Global Analysis of WELL Certification: Influence, Types of Spaces and Level Achieved

Abstract

The built environment directly impacts human health and well-being, yet most green certification systems prioritize energy efficiency over occupant health. The WELL Building Standard (WELL), launched in 2014, addresses this gap by focusing on the health and comfort of building users. Despite its growing importance, limited academic research systematically examines its global implementation. This study will fill this research gap by analyzing 1559 WELL-certified projects worldwide using the WELL database. The results reveal that 50% of certifications are concentrated in China and the United States, while regions such as Africa and Latin America show minimal adoption. Most projects are office buildings (83%), with fewer in education, healthcare and residential sectors. Additionally, most certified projects have achieved Gold or Platinum levels, and there has been a notable increase in certifications since the COVID-19 pandemic. By identifying geographic and typological disparities, this research provides a global overview of WELL adoption and offers insights for practitioners and policymakers seeking to promote health-focused building practices.

1. Introduction

People spend between 70% and 80% of their lives inside buildings for various purposes, such as housing, work and education [1]. In this context, several authors have highlighted that the office environment significantly influences work efficiency and employee health, which are key factors in business performance [2]. In this way, sustainability rating standards such as BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology) have been developed to improve occupant comfort. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is the most widely recognized certification globally, implemented in over 100 countries and boasting more than 18,000 certified projects in the United States alone [1,3]. However, these certifications predominantly focus on the energy performance of buildings, emissions and acoustics, addressing occupant health and well-being only partially [1,4]. For instance, in the case of BREEAM, only one out of nine categories addresses health and well-being, while in LEED, one of six categories focuses on this aspect through the evaluation of indoor air quality [1].

One approach that has gained attention in recent years is the WELL Building Standard (WELL), developed by the International Well Building Institute (IWBI) in 2014. This certification was the first to evaluate the impact of buildings on human well-being, with a special focus on user comfort and health improvement [3]. WELL is not an acronym in the traditional sense, like LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). Instead, the term WELL was chosen to reflect the certification’s focus on human well-being within the built environment. Adopted across sectors such as offices, schools, hotels and homes, its popularity surged during the COVID-19 pandemic [5,6]. Studies show that WELL-certified buildings enhance occupant satisfaction, productivity and indoor air quality, with users reporting improvements in energy, mood and even dietary habits [7,8,9,10,11]. In this regard, Kent et al. (2024) [12] noted, after surveying 1634 WELL- and LEED-certified buildings, there is a 39% higher likelihood of WELL occupants feeling more satisfied than those in LEED-certified buildings. Recent studies have positioned green certifications, particularly WELL, not only as tools for performance measurement but also as enablers of innovation in design, materials and project processes [13].

Given the limited adoption of this international standard, this research aims to analyze WELL-certified projects globally, identify the regions where it has been implemented, track the evolution of certified projects, examine the certification levels achieved, and explore the types of spaces certified. To achieve this target, the WELL project database is analyzed.

While the WELL Building Standard has gained recognition in recent years, there is a lack of comprehensive and up-to-date academic studies that analyze its global implementation [14]. Most of the existing literature focuses on individual case studies, user satisfaction or comparisons with other certifications.

Therefore, this study contributes to closing this gap by (i) providing a global characterization of WELL-certified projects across countries and building types, (ii) identifying regional and typological disparities in WELL adoption and (iii) offering a quantitative baseline that supports future research and policy decisions in the field of healthy buildings.

2. WELL Certification

WELL is an updated and comprehensive framework that promotes environments that enhance human health and well-being [15]. This standard guide to construction practices and organizational policies helps to create spaces that positively impact occupants’ physical and mental health.

The first version of the standard, WELL v1, included 100 evaluation features across seven categories related to human health and well-being, such as water, air, health, light, nutrition, comfort and mind [5]. In 2018, the IWBI launched WELL v2, incorporating strategies grounded in the latest scientific research. This version highlights design interventions, operational protocols and organizational policies fostering a culture focused on health and well-being. This version integrates insights from a broad community of professionals, public health experts and building scientists worldwide.

2.1. WELL Concepts

WELL v2 is structured around ten central concepts, each focusing on a different aspect of health and well-being within the built environment. These concepts are implemented through “features”, which are categorized as either preconditions or optimizations as follows:

-

Preconditions: These are the essential requirements that must be met for a project to achieve a WELL certification. They form the foundational elements necessary to create a healthy built environment and are mandatory for all projects. Preconditions ensure that fundamental health and well-being needs are comprehensively addressed.

-

Optimizations: These are optional pathways that projects can pursue to earn additional points beyond preconditions. Optimizations offer flexibility, allowing project teams to tailor their approach to specific health objectives or building characteristics. Each optimization is assigned a point value, reflecting its potential impact on enhancing health and well-being. Scoring is determined by the extent to which an optimization addresses specific health concerns or opportunities to promote well-being.

The ten concepts are air, water, nourishment, light, movement, thermal comfort, sound, materials, mind and community.

2.2. Types of Projects

WELL v2 classifies projects into the following two main categories based on the nature of the owner and the primary users of the space:

-

Owner-Occupied Projects: In these projects, the owner predominantly occupies the space and may use it for their business operations or other activities. Regular occupants, such as employees, are typically affiliated with the project owner. Special considerations apply to interior projects, where the owner rents space within a larger building (the “base building”). Such projects may need to coordinate with building owners to comply with requirements that affect shared systems or common areas.

-

WELL Core Projects: This category is designed for core and shell buildings, often called base buildings, where most of the space is leased to tenants. In WELL Core projects, the owner occupies a smaller portion of the building, while the remainder is leased to various tenants. WELL Core focuses on implementing essential health and wellness features that benefit all building occupants, including tenants. To be eligible for the WELL Core Certification, at least 75% of the project’s area must be occupied by tenants or serve as a shared space. Mixed-use buildings can also qualify for WELL Core if designated criteria are met, with specific guidelines on managing the interaction between tenant-occupied and owner-occupied spaces.

2.3. Scoring and Certification Levels

WELL v2 uses a point-based system to evaluate and certify projects. Projects must first meet all preconditions and then accumulate points through optimizations to achieve a certification. The system allows for a maximum of 110 points, including 100 points distributed across the ten concepts and an additional 10 points available under the innovation concept. Each feature or part of a feature contributes to the total points based on its assessed impact on health and well-being. Projects can earn up to 12 points per concept but may seek additional points through innovation if they have maximized their score in a particular concept. WELL offers different certification levels—Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum—reflecting the project’s commitment to health and well-being [5]. Architectural studies showed that a WELL certification complements other green certifications and places greater emphasis on spatial and ergonomic aspects that promote occupant well-being [16].

Table 1. Scoring and certification.

Minimum Score	WELL Certification		WELL Core Certification
	Minimum Points per Item	Certification Level	Minimum Points per Item	Certification Level
40 points	0	Bronze	0	Bronze
50 points	1	Silver	0	Silver
60 points	2	Gold	0	Gold
80 points	3	Platinum	0	Platinum

shows the scoring and certification levels [15].

2.4. Certification Process

Figure 1 shows the WELL certification process. It begins by registering the project on the WELL digital platform. If WELL precertification is desired—allowing owners to demonstrate their commitment to health and well-being in the built environment—the required documentation for the intent stage is prepared and submitted for review by the certifying entity, Green Business Certification Inc (GBCI). Should any observations be identified, they must be addressed to obtain the desired precertification. Following this, the documentation for the implementation stage is prepared and submitted to GBCI for review. Once the WELL reviewer completes and approves the review, a performance testing organization schedules an on-site performance verification. After all required strategies have been implemented, the WELL certification is granted, and it remains valid for 3 years. Therefore, an application for recertification must be submitted every 3 years to maintain the validity of the certification.

3. Methodology

This research employs a mixed approach; the mixed approach has been used to conduct an empirical analysis in projects of other certifications, such as LEED [17,18,19]. This approach allows for a global analysis of environmental certifications to be achieved and for the results to be analyzed and interpreted based on the current literature. In the first stage, a quantitative statistical analysis is performed using the official database of the International WELL Building Institute (IWBI). The databases of environmental certifications have been used in different research projects because they allow for the analysis of the strategies and scope of the certifications [20,21,22]. The data collected include the geographic distribution (classification of certified projects by country and continent), certification level and building typology. In the second stage, based on the results of the quantitative analysis, the results are interpreted and compared with those of previous studies.

Figure 2 details the selection process of projects for the quantitative analysis. This section follows the methodology developed by Condezo-Solano et al. (2024) in [23] for selecting the projects to be evaluated. This methodology consists of five stages, described as follows: In the preliminary stage (1), the WELL project database [15] was used as the primary source as it consolidates information on a variety of certified projects across different sectors. In the identification stage (2), 47,899 projects were retrieved from the WELL project database as of 15 July 2024, the date of access for this study. In the eligibility stage (3), only projects that had obtained a WELL certification were considered. As a result, 603 pre-certified projects and 34,784 registered projects were excluded. In the exclusion stage (4), the remaining 12,512 projects were further reviewed, and 10,927 projects with complementary WELL ratings (equity rating, health–safety rating and performance rating) were excluded, leaving 1585 projects remaining. Additionally, 13 projects with the WELL compliance rating seal and 13 projects with the WELL community certification were excluded. Finally, in the inclusion stage (5), an analysis was conducted on the remaining 1559 projects.

4. Results

4.1. WELL Certifications in the World

From the analysis of the 1559 projects in the WELL database, there are certified projects in 49 countries, and there are projects in five continents; the analysis of certification by continent is detailed below.

Asia: This continent has the highest number of certified projects (690), representing 44.3% of the total projects under study, and 13 countries have certified projects. The country with the highest number of projects is China, with 469 certified projects, which represents 30% of the total number of certified projects and 68% of the continent; the country with the second highest number of projects is India (98), followed by Japan (59), Taiwan (20) and Singapore (15), with 8 projects in the Middle East, namely in the United Arab Emirates, and the rest of the projects (31) are in Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Turkey.

Europe: This region has the second highest number of certified projects (427), accounting for 27.4% of certified projects. In contrast to Asia, the projects are distributed over more countries (22) and are not centralized in a single country. From the analysis, the projects per country are distributed as follows: France (89 projects), Spain (84), the Netherlands (54), the United Kingdom (54), Italy (31), Poland (25), Finland (15), Hungary (11), Sweden (12) and Ireland (10). The countries described above account for 90% of certified projects in Europe. In addition, France, Spain, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Italy account for 75% of the total number of certified projects. The remaining 10% of the certified projects (42) are distributed in the Czech Republic, Germany, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Norway, Switzerland, Austria, Bulgaria and Luxembourg.

America: This is the third continent with the highest number of certified projects (379), representing 23.6% of certified projects with projects in 10 countries. In this region, like Asia, the projects are centered in a single country, such as the United States, where there are 312 projects, representing 20% of the number of certified projects in the world and 82% of the projects in the continent. The second country in the region is Canada, with 35 projects, followed by Brazil with 12 projects and Mexico with 3 projects. The remaining six projects are distributed among Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Haiti, Panama and Peru.

Oceania: A total of 73 projects were obtained on this continent, representing 4.7% of the total number of projects analyzed. The projects in this region are concentrated in two countries: Australia, with 71 projects, and New Zealand, with 2.

Africa: This continent has only one WELL project located in South Africa.

Table 2. WELL-certified project by country.

Country	Quantity	Total Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
China	469	30.08%	30.08%
United States	312	20.01%	50.10%
India	98	6.29%	56.38%
France	89	5.71%	62.09%
Spain	84	5.39%	67.48%
Australia	71	4.55%	72.03%
Japan	59	3.78%	75.82%
Netherlands	54	3.46%	79.28%
United Kingdom	54	3.46%	82.75%
Canada	35	2.25%	84.99%
Italy	31	1.99%	86.98%
Poland	25	1.60%	88.58%
Taiwan Region	20	1.28%	89.87%
Finland	15	0.96%	90.83%
Singapore	15	0.96%	91.79%
Brazil	12	0.77%	92.56%
Others	116	7.44%	100.00%
Total	1559	-	-

below shows the main countries with certified projects and their partial and cumulative percentages.

Analyzing Table 2, which shows WELL-certified projects by country, revealed several interesting insights.

The United States and China lead, accounting for 50.10% of all certified projects, indicating a significant concentration of projects in these two countries. This percentage can be attributed to site-specific factors, government incentives and a greater awareness of occupant well-being in construction projects. In addition to the United States and China, other countries such as India, France and Spain show a notable presence, collectively contributing to 67.48% of certified projects. This percentage suggests a global trend toward adopting WELL standards across different regions.

Countries such as Australia, Japan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom also have a modest representation, each contributing between 3.46% and 4.55% of the total. This percentage reflects a diverse and growing global interest in WELL certification. Some countries, such as Brazil and others categorized as “Others”, have a smaller presence but still contribute significantly, accounting for 7.44% of the total. This percentage demonstrates that WELL certification is gaining worldwide recognition, though the intensity of adoption varies by country.

4.2. WELL Certification by Year and Level

The second analysis carried out with the obtained information was the annual evolution of WELL certification and the level of certification obtained, and the results can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3 shows that the number of certified projects has grown significantly in recent years. Between 2014 and 2020, there were 361 certified projects, representing 23.2% of the total. Between the years 2014 and 2016, due to the start of certification, the number of projects was 13, and between 2017 and 2020, 348 projects managed to be certified. The year 2021 shows a growth of 51 projects compared to 2020, representing a 44% growth compared to 2020. The year 2022 saw more significant growth, with 326 projects compared to 160 projects in 2021, representing an increase of more than 100% in the number of certified projects. The year 2023 also saw growth compared to 2022, with 420 projects being certified in that year, which is 94 more projects compared to the previous year, representing a growth of 29%. In 2024, up to the date of the study, 292 projects were obtained, representing 69% of projects compared to 2023; considering that the analysis was performed in the middle of the year and following the trend of previous years, growth in WELL certification is projected.

In addition to the analysis by year,

Table 3. WELL-certified project by year and level.

Year	Pilot	Bronze	Silver	Gold	Platinum	Total
2014	5	-	-	-	1	6
2015	-	-	-	1	-	1
2016	-	-	2	4	-	6
2017	1	-	22	19	2	44
2018	-	-	29	45	6	80
2019	-	1	26	67	19	113
2020	-	-	23	64	24	111
2021	-	-	24	75	61	160
2022	-	1	30	167	128	326
2023	-	4	27	217	172	420
2024	-	6	23	145	118	292
Total	6	12	206	804	531	1559

was developed, showing details of the certification levels obtained by year. Regarding the level obtained, six projects were obtained under the pilot version, which corresponds to the first stages of WELL, between 2014 and 2017.

4.3. WELL Certification by Type of Space

The WELL standard covers 27 types of spaces according to the use and typology of the project.

Table 4. WELL-certified projects by type of space.

Type of Space	Projects Number	% Total
Office	1295	83.1%
Housing	133	8.5%
Retail	42	2.7%
Education	22	1.4%
Health	8	0.5%
Storage	7	0.4%
Others	52	3.3%
Total	1559	100%

shows the percentages of representation of the types of spaces selected by the certified projects. It can be observed that the predominant space type is offices, with 1295 projects, which corresponds to 83.1% of the evaluated projects. This space is followed by housing with 133 projects, representing 8.5%, while retail is in third place with 42 projects, equivalent to 2.7% of the total. These data suggest that corporate companies are betting significantly on WELL certification, which is reflected in improvements in productivity and employee satisfaction in their work environments, supported by satisfaction surveys that allow for the identification of areas for improvement and executing corrective actions when necessary. In addition, these wellness practices are being extended to the residential environment, especially in remote or “home office” work, which offers greater flexibility for employees. At the same time, we can note that the education and healthcare sectors are showing increasing interest in the WELL standard, mainly because of its focus on occupant health and wellness. These sectors can enhance the quality of their spaces by adopting WELL guidelines, thus improving the conditions of the environments in which they operate.

5. Discussion

The results show that, unlike other certifications such as LEED and EDGE (Excellence in Design for Greater Efficiencies), the global influence of WELL remains limited, with recognition in only 49 countries. In contrast, EDGE has been implemented in over 140 countries [23], while LEED has been adopted in more than 100 countries [1]. The results of this study reveal an uneven global distribution in the adoption of environmental certifications such as WELL, LEED and BREEAM. North America and Europe lead in the number of certified projects, consistent with previous studies highlighting increased sustainability awareness and regulation in these regions. For example, Kokatnur et al. (2025) in [14] identified that most WELL certifications are concentrated in the United States and Western Europe. However, regions such as Latin America and Africa show limited adoption, suggesting the need for specific strategies to promote these certifications in emerging markets.

WELL has had minimal impact in regions such as Africa, where only one certified project has been recorded. This limited adoption can be attributed to region-specific challenges, including a lack of awareness among stakeholders and difficulties securing funding for sustainable and health-focused projects [24]. Additionally, significant barriers hinder the adoption of WELL guidelines, such as the absence of government incentives and resistance to transitioning toward more sustainable technologies. In this context, LEED certification has achieved a more significant presence, although it also faces similar implementation and acceptance challenges.

In the United States, WELL certification is applied less frequently than other certifications, such as LEED, which is more widely adopted and primarily focuses on environmental sustainability and energy efficiency [25]. Similarly, in Latin America, LEED and EDGE are the most widely adopted certifications [26], whereas WELL, which emphasizes occupant health and well-being, has experienced more limited implementation. Despite gaining recognition, WELL adoption remains low compared to LEED and EDGE, with only a few certified projects having this certification in countries such as Colombia and Peru [27,28]. Furthermore, EDGE is Peru’s most commonly used environmental certification, driven by municipal incentives; however, its adoption is lower than in countries like Colombia.

In Latin America, implementing sustainable building certifications faces significant challenges related to the lack of regulation and transparent government policies. An analysis of 26 countries in the region revealed that building codes rarely include sustainability requirements, which limits the adoption of international standards such as WELL, LEED and BREEAM [29]. In addition, Zepeda-Gil and Natarajan, 2020, in [30] analyzed environmental regulations in Latin America, highlighting that, although there are more than 90 regulations related to sustainability in construction, their application is heterogeneous and depends mainly on the private sector’s commitment. The growth of certifications in Latin America has been more pronounced in countries with more significant economic development and urbanization, such as Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Chile, where national programs have been implemented to encourage sustainable building, and where certifications such as EDGE and LEED have gained considerable popularity [23]. However, the perceived cost of obtaining certifications remains a key barrier as many companies consider that the return on investment is not immediate and need to rely on external financing to adopt sustainable practices [30].

In Europe, WELL certification has achieved a broader geographical presence; however, the number of WELL-certified projects remains lower than other certifications, such as BREEAM, the most widely used certification, followed by LEED and various national certification schemes [17]. Moreover, research comparing WELL to other community health assessment standards underscores that while WELL incorporates a broad set of health-related features, it may lack alignment with some local policy and socio-cultural factors, suggesting the need for localized adaptations [31]. In countries like Poland, for instance, WELL is emerging as a key certification in high-end office architecture due to its human-centric emphasis, surpassing LEED or BREEAM in design influence [16].

Another key aspect to consider is the increasing number of WELL-certified projects in recent years, which suggests a growing concern among developers regarding occupant well-being. However, the perception of value among real estate professionals plays a critical role in adopting certifications. In this regard, Marques et al. (2024) in [32] found that WELL is perceived as enhancing health and well-being but is less widely recognized or adopted in specific markets compared to LEED or BREEAM, partly due to limited awareness and concerns over initial costs. An analysis by project type revealed that most certified projects focus on office spaces. At the same time, educational environments, such as schools and universities—where students spend over 180 days per year—remain primarily unaddressed [5].

Regarding building type, offices represent the segment with the highest number of WELL certifications. This number is due to the growing evidence linking healthy office environments with increased employee productivity and satisfaction; WELL-certified environments show a higher satisfaction rate than certifications such as LEED [12]. In addition, Wu et al. (2017) in [18] analyzed LEED projects and found that corporate offices comprise a substantial proportion of certifications, indicating a similar trend in pursuing sustainable work environments. This trend is further supported by the significant number of studies examining WELL-certified office spaces regarding occupant comfort compared to other certification types [7,8,9,11,12]. Consequently, spaces such as hospitals and schools have been underexplored in the context of WELL certification.

In summary, WELL certification has seen more slowly adopted compared to other systems, such as LEED, EDGE and BREEAM, primarily because it is a relatively recent initiative (launched in 2014) and is still in the process of gaining global recognition. Its focus is on human health and well-being, making it unique and more demanding regarding organizational, cultural and operational changes. Unlike other certifications that primarily assess technical and environmental aspects, WELL requires implementing policies related to nutrition, physical activity, mental health and comfort—often involving a high level of institutional commitment.

In addition, WELL can involve higher costs as it requires third-party performance testing and periodic recertification. It is most commonly applied in buildings where occupant well-being is a priority, such as offices, healthcare and educational facilities, making it less prevalent in industrial or infrastructure sectors. Moreover, because it is still not widely recognized in many markets, it may not yet provide the same level of visibility or added value to investors or regulatory bodies. Nevertheless, its adoption is growing, particularly in projects seeking to complement technical certifications with a stronger emphasis on the human experience.

On the other hand, given the existence of various environmental and sustainability certification systems, companies seek certification that best aligns with their specific characteristics rather than the one that most appropriately reflects the goals or standards they should aim to achieve. Each certification features distinct criteria, measurement methods and evaluation approaches, which differ significantly and reflect varying priorities in terms of sustainability. Recent studies have proposed multidimensional frameworks to evaluate WELL and other standards, highlighting the need for context-sensitive and socio-ecological approaches to improve their applicability and effectiveness [31].

These findings contribute to the global discourse on sustainable and healthy buildings. By identifying regions and building typologies where WELL certification remains underrepresented, this study provides insights that can inform targeted strategies for promoting occupant health through building certification. Moreover, the structured and reproducible methodology used here can be a reference for future comparative studies on other certification systems.

6. Conclusions

Following the analysis of the WELL database, it was found that WELL certification has been implemented in 49 countries, with China and the United States accounting for over 50% of all WELL-certified projects worldwide. Conversely, the regions with the fewest WELL-certified projects are Africa, with only one, and Latin America, with approximately twenty-one certified projects. The analysis also indicates that WELL certification has experienced significant growth in recent years, primarily driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, which heightened the prioritization of health and well-being in built environments.

Most WELL-certified spaces are office buildings, representing 83% of all certified projects, followed by residential buildings (8.5%) and retail spaces (2.7%). This distribution highlights the limited application of WELL certification across different project types. Therefore, further research is needed to examine the adoption of WELL standards in other building typologies, such as schools and hospitals, and to assess its impact compared to other certification systems.

Additionally, the authors recommend investigating the factors limiting WELL adoption in various regions, particularly in those with fewer certified projects and in developing or emerging economies. Furthermore, it is essential to document the WELL certification process as the database lacks detailed information on specific WELL concepts, unlike other certifications such as EDGE and LEED. Moreover, as Marques et al. (2024) highlighted in [32], improving awareness and clarifying the value proposition of WELL certification could help address adoption barriers, especially in real estate sectors where economic return is a key decision driver. Additionally, as Ahmad (2023) emphasized in [13], the presence of WELL certification in a project can catalyze innovation in technology and stakeholder collaboration, expanding the value proposition beyond mere compliance.

This research offers a novel contribution to the literature by presenting a structured, data-driven analysis of WELL-certified projects worldwide. The insights obtained can support researchers, policymakers and practitioners in better understanding the current state and future opportunities for adopting WELL certification.

This study also has certain limitations. The analysis was based solely on certified projects, meaning the results could differ if pre-certified and registered projects were included. Moreover, the study did not consider additional WELL rating systems such as equity rating, health–safety rating, performance rating and compliance rating, which may offer further insights into the certification’s adoption and impact.