About lnovich

Laura Novich is a M.A. Candidate in the Sustainable Interior Environments Program at the Fashion Institute of Technology SUNY, and works as a Materials Researcher at Material ConneXion. Her research and design focus is sustainable, recycled materials for use in construction and their production. She graduated from Boston University with a B.A. in Environmental Science. She enjoys baking, the Food Network and dogs.

Final Paper- Laura Novich

Posted on December 16, 2012 by lnovich

Laura Novich

SE 562 Environment Behavior Research

12/17/12

There is a clear deficiency in how the manufacturers of construction materials represent their sustainable practices today. It is easy for the average consumer to believe clever marketing campaigns that declare products to be green, but it is an entirely different thing for consumers to be able to see the truth and draw their own conclusions. Materials are the backbone of sustainable design and so many companies mislead designers by claiming to be more sustainable than they actually are. When the cost of a product plays a significant role in how designers choose materials, it is crucial to make sustainable alternatives competitively priced. When unsustainable products are much cheaper than sustainable ones, it makes the decision easier for most projects, which is unfortunate.

Due to a greater desire from the public for more sustainable products, a niche industry has developed that, by its nature, can demand a higher price tag. While some construction material manufacturers see a lucrative advantage in tapping into this trend, others actually care about the difference their products can make on the environment and in the industry. As a result of this discrepancy, it is important that we, designers and consumers, are to be able to differentiate between authentic and imitation sustainable materials.

This issue led me to my research question: by examining sustainable building materials manufacturers, how is the sustainability of the supply chain conveyed to its consumers? How transparent is the company’s representations of sustainability? Do they accurately portray how they produce their materials? Or do they hide particular details in order to create a certain image? How important is this transparency to architects and interior designers who specify these materials?

I once heard a story from a friend who is an interior designer about a granite company that claimed to be locally sourced and could help projects gain LEED points for being within the required 500 mile radius. My friend was interested in learning more about the company’s claims so she looked into them further. She discovered that even though the company was located in Vermont, they would ship the granite to Italy to be cut and then ship it back to Vermont before sending it to wherever the customer was. They purposefully neglected to tell their customers this detail; yet, they marketed themselves as sustainable and local. With this uncovered truth, my friend did not specify them for her project. If this company were required to be more transparent about their practices, how many designers looking to specify a material for a sustainable project would have looked elsewhere?

As “green design” has become increasingly popular over the last few years, many manufacturing companies have started to become “green” and market themselves as such. Even if those companies do nothing sustainably, they will make false claims and present skewed data about their products to take advantage of the situation, which is known as “green washing”. Greenpeace defines “green washing” as “…the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.” Unfortunately, “green washing” is a prevalent marketing strategy that consumers unknowingly buy into. This is why it is important for companies to be transparent, so that consumers can see for themselves whether or not these representations of sustainability are accurate.

Among the literature I have found, there have been three consistent themes throughout: sustainable construction, sustainable building materials and supply chains. Building construction produces a significant amount of waste, most of which can be reused or recycled (Da Rocha and Sattler, 2009). According to Koletnik et al (2012), the European Council is enforcing new recycling laws for demolition and construction, setting a goal of at least 70% of construction waste be recycled by 2020. Even if this may seem unfeasible, it is, in fact, possible and should be implemented throughout the world, not just Europe. Recycling and reusing construction waste is a necessity because it will help create more sustainable production models for companies to use in their supply chains (Da Rocha and Sattler, 2009).

Born of the waste from construction and demolition are new, revamped building materials. These materials are fully functional and not from virgin resources. They are of sound quality and are just as effective and durable as brand new materials (Siddique, 2010). These sustainable building materials can come from sources other than previous construction products, such as coal and agricultural waste. According to Siddique (2010), coal ash, a byproduct of the energy sector in the US can be used in many alternative forms, such as cement. A company called Ecovative Designs produces a material used for insulation and acoustical tiles in buildings that are produced from agricultural waste and mycelium.

The supply chains in building material manufacturers are often quite intricate, with many levels. It becomes difficult to stipulate required practices of sustainability when there are many influencing external factors. As Irland (2007) explains, wood building products are often cut from sustainable, third party certified forests but are not being recognized for it. This is due to their failure to communicate with in the multi level supply chains of larger companies (Irland, 2007). This absence of communication in the supply chain is unfortunate because the company is actually doing what every wood company should be doing but not being properly recognized for it. There is a “lack of commitment in the supply chain to go green” and companies feel there could be significant financial risks by adopting green building practices (Zou and Couani, 2012). With more research and education on incorporating sustainability into supply chains, companies can have an easier time implementing and incorporating it into their business models.

The methods I would use to research this problem would be personal interviews, analyzing data from published corporate information, and surveying sustainable material manufacturers and design firms. The personal interviews will give me an understanding of how other people see this problem, if they see it as a problem at all. I feel that narratives from people will provide me with insight that might not be given if they were to just answer a few short questions. The published information will help me to fill in the blanks from the interviews, as well as give me a more thorough comprehension of the industry standards and company practices.

I would also like to use surveys because they are a great way of capturing data from a lot of vastly different companies. They would be a more efficient way of obtaining primary information from many manufacturers at one time instead of trying to connect with each of them individually, not knowing if they would be willing to participate at all. I can also use surveys as a precursor to determine whom I would like to interview. If I get back answers that sound promising, I would want to go forward with an interview with them. I would also use surveys to find design firms that would be appropriate to interview. By surveying designers, I would be able to get insight as to how they view the manufacturer’s representations of sustainability.

The sites in which my methods will take place would be at the manufacturing facility of the sustainable construction material companies as well as the offices of architects and interior designers. I feel that people would be more comfortable and open to speaking about private issues during personal interviews when they are in the safety of their own space. In addition to making interviewees comfortable, being at the manufacturing facilities will allow me to look at the physical offices and plants first hand. I understand that I will not necessarily be able to see the whole production line, but by seeing their spaces, hopefully a lot can be learned. I would be able to see for myself if they were telling the truth about their practices. For example, if they claim to have a recycling program set up, but I do not see any recycling bins, it would potentially foreshadow an inconsistency in their representations of sustainability.

If I were to use surveys, I would send them out to about 50 different companies and 50 design firms in early summer of 2013. Assuming I get responses by late summer 2013, I would begin mining through the information and finalizing a list to interview. I would begin interviewing early fall 2013 and finish by the end of fall 2013. From the 50 surveys initially sent, I would interview the ones that seemed the most enthusiastic about participating and willing to give detailed information. I would also want to interview those that seem the most intriguing and possibly controversial. To prepare my questions for both the surveys and interviews, I will use the data from the research I did on published industry information.

From seeing the results of surveys sent out in past research, I do not expect to get the full 100 surveys back, or even half. As long as I get back at least 10 responses from each, I will take those and choose 10-16 companies and firms to interview. At each company or design firm, I would try to interview at least 2-3 employees. Each interview would be approximately 1-2 hours. I would have between 10-40 hours of transcription. Upon completion of transcription in late fall of 2013, I will begin analyzing the data in winter 2014 and will finish the research paper in the spring of 2014.

Sustainability is a fairly new topic and not too much has been published regarding sustainable construction products’ marketing. The findings from my research could greatly benefit companies in developing their own marketing strategies and becoming more transparent to their customers. They will be able to see what other, similar companies are doing right and wrong, where they need to improve and what they should avoid. The research will not only help companies, but interior designers and architects as well. It will allow them to become more aware of false information presented to them by material manufacturers. They will scrutinize construction product manufacturers’ claims and dig a little deeper to find out if they are valid.

By having more informed designers and more transparent building material manufacturers, we will be able to get to the core of sustainable design. As a result of this, we, as a society, benefit. All of us are able to live and work in healthier buildings that reduce the amount of toxicities that we continuously come in contact with. With these cleaner buildings, we are one step closer to minimizing environmental degradation and preserving natural resources.

Works Cited

da Rocha, Cecillia Gravina, and Miguel Aloysio Sattler. 2009. “A Discussion on the Reuse of Building Components in Brazil: An Analysis of Major Social, Economical and Legal Factors.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 54 (2) (December): 104–112.

“Greenpeace | Greenwashing.” 2012. Accessed December 15. http://www.stopgreenwash.org/.

Irland, Lloyd C. 2007. “Developing Markets for Certified Wood Products.” Journal of Industrial Ecology 11 (2): 201–216.

Koletnik, Damijan, Rebeka Lukman, and Damjan Krajnc. 2012. “Environmental Management of Waste Based on Road Construction Materials.” Environmental Research, Engineering & Management 59 (1): 42–46.

Siddique, Rafat. 2010. “Utilization of Coal Combustion By-products in Sustainable Construction Materials.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 54 (12) (October): 1060–1066.

Zou, Patrick X. W., and Paul Couani. 2012. “Managing Risks in Green Building Supply Chain.” Architectural Engineering & Design Management 8 (2): 143–158.

Laura’s Research Project Outline

Posted on December 2, 2012 by lnovich

Laura Novich

Environmental Behavior Research

12/3/12

Research Question: Examining the supply chain of a small sustainable building materials manufacturer, how does the supply chain break down by cost and environmental impact at each step? How are these elements of the supply chain conveyed to consumers, if at all?

Literature Review: Irland explains how wood products that are cut from sustainable, certified forests are not being recognized as such due to lack of comprehension in the multi level supply chains and why this happens. It is important to understand the facts of where a system is failing in order to repair the problems. They did this by analyzing data that they had from the different parts of wood supply chains. Their key findings were that it is hard to market wood as certified through all the levels of supply chain. They explored those problems to help approach the situation and make the marketing of certified wood more apparent.

Zou and Couani explain how the new methods of green building can have an effect on the supply chain of companies and what risks they faced. This is important because understanding and addressing those problems could help promote and expand the industry. They sent out 250 questionnaires to professionals in Australia with 93 sent back, but only 91 valid. Their key findings were that it seemed possible to improve the green building industry, but there is a definite need for further research and development, education, experience, knowledge sharing and technology. The summary argument is that there was a general “lack of commitment in the supply chain to go green” and that there were financial risks companies felt were a result from green building.

Da Rocha and Sattler argue how materials can be recycled and reused after construction, because the construction industry produces the greatest amount of waste and, thus, causes severe environmental problems. This is an important task because it will help create a more sustainable production model for others to use. The authors did a single embedded case study by taking available data from Porto Alegre, Brazil and analyzing it. They found through the data and their own supply chain management approach that economical and social factors, and not just the lower socio-economic class, support the reuse of building materials. The summary argument is that by using their supply chain management approach, they can use it for “close loop” supply chains.

Koletnik, Lukman and Krajnc explain how the European Council enforced new recycling laws for demolition and construction, setting a goal of at least 70% of construction waste be recycled by 2020. The authors did a case study of the construction waste from roads in Slovenia. They took the data that was available and analyzed it, concluding the environmental impacts of the waste. Their key findings were that the construction of new roads has the most severe environmental impacts based on their toxicities and other chemical harms, followed by waste processing and then demolition.

Methods: I plan to use interviews and analyze data from archival research. Personal interviews will give me the most insight into a company and how it runs from a first hand account. Archival research will give me the qualitative information that companies published versus actual numbers and information.

Topic Importance: This topic interests me because I see a huge need for transparency in construction product manufacturers that claim to be sustainable. It is easy for an average consumer to believe good marketing declaring to be green, but it is another thing to be able to see deeper into the truth and come to your own decision. Materials are the backbone of sustainable design and it is misleading for designers that so many companies pretend to be more sustainable then they are.

Works Cited:

Irland, Lloyd C. 2007. “Developing Markets for Certified Wood Products.” Journal of Industrial Ecology 11 (2): 201–216.

Zou, Patrick X. W., and Paul Couani. 2012. “Managing Risks in Green Building Supply Chain.” Architectural Engineering & Design Management 8 (2): 143–158.

Power

Posted on November 19, 2012 by lnovich

Laura Novich

Mini Paper #3- Public Private

11-19-2012

Power is specific. Power can be dependent upon so many factors that are often out of our hands. Power is a bureaucratic. Power can be rigid and inflexible and unable to accept new ideas and theories. Power can be a good thing, beneficial, but in the production of sustainable building materials, power plays a pivotal role in the slow development of the sustainable built environment movement.

Lloyd Irland’s article, “Developing Markets for Certified Wood Products”, 2007, is about how wood products that are cut from sustainable, certified forests are not being recognized as such due to lack of comprehension in the multi level supply chains and why this happens. It is important to understand the facts of where a system is failing in order to repair the problems. They did this by analyzing data that they had from the different parts of wood supply chains. Their key findings were that it is hard to market wood as certified through all the levels of supply chain. They explored those problems to help approach the situation and make the marketing of certified wood more apparent.

Power, in this case, takes the form of the supply chain. It is difficult to label a product sustainable when different parts of the company are not abiding by set standards, and often, unintentionally. Higher end employees that dictate how a supply chain should run often do not know what actually takes place in the production. There is a miscommunication happening and it is unfortunate because it is important for the different levels of the supply chain to work together to form a cohesive product. Everyone in the company should understand each leg of the product’s journey; the CEO should know just as much about the production as the factory workers. Without complete understanding, it is hard to believe in your company as a truly sustainable one, and to sell that idea, too.

Cecillia Gravina da Rocha’s article, “A Discussion on the Reuse of Building Components in Brazil: An Analysis of Major Social, Economical and Legal Factors”, 2009, is about how materials can be recycled and reused after construction, because the construction industry produces the greatest amount of waste and, thus, causes severe environmental problems. This is an important task because it will help create a more sustainable production model for others to use. The authors did a single embedded case study by taking available data from Porto Alegre, Brazil and analyzing it. They found through the data and their own supply chain management approach that economical and social factors, and not just the lower socio-economic class, support the reuse of building materials. The summary argument is that by using their supply chain management approach, they can use it for “close loop” supply chains.

In this article, power was literal: public political power. Because of so many factors and restrictions, it is difficult to set standards in the building industry when it comes to construction waste and reusing it. Even if a country’s government agrees with the proposal, it still will take a long time to put the law or regulation into effect. This article explains how it is feasible to reuse waste from the construction industry, which is great, but you must ask yourself: how long will it actually take to make it happen? This is always the first thing that comes to my mind when I see potential change in the built environment: when will it actually happen?

Claire Cooper- Marcus’ article, “Environmental Memories”, 1992, is about how adults remember their surroundings as children, how they remember the spaces. This is important because it helps us to understand how people view their surroundings and how they react to certain spaces. It also helps to characterize what their preferences are for physical places. The author did this by taking first hand stories from many different people from all over the US and other countries. Her key findings were that children all reacted to and remembered their surroundings differently. The summary argument is that place has a strong role in people and their upbringing and childhood, which is visible in their adult lives and careers.

Cooper-Marcus’ article explores how people dealt with power as children, how they saw their environment as a refuge from whatever was happening in their lives. The way they interacted with their surroundings mirrored how they would as adults. For example, the one person who built a junky playhouse with his brother and then his father gave them a perfect one that he had bought. The children played with it to make their father happy, but then quickly returned to their original junky playhouse. That was their reaction to power and how they obeyed it initially, but then continued with what they originally were doing.

This one childhood anecdote could be an example of how companies produce excessive waste and are then targeted by the government to curb their emissions. The company addresses the problem, does what they are expected to do, and then once the government has stopped paying close attention, they revert back to their normal, polluting ways. The children in that story might not have grown up to be the employees implementing such tactics, but it was a strong similarity between how children react to power and how wasteful companies react to power.

Patrick Zou’s article, Managing Risks in Green Building Supply Chain”, 2012, is about how the new methods of green building can have an effect on the supply chain of companies and what risks they faced. This is important because understanding and addressing those problems could help promote and expand the industry. They sent out 250 questionnaires to professionals in Australia with 93 sent back, but only 91 valid. Their key findings were that it seemed possible to improve the green building industry, but there is a definite need for further research and development, education, experience, knowledge sharing and technology. The summary argument is that there was a general “lack of commitment in the supply chain to go green” and that there were financial risks companies felt were a result from green building.

This article explains how there are limitations to trying to achieve a green supply chain. Aside from governmental restrictions making it difficult to become a sustainably produced product, the company itself fears the financial risks. Companies are resistant to becoming a green, sustainably produced product because they think that the financial risks are far higher than what they expected or are prepared to pay. In this case, power is money. As much as we do not want to think that money controls everything, it does. Money is the root of business and, unfortunately, companies need to understand this and abide by it. However, money does not mean that a company cannot be sustainable and still make a profit. A company can very well make a solid profit if they make their production sustainable and change their supply chain approach.

Works Cited

Cooper-Marcus, C. 1992. “Environmental Memories” in Place Attachment, edited by Ian Altman and Setha Low. NY: Plenum Press, 1-12.

Irland, Lloyd C. 2007. “Developing Markets for Certified Wood Products.” Journal of Industrial Ecology 11 (2): 201–216.

Zou, Patrick X. W., and Paul Couani. 2012. “Managing Risks in Green Building Supply Chain.” Architectural Engineering & Design Management 8 (2): 143–158.