Posted: August 1st, 2023

Health, Productivity, and Wellbeing in Office Buildings

Health, Productivity, and Wellbeing in Office Buildings

Student Name

Course
Professor
Date
Table of Contents
Background 3
Statistics on Absenteeism/ Fluctuation 6
Financial Benefits for an Organization Utilizing Green Building 9
Sustainable Impact of Green Building 13
Building Features for Better Work Environment 15
Absenteeism and Green Buildings 18
Better Asset Management 21
Tenant Control 23
Best Practices on Sustainability: A Case Study of UK 24
Measure of Productivity Loss 27
Personal Factors 29
Workplace and Job-Related Factors 31
Physical and Health Factors 33
Assignment help – Discussion 34
References 38

Background
Buildings account for a significant amount of air pollution and more so the greenhouse gases which in return has a direct impact on the health, productivity, and general well-being of the occupants. Coming up with sustainable buildings that provide conducive environment has been and still is a big challenge for organizations, institutions, and individuals that seek to maintain general wellness. In the current era, the designing of sustainable buildings is such that they are more energy-efficient. In this sense, they mainly have wellness features such as rooftop gardens and fitness rooms that play a major role in the enhancement of job satisfaction, workplace productivity, and innovations thus making them more health-friendly. Subsequent research has proven that when both tenant and their employees are comfortable given that there is easy access to amenities that promote general health and wellness, the level of productivity increases which leads to job satisfaction . The demand for an urban work-play environment that meets the needs of the upcoming talents comprised mainly of millennials has led to the need for building with ample spaces where the employees can move around. Employees have access to healthy meals, ample parking, walking trails and electric car charging stations. Natural lighting comprised of big windows serves as both an aesthetic asset and as a means of minimizing carbon emission footprint. The green design helps to boosts the morale of the employees which not only help to retain them but also enhances their wellbeing and the productivity in their jobs. Further, natural lighting through large windows help to provide thermal comfort for the occupants and minimizes the use of air conditioners hence regulating energy use. A conducive work environment helps to minimize absenteeism which results in high productivity .
This report based on information from the Britain’s Healthiest Company (BHC) Competition adds to the evidence base on well-being and workplace environment profitability by exploring an interesting huge employer–employee dataset. Our gathered overview information incorporates business data for more than 80 UK organizations in addition to an exhaustive wellbeing appraisal of their workforce, including an expansive assortment of physical-and psychological well-being pointers for individual workers. Furthermore, the example comprises of 21,822 employees. Utilizing multivariate regression technique, I explore the relationship between an assortment of health risks and workplace factors in relationship with working environment efficiency lost because of absenteeism. I measure work efficiency utilizing the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire or WPAI-GH, which surveys productivity based on self-revealed general wellbeing and side effect seriousness. The inferences recommend that absence of rest, money related concerns and giving unpaid care to relatives or family members are contrarily connected with productivity.
Psychological well-being issues also tend to cause a significant loss in productivity, particularly as absenteeism. According to the current research, it is also possible to observe that employees with chronic and other musculoskeletal illnesses tend to have higher rates of absenteeism than those without such environment. A careful look at workplace factors (offices and buildings), it is evident that workers who experience workplace harassing report fundamentally higher levels of absenteeism than the individuals who are most certainly not. Additionally, more than 45 percent of those concentrated were found subjected to unrealistic time pressures, which I observe to be another critical reason for loss in productivity. Other workplace elements related with generally higher degrees of absenteeism were stressed relationships at work. Next to the previously mentioned huge relationship between certain productivity loss and risk variables in the workplace, a portion of the results are somewhat unreasonable. For example, smoking has not been observed to be factually connected with loss in productivity. Additionally, extreme obesity has not been observed to be identified with absenteeism. Here it is necessary to consider the cross-sectional nature of the gathered data. It is not possible to pursue people for a long time where the evidence demonstrates that obesity and smoking are related with serious wellbeing conditions, for example, cancer or cardiovascular ailment, the two of which are related with loss in productivity. In this manner, the discoveries possibly catch more momentary impacts, evaluated at a given point in time. Correspondingly, in our investigation, workplace factors, for example, an absence of control or deficient administrative or friendly help do not demonstrate any statistical relationship with workplace productivity loss.
This report ought to be helpful to policymakers and experts in recognizing the attributes of employees who are more in danger of work impairment. Our examination additionally shows the significance of work-environment factors on efficiency, something of significance to organizations hoping to improve their working condition and lessen its negative consequences for employees’ wellbeing and prosperity. Our investigation recognizes in more detail between elements that determine absenteeism. Based on the information, it is evident that different elements are somewhat contrastingly connected with absenteeism contrasted with presenteeism, demonstrating that policymakers and organizations might need to focus further on absenteeism and its related risk factors. Information about the efficiency of workplace health interventions and practices is yet developing and, this report cannot make direct recommendations about what sort of intercessions policymakers or companies should execute to improve employee wellbeing and prosperity. A portion of the results recommend that organizations which focus on wellbeing and prosperity at board level report lower cases of absenteeism, albeit more research still should be done into the viability of wellbeing interventions in the workplace.
Statistics on Absenteeism/ Fluctuation
The well-being and health at work is increasingly gaining public acceptance based on the impacts it has on organizations, individuals, and the society at large . A Black’s review by Dame Carol observed that there is a solid increasing evidence that the two are powerfully and closely linked and, on that note, must be addressed alongside one another . It was estimated in the 2014 UK survey that over 1.2 million citizen that worked during the last year were suffering from diseases that were prolonged by the past and current work environment. Almost a million of these tend to be new conditions which begun during the year. Roughly, 28 million days were lost because of business related sick wellbeing or injury . Black and Frost investigations on the UK workplace show that absenteeism result in the loss of over 140 million working days and 300,000 people resign from such environment annually due to ill-health . This puts the rough expense of ailment absence to British business at around £15bn every year . Likewise, organizations face noteworthy expenses not just because of presenteeism yet in addition from absenteeism. It is evaluated that absenteeism because of mental sick wellbeing costs the UK economy about £15bn every year .
It is estimated that 90 percent of the operating cost of any organization is based on salaries and benefits. Arguably, the productivity of the staff is of significant value and therefore, organizations should pay ultimate attention to their well-being and productivity . There is a direct relationship between the well-being and productivity of the employees and the quality of buildings. Buildings with poor lighting, air conditioning, poor ventilation, noise pollution, insufficient water, and air pollutants are likely to cause negative health impacts on the occupants hence resulting in high numbers of missed workdays in search for medical treatment . According to statistics, absenteeism because of ill-health causes a financial impact at the rate of 3% per employee in the private sector and 4% in the public sector in the United States. The United Kingdom suffers a loss of 30 billion Euros annually as a result of absenteeism caused by poor mental health. Australia experiences an annual loss of $7 billion annually and semi-absenteeism where employees may be at work but not fully functional due to health complications, at cost of about 26 billion dollars .
Over the past few decades, hastening innovative changes and new types of workplace organization have prompted laborers to accept extended obligations and more independence than any other time in memory . In spite of the fact that this has increased production capacity, adaptable present-day working practices have likewise expanded day by day job demands, expecting workers to perform multiple tasks and prompting expanded degrees of workplace stress and ridiculous time pressures . These advancements have not just prompted expanding levels of sickness absence yet additionally to the development of a marvel called ‘presenteeism’, when workers go to work while in sub-optimal health. It is assessed that presenteeism driven by mental wellbeing costs the UK economy £15bn annually . In addition, there is developing proof that issues identified with modifiable health conduct are ending up increasingly common, driven by smoking, an absence of physical activity, or by an ascent in obesity levels in the more extensive populace .This results to financial costs not exclusively to society yet additionally, more explicitly, to organizations as lost productive capacity. Considering such substantive expenses because of absenteeism and presenteeism, I would expect there to be a solid case for organizations to put resources into the wellbeing and prosperity of their workers. In any case, straightforward financial aspects disclose to us that organizations just think that its gainful to put resources into wellbeing advancement programs when the benefits exceed the expense of investment. For organizations it is pivotal to comprehend the immediate connection between efficiency in production and well-being. Precisely, an ideal investment level cannot be accomplished in case there is failure to come up with a comprehensive evidence base,.
Financial Benefits for an Organization Utilizing Green Building
Buildings take up large portions, water, energy, wood which translates to high financial cost in their construction and maintenance. However, sustainable, or green buildings make use of natural lighting, ventilation as well as making use of energy, water, and building material more effectively. Green building might be more expensive to construct that the conventional structures but in the long run, they have a vast range of long-term financial benefits compared to their counterparts. Generally, the benefits acquired from the use of sustainable building include lower energy costs, lower employee health costs, lower cost of operations, and minimizing the cost of maintenance. Organizations that make use of the sustainable construction requirement enjoy the benefits of minimized operational cost and maximum revenue because of enhanced productivity and enhanced job productivity .
The Centre for Built Environment and Lawrence Berkeley (CBE Berkeley) emphasizes on criteria that must be met for a building to be certified as sustainable . Sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere efficiency, type of materials and resources used, quality of the indoor environment, and the innovation credits are the six certification-criteria that must be met according to CBE Berkley, for a building to be considered green. Green buildings focus on the minimal utilization of energy, water, wood, and other financial resources and hence save an organization form a range of financial burden . Energy is substantial and accounts for a significant cost which can otherwise be minimized by the utilization of green buildings. Sustainable constructions make use of about 30 percent less energy compared to conventional buildings because of the utilization of renewable energy. Utilization of grid power is a key feature for such buildings and the use of natural lighting and ventilation also helps on minimization the amount of energy consumed in lighting and the use of air conditioners in the regulation of temperatures in the buildings. Non-renewable energy resulting from the burning of fossil fuels is also associated with air pollution which results in health complication resulting in a high rate of absenteeism and consequently low productivity . Solar power is the most efficient source of renewable energy that is associated with low utilization cost and zero environmental pollution hence serving the advantages of the low cost of utilization and promotion of employee health.
Therefore, there is a solid business case for investing resources into staff wellbeing and prosperity. The basic rationale is that viable interest in wellbeing and prosperity can spare an organization more in regards to lost productivity than the initial investment, a standard established by a few contextual investigations, prominently in some enormous UK employers . Ideally, a review by Boorman on the productivity and wellbeing of National Health Services (NHS) in connection with RAND Europe’s work reveal that the potential investment funds associations may make a positive staff morale by progressively embracing powerful strategies for initiating productivity at the workplace. That review assessed that getting lost profitability in the NHS down to levels experienced by great public sector performers (basically, by splitting lost profitability) would spare the NHS about £500m annually .
In any case, the idea of the viability of intercessions and projects and of logical components which impact well-being, is yet developing. Our involvement with associations partaking in the England’s Healthiest Company rivalry demonstrates that few measures returns on profitability or get it the viability of intercessions. There is, also, a lot of discussion on the most proficient method to gauge results, for example, profitability, albeit some evidence exists on a scope of mediations. The efficient audit by Cancelliere et al., for example, finds that intercessions, for example, occupational health programs, work pressure training for line chiefs and managers, way of life direction programs by email, and phone guiding sessions with emotional wellness clinicians give off an impression of being compelling in lessening levels of absenteeism .
Moreover, an ongoing survey for the UK government on psychological wellness and employment reports that intercessions based on psychological social treatment appear to be effective in improving employability as well as in keeping people with emotional well-being conditions at work and improving their efficiency in the workplace . So also, there is a developing body of evidence identifying with health programs , despite the fact that the ongoing systematic reviews by Buseman-Williams and Osilla et al. show that the viability of such projects is blended, and that they show up better at advancing individual wellbeing as opposed to more extensive company productivity ; . A few investigations additionally shed light on the significance of multi-program mediations , while more extensive evidence additionally exists concerning the way in which the workplace, for example, long hours or shifts Waddell et al. and other factors (for example rest) promote wellbeing .
Comprehending what is financially savvy for a given populace is significant however may not be the main barrier preventing companies from putting resources into staff wellbeing and prosperity. There is a typical recognition that bigger organizations may think that its simpler to make such ventures contrasted with smaller ones, that generally employ most of workers . Nonetheless, a RAND Europe research examining information over Europe recommends that in numerous nations, small employers really offer a similar kind of help as bigger ones . Administrative and national contexts are generally significant than the size and assets of an employer, accentuating the significance of behavior towards workplace wellbeing and prosperity.
Sustainable Impact of Green Building
Given that people spend a huge amount of their time indoors especially employees that work in an office setting, pollutant concentration indoors is higher than it is outdoors. On that note, it is logical to assert that indoor workplace environments have an impact on our health. Buildings have the potential for both positive and negative effects on this, and can alleviate the weight of outside contaminations indoors. More than 40 years of research on the indoor condition has yielded numerous bits of knowledge into structure related variables that impact wellbeing, prosperity, and efficiency. To address difficulties identified with vitality and materials, while at the same time giving solid indoor conditions, structures must fuse maintainability criteria into each part of design, operation, and construction. By definition, green structures center around limiting effects to nature through decreases in energy use, water utilization, and limiting ecological disturbances from the building site. Likewise, by definition, however maybe less broadly perceived, green building focus on improving human wellbeing through plan of healthy indoor conditions.
Sustainable buildings are constructed with less toxic materials such as low-emitting sealants, paints, carpets, and sealants. In most cases, composite wood is the most preferred material in the interior fittings . The green buildings are best suited with indoor chemical and pollutant source control which is inclusive of natural ventilation which helps to provide enough air circulation to the buildings hence helping to minimize pollutant air substances and hence promoting the well-being of the employees. Natural ventilation also minimizes the amount of electricity consumed to air-condition the building hence minimizing the amount of money the organization could have spent on electricity bills .
Better lighting through the utilization of natural lighting provided by the installation of large windows helps to brighten up the office spaces which create a good environment. Energy consumption is consequently minimized because of natural lighting as less electrical power will be required to light the rooms hence minimizing the cost of energy consumption for the organization . Efficient lighting has been linked to improved productivity as it plays a significant psychological motivation for the occupants giving them an ample environment to work in hence increasing revenue for the organization.
Sustainable buildings have improvised effective water utilization and recycling strategies which have led to minimal water waste. Organizations rarely experience the stress associated with water shortages or high cost of water bills due to their ability to effectively manage and recycle water. Proper waste disposal in the green buildings helps to minimize the emission of pollutant gases which not only has a direct impact on the health of the occupants but also reduces legal problems with the environmental watch bodies, by having a low carbon emission footprint.
Building Features for Better Work Environment
The construction of green buildings is more intensive than that of the conventional buildings and might appear to be more cost-intensive at the construction stage. The reason behind the assumption is based on the unique features that must be put in place in order to facilitate the use of natural lighting and ventilation, use of on-site renewable energy, efficient water utilization, and effective waste disposal. Whereas it is true that the features may incur an extra expense during construction, the rise of the green building has resulted in the reduction of the cost involved hence organizations should take the bold step of going green and incorporating the entire necessary features to meet the BCE Berkley standards .
Architects, engineers, and the entire teams involved in the construction process have a duty to focus on the design, construction, operation, and, maintenance phases in the building process to maximize on sustainability, performance, and to minimize cost-utilization. Inclusive of the features are; windows, sealing, ventilation, heaters, and energy selection. High-performance building envelop is utilized to minimize heat transfer between the inside and the outside of the building. The envelop is comprised of the exterior material covering the building which is inclusive of features such as windows, walls, roof, and doors. High R-values are desirable for wall and window insulation as they help to measure the ability of the material used to prevent the flow of heat. Envelops that are well insulated provide effective energy conservation as they help to regulate heat during winter and summer . There is no need to install air conditioner which consumes a lot of energy when regulating the thermal temperature in green building hence saving the organization money and creating room temperature that promotes employee productivity and well-being.
Appropriate ventilation is another feature for sustainable building. natural ventilation which can be through well-fitted wall ventilation or large windows helps in sufficient air circulation hence keeping the building free of toxic pollutants which works for the good of the health of the employees. Secondly, making use of heat recovery ventilators (HRV) helps to trap heat energy preventing it from escaping from the building. The air conditioners in the building will therefore not be exposed to work overload through air leakages hence helping to retain warm or cool air depending on the requirement and in the long run results in minimized energy demand and consumption.
Natural lighting is very important while constructing as it not only saves on energy but also boosts the work ambiance which has a direct psychological impact on the occupants by increasing their comfort and consequently their productivity . Natural lighting can be from large windows which help to provide daylight from the sun or translucent roof installation that allow light from the sun to penetrate the building.
Some simple installations such as gutters that help to harvest rainwater play a significant role when it comes to ensuring a conducive work environment. Harvested rainwater comes in handy where there are water shortages and hence minimizing occupant stress related to water outage such as what to flush the toilet with or what to water the plat with. Water security through harvesting from rainwater ensures there is sufficient water supply which also helps to run the cooling towers hence creative a workable environment for maximum productivity.
Solar thermal collectors are efficient as they help to collect natural energy from the sun which is used for lighting the building. The solar thermal collectors are used as alternatives to the photovoltaic panels in terms of cost. With solar energy, an organization saves on the cost of non-renewable thermal energy produced from the burning of fossil fuels . Thermal energy from the burnt fossil fuels is very harmful to the environment as it contributes to the high amount of greenhouse gases which has a negative health impact on the environment and consequently on occupants such buildings. Toxic gases lead to poor health and consequently to work absenteeism resulting in low productivity.
On-site geothermal heating and cooling can be utilized where geothermal heat pumps are used to provide lower KWh energy to the green buildings. Notably, air handling units, hydronic piping, and duct play a major role towards the provision of indoor cooling over summers and heating during winter. The heat pumps make use of secondary circuits that are directed underground to collect or block heat as per the requirement. The heat pumps have an advantage overheating system as they can eliminate any unwanted emissions.
LED lighting is another feature of a sustainable building due to its cost-effectiveness and for the fact that it offers a short payback as well as long-life when it comes to the provision of service . The savings result from the use of LED lighting amount to a minimized load of cooling the building and consequently saving on the amount of energy and finances spent on the air conditioning systems. There is less frequent change of LED lamps as compared to HID lamps and fluorescent lamps which also helps to save on energy and cost of replacement . As an extended energy saving precautions, organizations may choose to fit occupancy sensors that automatically switch the lights on and off when need be hence saving on energy consumption and cost.
Absenteeism and Green Buildings
Healthy indoor air is a requirement for every building and must be made available through the construction design. Each occupant in a building has a right to breathe healthy air as it has a direct relation to their health . Contaminated air full of toxic gases is very likely to cause respiratory disorder and other health risks hence contributing to high rates of employee absenteeism from work and consequently low productivity.
Employees within an organization have a right to sufficient information relating to any form of potential harm that they may be exposed to within the building. The organization must provide employees with effective means of control to the indoor exposures. For example, a paint manufacturing plant has a lot of chemicals and gases being produced which creates a toxic air condition for the employees. It is up to the employers to prepare new employees on the kind of chemical and gases that they will be interacting with . The employer should inform the employee on the emergency measures that should take in the instance they find themselves caught up with a health risk as a result of the exposure. The employer should also prepare the employees with gears such as gas masks to protect them from inhaling the toxic gases. Green building should be fitted with effective toxic gas absorbent as well as appropriate ventilation that helps to circulate fresh air and eliminate toxic gases. HVACs and air conditioning ACs as well as natural ventilation help to eliminate air pollutants from the inside of a building hence protecting the safety of the employees which would otherwise be compromised leading to health complication and failure to attend to work .
Lighting has both physical and psychological impact on the occupants where their comfort, safety, fatigue levels, and level of productivity is directly related to light. The level of light must be put into consideration while designing the building such as luminance and illuminance, the uniformity of light, control of glare, and the light distribution. Health complications such as dry eyes, headaches, allergic reaction, and eye fatigue among many other conditions arise because of poor lighting. This translates to the fact that employees in a work environment both poor lighting may miss days to seek treatment for their health complication that they can barely relate to light but are in real sense because of poor lighting. Green buildings that meet the required standards have enough lighting and especially natural lighting from the sun as they are fitted with large windows and skylights that help to illuminate the buildings during the day . The green building, therefore, meet the visual comfort of the employees through the natural lighting and effective artificial lighting which in return improve the health of the employees hence minimizing the levels of absenteeism.
Sound pollution which could be from outside sources could be having a negative impact on the hearing ability of employees which could lead to loss of hearing if exposed to the noise for long. Seeking treatment for hearing disorders resulting from noise pollution cause the occupants of the building to miss days of work in search of treatment. Some may fear for their health and choose to quit from the jobs and seek employment in a more conducive environment hence contributing to employee absenteeism . It is, therefore, necessary that green buildings make use of effective acoustics to filter outside noise that may pollute the indoor environment to protect the health of the occupant hence improving productivity and job satisfaction.
From research, there has been a direct correlation between the indoor environment quality (IEQ) and asthmas well as a range of allergies that limit the ability of an employee to be productive and must consistently miss workdays to attend to healthcare needs . Mold and dust are the biggest contributors to workplace-related allergies which result from the warm humid condition due to poor ventilation and lighting of the building resulting in conducive environments for allergens and irritants to thrive.
Lighting, temperatures, ventilation, and other indoor environmental quality factors influence the psychological health of employees and have been linked to factors such as stress, depression, and anxiety when they are poorly provided. High levels of anxiety and stress may lead to depression which in return may lead to cardiac disorders such as heart attack or other illnesses such as migraines which may affect the performance of an employee negatively. A severe illness results in missed workdays as which means that other employees will be overworked, leading to fatigue and consequently a chain of employees’ negative health impacts will be experiences resulting in decreased productivity .
Better Asset Management
The German Prologis Benelux is an example of an organization that cares for its employees, minimizes environmental impacts, and maximizes beneficial outcomes thereby exemplary acting as a corporate citizen for all stakeholders. Concentrating on the prosperity of employees inside stockrooms lines up with their sustainability and business targets, on the grounds that pulling in labor is a definitive factor in property determination. In partnership with the International WELL Building Institute, Prologis Benelux propelled, as one of the principal logistic real estate designers on the planet, a pilot to build up a standard for the wellbeing and health of warehousy employees. The pilot fits inside the aspiration of Prologis Benelux to ceaselessly raise the standard for buildings for its clients .
The Prologis pilot utilizes the WELL Building Standard™, which aims at seven classes of building efficiency: air, nourishment, water, light, wellness, mind, and brain. Spearheaded by Delos, WELL is grounded in proof based medicinal research that shows the association among buildings and their inhabitants’ wellbeing and health. The WELL Building Standard™ is managed by IWBI and outsider guaranteed by Green Business Certification Inc. Current logistics are regularly described by scale, effective utilization of storage room and escalated labor forms. Generally, productivity and safe storage were essential criteria in plan and development. Requests are evolving, nonetheless, and nature of the warehouse interior and other building features that impact employee well-being and sustainability are picking up significance .
Prologis worked together with Dutch software start-up hello energy to put resources into an innovative framework that screens the atmosphere in real time, lessening energy costs and permitting more exact control than a unified system. A few information sensors were introduced to make the building excellent. It gives more bits of knowledge into the utilization and the productivity of the building. Additionally, it includes huge glass surfaces, even on the mezzanine level, and unique light systems to augment sunlight and comfort. With front line plan studio Doepelstrijkers the inside of the distribution center was planned in which a few green zones were connected making a wonderful work environment condition. A propelled ventilation framework was fitted which enhances a superior indoor atmosphere. A few Join the Pipe tap establishments were introduced in the building giving individuals working in the logistics circulation centers access to drinking water which is likewise one of the WELL-criteria . In addition, explicit materials were utilized to upgrade the acoustics inside the conveyance office. Accordingly, “the WELL Building Standard™ project improves energy investment funds and also essentially reasonable for the well-being of the staff as well,” as noted by the Head of Project Management A.V., Kooij . Structuring distribution center offices as indicated by WELL Building Standard™ furnished Prologis with another field of proficiency. It is difficult to utilize this information in new advancements, and we approach each circumstance with an eye for effective solutions.
Tenant Control
Green building controls require tenants to meet a range of requirement in their structures inclusive of water efficiency, effective energy, and atmosphere control, materials and resources used for construction, indoor and environmental quality, as well as innovation in design. In terms of water efficiency, tenants have to ensure that there is a minimum of 20 percent water reduction. Secondly, in terms of energy use and the atmosphere, tenants should avoid making use of space heaters when there is no authorization by the landlord. For better energy management, tenants have to provide the landlord with information of the number of fulltime occupants, square footage of the server rooms and whether there are any existing supplemental HVAC units in the server rooms . The tenants must ensure that motion sensors are fitted in all private offices, closets, LAN rooms, conference rooms, and storage rooms to control the lighting in the room and hence save energy. Systems furniture and under cabinet lighting, also need to be fitted with the motion sensors and/or timers to manage task lighting.
Thirdly, in terms of materials and resource, landlords are required to perform a waste stream audit on the waste produced by the tenants where the tenants should provide well-marked containers serving as recycle bins at every work station. Tenants should avoid using vinyl material for the floor and wall installation and instead make use of products such as linoleum . Under no circumstances should tenants make use of both mineral and glass fibers both wrapped and unwrapped as insulations which lack efficient sealing hence exposing the return air.
Fourthly, indoor environmental quality requires that a landlord should make use of comprehensive green cleaning programs . If the tenant is not comfortable with the programs, the tenant should employ qualified cleaning contractors that make use of the same environmental standards set by the cleaning programs set by the landlord. Lastly, to meet the required innovation in design credit mark, a principal participant in the project team led by the tenant must have been certified by the CBE Berkeley, LEED Accredited Professional.
Best Practices on Sustainability: A Case Study of UK
Hypothesis; the well-being and productivity of employees are directly related to the indoor environmental quality of the greenhouse. From the study, it is arguably correct to state that designing the warehouse as per the Well Building StandardTM may result in the well-being of the employees plus a bonus benefit of saving on the energy costs . The WELL Building StandardTM focuses on the enough provision and utilization of air, water, light, comfort, fitness, nourishment, and psychological need of the occupants. Following and maintaining the standards, the warehouse benefits from improved employee productivity which leads to job satisfaction.
The people-occupational building relationship is a very important aspect that organizations should pay attention to for them to maximize productivity and save of utility costs. Anything that affects the productivity of an employee should be looked into with ultimate concern and in this case, the building design. Light, air, water, ventilation, noise control, materials, and energy should be supplied effectively given that they have a direct impact on both the psychological and physical well-being of the occupants. Architects, engineers, and the interprofessional construction teams should be highly concerned with coming up with a structure that promotes the well-being and productivity of the occupants. On that note, the case study is based on the search for UK’s healthiest Company in regards to WELL Building StandardTM.
The Britain’s Healthiest Company (BHC) rivalry was set up by health safety net provider VitalityHealth. The competition largely focused on determining the most outstanding organization in UK in relation to innovative strategies and best practice towards workplace wellbeing and health. It is one of the biggest UK national investigations, giving businesses significant bits of knowledge into the wellbeing of their employees. All organizations in Britain with at least 50 employees are welcome to take an interest in the challenge. After enrolling, the organizations return a corporate-health assessment, including general organization qualities, for example, the size of the association and the sector it works in and the data on their methodology to deal with health advancement and well-being intercessions. In this way, employees are welcome to react to a representative health-assessment study which gathers data on way of life, conduct, and clinical hazard factors (counting weight, diet, work out, smoking, liquor admission, stress, cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood glucose levels) just as asking how regularly individuals go to health screenings to screen and comprehend their health. Toward the end, each organization gets a secret corporate health report which offer them with a comprehensive perspective on employee well-being, furthermore, benchmark data which can be utilized to design future human resource (HR) techniques. The report gives a viable method for estimating and overseeing health risks inside within a company and of comprehending how these risks influence employee commitment and productivity levels. The employees get a nitty gritty health assessment giving data on their individual health and risks associated with their way of life. Both the corporate and worker reports incorporate reasonable proposals on the best way to oversee specific health risks and lifestyles.
Over 30 million citizens in the UK who are above the consent age worked between April to June 2014. On the other hand, there were over 400,000 organizations with more than 50 employees in 2012. The 2014 Britain’s Healthiest Company study got more than 27,000 reactions from March to May 2014 among employees at 80 organizations with 50 or more workers all over the UK . To comprehend the nature of the results from examinations dependent on the review data, it is significant to see how the review is as far as the taking part organizations and employees. It is additionally essential to comprehend whether those organizations which reacted to the overview were methodically not quite the same as those which did not.
To begin with, the study utilized feedback to the business and employee responses to investigate whether the respondents were illustrative of all employees in participating companies. The organizations report the age, income, and sex profiles of their workforce in the business study, while singular employees report their age, sexual orientation, and salary in their overview reactions. By looking at data from these two sources it is ideal to investigate which groups are under-represented or over among respondents. Specifically, this was followed by the quantification of the mean age, salary and extent of female employees in each taking an interest organization, utilizing data detailed in the business overviews and expecting that reactions in the top pay and age-group response classes (for example over £90,000 and 65 years of age) were on normal 68.5 years and £95,000 separately . Towards that end, it was essential to contrast these and the data exhibited by the employees.
Thereafter, it was important to contrast the qualities of the companies and employees with all organizations and employees in Britain. To that end there was evaluation of weights dependent on the feedback reaction, the age, sexual orientation and salary of responders, and company size. At this point, it was necessary to investigate whether utilizing them changed the evaluations acquired (for example weighting to all employees of the organizations, and to all organizations in the UK). In particular, inverse probability weights were made as pursues: employee age reactions were sorted into indistinguishable groups as exhibited in the business survey; income review alternative classifications were consistent across the two. Weights were evaluated by group, independently for age, sex, and income. Importantly, there was an evaluation of an extension of two more company weights, a weight for reaction rate for organization size (number of employees), to overall number of employees in that organization, and to a similar size profile as all other organizations in the nation.
Measure of Productivity Loss
Imperatively, it is evidently found that there are contrasts between participating companies and all organizations in the UK. Similarly, there is an over-portrayal of organizations with more prominent average quantities of middle-age employees and middle-income, or potentially with higher extents of female employees. Nevertheless, approximates of health measures, for example, BMI change minimal after weighting, and BMI gauges from respondents are just somewhat unique in relation to a broadly delegating group of employees. Notwithstanding, it is essential to note that overall feedback rates are ordinarily lower among the old, the youthful, and those living in lower-salary regions. It is additionally significant that employees with healthier ways of life are bound to react than employees with less healthy ways of life. The suggestions for this review are that respondents may not be typical of all respondents inside participating organizations, nor taking an interest organization of all organizations in the UK. Healthier ways of life, and ‘healthier’ organizations, are easy to be over-represented. In any case, the ramifications of these potential predispositions for the investigations displayed in the remainder of this report are low. All salary, age and sexual orientation groups are represented among respondents, and in the examination, the demographic and company qualities, for example, size and industry we adjusted.
The measurement of the workplace productivity in the BHC is associated with various determinants. These include but are not limited to; personal factors, such as mental-health and lifestyle factors; job and workplace related factors that contribute to the set-up of the environment such as work relations, pressure demands, like and general attitude of the corporate management; and health and physical factors that include aspects such as cholesterol and blood pressure levels. Albeit these aspects relate to productivity, there is however, a dynamic interrelationship among them. For example, somebody who is presented to unreasonable time weights or harassing in the workplace may create emotional wellness issues after some time. To catch such unique impacts, nevertheless, requires longitudinal information following that laborer over an extensive duration. Our information, on the other hand, mirror the separate impacts on profitability of both psychological well-being issues and time pressure at a given point in time, and are in this way cross-sectional in nature. Thus, its necessary to expound further on the estimation of workplace efficiency, the result wherein we are especially intrigued, and its deciding elements.
Personal Factors
On the other hand, the report for best practice also included the measurement of productivity loss which is categorized under absenteeism, measuring the number of days absent from work. Individual factors deciding workplace efficiency can be extensively arranged into three components. Foremost, this includes non-work factors, for example, work behavior and money related or family needs can impact a person’s non-attendance . Our information incorporates, for example, measures on regardless of whether an employee endures monetary weight or gives unpaid consideration taking care of an evil, fragile, or crippled relative. Besides, it has been discovered that way of life hazard variables including diet, obesity, and inactive way of life propensities impact workplace productivity ; ; . A need of physical movement has been related with low workplace productivity. Burton et al. looked at those utilizing a wellness center with the individuals who did not (utilizing a strategic relapse model balanced for age, sexual orientation, area, and health dangers) and found that the last were bound to report larger amounts of absenteeism . Even more, as of late, consideration has focused on rest as a determinant of productivity loss. Later ponders demonstrated the connection among sleep deprivation and workplace productivity . Utilizing a similar profitability scale, the investigation by Katz et al. found that (representing components, for example, socioeconomics and other health dangers) employees who slept under seven to eight hours out of every night experienced altogether greater efficiency misfortune contrasted with employees who dozed over eight hours out of every night by and large . Thirdly, gentle to serious psychological wellness conditions are observed to be real indicators of productivity loss . Work-related stress may promote ill health and productivity indirectly through affecting people’s health practices such as, liquor utilization and smoking or legitimately through natural stress pathways . In the BHC study, psychological wellness is estimated utilizing the Kessler Psychological Distress scale, a six-item survey method expected to give a proportion of distress in light of inquiries regarding nervousness and depressive side effects an individual has encountered in the latest four-week time frame . Both mental and physical health can be negatively affected by poor scores on mental wellbeing.
Workplace and Job-Related Factors
In this sense, the wider organizational factors, and the workplace design indicator such as the work environment are considered the main job-related factors that drive absenteeism. Workplace approaches including job stability and sick pay can firmly impact the absenteeism of an individual employee . Nevertheless, it is not simply through hierarchical approaches. The activity job itself (for example physical work or high-intensity public roles), the executives issues (counting impression of exertion reward balance) and the workplace condition would all be able to impact productivity, legitimately through their impact on specialist health or indirectly where absenteeism is a way of dealing with stress. Succinctly, an immediate interrelationship exists among family-friendly work management practices, job structure, employee health and wellbeing, and organizational change. The 2014 BHC study incorporates pointers to gauge job-related pressure utilizing six things from the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Management Standards (MS) Indicator Tool . Stress is estimated along the accompanying lines:
 Demands: ridiculous time pressures
 Control: decision in choosing what to do at work
 Managerial help: line supervisor empowers at work
 Peer support: regard at work from partners
 Relationships: those at work are stressed
 Change: staff are constantly updated on changes at work
In accordance with Gerich the company variables related with workplace productivity present in the 2014 BHC study incorporate further pointers demonstrating the significance of employee health and wellbeing in estimating an organization’s prosperity seen by board individuals, just as whether the association bolsters health-advancement programs in the workplace . Also, so as to explore the connection between an organization’s arrangement of health and wellbeing intercessions and productivity in the workplace we use data from both, the business and employee reviews, and build a mediation record estimating the force with which an organization offers health-advancement and wellbeing projects to its employees. To produce the record, we include the number of intercessions an organization gives and weight it with the portion of employees who reported as a matter of fact utilizing the suggested intervention. At this point, it was important to place organizations into three groups of equivalent size as per their health-intercession index score: organizations with low arrangement (low), organizations with medium arrangement (medium) and organizations with high arrangement (high).
Physical and Health Factors
Acute and chronic health conditions have been observed to be connected to workplace productivity misfortune . For example, an examination at a British college demonstrated that around 40 percent of employees with a self-revealed interminable sickness detailed constraint in their profitability when at work . Evidently, the current literature estimates the effect of co-morbidity by including the quantity of existing conditions for every person. Lerner et al. for instance, included the quantity of conditions and found that each extra additional chronic condition increases the likelihood of work productivity misfortune gradually because of absenteeism . Notwithstanding, the literature on profitability misfortune, which demonstrates a solid relationship between efficiency and psychological well-being, the connection with musculoskeletal torment is likewise significant. In a comprehensive investigation, Schultz and Edington note that just one examination which they recognize as of moderate quality, considers the relationship between musculoskeletal conditions and absenteeism. Utilizing a moderately long one-month review period for their productivity scale, demonstrate a productivity misfortune among Swedish PC laborers with musculoskeletal issues . A few investigations have likewise explored the relationship of biological risk factors, for example, hypertension, glucose, and cholesterol. Nevertheless, the general assessment is that the impact of these risk factor appears not to bother that much as a significant driver of profitability misfortune .
Assignment help – Discussion
This case study found a lot of noteworthy relationship between specific risk elements and productivity loss in companies. However, much we cannot be sure about the direction of causality, the findings contribute to a progressing evidence base in this field, and a significant number of them are consistent with different studies. The outcomes are valuable to policymakers and experts on five levels. Importantly, it enables them to distinguish the qualities of employees who are more in danger of impairment at work. This enables them to consider how their own conditions (whether they have caring responsibilities), their way of life (for example BMI) and potential health dangers (for example musculoskeletal conditions and mental well-being) relate to loss in productivity. It reveals much about who these people are and their issues. This information might be valuable in the focusing of intercessions in zones most connected with job impairment. From the research, poor emotional well-being is turning into the best explanation behind productivity loss. Nevertheless, follow-up meetings with participating organization shows that it is less obvious to what degree emotional well-being issues are tended to in the wellness strategies of an office. Understanding the elements that add to work hindrance is useful so companies can thoroughly consider their arrangement of health intercession exercises and look at where they are likely to have an impact. Any positive effect will profit both the wellbeing of single employees and the main concern of the company itself.
Second, the investigation gives data on how the workplace may add to impairment of work. The outcomes show the significance of connections at work and the impeding effect of harassment in the workplace. The issue here is not just perceiving how the workplace can add to improved employee health and wellbeing yet additionally, how it can straightforwardly add to poor health and wellbeing. The survey is of significance to companies, helping them to look at their working societies and exhibiting how the workplace environment can influence employees both emphatically and adversely. Moreover, absenteeism enables us to look at various elements of productivity loss. The research recommend that various factors add to the reasons why a few people come to work when unwell, while others remain away. One fascinating outcome is the disclosure that resting less hours is more connected with absenteeism. A comparative suggestion applies for harassment. This demonstrates policymakers and associations might need to investigate absenteeism, a result which is hard to capture.
Furthermore, the interplay between variables is additionally intriguing. Returning to our perception concerning the relationship between sleeping less hours and absenteeism, this finding may likewise point to parts of the workplace and their interrelationship with productivity loss (for example, working movement designs or very long or sporadic hours). Along these lines, urging employees to get adequate rest may likewise warrant seeing working practices and adaptable working even more explicitly. Last yet not least, a portion of the research findings are to some degree strange. Employees with very high BMI do not appear to have higher work hindrance than average ones. Also, the individuals who expend a great deal of liquor show little contrast in work disability than a normal employee. Here, there may be need to comprehend the dynamic better and dive further into the information, or promote analysis of data with additional qualitative work. This leaves a question as to whether it is an aspect of a ‘work hard’ and ‘party hard’ organizational culture? Are we may be focusing on short-run impacts in our model while some health dangers take more time to play out and at exactly that point impact work disability? Is it the case that a bigger gathering of people will not demonstrate a foreseen effect on health and wellbeing notwithstanding having certain health dangers? So also, workplace factors, for example, an absence of control, peer support or direct administrative help do not demonstrate any factually noteworthy relationship with workplace productivity loss.
In view of the research report, it is not possible to make proposals legitimately on what sort of mediations policymakers or associations should set up to improve employee health and wellbeing, and by affiliation lessen job impairment. Conversely, it proposes that health mediations as reported to us by companies appeared to have little effect on general productivity loss. Surely if anything, organizations having more intercessions likewise seemed to have higher rates of productivity loss. This finding may show that organizations are responding to work debilitation issues identified with absenteeism. Nonetheless, the absence of a positive relationship may just be driven by the way that we cannot watch organizations after some time, and late proof ; proposes that multi-program or progressively consistent methodologies are probably successful in handling health and wellbeing in the workplace.
Organizations that consider health and wellbeing as a marker of company achievement have lower levels of work disability because of absenteeism. This finding recommends maybe what gets estimated gets done. Steve Boorman in his audit on health and wellbeing in the NHS likewise found that associations that talk about health and wellbeing at board level were bound to oversee productivity loss viably . This point goes straightforwardly to the issue of evolving society. Notably, is important to make it a significant need at all levels rather than just understanding what is driving work impedance in a company. This will largely aid towards improving the health and wellbeing of workers.

References
1. Bergs, John. “Effect of healthy workplaces on well-being and productivity of office workers.” In Proceedings of International Plants for People Symposium. 2002.
2. UKGBC. Welcome to UKGBC | UK Green Building Council. Last modified 2019. https://www.ukgbc.org/sites/default/files/Health%2520Wellbeing%2520and%2520Productivity%2520in%2520Offices%2520-%2520The%2520next%2520chapter%2520for%2520green%2520building%2520Full%2520Report_0.pdf.
3. European Commission, 2008. Improving Quality and Productivity at Work: Community Strategy 2007–2012 on Health and Safety at Work.
4. Black, C.M., 2008. Working for a healthier tomorrow: Dame Carol Black’s review of the health of Britain’s working age population. The Stationery Office.
5. Health and Safety Executive, 2014. Health and Safety Statistics 2013-14.
6. Black, C.D., Frost, D., 2011. Health at work-an independent review of sickness absence. The Stationery Office.
7. Centre for Mental Health, 2011. Managing presenteeism: a discussion paper.
8. Clements-Croome, Derek, ed. Creating the productive workplace. Taylor & Francis, 2006.
9. Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., Kalleberg, A., 2000. Manufacturing competitive advantage: The effects of high-performance work systems on plant performance and company outcomes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
10. Bevan, S., 2012. Good work, high performance, and productivity. Work Foundation.
11. Goetzel, R.Z., Pei, X., Tabrizi, M.J., Henke, R.M., Kowlessar, N., Nelson, C.F., Metz, R.D., 2012. Ten modifiable health risk factors are linked to more than one-fifth of employer-employee health care spending. Health Aff. (Millwood) 31, 2474–2484.
12. Miller, Norm, Jay Spivey, and Andrew Florance. “Does green pay off?” Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management 14, no. 4 (2008): 385-400.
13. Zhang, H., C. Huizenga, Edward A. Arens, and T. Yu. “Modeling thermal comfort in stratified environments.” (2005).
14. Hassan, E., Austin, C., Celia, C., Disley, E., Priscillia, H., Marjanovic, S., van Dijk, L.V., van Stolk, C., Europe, R., 2009. Health and wellbeing at work in the United Kingdom. RAND.
15. Boorman, S., 2009. NHS Health and Well-being: Final Report.
16. Cancelliere, C., Cassidy, J.D., Ammendolia, C., Côté, P., 2011. Are workplace health promotion programs effective at improving presenteeism in workers? A systematic review and best evidence synthesis of the literature. BMC Public Health 11, 395.
17. Stolk, C. van, Hofman, J., Hafner, M., Janta, B., 2014. Psychological Wellbeing and Work.
18. Mattke, S., Liu, H., Caloyeras, J., Huang, C.Y., Van Busum, K.R., Khodyakov, D., Shier, V., Exum, E., Broderick, M., 2014. Do Workplace Wellness Programs Save Employers Money?
19. Buseman-Williams, A., 2014. A Systematic Review of the Health Impact of Employer-sponsored Wellness Programs.
20. Osilla, K.C., Van Busum, K., Schnyer, C., Larkin, J.W., Eibner, C., Mattke, S., 2012. Systematic review of the impact of worksite wellness programs. Am. J. Manag. Care 18, e68–81
21. Waddell, G., Burton, K., Aylward, M., 2006. Work and common health problems. J. Insur. Med. N. Y. NY 39, 109–120.
22. Stolk, C. van, Staetsky, L., Hassan, E., Kim, C.W., 2012. Management of Psychosocial Risks at Work.
23. Wargocki, Pawel, Monika Frontczak, Stefano Schiavon, John Goins, Ed Arens, and Hui Zhang. “Satisfaction and self-estimated performance in relation to indoor environmental parameters and building features.” (2012): 1-6.
24. Weißenberger, Markus, Werner Jensch, and Werner Lang. “The convergence of life cycle assessment and nearly zero-energy buildings: The case of Germany.” Energy and buildings76 (2014): 551-557.
25. Petersdorff, Carsten, Thomas Boermans, and Jochen Harnisch. “Mitigation of CO2 emissions from the EU-15 building stock. beyond the EU directive on the energy performance of buildings (9 pp).” Environmental Science and Pollution Research 13, no. 5 (2006): 350-358.
26. Liefferink, Policy-making Duncan, and Mikael Skou Andersen. “Strategies of the ‘Green’ Member States in EU Environmental.” In Environmental Policy in the EU, pp. 67-84. Routledge, 2012.
27. Vischer, Jacqueline C. “The effects of the physical environment on job performance: towards a theoretical model of workspace stress.” Stress and health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress 23, no. 3 (2007): 175-184.
28. Hammer, Monica S., Tracy K. Swinburn, and Richard L. Neitzel. “Environmental noise pollution in the United States: developing an effective public health response.” Environmental health perspectives 122, no. 2 (2013): 115-119.
29. Roulet, Claude-Alain. “Indoor environment quality in buildings and its impact on outdoor environment.” Energy and buildings33, no. 3 (2001): 183-191.
30. Prologis. “WELL Building Standard? Pilot in New Development.” Prologis Germany. Last modified May 9, 2018. https://www.prologisgermany.de/en/build-to-suit/case-study/well-building-standardtm-pilot-new-development.
31. Robinson, Spenser, Robert Simons, and Eunkyu Lee. “Which green office building features do tenants pay for? A study of observed rental effects.” Journal of Real Estate Research 39, no. 4 (2017): 467-492.
32. “The Business Case for Green Building: A Review of the Costs and Benefits for Developers, Investors and Occupants.” World Green Building Council, www.worldgbc.org/news-media/business-case-green-building-review-costs-and-benefits-developers-investors-and-occupants. Accessed 19 Aug. 2019.
33. Johns, G., 2010. Presenteeism in the workplace: A review and research agenda. J. Organ. Behav. 31, 519–542.
34. Alavinia, S.M., Molenaar, D., Burdorf, A., 2009. Productivity loss in the workforce: associations with health, work demands, and individual characteristics. Am. J. Ind. Med. 52, 49–56.
35. Boles, M., Pelletier, B., Lynch, W., 2004. The relationship between health risks and work productivity. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 46, 737–745.
36. Burton, W.N., Chen, C.-Y., Conti, D.J., Schultz, A.B., Pransky, G., Edington, D.W., 2005a. The association of health risks with on-the-job productivity. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 47, 769–777.
37. Bolge, S.C., Doan, J.F., Kannan, H., Baran, R.W., 2009. Association of insomnia with quality of life, work productivity, and activity impairment. Qual. Life Res. 18, 415–422.
38. Katz, A.S., Pronk, N.P., Lowry, M., 2014. The Association Between Optimal Lifestyle-Related Health Behaviors and Employee Productivity. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 56, 708–713.
39. Stewart, W.F., Ricci, J.A., Chee, E., Morganstein, D., Lipton, R., 2003b. Lost productive time and cost due to common pain conditions in the US workforce. Jama 290, 2443–2454.
40. Chandola, T., Britton, A., Brunner, E., Hemingway, H., Malik, M., Kumari, M., Badrick, E., Kivimaki, M., Marmot, M., 2008. Work stress and coronary heart disease: what are the mechanisms? Eur. Heart J. 29, 640–648.
41. Kessler, R.C., Andrews, G., Colpe, L.J., Hiripi, E., Mroczek, D.K., Normand, S.-L., Walters, E.E., Zaslavsky, A.M., 2002. Short screening scales to monitor population prevalence and trends in nonspecific psychological distress. Psychol. Med. 32, 959–976.
42. Black, C.M., 2008. Working for a healthier tomorrow: Dame Carol Black’s review of the health of Britain’s working age population. The Stationery Office.
43. Health and Safety Executive, 2015. Causes of Stress.
44. Burton, W.N., Pransky, G., Conti, D.J., Chen, C.-Y., Edington, D.W., 2004. The association of medical conditions and presenteeism. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 46, S38–S45.
45. Munir, F., Jones, D., Leka, S., Griffiths, A., 2005. Work limitations and employer adjustments for employees with chronic illness. Int. J. Rehabil. Res. 28, 111–117.
46. Lerner, D., Amick III, B.C., Lee, J.C., Rooney, T., Rogers, W.H., Chang, H., Berndt, E.R., 2003. Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work productivity. Med. Care 41, 649–659.
47. Hagberg, M., Tornqvist, E.W., Toomingas, A., 2002. Self-reported reduced productivity due to musculoskeletal symptoms: associations with workplace and individual factors among white-collar computer users. J. Occup. Rehabil. 12, 151–162.
48. Lorenz, David, and Thomas Lützkendorf. “Sustainability in property valuation: theory and practice.” Journal of Property Investment & Finance, vol. 26, no. 6, 2008, pp. 482-521.
49. Lützkendorf, Thomas, and David Lorenz. “Capturing sustainability-related information for property valuation.” Building Research & Information, vol. 39, no. 3, 2011, pp. 256-273.
50. Pivo, Gary, and UN Environment Programme Finance Initi. “Responsible property investing: what the leaders are doing.” Journal of Property Investment & Finance, vol. 26, no. 6, 2008, pp. 562-576.
51. “Sustainability and Commercial Property Valuation, 2nd Edition.” RICS: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, 2013, www.rics.org/ssa/upholding-professional-standards/sector-standards/valuation/sustainability-and-commercial-property-valuation/. Accessed 19 Aug. 2019.
52. Tatiana Bosteels and Peter Sweatman. “Sustainable Real Estate Investment: Implementing the Paris Climate Agreement.” PRI, 25 Feb. 2016, www.unpri.org/real-estate/sustainable-real-estate-investment-implementing-the-paris-climate-agreement/138.article. Accessed 19 Aug. 2019.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Masters Essays, PSY Papers, PSYC, Psychology Assignment, Psychology Dissertations