This article was downloaded by: [University of California, Riverside Libraries]On: 03 November 2014, At: 10:34Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Building Research & InformationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbri20

Action for sustainability: preparing an African plan forsustainable building and constructionChrisna du Plessis aa CSIR Building and Construction Technology , PO Box 395, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa E-mail:Published online: 17 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: Chrisna du Plessis (2005) Action for sustainability: preparing an African plan for sustainable building andconstruction, Building Research & Information, 33:5, 405-415, DOI: 10.1080/09613210500218974

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613210500218974

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Action for sustainability:preparing anAfricanplan for

sustainable building and construction

Chrisna du Plessis

CSIR Building andConstructionTechnology,PO Box 395,Pretoria,0001,South AfricaEmail: cdupless@csir.co.za

Sustainable development, and by extension sustainable building, is an evolving concept that relies for its implementation

on the development of regional and local approaches and solutions. There is, in particular, a split between the definitions,

approaches and priorities in developed and developing countries. Subsequently, a process for creating an international

agenda for sustainable building is needed to recognize these regional and local differences. Part of this process is the

development of regional action plans for sustainable building and construction at a number of regional sustainable

building conferences. The key elements of an action plan for Africa, based on a discussion session at the SB04 Africa

Conference, are considered and placed within the African context and the larger international issues. The key issue is

the establishment of a solid knowledge foundation for Africa that will equip the public, professionals, development

agencies and governments with accurate and relevant knowledge generated within the framework of the continent’s

social needs, its cultures and its biophysical environment to guide their decisions and actions towards establishing a

sustainable built environment.

Keywords: capability building, information transfer, public policy, regional development, sustainability, sustainable

building, sustainable development, Africa

Le developpement durable et, par extension, la construction durable, s’inscrivent dans un concept evolutif qui repose,

pour sa mise en œuvre, sur le developpement d’approches et de solutions regionales et locales. On constate en effet

une fracture dans les definitions, les approches et les priorites entre pays industrialises et pays en developpement. Il

faut donc que la construction durable s’inscrive dans un projet international capable de reconnaıtre ces differences

regionales et locales. Il convient notamment de developper des plans d’action regionaux en matiere de construction

durable et de les presenter a l’occasion de conferences regionales organisees autour de ces themes. Les elements cles

d’un plan d’action pour l’Afrique, sur la base d’un debat qui s’est instaure au sein de la Conference SB04 Afrique,

sont pris en compte et replaces dans le contexte africain et dans celui, plus large, des questions internationales.

L’objectif majeur est d’etablir, pour l’Afrique, une base de connaissance solide a laquelle auront acces le grand public,

les professionnels, les agences de developpement et les gouvernements; cette base contiendra un savoir precis

et pertinent defini sur la base des besoins sociaux de ce continent, de ses cultures et de son environnement

biophysique afin de guider les decisions et les actions vers l’etablissement d’un cadre bati durable.

Mots cles: renforcement des capacites, transfert d’information, politique publique, developpement regional, durabilite,

construction durable, developpement durable, Afrique

IntroductionOn 18 September 2000, in its 55th session, the GeneralAssembly of the United Nations adopted the Millen-nium Declaration. The following undertaking wasproclaimed:

We will spare no effort to free our fellow men,women and children from the abject and dehu-manizing conditions of extreme poverty, towhich more than a billion of them are currentlysubjected. We are committed to making the

BUILDING RESEARCH & INFORMATION (2005) 33(5), 405–415

Building Research & Information ISSN 0961-3218 print ⁄ISSN 1466-4321 online # 2005 Taylor & Francishttp: ⁄ ⁄www.tandf.co.uk ⁄journals

DOI: 10.1080/09613210500218974

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

right to development a reality for everyone andto freeing the entire human race from want.

(United Nations, 2000, para. 11)

Africa, as the least developed continent, stood to be themain focus of this renewed drive for development, andSection VII of the Declaration specifically deals withmeeting the special needs of Africa. The Declarationset a number of goals for achieving a world withoutwant, including a significant improvement in the livesof at least 100 million slum dwellers, as well as theprovision of clean water and improved sanitation tohalf of the world’s population who currently livewithout these services. These goals were echoed bythe Johannesburg Plan of Implementation adopted atthe World Summit on Sustainable Development(WSSD), September 2002, which added adequateshelter to the list. Key to the achievement of both theMillennium Development Goals and the JohannesburgPlan of Implementation is the provision of infrastruc-ture. The governments of Africa also have recognizedthis and bridging the infrastructure gap is one of fivepriority areas of the New Partnership for Africa’sDevelopment (NEPAD, 2001).

This agenda should see billions of dollars flowinginto Africa for infrastructure development andgeneral interventions in the built environment.However, as The Cocoyoc Declaration (UNEP, 1974)and numerous subsequent critics have pointed out(e.g. Serageldin, 1992; Sachs, 1995; Ake, 1996;Mkandawire and Soludo, 1999; Harrison andHuntington, 2000; Cheru, 2002; Stiglitz, 2002), 50years of investment in infrastructure development inAfrica has failed to produce the rapid economicgrowth, democracy and social justice hoped for, andhad instead created widespread environmental andsocial problems. This history begs that developmentagencies, and all those involved in development, askone question:

How can a repeat of this failure be prevented andwhat can be done to ensure that the developmentthat will happen in Africa in the 21st century willbe sustainable on all fronts – economic, socialand environmental?

Building and construction is probably the sector thatcan play the biggest role in determining whether22nd-century Africans will inherit a continent wherethe miserable living conditions experienced today willbe but a bad memory, while still being able to enjoythe awesome natural beauty, abundant resources andbiodiversity for which the continent is famous. Thebuilding and construction sector, in partnership withits stakeholders, will therefore have to prepare itselffor shouldering this responsibility. As suggested bythe Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction inDeveloping Countries (Du Plessis et al., 2002), one of

the first steps is to determine a plan for action, aroadmap that will guide the sector onto a path that isnot just financially sustainable and only focused onsustaining development, but that truly supports theprinciples of sustainable development.

This suggestion was made with full awareness that thedeveloping world is not a homogenous entity. Thereare many differences between the regions, and differentcountries within those regions are experiencingdifferent challenges and are at different stages of devel-opment. Having suffered under numerous attempts athomogenization, first the colonial ‘civilization’project, then ‘modernization’ and now ‘globalization’,those living in developing countries are all too wellaware of the dangers of blindly adopting globalsolutions. Thus, it is accepted that while a commongoal – achieving a state of sustainability – is shared,there are different ways of defining and approachingthis goal, and that these ways can best be determinedat a local level (Du Plessis et al., 2002). It is thereforenecessary to cascade the development of such anaction plan for sustainable building and construction(SBC) down to regional and ultimately national levels.

To assist with the development of a regional Plan forAction for Africa, a special discussion session washeld during the SB04 Africa conference (September2004 at Stellenbosch, South Africa). The purpose ofthis paper is to report the outcomes of that session.

However, it would be useful to describe briefly thecontext of these discussions as regards the internationaldebate on SBC, as well as the state of the built environ-ment, the perceptions of and challenges to sustainabledevelopment, and SBC, and the current uptake ofSBC in Africa.

The international debateSustainable development, and with it SBC, is an evol-ving concept, and our understanding of the type ofresponses and choices necessary for sustainable devel-opment are continuously evolving as our ability tounderstand the complex dynamics advance, but alsoas increasingly more actors enter the debate. The cog-nitive framework about what was to become sustain-able development was already laid down in the early1970s by The Cocoyoc Declaration (UNEP, 1974).This seven-page document contained the fundamentalideas around which sustainable development wouldbe constructed in the years to come:

. meeting basic human needs within environmentallimits

. through limiting impact and consumption

. in a cooperative world of networked settlements

Du Plessis

406

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

. in partnership with nature

. in solidarity with future generations

While there is general consensus that sustainable devel-opment is about restructuring the relationship betweenhumans and their needs, and the environment withinwhich these needs have to be met, to one that has anet positive impact (with the understanding that thisis done for the benefit of both current and future gener-ations), there is considerable divergence in opinionregarding which approaches, priorities and driversshould take precedence (for an extended discussion,see Marshall and Toffel, 2005). At the root of mostof these differences of opinion lies the debate aboutwhich is most important: the environment or humanneeds (including such needs as maximizing shareholdervalue and achieving a high standard of living). Thisdualistic tension can be found in the debates aroundweak and strong sustainability (Turner and Pearce,1993), Brown and Green Agendas (McGranahan andSatterthwaite, 2000; International Institute for Envi-ronment and Development, 2001), and Shallow versusDeep Ecology (Naess, 1995).

The question that underlies these debates is: are wesaving the planet or the world, and if we are savingthe world, whose version of it are we saving? Thegeological record tells us that the planet can survivevery well without Homo sapiens. Thus, what sustain-able development intends is to save the world (thesociosphere and the conditions that sustains it), andit can rightfully be construed as an anthropocentricconcept (Worster, 1995). However, as the health ofthe sociosphere is determined in large by the healthof the biosphere, it is in the interest of humans toprotect the biosphere. Until fairly recently the manage-ment of the human–biosphere relationship was seen asa matter of determining limits and then living withinthese limits (e.g. ecological footprints, fair shares,sink and source capacities, Factor 10 efficiency) – inother words, how much damage can one get awaywith?

More recent thinking is seeing a shift away from theeither/or approach to one of development throughcooperative regeneration – people working withnature to restore ecosystem health and communitiesworking together to restore the social fabric.McDonough and Braungart (2003, p. 14) epitomizethis thinking when they ask us to imagine:

buildings that make oxygen, sequester carbon,fix nitrogen, distil water, provide habitat forthousands of species, accrue solar energy asfuel, build soil, create microclimate, changewith the seasons and are beautiful

i.e. just like a tree.

There is also growing understanding that sustainabledevelopment (and SBC) is a relative concept withdifferent interpretations and solutions depending onboth the natural and the cultural context (Hobart,1993; Cole and Lorch, 2003; Guy and Moore,2005). Thus, while there are certain universals (e.g.the five aspects of sustainable development outlinedby The Cocoyoc Declaration), the achievement ofthese ideals is determined by local conditions, includ-ing local cultural constructs, especially value systems.As an intervention in the sociosphere (changinghuman behaviour), sustainable development willtherefore require more than technological or economicfixes, and there are calls for the use and methods ofanthropology and for an integration of sociologicaland technological approaches (for a deeper discussion,see Hobart, 1993; Curwell, 2003; Rohracher, 2005).These debates are mirrored in the debates aroundSBC.

Global agenda for sustainable constructionWhile the terms ‘green building’, ‘ecological building’and ‘sustainable architecture’ have been used forsome time, the first definition of sustainable construc-tion was proposed by Charles Kibert during the FirstInternational Conference on Sustainable Constructionin Tampa, Florida, US, in 1994:

Sustainable construction is the creation andresponsible management of a healthy builtenvironment based on resource efficient andecological principles

(cited in Bourdeau, 1999a, p. 41)

Other definitions include:

Sustainable construction, in its own processesand products during their service life, aims atminimizing the use of energy and emissions thatare harmful for environment and health, andproduces relevant information to customers fortheir decision-making.

(Huovila and Richter, 1997,cited in Huovila, 1998, p. 7)

or as

a way of building which aims at reducing (nega-tive) health and environmental impacts causedby the construction process or by buildings orby the built environment.

(Lanting, 1998, p. 7)

The European Union defines sustainable constructionsimply as:

the use and/or promotion of a) environmentallyfriendly materials, b) energy efficiency in

Preparing anAfrican plan for sustainable building and construction

407

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

buildings, and c) management of constructionand demolition waste.

(UNEP, 2003, p. 7)

All these early definitions have an almost exclusivefocus on environmental impact.

In an attempt to create a global framework andterminology for SBC, the International Council forResearch and Innovation in Building and Construction(CIB), in cooperation with the International Union ofTesting and Research Laboratories for Materials andStructures (RILEM), The Construction EngineeringResearch Foundation (CERF), the International Ene-rgy Agency (IEA), and the International Society forIndoor Air Quality and Climate (ISIAQ) producedthe Agenda 21 on Sustainable Construction (Bourdeau,1999a, b; Sjostrom and Bakens, 1999). This documenthighlighted the futility of attempting to achieve acommon short definition, or even common strategies,and called for locally appropriate approaches torespond to both global and local challenges andopportunities.

The Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction alsopointed to a number of differences between developedmarket economies, transition economies and develop-ing countries. These differences related to interpret-ations of terminology, technological needs, marketemphasis, identified priorities, and the scale and typesof challenges and barriers to be faced. The reportalso acknowledged that there is some truth to criticismthat the international discourse on SBC showed ‘analmost complete absence of the developing world andits problems’ (Du Plessis, 1999).

The World Sustainable Building Conference 2000 inMaastricht called further attention to the need toinclude developing countries in the internationaldebate on an equal basis (instead of as merely the reci-pients of thinking and knowledge generated in thedeveloped/industrialized/high-income countries). Thefinal resolution to the conference recommended thatthe CIB initiate specific activities to develop sustainablebuilding in developing countries (SB2000, 2001).

As a first step to increasing the voice of developingcountries, the CIB, in partnership with the UnitedNations Environment Programme–International Envi-ronmental Technology Centre (UNEP-IETC) andthe Council for Scientific and Industrial Research –specifically the Division of Building and ConstructionTechnology (CSIR) in South Africa, developed anAgenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in DevelopingCountries (A21SCDC) (Du Plessis et al., 2002). After aprocess involving 21 people from 13 countries, the finaldocument was launched at the World Summit on Sus-tainable Development at Johannesburg in 2002 and

the World Sustainable Building 2002 conference inOslo, Norway.

The process of developing the A21 SCDC brought twolargely ignored perspectives to the foreground. The firstis the idea that SBC should be based on the ‘searchfor an ecological model that views both realms [thenatural and the built environment] as fundamentallyinterconnected’ (Adebayo, 2001, p. 5). The second,that ‘in its deeper meaning the sustainability concepthas ethical, moral and spiritual connotations implyingattitudinal changes and value reorientation’ (Shah,2001, p. 2). Thus, the A21SCDC defined sustainableconstruction as ‘a holistic process aiming to restoreand maintain harmony between the natural and thebuilt environments, and create settlements that affirmhuman dignity and encourage economic equity’ (DuPlessis et al., 2002, p. 8). This definition takes sustain-ability further than a mere reduction of negative impact(as implied in the earlier definitions) by introducing theidea of restoring the environment. It also brings in thesocial and economic aspects of sustainability. Bycalling for economic equity, it foreshadows theWorld Summit on Sustainable Development’s reformu-lation of the ‘People, Planet, Profit’ slogan of the triplebottom line, which replaced ‘profit’ with ‘prosperity’ –a much wider concept. More telling, perhaps, about thedifferences in worldview between the developing anddeveloped countries is the notion that the most import-ant social consideration for sustainability is humandignity. Dignity and respect should provide thecontext within which ‘human needs’, ‘human develop-ment’ or ‘human well-being’ should be addressed.

The A21SCDC outlined a generic framework for anR&D Agenda and Strategy for Action for introducingSBC in the developing countries. This framework wasbased on the idea that three sets of interdependentenablers are required for sustainable construction.The goals of sustainable development cannot be metwithout the use of science and technology that supportsthe principles of sustainability – these are the techno-logical enablers. However, for technology enablers tobe successful, supporting processes for stimulatingtechnology development, technology transfer andmanagement are required, as well as access to thosetechnologies. This requires the presence of functioninginstitutional enablers such as supporting institutionalstructures (e.g. universities, professional councils andgovernment departments), policy and strategies,educational programmes, financial mechanisms, andregulations and legislation. Furthermore, specificvalue system enablers, such as shared codes ofconduct and new ways of measuring value andreward, are necessary to bring about the successfuluptake of technologies and behaviours that are condu-cive to sustainable development. These value systemsare also inextricably linked to local cultural ideasof ethics and morality. Therefore, the A21SCDC

Du Plessis

408

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

concluded that this framework needs to be fleshed outat a regional level through the development of regionalAgenda or Plans for Action that respond to the specificneeds and priorities in each region, and that thisprocess should eventually be cascaded down to anational level.

While the A21SCDC provided a basis for furtherdialogue, it only partially addresses the problem ofmeaningful developing country participation in theinternational discourse. At the 2002 World Conferenceon Sustainable Building in Oslo, it was decided that aseries of five regional conferences will be held inAfrica, Latin America and the Caribbean, South EastAsia, China, and Central/Eastern Europe in 2004.This would allow the development of detailed actionplans to advance a sustainable building agenda inthese regions, build regional networks, and encouragethe sharing of locally relevant knowledge and experi-ence. The regional Action Plans will be presented atthe 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference inTokyo in order to place developing country needsand priorities on the agenda. The present paperreports the recommendations made at the regionalSB04 Africa conference regarding the way forwardfor SBC in Africa.

Contextual background to SBC inAfricaState of the built environment in AfricaAfrica’s built environment ranges from sophisticatedmodern cities to isolated traditional villages in deeprural areas. The continent faces a number of challengesregarding the provision of adequate housing, infra-structure delivery and dealing with rapid urbanization.In many countries a large percentage of the population,including those in urban areas, lives in either traditionaldwellings built with adobe or wattle-and-daub or inshacks constructed of a range of marginal and/ordiscarded materials.

The full extent of the problem is difficult to gauge, asreliable statistics about Africa is very difficult tosource and usually outdated. The last available data(1993) show that in Sub-Saharan Africa, 61.4% ofhouseholds lived in permanent dwellings. However,only 48.6% of households lived in housing complyingwith local regulations (UN-Habitat, 2003). In Namibia,for instance, about 50% of the population live in‘traditional’ homes, 14% in ‘other’ or improviseddwellings and only 37% in conventional brick-and-mortar dwellings (Mendelsohn et al., 2002). Even inSouth Africa, which is considered the most developedcountry in the region, only 63.8% of the population(or 6.2 million households) live in formal dwellings.Of these, 1.6 million households live in government-provided subsidy housing of a very basic nature anddebatable quality (Statistics South Africa, 2003).

The picture is not much better for infrastructure. InSub-Saharan Africa, only 12.9% of roads are paved,58.1% of the population has access to an improvedwater source and 27 out of every 1000 people haveaccess to a telephone. Capital expenditure (2000data) by governments in Sub-Saharan Africa rangesfrom 4% (South Africa) to 45% (Uganda) of totalexpenditure (Development Bank of Southern Africa,2003). However, when the same bundle of countries(based on data available for both years) are comparedwith expenditure from 1990, a decline in expenditure isvisible from an average of 23% in 1990 to 18% in2000, with some countries showing a dramaticdecrease in expenditure – Lesotho dropped from44.6 to 19.3%, Kenya from 19.9 to 7.5%, and SouthAfrica from 10.4 to 4% (Development Bank ofSouthern Africa, 2003). Africa is also receiving thebeggar’s share of foreign investment and developmentaid. In 1995, it received only 5% or US$5.7 billion ofthe total flow of capital to developing countries (Devel-opment Bank of Southern Africa, 2003), and wealthyAfricans chose to locate 39% of their wealth outsidethe continent, as opposed to external investment of3% in South Asia and 10% in Latin America (Collierand Gunning, 1999).

Indicative statistics such as these speak of Africa’slegacy of underdevelopment and need. Apart fromthe lack of infrastructure, there is the additionalburden of badly deteriorating infrastructure due to alack of maintenance or damage during periods of con-flict. It is therefore not surprising that infrastructuredelivery plays such a large role in both the prioritiesof NEPAD and the Johannesburg Plan of Implemen-tation adopted during the World Summit on Sustain-able Development in 2002.

Perceptions and challengesIn a needs-driven environment, there is real danger thatdevelopment initiatives will focus on quantitativedelivery, without due consideration of sustainabilityissues. This is of especial concern in a context wherethere is little knowledge and therefore little under-standing of SBC practices, as is the case in Africa.This lack of knowledge is further compounded by theconflicting interpretations of what constitutes sustain-able development.

Globally the proponents of sustainable developmentcan be roughly divided into two streams: those whosee it as a process of ensuring that current modes ofdevelopment can be sustained (e.g. the UN, mostmembers of the World Business Council for Sustain-able Development, almost all governments) andthose who see it as a new model of developmentbased on a fundamental shift in human consciousness(e.g. Schumacher, 1974; Naess, 1995; Sachs, 1995;Capra, 1996, 2002; Bossel, 1998; AtKisson, 1999,

Preparing anAfrican plan for sustainable building and construction

409

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

2001; Kumar, 2002) Between these two poles is a greyarea, exemplified by the work of Hawken et al. (1999),Elkington (1998) and others, who suggest a subtle gearshift that results in broad improvements to currentdevelopment models (e.g. the concepts of naturalcapital; Factor 10 efficiency, the triple bottom line,etc.), without questioning too deeply the fundamentalsof the current development paradigm.

In this first decade of the 21st century, it is the aspira-tion of achieving ‘sustained development’ that is enjoy-ing prominence, as evidenced by the UN MillenniumDevelopment Goals, the WSSD Johannesburg Plan ofImplementation and, in Africa, the New Partnershipfor Africa’s Development. The emphasis of these strat-egies is on development and economic growth: ensur-ing that the developed countries can maintain theircurrent lifestyle and that developing countries areplaced ‘on a path of sustainable growth and develop-ment’ (NEPAD, 2001, para. 67) that will place themon par with the developed world.

Thus, in Africa, ‘sustainable development’ is oftenequated with ‘sustained development’ and most res-ponses are geared towards putting systems and supportstructures in place to support development basedon models followed in the industrialized countries.The recent SB04 Africa conference, as well as the CIBW107 First International Conference on Creating aSustainable Construction Industry in developingcountries (November 2002 at Stellenbosch) highlightedthe limited understanding, and therefore application,of SBC on the African continent. While a number ofresearchers have written about SBC in Africa, thefocus is mainly on the challenges facing Africanconstruction industries (Ofori, 2000; Ebohon, 2002;Smallwood, 2002; Watuka and Aligula, 2002),especially the ability of the industry to sustain itself.

Dlungwana and Rwelamila (2004) point out that manycontractors and other participants in the economy con-sider the creation of economic value (e.g. companyprofits) above environmental aspects (e.g. depletionof the ozone layer and forests) and social issues (e.g.the well-being of workers). However, there areadditional challenges that add to the slow uptake ofSBC. Two such challenges identified by Dlungwanaand Rwelamila are as follows:

Lack of comprehensive models, programmes andtools to assist in contractor development in termsof, inter alia, assessment, training and mentoring.Where they exist, the programmes are oftenhaphazard and unstructured, hampering the con-tractors’ development effort instead of helping it.

Lack of a balance between sustainable buildingtrade-offs, e.g. the creation of jobs using locallabour, has an impact on the quality of

construction products due to high labour turn-over. Quality can also vary due to the differencein the work ethic and skills levels in differentgeographical locations.

Given such a limited understanding of sustainabledevelopment and SBC, it is difficult to get an accuratepicture of the current uptake of SBC.

Uptake of SBC inAfricaAs part of the SB04 Africa conference, a regional BestPractice Awards competition was initiated in partner-ship with the African Union of Architects and theSouth African Institute of Architects. Built environ-ment practitioners from across the continent wereinvited to submit projects to an assessment processbased on the Sustainable Building Assessment System(SBAT) developed by the CSIR (Gibberd, 2002) specifi-cally for use in the African context. Submission couldbe done electronically and was open to not onlyarchitects, but also non-governmental organizations(NGOs) and communities. Nine projects were sub-mitted, of which six were deemed to fulfil the basicrequirements of a sustainable building according tothe SBAT model. While no entries were received fromoutside South Africa, two other projects (fromNamibia and Botswana) were presented during theconference, but were not entered for the awards.

Though disappointing, the lack of entries shouldnot be seen as a true reflection of the state of SBCin Africa. A number of projects were not enteredbecause the architects ‘did not have time’ or ‘foundthe assessment system too complex’. Others had tech-nical problems such as non-compatible computer soft-ware, or did not have access to an Internet connectionwith sufficient bandwith to do the electronic sub-mission. The language barrier between Anglo- andFrancophone countries also excluded all those whocould not complete the English forms.1 Furthermore,the bulk of SBC in Africa happens in donor-funded,NGO-driven, low-cost housing projects, and whilethese projects were not excluded (and some didenter), their project teams may not have been in thecommunication loop through which the Awards werepromoted. A later drive by the Holcim Foundation,which included the lure of substantial price moneyand visits by the Foundation to different Africancountries to solicit entries, resulted in just over 70entries from across Africa (D. Schoeman, personalcommunication, 15 March 2005).

The seemingly low levels of uptake of SBC, and theconfusion about what sustainable developmentmeans, is a cause for concern given the amount ofbuilt environment development that can reasonablybe expected to happen in Africa over the next fewdecades. Spencer Hodgson, CEO of the South African

Du Plessis

410

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Construction Industry Development Board, stated inhis keynote address at the SB04 Africa conferencethat a multi-faceted approach is needed to promotesustainable building for Africa (Hodgson, 2004). Oneof the key objectives of the SB04 Africa conferencewas to identify and prioritize the elements of such anapproach.

Sustainable building: action for AfricaDuring the SB04 Africa conference, a day-and-a-halfdiscussion session was held to identify the key prioritiesfor action in Africa. This section describes the out-comes of this session.

It should be stated clearly that this discussion sessionwas not intended as a replicable scientific study, norwas it meant to engage with the theoretical debate.The theoretical framework suggested in theA21SCDC was accepted as the point of departure,and the discussions focused on defining a practicalway forward. It was also not intended as a ‘mandated’political process with participants being elected stake-holder representatives. Instead, it was a voluntaryprocess that provided ordinary practitioners with theopportunity to identify the barriers they are experien-cing and suggest a way forward that would assistthem in mainstreaming SBC.

All attempts have been made to make the sessions asrepresentative as possible of the different Africancountries. The SB04 Africa conference was attendedby 134 delegates representing 21 African countries.Fifty-four of these delegates, representing nineAfrican countries, chose to participate in the discussionsession.

While the practicality of an African Plan for Actionmay be questioned, given that Africa itself can bedivided into six different sub-regions and has vastlydifferent cultures, levels of development and climaticconditions, there are two main reasons for focusingon a common action plan for the continent. The firstis the existence of the African Union and the New Part-nership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), whichprovides a common development framework for thecontinent, in much the same way that the activities ofthe European Union do for Europe. In fact, NEPADis seen as the main ‘instrument for advancing people-centred sustainable development’ (Dlamini-Zuma,2005). A common action plan stands a better chanceof influencing the NEPAD agenda. Second, despitetheir differences, African countries have a number ofcritical issues in common, including a scarcity ofresources for knowledge generation and sharing. Anagenda that focuses on the commonalities wouldenable the sharing and therefore optimization ofresources.

Methodology‘Open Space Technology’ was used to facilitate thesession. This methodology was chosen because it wasspecifically designed to surface and prioritize keyissues in complex environments in a participatory,democratic manner. Each participant at the discussionsession was invited to identify any issue or opportunitythey felt was important around the theme ‘Africa:Action for Sustainability’. These topics were discussedin small, self-selected groups and the discussions weredocumented. Participants then had the opportunity tovote for four topics to take to further discussions.These four topics were discussed in detail the nextday, again by groups that self-selected a particulartopic. The groups were then given an opportunity torotate between the topics, adding to the notes, andthe initial group consolidated the thinking. This pro-cess served to identify the priority areas for actionand go deeper into the specific actions required. Thenotes from these further discussion sessions are beingused as the basis from which to formulate a draftaction plan. This Draft Action Plan will be circulatedto participants and posted on the Web for commentsbefore a final version is presented at the InternationalSB05 Tokyo conference (September 2005) and distrib-uted to stakeholders both in the region and internation-ally. The elements discussed below are based on theauthor’s analysis of the notes from the discussionsessions and do not constitute the Draft Action Plan.

First steps to actionWhile it is recognized that there are enormous differ-ences between the different African countries, thereare also a number of common problems. The discus-sion session identified a twofold strategy, based onthese common problems as basis of the Action Plan.The first part of the strategy was the establishment ofa Knowledge Foundation for SBC; the second partwas the establishment of a champion agency thatwould drive the process.

Knowledge foundationA knowledge foundation consists of five basic elementsthat feed into each other. The starting point is the gath-ering and creation of knowledge. However, for knowl-edge to be of value requires that it be shared amongstpeers and transferred to others through educationand wider dissemination. This enables implementers toaccess relevant knowledge and apply it in projectdesign. Projects should be monitored and evaluatedand the results fed back into the process of gatheringand creating new knowledge (Du Plessis and Havemann,2004). Participants at the discussion session identifieda number of components required of a knowledgefoundation for SBC in Africa. Figure 1 shows the ident-ified components (discussed below) against theelements of a knowledge foundation.

Preparing anAfrican plan for sustainable building and construction

411

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Research collaboration and exchange pro-gramme. Due to a number of factors, Africa’sresearch capacity has fallen behind that of otherregions and many of its brightest scientists are workingoutside the continent due to a lack of funding andfacilities. To strengthen the African science and tech-nology base and generate knowledge that is relevantnot only to Africa, but also to local intellectual prop-erty, it is suggested that a programme be establishedthat encourages and enables research collaborationbetween researchers working within Africa andbetween African research institutes and researchersfrom countries dealing with similar problems in boththe developed and developing regions of the world.

Information portal. There is a critical need for aregularly maintained, easily accessible source of infor-mation that can be used by practitioners, educators,and other interested parties such as clients, localgovernment and funding agencies. The proposed infor-mation portal would provide, inter alia:

. access to tools, guidelines and Best Practiceexamples relevant to Africa

. regional database of accredited ‘green building’practitioners

. information about funding opportunities andprogrammes

. news about training courses, events and newpublications

. network of related information sources withinother developing countries and countries withsimilar climatic conditions

Educationand trainingprogramme. A three-prongededucation and training programme is required. Thefirst leg would be to introduce SBC as an integralpart of built environment courses taught at tertiaryinstitutions through the development of new curriculamonitored by professional bodies responsible for inter-national accreditation such as the International Unionof Architects. The second would be the development ofcontinued professional development courses thatwould provide a credible accreditation system for‘green’ building professionals. The third is a basic edu-cation programme for other stakeholders such as localgovernment and suppliers. Du Plessis and Havemann(2004) provide a more detailed framework for suchan education and training programme.

Outreach and awareness raising programmes. Topromote SBC with the general public that eventuallyconstitutes the client base, a number of publicawareness campaigns or outreach programmes weresuggested. These ranged from programmes in schoolsand the media (e.g. magazine articles or televisionprogrammes) to low-level activism such as the prep-aration of ‘pester questionnaires’ with which tointerrogate material suppliers and even developers,placing pressure on them to improve their offerings.

Building support centres. Building support centreswould provide the public with technical assistance in

Figure 1 Elements of a knowledge foundation

Du Plessis

412

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

retrofitting existing and building new buildings toimprove their sustainability. This was seen as a particu-larly valuable tool in Africa where the majority ofhouses are owner-built. Such building support centreswould also act as training centres and can be linkedto existing NGO activities, or run as part of a commu-nity service programme for built environment gradu-ates and the tertiary training institutions.

Assessment, rating and labelling systems. To facili-tate the application of knowledge developed, as wellas the monitoring and evaluation of SBC assessment,rating and labelling systems specific to Africa arerequired. Although the CSIR has developed anassessment system (Gibberd, 2002) suitable for use inAfrica, it relies on the further development of indi-cators specific to the challenges experienced on thecontinent. There is also currently no system for ratingand labelling building components and materialsexcept that developed in the industrialized countries.In most cases the development of these tools does notrequire new frameworks, but rather detailed researchto determine specific values related to manufactur-ing processes and the performance of materials andcomponents in the various climatic conditions of thecontinent.

Best practice recognition scheme. The final elementto be developed is a Best Practice recognition scheme tocapture and share knowledge between practitioners,evaluate the impact of the Knowledge Foundationand generate new knowledge.

Sustainable buildingand construction championEstablishing a knowledge foundation for SBC in Africais going to require a coordinated approach with dedi-cated human and financial resources. To drive thisprocess, it was suggested that an SBC ‘champion’body be created to take the A21SCDC forward inAfrica. In the medium- to long-term, this championwould be tasked with ensuring that SBC is taken upand pursued not only in the development of researchagenda, but also in strategic planning, policy formu-lation and other decision-making fora. In the short-term, the champion will be required to establish anetwork of stakeholders and partnerships with a viewto furthering the development of a sustainable builtenvironment. In doing so, the champion would berequired to lay the foundations for knowledge develop-ment as a first priority

While the structure of such a body is not clear, it couldbe coordinated by knowledge organizations such as theDevelopment Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) or theCSIR in South Africa, or it could be a network ofregional champions such as DBSA, CSIR, RIDA in

Rwanda, etc., and the regional professional associ-ations. The main functions of such a body could be to:

. manage the information portal

. solicit funding for and coordinate the knowledgefoundation programme of work outlined above

. build regional and international partnerships

. prepare reviews of the state of SBC in the differentsub-regions and sectors

. identify priority areas for intervention

. monitor and develop if necessary, the variousassessment, rating and labelling schemes, as wellas the content of new curricula

. manage the Best Practice programme and database

For such a body to be effective, it will have to be recog-nized by the African Union and work closely with therelevant NEPAD structures, especially science andtechnology, energy, and infrastructure development.

ConclusionIntroducing SBC practices into the construction sectorin Africa will require an approach that takes intoaccount regional needs and priorities, and that drawson local initiatives. This paper sketched the com-ponents of an Action Plan for mainstreaming SBC inAfrica, as surfaced during a workshop at the SB04Africa Conference, South Africa. The crux of the planis the establishment of a solid knowledge foundationfor Africa that will equip the public, professionals,development agencies and governments with accurateand relevant knowledge, generated within the frame-work of the continent’s social needs, its cultures andits biophysical environment, to guide their decisionsand actions towards establishing a sustainable builtenvironment.

Given the many obstacles facing the implementation ofthe proposals outlined in this document, a strong anddedicated champion will be required that can elicitthe following pledges from all stakeholders:

. commitment to adopt sustainable development asthe underlying foundation of their work

. encouragement through the acknowledgement andsharing of innovation and good and Best Practice

. assistance in creating an enabling environmentthrough a frank and open sharing of knowledge,regulatory and financial support, and cooperationin training and knowledge generation

Preparing anAfrican plan for sustainable building and construction

413

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Improving the quality of life in Africa in a mannerthat supports true sustainable development is goingto require not only huge investments, but also asound knowledge base from which to work.Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni (2004) recog-nized this when he said that one of the most importantfactors to be addressed is to build up the humanresources of the continent, and especially the scienceand technology base. And he is prepared to makesome sacrifices to do this:

I intend to cause a revolution by generously sup-porting scientists. Scientists must be paid well toremain at home. . . . It does not matter if the pre-sident does not have the highest salary. Let thescientists earn the most even if I, as presidentreceive much less.

That is the kind of commitment that is required ifAfrica is going to harness its huge resources to liftitself out of poverty and underdevelopment. Thebiggest challenge is to make sure that decision-makers such as Museveni and all the layers filteringdown to the ground have the knowledge that willensure the continent embarks on a path of sustainable,not just sustained, development, and that is the aim ofthe proposed action plan for SBC in Africa.

AcknowledgementsThe author thanks the Development Bank of SouthernAfrica for its generous support for the preparation ofthe African Plan for Action, and particularly Mr GlennHavemann, DBSA, for insightful comments andcontributions to the thinking behind the knowledgefoundation. Gratitude is also due to the anonymousreviewers who suggested a number of meaningfuladditions.

Note1While the conference itself was simultaneously translated, therewas no additional funding available to translate the SBATspreadsheets.

ReferencesAdebayo, A. (2001) Sustainable Construction in Africa

(available at: http://www.sustainablesettlement.co.za/policy/postionpapers.html).

Ake, C. (1996) Democracy and Development in Africa, Brook-ings Institution, Washington, DC.

AtKisson, A. (1999) Believing Cassandra, Green, White RiverJunction, VT.

AtKisson, A. (2001) Sustainability is Dead – Long LiveSustainability (available at: http://www.atkisson.com/pubs/Manifesto-AtK2001.pdf) (accessed on 16 July 2004).

Bossel, H. (1998) Earth at a Crossroads, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, UK.

Bourdeau, L. (ed.) (1999a) Agenda 21 on Sustainable Construc-tion. Report No. 237, CIB, Rotterdam.

Bourdeau, L. (1999b) Sustainable development and the future ofconstruction: a comparison of visions from various countries.Building Research & Information, 27(6), 355–367.

Capra, F. (1996) The Web of Life, Flamingo, London.Capra, F. (2002) The Hidden Connections, HarperCollins,

London.Cheru, F. (2002) African Renaissance, David Philip, Cape Town.Cole, R.J. and Lorch, R. (eds) (2003) Buildings, Culture and

Environment, Blackwell, Oxford.Collier, P. and Gunning, J.W. (1999) Explaining African economic

performance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3), 3–22.Curwell, S. (2003) Afterword: towards a new social contract?, in

Cole, R.J. and Lorch, R. (eds): Buildings, Culture andEnvironment, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 375–393.

Development Bank of Southern Africa (2003) DevelopmentReport 2003, DBSA, Johannesburg.

Dlamini-Zuma, N. (2005) Opening Statement by the Minister ofForeign Affairs of the Republic of South Africa, at the SouthAfrica–African Union–Caribbean Diaspora Conference,Kingston, Jamaica, 17 March.

Dlungwana, W.S. and Rwelamila, P.D. (2004) Contractor devel-opment models for promoting sustainable building – a casefor developing management capabilities of contractors, inProceedings of Sustainable Building 2004 – Africa, 13–18September 2004, Stellenbosch, South Africa.

Du Plessis, C. (1999) Sustainable development demands dialoguebetween developed and developing worlds. BuildingResearch & Information, 27(6), 379–390.

Du Plessis, C. and Havemann, G. (2004) An African plan foraction for sustainable building & construction – the first pri-ority. Akani, July (available at: http://www.buildnet.co.za/akani/2004/jul/pdfs/sb04_discussion_paper.pdf).

Du Plessis, C., Adebayo, A., Ebohon, O.J. et al. (2002) Agenda 21for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries, CIB/UNEP, Pretoria (available at: http://www.sustainablesettle-ment.co.za/policy).

Ebohon, O.J. (2002) Institutional aspects of construction indus-try development: a poignant dilemma for Sub-SaharaAfrica, in Proceedings of the 1st International Conferenceof CIB Work Group 107, Creating a Sustainable Construc-tion Industry in Developing Countries, 11–13 November2002, South Africa.

Elkington, J. (1998) Cannibals with Forks, New Society Publ.,Gabriola Island, BC.

Gibberd, J. (2002) The sustainable building assessment tool asses-sing how buildings can support sustainability in developingcountries (available at: http://www.buildnet.co.za/akani/2002/nov/gibberd_sandton.pdf).

Guy, S. and Moore, S.A. (eds) (2005) Sustainable Architectures,E&FN Spon, New York.

Harrison, L.E. and Huntington, S.P. (eds) (2000) CultureMatters;How Values Shape Human Progress, Basic, New York.

Hawken, P., Lovins, A. and Lovins, L.H. (1999) Natural Capital-ism, Back Bay, New York.

Hobart, M. (ed.) (1993) An Anthropological Critique of Devel-opment, Routledge, London.

Hodgson, S. (2004) Towards a sustainable South Africanconstruction industry, in Proceedings of Sustainable Build-ing 2004 – Africa, 13–18 September 2004, Stellenbosch,South Africa (available at: http://www.sustainablesettlement.co.za/policy/postionpapers.html).

Huovila, P. (1998) Sustainable Construction in Finland in 2010.Report 2, in CIB (1998) Sustainable Development and theFuture of Construction. A Comparison of Visions fromVarious Countries. Report No. 225, CIB, Rotterdam.

Huovila, P. and Richter, C. (1997) Life cycle building designin 2010, in Proceedings of the 11th International Conferenceon Engineering Design ICED 97, Tampere, Finland, August1997, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Vol. 2,pp. 635–643.

Du Plessis

414

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14

International Institute for Environment and Development (2001)Reconciling the ‘Green’ and ‘Brown’ Agendas for UrbanEnvironmental Improvement’. Briefing Paper 6, in UrbanEnvironmental Improvement and Poverty Reduction, IIEDHuman Settlements Programme, London.

Kumar, S. (2002) You Are Therefore I Am: A Declaration ofDependence, Green, Dartington.

Lanting, R. (1998) Sustainable Construction in the Netherlands.Report 9, in CIB (1998) Sustainable Development and theFuture of Construction. A Comparison of Visions fromVarious Countries. Report No. 225, CIB, Rotterdam.

Marshall, J.D. and Toffel, M.W. (2005) Framing the elusiveconcept of sustainability: a sustainability hierarchy.Environ-mental Science and Technology, 39(3), 673–682.

McDonough, W. and Braungart, M. (2003) Towards a sustainingarchitecture for the 21st century: the promise of cradle-to-cradle design. UNEP Industry and Environment, April–September, 13–16.

McGranahan, G. and Satterthwaite, D. (2000) Environmentalhealth and ecological sustainability: reconciling the Brownand Green agendas in urban development, in Pugh, C.(ed.): Sustainable Cities in Developing Countries, Earthscan,London, pp. 73–90.

Mendelsohn, J., Jarvis, A., Roberts, C. and Robertson, T. (2002)Atlas of Namibia. David Philip, Windhoek (available at:http://www.dea.met.gov.na).

Mkandawire, T. and Soludo, C. (1999) Our Continent, OurFuture: African Perspectives on Structural Adjustment,Africa World Press, Trenton, NJ.

Museveni, Y. (2004) Speech given at the Conference for AfricanMinisters of Finance, Planning and Economic Development,18 May 2004, Kampala, Uganda, quoted in Uganda: Scien-tists should be well paid. TWAS Newsletter, 16(3/4).

Naess, A. (1995) The shallow and the deep, long-range ecologymovements: a summary, in Sessions, G. (ed.): DeepEcology for the 21st Century, Shambala, Boston, MA, pp.151–155.

NEPAD (2001) Constitutive Act of the African Union and theNew Partnership for Africa’s Development, South AfricanDepartment of Foreign Affairs, Pretoria.

Ofori, G. (2000) Challenges of construction industries in develop-ing countries: lessons from various countries, in Proceedingsof the 2nd International Conference of the CIB Task Group29 (TG 29): Construction in Developing Countries, Gabor-one, Botswana, 15–17 November, pp. 1–11.

Rohracher, H. (2005) Social research on energy-efficient buildingtechnologies: towards a sociotechnical integration, in Guy, S.and Moore, S.A. (eds): Sustainable Architectures, E&FNSpon, New York, pp. 201–218.

Sachs, W. (1995) Global ecology and the shadow of ‘develop-ment, in Sessions, G. (ed.): Deep Ecology for the 21stCentury, Shambala, Boston, MA, pp. 428–444.

SB2000 (2001) Closing Document SB2000, Sustainable Building,1, 19.

Schumacher, E.F. (1974) Small is Beautiful, Sphere–Abacus,London.

Serageldin, I. (1992) The challenge of a holistic vision: culture,empowerment and the development paradigm, in Serageldin,I. and Tabaroff, J. (eds): Proceedings: Culture and Develop-ment in Africa, World Bank, Washington, DC, 2–3 April1992, pp. 15–32.

Shah, K. (2001) Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction inDeveloping Countries – The Indian Case (available at: http://www.sustainablesettlement.co.za/policy/positionpapers.html)

Sjostrom, C. and Bakens, W. (1999) CIB Agenda 21 for sustain-able construction: why, how and what. Building Research &Information, 27(6), 348–354.

Smallwood, J.J. (2002) Performance improvement in SouthAfrican construction, in Creating a Sustainable Construc-tion Industry in Developing Countries, 1st InternationalConference, 11–13 November 2002. CIB W107, SouthAfrica.

Statistics South Africa (2003) Census 2001, Pretoria (available at:http://www.statssa.co.za).

Stiglitz, J. (2002) Globalization and its Discontents, Norton,New York.

Turner, R.K. and Pearce, D.W. (1993) Sustainable econo-mic development: economic and ethical principles, inBarbier, E. (ed.): Economics and Ecology: NewFrontiers and Sustainable Development, Chapman & Hall,London.

UN-Habitat (2003) The Challenge of Slums: Global Report onHuman Settlements 2003, Earthscan, London.

UNEP (1974) The Cocoyoc Declaration. UNEP/UNCTAD Sym-posium on Patterns of Resource Use, Environment andDevelopment Strategies, Cocoyoc, Mexico, 8–12 October.United Nations General Assembly, 29th Session, SecondCommittee, Agenda item 46. A/C.2/292.

UNEP (2003) Sustainable building and construction: factsand figures. UNEP Industry and Environment, April–September, 5–8.

United Nations (2000) United Nations Millennium Declaration.General Assembly Resolution 55/2, 18 September 2000,United Nations, New York.

Watuka, J. and Aligula, E.M. (2002) Sustainable constructionpractices in the Kenyan construction industry: the need fora facilitative regulatory environment, in Creating a Sustain-able Construction Industry in Developing Countries, 1stInternational Conference, 11–13 November 2002. CIBW107, South Africa.

Worster, D. (1995) The shaky ground of sustainability, in Ses-sions, G. (ed.): Deep Ecology for the 21st Century, Sham-bala, Boston, MA, pp. 417–427.

Preparing anAfrican plan for sustainable building and construction

415

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a, R

iver

side

Lib

rari

es]

at 1

0:34

03

Nov

embe

r 20

14