Posts Tagged ‘Social Enterprises’

Event Overview: EV Roadmap 7

August 11, 2014

The 7th annual EV Roadmap Conference took place in Portland, OR July 24-25, 2014.

The EV Roadmap conference has established itself as the Pacific Northwest’s premier electric vehicle gathering and one of the leading electric vehicle conferences in the United States. EV Roadmap brings together Oregon’s early adopters with national and international experts to inform transportation electrification efforts across the nation. EV Roadmap 7 is produced by Portland State University, Portland General Electric, and Drive Oregon.


Photo Gallery


Click here to view select photos in the 2014 Conference Image Gallery. Photos courtesy of Becky Fajardo.

Produced By

Drive Oregon

Drive Oregon‘s mission is to promote, support, and grow the electric mobility industry in Oregon. We envision Oregon as a leader in the rapidly growing electric vehicle industry, providing thousands of family wage jobs in a range of businesses delivering infrastructure, components, specialized vehicles, and support services.

Portland General Electric

Portland General Electric is a recognized leader in the utility industry and has safely and dependably powered northwest Oregon since 1889. The focus today is on providing reliable electricity supplies at reasonable prices while continuing to be good stewards of Oregon’s environment. In part, that means supporting customers who are choosing electricity as a transportation fuel, running the most popular renewable power program in the nation and using smart grid technology to serve our customers efficiently.

Portland State University

Portland State University‘s motto is its mission: Let Knowledge Serve the City. Portland State offers more than 220 undergraduate, masters, and doctoral degree options, as well as graduate certificates and continuing education programs. PSU is Oregon’s largest and most diverse university, with some 30,000 students who come from all 50 states and from nearly 100 nations around the world. Located on a 50-acre campus in downtown Portland, the University is a nationally acclaimed leader in sustainability and community-based learning, and its position in the heart of Oregon’s economic and cultural center enables PSU students and faculty to apply scholarly theory to the real-world problems of business and community organizations. PSU is also the home of OTREC, Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium, a national university transportation center focusing on stimulating and conducting research on surface transportation, educating current and future transportation leaders and encouraging the real-world use of research results.

Social Enterprises Involvement

For the 2nd consecutive year, our team was responsible for assisting Drive Oregon, PGE and Portland State University in the following:


Branding & Marketing


Program Development & Management

Social Enterprises, Inc. Joins Ranks of Oregon Benefit Corporations and Becomes a Certified B Corporation!

February 12, 2014

PrintWe are proud to announce that we have gained certification as a B Corporation and officially changed our legal corporate status to a Benefit Corporation.

What is a Certified B Corporation?

B Corporations are a new kind of business that uses the power of business to solve social and environmental problems.

After a lengthy process 3rd party, B Lab, verified signed and stamped that we have worked hard to achieve a higher level of social and environmental performance, transparency and accountability.

We are joining over 900 businesses worldwide where we are not only competing to be the best in the world, but FOR the world.


Social Enterprises was founded in order to give organizations generating important change on the frontiers of sustainability and social impact an affordable and professional resource to execute events that support their ongoing work.

With the Benefit Corporation framework, we are able to hold ourselves accountable to the same standards we recommend to our clients and assure our stakeholders that we mean business when it comes to implementing the triple bottom line across all aspects of our enterprise.

Not only is sustainability the focus in the events we plan, it’s also the aim of how we take care of our employers, contractors, sponsors, community, and of course the environment.

We are proud and incredibly grateful to be recognized for the work we have done for the community and the environment. We are excited to represent B Lab’s mission and be a part of the B Corporation movement!


2012 Sustainable Opportunities Summit: Mark Gasta on Moving People To Embrace Sustainability

January 5, 2012

Marka Gasta

You don’t get to be Chief People Officer without a keen understanding of what motivates us as human beings. Vail Resorts’ CPO, Mark Gasta, works to uncover our drivers as professionals and to create behavior change that not only benefits us as people, but supports the bottom line and sustainability as well. In our Q+A, Mark shares his expert insights on moving people to embrace sustainability with dramatic results.

GoGreen: A lot of talk around sustainability for business focuses on efficiency and systems. What about the people? Where does the human element factor in and how important is it in the grand scheme of things?
Mark Gasta: Businesses are a system, and all of these factors play together. So if we are thinking about the environmental system, or other pieces of the system, and not paying attention to the human aspects of it, ultimately it won’t be sustainable. The system will become imbalanced.

In order to create organizations that do both well and good, we have to ensure the entire system is taken into consideration and that all intersections are tended to. Then we can maintain our profit margins, while also accomplishing our mission as an organization in the community. None of the elements in the system are mutually exclusive. When we drive shareholder value, we not only give that value to them, but we can then reinvest in our employees, our guest experience, our communities and environments–all are inextricably linked.

GG: From the human resources perspective, is sustainability a selling point for recruiting talent and retention rates?

MG: It is an incredibly strong selling point, because people want to feel good about the organization they work for. People want to understand how their efforts can contribute to a larger purpose. It doesn’t matter if the employee is coming just because they love the sport (in our case) and want to be a part of that sport. The stronger that connection is, the more they want to share this sport with others and share nature with others.

Its been proven through research that when people spend time in nature, it makes them want to protect it more and has a positive impact on their own personal values. You can build out that value chain and connect people with those higher purposes—and it doesn’t matter really what that higher purpose is as long as it’s greater than just showing up and punching the clock.

From this perspective, sustainability first creates greater success for the organization, but also results in greater engagement and satisfaction for the people working there. Getting back to the recruiting piece of it, when someone is contemplating their life and dreaming up how are they going to make a difference, they want to be part of something bigger. Sustainability helps us show that we can easily draw out their potential to have a very positive impact in the areas they care about.

GG: You also work with students in higher education. Are you seeing a greater tendency from this next generation of employees to place a higher value on sustainability?
MG: Oh, without a doubt. It’s on the minds of many kids coming through school right now. And that’s very refreshing and exciting. I read an article about a recent Harvard Business School graduating MBA class that had over 50% of its members sign a pledge that they would never work for an organization that did harm and that they would only work for organizations that did good.

People are looking for something more in their career. In the past, it took a catastrophe or something negative to cause people to be reflective and ask, “how am I going to make a difference” or “am I going to look back on my life knowing that I lived the life of purpose?” Today, I think those values are being engrained in us earlier on. Maybe it’s parents, maybe it’s technology giving people a better world view—but whatever the cause, it’s a good thing.

GG: What are your thoughts on where the responsibility should lie for succeeding at sustainability? Should it be with a green team or the sustainability officers or the executive team?
MG: The primary responsibility should not lie with a sustainability officer or green team. Now, should those parties be the conduit of educating others and providing tools and resources to help people understand how to drive and support green efforts – absolutely. But the reason I say no is because my goal is to make sustainability obsolete. Sustainability should be woven into the fabric of the culture and just be part of the business planning process. We should do it not because it’s going to result in altruistic successes, but instead because it’s the right thing to do for the business.

The beautiful thing about sustainability is that the pure definition of it is “be around to live another day.” If you’re not around to live another day, from a business standpoint you’re going to fail. If you want your business to be successful in the long-term, you have to ensure you build it in a sustainable way—which means paying attention and finding the balance for all of those key stakeholders. That includes not taking more than you give, as it relates to the environment, and ensuring you are not doing harm. Both can come back to bite you through brand reputation or negative aspects of compliance. That is the minimum expectation. From there companies have a unique opportunity to competitively differentiate themselves by becoming sustainability leaders and actually enhancing their surroundings.

Because it’s the right thing to do from a business perspective, the ultimate responsibility lies with an organization’s leaders. When they fully understand sustainability, they will see it meshes with the philosophy that wise decisions are those that consider the long-term viability of a company over short-term gains—and that short-term thinking ultimately does not result in a lasting success.

GG: How accountable do you think employees should be towards achieving the overall success of those strategic decisions and those goals?
MG: I think of it a little differently. I don’t think about holding employees accountable, so much as figuring out how we can inspire them to the chase the possibilities, Most people don’t wake up saying, “I want to destroy the earth today” or “I want to do things wrong today.” The responsibility lies with the folks who are leading this charge. They need to drive education, communication, and empowerment. It’s about helping people see how can they make a bigger difference, what their role is and their potential for aligning with a higher purpose.

We also need to create access to those paths and show how our teams can do all of this within their particular role. Every single person has the ability to make a positive difference . So, it’s not about holding employees accountable, it’s about inspiring them to be a part of something greater – which they naturally already want to do, in my estimation.

GG: Have you seen unintended consequences of a positive nature in other areas of your organization that have arisen from your sustainability efforts?
MG: Absolutely. It is all connected. I’ll go back to what we talked about earlier—that it’s all one system and you have to factor in all aspects of the system in order to create a sustainable organization. For example, as we work on employee engagement, many people may not immediately translate that as part of building a sustainable company. But taking care of the most foundational opportunities for employees allows them to become interested in things that create greater value-adds for the company overall.

When we do a regression analysis on our employee engagement scores, we see that the greatest driver in our company—the biggest difference we can make in further engaging our employees—is around sustainability. Our employees want to know how they can further influence our company’s work in the community and the environment, so we have been focusing on how to tie sustainability and employee engagement together.

As a result, we have never seen greater success as it relates to things like our guest satisfaction scores. This greater engagement we’ve fostered is resulting in higher guest satisfaction and it’s directly related to our efforts to help employees understand how our company makes a difference, and how they can personally contribute to our sustainability initiatives.

GG: What kind of organizational change is usually necessary to succeed at creating this very integrated system? What are the most common shifts needed or trends that you see?
MG: I think the greatest challenge for most of us is learning how to operate outside our silos. It’s easy to get stuck in them because that’s what we have control over. Thinking outside of those lines can be overwhelming. Be it a business unit or a department or a location – people are worried about themselves. They are not worried about everyone else.

Going back to the HR, many departments will plan their own strategy for the coming year, but how often do entire organizations bring the planning to a shared platform? Very few make that leap and even fewer take the more important step of looking across the full matrix to find points of integration and collaboration. But unless we look across all of those disparate agendas to ensure we have cross-coordinated our efforts in order to move forward together, we will always have the possibility that things will get out of balance. For example, you might have the greatest learning and development team in the world, but if your compensation and benefits programs are not competitive – you’re going to fail.

The key is to regularly look across the matrix and coordinate agendas at every level within the organization. If any aspect gets out of balance, you are going to stop moving forward and it is not a sustainable long-term solution.

GG: What would you say is the biggest barrier you’ve run up against in maintaining balance? How did you surpass it?
MG: Working outside silos is an on-going challenge. It’s hard and that ‘s why people don’t do it very often. It is easier for me to close my door and just worry about my work. If you take a collaborative approach, now I have to worry about everyone else’s work and how it fits together to create systems that are mutually supportive. Constant communication is required, as is a true commitment to a shared vision.

A very simple example: if my CEO came in right now and asked me to create a frontline bonus program for employees, I could close my door, pull up old documents of other frontline bonus programs created over time and come out in a few hours with a sixty page document that is a perfect frontline bonus program on paper. But would that be successful or would it fail?

It would fail, because I failed to ask a lot of questions that require looking outside of my own silo. What technologies are necessary to pay these bonuses and measure these successes? Are the measures I put within the program driving the right behaviors to lead to the right outcomes? Have we communicated to employees how they will be rewarded based on the desired behaviors and why that’s important to the overall success of the business? Have we trained leaders to help connect this rewards program with the outcomes we want? On and on and on—you can begin to see all the systemic interconnections in just that one example. Unless I work with all of those constituents—unless I coordinate across that matrix—the program won’t be successful.

GG: OK, lightning round (:30 or less!).

1. Best book you’ve read that’s not about sustainability, but totally applies to it?
MG: “How Then, Shall We Live” by Wayne Muller

2. What’s the worst great idea you’ve put in place and turned out to be a flop? How would you make it better the next time around?

MG: We have what we call “Street Teams” in our organization. Traditionally Street Teams are a group of people that go out before a band hits the city and do things like chalk the sidewalks and post posters all around to gain excitement around the bands coming in to town. We have established street teams at all of our resorts and the idea is that they are the voice of our employee population—they are owning and fostering a culture around the environment and engaging our workforce further. We are utilizing them for outward communication and to gather information. It is a great idea, but it’s really hard to implement, organize, and to keep it alive, plus figure out how to fully leverage it. So, I still believe that it is a great idea—but it is certainly not optimized and it is a constant struggle to keep going.

3. The number one concept you drill into your students’ and employee’s heads about sustainability?
MG: Find and live your passion. You want to be able look back on your life and feel fulfilled in it. That is defined differently for each of us, but in order to do that we have to understand ourselves—what we believe, what’s important to us, what are we good at, what we like and dislike, what gives us energy. Once you find those answers and live them daily, success will result personally and professionally.

4. What’s one piece of advice you would give to an organization just getting started on a sustainability strategy?
MG: Help your people understand the potential of sustainability—that it is not just altruistic, but it allows you to do the right thing and make smart business decisions.

5. One piece of advice you would give to an organization ready to take things up a notch?
MG: Similarly, when you help your team see the greater potential in sustainability, you will have the foundation set to reach new heights. Again, I think it is about education, empowerment and making sure you are speaking to the triggers of your audience.

Mark Gasta is the Chief People Officer and a sustainability advocate at Vail Resorts Management Company. He is also a featured speaker at the 2012 Sustainable Opportunities Summit and share insights on driving sustainability via behavioral and organizational change with attendees, March 21 in Denver, Colorado. Learn more about the Summit at:

EcoDistricts ’11: Photos Are In!

November 10, 2011

Photos from the 2011 EcoDistricts Summit are in! We’re excited to share snapshots from the best moments of this year’s event. Many thanks to event photographer, Edis Jurcys Photography for capturing the spirit of a very invigorating and thought-provoking event!

Day 1

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Day 2

Vodpod videos no longer available.

EcoDistricts ’11 Scaling Innovation: Sarah Heinicke

October 26, 2011

The Lloyd District is one of Portland’s five Pilot EcoDistricts and is moving forward to build a green-minded, diverse and unique neighborhood with a strong identity and strong ties to sustainability with a business case baked in. District Sustainability Director, Sarah Heinicke, shares her vision and an update on how this neighborhood is tackling environmental and social issues, while seizing opportunities, all at the district scale.

EcoDistricts: Each of the Portland EcoDistrict Pilots are quite distinct in terms of neighborhood culture and circumstance. How does the Lloyd District differ from its counterparts in the program and what priorities have come out of that unique perspective?

Sarah Heinicke: The Lloyd Eco district is comprised of large superblocks, suburban-style office development and governmental uses. The board itself is comprised of leaders from those key stakeholder firms and institutions. Currently there is no representation from the relatively small residential population, or small businesses interests, though we intend to reach out to those communities.

These are the obvious differences when you think of Lloyd District compared to Foster Green, or South Waterfront. Those are material differences, but I think we have a lot more in common than not. The process of implementing these kind of transformative changes on this scale, the issue of board involvement, community advocacy, and the prospect of implementation in a bearish market are challenges all the districts face no matter what their mix.

We are just now initiating our project priorities discussion and although I don’t have a final list to share with you, I can tell you there is a lot of excitement to just get started on something. It’s my job to make sure the project mix is right—from big multi-year, multi-stakeholder efforts to smaller, simpler projects. Projects that are feasible, impactful, executable and have a funding mechanisms built in are the strong favorites. Another priority that has emerged is getting our governance structure in order sooner rather than later so that we know exactly where we stand and to approach the community for support, either in terms of mission or funding.

EcoD: You’ve been in your role for several months now. What kind of vision has your working group developed for the Lloyd EcoDistrict in that time? How is success defined now that you’ve become acquainted with the project, the stakeholders and their priorities?


EcoDistricts Summit ’11: PoSI’s Naomi Cole on The Compelling Nature of District-Scale

October 18, 2011

The team at Portland Sustainability Institute are quickly becoming the global experts at district-scale innovation. Their EcoDistricts model drives sustainable development in cities through stakeholder mobilization, social and infrastructure improvements across a neighborhood, and integration of best practices into the broader citywide cultural fabric. Three weeks from hosting their third annual EcoDistricts Summit, Program Manager Naomi Cole, talks about the increased value found in working at the district scale and why cities around the world are looking to Portland for a roadmap to sustainable development.

EcoDistricts: How does the development strategy change when working at the district scale rather than on a single structure?

Naomi Cole: It’s an entirely different strategy at a district scale. When working on a physical structure, the overall goal is pretty clear: a successful structure, like a new or retrofitted building, bioswale or energy system for example. When working at an EcoDistrict scale, there are potentially hundreds of projects and strategies to achieve the overall goal of environmental and social performance improvements.

At the district scale, we consider projects in the built environment as well as programs around people and behavior. And most importantly, the mechanisms for achieving these projects become much more complex because there are many more stakeholders than in a single structure. At a minimum, we have neighbors, developers, institutions, a city and utilities. Development at this scale requires a new process for making sustainable cities. We created EcoDistricts to provide a framework and approach for creating sustainable neighborhoods that includes new models of governance, assessment, project innovation, finance and policy.

EcoD: What is the most surprising unforeseen challenge you’ve encountered since working at the district scale and what solution or solutions have you discovered to address it?

NC: The process takes a long time. Stakeholder engagement and buy-in is, in many ways, the most critical step, and that process is dynamic and difficult to control. After we built our EcoDistricts framework we thought we’d be able to progress relatively efficiently in our pilot districts. But the process of engaging neighbors, formalizing partnerships, committing resources and building local capacity is very process heavy and takes time. Engagement has to be done right in order to get to the next steps of assessment and project implementation, which is where we all want to be.

EcoD: What is the single biggest driver of success for the development of an EcoDistrict? Why is it so important?

NC: There are two equally important drivers for success and they are addressed by our first two phases of EcoDistrict development: district organization and district assessment. The district organization process is what I described in the last question — engagement, vision, partnerships, capacity, and governance of stakeholders in an EcoDistrict. If this is done right, the next steps fall into place. The second, and equally critical, driver of success is an effective assessment process to prioritize projects. The biggest question once an EcoDistrict is organized is, “what are the right projects?” An integrated sustainability assessment across a neighborhood is critical for determining high impact projects, low-hanging fruit, and long-term ambitious investments. An effective assessment provides a roadmap for ongoing district sustainability improvements.

EcoD: Are EcoDistricts just a sum of their parts, in terms of benefits, or do the positive impacts grow exponentially when addressed as a collective unit?

NC: Definitely the latter. In fact, we often say, “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” to describe the value proposition for EcoDistricts. The intention behind EcoDistricts is a more integrated approach to developing our cities. By thinking district-wide across multiple areas of performance, we see opportunities for investments to do many things at once. Adding bioswales to sidewalks, for example, provides a timely opportunity to lay infrastructure for district utilities, saving huge capital costs by tearing up streets only once. A neighborhood building retrofit program can save energy while also improving comfort, saving on utility bills, creating jobs and increasing property value. We focus on the district scale because it’s a compelling size — small enough to innovate quickly but big enough for meaningful results.

EcoD: What drew you to working at the district scale? Why is this concept so enticing to you personally?

NC: Neighborhoods are the building blocks of cities, so it’s the next scale (beyond buildings) that we have to tackle if we’re going to achieve the kind of ambitious city and regional sustainability goals adopted around the world. My background is in architecture, and I was drawn to architecture because the built environment provides an opportunity to create better places for people and nature. After working on buildings for a few years, I quickly realized that we could only accomplish so much within the walls of a structure. The next opportunity for the sustainability industry is neighborhoods because of the compelling scale.

Social networks enable change, buildings have the potential to share systems, and public spaces are ripe to create community and provide ecosystem services. I like the complexity of the neighborhood scale because we are challenged to consider a range of social, technical, financial and political issues that don’t come up at the building scale, but feel more manageable to address than at a citywide scale.

EcoD: If you could paint a picture of this nation’s cities in 20 years — how does the EcoDistrict fit in? What kind of progress and results do you hope to see over that time as a result of district scale innovation and development? Is there an end game or set of goals PoSI is working towards?

NC: EcoDistricts are a critical step towards eco cities. They aren’t an end in themselves but an important step on the path towards scaling up what works in urban sustainability innovation to address the myriad challenges faced by metropolitan areas. So many sustainability successes are still seen as boutique projects and not transferable. Our goal is not for every neighborhood to become its own independent EcoDistrict. Through EcoDistricts, we aim to innovate at the neighborhood scale to figure out what works and what doesn’t. Then we hope to ultimately make a particular practice, whether it’s neighborhood governance or assessment or finance, become the new norm for how cities operate.

EcoD: What do you think is so compelling about Portland’s EcoDistrict model? Why are cities around the world turning to the Rose City for guidance in developing their own district scale projects?

NC: I think the thing that’s compelling about our work is that we’ve created a framework – a “how to” approach – for getting to sustainable neighborhoods. Every city is looking for this. And while we know what we’ve got now isn’t perfect, it’s the best of what’s out there and it captures lessons learned and case studies from sustainable neighborhood projects around the world. While many cities work in specific neighborhoods with ambitious sustainability goals, we’ve taken a broad approach by developing a transferable framework that we hope can be adopted by cities around the world. In addition, as we respond to inquiries about EcoDistricts, we find that cities are equally interested in our expertise as they are in our leadership in creating learning networks and a place to share lessons learned in creating sustainable neighborhoods.

Naomi Cole is the program manager for Portland Sustainability Institute (PoSI) and a featured speaker at the third annual 2011 EcoDistricts Summit, October 26-28 in Portland, Oregon. Learn more about PoSI and their EcoDistricts model at Find details on the 2011 EcoDistricts Summit and register at

2011 EcoDistricts Summit: Skanska’s Beth Heider on Building For 100 Years

August 26, 2011

Skanska VP Beth Heider believes in building for the next 100 years—not just the next 10. It’s a strategic shift in thinking that challenges developers and builders to look at costs over time and consider the future—as much as the present—bottom line when making decisions that will affect occupants and owners, as well as city and neighborhood vitality. With energy prices currently soaring and expected to rise even higher, performance becomes a key component of both building valuation and operational costs over time. In our interview, Beth outlines how the LEED system, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), continues to help us make more informed decisions going forward.

EcoDistricts Summit: How do you see EcoDistricts playing a role in the planning of sustainable cities going forward?
Beth Heider: From where I sit—using insights gained working for Skanska and with the USGBC—I would say we need to look beyond the drip lines of our high performance buildings and—in the lexicon of the Living Building Challenge—scale jump. We need to look at how buildings act in a synergistic way with other buildings around them and how they work within the infrastructure that lays the basis for a community.

If you look at the statistics, people are moving toward cities and more densely populated communities. I think we have a unique opportunity to take a look at what we’re doing in our communities from a sustainability perspective in a broader way. If we take advantage of that opportunity, it should have wide-ranging effects. It’s going to demand that we look at things in a new light and create political, legal, financial and design infrastructures that are different than those we have now.

As you know, LEED has a number of rating systems. LEED for Neighborhood Development (ND) addresses a collection of buildings and the infrastructure that ties them together at the district scale. Perhaps the greatest impact the LEED ND program will have is how it informs the other rating systems. For instance, the number of credits available for choosing a site wisely has increased in LEED 2009.

EcoD: The LEED platform has been a significant driver of both the construction and mainstreaming of more sustainable buildings. But so much of the day-to-day benefit after a building is “finished” comes from behavior change and interactions with a structure. How do we take the energy that LEED brings to a project and carry it out over the long term—so that we’re not just creating technically sustainable structures, but also using them efficiently? 
BH: One of the things we’ve learned in the green building movement is the importance of using a consistent lexicon—a consistent way to benchmark the energy and environmental performance of buildings. The LEED platform gives structure to the dialogue.

When we started to look at the performance of buildings—it differed from the modeled performance. The notable New Buildings Institute (NBI) study that was done a few years ago on LEED buildings revealed anomalies – something that you can only do when you have a basis of comparison.

EcoD: What did the results show or prove? 
BH: What we found is that there are three key things that influence the performance of buildings—and now I’m not talking about ecodistricts, but rather the individual buildings.

One is how the building was designed. Was it designed thoughtfully in the LEED lexicon? Were the points pursued part of an integrated strategy and appropriate to what the building was intended to do? How was the building designed toward environmental and energy performance?

The second thing is how a building is used by its occupants. That speaks directly to your question. It’s the same with cars. If you drive your Prius like it’s a Maserati—you’re not going to get great gas mileage. It works the same for buildings. Fortunately with your Prius, you have a video game built into the dashboard that provides constant feedback on how your actions affect the car’s performance. Toyota puts you in a position to understand the direct relationship between what you do and how that changes energy consumption—which means you’re in an informed position to make decisions. If you want to drive your Prius like a Maserati—fine, but there are consequences that have to do with energy performance and the connected cost of fuel.

The third component is how a building is maintained and operated. Again, using a car analogy, it’s no different than making sure your tires are inflated properly and your oil has been changed recently. If you have all of those things in play, your building—like your car—will function as optimally as possible.

All three elements play into the performance of a project, but the great contribution that LEED makes is a lexicon that allows us to have this dialogue. And that conversation has, in turn, informed how LEED has evolved. As we move forward, the Building Performance Partnership Program is in place to capture electric and utility costs (as of LEED 2009). This new data management platform allows us (USGBC) to link performance of buildings to the decisions that were made or attributes of a project. We can provide owners feedback about the relationship between the points they have elected to pursue versus how their building is performaning on an actual basis (rather than a modeled basis). And this is a huge step between connecting building performance with the design intent reflected in the LEED points system.

EcoD: Do you think there is potential for a tool that—similar to LEED—allows cities to measure their building performance on a municipal scale that would be publically available and encourage friendly competition?
BH: Having reasonable data that is consistent and well-gathered, and feeding into a common metric for municipalities is a good idea—though there are all kinds of challenges around how you verify that the information reported is correct and making sure there is adequate education so people are able to understand how to participate.

There is also the issue of voluntary participation—which is what the LEED program is—versus legislated participation—which you see in places like Europe—that mandates a building’s grade be posted on the building. I think there is a balance there that we have to get right in terms of ensuring broad participation but not creating a mandate that is invasive. We want people to participate in a way that is righteous and consistent.

One of the great things we’re seeing come together at USGBC is that ability to aggregate information. If you get a chance, go check out the GBIG (Green Building Information Gateway) tool, which is available as an app on your iPad or iPhone. It takes the information loaded into the USGBC platform for buildings in a growing number of cities, and lets you click on a building (as long as it’s under the LEED certification umbrella) and view what LEED points were pursued and its carbon index. That tells you where the building stands on its own accord, but also how it stacks up against other buildings around it.

The GBIG analysis lets you see the landscape and when you’re planning subsequent buildings you can then decide whether you’re comfortable with where your building measures up in the marketplace or whether you want to take a stronger market leadership position. You can see what that might entail by comparing your ideas to what has been done within the country or your region. This tool very quickly calculates that information so you know how to plan your next project. It helps propel the market forward and accelerates the ability of developers or owners to make informed decisions. This is the mission of the USGBC: Market transformation.

Emboldened by our own research and feedback from tools like GBIG, at Skanska, our Commercial Development group has decided that LEED Gold will be the floor for all our development projects worldwide. In some markets, we are exploring LEED Platinum and recently, a Living Building, because we’re able to clearly see where our buildings need to be now, but also ask where they need to be in the future, so that people will be interested in leasing them and buyers will be interested in acquiring the buildings.

EcoD: What’s the vision in how stakeholders will use the GBIG tool? Can it help drive district scale sustainable development? 
BH: Owners, tenants and developers need to see where they’re going next and what their portfolio will need to look like in the future. That goes for new and existing buildings. Informed owners, lessees, brokerage houses, banks and insurance providers now have the ability to make a decision about where they want to be 20 years down the road. They can see which buildings match up, not only with their commitment to the environment, but also from a risk profile perspective. Assuming foreign oil and energy prices continue to go up or should some kind of carbon metric be established, GBIG provides the market with crucial information.

When you’re in a retracting market, sometimes you don’t want to think about the future, because the now is difficult enough to handle. But buildings last a long time, especially buildings constructed for institutional clients and in cities, which are designed to last 50 to 100 years or more.

We need to be thoughtful about where each buildings is going to be positioned in the future. Its value could easily erode if other buildings around it are performing at a much higher level. The cost of ownership or occupancy could be so high that people won’t want that energy hog over there when they can have this higher performing building over here. If you’re planning for 100 years you tend to make different decisions.

The ability to provide “buyer beware” information on our buildings will make it easier for people to make informed decisions. I think there is far more acuity in the market than we like to admit. The market is much savvier in regard to the connection between energy performance and long-term value now and growing more so every day. One of the reasons is that the LEED rating system has been around long enough that we are beginning to see performance over time. Banks can base building valuations on precedence rather than projections—which is huge. There is enough LEED stock on the market that we are beginning to see building valuations rewarding those who are doing the right thing from an energy and environmental standpoint. And that makes sustainable engineering/design a more scaleable and viable option for any development—including district scale development—then if you’re doing it just because it feels good or is consistent with a brand.

Beth Heider is Senior Vice President for Green Markets at Skanska and the Chair Elect of the US Green Building Council. She will be a featured speaker on the Leadership Panel at the 2011 EcoDistricts Summit, October 26-28 in Portland, Oregon. To learn more about the 2011 Summit or to register, visit: For 2011 Summit and Portland Sustainability Institute news and updates, follow @PDXInstitute on Twitter and Like on Facebook. 

2011 Green Sports Summit—A Better Way to Play

August 13, 2011

Last week our team was fortunate enough to be a part of the inaugural Green Sports Summit. Hosted by the newly founded Green Sports Alliance, the Summit was a three-day catalyst for the dialogue on greening the sports we love. They like to call it “a better way to play” and we couldn’t agree more. It’s an exciting time for a environmentally savvy sports fan!

We just got in some incredible photos from Opening Night from Dabe Alen Photography—who graciously captured the evening through his lens. What stands out to us? The vibrant energy present in everyone involved in this movement.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

More pics to come from days two and three. Stay tuned sports/Earth fans!

EcoDistricts Summit 2011: Mark Holland on the Advantages of Neighborhood Scale Development

June 8, 2011

Social Enterprises: What can we do to take sustainable building practices from dots on a landscape (LEED building here, LEED building there) and create cohesive sustainable communities?
Mark Holland: The first step is to expand the focus on sustainability from a “building” to a community – which means adding several additional elements.  I have structured my approach to this around what we have been calling “The 8 Pillars of a Sustainable Community”.  Buildings are one of the pillars – but the other seven outline the scope of planning, design and development of a community:

  1. Land Use – complete community land use patterns
  2. Transportation – low impact transportation systems
  3. Buildings – green buildings
  4. Landscapes – multi-purposed landscapes (ecology, arts and culture, recreation, food production)
  5. Infrastructure – innovative green infrastructure – energy systems, water supply, wastewater management, stormwater management, solid waste systems.
  6. Food – local food systems
  7. Social issues – individual and social health (with facilities and programs to support these)
  8. Economy – local sustainable economies

The key in helping develop sustainable communities is first to consider all of these core issues of a community through a sustainability lens – and then if the focus is on buildings, then identifying how a building needs to be designed to support the full range of goals across all the community elements.

SE: Can you give us a working definition of a sustainable community?
MH: I don’t usually spend a lot of time trying to create succinct definitions of sustainability or sustainable communities – and the thousands of definitions in play today across the world show similarities and differences in how it is expressed.

I look at it as a sustainable community is a one whose prosperity, social system and physical ecosystems are being consciously addressed, designed, developed and maintained to remain healthy and prosperous for the next century.

SE: What does the public gain from planning done at the neighborhood/district scale rather than a building-by-building scale?
MH: Many efficiencies can be achieved by thinking at the district-scale.  The building is one of the most important building blocks in a community, but other efficiencies and benefits can be achieved by thinking about larger systems.  For instance, a building-scale energy system may cost everyone money, but a district energy system can be an important asset, keep energy costs to a minimum, and provide better overall performance, because it can utilize many different sources of energy and balance loads across different buildings that have different uses.  Likewise, a building-scale stormwater management system may be onerous, but one managed at a neighbourhood scale may actually save money and provide significant habitat and community amenity. The same district-scale advantages can be applied to open space, recreation facilities, food production, etc.

SE: What are major hurdles to implementing a district approach to sustainable community development? How do you propose we clear those hurdles?
MH: In a new “master-planned community” context, the district-scale approach can simply be put on the table at the beginning, the necessary utilities involved from the beginning – and it will naturally unfold.  In an infill/redevelopment context, typically the local government has to play a role, or various roles, including:

  • Ensuring there is a good neighbourhood plan that ensures an overall sustainability performance on all the issues I identified in the first question;
  • A multi-stakeholder consultation and choreography role;
  • A financial role using “late-comer” agreements for infrastructure and facilities where needed over time;
  • A utility role as either “the” district utility provider or as a partner with the utilities, often owning the district energy/water pipes that are in the roads between buildings or parcels with different owners.

SE: Why should developers and property owners be on board with the district approach to sustainability? How can it benefit them?
MH: Everyone can optimize their performance and profit when we work at a district scale – as not every building has to take on the responsibility to be self-sufficient or overly complex – and as such, everyone wins.

SE: Can you speak to the idea of making sustainability more approachable and less dogmatic? Why do we need to do it and how do you suggest it be done?
MH: I always take my development clients back to first principles of the core performance accounts which are why we are not sustainable, including:

  • Climate change / air emissions
  • Water
  • Ecosystem health and biodiversity
  • Materials – resources, toxins, waste
  • Sustainable food systems
  • Social needs and health
  • Economic stability and prosperity

I always recommend that a sustainability strategy be created for each project that directly addresses these issues and that directions selected in each of the issues I noted at the beginning (the 8 pillars) be addressed with the unique costs/benefits/opportunities each project presents.  As such, in my experience, no two sustainability strategies are alike.

This approach ensures we address the core sustainability issues in a manner that passes the “straight face test” for each developer, community, neighbourhood, regulatory context, financial reality, etc. Sometimes LEED or another rating system seems to make sense – often we don’t use them (or just reference them) as it’s better to spend money and effort addressing sustainability issues in ways that may not deliver points. It also does away with the concept of pre-requisites as we can make any project perform quite well on most sustainability accounts with a little work.

SE: Some might argue that creating EcoDistricts is gentrification veiled as sustainability. How do we ensure that sustainable districts are developed across the spectrum and remain available, affordable and accessible to all people?
MH: The arguments against gentrification are nonsense.  Gentrification is just a fancy term applied to any kind of redevelopment in an infill context that is occurring because land value is cheaper in older areas (which is also the reason why rents are cheaper and these neighbourhoods are often the home of those of low income).

The only way to stop gentrification is through government intervention and requirements to provide subsidized/non-market housing – which can be achieved in many different ways – and should be pursued in each neighbourhood in order to provide a balanced social environment. Examples of very proactive developers (such as John Knott and the Noisette Project) are increasing where developers are finding ways to support a decent percent of less-than-market prices through other means.

SE: Are there any projects that you feel particularly inspired by lately? Ones that have solved issues and are very likely replicable by other cities/communities?
MH: I like the Dockside project in Victoria.  I worked extensively on the Southeast False Creek project in Vancouver (LEED ND Platinum) and think it turned out pretty good.  I am always inspired by the Noisette Project I mentioned earlier in South Carolina.  I like the projects that are now integrating food systems centrally into their design (we wrote the book Agricultural Urbanism last year on this topic).  We have been involved in a few of these – most notably Southlands in Delta BC, that DPZ did the site plan for.  I also really like the Pearl District in your fair city.

The issue of replicability is difficult – as each factor in a development is always unique to that place and moment in time.  I think it’s more important to look for inspiration in other projects, but to build each project uniquely with the people, champions and resources that are available to that project and place.  I believe strongly in “project terriore” – the unique interesting eccentricities of a place and the people – that get imbued into a project.

SE: What do you hope comes out of the 2011 EcoDistricts Summit? What do our cities and the industry (for lack of a better word) need from it at this moment in time? 
MH: I think the most important thing is to start thinking at the district scale for all things – and to better understand what should be required of developers at a parcel/building scale – and what is really best addressed by the local government at the district scale.

We can achieve much higher sustainability performance and make money doing it if we address core sustainability issues at the district scale first – and then define the responsibility / role of each building/site within that district as we go.

SE: Why is the kind of dialogue available at the EcoDistricts Summit valuable for those developing our cities to engage in? 
MH: Most of the work done on sustainable communities is focused either on the building scale or at the city scale – and yet the district scale is probably the most important.  An event focused on this critical scale to 21st century planning and development is a great opportunity – and on the leading edge.

EcoVative: Dan Wildenhaus on Why Energy Efficiency + Best Green Building Practices are a No-Brainer

April 4, 2011

Dan Wildenhaus is a well-versed man when it comes to green building best practices and integrating sound building science with energy efficiency. He’s been a contractor, energy auditor, consultant, trainer, speaker and college instructor. One thing he’s never lost sight of is the role common sense should play in the building industry—and today he shares that point-of-view with us on the topics of energy efficiency and green building.

EcoVative: You’ve got first-hand experience—just how valuable of a skill set are energy auditing, weatherization and efficiency specializations? What’s in it for the builders, contractors and vendors who take on training in these areas?
Dan Wildenhaus: Understanding building science—how houses work—is the fundamental element of both energy auditing and weatherization. This skill set is also valuable to contractors and builders. An appreciation for how the various parts of a building interact and impact each other can lead to better buildings with fewer call backs, greater efficiency, potentially better indoor air quality, more consistent comfort and increased building durability. One of my former students, who happens to now be a builder once told me, “every builder should have a building scientist on staff!”

EV: Is there demand for these services? Has it grown or shrunk during the recession?
DW: The demand is still there, however it has been more of a requirement in up-skilling the existing work force. In certain parts of the country, those with high utility rates or other strong driving forces, there has been a slight increase in the demand on the market for well-trained folks. That being said, the construction industry remains one of the hardest hit by unemployment.

EV: If demand is rising for more sustainable homes, why do you think that is? Where are the biggest opportunities going forward?
DW: I think that buyers in general want more—more for the same price. What that “more” is will always be dependent on both the economy and culture. We are in a time and place where a focus on efficiency and responsibility are expected. This is what high performance homes are all about—delivering the home that does what it should do (be comfortable, good IAQ, reasonable to heat and cool, durable and safe) with a price point as close to normal as possible.  Other elements of sustainability are also on the rise in certain parts of the country. However these are more fluid concepts and with today’s economy, many of them are simply not in the forefront of most home buyers minds.

EV: What is the biggest opportunity missed by builders, contractors and vendors working on new or existing homes that would support their profit margins, make positive impact on the environment AND benefit their clients? How can they seize that opportunity?
DW: In my opinion, the biggest opportunity missed is taking advantage of programs designed to guide builders and contractors toward better built homes and provide third party verification. There are over 80 major regional or national green building and labeling programs in America. Many of these programs require third-party verification that the home or project has been done correctly.

A lot of folks ask, “Why should I get the home labeled? Why can’t I just install the features and let my clients know?” I have to ask them back, “Would you trust the word of a manufacturer about its product performance over the word of third-party?” Probably not. I want more than just my auto makers’ assurance that my new car gets over 30 miles per gallon, right?

EV: We hear a lot about LEED, commercial building retrofits and sustainable buildings under construction, but less about the benefits of greening your home. What are the biggest benefits regarding homes? And what kind of impact can a shift in building practices towards sustainability make on both our economy and public health?
DW: We hear less about homes because there are so many different verifications. But the benefits are still great.  Even if we take some of the more politically charged opinions out of the equation, building or retrofitting homes so that they cost the homeowner less to own and operate is a good thing—is it not?  You can extrapolate that to the societal benefits when you talk about re-using materials, practicing waste and water use reduction techniques, and creating neighborhoods where homeowners stand a better chance of keeping their homes since they don’t have to pay as much each month on bills and maintenance.

EV: Are there any reasons not to employ energy efficient techniques and technologies? Or have we reached the point where these kind of outfits and retrofits are a no-brainer?
DW: There are still some energy efficiency techniques and technologies that do not pay for themselves over the average time a homeowner lives in their home (about 7 years). That’s not to say these are not good ideas or should not be considered. And that being said, it should be common sense, when properly explained, that a great many of these features are no-brainers, do pay off and should be readily adopted. The folks that focus their construction on more advanced techniques are a great help as well, because they drive down costs for advanced features through understanding and awareness.

EV: What do we need to do in order to shift public perception regarding the notion that greener buildings are too expensive to make business sense?
DW: I think it starts with demystifying “green” construction. By focusing on high-performance homes and waste reduction, we can show folks that the cost of ownership (purchase price + ongoing costs) is actually the same or less than a “standard” home—plus the home does everything it should!

EV: What is the role of contractors, builders and vendors in helping sustainable best building practices, techniques and products go further into the mainstream?
DW: The folks that actually make the homes we live in play a vital role. By taking a chance on a new product in a demo house or signing up for a third-party verification program, contractors can be a primary driver. More than that, the people working on homes every day can help to inform the science geeks about what is and is not doable for a reasonable price. I think there is sometimes a disconnect between what is best practice and what is feasible at most homeowner price points.

EV: What will you be focusing on in your talk at EcoVative?
DW: My colleague and I will be discussing what is unique about high-performance homes and how they can be marketed for builder or contractors advantage.

EV: If you could get one point across to EcoVative attendees, what would you hammer home?
DW: Let’s work together to show everyone that good building techniques and high-performance buildings make sense and should be in higher demand!

EV: Why are educational opportunities like EcoVative important for the industry? What benefit do they bring?
DW: I think opportunities like EcoVative bring a unique variety of people together and provide excellent avenues for the sharing of information about integrating building science into practice.

Dan Wildenhaus is Technical Manager at Fluid Market Strategies. He will be presenting at the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland’s 2011 EcoVative Conference and Expo May 10, 2011 at the Holiday Inn Portland South in Wilsonville. EcoVative is a one-day conference for home builders and contractors to unite education and practice. Featuring lectures and training sessions with regional experts, EcoVative provides opportunities for Oregon CCB Continuing Education credits. For more information or to register, please visit:

For the latest on green building and EcoVative, follow the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland on Twitter, EcoVative on Facebook, or join the EcoVative LinkedIn Group!