Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A top-down approach for implementation of Environmental Product Declarations in Mexico’s housing sector

  • REGIONAL TOPICS FROM LATIN AMERICA
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

A solid legislative framework and a strong sense of environmental sensitivity by the government are some of the elements that have contributed to a sustained development of Environmental Product Declarations (EPD) in developed countries, especially within the building sector. In Mexico, a big portion of the sustainability strategy from this sector has been focused on social housing. For this reason, the main objective of this research is to analyze a possible path to incorporate EPDs as part of this sustainability strategy, determining its possible reach and limitations in the current context of Mexican environmental legislative framework for housing sector.

Methods

General information about the legislative framework supporting the government strategy for sustainability in the housing sector is presented. The main instruments and programs that have been developed to accomplish this strategy are analyzed. This analysis is made mainly through the National Strategy for Sustainable Housing (NSSH) because it organizes and correlates most of these instruments. An analysis is made on how the life cycle approach and EPDs are considered within the NSSH.

Results and discussion

There are instruments contemplating the life cycle approach and even the use of EPDs to promote the sustainability of the housing sector; however, these instruments are not part of the NSSH. Despite this, the majority of housing developers know and use them during their housing design process, but they do not do it properly, since they are unaware of the LCA methodology and EPDs. So, a proposal is made to fully incorporate the use of EPDs as part of the government’s sustainability strategy for the Mexican housing sector. The Sisevive-Ecohouse (the only official instrument in Mexico for the housing evaluation) is proposed as a platform. Incorporating the instruments that already contemplate the life cycle approach and the use of EPDs as part of the NSSH is also part of the proposed strategy.

Conclusions

The strategy for housing sustainability in Mexico is mainly focused on the houses’ use phase, so a paradigm shift on this strategy has to be made, where life cycle approach must be included. There is feasibility for EPDs to be used for this purpose from existing instruments and programs. Nevertheless, the lack of legislative connection in addition to the obstacles for EPD implementation in an emergent economy as Mexico could slow down its development.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This city’s growth requires the construction of new buildings and renewal of existing ones, and so the consumption of building materials.

  2. The use of the term “urban” in this paper is used to refer to the concept of “city”.

  3. IDEA Foundation “is a non-profit, independent and nonpartisan, organization whose mission is to design and promote innovative public policies, which generate opportunity equality for Mexican by means of economic development and poverty reduction; as well as being a confident source of independent analysis for government servants general public” (Fundación IDEA 2013)

  4. The order in which the instruments are presented in Table 1 is not a mandatory or rigorous process to build and sell sustainable housing in Mexico. This table is just to present, in an organized way, the available instruments (and their objectives) to build sustainable housing, according to the Fundación IDEA (2013); and CIDOC and SHF (2015).

  5. For this standard, the main materials are those representing the largest volume of total materials used in the building.

  6. The energy and indoor performance (and now also an environmental performance) of a reference dwelling is used by the Sisevive-Ecohouse to establish a baseline performance on these issues

  7. This program is currently in a pilot phase, and just some housing developers companies nationwide are part of the 4,747 homes of this phase (Kaineg et al. 2013; Arvizu-Piña et al. 2019).

  8. An exchange rate of $1.17 per euro is considered.

  9. Building environmental assessment schemes, like Sisevive-Ecohouse, are part of the key elements to boost EPDs in developed countries (Arvizu-Piña and Cuchí Burgos 2017).

References

  • Arvizu-Piña VA (2018) Las Declaraciones Ambientales de Producto como instrumento de mejora ambiental en el sector de la construcción en México. El sector de la vivienda como enfoque inicial. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya

  • Arvizu-Piña VA, Cuchí Burgos A (2017) Promoting sustainability in Mexico’s building sector via environmental product declarations. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1744–1759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvizu-Piña VA, Cuchí-Burgos A, Chargoy Amador JP (2019) A bottom-up approach for implementation of environmental product declarations in Mexico’s housing sector. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01587-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braune A, Wittstock B (2011) Measuring environmental sustainability: the use of LCA based building performance indicators. In: Life Cycle Manag Conf

  • CADIS (2014) EPD Rolan Rockwool insulation board. 1–20

  • CADIS, ADDERE (2015) EPD Latin America. In: Hub Lat. Am. Int. EPD® Syst. http://www.epd-americalatina.com. Accessed 30 Jul 2016

  • CCA (2008) Edificación Sustentable en América del Norte. Oportunidades y Retos, Quebec, Canadá

    Google Scholar 

  • Chevalier J, Lebert A, Schiopu N et al (2010) ELODIE : a tool for the environmental assessment of building, pp 67–77

    Google Scholar 

  • CIDOC, SHF (2015) Estado Actual de la Vivienda en México 2015

  • CONAVI (2007) Código de Edificación de Vivienda, 2nd edn, pp 301–303

    Google Scholar 

  • CONAVI (2008) Criterios e indicadores para desarrollos habitacionales sustentables. 1–65

  • CONAVI (2014) Programa Nacional de Vivienda (PNV) 2014-2018. 1–33

  • Del Borghi A (2013) LCA and communication: environmental product declaration. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:293–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0513-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franzitta V, La Gennusa M, Peri G et al (2011) Toward a European Eco-label brand for residential buildings: holistic or by-components approaches? Energy 36:1884–1892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frischknecht R, Wyss F, Knöpfel SB, Stolz P (2015) Life cycle assessment in the building sector: analytical tools, environmental information and labels. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:421–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fundación IDEA (2013) Estrategia Nacional para la Vivienda Sustentable. British Embasy in Mexico, Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazulla C, Oregi X (2015) SOFIAS: uso de Declaraciones Ambientales de Producto ( DAP ) para el análisis de ciclo de vida de edificios. In: World SB 2014, pp 0–15

    Google Scholar 

  • González A, Sánchez A, Domenico DS (2014) Ecómetro, collaborative work project to develop a design and measure tool of ecology in architecture. In: World SB14, pp 1–36

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Colin M, Suppen Reynaga N, Felix-Acuña R (2011) The Mexican life cycle inventory database - MEXICANIUH. In: CILCA 2011, México. Veracruz, México, pp 257–259

  • Haapio A, Viitaniemi P (2008) A critical review of building environmental assessment tools. Environ Impact Assess Rev 28:469–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2008.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • INFONAVIT (2016) Elige vivienda sustentable. http://portal.infonavit.org.mx/wps/wcm/connect/infonavit/trabajadores/saber+para+decidir/estoy_buscando_casa/elige_vivienda_sustentable. Accessed 14 Oct 2016

  • Ingwersen WW, Stevenson MJ (2011) Can we compare the environmental performance of this product to that one? An update on the development of product category rules and future challenges toward alignment. J Clean Prod 24:102–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isasa M, Gazulla C, Zabalza I et al (2014) EnerBuiLCA: life cycle assessment for energy efficiency in buildings. In: World SB 2014, Barcelona, pp 1–32

  • ISO (2006) ISO 14025: Environmental labels and declarations-type III environmental declarations-principles and procedures

  • Jönsson K (2000) Communicating the environmental characteristics of products. The use of environmental product declarations in the building, energy and automotive industries. Lund University

  • Kaineg R, Kraft G, Neuhauss W et al (2013) NAMA Apoyada para la Vivienda Sustentable en México – Acciones de Mitigación y Paquetes Financieros

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasvaux S, Gantner J, Wittstock B, Bazzana M, Schiopu N, Saunders T, Gazulla C, Mundy JA, Sjöström C, Fullana-i-Palmer P, Barrow-Williams T, Braune A, Anderson J, Lenz K, Takacs Z, Hans J, Chevalier J (2014) Achieving consistency in life cycle assessment practice within the European construction sector: the role of the EeBGuide InfoHub. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1783–1793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minkov N, Schneider L, Lehmann A, Finkbeiner M (2015) Type III environmental declaration programmes and harmonization of product category rules: status quo and practical challenges. J Clean Prod 94:235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemry F, Uihlein A, Colodel CM, Wetzel C, Braune A, Wittstock B, Hasan I, Kreißig J, Gallon N, Niemeier S, Frech Y (2010) Options to reduce the environmental impacts of residential buildings in the European Union—potential and costs. Energy Build 42:976–984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OJEU (2011) Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC

  • Passer A, Kreiner H, Maydl P (2012) Assessment of the environmental performance of buildings: a critical evaluation of the influence of technical building equipment on residential buildings. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:1116–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passer A, Lasvaux S, Allacker K, de Lathauwer D, Spirinckx C, Wittstock B, Kellenberger D, Gschösser F, Wall J, Wallbaum H (2015a) Environmental product declarations entering the building sector: critical reflections based on 5 to 10 years experience in different European countries. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1199–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passer A, Wall J, Kreiner H, Maydl P, Höfler K (2015b) Sustainable buildings, construction products and technologies: linking research and construction practice. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Plan Nacional de Desarrollo (2013) Plan Nacional de Desarrollo (PND) 2013-2018

  • Schenck R (2010) A roadmap to environmental product declarations in the United States. United States of America

  • Secretaría de Economía (2013) Norma Mexicana NMX-AA-164-SCFI-2013 Sustainable Building.-Criteria and Minimal Environmental Requirements

  • SEDATU, CONAVI (2016) Política de Vivienda Sustentable en México. La NAMA como parte de la transformación del sector de vivienda

  • SEMARNAT, SHF, INFONAVIT, CONAVI (2011) Vivienda Sustentable en Mexico

  • SOFTEC (2012) Mexican housing overview. México, D.F

  • Sunyer P, del Valle Isla AEP (2008) Quince años de Desarrollo Sostenible en México, Sripta Nov XII, pp 1–19

  • Wallhagen M, Glaumann M (2011) Design consequences of differences in building assessment tools: a case study. Build Res Inf 39:16–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallhagen M, Glaumann M, Eriksson O, Westerberg U (2013) Framework for detailed comparison of building environmental assessment tools. Buildings 3:39–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Arquitectura, Urbanismo e Ingeniería Civil, Universidad Iberoamericana Ciudad de México, Prolongación de Paseo de la Reforma No. 880, Col. Lomas de Santa Fe, Delegación Álvaro Obregón, 01219, Mexico City, Mexico

    Victor Alberto Arvizu-Piña

  2. Barcelona School of Architecture, Department of Architectural Technology, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Av. Diagonal, 649, 7th floor, 08028, Barcelona, Spain

    Victor Alberto Arvizu-Piña, Albert Cuchí-Burgos & Itzia Gabriela Barrera-Alarcón

Authors
  1. Victor Alberto Arvizu-Piña
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Albert Cuchí-Burgos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Itzia Gabriela Barrera-Alarcón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victor Alberto Arvizu-Piña.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Adriana Del Borghi

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arvizu-Piña, V.A., Cuchí-Burgos, A. & Barrera-Alarcón, I.G. A top-down approach for implementation of Environmental Product Declarations in Mexico’s housing sector. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25, 157–167 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01657-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01657-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation