Summary

• The Indian construction sector has a high ecological and carbon footprint. With increasing urbanisation and growth in India, the impacts of the construction sector will only increase.
• Small cities and towns have been the primary locus of growth. Urban housing shortage in 7,935 towns is estimated to be 18.78 million as of 2012. Therefore, efforts to reduce the ecological footprint should take into account the housing requirements in urban areas.
• Low-carbon and resource-efficient technologies exist and could substantially reduce the ecological footprint of the sector were they dominant. In order to mainstream these technologies, it is essential for policy makers to streamline policies and develop guidelines that include a green mandate.
• The implementation process should also be strengthened at the same time. Technical capacity building of government officials will aid in the implementation of policies.
• Integrated and concerted efforts from different government departments are crucial for mainstreaming green construction.

 For the full paper: LCD06-Vashist and project details

Recommendations

National level

• Guidelines, codes and standards should be developed by the government to include aspects of green construction in policies and schemes and to accommodate green building materials. The scope of the schedule of rates (SoR) should be expanded to accommodate green building materials.
• A quality control system in the form of eco-labelling/ rating systems for materials and products should be set in place to ensure standardisation of materials.
• Collaborative research for technology innovation and demonstrations should be promoted.
• Large-scale awareness programmes targeting both entrepreneurs and users should be organised.

Local level

• Capacity building of officials for the proper implementation of these policies should be promoted.
• Technical training and certification of masons and engineers should be organised on a regular basis. Green aspects need to be included in the curricula for engineers and architects.
• Fiscal incentives and priority financing for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) should be initiated.
• Public-private partnership should be promoted.

Summary

• Adoption and upscaling of low-carbon and energy-efficient construction technology for housing is emerging as an important policy and implementation agenda in Nepal both in consideration of rapid urbanisation and climate change.
• With an annual urban growth rate of 3.62%, Nepal will require an additional one million urban houses from 2011 to 2021 (UN-Habitat, 2011).
• Using conventional practices will exploit depletable resources, incur high costs and increase CO2 emissions.
• It is essential to enable the policy environment to promote sustainable construction materials and housing, to strengthen the supply chain for sustainable construction materials, and to stimulate the demand for sustainable housing as an economical, environmentally sound and aesthetically pleasing solution.

 For the full paper: LCD06-Vashist and project details

Recommendations

Author: Mr. Suman Udas, Clean Energy Nepal

Mainstreaming low-carbon construction materials (LCCM) requires action on enhancing awareness and knowledge on LCCM and alternative structural materials and systems, codes and standards, as well as labeling of construction materials. Thus, decision makers should consider the following:

• Providing subsidies on building design approval for the adoption of LCCM. To this end, Lalitpur Sub-metropolitan City is planning to categorise houses into A, B and C classes on the basis of five major aspects — use of eco-friendly construction materials, passive solar design, energy efficiency, water conservation and sustainable management of solid and liquid waste.

• A voluntary green building certification system can be an effective tool for promoting low-carbon construction. Internationally, voluntary building rating and certification systems have been instrumental in raising awareness and popularising sustainable building and most of the rating systems devised have been tailored to suit the building industry of the country where they were developed. There are various rating systems around the world such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) in the USA, the DGNB system of the German Sustainable Building Council in Germany, the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment (BREEAM) in the UK, and the Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA) in India, etc.
• The increased usage of low-carbon construction material can be made possible by improving awareness and knowledge of these materials, encouraging construction practitioners to invest in a long-term low-carbon construction future, and providing code and regulation compliance for the materials.
• The increased adoption of alternative building materials through increased awareness, knowledge and stringent building codes and regulations will attract more investment into the market. There is also a need for norms, guides and regulations from the government to assure the quality of alternative building materials in the market.

Policy Implications

The adoption of low-carbon construction materials as an alternative to conventional materials is essential for the construction sector to reduce GHG emissions. For this, the following policy needs have been identified.

• Incorporate sustainable building components and provisions for sustainable housing into National Building Codes.
• Develop more specific policies and detailed guidelines related to sustainable housing.
• Encourage research to mainstream LCCM in the local context.
• Incorporate adaptation and mitigation measures into local municipal planning and service delivery to promote low-carbon construction practices. Under a business-as-usual scenario, 55 billion bricks (117 million per year) and a 10% increase in cement use is required to meet the housing demand. The suggested policy measures above will help mainstream LCCM as viable alternatives for sustainable housing in Nepal and curtail the use of brick and cement. The application of policy measures to mainstream LCCM will also benefit the national economy by cutting imports and lowering the cost of construction. The constraints for mainstreaming alternative construction materials in Nepal based on the finding of a survey conducted by the research team is presented in the box below.

Constraints for Mainstream Alternative Construction Materials in Nepal

With increasing urbanisation, the number of traditional buildings has decreased dramatically in the past six decades. They were gradually replaced by modern buildings made of contemporary building materials such as brick, cement, concrete, steel and aluminium. Traditional mud-and-stone houses were common in the past and designed to suit the local climate using traditional knowledge. The materials used, such as soil, stone, timber, bamboo and wood, were mostly available locally. The National Housing Policy 2012 mentions that 57% of the houses in Nepal are constructed with cement mortar, 27% with mud and stone and the remaining 8% with wood, bamboo and other temporary materials.

There are existing practices of using low-carbon construction technologies such as hollow concrete brick (HCB), compressed stabilised earth block (CSEB), bamboo housing, earth rammed housing and traditional mud stone houses, which are comparably
low-cost technologies. However, the popular public perception is that low cost means low grade. These technologies are further sidelined by the absence of an enabling policy environment. Construction practitioners tend to focus on conventional building practices and are less aware of LCCM as an alternative to contemporary materials and their importance in protecting the
environment and reducing GHG emissions. The relatively low cost of LCCM gives consumers a perception that they are structurally weak and designed for people with low income. The absence of guidelines, codes and regulations for encouraging the adoption of LCCM is one of the major barriers in mainstreaming these materials.

Due to an imbalance between supply and demand, there is limited availability of LCCM in the market. There is also a lack of readily accessible and reliable information that compares alternative structural materials and systems. Further, there is a lack of quality assurance for LCCM available in the market. No norms or guidelines exist for manufacturing these alternative materials, and monitoring mechanisms are lacking to ensure the quality and strength of these alternative, sustainable materials. This poses barriers in public acceptance. (SBCI, 2007).

Recommendations

• The government should encourage research and implementation of greener technologies.
• Efforts should be taken to educate the population in the technology and skills involved in low-carbon construction.
• The government should break the monopoly of cement industries in the market.
• Good quality alternative materials should be made available in the market to increase their usage.
• The government needs to recognise brick making as an industry requiring dedicated regulations, policies and standards.
• The government needs to raise awareness of local manufacturers and kiln workers about low-carbon options and support the transition to such technologies.
• The government should take significant efforts to introduce environmentally friendly and energy-efficient brick production technology, such as vertical shaft brick kilns.
• The government should develop partnerships with donor institutions, agencies or banks to ensure access to financing for entrepreneurs.
• The government should encourage synergies between local investors and entrepreneurs to increase ownership and acceptability of alternative technology.
• There is a need for wider dissemination via print and electronic media before the establishment of kilns.
• More pilot VSBKs should be established in areas like Lahore, Sialkot, Sargodha and Faisalabad.
• The government should protect bamboo resources and incentivise its production.
• Targeted advocacy efforts are needed to overcome the barrier of social and cultural associations with bamboo as a less-preferred material.
• The government needs to update policies and building codes to reflect new research and ideas.

 For the full paper: LCD06-Vashist and project details

Policy Implications

• Customised construction guidelines are not available and instruments like the Housing Policy (2001), planning standards, and building codes are outdated, not addressing the issue of low-carbon construction. Taking carbon considerations into account in risk reduction, relief and reconstruction would contribute to the potential “greening” of the disaster risk management industry. This is an important dimension for recognising the benefits that a low-carbon economy can bring to developing countries. (Urban, Mitchell, & Villanueva, 2010)
• There is a desperate need for the concerned authorities to push the need for low-carbon construction in housing policies, reconstruction guidelines, agendas for NGOs and international donors, as well as encourage academic research on the issue.
• There is a dire need to launch campaigns generating awareness among regulatory agencies, builders/architects, end users and the general public. Furthermore, these campaigns need the endorsement and support of the Pakistan Environment Protection Agency (Neilsen, 2010). The involvement of the authorities is for eradicating institutional barriers.
• By encouraging the streamlining of indigenous, locally produced material, there will be a significant economic regeneration within the select communities. Some projects have assigned duties and responsibilities to specific trained members of the community, who are then given an adequate compensation. This aids individuals in earning their livelihoods, along with promoting green construction and building shelters.
• There is an urgent need for authorities to recognise the environmentally destructive monopoly of cement and brick in the construction industry, and actively work towards breaking this hold. Foundations are making their own contribution in introducing these indigenous technologies to communities, making them aware of their advantages and using development forums to discuss these issues. However, there needs to be an institutionalised, collective effort made to mainstream these materials and technology into housing policies, instructional guidelines etc., for widespread usage.
• There is a glaring lack of any kind of academic and research work on low-carbon construction in Pakistan. There needs to be a provision for instructional courses at different levels of university studies and technical schools about the use of prospective indigenous and traditional building materials and technology. This will give a genuine motivation to students and can lead to the enhancement of local conditions of living and a greener construction industry. (Adhikary, Ervin, & Chand, 2012)
• Studies are being carried out to establish the durability of bamboo reinforcement with improved bonding capability of bamboo reinforcing bars. Results from around the world show that bamboo can satisfactorily substitute steel structures. With reference to these types of studies there is also a need for updating national building codes especially in the case of developing countries. (Adhikary, Ervin, & Chand, 2012).