MASARYK UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF SOCIAL STUDIES Department of International Relations and European Studies Community-Oriented Energy Efficiency Policies in the European Union Master’s Thesis Author: Aryuna Shoynzhonova UČO: 442839 Supervisor: Mgr. Jan Osicka, Ph.D. Study Field: Energy Security Studies Year of Enrollment: 2015 Brno, 2017 1 Statement of Authorship I hereby declare that this thesis I submit for assessment is entirely my own work and has not been taken from the work of others save to the extent that such work has been cited and acknowledged within the text of my work. Date:__________________________Aryuna Shoynzhonova_______________________ 2 Acknowledgments I would like to first of all thank my thesis supervisor, Jan Osicka, Ph.D. for his truly extensive assistance and invaluable advice to prepare this work. I would also like to express my gratitude to all the other professors and lecturers of the Energy Security Studies program at Masaryk University, who through their cumulative efforts have made this academic journey an intellectually enriching and positively challenging experience. I want to thank all my comrades at arms, the program students, who throughout the studies showed exemplary cooperation and went to great length to help each other. Finally, I would like to thank my partner and friend Michal, who has been tremendously supportive, caring and patient to me throughout my studies. 3 Table of Contents List of Abbreviations 6 Abstract 7 I. Introduction 8 1.1 Targeting Building Stock of the European Union 1.2 The Middle-Out Approach to Energy Inefficiency in the Building Sector 6 II. Theoretical Framework 14 2.1 The Energy Efficiency Gap and Barriers to Energy Efficiency 2.1.1 Economic Barriers: Market Failures 2.1.2 Economic Barriers: Non-Market Failures 2.1.3 Behavioural Barriers 2.1.4 Organizational Barriers 2.2 Behavioural and Contextual Aspects of Energy Inefficiency 2.3 Community Approach to Energy Efficiency in the Built Environment 2.3.1 Definition of Community and the Role of Stakeholders 2.3.2 Identifying the Middle Agents in Local Energy Efficiency Projects 2.4 Example of Community Approach in the EU: Concerto Initiative 2.5 Weaknesses of the Middle-Out Approach III. Methodology 42 3.1 Preliminary Analysis 3.2 In-Project Elimination and Comparison Grounds 3.3 Data Collection and Processing 3.4 Expectations 3.5 Limitations IV. Results and Discussion 49 4.1 Energy in Minds 4.1.1 Background 4.1.2 Zlin 4.1.3 Neckrasulm 4.1.4 Falkenberg 4.1.5 Weiz-Gleisdorf 4.2 Exploring the Middle Agents and Their Capacities 4.2.1 Neckrasulm: Energy Agency as the Main Driver 4.2.2 Zlin: Green Housing Association as the Agent of Change 4.3 Barriers Encountered 4.4 Other Key Stakeholders: Private House Owners and Apartment Owners 4 V. Conclusion 76 Bibliography Appendix 1. House Owner Interview Questions. General Outline 75 Appendix 2. Apartment Owner Survey Questions 76 5 List of Abbreviations EC – European Commission EIM – Energy in Minds EU – European Union EUCR – European Union Committee of the Regions PV – photovoltaics RES – Renewable Energy Sources 6 Abstract The unsatisfactory rate of development of the EU’s climate change mitigation policies, both on national and international levels, has been found to be locked in the inability of regulators to push forward the energy efficiency agenda in residential sector. The built environment, meanwhile, appears to contain the greatest potential for energy savings, accounting for over 30% of CO2 emissions in the region. To unlock this potential, however, regulators need to look beyond conventional top-down policy implementation. The extremely low adoption rates of RES and energy- and cost-efficient technologies have prompted policy makers to reconsider the ways policy measures are introduced to the market. Borrowing from the structuralist perspective of Agency and Capacity as well as the grassroot theories legislators are actively exploring the ways to engage a variety of sub-national actors to help realize the objectives of the energy efficiency agenda. This study is concerned with the concept of the “middle-out” approach to policy implementation in the realm of energy efficiency, that incorporates ideas of local governance through special agents of choice and community stakeholder participation. Keywords: energy efficiency, barriers, middle-out, community, local, governance, sustainability, building sector, residential sector 7 I. Introduction Tackling the challenges of energy efficiency is a pivotal task within the energy security strategy of the European Union (EU). The current transition towards a low-carbon economy is facilitated by the promotion of renewable energy sources (RES) and reduction of the CO2 emissions. However, the unsatisfactory penetration rates of innovative technologies and ineffective energy saving measures especially in the European built environment have proved that traditional policy tools are no longer adequate to address these challenges effectively (Janda & Parag 2014, Koopmans & Velde 2001). The conventional market thinking about policy implementation in the areas of energy conservation and dissemination of the RES has often found itself limited to deliver large-scale impact (Linden et al. 2006). Simple provision of technology and standardization from the “top” do not tackle complex implementation issues on the ground, and economic incentives fail to motivate consumers to modify their energy-inefficient behaviour (Janda & Parag 2014, Jaffe & Stavins 1994, Cook 2013). On the other hand, the grassroot activism, or the “bottom”, cannot provide conditions for extensive and lasting transformations due to the lack of resources, knowledge and control over processes (Janda & Parag 2014, Reed 2008). Modern research shows that besides traditional market failures there is a myriad of non-market obstacles that appear to significantly hinder and deter the adoption of cost- and energy-efficient technologies, among which are social and behavioural barriers (Shove 1998, Cook 2013, Sorrell et al. 2000, Tuominen 2012, Stengel 2104, Perlaviciute & Steg 2014). One of the approaches to energy transition in buildings argues that the solution to the ineffective policy implementation lies in establishing a link between the “top” and “bottom” 8 (Janda & Parag 2014). Borrowing from the structuralist concept of Agency and Capacity the perspective claims that there exist some “middle agents”, who can foster the complex energy transformation due to their ability and will to remove the barriers. These catalysts are considered to be municipalities, communities, professional networks, energy services companies, housing associations, NGOs and other local organizations that can reach out to, provide assistance/services to and organize end users and hence influence norms and values of the groups (Cook 2013, Quitzau 2013, Janda & Parag 2014). The assumption is that these particular actors possess the characteristics of both the “top” and “bottom” and, therefore, can induce necessary change in the structure of established energy systems. Thus, while the general goal of this study is to contribute to the knowledge of complex implementation processes of energy efficiency policies in the EU, the objective focuses on exploring the concept of the “middle agents”, and how these agents attempt to implement energy efficiency policies in the building sector. To achieve this objective the paper looks at one implementation model at a community level, initiated and funded by the European Commission. The research question is the following: How does the “middle-out” approach contribute to the implementation of energy efficiency measures in the built environment? 1.1 Targeting Building Stock of the European Union The problem of low energy efficiency is especially acute in the building sector. Buildings in Europe account for about 40% of the total final energy consumption and are responsible for 36% of the total CO2 emissions in the region (European Commission, Stengel 2014, Quitzau 9 2012).1 Half of the stock consists of rapidly aging units primarily in the residential sector that were constructed before 1970s, i.e. before the introduction of energy performance regulations (Quitzau 2012, Meijer et al. 2009, European Commission 2014). The significance of renovating the building stock lies not only in the possibility to unlock the energy saving potential, which is estimated to amount to 27-33% of the total energy savings (by 2020), but also in economic and social gains it can generate for people (Tuominen et al. 2012, Holmes 2012, Hope & Booth 2014, Loring 2007). The construction of buildings, that fell subject to the energy efficiency requirements in the 2000s, produced units consuming 30% to 60% less energy than the houses developed in the 1990s (Caputo & Pasetti 2015). However, these policies, notably the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive2, aim at establishing sustainability standards in regard to the newly built units only, and the latter represents additions of less than 1% per annum, reflecting rather limited impact on the energy savings (Meijer et al. 2009, Hope & Booth 2014, Nair 2010). As the EU statistics shows a substantial portion of the stock in some countries has never been retrofitted even after the regulations were adopted due to their historical and/or cultural value (for instance, in Italy & the UK), while the portion of buildings, that fell under the immediate post-1970 regulation and was renovated, however, now requires another round of retrofitting measures because