• Consider all aspects of obsolescence. When planning capital outlays, investors and authorities alike should consider the multiple dimensions of obsolescence – age and design, regulatory and location – in order to maximize return on investment.
• Anticipate changes in real estate demand. Within cities, the fluidity of office demand is contrasting with acute shortfalls in residential, experience-based retail and urban logistics supply to reshape spatial development and regeneration patterns.
• Identify locations to prioritize. Upwards of US$1.2 trillion in capital expenditure globally could be needed to bring office assets at the end of their life cycle up to current standards. Additionally, 78% of office product and 83% of necessary capex is found in the U.S. and Europe. 
• Plan for the long term. On the other hand, data centers, student accommodation and other emerging and alternative classes are only beginning their life-cycle journeys, with implications for strategic asset management into the 2030s.

Pressure on owners to extensively retrofit their buildings is also coming from both private and public forces with respect to sustainability and decarbonization. Although the share of emissions sourced directly from buildings is beginning to flatline, they still comprise upwards of 39% to 42% of global emissions on an annual basis. In order to reach impending net-zero targets, the scale of retrofitting will need to accelerate markedly. The top eight markets for regulatory stranding risk have more than 86 million square meters of office product in need of near-term capex due to tightening compliance standards alone.

The upfront expense of necessary capital expenditures, however, comes with longer-term benefits to operating costs over the life cycle of a given asset. Whole-building retrofits involving a reduction in energy usage of between 40% and 65% have an average saving of US$31 per square meter. If applied under a medium scenario for global at-risk office product in the eight highest-risk markets for stranding, this would yield US$2.7 billion in annual energy savings alone for institutional office owners. These opex benefits are coinciding with sustained growth in tenant and investor demand alike for low-carbon buildings across asset classes and intensifying emissions reporting and benchmarking mandates from national and local governments. As a result, owners who are proactive about bringing product up to and above sustainability expectations will find greater return on investment and minimize the incidence of stranding.

The geographic concentration of aging product and places in cities with higher shares of emissions coming from buildings means that the rewards from decarbonization scale rapidly. Under even a moderate scenario, more than 52 million square meters of current office product in Boston, Washington DC, Paris, London, Seoul and Tokyo is likely functionally obsolete, but more than 60% of emissions in these metro areas originates from the built environment. Similarly, European and Asian cities with strengthening regulatory regimes also have more than half of their emissions emanating from buildings, meaning that the risk of stranding is now an impetus to accelerate wholesale retrofitting and meeting net-zero targets.

Sustainability and regulatory changes will also affect the spectrum of asset classes at highly variable rates, with significant implications for capital costs, portfolio optimization and stranding risk. Most sectors have a typical site energy use intensity of 800 to 1,550kBtu per square meter, although this rises above 2,400 for data centers and approaches 3,500 for lab space. On the other hand, warehouses fall below the 500kBtu per square meter threshold and the broader industrial and logistics segment skews near the bottom, creating significant opportunity for a 100-200bps rise in returns in stringent compliance regions such as Europe. 

There are four core pathways to avoid stranding risk, each with requisite market, financial and political considerations