Innovative policy practices to advance building energy efficiency and retrofitting: Approaches,impacts and challenges in ten C40 cities |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Clark University, Department of International Development, Community and Environment, Worcester, USA;2. University College London, Faculty of the Built Environment, London, United Kingdom;3. CSR Design Green Investment Advisory, Tokyo, Japan;4. C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, London, United Kingdom;5. Tokyo Metropolitan Government – Bureau of Environment, Tokyo, Japan;6. University of Tokyo, Graduate School of Public Policy, Tokyo, Japan;7. University College London, Department of Science, Technology, Engineering & Public Policy, London, United Kingdom;1. Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, 16-2 Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8506, Japan;2. Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, 457-4 Motoyama, Kamigamo, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8047, Japan;3. Kyoto University Join Research Project for Renewable Energy Economics, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyuo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan;4. Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, Universitätstrasse 16, Zürich 8092, Switzerland;5. University of Melbourne, 187 Grattan Street, Carlton, VIC 3053, Melbourne, Australia;6. Graduate School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyō, Tokyo 113-8654, Japan;7. Department of Innovation Science, School of Environment and Society, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 3-3-6 Shibaura, Minato, Tokyo 105-0023, Japan;8. Division of Public Policy, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region;9. Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom;10. Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan;11. Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, 2-1 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan;1. Division of Public Policy, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong;2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong;3. Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy, University College London, Gower Street, London, United Kingdom;4. Graduate School of Public Policy, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan;5. Division of Social Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong;1. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Global Health Institute, 1070 Medical Sciences Center, 1300 University Avenue, Madison, WI, 53706, United States;2. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment, United States;3. Georgia Institute of Technology, School of City and Regional Planning, Atlanta, GA, United States;4. Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Atlanta, GA, United States;1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Aalto University, Helsinki, Finland;2. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland;3. Smart City Center of Excellence, TalTech, Tallinn, Estonia;4. Granlund Consulting Oy, Helsinki, Finland;5. Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland;6. College of Urban Construction, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing, China;1. Department of Political Science, Yonsei University, Yonsei Ro 50 Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, South Korea;2. Department of Area Studies, Ewha Womans University, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, South Korea |
| |
| Abstract: | This study examines ten programmes to advance energy efficiency and retrofitting of existing, private sector buildings in C40 cities in Asia-Pacific and USA. We set out to identify differing policy approaches, together with potential impacts and implementation challenges for each. Findings unearthed six policy models – both mandatory and voluntary – with unique impacts and challenges. We demonstrate that innovation occurs without new policy inventions and largely by necessity, as new features are added and generic models are adapted to local circumstances. Our sample demonstrated experimentation with benchmarking in the USA, comprehensive regulation in Asia, and voluntary approaches in Australia. Overall, environmental impacts are particularly slow to emerge and plagued with attribution challenges. We found limited evidence of benchmarking programme effectiveness in reducing energy consumption in the short-term, but some indication of mid-term outcomes. Driven by unique local circumstances, the cap-and-trade model stood out by fostering large, sustained and attributable GHG emission reductions and retrofitting. Market and social impacts are highly significant across all programmes, highlighting needs to consider non-environmental impacts in policy evaluation. We emphasise the complementary potential of voluntary and regulatory approaches to advancing energy efficiency and climate resilience. We also underscore the potential for reporting or benchmarking programmes to later transition to models mandating performance improvements, such as cap-and-trade. |
| |
| Keywords: | Building energy efficiency Retrofitting City climate governance Policy innovation C40 |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
