Story at a glance:

  • The AEC industry won’t reach its sustainability goals through incremental steps.
  • The time is now for the industry to make big moves, according to LPA president.

As we enter the next phase of our fight against climate change, I am cautiously optimistic about our sustainable future and the design industry’s ability to affect what the AIA calls the biggest challenge of our generation.

I’m optimistic because for the first time I have clients who are saying this is something they want to do. We no longer have to sell them on the benefits and importance of sustainability measures. Schools are asking us how to design net zero campuses. Corporations want information on electrification and carbon emission reductions. They know it’s in their best interest to look at these things now—the general public and investors are demanding the industry address ESG (environmental, social, and governance) goals.

At the same time, I’m concerned the industry is not moving fast enough. The A&E industry has always been slow to react and, unfortunately, we’re repeating history.

We are at a point when doing “less bad” is not good enough. Our design and construction process can’t simply be about reducing the potential harm; we must be part of the solution. Being less bad can’t be standard practice. Incremental changes won’t get us over the next hurdles. It must be a revolutionary change. The time for incremental steps is over.

The industry must create projects that contribute to a more sustainable future. Our work should aspire to enhance our environment and make a positive impact, not simply to decrease the damage of our work. We need to embrace and promote an integrated design process—giving engineers, landscape architects, interior designers, builders, and clients a seat at the table from the very beginning of the process.

lpa design firm 01

Rendering courtesy of LPA

Collaboration is the only way to achieve meaningful results that are needed to achieve:

Net zero energy use

Deep reductions in embodied carbon

Elimination of fossil fuels

Carbon sequestration

Habitat restoration

The only way we are going to make a real difference is with scale—not just a handful of projects. We must be purposeful in finding sustainable strategies for every project. As an industry we need to be consistent and ruthless in making energy efficiency and carbon emission reductions a measure of design excellence.

Here are three areas where the industry and policy changes can make a difference:


This award program is meant to promote and hold out as an example the 10 best sustainably designed projects created by AIA members each year. Yet, year after year many of the winning projects don’t meet the AIA 2030 Commitment for predicted energy performance. This is a disconnect that sends mixed messages.

All AIA awards programs should adopt the 2030 Commitment as a minimum requirement for award criteria. We all know the excuses for not doing it: Clients don’t care about the 2030 Commitment; small firms might lose opportunities. We don’t need excuses now; we need action. This is an area that architects can control, and we need to show leadership.

LEED Energy Efficiency

This is another area where an industry-focused organization can make changes that would greatly improve energy efficiency. The recently released LEED version 4.1 talks a good game, but the energy efficiency requirements are sadly out of step with where the industry can and should be. It is still possible to complete a LEED-certified building with only marginally better energy performance than code minimum energy efficiency standards. That isn’t moving the needle.

Government Requirements

As an industry, this is sensitive territory. But only updated building codes will really push the industry to do better. We should support stronger codes that require change. It’s unbelievable that in 2022 we still have eight states that do not have statewide energy codes for building construction. Of the 42 that do, only five states have adopted codes in line with ASHRAE 90.1-2019 requirements for energy efficiency. Unfortunately, a project that meets those “stricter” energy code requirements is estimated to be 52% better than the CBECS benchmark that the 2030 Commitment is based on; that is not good enough. It’s time for regulations to push for building electrification, increased performance requirements for new construction, and incentives to reuse and upgrade existing structures. As long as codes are not in step with the industry’s carbon reduction goals, we will never hit the aggressive target the 2030 Commitment has set.

Now is the time. Everyone understands the goals and the urgency. But we still need to take bold action as an industry if we are going to achieve significant change.