Acceptance of novel low environmental impact construction products
In 2025, addressing challenges around the acceptance of novel low environmental impact construction, the Emergent Sustainable Built Environment Materials Innovation Network (ESBEM) ran a series of webinars to help innovators and adopters obtain a base level of understanding in construction regulatory compliance, testing, test standards, third party certification and carbon accounting. From this and follow on activities, we have distilled this short summary, and through further community engagement identified a fundamental blocker that makes scaling difficult for innovators.
From product development to real-world pilot
As innovators scale up from product development into market penetration and manufacturing, they usually see the need to invest; often delivering successful pilot deployments to showcase the potential to adopters and investors is critical.
Delivering real-world pilots can be different to the early-stage trials used to develop the product. They are larger scale and ideally part of the permanent works. This escalates the level of risk and brings in more critical stakeholders; the nature of these stakeholders is not to be underestimated, they are de facto key decision makers, even by inaction. As such, they are described in this article as “gatekeepers”.
For a typical project, the gatekeepers that need to be satisfied to some level include: the asset owner, the specifiers, the constructor, the insurers and building control.
Managing risk through independent evidence
The acceptance of products on a project is a process of Risk Management for each gatekeeper, who will each have a different perspective. Technical risk is mitigated through the testing evidence provided and/or 3rd party certification. Test evidence must be provided by independent UKAS accredited test centres, where available, and should be to recognised codes and standards, where available. In many applications, specific test or performance standards will be implied to satisfy regulatory compliance.
The principle of independent evidence is fundamental: the manufacturer makes performance claims and provides independent recognised tests to prove their claims.
Further, for advantageous market positioning, particularly of ESBEM materials, this principle can be applied to other performance claims, such as productivity, air quality, reduced site hazards or socio-economic benefits. For low environmental impact claims, it is especially important to evidence this, ideally through an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) from a “Programme Operator”, or at least an independent Life Cycle Assessment (LCA).
Why third-party certification matters
Third party certification is voluntary and is a powerful enabler for market penetration; it is increasingly a critical requirement for the adoption of novel products in construction. This is particularly true for higher risk situations or for novel materials that fall outside of existing test codes. Third party certification is a rigorous audit of the evidence provided against the claimed performance and requirements for regulatory compliance, backed up with surveillance audits of the input materials and manufacturing production line consistency, “Factory Production Control”; all communicated as a simple-to-follow certificate and document. This simplicity and independent reputable endorsement is deeply valued by many gatekeepers.
There are a number of certification bodies (see resources) with differing scopes and significantly differing alignment to warranty provider needs. A certificate obtained for the warranty provider on one project may not be complete for a different warranty provider on a different project.
The scale-up challenge
Within ESBEM, we are working to understand and hence identify or develop solutions to a recurrent issue: third party certification is highly desirable, if not essential, to adoption at scale of products. Putting aside the significant time and investment involved, this requires a level of product maturity and an auditable production line. Often this auditable scaled production line does not exist; the 3rd party certification being sought to allow the market to be evidenced before committing to scale-up investment.
Having collected a lot of definition and the detail of this problem through workshops, conversations and surveys, we are now planning further activities (July 2026 onwards) to identify, explore and communicate solutions to this regular challenge.
Useful pointers on testing and certification
In addition, from the webinar series in 2025, we have collated some useful pointers for innovators starting to scale. View the full webinar recordings.
Planning testing and certification
Early engagement with 3rd party certifiers, BRE (Advice Pro), test houses, RTOs or consultants can clarify and identify the performance requirements, compliance needs, target market and testing evidence required.
Testing evidence is proportionate to the product risk and construction system complexity.
Certification process
BRE can provide a snapshot endorsement that product claims are met through an Environmental Technical Verification (ETV). While in no way equal to a full 3rd party certificate, this can help reassure adopters on the performance claims of a new product.
Third party certification is provided against set criteria: scope, usage, compliance, installation or construction method, materials, performance, manufacturing process and materials. It is important to fully understand and fix these at the start of the certification process. After certification, these are verified by periodic audit, so changes necessitate rapid update or renewal.
The certification process can be more streamlined and assured through early engagement with the certifying organisation and having clarity of exact scope.
Specific projects
Project timelines can preclude novel products that lack comprehensive test evidence or 3rd party certification; early engagement across project teams is crucial to designing for and adopting novel products.
Gatekeepers will equally consider their commercial risk (cost, liability, availability, liabilities, reputation), as well as technical risk.
Warranty providers consider systems-level technical risks and their historical claims experience.
The NHBC (National House Building Council) can have dual roles: warranty provider for new homes and Building Control. This latter role precludes them from providing or inferring any design guidance.
Some project use cases, particularly relating to fire performance, will demand performance exceeding regulatory minima.
Fire compliance relates to many construction products to some degree and addresses both the Reaction and the Resistance to Fire. During product development, the simple, rapid, cone calorimetry test can be valuable for benchmarking.
Sustainable materials with bio or polymer content struggle to satisfy BSEN 13501 Class A2 “non-combustible”; this can preclude applications where this is part of regulatory compliance, or is insisted upon by one of the gatekeepers, such as the insurer.
Resources
Testing centre directories
- The Construction Index
- UK Construction Directory
- Test House Directory
- UKAS accredited construction testing labs
Third-party certification providers
BRE Group services
Other resources
Related programme
Emergent Sustainable Built Environment Materials Innovation Network
Driving rapid adoption of UK sustainable construction materials to reduce environmental impact.