Sustainability and energy efficiency certifications have become an important benchmark in the construction market. They promise performance, reduced operating costs, and a lower environmental impact. In practice, however, an increasing number of certified buildings fail to deliver the expected results in operation.

The disconnect stems from the way certifications are obtained. Most schemes assess compliance with criteria during the design phase or upon completion of construction, rather than real long-term performance. Indicators are calculated based on standardized assumptions that rarely reflect how the building is actually used.

Another factor is the fragmented approach. Design, execution, and operation are treated as separate stages, and certification does not guarantee continuity between them. A building may meet formal requirements, but minor execution deviations, lack of fine-tuning, or insufficient maintenance can quickly erode initial performance.

In addition, the emphasis on scoring sometimes leads to solutions optimized for certification rather than for functionality. Systems become complex, difficult to operate, and sensitive to errors, which affects daily use.

Certification is not useless, but it is not synonymous with functionality. Without post-commissioning monitoring, clear operational responsibility, and evaluation of real performance, certified buildings risk remaining efficient only on paper.

(Photo: Freepik)