1976). Dansk Energiplan 1976. Copenhagen, Denmark: Handelsministeriet (Ministry of Commerce).

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Ministry of Energy, Utilities and Climate. (2017). Klimapolitisk redegørelse 2017 (Climate Policy Brief 2017). Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Ministry of Energy, Utilities and Climate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., & Montes-Sancho, M. J. (2010). Voluntary Agreements to Improve Environmental Quality: Symbolic and Substantive Cooperation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 575–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durand, R., & Boulongne, R. (2017). Advancing Category Research: Theoretical Mapping and Under-Researched Areas. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence, & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (2nd ed., pp. 647–668). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ea Energianalyse, Niras, RUC, & 4-Fact. (2008). En vej til flere og billigere energibesparelser. En evaluering af samtlige danske energispareaktiviteter. Teknisk bilag B4: Bygningsreglementet [A Way to More and Cheaper Energy Savings. An Evaluation of All Danish Energy Saving Initiatives. Technical Report B4: Building Regulation]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Ea Energianalyse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engberg, L. A. (2012). Denmark: Climate Partnerships in Social Housing. In N. Nieboer, A. Gruis, A. Van Hal, & S. Tsenkova (Eds.), Energy Efficiency in Housing Management: Policy and Practice in Eleven Countries (pp. 38–54). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2002). Directive 2002/91/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the Energy Performance of Buildings. Brussels, Belgium. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:001:0065:0065:EN:PDF. Assessed 15 January 2013.

  • Giama, E., & Papdopoulos, A. M. (2012). Sustainable Building Management: Overview of Certification Schemes and Standards. Advances in Building Energy Research, 6(2), 242–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granqvist, N., Grodal, S., & Woolley, J. L. (2013). Hedging Your Bets: Explaining Executives’ Market Labeling Strategies in Nanotechnology. Organizational Science, 24(2), 395–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grodal, S., Suarez, F., & Zunino, D. (2015). Why Do Category Labels Stick? Industry Evolution and the Battle for Categorical Dominance. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagelskjær Lauridsen, E., & Stissing Jensen, J. (2013). The Strictest Energy Requirements in the World: An Analysis of the Path Dependencies of a Self-Proclaimed Success. Energy Policy, 53, 97–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R. C., & Bowen, P. A. (1997). Sustainable Construction: Principles and a Framework for Attainment. Construction Management and Economics, 15(3), 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, G., Hannan, M. T., & Koçak, Ö. (2009). Multiple Category Memberships in Markets: An Integrative Theory and Two Empirical Tests. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 150–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joss, S., Kargon, R. H., & Molella, A. P. (2013). From the Guest Editors. Journal of Urban Technology, 20(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kibert, C. J., & Fard, M. M. (2012). Differentiating Among Low-Energy, Low-Carbon and Net-Zero-Energy Building Strategies for Policy Formulation. Building Research & Information, 40(5), 625–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2000). Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry’s Responsible Care Program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 698–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. A., Lenox, M. J., & Terlaak, A. N. N. (2005). The Strategic Use of Decentralized Institutions: Exploring Certification with the ISO 14001 Management Standard. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1091–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurent, B. (2016). Political Experiments That Matter: Ordering Democracy from Experimental Sites. Social Studies of Science, 46(5), 773–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenox, M. J. (2006). The Role of Private Decentralized Institutions in Sustaining Industrial Self-Regulation. Organization Science, 17(6), 677–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewers, C. (2008). From Zero to Net-Zero Squared, Advancing Technology in Commercial Buildings. Available: http://www.buildings.com/tabid/3334/ArticleID/5605/Default.aspx. Accessed 15 January 2013.

  • Loconto, A., & Busch, L. (2010). Standards, Techno-economic Networks, and Playing Fields: Performing the Global Market Economy. Review of International Political Economy, 17(3), 507–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, O. A. (2010). Challenges for Energy and Buildings Research. Building Research & Information, 38(1), 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2004). The Logic of Appropriateness (ARENA Working Paper). Oslo, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012). Sustainability Transitions: An Emerging Field of Research and Its Prospects. Research Policy, 41, 955–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millo, Y., & Lezaun, J. (2006). Regulatory Experiments: Genetically Modified Crops and Financial Derivatives on Trial. Science and Public Policy, 33(3), 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S., & Rydin, Y. (2008). Promoting Sustainable Construction: European and British Networks at the Knowledge-Policy Interface. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 10(3), 233–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen, L., Kanafani, K., & Aggerholm, S. (2018). Frivillig bæredygtighedsklasse i bygningsreglementet: Oplæg fra byggebranchen [A Voluntary Sustainability Class in the Danish Building Regulations: Commentary from the Construction Industry]. InnoBYG (Innovation Network for Sustainable Construction).

    Google Scholar 

  • Munir, K. A. (2005). The Social Construction of Events: A Study of Institutional Change in the Photographic Field. Organization Studies, 26(1), 93–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadaï, A., & Labussière, O. (2018). Technological Demonstration at the Core of the Energy Transition. In O. Labussière & A. Nadaï (Eds.), Energy Transitions (pp. 191–237). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Navis, C., & Glynn, M. A. (2010). How New Market Categories Emerge: Temporal Dynamics of Legitimacy, Identity, and Entrepreneurship in Satellite Radio, 1990–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(3), 439–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nigam, A., & Ocasio, W. (2010). Event Attention, Environmental Sensemaking, and Change in Institutional Logics: An Inductive Analysis of the Effects of Public Attention to Clinton’s Health Care Reform Initiative. Organization Science, 21(4), 823–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A. (2010). The Limits of Corporate Responsibility Standards. Business Ethics: A European Review, 19(3), 280–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regeringen. (2009). Strategi for reduktion af energiforbruget i bygninger [Strategy to Reduce the Energy Consumption of Buildings]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Erhvervs- og Byggestyrelsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reijonen, S., & Pinheiro-Croisel, R. (2017). The Dynamics of Innovation Drivers: Client Requirements and Sustainable Energy Innovation Uptake. Journal of Modern Project Management, 4(3), 66–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosental, C. (2013). Toward a Sociology of Public Demonstrations. Sociological Theory, 31(4), 343–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryghaug, M., & Sørensen, K. H. (2009). How Energy Efficiency Fails in the Building Industry. Energy Policy, 37(3), 984–991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweber, L. (2013). The Effect of BREEAM on Clients and Construction Professionals. Building Research & Information, 41(2), 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slager, R., Gond, J.-P., & Moon, J. (2012). Standardization as Institutional Work: The Regulatory Power of a Responsible Investment Standard. Organization Studies, 33(5–6), 763–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, S., & Epstein, S. (2010). A World of Standards but Not a Standard World: Toward a Sociology of Standards and Standardization. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tupamäki, O. (n.d.). Total LCC and Sustainable Construction. Available: http://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB3211.pdf. Accessed 18 November 18.

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wry, T., Lounsbury, M., & Glynn, M. A. (2011). Legitimating Nascent Collective Identities: Coordinating Cultural Entrepreneurship. Organization Science, 22(2), 449–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, E. W. (1999). The Categorical Imperative: Securities Analysts and the Illegitimacy Discount. American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1398–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Eva Boxenbaum

  2. Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

    Susse Georg

Authors
  1. Eva Boxenbaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susse Georg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eva Boxenbaum .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre de Sociologie de l’Innovation - i3, Mines ParisTech, PSL University, Paris, France

    Brice Laurent

  2. Centre de Sociologie de l’Innovation - i3, Mines ParisTech, PSL University, Paris, France

    Alexandre Mallard

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Boxenbaum, E., Georg, S. (2020). The Role of Standards and Exemplars in Consolidating Labels for Sustainable Construction. In: Laurent, B., Mallard, A. (eds) Labelling the Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1498-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1498-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-1497-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-1498-2

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation