Pablo Sepulveda explores upstream and downstream thinking at AAD event 

At a recent Australian Architects Declare event hosted by Woods Bagot, Impact Futures Sustainability Leader for Australia Pablo Sepulveda challenged attendees to look beyond building performance and consider a broader measure of sustainability, one that examines both what a project takes from the world and what it gives back.      

The built environment has made significant progress in measuring sustainability. Ratings, certifications and benchmarks have helped establish clearer expectations for performance and created a common language for evaluating projects.  

As Pablo Sepulveda observed, “Sustainability is not just about the performance of the building. The real purpose of sustainability is doing something good for people and the planet.”  

That perspective formed the basis of his contribution to the evening’s discussion, which centred on the theme Sustainability does not always photograph well. While a completed building can reveal design quality and expected operational performance, many of the factors that determine its true impact remain hidden from view.   

To illustrate this, Pablo believes sustainability should be considered in two directions: upstream (planet’s impact) and downstream (people’s impact). Together, they offer a more complete picture of a building’s environmental and social impact.  

Looking upstream

Much of a building’s environmental footprint is established long before the first shovel hits the ground. By the time construction begins, countless decisions have already shaped its environmental impact. The challenge is that many of the resources on which the industry depends are becoming more difficult and energy-intensive to obtain. Even the transition to renewable energy brings new demands and challenges. 

These are the impacts that are rarely visible in a completed project. The extraction of materials, the energy required to produce them and the pressure placed on natural systems all occur well before a building opens its doors. Yet they play a significant role in determining its environmental footprint.  

For Pablo, these realities raise a more important question than whether a building performs efficiently, noting, “Are we merely slowing damage or actively repairing ecosystems?” 

The distinction is significant. Reducing harm remains essential, but growing environmental pressures are prompting the profession to think more broadly about the role the built environment can play in supporting healthier and more resilient ecosystems.    

This shift also requires revisiting some long-held assumptions about efficiency. Technical solutions continue to improve but they cannot compensate for asking the wrong questions in the first place. Efficiency without sufficiency in mind would not solve the equation. Decisions about what should be built, why it should be built and who it serves often have a greater influence on sustainability outcomes than any technology applied later in the process.

Looking downstream

If upstream thinking focusses on what a project demands from the world, downstream thinking considers the value it creates.  

Buildings shape daily experience in ways that are difficult to quantify, influence wellbeing, opportunity and connection over time. These outcomes may not feature prominently in sustainability reporting, yet they often determine whether a project creates lasting value.   

Housing, workplaces, school and civic infrastructure all serve a broader purpose than providing shelter. Their success is reflected in the experiences they enable and the contribution they make to the communities around them.  

This is why Pablo argued that sustainability should be considered through a wider lens than operational efficiency alone, “The question is not about doing things more efficiently, but about doing more with less.” 

The strongest outcomes emerge when environmental responsibility and social value are considered together. Adaptive reuse projects, climate-responsive schools and community-focussed developments demonstrated how thoughtful design decisions can create benefits that extend well beyond performance metrics.  

The industry’s ability to measure performance will continue to improve. The greater challenge may be ensuring equal attention is given to the decisions and outcomes that are harder to see, but which ultimately shape a project’s lasting impact.