Drivers of Investment in Commercial Real Estate Sustainability: 2006–2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the factors (“drivers”) that motivated investment in energy efficiency in commercial real estate office buildings over the 2006–2011 and 2012–2017 period, and looking forward from 2018 in the context of growing concern over carbon emissions around the world. These insights were collected from large Canadian asset managers through interviews conducted in 2017 and 2018. Key findings were that (1) organizations noted an increasing number of factors driving investment decisions over the three periods; (2) cost drivers (payback period and anticipated financial returns) were the top two drivers in 2006–2017; (3) public relations factors became significantly more important looking forward, with brand (reputational impact) as the top-ranked driver and tenant attraction tied for third place; and (4) mitigation against risks such as resilience and anticipated compliance consistently increased in importance. This study contributes to a comprehensive understanding of past, present, and near-future sustainable real estate investment priorities, changing owner behaviors, and the perceived business case for building energy efficiency investments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".