Study links green building design to higher cognitive performance ⁰

People who work in well-ventilated offices with below-average levels of indoor pollutants and carbon dioxide have significantly higher cognitive functioning scores in crucial areas such as responding to a crisis or developing strategy than those who work in offices with typical levels. That is the headline finding of a new study from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health’s Center for Health and the Global Environment, SUNY Upstate Medical University, and Syracuse University published this week in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.The researchers looked at people’s experiences in “green” vs. “non-green” buildings in a double-blind study. The findings suggest that the indoor environments in which many people work daily could be adversely affecting cognitive function-and that, conversely, improved air quality could greatly increase the cognitive function performance of workers.

“We have been ignoring the 90 percent. We spend 90 percent of our time indoors and 90 percent of the cost of a building are the occupants, yet indoor environmental quality and its impact on health and productivity are often an afterthought,” said Joseph Allen, assistant professor of exposure assessment science, director of the Healthy Buildings Program at the Harvard Center for Health and the Global Environment, and lead author of the study. “These results suggest that even modest improvements to indoor environmental quality may have a profound impact on the decision-making performance of workers.”

Researchers wanted to look at the impact of ventilation, chemicals, and carbon dioxide on workers’ cognitive function because, as buildings have become more energy efficient, they have also become more airtight, increasing the potential for poor indoor environmental quality. Building-related illnesses and “sick building syndrome” were first reported in the 1980s as ventilation rates decreased. In response, there has been an emphasis on sustainable design–“green” buildings that are energy efficient and are also designed to enhance indoor environmental quality.

The researchers designed this study to identify the specific attributes of green building design that influence cognitive function, an objective measure of productivity.

In the new study, researchers utilized a double-blinded, repeated measures design to look at the decision-making performance of 24 participants–including architects, designers, programmers, engineers, creative marketing professionals, and managers–while they worked in a controlled office environment at the Total Indoor Environmental Quality (TIEQ) Laboratory at the Syracuse Center of Excellence in Environmental and Energy Systems.

For six days in November 2014, while the participants performed their normal work, the researchers exposed them to various simulated building conditions: conventional conditions with relatively high concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as those emitted from common materials in offices; green conditions with low VOC concentrations; green conditions with enhanced ventilation (dubbed “green+”); and conditions with artificially elevated levels of CO2, independent of ventilation. At the end of each day, they conducted cognitive testing on the participants.

They found that cognitive performance scores for the participants who worked in the green+ environments were on average double those of participants who worked in conventional environments; scores for those working in green environments were 61 percent higher. Measuring nine cognitive function domains, researchers found that the largest improvements occurred in the areas of:

• crisis response (97 percent higher scores in green conditions and 131 percent higher in green+)
• strategy (183 percent and 288 percent higher)
• information usage (172 percent and 299 percent higher)

In addition, when researchers looked at the effect of CO2, not normally thought of as a direct indoor pollutant, they found that, for seven of the nine cognitive functions tested, average scores decreased as CO2 levels increased to levels commonly observed in many indoor environments.

According to Usha Satish, professor, Department of Psychiatry, SUNY Upstate Medical University, “The major significance of this finding lies in the fact that these are the critical decision making parameters that are linked to optimal and productive functioning. Losing components of these skills impacts how people handle their day to day lives.”