More from the BuilderScrap.com team about measuring sustainability….

Q: How do you think progress should be measured against the targets? Who should be responsible for measuring, evaluating and reporting on the actions of both Government and industry in moving towards the targets?

1. There was a very broad spectrum of suggestions as to what type of organisation should coordinate the delivery of the Strategy. However, the majority of the respondents favoured an independent objective body to hold Government and industry to account. It would need to have strong links to the industry and an understanding of the issues of sustainability.
Suggestions included the Strategic Forum for Construction, the Sustainable Development Commission, Centres for Excellence, the National Audit Office, the Environment Agency, Learning and Skills Councils, CABE (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment) and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. A number of respondents also requested that whoever undertook the task, there should be a dedicated resource to co-ordinate, encourage and drive
progress.

2. Others suggested an independent body at national level with Trade Associations monitoring the performance of individual sectors. A role for the Regional Development Agencies was suggested, with the National Audit Office providing verification. Some respondents suggested that local authorities should be responsible for monitoring their own buildings
through the reintroduction of appropriate Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI) or the introduction of KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) and inclusion within the Audit Commission’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment which annually assesses the performance of local authorities.

3. Some suggested that delivery of the Strategy (or of its key targets) should be included in Public Service Agreements for relevant departments.

4. A number of respondents suggested that each organisation should measure its own performance and report progress annually (possibly to Government). Some suggested that these reports should be validated by an independent third party.

5. Some suggested the Strategy should set the context for the targets and describe the mechanisms for monitoring performance; and that Government should lead by example, set appropriate targets to reduce its overall impact and report progress publicly.

6. Whilst most favoured voluntary KPIs, a small number favoured imposition by regulation.

7. Some respondents said they would welcome the adoption of a standardised approach to KPIs. The work of Constructing Excellence on KPIs and the Construction Project Information Committee in developing the Uniclass system were seen as helpful. KPIs such as these, combined with the effective application of the Office of Government Commerce’s
Common Minimum Standards, validated by appropriate independent bodies across the public sector, could have a significant impact.

8. Others proposed a thorough review of construction industry KPI data, with greater focus on environmental and socio-economic indicators and sustainable communities. This was an area where Government guidance might help.