In aggregate, improvements in IEQ have been estimated to have potential annual savings of:

• $6-14 billion from reduced respiratory disease
• $1-4 billion from reduced allergies and asthma
• $10-30 billion from reduced symptoms of sick building syndrome in the US alone.¹

Healthy occupants miss less work and perform tasks at sustained levels, creating financial incentives from both the bottom-up and top-down.

Worker salaries constitute a majority of the costs accrued over the buildings life cycle, and as a result any increase in worker productivity can lead to significant returns on investments. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute’s Green Developments in Real Estate, office worker salaries are estimated to be 72 times higher than energy costs, and they account for 92% of the life-cycle costs of a building.² Other studies report even higher numbers.³ Estimates find that productivity increases of a few percent to up to 10% can occur with conscious IEQ renovation, often times far outweighing the initial investment.² Direct improvements in worker performance from enhanced IEQ have the potential annual savings of $20-160 billion in the US.¹

1. Fisk, W.J,”Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency.” Annual Rev. Energy Environ. 25 (2000): 537-66 2. Rocky Mountain Institute | Romm, Jospeph J. and Browning, William D. “Greening the Building and the Bottom Line” (1994) 3. DOE LBL | IAQ Scientific Findings Resource Bank - Cost Effectiveness of Improving Indoor Environments to Increase Productivity

IEQ investments can face barriers even with promising payback potential. Quantifying the economic benefit of improved occupant morale and performance can be difficult and often the owner does not directly benefit from the improvements. Bringing the owner and occupants together at the integrative process table and sharing benefits across all stakeholders can provide the necessary incentives to invest in occupant health.