IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7871-d594152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

User Experience of Green Building Certification Resources: EarthCraft Multifamily

Author

Listed:
  • Dwayne Jefferson

    (Charles Edward Via, Jr., Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, 114 Patton Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • Frederick Paige

    (Charles Edward Via, Jr., Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, 114 Patton Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • Philip Agee

    (Department of Building Construction, Virginia Tech, 430 Bishop-Favrao Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • France Jackson

    (UX Research & Design Intel Corporation, 6380 NE Cherry Drive #309, Hillsboro, OR 97124, USA)

Abstract

To improve the construction industry’s capacity to deliver sustainable infrastructure, guidance on delivering green building systems needs to be more usable. Green buildings have certifications and ratings in place that ensure that projects are environmentally responsible and meet standards in resource efficiency. EarthCraft Multifamily (ECMF), an evolving green building certification, has been successful in increasing the delivery of energy-efficient affordable housing, and this study leverages user experience (UX) methodologies to understand how to further improve ECMF and replicate its success. This study identifies the impact ECMF tools and resources, such as the program manual, worksheet, and technical guidelines, have on enhancing project delivery for architects. This study conducted data analysis on project specifications, heuristic evaluation data, and stakeholder interview data. As the strengths and weaknesses of ECMF were identified, knowledge on the usability of the green building certification program was unveiled. Heuristic evaluations data show that accessibility and usability issues are present in ECMF resources. Interview data show that architects’ experiences with ECMF resources were affected by some of the usability issues identified in the heuristic evaluation data. Coded interview transcripts show the most prominent participant-identified improvements represented within the data. Resources need appropriate visual representation such as readability and hierarchy to improve their usability. Understanding how ECMF resources are utilized during project delivery allows for the appropriate content and options to be strategically framed to improve accessibility and enhance user decision making. ECMF resources can allow for the inclusion of a broader set of stakeholders by lowering the level of expertise required for sustainable infrastructure delivery.

Suggested Citation

  • Dwayne Jefferson & Frederick Paige & Philip Agee & France Jackson, 2021. "User Experience of Green Building Certification Resources: EarthCraft Multifamily," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7871-:d:594152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7871/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7871/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anthony Onwuegbuzie & Nancy Leech, 2005. "Taking the “Q” Out of Research: Teaching Research Methodology Courses Without the Divide Between Quantitative and Qualitative Paradigms," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 267-295, June.
    2. Eric Johnson & Suzanne Shu & Benedict Dellaert & Craig Fox & Daniel Goldstein & Gerald Häubl & Richard Larrick & John Payne & Ellen Peters & David Schkade & Brian Wansink & Elke Weber, 2012. "Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 487-504, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chandan Swaroop Meena & Ashwani Kumar & Siddharth Jain & Ateeq Ur Rehman & Sachin Mishra & Naveen Kumar Sharma & Mohit Bajaj & Muhammad Shafiq & Elsayed Tag Eldin, 2022. "Innovation in Green Building Sector for Sustainable Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-16, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miguel Godinho de Matos & Pedro Ferreira, 2020. "The Effect of Binge-Watching on the Subscription of Video on Demand: Results from Randomized Experiments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1337-1360, December.
    2. Vaidya, Shalvaree, 2021. "The impact of premium subsidies on health plan choices in Switzerland: Who responds to the incentives set by in-kind as opposed to cash transfers?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(6), pages 675-684.
    3. François Cochard & Emmanuel Peterle & Jean-Christian Tisserand, 2025. "Do Donation Ceilings Increase Contributions? Evidence from an Experimental Study," Working Papers 2025-06, CRESE.
    4. Kılkış, Şiir & Ulpiani, Giulia & Vetters, Nadja, 2024. "Visions for climate neutrality and opportunities for co-learning in European cities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    5. Kim Kaleva Kaivanto & Peng Zhang, 2016. "A Resolution of Emissions-Estimate Confusion for Informing Flight Choice," Working Papers 115969274, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    6. Karen S Hamrick & Margaret Andrews, 2016. "SNAP Participants’ Eating Patterns over the Benefit Month: A Time Use Perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    8. Wansink, Brian, 2017. "Healthy Profits: An Interdisciplinary Retail Framework that Increases the Sales of Healthy Foods," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 65-78.
    9. James F. M. Cornwell & David H. Krantz, 2014. "Public policy for thee, but not for me: Varying the grammatical person of public policy justifications influences their support," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 433-444, September.
    10. Idris Adjerid & Alessandro Acquisti & George Loewenstein, 2019. "Choice Architecture, Framing, and Cascaded Privacy Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2267-2290, May.
    11. Simon J. Blanchard & Remi Trudel, 2024. "Life insurance, loss aversion, and temporal orientation: a field experiment and replication with young adults," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 575-587, December.
    12. Dellaert, B.G.C. & Johnson, E.J. & Baker, T., 2019. "Choice Architecture for Healthier Insurance Choices: Ordering and Partitioning Can Improve Decisions," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2019-008-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    13. Ellen R. K. Evers & Yoel Inbar & Irene Blanken & Linda D. Oosterwijk, 2017. "When Do People Prefer Carrots to Sticks? A Robust “Matching Effect” in Policy Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4261-4276, December.
    14. Milfeld, Tyler & Packer, Olivia, 2025. "Marketplace power and choice framing: How and when CSR surcharges generate consumer anger," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    15. Michael W. Mehaffy, 2018. "Neighborhood “Choice Architecture”: A New Strategy for Lower-Emissions Urban Planning?," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(2), pages 113-127.
    16. Atiyeh Yeganloo & Cahal Moran & Juvaria Jafri, 2025. "Let me think about it: evidence of choice deprivation, not overload, in charitable giving," Working Papers EPRG2518, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    17. Michael W. Mehaffy, 2018. "Neighborhood “Choice Architecture”: A New Strategy for Lower-Emissions Urban Planning?," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(2), pages 113-127.
    18. Dolnicar, Sara, 2020. "Designing for more environmentally friendly tourism," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    19. Marvin M. Müller & Kim Leonardo Böhm & Erich Renz, 2023. "Pay or nudge employees into change? A theoretical and experimental investigation of the effect of nudging for organizational change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(6), pages 3666-3695, September.
    20. Andor, Mark Andreas & Götte, Lorenz & Price, Michael Keith & Schulze Tilling, Anna & Tomberg, Lukas, 2023. "Differences in how and why social comparisons and real-time feedback impact resource use: Evidence from a field experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 1059, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7871-:d:594152. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.