ENR 2022 Top 100 Green Buildings Design Firms
The sustainable design and contracting market is fertile ground for innovation now more than ever, Top 100 firms share. With decarbonization incentives baked into recent federal spending packages such as the CHIPS and Science Act, Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, many owners across industrial and infrastructure sectors now have the wherewithal to think green. But when it comes to the buildings sector, Top 100 firms say occupant health and wellness standards are requiring owners to think even greener. After the COVID-19 pandemic pushed many occupants away from offices and shared spaces, many owners are looking to bring people back in with third-party sustainability certifications that focus on how buildings can keep people healthy.
Current Top 100 Green Design Firms Story:
2022 Top 100 Green Design Firms and Contractors
More detailed information on the Top 100 Green Design Firms:View complete list with revenue and market data
Click below for earlier editions:
2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008
Companies are ranked according to revenue for construction or design services generated in 2019 from projects that have been registered with or certified by a third-party organization that sets standards for measuring a building’s or facility's environmental impact, energy efficiency or carbon footprint. Such groups include the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and the Green Building Initiative. The volume of revenue is measured in ($) millions. Some markets may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Revenue from construction management on a fee-only basis is not included.
Would you like to have this ENR Top List in Excel with revenue and sector data? Click here.
ENR 2022 Top 100 Green Buildings Design Firms
| RANK 2022 | RANK 2021 | FIRM | GREEN ACCREDITED STAFF | GREEN DESIGN REVENUE ($ MIL.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | AECOM, Dallas, Texas | NA | 1,017.00 |
| 2 | 1 | Gensler, Los Angeles, Calif. | 1,385 | 958.45 |
| 3 | 3 | Arup, New York, N.Y. | 165 | 441.64 |
| 4 | 4 | HOK, New York, N.Y. | 692 | 430.61 |
| 5 | ** | Tetra Tech Inc., Pasadena, Calif. | 322 | 301 |
| 6 | 14 | Kimley-Horn, Raleigh, N.C. | 139 | 228.9 |
| 7 | 5 | HDR, Omaha, Neb. | 499 | 226.88 |
| 8 | 7 | HKS, Dallas, Texas | 384 | 218.44 |
| 9 | 12 | WSP USA, New York, N.Y. | 1,086 | 207 |
| 10 | 6 | Stantec Inc., Irvine, Calif. | 297 | 205.74 |
| 11 | 9 | Skidmore Owings & Merrill, New York, N.Y. | 302 | 200.5 |
| 12 | 11 | ZGF Architects, Portland, Ore. | 202 | 183.76 |
| 13 | 13 | CannonDesign, New York, N.Y. | 295 | 178 |
| 14 | 25 | HGA, Minneapolis, Minn. | 185 | 172 |
| 15 | 20 | Perkins&Will, Chicago, Ill. | 1,395 | 171.7 |
| 16 | ** | LANGAN, Parsippany, N.J. | 103 | 155.62 |
| 17 | 16 | NBBJ, Seattle, Wash. | 241 | 147.7 |
| 18 | 15 | Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, Mo. | 204 | 140.66 |
| 19 | 21 | Thornton Tomasetti, New York, N.Y. | 200 | 135.05 |
| 20 | 17 | SmithGroup, Detroit, Mich. | 461 | 124.15 |