A review of building energy regulation and policy for energy conservation in developing countries

Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

A review of building energy regulation and policy for energy conservation in developing countries Joseph Iwaro n, Abraham Mwasha Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, St. Augustine Campus, University of West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago

a r t i c l e in f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 9 January 2010 Accepted 17 August 2010 Available online 15 September 2010

The rapid growth of energy use, worldwide, hfs raised concerns over problems of energy supply and exhaustion of energy resources. Most of the developed countries are implementing building energy regulations such as energy standards, codes etc., to reduce building energy consumption. The position of developing countries with respect to energy regulations implementation and enforcement is either poorly documented or not documented at all. In addition, there is a lack of consistent data, which makes it difficult to understand the underlying changes that affect energy regulation implementation in developing countries. In that respect, this paper investigates the progress of building energy regulations in developing countries and its implication for energy conservation and efficiency. The present status of building energy regulations in 60 developing countries around the world was analysed through a survey of building energy regulations using online survey. The study revealed the present progress made on building energy regulations in relation to implementation, development and compliance; at the same time the study recommends possible solutions to the barriers facing building energy regulation implementation in the developing world. & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Energy regulation Building Developing countries

1. Introduction Energy consumption in developing countries has been increasing rapidly due to recent economic growth and development. According to Building Energy Standards (BES) (HKU, 2009; Janda and Busch, 1994), this energy consumption has led to serious environmental problems such as increasing energy demand, global warming, air pollution and acid rain. In developing countries, the number of new buildings is growing rapidly and the energy prices and market often do not encourage the use of efficient technologies (Hui, 2000). In view of these facts, there is a pragmatic shift to the use of building energy standard and code to reduce building energy consumption in developed countries. Building energy regulations can be used to address the energy use of an entire building or building systems such as heating or air conditioning (Birner and Martinot, 2002). Energy regulation is one of the most frequently used instruments for energy efficiency improvements in buildings and can play an important role in enhancing energy efficiency in buildings (OECD, 2003). This paper investigates the progress of building energy regulations in developing countries and its implication for energy conservation and efficiency. The paper reviews the present status of building

n

Corresponding author. Tel.: + 1 868 763 9590. E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Iwaro).

0301-4215/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.08.027

energy regulation in 60 developing countries around the world through a survey of building energy regulations using online survey. It also discusses the implication for energy conservation and efficiency, challenges, barriers and possible solutions. In existing research on energy consumption, buildings, worldwide, account for as much as 45% of primary energy resources and that makes building the biggest single contributor to total energy consumption (Nature Publishing Group, 2008; Omar and Mohammed, 2004; Yamtraipat et al., 2006; Yang et al., 2008; Radhi, 2008; Lombard et al., 2008; Chow, 2001). Energy uses in office buildings is about 70–300 kWh/m2 per annum, 10–20 times that of residential buildings (Yang et al., 2008; Tso Geoffrey and Yau Kelvin, 2003; EC, 2007). The rapid growth of energy use, worldwide, has already raised concerns over problems of supply, the exhaustion of energy resources and severe environmental impacts (ozone layer depletion, global warning, climate change, etc.) (Saidur, 2009; Anon, 2006). The global contributions from buildings towards energy consumption, both residential and commercial, have steadily increased, reaching figures between 20% and 40% in developed countries (Lombard et al., 2008; Tso Geoffrey and Yau Kelvin, 2003; EC, 2007; Hassan, 2008). Growth in population, increasing pressure for building services, and enhanced comfort levels, together with the rise in times spent inside buildings, assured upward trend in energy demand will continue in the future. For this reason, energy efficiency in building is today a prime objective for energy policy at regional, national, and international levels (Saidur, 2009; Lombard et al., 2008).

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

1.1. The role of building energy regulations in building energy efficient design and construction Energy codes and standards are building energy regulations, setting standards for the design and construction of buildings, primarily to ensure the safety and health of people in or around those buildings, but also for energy conservation and access to and about buildings (Communities, 2010). Energy codes and standards play a vital role by setting minimum requirements for energyefficient design and construction. They outline uniform requirements for new buildings as well as additions and renovations. Energy codes specify how buildings must be constructed or perform, and are written in mandatory, enforceable language. States or local governments adopt and enforce energy codes for their jurisdictions (Bartlett et al., 2003), whereas, Energy standards describe how buildings should be constructed to save energy costeffectively. They are published by national organisations such as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). They are not mandatory, but serve as national recommendations, with some variation for regional climate. States and local governments frequently use energy standards as the technical basis for developing their energy codes (Bartlett et al., 2003). Besides, energy standards are voluntary with less government involvement. On the other hand, some energy standards are written in mandatory, enforceable language, making it easy for jurisdictions to incorporate the provisions of the energy standards directly into their laws or regulations (Bartlett et al., 2003).

1.2. Buildings energy regulations in developing countries While building energy regulations exist in almost all developed countries more and more developing countries are currently introducing such legislation (UNEP, 2009a, 2009b; Deringer et al., 2004). According to Communities (2010), there are two main types of energy regulation as identified in the earlier section: building energy standard and code. Further investigation revealed that there are two major types of building energy standard: prescriptive standards that set separate performance levels for major envelope and equipment components, such as minimum thermal resistance of walls, are used more frequently, possibly due to their easier enforcement. On the other hand, overall performance-based standards, prescribing only an annual energy consumption level or energy cost budget, usually provide more incentives for innovation (Gann et al., 1998). However, the effectiveness of building energy standards varies significantly from country to country, mainly due to difficulties and resulting differences in compliance and enforcement. In developing countries, building energy standards are often ineffective or much less effective than predicted (UNEP, 2009a, 2009b). Deringer et al. (2004) argued that while building energy standards exist in a number of developing countries, they are often only on paper due to insufficient implementation and enforcement, corruption and other problems. Building energy standards in developing countries are usually promoted by and developed with support from international donor agencies, but if this support does not cover the implementation period, prospects are rather negative. Building energy standards are a set of procedures and regulations that prescribe the energy performance of buildings. Energy efficiency standards can be either mandatory or voluntary (Communities, 2010). Thomsen and Wittchen (2009) conducted an international comparative study of standards for very low energy buildings in the European Union that usefully describes both governmental and non-governmental activities. Other authors, like Hitchin (2009) and Lausten (2008), set their work in an international context, but their goal is to assess the utility of energy standards as a policy

7745

instrument rather than articulating the content in particular countries. The World Energy Council conducted a survey of 63 countries and found that there were mandatory standards for new dwellings and buildings in all European countries (Moissan, 2005). Furthermore, Janda (2009) identified the worldwide status of energy standards for buildings with more focus on developed countries. Janda conducted a survey of 81 countries and it was found that 61 countries have some form of mandatory and voluntary existing standards, eleven countries had proposed standards, and nine countries did not have standards. The limited information about developing countries reflects an information gap surrounding the development, use and effectiveness of building energy regulations for building energy conservation. It was not the intension of this paper to differentiate the superior building energy regulatory measures but to investigate their implementation, development and compliance status in different regions. Most European countries have set up mandatory energy standards for new dwellings and service sector buildings while almost half of the other OECD countries in Asia and America are mandatory and in the other half voluntary standards (WEC, 2010). Some non-OECD countries outside Europe have recently established mandatory or voluntary standards for service buildings: Singapore and the Philippines were among the first, followed by Algeria, Malaysia, Egypt and Syria for instance. In most countries, standards exist for both dwellings and service sector buildings, except in Africa and in Asia where most often standards only apply to non-residential buildings. The situation in these two regions is explained by the fact that commercial buildings account for the largest share of energy consumption. Altogether, about 50% of the countries surveyed had mandatory or voluntary standards for new non-residential buildings (WEC, 2010). Thus, suggests that building energy regulation status is at a very high level of implementation and development when compared to other regions. This status can be attributed to the performance of developed OECD countries in this region. Moreover, investigation on energy regulation status in developing countries revealed some levels of progress as Philippines, Singapore and Thailand have adopted mandatory building energy performance requirements as parts of laws on building control on energy conservation, while Indonesia and Malaysia utilized building energy code on a voluntary basis (Chirarattananon et al., 2004). Other regulations, not directly linked to building energy efficiency, but having significant impact on energy use e.g. speed limit, are not included in this review. Also, other regulations implemented in some countries that have direct link with building energy efficiency are WEC, 2010: labelling, mandatory energy consumption reporting, mandatory energy managers and mandatory energy saving plans, mandatory maintenance and obligation of energy savings imposed on utilities.

2. Methodology To exploit this important area of research, this paper used mail survey to gather detailed information about building energy regulations. The investigation assessed the progress made so far on the development, implementation, compliance and usage of building energy regulations for energy conservation in developing countries. The survey was sent to approximately 145 contacts in government, research organisations and professionals in 95 countries. Given the survey’s length and the need for specific information in several areas, the response rate of 46% (67 surveys from 46 countries) was better than anticipated. However, given the importance of this investigation, more contacts were made for more information. An additional 28 surveys were received from 14 different countries. Hence, a total of 30 surveys were sent to

7746

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

each of the six regions surveyed in this investigation. The information from survey respondents’ countries contained: (1) the status of energy standards for buildings in each country; (2) approaches to standards development; (3) implementation and compliance. These investigation variables and the questions asked in the survey were derived from the literature reviewed (Janda, 2009; RIC, 2009; UNEP, 2009a, 2009b).Questions such as status and adoption: are there any proposed or existing energy standards for buildings in your country, what is the status of energy standards for building at national level in your country (mandatory, mixed/voluntary, proposed and none). Standard development—is the energy standard in your country scheduled for regular review and revision? Are computer simulations used to attain compliance with the standards? Were energy standards from other country used in developing the energy standards in your country? And what information aid was used in developing the energy standard in your country? Furthermore, on implementation and compliance: what compliance mechanisms are used in your country? What training/educational aids are used for energy standard implementation in your country? And at what stage in the construction process is the compliance mechanisms directed (prior, during, after)? The surveyed data and analysis are present in Section 3. 2.1. Classification of developed and developing countries This paper was aimed to assess the region equally even though some regions were more economically developed than the others. The regions were Europe, Africa, Asia, North America, Latin America and Middle East. Moreover, World Bank (2010) considers all lowand middle-income countries as developing. However, IMF uses a flexible classification system that considers (1) per capita income level, (2) export diversification—so oil exporters that have high per capita GDP would not make the advanced classification because around 70% of its exports are oil and (3) degree of integration into the global financial system (IMF, 2010b). In consideration of the above definitions, this study further classified developing countries as emerging and developing countries (IMF, 2010a) and Graduated developing Countries, also known as newly industrialized countries (NIC). Some developing countries have been classified as ’’Developed countries’’ such as South Africa, and Turkey by the CIA (IMF, 2010a) and Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Equatorial Guinea, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Trinidad and Tobago Saudi Arabia by the World Bank (World Bank, 2010). Also newly industrialized countries (NICs) are nations with economies more advanced and developed than those in the developing world, but not yet with the full signs of a developed country (IMF, 2010a; Pawe", 2006; Mauro, 2003; Waugh, 2000; Mankiw, 2007). It includes Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, Malaysia, Mexico, South Africa, Thailand and Turkey. The above classification by World Bank, IMF and CIA is based on the level of economic development as they are yet to be recognized as developed countries.

3. Data analysis and discussion In the sample surveyed, a total of 97 responses were received from 60 different countries. According to Fig. 1, 62% of the countries that responded to this survey were from emerging developing countries while 38% were from graduated/NIC developing countries. The differences in their response can be attributed to the differences in the level of economic development as economic development is among the most important factors to be considered in projecting changes in energy consumption and national policies (EIA, 2009b, 2009a). Growth potential is

Breakdown of Response Rate

Fig. 1. Respondents’ response rate.

influenced by population growth, labor force participation rates, capital accumulation and productivity improvements. In addition, for the developing economies, progress in building human and physical capital infrastructures, establishing credible regulatory mechanisms to govern markets, and ensuring political stability play relatively more important roles in determining their medium- to long-term growth potential than energy regulatory mechanisms. However, the most rapid growth in energy demand from 2007 to 2035 occurs in nations outside the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (non-OECD nations) (EIA, 2010). Total non-OECD energy consumption increases by 84% compared with a 14% increase in energy use among OECD countries. Hence, strong long-term economic growth in gross domestic product (GDP) in the emerging economies of non-OECD countries drives their growing energy demand (EIA, 2010). Presently, energy consumption is experiencing an unprecedented growth and it is projected to increase by 70% over a projected period 2006–2030 in emerging developing countries such as China and India, as indicated in Fig. 2 (EIA, 2009b, 2009a) while energy consumption in other developing regions also grows strongly over the same projection period, with projected increases of around 50% for the Middle East and for Central and South America and 50% for Africa. A smaller increase, about 25%, is expected for developing Europe and Eurasia (EIA, 2009b, 2009a). The energy consumption in developing countries around the world is increasing with increase in economy, population, GDP and modernisation (Cai et al., 2009; Genjo et al., 2005; Meier et al., 2004). Likewise, the energy consumption in newly industrialized developing countries is also increasing with a rapid urbanization (Cai et al., 2009; Ouyang and Hokao, 2009; Genjo et al., 2005). This suggests the need to start implementing more rapidly building energy regulations in developing countries as well as emerging economic countries. Therefore, the requirements of building energy regulations for building energy conservation are considered to be issued in the form of policy or regulation (Yin, 2006). As a result of this unique problem confronting developing countries at different levels of economic development, the effectiveness of building standards varies significantly from country to country, mainly due to difficulties and resulting differences in economic development, compliance and enforcement (UNEP, 2009a, 2009b). Besides, the building energy codes, standards that address the energy use of an entire building or building systems such as heating or air conditioning (Birner and Martinot, 2002), are some of the most frequently used instruments for energy efficiency improvements in buildings and can play an important role in improving energy efficiency in buildings (OECD, 2003). The building energy standards development and adoption as investigated in this research showed that 42% of emerging developing countries surveyed have no energy standard in place, 20% have mandatory, 22% have mixed and 16% proposed. In spite of the fact that most developed countries have one kind of building energy regulation in place either mandatory, mixed or being proposed standard. However, this survey revealed that some developing countries classified as developed countries by World Bank (World Bank, 2010) and also classified as graduated/new industrialized

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

7747

Fig. 2. Energy consumption performance in the developing economies by region, 1980–2030 (EIA, 2009b, 2009a).

Mexico

Ethiopia

Costal Rica

Gabon

Cameroun

Ghana

Burundi

Grenada

Burkina Faso

Guinea

Nigeria

Guyana

Barbados

Kenya

Togo

Mali

Liberia

Slovak Rep.

South Africa Romania Thailand

Dominica

Bangladesh Angola Trinidad and

Slovenia

Egypt

Czech Rep.

Saudi Arabia

Antigua and Barbuda

Taiwan

Omar

Sri Lanka

Qatar

Palestine

Paraguay

Pakistan

Algeria

Lebanon

Morocco

Syria

Colombia

Belgium

Brazil

Finland

Tobago No Standard

Singapore Tunisia Bahrain

St Vincent

Equatorial Guin.

Malaysia

Ecuador Cuba

Bahamas

South Korea

Portugal Tanzania

Indonesia

Turkey

Zambia Mandatory

Mixed

Proposed

Fig. 3. Status of Building Energy Standards development and adoption in 60 developing countries (emerging and graduated/NIC), 2010.

countries by IMF (IMF, 2010a) with graduated economy as shown in Fig. 4, such as Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados, have no standard in place. This position in which 42% of countries surveyed have no energy standards in place is shown in Fig. 3, and they are all emerging developing countries with emerging economics as shown in Fig. 4. This could be attributed to the lack of building energy policy, government interest in energy conservation and inadequate information about the usefulness of building energy regulations for building energy conservation, building energy consumption, implication of energy conservation on economy and climate change (Evander et al., 2004; Deringer et al., 2004). Also, it can be a result of corruption, lack of infrastructure and technology as well as inability of some developing countries to implement building energy conservation and efficiency measures under building energy regulatory policy due to the low level of economy (IPCC, 2007; Wang et al., 2008; UNEP, 2009a, 2009b). The major impediments to implementing building energy regulations for energy conservation and efficiency in the building sector are institutional barriers and market failures rather than technical

problems, as pointed out by Nature Publishing Group (2008). Among these, Santamouris (2005) includes: lack of owners’ awareness of energy conservation benefits, building energy regulations benefits, insufficient awareness and training of property managers, builders and engineers and lack of specialized professionals to ensure compliance. Based on the above information, the level of development and adoption of building energy regulations such as energy standard in developing countries are still far behind when compared to building energy regulation adoption and implementation in developed countries. In this study, 25 developing countries out of 60 countries surveyed have no standard compared to the Janda (2009) finding where only 9 countries were without standard out of 81 countries surveyed. This shows that the current status of developing countries in terms of energy regulation adoption, implementation and compliance is more revealed in this study compared to Janda’s result. Also, this study is more directed towards developing countries as compared to Janda’s study, which was more directed toward developed countries. Besides, this study identified 25 countries without energy standard and they were all

7748

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

Colombia

Czech Rep.

Jamaica

Finland

Barbados Antigua and Barbuda

Ethiopia

Costal Rica

Portugal

Gabon

Cameroun

Poland

Ghana

Burundi

Omar Trinidad and Tobago

Qatar

Turkey

Paraguay

Bahamas

Brazil Mexico

Grenada Faso

Burkina Morocco

Guinea

Nigeria

Guyana Togo

Kenya Mali

Liberia

Algeria

Equatorial Guin

Tanzania

Ecuador

Singapore

Dominica

Cuba

Tunisia

Bangladesh

Angola

Bahrain

St Vincent

Zambia

Kuwait

Slovak Rep. Romania South Korea Slovenia

Emerging economy

Graduated/ NIC economy

Fig. 4. Economy status of the surveyed countries, 2010.

developing countries whereas Janda’s study identified only 9 countries without standard. This indicates the inclination of their study to developed countries. Moreover, some levels of progress have been made according to Fig. 3; this study recorded new proposals over the findings from Janda (2009). The countries with proposed standard are Bahamas, Equatorial Guinea, Antigua and Barbuda, Omar and Qatar. Also, Syria has mixed/voluntary standard compared to Janda (2009) where Syria only made a proposal for standard. However, it is evidenced that building energy regulation’s activities are still far behind in developing countries despite continuous increase in building energy demand as shown in Fig. 3. Countries with no building energy standards are far greater than countries with building energy standards while little proposed standards were recorded. This shows that the levels of development and adoption of building energy regulations in developing countries are still at the infant level when compared to building energy regulation implementation in developed countries. As confirmed in UNEP (2009a, 2009b), building regulations in the US are estimated to have reduced energy use by 15–16% of the baseline in 2000 (0.57 EJ). According to estimates, new dwellings in the EU built today use on average 60% less energy compared to the building stock built before the first oil shock. This shows the level of building energy regulation development and adoption in European countries, which also confirmed the findings of this study in Fig. 3, where most of the euro countries surveyed had mandatory standard in place. Furthermore, in many developing countries, baseline data on energy consumption are missing. This is problematic as measuring the success of implemented building energy regulations, policy instruments requires the knowledge of the baseline energy consumption. Regular monitoring and evaluation of programs are necessary in order to adapt the program if possible to changing circumstances and thereby maximize its outcome (Jannuzzi, 2005). This is not only applying to developing countries but also developed countries. In the case of developing countries, the

major barriers against baseline data on energy consumption and energy regulation implementation include lack of awareness on the importance and the potential of energy regulation and efficiency improvements, lack of financing, lack of qualified personnel and insufficient energy service levels (Urge-Vorsatz et al., 2007). As part of the integrated framework of policy tools, regulatory instruments and standards are very important in building energy standard development. Many developing countries such as Malaysia and partly Thailand first introduced voluntary standards or voluntary labelling for appliances or buildings, which are, however, often less effective than mandatory ones. Mandatory standard for public buildings and commercial sector buildings above a certain annual consumption is a frequently used instrument, applied for example in Tunisia and Thailand. However, compliance might be difficult to achieve. In order to ensure enforcement of building energy standards, special efforts are necessary such as combination of regulatory measures with incentives like subsidies or awards.

3.1. Regional performance of energy regulation in developing countries Building energy standards are starting to appear in Africa, Latin America and Middle East regions, even though in general, this is a new development going by the result obtained in this study. According to Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RIC, 2009), with UNDP and GEF support, a number of codes are being developed in developing countries, and these typically include both elemental and integrated routes to compliance, i.e. an elemental method defines the performance requirements of specific building elements. An integrated method, on the other hand, sets a whole-building performance target and provides a calculation mechanism for evaluating whether or not a proposed

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

(or actual) building complies but often only dealing with building envelope issues. As shown in Fig. 5, Africa and Latin America recorded the highest percentage of no standard and at the same time showed the highest percentage of energy standard activities as indicated by the percentage of proposed standards. However, Asia and Middle East displaced a high level of performance in the drive toward achieving energy standard implementation as indicated by the percentage of mixed/voluntary standards recorded in Fig. 5. Moreover, the performance of Europe is highly encouraging with respect to energy standard activities. They recorded the highest percentage of mandatory energy standard when compared to other five regions. According to Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RIC, 2009), in Africa, a number of North African countries such as Tunisia and Egypt have programmes relating to building energy standards, as shown in Fig. 3, while Algeria and Morocco are currently proposing to have building energy standard. Likewise, Egypt energy standard for housing became law in 2005 while their commercial standard was expected to follow, and the background analysis had already been completed. The standards have elemental and integrated routes and also include minimum performance levels for air-conditioners and other appliances application (RIC, 2009). However, in 2005 enforcement legislation was said to still be needed. Also, Morocco initiated a plan in 2005 to develop thermal energy standards for buildings, focusing on the health, hotel and collective housing sectors. This was expected to be completed in 2010. Moreover, in order to increase the performance of their building, Tunisia has developed mandatory standards while Algeria plans for similar standards but needs to develop supporting infrastructure and education programmes for effective application (RIC, 2009). South Africa is presently using mixed/voluntary standard and it is developing a mandatory building energy efficiency standards for residential and commercial buildings as party of its national energy efficiency strategy. The timescale is not entirely clear but appears to be for implementation between 2011 and 2015 (Anon, 2005; Huang et al., 2003). Furthermore, in Asia, there is a very mixed picture in this region, with some countries having no building energy standards, and others having mandatory standards (Singapore) while still others have mixed standards (Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, Philippines). Enforcement seems to be robust in Singapore and Taiwan (RIC, 2009). However, going by the level of energy standard activities and performance shown in Fig. 5, the region is making some progress in building energy regulation implementation as indicated by 35% mixed standard and 20% mandatory standard recorded in this region. But a recent study by the United Nations Development Programme has suggested that elsewhere a lack of resources has compromised compliance (RIC, 2009). Also, Pakistan introduced a voluntary energy efficiency standard in 1992 and is presently using the mixed energy standard. India and Sri Lanka have recently developed standards for larger commercial buildings, thus providing both elemental and trade-off routes to compliance and enforcement (Hong and Chiang, 2007; Huang, 2006).

Fig. 5. Regional energy standard performance for developing countries.

7749

In the Middle East, some progress has been made on building energy standard development and adoption as shown in Fig. 5, while Kuwait developed standards in the 1980s, but their current status in this study is the mandatory energy standard. As shown in this study, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestine territories have mixed energy standard while Lebanon has mixed standard and there is a proposal for it to be implemented mandatorily in 2010. In addition, Qatar and Omar are currently on the process to adopt energy standard as shown in Fig. 3. However, lack of an established regulatory infrastructure is a significant barrier to practical application of building energy standard (RIC, 2009). North America has good energy standard performance (Janda, 2009) as indicated by Mexico energy standard performance with mandatory energy standard in Fig. 3, even though the region recorded low performance. However, there was no respondent from USA in response to the survey conducted, thus affecting their energy regulatory performance in this study. According to the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RIC, 2009), in Mexico, a 2001 standard relating to the energy efficiency of non-residential buildings was developed, apparently focusing on limiting heat gains. The country has a substantial number of regulations and standards relating to equipment efficiencies, which may be seen as a higher priority. The Latin America region appears to be in the early stages of developing building energy standards, albeit with some countries being more advanced than others. A number of countries do not appear to have any legal framework to support building energy standards (Ecuador, Costa Rica, Cuba, Trinidad and Tobago, Dominica, and Guyana) (Lamberts et al., 2007). Besides, Colombia, Brazil, Paraguay, Antigua and Barbuda and Bahamas have a proposed standard. The proposed regulation allows both a prescriptive route and a simulation route (RIC, 2009). 3.2. Building energy regulation development, implementation and compliance 3.2.1. Development This section analyses the development performance of building energy regulations in these stated regions. In Fig. 4, 78% of the countries surveyed for Europe indicated that Energy standards in their countries are scheduled for review while 40% in Africa and 15% from Latin America indicated that their energy standards are scheduled for review, which also indicate energy regulation’s new consideration and interest in these regions. The high percentage recorded from Europe and North America shows their level of energy regulation development, progress due to regular upgrading of their energy standards compared to other regions where development is still at an infant stage such as Latin America. In line with this view, 58% of respondent countries from Europe, 100% from North America and 42% from Africa indicated that computer simulations were used to attain compliance. In support of the above views, 78% of the countries surveyed from Europe, 100% North America and 64% Africa confirmed that energy standards from a different country were used to develop their standards, including proposed standards. In the case of Latin America and Africa, this result indicates some level of energy regulation activities is going on in these regions as indicated by the high level of proposed standard recorded in Fig. 3 and the high level of awareness of other countries’ regulation activities. 3.2.2. Types of information used On the types of information that was used to developed energy standards in their countries, 64% of respondents from Africa, 60% from Latin America and 60% from Middle East indicated lack of information in developing their energy standards. Moreover, 62%

7750

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

from Europe, 100% from North America, and 40% from Asia and Middle East indicated using professional judgement to develop their energy standards while 22% from Latin America and 18% from Africa indicated gathering information through audits and surveys for the purpose of developing their standards. 3.2.3. Standard development process On the standard development process, 62% of respondents from Europe, 60% from Asia and 100% from North America indicated consensus decision from all stakeholders such as government at different levels, private organisations, academia, building professions, energy professions, communities etc., while 25% from Africa, 18% from Latin America and 60% from Middle East showed support for mandate decision. Mandate decision is based on government policy and required mandated enforcement and compliance from all other stakeholders. This analysis suggests that countries surveyed from Europe, North America and Asia, which are mainly graduated/NIC developing countries are more prone to integrated and consensus approach. This suggests their high level of energy standard usage, progress and development in these regions. On the other hand, Africa, Latin America and Middle East, which are mainly emerging countries, are more prone to mandate approach in making decisions and developmental policies as they recorded lower percentages of consensus approach. This suggests that all decision making regarding energy standard is still from the government only, with little or no input from non-governmental entities. As a result, there is lower energy standard development recorded in these regions compared to regions with consensus and integrated approach. 3.2.4. Implementation and compliance The implementation levels of building energy regulations in developing countries can be assessed by looking at the training and educational aids being used and also, considering the characteristics of the entities involved in implementing energy standards in those countries. Fig. 8 (Latin America, 58%; Europe, 56%; Asia, 60% and North America) shows the use of compliance forms and written guides as training/educational aids for energy standard implementation while Africa and Middle East recorded lower percentages in this area. Besides, 42% in Asia and 42% in Middle East indicated the use of workshops and seminars. Furthermore, 62% of respondents from Middle East, 45% from Africa and 43% from Latin America indicated that existing government agencies such as building agencies, energy agencies are involved in implementing building energy standards in their countries compared to 20% from Europe, 38% from Asia and 0% from North America, which indicated the involvement of existing agencies. Agency role is very important in developing and implementing energy regulations in any country. The government agency could be government commission, board, ministry and government parastatals. Also, non-governmental agency could be voluntary organisations or professional organisations involved in regulation development, compliance and certification such as energy commission, world energy organisation, international energy conservation code, etc. On the other hand, it could be a separate agency involving voluntary organisations, professional organisations and government such as International Energy Agency. The used of new/separate agency recorded higher percentages from North America, Europe and Asia. This shows a high level of energy standard implementation in these areas as confirmed in their high performance in developing energy standard as shown in Fig. 6. However, the general response on the sole dependence on voluntary organisations is very low, which indicates some level of progress on government interest and involvement in implement-

Fig. 6. Regional building energy standard development performance.

ing energy standards in these countries. In addition, 58% from Asia, 40% from Europe and 30% from Latin America confirmed the use of policy approach, an energy policy that emanates from government as their compliance mechanism while 62% from Europe, 100% from North America and 45% from Asia confirmed the use of certification approach as their compliance mechanism. On the other hand, 62% respondents from Africa, 60% from Latin America and 58% from Middle East indicated that no compliance mechanisms were in place. Thus as well indicates the low level of compliance in these regions. In general, in spite of the low compliance performance recorded from some regions and countries, some levels of progress have been made in some areas based on this study’s findings and the analyses such as increasing government involvement in energy regulation development and implementation, increased number of proposed standards, increasing level of energy standard implementation, especially in part of developing countries (graduated/ NIC countries) and upgrading of some energy standards from proposed to mixed/voluntary, from mixed to mandatory.

4. Implications of building energy regulation for energy conservation and efficiency Building energy regulations are policy measures widely used to control energy consumption in buildings (Janda and Busch, 1994). Energy regulation is an important link between building energy consumption and building performance assessment tools such as LEED, NABERS, GreenStar, GBTool, SBTool and BEPAC (Casals, 2005; Ding, 2008). The success of building energy regulation in effectively controlling the energy consumption in the building sector will be to a great extent associated with the adopted energy performance indicator and to the promoted energy assessment tools (Casals, 2005). It can help overcome some of the significant market barriers and ensure that costeffective energy efficiency opportunities are incorporated into new buildings. This is especially important in developing countries where the number of new buildings is growing rapidly and the energy prices and market often do not encourage the use of efficient technologies (Hui, 2000). Despite this situation, some parts of developing countries are making progress on the adoption, development, implementation and compliance of building energy standards as indicated in the above analysis shown in Figs. 1–9. However, the implementation and application of energy regulations to conservation energy in building are still far behind compared to developed countries (WBDG, 2009; UNEP, 2009a, 2009b; Deringer et al., 2004). Building energy standards are some of the most frequently used instruments for energy efficiency improvements in buildings and can play an important role in improving energy conservation in buildings (OECD, 2003). Energy standards provide minimum building requirements that are cost-effective in saving energy in building and provide a degree of control over building design practices and encourage awareness of energy-conscious design in building (HkU, 2010). Also, energy standards allow the use of innovative approaches and

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

techniques to achieve effective utilization of energy and optimum building performance. Besides, it encourages cost-effective energy use of building components including building envelope, lighting, HVAC, electrical installations, lift and escalator and other equipment (EMSD, 2010). Hence, a clear understanding of the energy policy, building performance assessment tools and building energy regulation is essential for architects and building designers to achieve optimal energy efficient building design (HkU, 2010). Energy demand intensity will increase sharply in most developing countries, particularly in Asia. These phenomena require urgent action such as the application of new technologies, implementation of building energy regulations, development of renewable energy sources and improved energy efficiency (EU, 2009). According to Whole Building Design (WBDG, 2009), implementing and enforcing energy regulations will result in fewer energy demand, fewer power plants and natural resources being used to provide electricity and natural gas. It also means fewer emissions to the atmosphere. In the US most buildings are constructed to meet minimum energy code requirements (WBDG, 2009). Therefore, energy standards generally dictate the requirements for building’s envelope, mechanical and lighting requirements. In addition, according to WBDG (2009), building envelope requirements in energy standards generally include minimum insulation levels for walls, roofs and floors, as well as window requirements. These generally vary with climate region, since more insulation is costeffective in cold or extremely hot regions. Mechanical system requirements include minimum equipment efficiency requirements, insulation requirements for ducts and piping and controls

7751

for off-hours and dead bands, i.e. temperature control mechanism. Commercial building requirements for lighting include total building wattage requirements for interior and exterior lighting. Controls are generally required to assure lighting is turned off when facilities are unoccupied. This can be achieved through programmable controls or occupancy sensors. All these measures are incorporated in building energy standards and lead to significant reduction in building energy consumption and enhance energy conservation and efficiency in the building. This study has shown that there is a strong relationship between energy regulation performance as shown in Figs. 3–9, energy consumption performance as shown in Fig. 2 and building performance assessment methods as identified by (Casals, 2005; Ding, 2008). Building energy regulation specifies and recommends the appropriate energy performance indicators to be incorporated into these performance assessment methods and how they should be applied for building performance assessment, so as to reduce building energy consumption.

5. Barriers facing building energy regulation application in developing countries The present position in which 42% of developing countries surveyed do not have building energy regulations in place could be attributed to some implementation barriers (Evander et al., 2004; Deringer et al., 2004). The numerous barriers presented explain why implementation of building energy regulation towards energy conservation and energy efficiency improvements usually require special impetus through governmental action. The number of barriers is enormous and according to some estimates, it is higher in the buildings sector than in any other sector. These barriers include economic/financial barriers, lack of appropriate production technologies (LAPT), behavioral and organisational constraints and information barriers (IPCC, 2007; Wang et al., 2008; UNEP, 2009a, 2009b). 5.1. Economic/financial barriers

Fig. 7. Regional building energy standard development performance.

Fig. 8. Regional energy standard implementation performances.

Purchasing more efficient equipment as stipulated in building energy standards usually involves higher costs which many consumers do not want to spend and low-income consumers cannot afford because they have limited capital (Carbon Trust, 2009). This is one of the most important barriers facing the application of energy regulations in developing countries as a result of lack of funding. As it is now, the energy prices and market often do not encourage the use of energy standards involving efficient technologies (Hui, 2000). Although it is an efficient way or technique to apply high technology and equipment to save energy in buildings, cost consideration is a prime challenge. The high cost has hindered the utilization of building energy regulation, because the technical level of most developing countries lags behind some developed countries

Fig. 9. Regional energy standard compliance performances.

7752

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

(INTEESA, 2009), forcing developers to import equipment and new technologies from overseas at a higher cost. This barrier is common to most countries. However, developing countries are more impacted when it comes to energy regulation implementation and the ratio of investment cost to value of energy savings. This is because they are more affected by higher up-front costs for more efficient equipment, lack of access to financing, energy subsidies, lack of internalization of environmental, health and other external costs (Deringer et al., 2004; Carbon Trust, 2005; IPCC, 2007).

advantages of always combining these with application of building energy regulations for energy efficiency in order to reduce the electricity required. Even in Germany and most European as well as other developed countries many architects do not know. Therefore, inadequate data and information (IDI) is a serious barrier faced by developing countries in the process of energy regulation implementation.

5.2. Lack of appropriate production technologies (LAPT)

6.1. Overcoming the economic and financial barriers by investing in building energy regulatory measures now and gain the benefit later

LAPT is a crucial barrier to building energy regulation because most developing countries lack production capability to produce energy-efficient and cost-effective products in line with energy regulations stipulation, implementation and compliance. As a result, developing countries were unable to properly enforce building energy regulations, which would have created market and encouraged the development of local skills in all areas of building energy regulation such as energy standard implementation, compliance, development, energy conservation and efficiency. This makes the implementation of energy regulations in building abound in technical bottlenecks, which waste energy and pollute the environment. Even with importing and international trade opportunities such as reduction in tariffs and importing barriers, there are other barriers still affecting production capability of developing countries. Carbon Trust (2005) and IPCC (2007) identified hidden costs barrier, cost or risks that are not captured directly in financial flows. Although common to most countries, developing countries are more affected. This could be costs and risks due to potential incompatibilities, performance risks and transaction costs within the countries and across borders, and poor power quality, particularly in some developing countries. 5.3. Behavioral and organisational constraints Behavioral characteristics of individuals and organisational do hinder energy regulation practices. Small but easy opportunities and strategies for energy standards implementation are often ignored and changing behavior or lifestyle is very difficult (Shove, 2003; Chappell’s and Shove, 2005). This phenomenon can be described as ‘‘bounded rationality’’ according to Simon (1960), who argues that human beings act and decide only partly on a rational basis. Some of the behavioral characteristics of individuals relating to this barrier are: tendency to ignore small energy saving opportunities, organisational failures (e.g. internal split incentives), non-payment and electricity theft, tradition, behavior and lifestyle, corruption, transition in energy expertise: loss of traditional knowledge and non-suitability of Western techniques (Carbon Trust, 2005; Deringer et al., 2004; IPCC, 2007). Thus these eliminate the existence of voluntary agreements that suppose to promote energy efficient practices within the organisation. Hence, they necessitate negative impacts on energy regulation practices. This barrier is common to most countries and in particular to developing countries due to corruption, political instability, lower income and poor standard of living (IPCC, 2007). 5.4. Information barriers Lack of information about the potentials of building energy standard as energy efficiency solutions is a major barrier in developing countries (Evander et al., 2004; Deringer et al., 2004). Very often, provision of energy services or provision of access to the national grid is considered a priority without recognizing the

6. Possible solutions to these barriers

The options involved in this approach are given below. 6.1.1. Establish financial partnership with international bodies for grant and financial support This will bring about improvement in technologies and reduce the cost of energy efficient features and equipment. Besides, it will help to stimulate compliance by combine energy regulation measures with financial incentive. Moreover, this option will overcome the problem of higher cost of purchasing for more efficient equipment, lack of access to financing and capital. Hence, this option will bring about access to capital for low income consumers, building contractors and increase the purchasing power of consumers. Therefore, the practice of energy regulation relating implementation, development and compliance will be greatly promoted in these countries. This can be managed by the government through the assigned energy regulation agency by setting up innovative financial schemes (EE funds, loan guarantee mechanism, GEF, CDM, etc.), and involving the local financial sector to support the implementation of energy standard measures. 6.1.2. The use of economic and market based regulatory instruments Economic regulatory instruments help to reduce transaction costs such as EPC. Energy performance contracting (EPC) means that a contractor, typically an energy service company (ESCO), guarantees certain energy savings for a location over a specified period; implements the appropriate energy efficiency improvements; and is paid from the estimated energy cost reductions achieved through the building energy regulatory measure applications (UNEP, 2009a, 2009b). EPC and ESCOs therefore serve as vehicles or agents for implementing and financing building energy regulations. The other three economic instruments that can be exploited are cooperative procurement, energy efficiency certificate schemes and Kyoto flexibility mechanisms. This option will overcome hidden cost barrier, transaction cost as well as poor power quality particular to developing countries. Besides, this option can effectively promote building energy regulation development and implementation in most developed and developing countries. 6.1.3. Fiscal instruments and incentives Capital subsidies, grants, subsidized loans and rebates are one of the most frequently used instruments for increasing energy efficiency in buildings. Subsidies are very commonly used to overcome the major barrier of high first costs (ECS, 2002). They are used to finance better insulation such as roof insulation in the UK, more efficient equipment such as refrigerators in Germany, and CFLs or energy audits as in France. Subsidized loans are used for example in Austria to support ESCOs. Apart from overcoming high cost of purchasing barrier, this particular option can also effectively overcome the energy subsidy barrier confronting most developing countries. Rather than subsidizing energy subsidy for

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

short benefits, subsidizing energy regulatory measures will bring about long term benefits and energy efficiency in building. 6.1.3.1. Comparison of fiscal instruments and incentives. Fiscal instruments and incentives can be defined as policy tools that influence energy prices either by imposing taxes aimed at reducing energy consumption or by financial support if first-cost related barriers are to be addressed. Environmental economists often consider fiscal instruments and especially taxes to be the best instruments, as they can give a uniform signal to the whole economy and equalize compliance costs (UNEP, 2009a, 2009b). However, the assessment shows that fiscal instruments vary widely. The effectiveness of these instruments varies considerably and depends strongly on the design of the instrument. The effectiveness of taxes depends, for instance, on the level of taxes or on the use of the tax revenue by the government. Tax exemptions are usually more effective and seem to be one of the most neglected, yet very useful instruments. On the other hand, subsidies, EPC, grants, loans and rebates can be effective if designed well, and are especially needed in developing countries where lack of financing constitutes a major barrier. In these countries, tax exemptions are not enough. Fiscal instruments can help overcome the barriers under the categories of economic and financial barrier. In addition, subsidies and grants are often effective, but usually less cost-effective from a societal point of view. However, according to UNEP (2009a, 2009b) the German and Slovenian subsidy schemes have been very effective. Therefore, subsidies can be important to facilitate the introduction of new technologies and enable especially poor households to engage in energy regulation implementation and energy efficiency investments. For this reason, they are especially useful in developing countries where financial limitations constitute one of the major barriers for energy regulation practices. 6.2. Overcoming the information barrier by using information policy instrument This instrument can be very effective if combined with regulatory measures. Public information campaigns can be described as policy instruments designed by government agencies with the intention to change individual behaviors, attitudes, values, or knowledge (Bender et al., 2004). Program types include counselling, consumption feedback, elementary school programs and mass media motivational campaigns on how energy standard can be effectively implemented. Also, creating local energy information centres, establishing good information systems, strengthening data collection networks can effectively overcome this barrier. 6.3. Lack of appropriate production technologies Technology subsidies can help to facilitate the introduction of new technologies, improve economic and enable especially poor households to engage in energy efficiency investments and implementation of energy regulation measures. For this reason, they are especially useful in developing countries where financial limitations constitute one of the major barriers for energy regulations implementation. This will create a market for cost effective, energy efficient building components and encourage local skills. Also it will enhance better enforcement of building energy regulation, development and implementation. Besides, these types of subsidies can be very effective if combined with regulatory measures. In developing countries, energy expenditure represents a much larger share of the disposable income, but energy subsidies often lower the energy price artificially, which

7753

does not encourage the practice of building energy regulations as more incomes are directed towards energy subsides rather than energy regulation implementation. Actually, energy subsidies are frequently considered as one of the most important barriers for energy regulation practices in developing countries (Alam et al., 1998). This is because most of the findings that are supposed to be expended on energy saving programs such as subsidizing the implementation and proper enforcement of building energy regulations are being spent on energy subsidy for short-term benefits. Also, complete elimination of energy subsidy should be considered as this will facilitate the availability of cost effective technologies and increase in capital subsidies allocated for building energy regulation development, implementation, compliance and enforcement. 6.4. Behavioral and organisational constraints Voluntary policy instruments and regulatory measures can be implemented to confront this barrier. These approaches involved voluntary agreement, certification, public leadership programs and detailed billing. These are the regulatory measures that can ensure compliance and adequate enforcement of building energy standard in the organisation. In order to ensure compliance, combined regulatory measures can be exploited such as voluntary agreements with a threat of regulation, industrial agreements and energy audits, industrial agreements and tax exemptions.

7. Conclusion and recommendations Building energy regulation plays a significant role in reducing building energy consumption. Besides, it is a widely used instrument in most developed countries to control energy consumption in building. However, the position of developing countries with respect to energy regulation implementation toward energy conservation and efficiency is not known. In that respect, this paper investigated the progress on building energy regulation in developing countries and the implication for energy conservation and efficiency. Major findings indicate that the level of progress on energy regulation activities in Africa, Latin America and Middle East is increasing in view of the higher number of energy standard proposals recorded in these regions (see Fig. 5). However, they are still far behind in building energy regulation development, implementation and compliance when compared to developed nations (Janda, 2009). Also, decision making regarding energy regulations is still from the government only, with little or no input from non-governmental entities. As a result, there is lower energy regulation development recorded in these regions compared to regions with integrated and consensus approach. In addition, this study identified 25 countries without energy standard and they are all developing countries. Moreover, there is a steady progress on energy regulation implementation in Europe, North America and Asia with the highest number of building energy standard being adopted and implemented as shown in this study (see Fig. 5). Also, there is an increasing government involvement in energy standard development and implementation as shown in Fig. 5, where 62% of the respondents from the Middle east, 45% from Africa and 43% from Latin America indicated that existing government agencies such as building agencies, energy agencies are involved in implementing building energy standards in their countries compared to 20% from Europe, 38% from Asia and 0% from North America, which indicated the involvement of existing agencies. On the other hand, the use of new/separate agency recorded higher percentages from North America, Europe and Asia. Also, the response on the sole

7754

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

dependence on voluntary organisations is very low which indicates some level of progress on government interest and involvement in implementing energy standards in these countries. Moreover, the increasing number of proposed standards, increasing level of energy standard implementation, especially in part of developing countries (graduated/NIC countries) and upgrading of some energy standards from proposed to mixed/ voluntary, from mixed to mandatory (see Figs. 3 and 5) is a sign of increase in building energy regulation practice. As confirmed in Latin America and Africa, this result indicates some level of energy regulation activities is going on in these regions as indicated by the high level of proposed standard recorded in Fig. 3 and the high level of awareness of other countries’ regulation activities. Finally, this study has shown that there is a strong relationship between energy regulation performance as shown in Figs. 3–9, energy consumption performance shown in Fig. 2 and building performance assessment methods identified by Casals (2005) and Ding (2008).Promoting the use of building energy regulations for energy conservation and efficiency in developing countries through adequate implementation of the proposed solutions to the identified barriers in this study is therefore required.

Acknowledgements The author acknowledges the United Nation Environment Programme Report (UNEP, 2009) and Kathryn Janda (Janda, 2009), whose reports have served as a major reference in this study. References Alam, M., Sathaye, J., Barnes, D., 1998. Urban household energy use in India, efficiency and policy implications. Energy Policy 26 (11), 885–891. Anon, 2005. In: Proceeding of the Regional Workshop—Toward Energy Efficiency Thermal Building Codes in Mediterranean Countries, ANME, Hammamet. Anon, 2006. Ninth Malaysian Plane 2006–2010, The Economic Planning Unit Prime Minister’s Department, Putrajaya, Malaysia. Bartlett, M.A., Halverson,D.L., Shankle, 2003.Understanding Building Energy Codes and Standards. Available from: /http://www.energycodes.gov/implement/ pdfs/codes/01.pdf2010S. Bender, S., Moezzi, M., Gossard, M., Lutzenhiser, L., 2004. Using mass media to influence energy consumption behavior: California’s 2001 flex your power campaign as a case study. In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, ACEEE Press. Birner, S., Martinot,E., 2002.The GEF energy-efficient product portfolio: emerging experience and lessons. Washington, DC. Cai, W.G., Wu, Y., Zhong., Y., 2009. China building energy consumption: situation, challenges and corresponding measures. Energy Policy 37, 2054–2059. Carbon Trust, 2005. The UK Climate Change Programme: Potential Evolution for Business and the Public Sector. Technical Report. Available online: /http:// www.carbontrust.co.ukS. Carbon Trust, 2009. The UK Climate Change Programme: Potential Evolution for Business and the Public Sector. Technical Report. Available online: /www. carbontrust.co.uk/cited2009S. Casals, Xavier Garcı., 2005. Analysis of building energy regulation and certification in Europe: their role, limitations and differences. Energy and Buildings 38 (2006), 381–392. Chappell’s, H., Shove, E., 2005. Debating the future of comfort: environmental sustainability, energy consumption and the indoor environment. Building Research and Information 33 (1), 32–40. Chirarattananon, Surapong, Rakwamsuk, Pattana, Hien, Vu Duc, Taweekun, JuntakanMettanant, Vichuda, 2004. Development of a Building Energy Code for New Buildings in Thailand. In: Proceedings of The Joint International Conference on Sustainable Energy and Environment (SEE), 1–3 December 2004, Hua Hin, Thailand. Chow, L.C., 2001. A study of sectoral energy consumption in Hong Kong (1984–97) with special emphasis on the household sector. Energy Policy 29, 1099–1110. Communities, 2010. Building regulation /http://www.communities.gov.uk/docu ments/panningandbuilding/pdf/cited2010S. Deringer, J., Iyer, M., Yu Joe Huang, Y.J., 2004. Transferred just on paper? why doesn’t the reality of transferring/adapting energy efficiency codes and standards come close to the potential? In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Pacific Grove, CA, August 2004. Ding, G.K., 2008. Sustainable construction: the role of environmental assessment tools. Journal of Environmental Management 86 (2008), 451–464.

Electrical & Mechanical Service Department (EMSD), 2010. Performance BasedBuilding Energy Codes. /http://www.emsd.gov.hk/emsd/cited2010S. Energy Charter Secretariat (ECS), 2002. Fiscal policies for improving energy efficiency. Taxation, grants and subsidies, ECS, Brussels. Energy Commission (EC), 2007. Statistics of Electricity Supply in Malaysia. Energy Commission, Malaysia. ¨ Evander, A., Siebock, G., Neij, L., 2004. Diffusion and development of new energy technologies: lessons learned in view of renewable energy and energy efficiency end-use projects in developing countries. International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, report 2004, 2. European Union (EU), 2009. Energy Cooperation with the Developing Countries. /http://www.europa.eu/legislation_summaries/development/sectorialdeve lopment/cited2009S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2009b. Trinidad and Caribbean Energy Information /http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/caribbean/pdf/ci ted2009S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2009a. World Energy Demand and Economic Outlook. /http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/world./cited2009S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2010. World Energy Demand and Economic Outlook /http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/world./cited2010S. Gann, D.M., Wang, Y., Hawkins, R., 1998. Do regulations encourage innovation?—the case of energy efficiency in housing. Building Research and Information 26 (5), 280–296. Genjo, K.S., Tanabe, S., Matsumoto, K., Hasegawa, Yoshino, H., 2005. Relationship between possession of electric appliances and electricity for lighting and others in Japanese households. Energy and Buildings 37 (3), 259–272. Hassan, R., 2008. A systematic methodology for optimising the energy performance of buildings in Bahrain. Energy and Building 40, 1297–1303. Hitchin, R., 2009. Can Building Codes Deliver Energy Efficiency?. Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors London /http://www.rics.org/cited2009S. Hongkong University (hku), 2009. Building Energy Standard and Code. /http:// www.arch.rhku.hk/research/beer/besc.htm/cited2009S. Huang, J., 2006. International experience in building codes’ Workshop on energy Efficiency Codes in Buildings. New Delhi. Huang, J., et al., 2003. The development of residential and commercial building energy standards for Egypt. In: Proceedings of the Energy Conservation Workshop in Buildings Workshop, Kuwait. Hong, W., Chiang, M.S., 2007. Trends in Asia’s building energy efficiency policies. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Climate Change, Hong Kong. Hui, S.C.M., 2000. Building energy efficiency standards in Hong Kong and mainland China. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, 20–25 August 2000, Pacific Grove, California. HkU, 2010. Building Energy Standards and Codes (BESC). /http://www.arch.hku/ research/BEER/besc.htm/cited2010S. Institute for Techno-Economics and Energy system Analysis (INTEESA), 2009. The role of renewable energy options in China’s present and future energy system. Available online at: /http://www.nautilus.org/archives/energy/eaef/C4_.nal. PDFSS. International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010a. IMF emerging and developing economies list. World Economic Outlook Database, October 2009. /http:// www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/02/weodata/groups.htm/ cited2010S. International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010b. How does the WEO categorize advanced versus emerging and developing economies? /http://www.imf. org/external/pubs/ft/weo/faq.htm./cited2010S. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2007. Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Janda, K.B., Busch, J.F., 1994. Worldwide status of energy standards for buildings. Energy 19 (1), 27–44. Janda, 2009. World Status of Energy Standard for Buildings. /http://www.eci.ox. ac.uk/publications/downloads/janda09worldwidestatus/cited2009S. Jannuzzi, G.M., 2005. Energy efficiency and R&D activities in Brazil: experiences from the Wirecharge mechanism (1998–2004). In: Developing Financial Intermediation Mechanisms for Energy Projects in Brazil, China and India, June 2005. Lausten, J., 2008. Energy efficiency requirements in building codes, energy efficiency policies for new buildings. IEA Information paper. OECD/ IEA, Paris. Lombard, L.P., Jose, O., Christine, P., 2008. A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy and Building 40 (3), 394–398. Lamberts, R., et al., 2007. Regulation for energy efficient labelling of commercial buildings in Brazil. In: Proceedings of the Passive and Low Energy Cooling for the Built Environment Conference. Mankiw, N. Gregory,2007. Principles of Economics. 4th edition, isbn:0-32-422472-9. Mauro, F.Guille´n, 2003. Multinationals, Ideology, and Organized Labor. The Limits of Convergence. Princeton University Press isbn:0-69-111633-4. Meier, J., Lin, J., Liu, Li, T., 2004. Standby power use in Chinese homes. Energy and Buildings 36 (12), 11–1216. Moissan, F., 2005. Energy efficiency: a worldwide review. In: Proceedings of WEC COP 11, 6 December 2005. Nature Publishing Group, 2008. Architects of a low-energy future. Nature 452 (3), 520–523.

J. Iwaro, A. Mwasha / Energy Policy 38 (2010) 7744–7755

Omar, M.A., Mohammed, M.A., 2004. A survey of energy-efficient strategies for effective air-conditioning. Energy Conversion and Management 45, 1643–1654. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2003. Environmentally Sustainable Buildings—Challenges and Policies. OECD, Paris. Ouyang, J., Hokao, K., 2009. Energy-saving potential by improving occupants’ behavior in urban residential sector in Hangzhou city, China. Energy and Building 41, 711–720. Pawe", Boz˙yk, 2006. Newly Industrialized Countries. Globalization and the Transformation of Foreign Economic Policy. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. isbn: 0-75-464638-6. Radhi, H., 2008. A systematic methodology for optimizing the energy performance of buildings in Bahrain. Energy and Buildings 40 (7), 1297–1303. Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RIC), 2009. Can Building Code Deliver Energy Efficiency. /http://www.rics.org/site/download_feed.aspx/cited2009S. Saidur, R., 2009. Energy consumption, energy savings, and emission analysis in Malaysian office buildings. Energy Policy 37, 4104–4113. Santamouris, M., 2005. Energy Performance Residential Buildings. James & James/ Earth Scan, UK. Shove, E., 2003. Comfort, Cleanliness, and Convenience: The Social Organization of Normality. Berg Publishers, Oxford and New York. Simon, H.A., 1960. The New Science of Management Decision. Harper & Bros, New York. Thomsen, K.E., Wittchen, K.B., 2009. European National Strategies to move towards Very Low Energy Buildings. SBi, Danish Building Research Institute, Aalborg University /http://www.euroace.org/cited2009S. ibsn:978-87-563-1329-2. Tso Geoffrey, K.F., Yau Kelvin, K., 2003. A study of domestic energy usage patterns in Hong Kong. Energy 28: 1671–1682.

7755

United Nation Environmental Programme (UNEP), 2009a. Assessment of policy instruments for reducing green house gas emissions. /http://www.unep.org/ sbci/pdfs/SBCI_CEU_Policy_Tool_Report./cited2009S. UNEP, 2009b. Assessment of policy instruments for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. /http://www.unep.org/themes/consumption/pdf/ SBCI_CEU_Policy_Tool_Report/cited2009S. Urge-Vorsatz, D., Mirasgedis, S., Harvey, D., Levine, M., 2007. Mitigating CO2 emissions from energy use in the world’s buildings. Building Research and Information 35 (4), 458–477. Waugh, David, 2000. Manufacturing industries (chapter 19), World Development (chapter 22). Geography, An Integrated Approach 3rd edition Nelson Thornes Ltd., pp. 563, 576–579, 633, and 640. isbn:0-17-444706-X. Wang, G., YunXia, Wangb, Tao, Zhao, 2008. Analysis of interactions among the barriers to energy saving in China. Energy Policy 36, 1879–1889. World Bank, 2010. Countries Classifications. /http://www.worldbank.org/ci ted2010S. Whole Building Design (WBDG), 2009. Energy Code and Standard. /http://www. wbdg.org/resources/energycodes.php/cited2009S. World Energy Council, 2010. Energy efficiency policies around the world: review and evaluation. /http://www.worldenergy.org/publications/energy_efficien cy_policies_around_the_world/cited2010S. Yang, L., Joseph, C. Lam, Tsang, C.L., 2008. Energy performance of building envelopes in different climate zones in China. Applied Energy. Yamtraipat, N., Khedari, J., Hirunlabh, J., Kunchornrat, J., 2006. Assessment of Thailand indoor set-point impact on energy consumption and environment. Energy Policy 34 (7), 765–770. Yin, B., 2006. Study on Administration of Energy Efficiency Labelling of Building. Tianjing University, China.