Introducing the qualitative performance gap: stories about a sustainable building

Rethinking Performance Gaps: A Regenerative Sustainability Approach to Built Environment Performance Assessment

“…One regenerative sustainability building that has been the subject of much study is the Centre for Interactive Sustainability at the University of British Columbia in Canada. Research indicates that the net positive environmental goals are less easily achieved than the human goals [15][16][17]. A crucial consideration is that regenerative approaches are systems-based and are characterized by inherently unpredictable emergent properties, thus exhibiting levels of complexity that are difficult to measure and incorporate in practice.…”

“…Gap B is the qualitative, social analogue to the quantitative performance gap discussed above, and occupies the Human Systems bottom half of Figure 1, noted as 'B': it is often present when comparing Pre-Occupancy and Post-Occupancy Evaluation results. The Expectations Gap in the context of occupancy assessment is defined by Coleman and Robinson [17] as the gap in occupant expectations: it lies between what occupants expect and what they experience in a building, and is expressed in qualitative feedback through survey and/or interview. The gap, summarized here, therefore describes differences between an assumed or predicted story about building performance as perceived and shared by occupants (based on prior experience, and sometimes influenced by information available about the building) and the dynamic, ongoing lived experience of it [17].…”

“…Cole et al [52] argued for the necessity of involved occupants, in the aim of re-contextualizing comfort requirements under climate change goals and building energy use [3]. To enable this re-contextualization, occupant opinions and experiences are ideally sought and valued in building design and operations, allowing feedback and feedforward to design stakeholders [17,[52][53][54][55][56].…”

“…The evidence for a qualitative performance gap can be seen in the form of disappointment and backlash, (including claims of greenwashing in the case of a green or regenerative building) [17]. Thus, there are two levels at which the qualitative performance gap has potential negative consequences: at the level of occupants, in which disappointment about building performance may affect their perception of their employer or the sustainable building movement as a whole; and at the level of designers, who rely on the good reputation of precedent buildings for continued success.…”

“…A particular instance of the Expectations Gap is found in highly sustainable buildings [62], where stakeholders' expectations (designers, clients, and those with an invested interest in the building's performance) become codified in promotional material, which then influences occupant expectations, a finding supported by other researchers [53,54]. Conceived of as 'bids' for social or normative alignment [63], occupant stories about the qualities of built space constitute a powerful socially binding force, and have implications for the normalization of current and future building design [17,52,62].…”