Exploring the dynamic nature of the evolution of Building Environmental Assessment Methods (BEAMs): a call for a diachronic analysis of BEAMs

Abstract

The dynamic interactions between stakeholders from diverse backgrounds with interest in green building have led to the emergence of various collective groups of actors promoting different Building Environmental Assessment Methods (BEAMs). The corollary is the emergence of a wide array of competing, conflicting, and sometimes, complimentary BEAMs. Yet, relatively little attention has been paid to how these BEAMs have been developed– how the contentious relationship between actors over the meaning of ‘green building’ have influenced the content and development of BEAMs, and why stakeholders have coalesced into different groups promoting different BEAMs. Drawing on the theory of Strategic Action Fields we show how actors have jostled for position and engaged with each other to advance their interests and supported BEAMs that resonate with their core ideologies. We explain how the plurality of espoused definitions of green building, and actors’ strategies to promote and support a conceptualization of green building that serve their interests, have culminated in the presence of multiple BEAMs and a struggle for market dominance. We question what this contentious relationship means for the future of green building and the development of BEAMs. The paper sets an agenda for the need to explore the historical context from which BEAMs have emerged.