REbuild, the event on sustainable innovation in the built environment, has presented new research on green housesanalyzing in particular the effects of the European directive which was recently approved by the European Parliament. According to the research published for the REbuild Observatory by the Department of Project Cultures of the IUAV University of Venice, real estate redevelopment is rewarded by the market, but with strong inhomogeneities which penalize small and medium-sized cities much more markedly. In particular, in medium-sized cities such as Padua, Mestre or Bergamo, the delta in loss of value of non-redeveloped properties is double that recorded in metropolitan cities such as Milan, Turin or Florence.
The study highlighted that redevelop the existing building stock it means investing in the maintenance of an asset which, if well renovated, is capable of generate new economic value And a better quality of life. But the research also highlights the fact that if most important marketsfor example in Milan or Florence, demand largely supports supply and the most innovative deep retrofit interventions generate their own profitability, in other contexts, such as smaller citieswhere widespread ownership is in the hands of segments of the population with low spending capacity, the situation is very different.
In smaller cities the state must intervene with support
In these contexts, in fact, as underlined by the researchers, it is necessary for the State to intervene with supportto prevent the transition from being perceived as unfair, discriminating against those who do not have resources for retrofitting, as well as causing territorial polarisation, penalizing Italy compared to other European nations.
The research specified that the market recognizes the price changes for higher levels of energy performance and that this recognition is more marked in medium-sized centres compared to large cities. But this also means that the failure to retrain causes one greater erosion of property values in centers that are already characterized by lower, less lively and less dynamic market values. In this context, the risk is that the transition may appear unfair as it disproportionately affects those with lower property values and limited means to provide for technological improvements to properties.
In medium-sized cities the average gap in premium price between Class A and Class G properties is 30%
The study took into consideration the real estate market in six Italian cities: three metropolitan areas (Milan, Turin and Florence) and three medium-sized cities (Padua, Mestre and Bergamo). The sample includes almost 3,000 properties of which the main locational, typological and technological characteristics have been recorded in accordance with the Revenue Agency classification.
As indicated by the data that emerged, in medium-sized cities The average gap in premium price between high efficiency properties (class A) and low efficiency properties (class G) is del 30%while it reaches 14% between class D and class G properties metropolitan citiesThe gap in premium price between high efficiency properties (class A) and low efficiency properties (class G) is del 15%and decreases to 6% between class D and class G properties.
Research has highlighted that the large cities with significant real estate markets I am less influenced by value growth associated with one greater energy efficiency: The value gap is limited due to higher demand and greater market vitality. Smaller cities with less vibrant, competitive and dynamic markets stand out for their more significant gaps. This leads to a polarization of real estate values between territories and social groups, which occurs mainly between those who have the financial means to invest in technological upgrades for their property and those who do not, and again, between owners in large centers and those in medium and small-sized centres.
Micelli: “Where needed, an incentive plan modulated according to a strategic approach must be outlined”
The president of the REbuild Scientific Committee, Ezio Micelli, underlined that “the green transition is a great opportunity, but politicians and institutions are called to pay attention to the high risk of discontent”. According to Micelli, first of all “the construction industry and its entire supply chain must be aligned with the shared values of sustainability, at all levels of the chain”, then “we need to move away from the logic of random bonuses, to outline an incentive plan modulated according to a strategic approach where help is needed. Finally, it is necessary to resolve the problem of the brake on regeneration which too often derives from administrative processes and bureaucracy that are not in step with the urgencies of the times we live in”.
