Bridging the Carbon Gap: Smoothing Collaboration Between Quantity Surveyors and Sustainability Consultants
- Michael Nixon
- 1 day ago
- 4 min read
This week, the VIC/TAS branch of the AIQS hosted its first in-person CPD event of 2025. "Greenstar fundamentals for Quantity Surveyors.
During an insightful presentation, Simon Liley & Hannah Blossom of Cundall provided a helpful overview of the current Green Star tools and upcoming changes.
There was a lot to take in and I will do another article on the changes once the slides to the event have been distributed. However, it was interesting hear Simon (particularly) talk about how Sustainability Consultants and Quantity Surveyors work together and how Cundall are keen to start a conversation about eliminating some of the friction that the current processes can produce.
My initial thoughts/takeaways from the session are as follows:
Context
The construction industry, a significant contributor to global carbon emissions, is under increasing pressure to embrace sustainable practices. Within this evolving landscape, Quantity Surveyors (QS) and Sustainability Consultants (SC) hold crucial roles. However, friction often arises in their collaboration, particularly when it comes to the intricate process of carbon measurement. During the session the Simon explored the common pain points and proposed to start a conversation to find a pathway to a more seamless and effective partnership.
Traditional roles
Traditionally, the QS has been the custodian of cost, meticulously tracking materials, labor, and plant to deliver accurate project budgets and cost control. Sustainability Consultants, on the other hand, bring expertise in environmental performance, assessing embodied and operational carbon, and recommending strategies for reduction. While their objectives are ultimately aligned – a successful and environmentally responsible project – their approaches and priorities can sometimes clash.
Timing and granularity of data
One key area of friction lies in the timing and granularity of data. Sustainability assessments often require detailed material specifications and quantities early in the design phase to accurately calculate embodied carbon. QS, focused on cost estimation, might not have this level of detail readily available at that stage. This can lead to frustration and rework as the design evolves and more precise information becomes accessible.
Furthermore, differing methodologies and data sources can create confusion. Carbon measurement involves various standards and databases, and QS and SC may not always be aligned on which to use or how to interpret the results. This can lead to discrepancies in carbon calculations and a lack of confidence in the final figures. The focus on financial versus environmental metrics can also contribute to misunderstandings. While QS are primarily driven by cost efficiency, SC prioritize carbon reduction, and finding the right balance can be challenging without a shared understanding of the trade-offs.
Overcoming the difficulties
So, how can we dismantle these barriers and cultivate a more collaborative environment? Obviously in our 45 minute session we could not expect to solve all the industries woes. As I understand it Cundalls primary objective is to foster collaboration and start a productive conversation. However, several key strategies can pave the way:
1. Early Engagement and Integrated Workflows: The most crucial step is to involve Sustainability Consultants from the project's inception. This allows for carbon considerations to influence design decisions early on, making it easier for QS to incorporate the necessary data collection into their processes. Note: The session did not explicitly touch on Integrated Building Information Modelling (BIM) workflows but obviously these can play a pivotal role, providing a central platform for sharing material information and facilitating carbon calculations alongside cost estimations.
2. Standardized Methodologies and Data Sharing: Industry-wide adoption of standardized carbon measurement methodologies and consistent data formats is essential. Clear guidelines on which databases and calculation methods to use will reduce ambiguity and ensure greater accuracy and comparability of results. Collaborative platforms and digital tools that allow for seamless data sharing between QS and SC can streamline the process significantly.
3. Upskilling and Cross-Disciplinary Understanding: Investing in training and development for both QS and SC to enhance their understanding of each other's disciplines is vital. QS should gain a better grasp of carbon measurement principles and the importance of early data for sustainability assessments. Conversely, SC should understand the practicalities of cost management and the data collection processes typically employed by QS. This cross-pollination of knowledge will foster empathy and more effective communication.
For example during the session Simon invited those present to reach out and clarify the difference between a BOQ and a schedule or materials. I would say that this (AI produced) response is a reasonable starting point: A Bill of Quantities (BOQ) is a comprehensive document that lists all materials, labour, and other resources required for a construction project, including their quantities and associated costs. A Schedule of Materials (also called a Bill of Materials or BOM), on the other hand, focuses solely on the materials needed for a project, including their quantities, descriptions, and sometimes unit prices
4. Defining Clear Roles and Responsibilities: Establishing clear roles and responsibilities for both QS and SC in the carbon measurement process will prevent overlaps and gaps. A collaborative framework that outlines who is responsible for data collection, calculations, reporting, and target setting will ensure a more efficient workflow.
5. Embracing Technology and Digital Tools: Leveraging digital tools specifically designed for carbon measurement and integration with cost management software can significantly reduce friction. These tools can automate data extraction, perform calculations, and visualize both cost and carbon implications of design choices, facilitating informed decision-making.
By actively addressing these points of friction, the construction industry can unlock the true potential of collaboration between Quantity Surveyors and Sustainability Consultants. A more integrated approach to carbon measurement will not only lead to more accurate and reliable data but also empower project teams to make informed decisions that drive down carbon emissions and contribute to a more sustainable built environment. Ultimately, bridging this carbon gap will pave the way for a greener, more resilient future for the industry.
Thank you to the presenters, organisers and host
Thank you to all parties who contributed to presenting, planning, and hosting the event. In particular, Simon, for an excellent presentation, the CPD Committee ably led by Chair Snow Chi, long-serving volunteers David Gifford and Joanne Chan, and Jane Northey of John Holland for hosting.
Related links
Disclaimer: This information is for general knowledge purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. It is essential to consult with a qualified legal professional for any legal matters or concerns.
Comments