Skip to main content
Log in

Certification Matters: Is Green Talk Cheap Talk?

  • Published:
The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is an active and growing literature examining the rental rate, sales price, and occupancy premiums associated with sustainable or energy efficient certified real estate. To date, the focus has rested largely on office properties and for sale single family residential properties. We examine the rental rates achieved by green multifamily properties, providing the first look at the population of LEED market-rate apartments in the United States. We find an approximate 8.9 % rental rate premium associated with LEED apartments. Moreover, this research provides the first indication that LEED certification garners an additional premium over non-certified space that identifies as green, indicating the strength of the certification signal and contributing to the longstanding discussion on the merits of certification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.ncreif.org

  2. http://www.reit.com/DataAndResearch/Property-Sector-Performance.aspx

  3. http://www.nmhc.org/Content/LandingPage.cfm?NavID=2

  4. www.usgbc.org.

  5. The Appraisal Foundation-approved methodology is considered to be the real estate industry’s best practice.

  6. The Appraisal of Real Estate – 12th Edition indicates that a single sale may sufficiently explain the market, but that the most important aspect of comparable selection is that the value of including each comparable in the selection be understood (pg. 420).

  7. There are eight cases in which this occurs. These eight properties are situated in: Seattle, WA (2 of 8 properties in MSA); Portland, OR (1 of 9 properties in MSA); Washington, DC (1 of 8 properties in MSA); Bayonne, NJ (1 of 11 properties in NYC MSA); Anaheim, CA (1 of 8 properties in LA MSA); Cincinnati, OH (1 of 2 properties in MSA); and, Augusta, GA (only property).

  8. The “family” refers to all unit types that share bedroom/bathroom configurations, despite the presence or lack of a den, ensuite laundry, and/or private outdoor space.

  9. In addition to cluster fixed effects, all equations are also estimated using MSA fixed effects. There is little change in the results, with the exception of a lower R^2 due to the decrease in variables.

  10. 2012 multifamily capitalization rates were 5.91 and 6.09 % for urban and suburban properties, respectively (Integra Realty Resources 2013).

  11. To put this value in context, using that average rental rate per square foot of $2.67 for the example building with a 40 % expense ratio and the 6 % capitalization rate would indicate a base building value of approximately $80 million.

References

  • Anderson, W., & Cunningham, W. (1972). The socially conscious consumer. The Journal of Marketing, 36(3), 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appraisal Institute. (2001). The appraisal of real estate (12th ed.). Chicago: The Appraisal Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aroul, R., & Hansz, J. (2012). The value of “Green:” evidence from the first mandatory residential green building program. Journal of Real Estate Research, 34(1), 27–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brounen, D., & Kok, N. (2011). On the economics of energy labels in the housing market. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 62, 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruana, R. (2007). A sociological perspective of consumption morality. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6, 287–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2001). Design for the environment: a quality-based model for green product development. Management Science, 47, 250–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciochetti, B., & McGowan, M. (2010). Energy Efficiency Improvements: do they pay? Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, 2(1), 305–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A. (2001). Unpacking the ethical product. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecofys. (2003). Cost effective climate protection in the eu building stock. Report for EURIMA. Cologne, Germany: Ecofys. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://www.ecofys.com/en/publication/cost-effective- climate-protection-in-the-eu-building-stock/.

  • Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. (2009). Why do companies rent green? Real property and corporate social responsibility. London: RICS Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. (2010). Doing well by doing good: green office buildings. American Economic Review, 100, 2494–2511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichholtz, P., Kok, N., & Quigley, J. (2013). The economics of green building. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 50–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuerst, F., & McAllister, P. (2009). An Investigation of the effect of eco-labeling on office occupancy rates. Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, 1(1), 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuerst, F., & McAllister, P. (2011). Green noise or green value? Measuring the effects of environmental certification on office values. Real Estate Economics, 39(1), 45–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, K., Waller, B., & Weeks, H. (2015). The impact of Broker Vernacular in Residential Real Estate. Journal of Housing Research.

  • Haag, J., Rutherford, R., & Thomson, T. (2000). Real estate agent remarks: help or hype? Journal of Real Estate Research, 20, 205–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, K. (2011). What does Gen Y Want? REALTOR Magazine, May 2011.

  • Heschmeyer, M. (2013). Real estate is local; so are price, amenities. Washington, DC: Costar. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://www.costar.com/News/Article/Real-Estate-Is-Local;-So-Are- Price-Amenities/149659.

  • Iacus, S., King, G., & Porro, G. (2009). Causal inference without balance checking: coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis. doi:10.1093/pan/mpr013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Integra Realty Resources. (2013). Viewpoint 2013: Integra Realty Resources Real Estate Value Trends. New York: Integra Realty Resources, Inc. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://irr.com/_FileLibrary/Publication/13/viewpoint2013.pdf.

  • Irwin, J., & Baron, H. (2001). Response mode effects and moral values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 84, 177–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kats, G. (2003, October). The costs and financial benefits of green buildings: a report to California’s sustainable building task force. Washington, DC: U.S. Green building council. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from www.usgbc.org/Docs/News/News477.pdf.

  • Kinnear, T., Taylor, J., & Ahmed, S. (1974). Ecologically concerned consumers: who are they? The Journal of Marketing, 38(2), 20–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kok, N. & Kahn, M. (2012). The value of green labels in the California housing market: an economic analysis of the impact of green labeling on the sales price of a home. Retrieved on January 29, 2015, from http://issuu.com/nilskok/docs/kk_green_homes_071912/3.

  • Kok, N., McGraw, M., & Quigley, J. (2011). The diffusion of energy efficiency in building. American Economic Review, 101(3), 77–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, K. (2011). Generational change in paid and unpaid work. Canadian Social Trends. 92, catalogue no. 11- 008-X.

  • Mazar, N., & Zhong, C. (2010). Do green products make up better people? Psychological Science, 21(4), 494–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N., Spivey, J., & Florance, A. (2008). Does green pay off? Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management, 14(4), 385–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, A. (2007). The greening of U.S. investment real estate – market fundamentals, prospects and opportunities. RREEF Research Report. No. 57, November 2007.

  • Schlegelmilch, B., Bohlen, G., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1996). The link between green purchasing decisions and measures of environmental consciousness. European Journal of Marketing, 30(5), 35–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrum, L., McCarty, J., & Lowrey, T. (1995). Buyer characteristics of the green consumer and their implications for advertising. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 71–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torres, B. (2010, June 3). Why Gen Y delays homebuying. San Francisco Business Times. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2010/06/why_gen_y_delays_homebuying.html?pa ge = all.

  • Wiley, J., Benefield, J., & Johnson, K. (2010). Green design and the market for commercial office space. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 41(2), 228–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Green Building Council. (2013). The business case for green building: a review of the costs and benefits for developers, investors and occupants. Retrieved on January 29, 2015, from http://www.worldgbc.org/files/8313/6324/2676/Business_Case_For_Green_Building_Report_WEB_2013- 03–13.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Michael Ferguson, David Brasington, and the participants at the 2015 AREUEA Annual Meeting, 2014 AREUEA International Meeting, Pepperdine University Speaker Series, and 2014 EBS Real Estate Conference for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Avis Devine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bond, S.A., Devine, A. Certification Matters: Is Green Talk Cheap Talk?. J Real Estate Finan Econ 52, 117–140 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11146-015-9499-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11146-015-9499-y

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation