Can a Building Product Help Achieve WELL, BREEAM or LEED Credits?
written by Matt morley, founder of biofilico (well standard advisory - mind category - 2026)
Healthy materials, product documentation and green building certification
Architects, designers, developers and product manufacturers are increasingly focused on the relationship between healthy materials and green building certification.
We see this as a positive shift. Interior finishes, adhesives, coatings, sealers, flooring, furniture, paints and wall systems all influence the quality of the indoor environment. They can affect indoor air quality, occupant comfort, perceived wellbeing, environmental impact and the ability of a project team to document better material choices.
However, there is an important distinction that is often missed.
A product rarely “achieves” a green building certification credit by itself. More often, it contributes to a wider compliance pathway, provides supporting evidence, or helps a project team align with the intent of a standard such as WELL, BREEAM, LEED, Fitwel, RESET Air or Passivhaus.
That distinction matters.
For architects, it helps avoid misleading specification claims.
For product manufacturers, it creates a more credible sustainability narrative.
For developers and occupiers, it supports better decision-making during design, procurement and fit-out.
At Biofilico, this is a recurring part of our healthy building advisory work: translating material attributes, technical documentation and certification requirements into clear, defensible guidance for project teams.
Product claims vs project certification outcomes
The first principle is simple:
A building product can support certification, but certification is usually awarded at project level.
A material or finish may provide:
an Environmental Product Declaration;
VOC emissions certification;
Health Product Declaration or material ingredient disclosure;
Cradle to Cradle, Declare, Greenguard, FSC or BIFMA documentation;
low-carbon or biobased material evidence;
recycled content data;
responsible sourcing information;
installation or maintenance guidance;
low-emitting product test results.
All of this can be valuable. But most certification schemes assess how a product sits within the wider building, interior or operational strategy.
For example, a low-VOC wall finish may support an indoor air quality credit, but the project team may still need to demonstrate compliance across multiple paints, coatings, adhesives, sealants, flooring products, wall systems and furniture packages.
Similarly, an Environmental Product Declaration may contribute to a LEED or BREEAM materials pathway, but the credit may depend on the number of compliant products, their cost, their category, or the way they are calculated within a broader lifecycle assessment.
This is why careful language is essential. It is usually more accurate to say:
“This product may contribute to…”
“This material can provide supporting evidence for…”
“This finish aligns with the intent of…”
“This product documentation may assist project teams targeting…”
Rather than:
“This product achieves the credit.”
The latter may be true in very specific cases, but often it overstates the role of an individual material within a whole-building certification framework.
How healthy materials contribute to WELL
The WELL Building Standard is one of the most relevant frameworks for healthy materials because it focuses directly on the relationship between buildings and human health.
From a materials perspective, WELL can be relevant to:
VOC restrictions;
material transparency;
enhanced material safety;
reduction of hazardous ingredients;
low-emitting finishes;
indoor air quality;
cleaning and maintenance protocols;
moisture and mould prevention;
occupant exposure to pollutants.
In a WELL-aligned project, product documentation can be important. Project teams may need evidence that paints, coatings, adhesives, sealants, flooring, furniture or wall finishes comply with specific emissions thresholds or disclosure requirements.
A healthy material may therefore contribute in several ways.
First, it may help reduce the pollutant load within an interior. Low-emitting materials are particularly important in tightly sealed buildings, where indoor air pollutants can accumulate if ventilation, filtration and material selection are not properly coordinated.
Second, it may support material transparency. Documentation such as HPDs, Declare labels, Cradle to Cradle certification or equivalent ingredient disclosure tools can help project teams understand what a product contains.
Third, it may help align the interior design strategy with broader occupant wellbeing objectives. A product with natural, mineral, low-emitting or vapour-open properties may not automatically “earn” a WELL point, but it can still form part of a healthier interior specification.
For architects and designers, the key is to understand which claim is being made: direct compliance, supporting evidence, or broader alignment.
How healthy materials contribute to USGBC LEED
LEED places significant emphasis on material transparency, environmental impact and indoor environmental quality.
Healthy materials and sustainable finishes may be relevant to LEED categories such as:
low-emitting materials;
Environmental Product Declarations;
material ingredient reporting;
responsible sourcing;
recycled content;
biobased content;
lifecycle impacts;
indoor environmental quality.
For example, a product with a third-party verified EPD may contribute towards a project’s material disclosure strategy. A product with low VOC emissions certification may support indoor environmental quality requirements. A product with HPD, Declare or Cradle to Cradle documentation may assist with material ingredient reporting.
Again, the credit is typically not about a single product in isolation.
LEED often requires a certain number of compliant products, a percentage of cost, or compliance across a defined category of materials. A single healthy material can be useful, but the project team still needs to coordinate the wider schedule of finishes and products.
This makes product-level documentation valuable, but it also means product manufacturers need to be precise. The strongest language usually explains how a product supports LEED documentation pathways rather than claiming that it independently secures LEED credits.
How healthy materials contribute to BREEAM
For UK architects, BREEAM remains one of the most important sustainability certification systems. It can be especially relevant when discussing materials, indoor air quality and responsible specification.
Healthy materials may contribute to BREEAM-related strategies around:
indoor air quality;
VOC emissions;
responsible sourcing;
environmental product declarations;
lifecycle assessment;
construction pollution management;
material efficiency;
durability and maintenance;
responsible fit-out practices.
BREEAM is often more closely connected to UK project delivery, so product manufacturers selling into the UK architectural market need to understand the scheme’s language and evidence requirements.
A wall finish, plaster, floor system, coating or adhesive may be relevant to BREEAM if it has appropriate emissions testing, EPD documentation or responsible sourcing evidence. But the project’s assessor will still consider the product within the overall certification framework.
This creates a clear opportunity for product manufacturers: provide architects with the documentation they need, but avoid implying that a single product guarantees a BREEAM outcome.
The best positioning is specific, cautious and useful:
“This product provides documentation relevant to BREEAM indoor air quality and materials assessment pathways, subject to project-specific review by the appointed assessor.”
That kind of language is more credible than broad sustainability claims.
What about Passivhaus?
Passivhaus (or Passive House) is slightly different.
Unlike WELL, BREEAM or LEED, Passivhaus is not primarily a materials credit system. It is a building performance standard focused on energy demand, airtightness, thermal comfort, ventilation and building physics.
This does not mean materials are irrelevant. They can still support Passivhaus-aligned design objectives.
For example, healthy and breathable interior materials may be relevant to:
vapour-open wall assemblies;
moisture-conscious construction;
low-emission interiors;
thermal comfort;
airtight but healthy indoor environments;
durability and mould prevention;
reduced reliance on synthetic finishes.
However, product manufacturers should be careful not to suggest that a finish “achieves Passivhaus credits” in the same way that it might contribute to a WELL, LEED or BREEAM pathway.
A better formulation is:
“This material may support Passivhaus-aligned design principles around low-emission interiors, vapour-open construction and moisture-conscious building fabric strategies.”
That is a more technically accurate claim.
Why VOCs and indoor air quality still matter
Indoor air quality is one of the clearest links between healthy materials and building performance.
Many materials used in interior fit-out can release volatile organic compounds or other emissions into indoor air. These may come from:
paints;
coatings;
adhesives;
sealants;
primers;
lacquers;
composite wood products;
vinyl flooring;
carpets and backing materials;
synthetic fabrics;
fire-retardant treatments;
cleaning products;
installation products.
The visible finish is only part of the issue. Often, the more significant risk sits behind the surface: adhesive, sealer, primer, lacquer or backing material.
For example, a natural timber floor may be a strong material choice, but the adhesive and finish used during installation still need review. A mineral wall finish may have a compelling health and sustainability story, but the primer, sealer or maintenance system can influence the final indoor air quality outcome.
This is why healthy materials consultancy should look beyond the headline product.
A robust review considers:
the base material;
surface finish;
installation products;
emissions testing;
maintenance requirements;
cleaning protocols;
construction sequencing;
pre-occupancy flush-out;
post-occupancy monitoring.
Healthy interiors are not created by specification alone. They depend on fit-out execution, ventilation, cleaning, procurement and ongoing management.
al wajba palace interiors by ketty schiebeck interiors
Case study: healthy materials advisory for Al Wajba Main Villa, Doha
Biofilico provided healthy interiors and materials advisory for the 4,700m² Al Wajba Main Villa in Doha, Qatar.
Our role was to review the existing interior design proposals from a healthy indoor environment perspective, with particular focus on materials, finishes, coatings, adhesives and fit-out processes that could influence indoor environmental quality.
The objective was to reduce avoidable exposure to VOCs and other potentially harmful substances while respecting the established design intent.
Biofilico reviewed approximately 90 materials and finishes, including:
stone;
timber;
paints and coatings;
carpets and rugs;
curtain and upholstery fabrics;
metals;
tile flooring;
rubber flooring;
mirrors and glazing;
plastics;
adhesives, sealers and fit-out products.
The final assessment identified:
43 full approvals
47 minor modifications
0 major concerns
The outcome was not a wholesale redesign. It was a targeted healthy materials review that helped the project team understand where the specification was already strong, where minor changes could improve indoor environmental quality, and where additional caution was needed.
Recommendations included lower-emitting adhesives, sealers, paints and coatings; alternative specification routes for higher-risk products; pre-occupancy flush-out guidance; and post-occupancy indoor air quality monitoring principles.
The key lesson was that healthy materials advisory can improve a project without disrupting the design concept. Often, the best interventions are precise, technical and relatively low visibility: changing an adhesive, specifying a safer sealer, extending a flush-out period, or adding an indoor air quality testing protocol before occupation.
bolton group headquarters milan
Case study: healthy workplace advisory for Bolton Group headquarters, Milan
Biofilico / Green Healthy Places also provided healthy building and workplace wellness advisory for the phased refurbishment of Bolton Group’s headquarters at Via G.B. Pirelli in Milan.
This was not an interior design role. The work was advisory, supporting the client-side real estate team, HR department and design consultants as the building was gradually refurbished.
The scope included:
healthy materials review;
furniture and finishes sustainability analysis;
biophilia strategy;
indoor air quality;
lighting;
acoustics;
active design;
workplace wellbeing;
certification strategy.
The project also involved a comparison of relevant healthy building certification options, including WELL, LEED Operations + Maintenance, RESET Air and Fitwel. The aim was to help the client evaluate whether formal certification was appropriate, or whether the standards could instead be used as a benchmark for better design and operational decisions.
As part of the work, Biofilico / Green Healthy Places developed a Fitwel strategy matrix for the workplace, identifying current points, possible points and a gap-to-target pathway. The matrix translated certification requirements into practical recommendations across real estate, HR, facilities management and internal communications.
This is an important point.
Healthy buildings are not only about design. They are also about policies, operations, cleaning, food, water, air quality testing, occupant surveys, active commuting, emergency preparedness and internal communication.
Certification frameworks can therefore be useful even when a client does not pursue certification. They provide a structured checklist for improving the workplace.
A practical framework for product manufacturers
Product manufacturers increasingly need to explain how their materials support green building schemes. The challenge is to make those claims useful without overstating them.
A practical approach is to classify each claim into one of four categories of claim types:
Direct contribution / Product evidence appears directly relevant to a specific credit, feature or requirement, subject to project-specific assessment.
Supporting evidence / Product documentation helps the project team within a wider compliance pathway.
Strategic alignment / The product supports the intent of a standard or design principle but may not directly contribute to formal credit achievement.
Further evidence required / The claim should be softened, avoided or supported by additional testing or documentation before use.
This framework is useful because it helps product teams, architects and specification consultants speak the same language.
For example:
An EPD may be a direct contribution to a materials disclosure pathway.
VOC emissions testing may provide supporting evidence for indoor air quality requirements.
Vapour permeability may offer strategic alignment with moisture-conscious construction or Passivhaus principles.
A broad claim such as “improves wellbeing” may require further evidence unless it can be linked to a specific mechanism, standard or tested performance attribute.
This is not about weakening a product’s sustainability story. It is about making the story more credible.
What architects need from manufacturers
Architects do not need vague claims. They need evidence that helps them specify with confidence.
The most useful product documentation usually includes:
current EPDs;
VOC emissions test certificates;
material ingredient disclosures;
HPDs, Declare labels or equivalent transparency documents;
installation guidance;
maintenance requirements;
product category applicability;
fire, moisture and durability data;
any relevant certification crosswalks;
clear statements of which claims are verified and which are interpretive.
Architect-facing CPD content should therefore do more than promote material benefits. It should help architects understand how the product can be used responsibly within real projects.
Good CPD content answers questions such as:
Which certification schemes is this product most relevant to?
Which credits or features might it support?
What evidence is available?
What evidence is missing?
Which claims are direct, and which are broader alignment claims?
What language should the architect use in specifications?
What should be confirmed with the project assessor or consultant?
This is where product manufacturers can add genuine value. The best product sustainability communication makes life easier for the architect, the sustainability consultant and the assessor.
Healthy materials need both technical accuracy and commercial clarity
There is a balance to strike.
If the language is too cautious, the product’s value is under-communicated.
If the language is too assertive, the claim may become technically inaccurate.
The right approach sits between the two.
Healthy material claims should be:
specific;
evidence-based;
aligned with recognised standards;
honest about project-level dependencies;
clear about the role of third-party assessors;
useful for architects and specification teams.
This is especially important for products with strong natural, low-emitting, low-carbon or transparent material stories. These products often do have a valuable role to play, but that role needs to be described correctly.
A natural clay plaster, mineral paint, timber product, acoustic panel, flooring system or furniture item may all contribute to healthier interiors. But the strength of the claim depends on the documentation, the standard, the product category and the project context.
Using certification frameworks without pursuing certification
One of the most useful aspects of standards such as WELL, BREEAM, LEED, Fitwel and RESET Air is that they can inform better decisions even when a project does not pursue formal certification.
A developer may not want the cost or complexity of a full certification process. A private client may not need a plaque. A workplace occupier may want to improve conditions for staff without committing to a formal rating.
In these cases, certification frameworks can still be used as benchmarks.
They can guide:
healthier material selection;
low-VOC fit-out strategies;
indoor air quality testing;
ventilation and filtration standards;
cleaning policies;
daylight and lighting decisions;
acoustic comfort;
active design;
healthy food and water provision;
biophilic design;
occupant feedback;
operational policies.
This is often where healthy building advisory becomes most valuable. The consultant’s role is not always to secure certification. It may be to translate the best ideas from certification standards into practical, proportionate, project-specific recommendations.
Conclusion: one product can contribute, but the project earns the credit
Healthy materials matter. They can reduce indoor air quality risks, support transparency, lower environmental impact, improve specification quality and help project teams align with green building standards.
But a product’s role needs to be described accurately.
In most cases, a product does not single-handedly achieve a WELL, BREEAM, LEED or Fitwel outcome. Instead, it contributes evidence, supports a compliance pathway, or aligns with the intent of a healthier, more sustainable building.
For architects, this distinction supports better specification decisions.
For developers and occupiers, it reduces risk and improves project quality.
For product manufacturers, it creates a more credible and useful sustainability narrative.
The future of healthy materials is not about generic claims. It is about clear evidence, careful wording and a better understanding of how products contribute to the wider indoor environment.
Biofilico healthy materials consultancy
Biofilico advises developers, architects, designers and product manufacturers on healthy materials, indoor environmental quality and green building certification alignment.
Our work includes:
healthy materials reviews;
low-VOC interior strategies;
product certification mapping;
WELL, BREEAM, LEED, Fitwel and RESET Air alignment;
CPD claims review for product manufacturers;
indoor environmental quality strategy;
healthy interiors consultancy for residential, workplace, hospitality and mixed-use projects.
For product manufacturers, we help translate technical documentation into clear, architect-facing certification guidance.
For project teams, we help identify healthier materials, finishes and fit-out strategies that support better indoor environments.
Contact Biofilico to discuss healthy materials, certification mapping or indoor environmental quality advisory for your next project.