3.2.2012

Could do better? BREEAM is called to the headmaster’s office

Critics say it has just become a paint-by-numbers process; overly bureaucratic and needlessly expensive. It restricts innovation and has become little more than a costly box ticking exercise.

Conversely, supporters will say the long-term savings far outweigh any initial expense. They’ll tell you that the industry needs a minimum standard such as BREEAM to ensure we don’t simply become motivated by constructing schools as cheaply and quickly as possible.

So, the real question isn’t whether an environmental assessment system should be used, but rather, what should that system be? And do we gain anything by forcing new schools to all use the same metric when some may feel it’s not right for them?

A monopoly is rarely healthy for any market and there are other systems out there. Perhaps this is an opportunity for the Government simply to mandate that an environmental assessment system must be used, but let the end user and market forces determine which one? Building new schools sustainably and cost-effectively - for the whole life of the building - is surely a challenge UK design and construction is more than able to meet?

As the debate rages, it would be useful to remember the refreshingly straightforward BSF mantra of ‘creating inspirational learning environments’. The BSF programme may be confined to the history books, but its vision remains more relevant than ever.