For years, ESG in real estate was something owners talked about and few priced. That is changing. In East Africa, the gap between sustainable buildings and the rest is starting to show up where it counts — in occupancy, in operating cost, and increasingly in value.
From narrative to numbers
The shift is from ESG as a story told in a brochure to ESG as data reported against a recognised framework. GRI-aligned reporting gives owners a structured, comparable way to evidence performance rather than assert it.
Why valuers are paying attention
Sustainability factors influence the variables that drive value: energy and water costs, tenant demand, regulatory exposure and the risk of obsolescence. When those move, value moves — and a current valuation should reflect it.
- Lower operating costs improve net income.
- Stronger tenant demand supports occupancy and rents.
- Green credentials reduce the risk of premature obsolescence.
The question is shifting from “does sustainability pay?” to “what does ignoring it cost?”
Retrofits and the value case
Green retrofits are increasingly assessed not as goodwill but as capital projects with a return — lower running costs, improved lettability and a longer competitive life for the building. The discipline is the same as any investment: cost, benefit, payback.
How we frame it
We assess sustainability factors as part of the valuation and advisory process, drawing on GRI-aligned reporting principles so the impact on value is explicit rather than implied.
The takeaway
ESG has moved from the margins to the model. Owners who measure and report it credibly will increasingly find it reflected on their balance sheet — and those who don’t may find the cost shows up anyway.