IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v3y2011i12p2392-2412d15184.html

Environmental Assessment Methodologies for Commercial Buildings: An Elicitation Study of U.S. Building Professionals’ Beliefs on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

Author

Listed:
  • Jasmin Kientzel

    (School of Governance and UNU-MERIT, Maastricht University, Keizer Karelplein 19, Maastricht 6211 TC, The Netherlands)

  • Gerjo Kok

    (Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Work and Social Psychology, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht 6229 ER, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Voluntary environmental programs (VEPs) have become increasingly popular around the world to address energy efficiency issues that mandatory building codes have not been able to tackle. Even though the utility of voluntary schemes is widely debated, they have become a de facto reality for many professionals in the building and construction sector. One topic that is neglected, however, in both academic and policy discussions, relates to how professionals (architects, engineers, real estate developers, etc .) perceive the rise of voluntary rating schemes. In order to fill this gap in the literature, the present study investigates beliefs underlying adoption behavior regarding one of the most prominent voluntary assessment and certification programs in the U.S. building industry, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) scheme. In this paper, an elicitation study, based on 14 semi-structured interviews with building professionals in the North East of the United States, was conducted to analyze this question. Building on the Reasoned Action Approach, this paper shows that, in addition to more conventional factors such as financial calculations and marketing aspects, the understanding of beliefs held by building professionals offers important insights into their decisions to work with Voluntary Environmental Assessment and Rating Programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Jasmin Kientzel & Gerjo Kok, 2011. "Environmental Assessment Methodologies for Commercial Buildings: An Elicitation Study of U.S. Building Professionals’ Beliefs on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(12), pages 1-21, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:3:y:2011:i:12:p:2392-2412:d:15184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/12/2392/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/12/2392/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rutström, E. Elisabet & Wilcox, Nathaniel T., 2009. "Stated beliefs versus inferred beliefs: A methodological inquiry and experimental test," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 616-632, November.
    2. Piet Eichholtz & Nils Kok & John M. Quigley, 2010. "Doing Well by Doing Good? Green Office Buildings," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2492-2509, December.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Grunert, Klaus G. & Bech-Larsen, Tino, 2005. "Explaining choice option attractiveness by beliefs elicited by the laddering method," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 223-241, April.
    5. Katie Williams & Carol Dair, 2007. "What is stopping sustainable building in England? Barriers experienced by stakeholders in delivering sustainable developments," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 135-147.
    6. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    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. Hung Duy Nguyen & Laura Macchion, 2023. "Risk management in green building: a review of the current state of research and future directions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2136-2172, March.
    2. Giovanni Pino & Pierluigi Toma & Cristian Rizzo & Pier Paolo Miglietta & Alessandro M. Peluso & Gianluigi Guido, 2017. "Determinants of Farmers’ Intention to Adopt Water Saving Measures: Evidence from Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Hong Hu & Stan Geertman & Pieter Hooimeijer, 2015. "Planning Support in Estimating Green Housing Opportunities for Different Socioeconomic Groups in Nanjing, China," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(2), pages 316-337, April.
    4. Ali Amiri & Juudit Ottelin & Jaana Sorvari, 2019. "Are LEED-Certified Buildings Energy-Efficient in Practice?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Hong Hu & Stan Geertman & Pieter Hooimeijer, 2014. "The willingness to pay for green apartments: The case of Nanjing, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(16), pages 3459-3478, December.

    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. Zhang, Kai & Cheng, Xiaoting, 2025. "Determinants of consumers’ intentions to use smart home devices from the perspective of perceived value: A mixed SEM, NCA, and fsQCA study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Mäntymäki, Matti & Salo, Jari, 2013. "Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An examination of Habbo Hotel," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 282-290.
    3. Fatima Zahra Barrane & Gahima Egide Karuranga & Diane Poulin, 2018. "Technology Adoption and Diffusion: A New Application of the UTAUT Model," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Joan Torrent-Sellens & Cristian Salazar-Concha & Pilar Ficapal-Cusí & Francesc Saigí-Rubió, 2021. "Using Digital Platforms to Promote Blood Donation: Motivational and Preliminary Evidence from Latin America and Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Alfiero, Simona & Battisti, Enrico & Ηadjielias, Elias, 2022. "Black box technology, usage-based insurance, and prediction of purchase behavior: Evidence from the auto insurance sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    6. Cowan, Kelly R. & Daim, Tugrul U., 2011. "Review of technology acquisition and adoption research in the energy sector," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 183-199.
    7. Chia-Chien Hsu & Brian Sandford & Chia-Ju Ling & Ching-Torng Lin, 2021. "Can the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) Help Explain Subjective Well-Being in Senior Citizens due to Gateball Participation?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-15, August.
    8. Asmussen, Katherine E. & Mondal, Aupal & Bhat, Chandra R., 2022. "Adoption of partially automated vehicle technology features and impacts on vehicle miles of travel (VMT)," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 156-179.
    9. Abu Elnasr E. Sobaih & Ibrahim A. Elshaer, 2023. "Risk-Taking, Financial Knowledge, and Risky Investment Intention: Expanding Theory of Planned Behavior Using a Moderating-Mediating Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    10. Wei Wang & Shoujian Zhang & Yikun Su & Xinyang Deng, 2019. "An Empirical Analysis of the Factors Affecting the Adoption and Diffusion of GBTS in the Construction Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    11. Peter Bou Saba & Régis Meissonier, 2016. "Conflict contagion effects from previous IT projects: action research during preliminary phases of a DST implementation project [Effets de contagion de conflits de projets TI antérieurs:Une recherche-action lors des phases préliminaires d'un proje," Post-Print hal-02161336, HAL.
    12. Sanjeev Verma, 2015. "Harnessing the Benefit of Social Networking Sites for Intentional Social Action: Determinants and Challenges," Vision, , vol. 19(2), pages 104-111, June.
    13. Queiroz, Maciel M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2019. "Blockchain adoption challenges in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in India and the USA," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 70-82.
    14. Sarv Devaraj & Ming Fan & Rajiv Kohli, 2002. "Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference: Validating e-Commerce Metrics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 316-333, September.
    15. Gansser, Oliver Alexander & Reich, Christina Stefanie, 2021. "A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    16. Chua Chang Jin & Lim Chee Seong & Aye Aye Khin, 2019. "Factors Affecting the Consumer Acceptance towards Fintech Products and Services in Malaysia," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(1), pages 59-65, January.
    17. Triadi Agung Sudarto & Dodik Juliardi, 2022. "The effect of perceptions on tax evasion and tax sanction on ethical behaviour of accounting student compliance," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(10), pages 206-216, December.
    18. Gupta, Somya & Hassen, Majdi & Pandey, Dharen Kumar & Sahu, Ganesh P., 2024. "Cognitive, affective, and normative factors affecting digital insurance adoption among persons with disabilities: A two-stage SEM-ANN analysis," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    19. Hongping Yuan & Yu Yang & Xiaolong Xue, 2019. "Promoting Owners’ BIM Adoption Behaviors to Achieve Sustainable Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    20. Donmez, Birsen & Matson, Zannah & Savan, Beth & Farahani, Ellie & Photiadis, David & Dafoe, Joanna, 2014. "Interruption management and office norms: Technology adoption lessons from a product commercialization study," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 741-750.

    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:3:y:2011:i:12:p:2392-2412:d:15184. 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.