Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

Awareness development for an energy management programfor social housing in Canada

Scott McKay, Anshuman Khare∗Athabasca University, 301-22 Sir Winston Churchill Avenue, St. Albert AB, Canada T8N 1B4

Received 5 October 2003; received in revised form 20 November 2003; accepted 1 December 2003

Abstract

Social housing organizations compete with other social causes for limited public and private sector funding. While the environmentalimpact is important, it must be recognized that for most social housing organizations the most appealing aspect of an energy managementprogram is the reduction in operating costs through reduced energy consumption. In order to secure financial resources for an energymanagement program, organizations will need to identify and address stakeholder perspectives in the formulation of ‘marketing’ strategies.The ‘marketing’ of an energy management program would be aimed at illustrating the substantial financial savings that can be achieved byincreasing energy efficiency in social housing units. The bonus of an energy management program is the contribution towards environmentalconservation and initiatives such as the Kyoto Protocol, as increased efficiency in energy usage and the subsequent reduction in overallenergy consumption in social housing units contributes to reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.© 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:Energy management; Energy conservation; Social housing; Kyoto Protocol; environmental marketing

1. Introduction

Energy conservation is an economical and environmentalissue that organizations face in today’s world. For most, theconcern is based more on economical than environmentalconcerns. However, with initiatives such as the Kyoto Pro-tocol being discussed, governments and organizations willface a social and business responsibility to reduce energyconsumption and greenhouse gas emissions.

In Canada, the residential sector now accounts for 6%of the total greenhouse gas emissions. In 1990 residentialgreenhouse gas emissions were 8.2%[1]. The reduction isattributed to energy efficiency improvements in appliances,heating equipment, and the thermal characteristics of houses[2].

On an individual basis a typical 2000 ft2 home requires120 GJ of heat to last through an average Calgary winter ifbuilt before 1990, with newer construction standards that isreduced to 90 GJ[3]. The potential energy usage and costsavings for individuals can be transferred to organizationsthat house multi-families or individuals in row housing, du-plexes, or apartments. The combined increase in energy effi-ciency and cost savings on a multiple factor for the number

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.:+1-780-4187533; fax:+1-780-4592093.E-mail address:anshuman@athabascau.ca (A. Khare).

of households affected in an organization would equate tosubstantial energy and cost savings across the country.

Throughout Canada non-profit organizations are involvedin social housing for low-income seniors and families. Inmany cases non-profit organizations manage the day-to-dayissues of the units while provincial, federal, or municipalgovernments have ownership and oversee legislation. Tradi-tionally, for most organizations, utilities have been an areawhere there is limited control over costs and minimum efforthas been made to reduce utility consumption by residents ormake older buildings more energy efficient.

Social housing in Canada is in a state of change as thefederal and provincial governments review their role andchange the existing funding and ownership structures acrossthe country. The federal government is presently removingitself from ownership of units and moving towards a flatrate funding agreement with provinces and territories. Tra-ditionally, each province has managed social housing its’own way, and there may not be any direct correlation be-tween the operations from one province to another. Manyprovinces are changing their method of management to moredirect municipal and non-profit involvement and ownershipand less direct involvement by the provincial government.As a result of these changes, the future is likely to see moreresponsibility to local municipalities and boards of directorsof non-profit organizations for social housing units. With a

0378-7788/$ – see front matter © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2003.12.001

238 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

local emphasis on operations, the cost and consumption ofenergy is more likely to be an issue that will need to beaddressed. Senior management referred to in this documentencompasses the present provincial staff involved in socialhousing for provinces and territories that are not moving tolocal ownership and operations, as well as the boards and di-rectors of non-profit organizations and local municipal rep-resentatives for areas where the shift in social housing isoccurring.

An energy management program for social housing wouldhave to consist of two distinct phases—first, “marketing”that would initiate fund raising, allocations, and approval ofthe energy management initiative; and second would be the“implementation and follow through” of an energy manage-ment program to reduce energy consumption and long-termutility costs. Overall, the energy management programwould contribute towards resource sustainability throughmodifying construction standards of units and encouragingwise energy practices by residents. The major issues to beaddressed during the various phases of the program wouldbe marketing strategy, capital and resident initiatives.

For implementation of an energy management programthe emphasis is on the application of environmental strategyin order to achieve energy conservation and reduce utilitycosts. The five elements of a successful environmental strat-egy are based on the work of Piasecki et al.[4] in “Environ-mental Management and Business Strategy.” This will allowfor a coordinated approach to environmental management asorganizations encourage commitment, implement environ-mental audit and information systems, identify performancemeasures, and report results.

Reducing environmental impacts and the footprint that weleave is a responsibility for all individuals, organizations andgovernments. The energy management program will presentan approach to reduce utility costs and consumption, whilecontributing to resource sustainability and targets set in theKyoto Protocol (Kyoto Protocol, Article 2.1.(a).(i) states thateach party shall enhance energy efficiency in relevant sec-tors of the national economy[13]). It will create a win-winsituation for non-profit organizations, politicians, taxpayers,and the environment.

2. Defining environmental strategy for non-profitorganizations

Strategy in the non-profit sector is often dictated by ex-ternal factors that organizations have little control over.Political will, economic conditions, public perception andreception, all contribute to the overall atmosphere that orga-nizations must deal with. Traditionally, many social housingorganizations have been reactive to these external factorsrather than taking a proactive approach.

In the present political climate, government spending iscentered on health and education. Social housing has notbeen a priority and is unlikely to be a priority. In order for

housing to get funds for an energy management program, itwill have to align itself with the issue of ‘the environment’and aggressively market the benefits to stakeholders.

Piasecki et al.[4] refer to three kinds of strategic advan-tages in environmental management ([4], p. 103):

1. Opportunity advantage: When you have an early lead ina technical skill base or approach, and when others arenot yet ready to replicate.

2. Terrain advantage: When the convention of science andlaw support your direction of growth, as does your marketposition.

3. Moral advantage: When the public and the press con-stantly want your “corporate” position. This is about im-age and prestige.

For social housing, the opportunity advantage is to demon-strate a form of competitive advantage over other socialcauses through alignment with environmental issues and fi-nancial returns on investment. Piasecki et al.[4] refers toan environmental opportunity advantage as “When a com-pany reinvents the traditional product rules of an entrenchedindustry usually dependent upon stability and slow change,then you are seeing an example of a strategy that recognizesenvironmental ‘opportunity advantage”’ ([4], p. 103). Withan emphasis on environmental construction standards andresident consumption patterns social housing will present anon-traditional approach to low-income property manage-ment. The risks, are public and political backlash for spend-ing public funds, while the rewards are far reaching as theydeal with capital improvements that will extend the usefullife of buildings, reduced energy costs and consumption, anda lifetime use of good energy practices by residents (regard-less of where they live).

Terrain advantage is one that has to be addressed throughthe marketing of the energy management program as socialhousing is not a top priority for governments or the publicand therefore the relative market position could be describedas weak. By tying the marketing campaign into moral ad-vantage housing has a chance to improve its’ positioning.Moral advantage can be used in several ways:

• Political forces can use an energy management programas an illustration of the government participating in en-vironmental management and contributing to worldwidetargets as defined in papers such as the Kyoto Protocol.

• The public can be shown that government is serious aboutenvironmental management and is prepared to incur somecosts in the short term to protect Canadian society thoughlong-term gains in reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

• The program would show a long-term proactive perspec-tive by the government and non-profit organizations.

• Families who move out of social housing will have learnedgood energy management practices to better prepare themfor ‘market’ rentals—a lifetime of environmental aware-ness and good practices will have been introduced to asegment of the population.

S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250 239

Setting up an environmental management strategy (EMS)involves attention to a core set of concerns originally men-tioned by Piasecki et al. and modified here for social housing([4], p. 104):

• Strategically recognizing the environmental initiativethrough the mission statement, policies, and organiza-tional and individual behavior. Formal recognition of theenergy management program in a clear, concise languagethat can be understood by staff and external stakeholders.

• Modify staff functions. As part of the formal recognitionof the energy program, staff duties must be changed toreflect the importance of the energy initiative.

• Adaptations to existing management tools with an em-phasis on reviewing cost savings and return on investment(ROI). ROI may not be used in most non-profits, but thisis a good example of where the nature of the organiza-tion changes some of it’s practices to incorporate envi-ronmental initiatives and open the way for further opera-tional enhancements that will allow for the organizationto compete for government and private sector funding.

• Motivational programs for senior management and staff toachieve internal buy-in for operational changes and adap-tation of the corporate culture to include environmentalissues.

• Strategic alliances with better external relations to stake-holders who have an influence on the implementationand continuation of environmental programs. The polit-ical process in particular will have an impact on an en-ergy management program. Political will can be viewedas an extension of four contributing factors; the politi-cal interpretation of the feelings and desires of the gen-eral public; the extension of the social responsibility ofthe government in it’s role to act on behalf of the peo-ple; the personal interpretation by the politicians of thepresent situation based on their own feelings; and, the po-litical ramifications to back or oppose a specific issue. Theformation and implementation of a marketing plan facili-tates the influencing of political, public, and private sectorthinking.

“Sound strategic thinking allows leaders to recognizereliable business opportunities and integrate superior en-vironmental programs” ([4], p. 95). By looking at energymanagement programs as a means to introduce proactivestrategic thinking, housing organizations will be able toequate the “business” opportunity of reducing operatingcosts through energy management while participating in asocially responsible environmental conservation strategy.

In order to be successful the strategy must address themajor issues of political and public perception, while timingit right so that economics favor the implementation of anenergy management program. This is a new direction formany and will require a designated champion, strong internalleadership, and a marketing plan aimed at key political andpublic stakeholders.

3. Marketing

In order to get approval to commence with an energy man-agement program that will need funds from the public purseor donations from individual and corporate sources, a mar-keting plan should be devised to ‘sell’ the benefits of energymanagement to stakeholders—governments, non-profits,taxpayers, politicians, and the residents themselves.

In today’s political environment politicians and the publicare looking for initiatives that reduce overall costs. An en-ergy management campaign would be aimed at illustratingthe substantial financial savings that can be achieved by in-creasing energy efficiency in social housing units. In manyrespects, the timing for an energy management program isright as financial savings could be achieved over the longterm, environmental savings could be achieved almost im-mediately, and initiatives such as Kyoto are drawing atten-tion to the need for action with respect to the environment.Hurdles include convincing the public and politicians thatan energy management program is a wise investment in thefuture, and that the public really is ready to acknowledgethat environmental actions need to be acted on now.

Ultimately, the issues to be addressed for an energymanagement program will be whether politicians and thepublic can see the long-term economic positives enough tosupport the cost of implementing an energy managementprogram. Is the environment that much of a priority, andare initiatives such as Kyoto Protocol going to get publicand political attention?

3.1. Objectives

Internal objectives include introducing environmentalmanagement as a key strategic direction for social housingorganizations and involving management and staff in thecreation of a corporate culture that recognizes and priori-tizes the environment. If this is accomplished then it canbe expected that every effort will be made by organizationsand staff to reduce energy consumption and utility costs ofsocial housing units, and that across the country there willbe a positive impact on reducing GHG emissions. Trulycommitted staff can be instrumental in passing on the com-mitment to energy management to residents who will alsohave a role in an energy management program.

Financial objectives are to reduce the cost of utility con-sumption, provide a reasonable long-term financial rate ofreturn on the cost of capital improvement versus utility costs,and, provide the right kind of government incentives for or-ganizations to implement an energy management program.

Marketing objectives involve implementing a campaign toget the messages across that social housing energy manage-ment programs are worthwhile, will provide for long-termcost effectiveness, and demonstrating that due to the highnumber of social housing units in the country that an energymanagement program will have a positive affect on the envi-ronment and greenhouse gas emissions. Another goal will be

240 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

to demonstrate to private industry and the public that the gov-ernment is also taking steps to reduce greenhouse gas emis-sions in accordance to initiatives such as the Kyoto Protocol.

3.2. Action plan

Three courses of action will be used in deploying market-ing strategies:

(1) Identify who the major stakeholders are, what their mainconcerns are, how they feel on environmental issues, andwhy they should be interested in energy managementprograms.

Politicians react to their interpretation of public willand to opportunities for positive public relations. In thiscase, the marketing plan is aimed at illustrating to politi-cians the benefits of being seen as investing in the futurefor the sake of present and future generations and theimmediate operating savings of reduced utility costs insocial housing facilities. The key is to get politicians tosee past the cost of capital work and focus on energymanagement programs as an investment in long-termenvironmental and operational savings.

Conscious of government spending on social pro-grams, the public is looking for responsible manage-ment of taxpayer dollars. While unsure of their totalcommitment to the environment, the public is willing toparticipate in energy management if they see a financialsavings that complements the environmental benefits.

Senior bureaucrats respond to political pressure puton them for program costs and ensuring that controversyis kept to a minimum. The marketing program will needto ensure that the main message that gets communicatedis that an energy management programs primary benefitis the reduction in operating costs. Through the use ofthe marketing plan informing and educating politiciansand the public on the benefits of energy management,controversy should be minimal.

Action: Identify the main stakeholders and throughthe use of surveys or interviews find out what their un-derstanding of social housing is, how they feel about itand where they feel the environment fits into societiespriorities. Have relevant statistics (or estimates from acredible source) available to illustrate the cost savings inutilities of energy management programs and the posi-tive effect of reducing GHG emissions in the residentialsector. Provide written summaries to stakeholders em-phasizing that an investment in energy management isworthwhile economically and environmentally.

(2) Research cost implications of energy management ver-sus not providing energy management (based on geo-graphic economics of utility costs, and local consump-tion patterns).

In many cases, the foundation of the justification forthe energy management program will be based on con-sumption of utilities in the past and a forecasted savings

if energy management program initiatives are acted on.Forecasted savings can be based on expected patterns ofusage and behavior of capital works projects such as theperformance expectations of high-efficiency furnaces.

In locations where historical cost of utilities has beenhigh or changes such deregulation are expected to occur,the forecasting can include a reference to the changesand their probable impact on the cost of utilities to theorganization.

Illustrating the positive impact on present and futureresidents by implementing an energy management pro-gram, a local environmental impact of energy manage-ment can be illustrated and used.

Action: Prepare a spreadsheet that illustrates presentconsumption versus forecasted savings if energy man-agement programs are implemented. Show different sce-narios of utility costs for the future and compare thisto the present consumption costs and the expected con-sumption costs if an energy management program is im-plemented. Emphasize the economic and environmen-tal return on investment. “Return on investment is stillthe most common business test of validity, and manyhard-nosed managers have not seen business-orientatedanalyses and explanations of costs and benefits of envi-ronmental initiatives” ([4], p. 14). Return on investmentcan be used for non-profits, as the emphasis will be onthe time required to return the initial cost of the capi-tal in implementing energy management improvementsto the daily operational savings in utilities being expe-rienced via the changes. Through use of ROI, manage-ment will have the tool it needs to convince themselvesand stakeholders of the validity of an energy manage-ment program.

(3) Combating the existing negative public perception ofsocial housing residents can be achieved by focusing onthe cost savings of an energy management program tothe public and the greater good to the community byimproving energy consumption and reducing harmfulgreenhouse gas emissions. Focusing on these positiveimpacts will take attention away from the residents andthe negative image they have.

Action: Through the communication process in themarketing campaign emphasize the positives of energymanagement and the wise investment in the economicand environmental benefits to be realized by implement-ing an energy management program for social housing.

3.3. Stakeholder perspectives

It is recognized that in order for an energy managementprogram for social housing to proceed, that stakeholder per-spectives and concerns have to identified and addressed.The role of stakeholders cannot be underestimated, as with-out buy-in from them, an environmental initiative will stall.Stakeholders can be seen as internal, external, or a bit ofboth depending on the situation. The ultimate goal would be

S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250 241

for each stakeholder to see and understand the benefits forthem of an energy management program.

Non-profit organizationsneed to see how the reductionof energy consumption has a positive impact on their bud-gets and the environment, and, how better energy practicesimpact on the comfort and life skills of their residents.Roughly one in four Canadians are allergic to contaminantsfound in homes, and programs such as the R-2000 build-ing program are aimed at providing a healthier home andreducing greenhouse gas emissions through improved airtightness, alternative construction materials, energy-savingappliances, and more efficient heating and ventilationequipment[5].

Non-profit organizations exhibit a wide range of expertisewhen it comes to managing property and having technicalor financial knowledge. An energy management programwith its’ short-term financial cost is bound to be an issue formany and the challenge will be to get organizations to seethe long-term financial benefits of the initiatives. Using amodified Design for Environment (DFE) philosophy, energyefficiency of the buildings will be accomplished throughtechnology management and resident programs.

Residentneed to see how reduced energy consumptionwill have a positive impact on their household costs and, forfamilies in particular, the benefits to young kids in develop-ing good energy consumption habits for the future. Collab-orations with government departments/ministries and utilitycompanies and their consumer programs could be sought toprovide material for educating residents with an emphasison ‘teaching our youth for a better future.’

Politicians need to see that reduced energy consumptionhas a positive effect on government budgets, utility prices,and can be spun off into an image of them ‘caring about theenvironment and future generations.’

In many markets where deregulation is occurring (own-ership of utilities is transferring from government to pri-vate industry), a benefit to reduced consumption would bereduced utility prices. This is important. Joseph Doucet, aderegulation expert with the University of Alberta, is quotedas saying “Cutting down consumption is not necessarily oneof the objectives of deregulation, but it would help bringdown prices”[6].

The main issue that will have to be addressed is that theenvironmental actions will have a short-term capital cost thatwill produce long-term operational savings. The politicalfocus tends to be very short term (i.e. till the next election)and therefore the challenge is to get them to agree to thepositive long-term benefits of financial return on investmentand protecting the environment for future generations. Asnoted by Jacobs, “We may simply note that sustainability isthus a commitment of some form of intergenerational equity,or the fair distribution of environmental benefits and costsbetween generations” ([7], p. 60).

It may be worthwhile to comment to politicians that en-ergy initiatives are underway in the United States throughthe federal department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD) to reduce energy consumption and cost in PublicHousing Authorities (PHA) in the United States[8].

Public needs to see that the use of their tax dollars onenergy conservation and efficiency is wise, and has posi-tive paybacks. “Improving your home’s energy efficiency isone of the best investments you can make, paying tax-freedividends immediately in the form of lower heating costs.Home insulation is better than just about any other low-risk,long-term investment you can make”[9].

Emphasis should be on financial “savings” (on the oper-ational side) and the positive effect to the environment formembers of the public and their families. The governmentperspective would be the public seeing reduced operatingcosts and then the ‘proactive’ move by the government topromote positive environmental impact actions. It shouldalso be noted that from a public perspective the investmentis good, since it is an investment that will prolong the usefullife of social housing facilities and conserve valuable energysupplies. Everyone will benefit from environmental conser-vation.

4. Implementation and review

“Strategic environmental management initiatives movedorganizations from reactive to proactive. . . ” ( [4], p. 11).After completing the marketing program and funding is se-cured, a strategic implementation plan is required. Piaseckiet al. [4] in their book “Environmental Management andBusiness Strategy,” note five essential elements of an envi-ronmental strategy. Applying these elements to an integratedplan for social housing units, the approach to energy con-servation and reduced utility consumption will be based on:

1. Senior managements role.2. The use of an environmental audit system.3. Environmental performance measures.4. Environmental information and management systems.5. Environmental reporting and disclosure.

4.1. The role of senior management

Michael Porter finds “the environmental component themost exciting part of corporate strategy today,. . . ”( [4],p. 10). In order to implement an energy management pro-gram, with anticipated capital costs and resident participa-tion, senior management’s role will need to adopt to a newperspective as they face challenges including political pres-sure on spending, possible regulatory compliance (shouldan initiative such as Kyoto become activated), being firm ontheir commitment to follow through on energy managementprograms, and working with a wider range of external stake-holders than they have traditionally been exposed to. Thesechallenges will require management to display diplomaticand political savvy and an ability to resolve disputes whilemaintaining the energy management programs momentuminternally and externally.

242 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

An integrated, interactive environmental strategy will re-quire management to ([4], pp. 20–21, modified to reflectsocial housing situation):

• Make environmental management a business issue thatcomplements the overall business strategy—“When keymeasures are aligned with the company’s vision and fo-cused on those activities within a given process, manage-ment objectives can be reached in a cost-effective and en-vironmentally responsible manner.” The approach to takewill be to illustrate how each major stakeholder wouldbenefit from the energy management actions taken by theorganization (seeSection 3.3), how the environmental ac-tions would be a positive image-maker for the organiza-tion (and subsequently the politicians), and how short andlong-term costs would be affected. Organizational busi-ness plans may reference the alignment of goals to envi-ronmental issues in the provincial governments’ businessplans. In addressing social housing energy management,provinces’ could take a step in reducing GHG emissionsas the number of units in a province may equate to theequivalent of a small city.

• Change environmental communications to reflect politicalrealities and business priorities. Senior management needsto communicate to stakeholders the financial impacts ofthe actions and foster public relations benefits for takingthe environmental route. Given the present political cli-mate in many areas, environmental progress should be as-sociated with financial ‘savings’ in order to be given anyattention. Political pressure from different stakeholdersmay test the organization’s commitment to its goals. If the

Table 1Political and internal rationale analysis for changes

Change Internal rationale Political Rationale

Institute a moderate cost capital environmentalinitiative involving non-profit cooperation toinstall low flow showerheads, low flushtoilets, etc. to improve insulation and draftcontrols.

Control: Moderate priced initiatives. Control: Politically palatable because cost isnot high.

Philosophy: Without incurring large capitaloutlays minor changes can be made which haveproven environmental benefits and probablefinancial benefits. Low capital outlay, averagefinancial return, positive environmental impact.

Philosophy: Shows environmentalresponsibility without the high capital cost.Low capital outlay, good public relations,positive environmental impact.

Major capital program to look at window anddoor replacements, high-efficiency furnaceand boiler installations, buildingrenovations, etc.

Control: Expensive capital outlays withlong-term returns on investment.

Control: Resistance to large capital outlays.

Philosophy: Improves building life withimproved energy efficiency and reduced costs.High capital outlay, good long-term financialreturn with reduced utility costs, positiveenvironmental impact.

Philosophy: Environmental concerns do nottake priority over financial concerns Highcapital outlay, poor public reaction to spending,Long-term positive effect on environment andbuilding life are not a consideration unlesseconomics can prove otherwise.

Resident education programs to put into placesound personal environmental practices.

Philosophy: Part of case managementphilosophy and preparing residents for markethousing (mostly applies to families). Financialreturn is low to medium, cost is minimal withpartnerships, environmental impact verypositive.

Philosophy: Political concern over residents isprobably minimal but some positive publicrelations could be used, particularly aimed atconcern for future generations and theenvironmental impact of today’s energyconsumption. Since cost is low probably notan issue.

pressure is great enough, management must be aware thatthe strategy will be in danger of hitting the ‘green wall,’a “. . . point at which the overall organization refuses tomove forward with its strategic environmental manage-ment program, and the environmental initiative stops deadin its tracks, as if it had hit a wall” ([4], p. 11). Awarenessof this possibility, rational arguments such as those listedin Table 1, and preparation through documentation of theenvironmental initiatives costs and benefits, are recom-mended. Reference could be given to the environmentalinitiative complying with government goals in reducingGHG emissions and tying this goal to business plans.

• Support and actively review the measurement of the costsand benefits of energy management programs. Be pre-pared to answer public expectations by satisfying keystakeholders. It will be difficult to provide preliminary es-timates of savings due to the variables of how much capitalwork will be done and how active residents will be in con-servation measures. Appropriate statistics would includethe estimated reduction in consumption, planned capitaloutlays, estimated operational savings on a yearly basis,and the overall ‘payback’ period of any capital work.

• Making environmental management part of the businessorganization, and conveying a long-term commitment tothis strategy to staff and stakeholders. Become a cham-pion of the cause. In many instances the changes requiredwould not be supplemented with additional staff andresources, and management will have to prioritize the en-vironmental initiatives against daily operational demands.“The goal of strategic environmental management initia-tives is greater integration of environmental management

S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250 243

with the business functions of operations and stafffunctions” ([4], p. 13). Management could look into attain-ing ISO 14000 certification, as a means of validating theorganizations commitment to environmental initiatives.

• If applicable, changing job descriptions to reinforce theoverall environmental aspect of the business culture. “Nomatter how compelling a corporate vision, no matter howeffective a quality blueprint, and no matter how clear apolicy to integrate technology and the environment, theyare of no value unless teams of individuals are personallycommitted to making a difference in performance” ([4],p. 159).

4.2. The use of an environmental audit system

For social housing the main purposes of the audit systemwould be the initial audit to identify potential capital workand evaluate existing management systems, and subsequentaudits on a periodic basis that reviewed and evaluated theeffectiveness of capital work done and any new or changedmanagement systems.

The initial audit would focus on identifying large andsmall capital projects that would have a positive impact onthe energy consumption and utility cost of the various socialhousing facilities. While the specifics would vary for apart-ment complexes versus row or duplex housing the overallintent of the initial audit would remain the same. At the sametime the initial audit would evaluate any existing manage-ment systems in place as to their effectiveness in providinguseful information and whether with any proposed capitalchanges the system would remain effective.

From the information gathered in the initial audit, a re-view of proposed capital work could be done based on theprojected cost against potential utility savings and the es-timated payback period to recover capital costs. A secondaspect of the review of the audits recommendations wouldbe to evaluate the energy consumption changes as a meansof forecasting the facilities impact on the environment.

The ongoing purpose of environmental auditing is for asystematic, objective review of facility operations and prac-tices. Future audits could be designed to evaluate the effec-tiveness of energy management systems implemented afterthe initial capital work and the results of resident participa-tion on energy consumption.

Some provinces or municipalities may already have anenergy audit system in place through the provincial or mu-nicipal government that they can access (especially if thehousing units are government owned). For instance, in Al-berta, the provincially run energy audit system has focusedon office buildings where provincial staff work and the auditshave not been used on educational, health, or social housingfacilities. An attempt to get cooperation in the participationin an energy audit of the provincially owned social housingunits should be pursued where applicable.

“In essence, audits may be used to bridge the transitionfrom a focus on finding problems to a focus on confirming

the absence of problems. This may be visualized as a seriesof three steps evolving over time from: (1) the identificationof problems, to (2) the verification of compliance status, to(3) the confirmation of management systems effectiveness”([4], p. 32). Over time it is important to reevaluate the auditsas to their purpose, what and how they are evaluating andthe timeliness of them. Changes to the audit process wouldthen be done based on this evaluation.

4.3. Environmental performance measures

“Ultimately, measuring for environmental performanceboils down to the fundamental questions: What to measure,how to measure, and how to communicate those measure-ments both internally and externally?” ([4], p. 47). In addi-tion to the key factors identified by Piasecki et al., it shouldbe noted that having the resources for measurement are animportant factor for many non-profit organizations. Whileprivate industry has concerns about the cost of measurement,they are more likely to have the resources necessary or theability to acquire the necessary resources than non-profit or-ganizations working within a restricted budget.

The purpose of environmental performance measuresshould be to facilitate organizational change so that envi-ronmental performance improves. Internal stakeholders cansee the results of the actions taken in energy managementprograms, and external stakeholders can feel that the ben-efits derived from energy management are worth the costincurred.

In measuring performance social housing organizationswill key in on the energy consumption reductions as the ob-vious performance measurement evaluator. In planning themeasurement system organizations should also keep in mindthe effectiveness of the processes they have put into placeas part of the energy management program. For instance, ifmaintenance staff spends time recording results at the ex-pense of regular preventative maintenance on equipment,then the efficiency of the equipment being used will startto deteriorate and negatively affect the results of the energymanagement program. A balance between measurement sys-tems and daily operational processes must be reached.

Measuring cost and results are key components of per-formance in identifying and quantifying activities for socialhousing organizations. Financial concerns will be criticalin justifying environmental initiatives, so the emphasis willbe on the operational aspect of monitoring energy usageand the financial aspect of the cost of utilities in facilities.Projections of what the cost would have been if the changeshad not been made will be emphasized to allow for relevantcomparisons because of utility price fluctuations. Com-parisons may also be made based on targets set throughthe audit process. The measurement system needs to beunderstandable to internal and external stakeholders, con-sistently reported, and perceived as being objective in whatit measures. The functions and purpose of an environmentalmeasurement system are illustrated inTable 2. Management

244 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

Table 2Functions and purposes of an environmental measurement system

Lagging indicators Leading indicators

Measure Comparative data showing past consumption. Present consumption.

Approach Show how past consumption would have a greater expensebased on present utility cost.

Show present cost and usage with estimated payback period forcapital work performed and reduced environmental footprintbased on reduced consumption compared to past usage.

Example Excel spreadsheet with past usage of heating and electricpower by month for 3 years prior to energy managementprogram. Spreadsheet calculates present day cost of theenergy consumption.

Excel spreadsheet showing the present cost of utilities vs. thecalculated cost of utilities if the capital work had not been done(lagging spreadsheet) and the subsequent estimated paybackperiod based on savings to date. Also show the reducedconsumption pattern.

Strength Easily shows what costs would be without energymanagement program.

Allows for quick comparisons and proves financial viability ofenergy management programs.

Weakness Does not detail changes that were made. May illustrate payback period being longer than originallyestimated.

will then be able to evaluate the cost effectiveness of energymanagement programs through the key activities of utilityusage and cost through comparative analysis.

“The Global Environmental Management Initiative(GEMI) Advice for Environmental Measurement Systems”([4], p. 49) has the following guidelines that have beenexpanded to apply to social housing organizations:

• One size does not fit all—consider the organization’soperations, internal organization, and unique environ-mental impacts. Organizations will differ in the speedin which they can implement change and the physicalconstraints of some facilities will make some conversionsun-economical. Comparisons between organizations andfacilities will not be fair as circumstances are different.

• Determine whether health and safety metrics will be in-cluded in the program—health and safety factors affect-ing residents and staff (i.e. air quality in facilities) couldbe a prime factor in the marketing campaign.

• Ensure that the program is sustainable, even as the busi-ness and political environment changes—the marketingcampaign should not be seen as a one-time event butshould be approached as a continuous exercise by socialhousing organizations (although probably pulled back tosome degree or focused in a different way).

• Select metrics that drive performance—financial consid-eration is the main driver; reduced environmental footprintis the bonus.

• Select metrics that are understandable and compati-ble with the company’s operations and informationsystems—as the chart above illustrates for social housing.

• Define performance expectations and identify who isaccountable—the energy audit will define expectations.Social housing organizations will have to take respon-sibility for the marketing and ongoing implementationof the energy management programs. Ultimately, if re-sults are less than expected they will also have to acceptresponsibility for this as well.

• Get upper management support and business unit support.• Ensure that the right people are getting data quickly so

necessary actions can be taken—this is an important as-pect of the marketing campaign and the environmentalmeasurement process, and may cause problems in highlybureaucratic organizations.

• Ensure the metrics are driving the right or intendedbehavior—repeated review of the data being providedand making changes if necessary.

• Get feedback on the system from employees, the public,and stakeholders.

The environmental performance measures are meant tovalidate the organizations strategies and vision with regardsto reducing energy costs and consumption and are a valuabletool in ensuring that the organization is headed in the rightdirection and accomplishing what it set out to do.

4.4. Environmental information and management systems

“An environmental management strategy includes theoverall strategies, policies, objectives, and organizationalstructure established to manage and sustain the business andits operations” ([4], p. 162). Through proper informationand management systems housing staff and managementwill have the necessary tools and personnel to implementthe energy management system. The EMS is only as goodas the commitment of management and staff to make theenergy management programs work.

The information management system is part of theprocess that allows for the setting of goals and strate-gic direction of the organization with regards to energymanagement. It will be the main tool for the extractionand calculation of utility consumption and cost based oncomparative analysis of pre and post energy managementinitiatives. In many instances for non-profit organizations,information management is very basic and it has to be rec-ognized that high level technology will not be available to

S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250 245

assist with information gathering and that manual or closeto manual information gathering will be the main methodused.

For social housing, part of the environmental manage-ment strategy involves a cultural shift for organizations toincorporate the energy management programs. The changesinvolved to organizational systems, staff, and managementbehavior will take time.

4.4.1. Environmental informationUsing a modified Design for Environment concept (a rel-

atively new concept pertaining to the cradle-to-grave evalu-ation of the environmental impacts associated with productsand technologies[4], p. 140), social housing organizationscan incorporate the most successful energy managementinitiatives into planned changes for existing facilities andfor construction of future facilities. By evaluating the en-ergy management actions taken to date and monitoring theresults of those actions decisions can be made as to whetherto continue with particular capital projects.

While typical DFE initiatives are broad in scope andrequire an assessment of the impact of the product and pro-cesses for the entire life cycle (raw material through manu-facturing, to disposal), for social housing a more workablecycle of ‘cost’ of labor and product, and efficiency in re-ducing the cost and environmental impact are the areas thatan assessment would focus on. Looking at the benefits andconcerns of a life cycle assessment as it applies to socialhousing would produce:

4.4.1.1. Benefits.• Identification of potential problems in installation of cap-

ital products—this provides the opportunity to schedulelow-impact changes or cancel future capital work of thisnature if problems out-weight cost.

• The decision on implementing capital work is based on anobjective view of life cycle aspects of the capital product,including impact on stakeholders—to completely renovatean existing apartment building may not be feasible due tothe logistics of where to move residents during renovation.

• Priorities are identified by the life cycle analysis—offeringa systematic means to judge the most important energymanagement initiatives and their relationship to cost andenvironmental considerations.

• Input into capital initiatives—reviewing the future needsof the facility may show that the installation of a partic-ular forced air system is not adequate for future facilityexpansion.

• Provides a blueprint for assessing the environmental im-pact of each capital initiative—priorities can be definedusing cost and impact analysis.

4.4.1.2. Concerns.• Life cycle analysis takes time and resources that may not

be available for non-profit organizations.

• Identified capital project initiatives may prove to be toocostly to begin.

• Products of a capital nature may not produce the desired(or advertised) results due to variable factors in originalconstruction, etc.

• Priorities can conflict with existing staff resources or res-ident needs.

• The consequences or impacts of projects are complex andit is difficult to know if desired results will occur untilafter the fact and the initial financial outlay for even oneproject or housing facility could be high.

4.4.2. Management systemDue to the diverse nature of social housing operations

across the country each province, territory, municipality, andnon–profit organization will have to review its own methodof operations and decide what course of action best fits itsneeds.

Formal programs exist such as Total Quality Management(TQM), a management system used to increase quality andpromote continuous improvement, or Total Quality Environ-mental Management (TQEM) which applies TQM principlesto environmental health and safety. TQEM has evolved fromTQM and the Global Environmental Management Initiativeidentifies the basic elements of TQEM as ([4], p. 161):

• Identify your customer.• Focus on continuous improvement.• Do the job right the first time.• Take a systems approach.

An important point brought up by Richard Wells states,“the vision for both TQM and TQEM programs. . . . Is toadd value to customers and thereby contribute to share-holder value. In TQEM, this means satisfying not onlyproduct customers, but also our internal customers andexternal stakeholders” ([4], p. 163). For non-profit organi-zations contributing to shareholder value would be seen inthe wise use of taxpayer or donated dollars. TQEM couldequate to product quality of enhanced energy managementin housing units through capital works and process qualitythrough information and management systems geared toenergy management programs.

The purposes of the information management system areto track the progress of energy management program ini-tiatives against the usage prior to any construction, mea-sure the progress against the proposed audited results, andto highlight any areas where changes or improvements canbe made. Management can use the data to ensure that thechanges are occurring as desired. The data management sys-tems can impact five elements of an energy managementprogram: planning and organization; data collection; assess-ment; feasibility analysis; and implementation ([4], p. 165).

Environmental health and safety programs typically relyon five interrelated information management activities ([4],p. 167). When converted to social housing energy manage-ment these translate to:

246 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

1. Knowledge acquisition: The collecting of information onpast utility usage, the collection of new utility usage pat-terns.

2. Data warehousing: The activity of recording and main-taining knowledge in comparative charting that illustratesthe changed utility consumption patterns after energymanagement initiatives are implemented.

3. Data mining: Selecting data warehouse knowledge toshow the projected return on investments and payoutperiods for the cost of the work done versus the reducedenergy costs. The illustration of reduced energy con-sumption from an environmental footprint perspectivewould also be illustrated here.

4. Knowledge communication: The communication of infor-mation on reduced utility cost and energy consumption.

5. Performance and compliance reporting: Quantitative in-formation to management, shareholders, and regulators(for issues such as the Kyoto Protocol), showing theenergy cost saving financially and environmentally.

For social housing organizations, the key factor is proac-tive management for reducing utility costs, as that is wherethey are going to receive the most feedback from externalstakeholders and support for the energy management pro-gram.

Piasecki et al. mention 10 strategic elements of an envi-ronmental management system ([4], p. 17–19). These ele-ments will require social housing organizations to focus on:

1. Organization and staffing: Who is responsible for theenergy management program planning and capital workimplementation schedule, and the implementation ofbest practices for residents? Where applicable for socialhousing the government would be responsible for theoverall environmental initiative planning and allocatingcapital dollars based on the capital work implementationschedule. Non-profits will be responsible for the imple-mentation of best practices for residents and overseeingonsite capital work. Reporting requirements would varybased on who the housing organization is responsibleto.

2. Policies and Procedures: Where and how will environ-mental initiative proposals be communicated and theformal recognition of responsibility and roles. The en-vironmental initiative proposals should be outlined ina formal written policy document giving details on theproposals and the responsibilities of non-profits to im-plement and monitor the energy management programs.

3. Planning: The government and non-profits will integratethe environmental initiatives into their business plans.

4. Program management systems: Energy audits, identifi-cation and prioritization of areas of work, monitoringand reporting. Through energy audits identification ofareas where work can be done will be prioritized bywhichever party has control over the capital dollars andallocations. Local projects will begin, and subsequentmonthly monitoring will occur either through already

established reporting channels and reports or throughnew reports aimed at illustrating the effect of the energymanagement program on consumption and costs.

5. Review and evaluation: Follow-up audits based on theamount of work required and the time in between audits.If the monitoring process yields results that are morethan 20% off targeted savings from the audit projections,then immediate audits will occur to investigate reasonsfor the variation. No facility will go more than 5 yearsbetween audits.

6. Management information systems: Statistics showingprevious and present energy consumption and energycost, updated estimated payouts for capital work basedon present energy consumption, targeted energy savingsand payouts, and energy costs if changes had not beenmade will be accessible to all stakeholders. Where pos-sible the monthly summary of results will be presentedat senior management meetings and for the review ofpolitical stakeholders.

7. Budgeting and scheduling: Scheduling and costs of ma-jor projects to be completed based on budget limitationsand relevant construction factors such as weather, per-mits, etc. Based on the findings of the audits the capitalprogram will be scheduled with all major projects to becompleted as soon as economically possible.

8. Communication and outreach: Proactive communica-tion with stakeholders on energy management programprogress and results. Resident training will emphasizeactions by individuals can make a difference. Throughthe business plan general results will be available andmore detailed statistics will be available upon request.

9. Legal and regulatory surveillance: Local building codesneed to be met and in collaboration with respectivefederal and provincial environmental departments (e.g.,Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN) and Canada Mort-gage and Housing Corporation), every available oppor-tunity will be made to communicate successes and toform partnerships to recommend appropriate changes inbuilding regulations.

10. Risk and loss management: Provinces may be requiredthrough protocols such as Kyoto to meet targeted green-house gas emission levels. This initiative can be acontributing factor to provincial targets. The proposedenergy management program capital initiatives willcontribute to updating the social housing portfolio topost-1990 standards.

Social housing organizations may be able to take advan-tage of accounting practices for providing management sys-tem information for the energy management initiatives, in-cluding controlling of costs, and highlighting areas wherefuture decisions will need to be made.

The end result of the information systems is that theyshould provide support to the organizations energy manage-ment program through the provision of information that as-sists in making decisions.

S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250 247

4.5. Environmental reporting and disclosure

Social housing organizations will have to regularly dis-tribute the results of the energy management program tostakeholders for continued support. To properly commu-nicate financial and environmental benefits of the energymanagement program is a major challenge for organiza-tions given the potential political impact of stakeholders.Clear, concise, consistent, and reliable communication mustbe made. Identify your audience and target communicationsto meet their needs (seeSection 3.3).

“ Public Environmental Reporting Initiative (PERI) orga-nizes environmental report content into 10 major categories:company profile, environmental policy, environmental man-agement system, releases to the environment, environmentalrisk management, environmental compliance, product stew-ardship/life cycle management, employee recognition, stake-holder involvement, and resource conservation” ([4], p. 286).It is not realistic to expect social housing organizations withlimited resources to go to this extent for an environmentalreport. However, they should concentrate on environmentalmanagement systems, life cycle management for their hous-ing facilities, stakeholder involvement, and resource conser-vation as information that should be on hand at all times intheir annual report and if possible in a separate environmen-tal report in preparation for stakeholder pressure and publicrelations requirements.

The concern would be a controversy with regards to usingfunds to improve the energy efficiency of buildings, and notget the expected results and therefore open the organizationand the government to criticism for ‘wasting’ taxpayers ordonated money. Since government records are accessible bythe public through legislation, to hide any results would notbe wise and certainly one of the strategic issues of privateenterprise environmental initiatives is the lack-of-trust bythe public to corporate efforts in improving environmentalimpacts. Non-profits and government run social housing or-ganizations do not want to get involved in this lack-of-trustcontroversy.

In order to facilitate communication, energy consumptionresults should be available monthly (or minimum quarterly,based on resources) to any interested party and regular dis-tribution to interested stakeholders should be implemented.Management will have monthly access to the results of theinitiative to facilitate strategic decision-making and to en-sure that they aware of the energy programs progress shouldquestions from external stakeholders arise.

Should the results cause public misperception or a con-troversy then appropriate actions need to be taken. Identifythe issue(s), who is concerned and who is in charge, whatwould they like to see, and has a workable solution beensuggested. In developing an action plan to address issues,organizations should be aware of the perspective of the pub-lic and address the response based on this awareness. Polit-ical factors will be involved and the best route to take willbe discussion about the issue and a development of a so-

lution that suits all parties. In some cases the organizationmay make changes to meet what the stakeholders are askingfor. In all cases the organization should be honest about thefacts and if necessary, admit that a mistake has been made.An action plan for resolution of the issue will require thecommitment of senior management.

5. Capital and resident initiatives

The energy management programs will focus on capi-tal and resident initiatives comprising of ideas that will re-duce energy consumption and improve on resource sustain-ability while being implemented in a cost efficient manner.Government programs, grants, and private industry energyconservation programs will be utilized to integrate into theenvironmental strategy and energy management programs.Some examples of the available energy wise programs are:

• Energuide for houses program: Encourages Canadians toimprove the energy performance of their homes. Home-owners receive advice from independent energy efficiencyexperts to improve home comfort and reduce heating andcooling costs when making home improvements (Govern-ment of Canada, p. 66, Third National Report).

• Renewable energy deployment initiative: Promotes renew-able energy systems for space and water heating and forcooling through an incentive that fund 25% of the cost ofadopting new systems (up to a maximum of US$ 50,000).

• Commercial building incentive program: To provide in-centives that encourage building owners and developersto incorporate energy efficient technologies and practicesinto designs for new commercial and institutional build-ings (Government of Canada, p. 66, Third National Re-port)

• Energy innovators initiative through Natural ResourcesCanada: Energy innovators initiative through Natural Re-sources Canada has several contacts with specifics onpossible programs for various sectors such as colleges,multi-unit residential, office buildings, retail, etc.

• Energyline by ATCO Gas with consumer tips.• EPCOR: Essential tips for conserving energy, consumer

tips.• Energy efficient housing initiative: A US$ 35 million pro-

gram where builders are encouraged to adopt the Ener-guide for new houses program. This is part of the federalgovernment’s US$ 500 million Climate Change ActionPlan 2000[5].

Direct energy management actions that can be taken bynon-profit organizations include (based on information avail-able from EPCOR, Canada Natural Resources, and ATCOGas):

• Water heater temperature should be no higher than 50◦C• Set the fridge at 3◦C and the freezer at−18◦C for opti-

mum efficiency

248 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

• Furnaces should be checked and serviced each year.• Cut grass relatively high (2.5 in. or 6 cm)• Oscillating sprinklers lose as much as 50% of what they

disperse through evaporation.

5.1. Capital initiatives

Energy audits performed on buildings would identifypotential construction initiatives that will reduce utilitycosts, consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. Iden-tified capital work such as improving insulation, replacingwindows, and new heating/ventilation systems would needto provide a reasonable rate of return based on the capitalcost incurred in order to satisfy the public and politicaldemand for reducing overall costs in social programs. It isimportant to note that in many cases the work performedmay not be major in nature, but that it is through the largenumber of units affected by the changes that substantial costand energy consumption savings would be achieved. Majorcapital work would take advantage of improved technologyand construction practices to increase energy efficiencyin the units after construction and improve environmentalpractices during construction. By improving the buildingsthrough various capital initiatives, the overall useful lifeof the facility will increase creating another advantage toinitiating a capital energy management program.

Government programs, initiatives, and research, provideinformation on energy conservation for commercial and res-idential purposes. Natural Resources Canada, website[9] il-lustrates air movement and typical leakage sites for a home.The US Department of Housing and Urban Development andNatural Resources Canada provide information on energyconservation research and available environmental grant pro-grams. Other sources of research such as the Government ofCanada, “Third National Report on Climate Change” (2001)provide information on the scope that housing effects theenvironment (e.g., the residential sector accounts for 6% ofCanada’s green house gases).

The cost factor may detract from the overall benefit ofthe initiative (which is long-term cost reduction and conser-vation of energy), and so every effort must be made to getstakeholders to have a long-term perspective of environmen-tal strategies to do with energy conservation. Organizationsshould detail possible project initiatives and if possible anestimated cost savings with each project.

It should be noted that one third of a homes total heat losshappens through windows and doors and that many proposedprojects might not be expensive by themselves if lookingat one unit, but the cost will be relative to the volume (thebenefit is also relative to the volume and this point shouldnot be ignored).

Design for Environment could play a large role in the fu-ture development of social housing as organizations have anopportunity to design new facilities that will take into ac-count environmental and management issues from the de-sign of the facility through construction and ultimately use.

Standards can be set up by government agencies that spellout the different construction considerations for organiza-tions to review at the start of a new project.

The capital cost may be spread over several years. In aneffort to make individual projects as economical as possi-ble, non-profit organizations could seek labor and materialdiscounts from local suppliers through actions such as do-nations, work in kind, free publicity, etc. If possible orga-nizations could look at ‘teaming up’ to get bulk discountson materials. Many of the steps to reduce heat loss do notinvolve major capital renovations.

Information on examples of possible capital work (whichwould be identified in the environmental audit stage) aresummarized from ATCO Gas Customer Service Energy Tips[10], EPCOR Energy Depot[11], Natural Resources CanadaOffice of Energy Efficiency (2002):

• By upgrading a standard 60% efficiency furnace to amid-efficiency 80% furnace a 25% savings would beachieved on energy usage, and a 37% energy savingscould be achieved by upgrading to a 95% high-efficiencyfurnace. For a typical residential consumer 70% of gasconsumption each year is for space heating (furnace)and 30% is for water heating. Upgrading the furnace toa high-efficiency model could save US$ 500 annually(depending on local utility costs).

• Windows—want high (above 0.70) solar heat gain coef-ficients, and air leakage rate of 0.01–0.06 cfm/ft[12]. In-cludes weather stripping, caulking and installing stormwindows. Effectively draft proofing a home could save upto US$ 150 per year.

• Doors—install new weather stripping around the wholedoorframe and new door sweeps on the bottom of thedoors.

• Insulation—all the way down in the basement (manybuilding codes have only half way down), no insulationin the basement can cost up to US$ 260 more in heatingcosts. Based on energy audit replace or increase existinginsulation in walls and attics/roofs.

• Installation of low flow showerheads (can save up to US$100 on the water heating bill), and flow reducer devices ontaps. Bathrooms represent 63% of total indoor water use.

• Installation of new low flush toilets that use 50–80% lesswater per flush as most units toilets are more than 10 yearsold.

• Installation of programmable thermostats (and instructionon how to use properly).

• Replace 100 W bulbs with 28 W compact fluorescents—they last 10 times longer, give the same light and save US$29 in electricity costs over the life of the bulb (note thatthis may have been done in some apartment buildings).

• A bathroom fan with an automatic humidity sensor runsthe fan just long enough to remove excess moisture, thenturns off to save electricity.

• Upgrading the water heater to a higher efficiency modeland save over US$ 90 in water heating costs annually.

S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250 249

• Fridges account for 11% of the average households energyeach year. A typical fridge today uses 70% less energythan one made in 1984 for savings of US$ 75 per year(based on the price of electricity). Note that many fridgeshave been replaced over the years but attention should begiven to the purchase of more energy efficient appliances,not necessarily the cheapest ones.

• The new generation of appliances can decrease energy useby as much as 50%[2].

• Conversion to solar heating or wind-generated electricitywould be dependent on the energy audit findings, andgiven the financial climate right now it is recommendedthat these expensive capital projects be analyzed locallyfor economic viability.

• Self-cleaning ovens save energy because they are betterinsulated.

The above points are all aimed at assisting organizations tomove from a lower level to a higher level of energy efficiencyto save on utility costs and consumption. Not all points needto be acted on, as long as the organization realizes gains inreducing energy consumption in the steps it does take. Otheravenues and steps not listed could be taken based on eachorganizations particular situation.

5.2. Resident initiatives

Education and promotion of tips to conserve energy andreduce utility costs would occur through collaboration withutility companies, residents, non-profit organizations, andgovernment departments. Where possible, counseling onenergy practices will occur on a one-on-one basis. In otherinstances, pamphlets, posters, ‘community meetings’ andother means of mass distribution of information would beutilized to ensure that residents are exposed to informationon how they can reduce their energy consumption. Whileit will be difficult to predict the initial effectiveness of aresident education program, past experience has shownshort-term success in programs that are initiated for issuessuch as water conservation during the heat of summer andreducing electrical consumption during prime usage hoursin winter. Specific programs would be initiated to promoteenvironmentally friendly consumption practices that res-idents could utilize throughout their life, with particularemphasis, on ensuring that the children of families areexposed to and taught sound environmental practices.

Using information from local utility companies, educa-tion and promotion of energy conservation practices withresidents will require collaborative efforts between publicand private sectors. Educational tools such as presentationsand pamphlets will be available for residents and govern-ment or non-profit consumer education programs may beutilized to communicate the energy management program.

Non-profits with life skills counselors could utilize themas the teaching source. By using existing materials and en-listing the cooperation of utility companies, government

ministries, and existing staff with non-profit organizationsadditional operating costs for the resident component of theenergy management programs will be minimal.

Private industry has implemented consumer educationprograms on reducing home energy costs. Companies suchas ATCO Gas have websites with energy tips aimed atinforming consumers of actions they can take to reducehousehold energy cost and consumption. Energy call-inlines are also utilized for initiating contact with consumerson energy management practices. It is very difficult tomeasure the success of these programs as in many caseshouseholds will have an energy evaluation done on theirhome, and the recommended energy retrofit measures maybe implemented over a long period of time or may notbe acted on at all. The utility company is most likely notinformed of any actions that a consumer does take.

Examples of resident initiatives that could be taught ina resident energy management program are available fromutility companies and the federal government (e.g., ATCOGas Customer Service Energy Tips, EPCOR Energy Depot,Natural Resources Canada Office of Energy Efficiency).

6. Conclusion

Major gains in addressing and implementing energy man-agement programs for social housing could be made if thefollowing statements are well understood and result in suit-able actions as discussed throughout the paper:

• That non-profit organizations recognize that social hous-ing is competing for government funding and private andcorporate donations against other social causes.

• That an energy management program for social housingconsist of two distinct phases; first, ‘marketing’ to sell thebenefits of an energy management program to stakehold-ers, second, implementation and follow through on actionsto reduce energy consumption, long-term utility costs, andcontribute towards reduced green house gas emissions.

• That the implementation of an energy management pro-gram consists of the following elements: outlining seniormanagements role, the use of an environmental audit sys-tem, environmental performance measures, environmen-tal information and management systems, environmentalreporting and disclosure.

• That senior management (politicians, bureaucrats, mu-nicipal representatives, non-profit organizations board ofdirectors and managers/directors) commits to an energymanagement program and oversees the necessary changesto staff functions and priorities, and the organizations op-erations.

• That organizations identify and address stakeholder per-spectives in the formulation of strategies for an energymanagement program.

• That the implementation of energy management focuseson the key areas of capital work on facilities, and, residentinitiatives promoting energy wise consumption practices.

250 S. McKay, A. Khare / Energy and Buildings 36 (2004) 237–250

Social housing units contribute to the 6% of greenhousegas emissions that is attributable to Canada’s housing indus-try. Environmental initiatives such as the Kyoto Protocol,will end up placing an emphasis on governments and orga-nizations to be responsible in reducing energy consumptionand greenhouse gas emissions. An energy management pro-gram will allow social housing organizations to participatein Canada’s efforts to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.

Non-profit organizations and most government depart-ments are in a work environment that emphasizes fiscal re-sponsibility. The implementation of an energy managementprogram for social housing units will create an opportu-nity for organizations to reduce their daily operating coststhrough savings on utilities and extend the useful life of thefacilities they manage through capital improvements.

Recognizing that social housing is in a competitive sit-uation for financial resources with other social causes, anenergy management program will begin with a marketingcampaign that is focused on ‘selling’ stakeholders on thefinancial and environmental benefits of the initiative. Thechallenge will be to get stakeholders to see that the long-termbenefits of an energy management program out-weight theshort-term costs of any capital work required.

The cornerstones of the energy management program willbe capital projects as identified in the energy audits andeducation and promotion of ‘wise’ utility use by residents.

Though collaborations between non-profit organizations,government departments, private industry, and utility com-panies a difference can be made in the energy consumptionof social housing units in Canada. While the cost savings inutility usage will be the original factor that the energy man-agement programs success is based on, the true benefit ofthe program will be the long-term environmental impact ofsocial housing organizations reducing energy consumptionand greenhouse gas emissions.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the contribution and commentsfrom Dr. Mike Mayo, Professor of Marketing at AthabascaUniversity. They also wish to acknowledge the efforts of var-ious utility companies and federal government agencies thatare providing energy use tips for households across Canada.

References

[1] Canada’s Third National Report on Climate Change Actions to MeetCommitments Under the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change, ISBN 0-66018694 2 Cat. No. En21-125/2001E,Available at: http://WWW.CLIMATECHANGE.GC.CA/ENGLISH/3nr/3NRPublishedVersionEN.pdf, pp. 65–66, Accessed 23 August2002, Canada, 2001.

[2] Article: appliances cut use of energy, The Calgary Herald, AssociatedPress, June 2002.

[3] L. Connery, Special advertising section—energy choices—an indus-try report for consumers, The Calgary Herald, 26 February 2002, p.EC3.

[4] B. Piasecki, K. Fletcher, F. Mendelson, Environmental managementand business strategy, Leadership Skills for the 21st Century, Wiley,New York.

[5] M. Hope, Health key to homeowners, The Calgary Herald, 22 June2002, p HS3.

[6] G. Robertson, Conservation of power urged to reduce prices, TheCalgary Herald, 15 March 2001, p. C8.

[7] M. Jacobs, The green economy, Environment, Sustainable Develop-ment and the Politics of the Future, UBC Press, Vancouver.

[8] US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Utility man-agement: background & frequently asked questions, Public HousingEnergy Conservation Clearinghouse, Available at US Department ofHousing and Urban Development website:http://www.phaenergy.org/utility mgmt.htm and http://www.phaenergy.org/faq.htm, Accessed12 February 2002, 13 and 18 June 2001.

[9] Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN), Office of Energy Efficiency,Available at:http://www.oee.nrcan.gc.ca, Accessed 26 August 2002,2002.

[10] ATCO Gas—Customer Services—Energy Tips, Available at:http://www.atcogas.com/customerservices?EnergyTips.asp, Accessed 26July 2002.

[11] EPCOR’s Energy Depot, Available at:http://www.energydepot.com/epcorres/index.asp, Accessed 2 June 2002.

[12] Haylard Consulting, Heating and Cooling, Available athttp://energyhawk.com/heat/index.php, Accessed: 26 August 2002,2001.

[13] Kyoto Protocol, Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Frame-work Convention on Climate Change, Available athttp://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.html, Accessed 19 February 2002.

Scott McKay has previous environmental experience in working with ateam involved in analyzing the social and environmental impact of oiland gas development in Canada’s north. He has also worked in the socialhousing area and recognized the opportunity to combine a personal in-terest in the environment with the need for social housing organizationsto reduce utility costs and consumption. Scott holds a masters degree inbusiness administration from Athabasca University.

Anshuman Khare works as an associate professor for operations man-agement at Athabasca University in Canada. Earlier he has worked as aresearch scientist for the University Grants Commission, India. He teachesOperations management and quantitative analysis. His research interestsare Japanese business philosophy and responsible manufacturing. He hasdone his post-doctoral research at Ryukoku University, Kyoto, Japan ona Japanese Government Scholarship (1995–1997). He was a research fel-low of the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung at the Johannes–GutenbergUniversität Mainz, Mainz, Germany and worked on environment relatedtechno-managerial issues in automobile manufacturing.