A systematic review of strategies for overcoming the barriers to energy-efficient technologies in buildings

Abstract The energy used to construct, operate and eventually demolish buildings has accounted for 40% of total energy used globally and 9% of the world’s greenhouse emissions. When examining major energy consumers such as Europe or the United States, the amounts of energy used for buildings is even higher. The use of energy-efficient technologies (EETs), such as low-energy windows and programmable thermostats, have had many positive results, including long-term energy reductions, a healthier living environment, the creation of jobs, and better quality housing. Unfortunately, there continue to be barriers to the use of EETs. While there are dozens of strategies for overcoming these barriers, many have gotten overlooked or lost. This paper provides a review of the literature that has focused on barriers to the use of EETs and strategies for overcoming these barriers. The method used for identifying relevant literature was a systematic search of scholarly publications addressing barriers and/or strategies for EET use. A theoretical framework is presented as a means of organizing the literature. The framework includes three broad groups of barriers: knowledge of EETs, access to EETs, and desire to use EETs. Strategies for overcoming the barriers are likewise organized and described.

[1]  Kathryn B. Janda,et al.  From “if only” to “social potential” in schemes to reduce building energy use , 2014 .

[2]  J. Yudelson.  The Business Case for Green Buildings , 2012, Marketing Green Buildings:.

[3]  Chien-fei Chen,et al.  Who wants solar water heaters and alternative fuel vehicles? Assessing social–psychological predictors of adoption intention and policy support in China , 2016 .

[4]  Chris Knowles,et al.  Barriers to the implementation of sustainable structural materials in green buildings , 2010 .

[5]  M. Webber.  Brown, L.A. 1981: Innovation diffusion: a new perspective. London: Methuen , 2006 .

[6]  M. Landman,et al.  Breaking through the Barriers to Sustainable Building: Insights from Building Professionals on Government Initiatives to Promote Environmentally Sound Practices , 1999 .

[7]  F. Tödtling,et al.  One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach , 2005 .

[8]  Shilpi Saraswat,et al.  Adoption of Green Building Concept by Selected Builders of Vadodara City in Selected Housing Colonies Constructed by Them , 2015 .

[9]  B. Sovacool.  What Are We Doing Here? Analyzing Fifteen Years of Energy Scholarship and Proposing a Social Science Research Agenda , 2014 .

[10]  Daniel Levi,et al.  The driving and restraining forces which affect technological innovation in organizations , 1993 .

[11]  X. Bai,et al.  A Vision for Human Well-Being: Transition to Social Sustainability , 2012 .

[12]  K. Williams,et al.  What is stopping sustainable building in England? Barriers experienced by stakeholders in delivering sustainable developments , 2007 .

[13]  Gerjo Kok,et al.  One size fits all? Policy instruments should fit the segments of target groups , 2006 .

[14]  Kenneth M. Keating,et al.  Energy and Society , 1988 .

[15]  D. Hes,et al.  Sustainability Uptake in Housing in Metropolitan Australia: An Institutional Problem, Not a Technological One , 2009 .

[16]  Gregory L. Simon.  Mobilizing Cookstoves for Development: A Dual Adoption Framework Analysis of Collaborative Technology Innovations in Western India , 2010 .

[17]  Martin Sexton,et al.  An evolutionary innovation perspective on the selection of low and zero-carbon technologies in new housing , 2014 .

[18]  Maurizio Cellura,et al.  Energy life-cycle approach in Net zero energy buildings balance: Operation and embodied energy of an Italian case study , 2014 .

[19]  Hugo Priemus,et al.  Institutional Barriers to Sustainable Construction , 2002 .

[20]  Martin S. Symes,et al.  The diffusion of innovations in urban design: The case of sustainability in the Hulme development guide , 1999 .

[21]  David Gann,et al.  Do regulations encourage innovation? The case of energy efficiency in housing. , 1998 .

[22]  Olabode E. Ogunsanmi,et al.  Stakeholders Perception of Factors Determining the Adoptability of Green Building Practices In Construction Projects In Nigeria , 2015 .

[23]  Gavin Killip,et al.  Transition Management Using a Market Transformation Approach: Lessons for Theory, Research, and Practice from the Case of Low-Carbon Housing Refurbishment in the UK , 2013 .

[24]  O. Debande,et al.  Information and Communication Technologies: A Tool Empowering and Developing the Horizon of the Learner. , 2004 .

[25]  Patrick McAllister,et al.  Energy Performance Ratings and House Prices in Wales: An Empirical Study , 2015 .

[26]  Chris Harty,et al.  Actors and objects: a socio‐technical networks approach to technology uptake in the construction sector , 2010 .

[27]  S. Hultén,et al.  Escaping lock-in: The case of the electric vehicle☆ , 1996 .

[28]  Kathryn B. Janda,et al.  Building communities and social potential: Between and beyond organizations and individuals in commercial properties , 2014 .

[29]  H. Kan,et al.  Ambient carbon monoxide and daily mortality in three Chinese cities: the China Air Pollution and Health Effects Study (CAPES). , 2011, The Science of the total environment.

[30]  End Use.  Annual energy review , 1984 .

[31]  Milou Beerepoot,et al.  Government regulation as an impetus for innovation: Evidence from energy performance regulation in the Dutch residential building sector , 2007 .

[32]  M. Savitz,et al.  Rethinking energy innovation and social science , 2014 .

[33]  J. Coleman,et al.  The Diffusion of an Innovation Among Physicians , 1957 .

[34]  Beatriz Kury,et al.  The diffusion of exporting in Brazilian industrial clusters , 2009 .

[35]  Diffusion of bio-climatic building design techniques in Kenya: Impediments and opportunities , 1997 .

[36]  J. Emmel,et al.  The adoption of sustainable laundry technologies by US consumers , 2013 .

[37]  L. Mundaca,et al.  Exploring transaction costs in passive house-oriented retrofitting , 2016 .

[38]  Harald Rohracher,et al.  Managing the Technological Transition to Sustainable Construction of Buildings: A Socio-Technical Perspective , 2001, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[39]  Vladislav Kantchev Shunturov,et al.  Dormitory residents reduce electricity consumption when exposed to real‐time visual feedback and incentives , 2007 .

[40]  Hongjai Rhee,et al.  Forecasting 3G mobile subscription in China: A study based on stochastic frontier analysis and a Bass diffusion model , 2012 .

[41]  Thomas Magnusson,et al.  Fostering sustainable technologies: a framework for analysing the governance of innovation systems , 2011 .

[42]  Hippu Salk Kristle Nathan,et al.  Commercialization of sustainable energy technologies , 2010 .

[43]  W. Abrahamse,et al.  How do socio-demographic and psychological factors relate to households' direct and indirect energy use and savings? , 2009 .

[44]  Chien-fei Chen,et al.  The moderating role of individual differences in responses to benefit and temporal framing of messages promoting residential energy saving , 2015 .

[45]  D. Stone.  Non‐Governmental Policy Transfer: The Strategies of Independent Policy Institutes , 2000 .

[46]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[47]  D. Horsky,et al.  Advertising and the Diffusion of New Products , 1983 .

[48]  Ola Johansson,et al.  The spatial diffusion of green building technologies: The case of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) in the United States , 2012 .

[49]  W. Stubbs,et al.  Integrating environmental sustainability into universities , 2013, Higher Education.