Re-thinking energy efficiency in European policy: Practitioners' use of ‘multiple benefits’ arguments
Introduction
Energy efficiency has featured in national and international policy for more than 40 years. The idea that energy efficiency should be an important part of government energy policy developed in response to the first oil price crisis in 1973, when reducing energy demand was seen as a route to greater energy security in many developed countries (Geller et al., 2006). As political and economic priorities have changed, government justifications for continuing to develop policy on energy efficiency have stressed different benefits, including energy security, affordability of energy, business competitiveness, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Mallaburn and Eyre, 2014). Thus, energy efficiency is already understood as a means to reach a variety of ends. Now, the ‘multiple benefits’ framing of energy efficiency seeks to expand the range of benefits which energy efficiency is recognised to deliver, and thereby to increase its role in policy making. This paper presents empirical evidence about whether and how the multiple benefits concept is being used by energy efficiency advocates to influence EU and UK policy makers.
The multiple benefits framing of energy efficiency proposes that energy efficiency has many environmental, social and economic benefits, such as improved health, new job creation, and increased productivity, and that these are not currently properly understood or taken account of in decision-making (IEA, 2014). This approach seeks to expand the perspective of energy efficiency beyond the traditional measures of reduced energy demand and lower greenhouse gas emissions by identifying and measuring its impacts across many different spheres. In their influential report, the International Energy Agency (IEA) brought together a wide range of empirical evidence on the benefits of energy efficiency (IEA, 2014). IEA identified fifteen classes of multiple benefits, represented by a ‘flower’ diagram (Fig. 1). The report focused on bringing together evidence in five key areas - macroeconomic development, public budgets, health and well-being, industrial productivity and energy delivery. This report has been a landmark in establishing multiple benefits as a significant development in thinking about energy efficiency.
In order to examine whether this framing of energy efficiency is likely to influence policy making in the EU and UK, our research uses empirical evidence to look at how the idea is currently being adopted and used. The key research aim is to find out how the multiple benefits framing of energy efficiency is used in advocacy with politicians, civil servants and other decision makers by pro-efficiency non-governmental organisations (NGOs), energy efficiency trade associations and other promoters of energy efficiency. Further, to understand whether and how this framing changes how advocates communicate around energy efficiency, what evidence and arguments they use, what evidence is missing, how multiple benefits arguments play into the political debate, why these arguments might sometimes fail, and what advocates see as the future for multiple benefits thinking.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows: first, the paper provides contextual information on the extent to which a multiple benefits framing of energy efficiency is currently embodied within EU policy and a brief literature review (Section 2). Then, empirical interview evidence is used to explore whether and how multiple impacts arguments are being used by advocates to influence policy makers and politicians, and how those arguments are received (Sections 3 Methods, 4 Results). Finally, the results are discussed (Section 5), and conclusions presented (Section 6).
Section snippets
Context & literature review
First the literature on multiple benefits is briefly outlined. This is followed by discussion of the use of cost benefit analysis in decision making about energy efficiency, a summary of the EU approach to efficiency policy and finally an explanation of the place of advocates in EU policy making. Together this provides the context within which this research was carried out.
Methods
The aim of our empirical work with NGOs and trade associations – practitioners – was to find out how the multiple benefits framing of energy efficiency is used in real-life advocacy with politicians, civil servants and other decision makers. To do this, nine semi-structured interviews were undertaken with a range of practitioners, selected through the authors' professional networks, based on the established reputation of each organisation and the interviewee's experience in using the multiple
Results
Overall there was considerable agreement between different actors about the ways in which messages are constructed and used and the importance of multiple benefits as an approach. The findings below highlight consensus messages and common themes. However, we have also included examples where respondents have different perspectives from the majority.
Discussion
The ‘multiple benefits’ approach evidenced in the interviews has the potential to increase understanding and uptake of energy efficiency. However, it is not currently the basis of most formal decision-making or standards setting processes, which are based solely around financial costs and benefits. This means many important social, environmental and economic benefits are excluded from decisions, to the detriment of the quality of decision. These are the benefits which politicians often care
Conclusions
The multiple benefits framing of energy efficiency is still under development as an area of research and practice - as exemplified by the diversity in language, and the modest academic research base. Introducing a multiple benefits approach in governmental policy making and evaluation would deliver more evidence on benefits (and costs in some cases) and change the terms of the debate. It would be expected to result in stronger energy efficiency targets.
As the empirical work with practitioners
Acknowledgements
This research work was funded by the EU Horizon 2020 programme under grant agreement No 649619, as part of the IN-BEE project. The authors' time in writing the paper was supported by the UK Energy Research Centre, which is funded by the UK Research Councils [EPSRC award EP/L024756/1].
References (48)
- et al.
Sustainable buildings for healthier cities: assessing the co-benefits of green buildings in Japan
J. Clean. Prod.
(2017) - et al.
Tools and procedures to support decision making for cost-effective energy and carbon emissions optimization in building renovation
Energy Build.
(2018) - et al.
Non-energy benefits: workhorse or unicorn of energy efficiency programs?
Electr. J.
(2017) - et al.
Policies for increasing energy efficiency: thirty years experience in OECD countries
Energy Pol.
(2006) - et al.
The rationale for energy efficiency policy: assessing the recognition of the multiple benefits of energy efficiency retrofit policy
Energy Pol.
(2017) - et al.
Energy audits in industrial processes
J. Clean. Prod.
(2017) - et al.
The science and politics of co-benefits in climate policy
Environ. Sci. Pol.
(2016) - et al.
How do firms consider non-energy benefits? Empirical findings on energy-efficiency investments in Swedish industry
J. Clean. Prod.
(2016) - et al.
The governance of the European energy union: efficiency, effectiveness and acceptance of the winter package 2016
Energy Pol.
(2018) - et al.
Measuring multiple impacts of low-carbon energy options in a green economy context
Appl. Energy
(2016)
Assessing air pollution abatement co-benefits of energy efficiency improvement in cement industry: a city level analysis
J. Clean. Prod.
Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world
Nat. Clim. Change
What Are the Factors Influencing Energy Behaviours and Decision-making in the Non-domestic Sector? a Rapid Evidence Assessment
Efficiency First in the European Union: Progress Report
Building Deep Energy Retrofit: Using Dynamic Cash Flow Analysis and Multiple Benefits to Convince Investors. ECEEE 2017 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency
Low Carbon Jobs: the Evidence for Net Job Creation from Policy Support for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Integrating value and uncertainty in the energy retrofit analysis in real estate investment
Energy Efficiency
Energy-efficiency skeptics and advocates: the debate heats up as the stakes rise
Energy Efficiency
Salience, Credibility, Legitimacy and Boundaries: Linking Research, Assessment and Decision Making
The new EU power source: energy-efficient lobbying, Politico
Productivity Impact from Multiple Impact Perspective. ECEEE 2017 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency
The Fifth Carbon Budget: the Next Step towards a Low Carbon Economy
Valuation of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
Clean Energy for All Europeans – Unlocking Europe's Growth Potential, Brussels
Cited by (54)
Hard-to-reach energy users: An ex-post cross-country assessment of behavioural-oriented interventions
2023, Energy Research and Social ScienceWhere to meet on heat? A conceptual framework for optimising demand reduction and decarbonised heat supply
2023, Energy Research and Social ScienceFirst and last and always: Politics of the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle in EU energy and climate policy
2023, Energy Research and Social ScienceMuch broader than health: Surveying the diverse co-benefits of energy demand reduction in Europe
2023, Energy Research and Social Science