guidance note on stakeholder involvement › site › assets › files › 1313 › ... · involves...

Guidance note on stakeholder involvement

Project Title: EmBuild - Empower public authorities to establish a long-term strategy for mobilizing

investment in the energy efficient renovation of the building stock

Grant Agreement N° 695169 - Deliverable N° 2.4

Lead Partner: KSSENA

Survey status on: 20.09.2016

Document produced on: 30.09.2016

This project receives funding from the Horizon 2020 European Union Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement No 695169

IMPRINT

This document is issued by the consortium formed for the implementation of the EmBuild project under

Grant Agreement N° 695169 by the following partners:

GIZ - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (Germany)

KSSENA - Energy Agency of Savinjska, Šaleška and Koroška Region (Slovenia)

Eza - Energie- und Umweltzentrum Allgäu gemeinnützige GmbH (Germany)

BPIE - Buildings Performance Institute Europe ASBL (Belgium)

NALAS - Network of Association of Local Authorities of South East Europe (Macedonia)

TUM - Technische Universität München (Germany)

AE3R – Agentia pentru eficienta energeticasi energii regenerabile Ploiesti-Prahova asociatie (Romania)

UoB – University of Belgrade (Serbia)

REGEA – North-West Croatia Regional Energy Agency (Croatia)

EnEffect – DZZD EnEffect group (Bulgaria)

Lead Partner for the compilation of this document

Coordinator contact:

Frank Mischler

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH

Max-Joseph Straße 5

80333 Munich, Germany

[email protected]

Authors of this report

Nejc Jurko (KSSENA), Sebastian Botzler (TUM), Marko Vlainic (REGEA), Mariangiola Fabbri (BPIE)

Disclaimer

Neither GIZ nor any other consortium member nor the authors will accept any liability at any time for any kind of damage or

loss that might occur to anybody from referring to this document. In addition neither the European Commission nor the

Agencies (or any person acting on their behalf) can be held responsible for the use made of the information provided in this

document.

mailto:[email protected]


About the project EmBuild (full name: Empower public authorities to establish a long-term strategy for mobilizing

investment in the energy efficient renovation of the building stock) is a project initiated in 2016, which

involves institutions from Germany, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Belgium and

Slovenia. It was established to empower public authorities at local and regional level- to establish a long-

term strategy for mobilizing investment in the energy efficient renovation of the public building stock,

based on national strategies.

Project background: 40% of all energy consumption and 36% of CO2 emissions in the European Union

arise in private and public buildings. By retrofitting the building stock, the energy consumption at EU

level can be reduced by more than 17%. The goal of the project is to identify administrative and technical

barriers that hinder the implementation of energy efficiency projects in public buildings with main focus

on selected municipalities.

The project is successful, if our focus municipalities have produced solid renovation strategies for their

building stock and became the front-runners for other municipalities across partner regions who follow

up their example.


TABLE OF CONTENT

About the project .............................................................................................................. 3

1 Introduction to Deliverable 2.4 ................................................................................... 5

2 What are the target groups of EmBuild? ...................................................................... 5

3 Introduction to the survey and methodology .............................................................. 5

3.1 Participation and Participants ................................................................................ 6

4 Results of the survey ................................................................................................... 9

4.1 Existing Knowledge and Working Proficiency ........................................................ 9

4.2 Experiences with Deep Renovation and Energy Efficiency .................................. 14

4.3 Existing Project and implemented Energy Efficiency Measures? ........................ 17

5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 19

5.1 Next steps ............................................................................................................ 20

6 Annex: questionnaire ................................................................................................. 21


1 Introduction to Deliverable 2.4 Following the project’s Communication plan (D2.2), in summer 2016, project partners have reached out to

public authorities - for the first time under the EmBuild banner- via an online survey tool.

In order to increase the capacity of public officers across the partner regions, the first step is to examine

their respective fields of interest, knowledge of energy efficiency regulations, understanding the impacts of

energy efficiency measures as well as their interest for EmBuild project activities.

The information collected and generated during this survey will be at the cornerstone of further project

activities planning for selected municipalities and is included in a unique document called- D2.4 Guidance

note on stakeholders’ involvement.

After a short revision of the definitions for primary and secondary target groups in Section 2, Sections 3-4

will show the results of the survey (for the entire questionnaire see Annex) by partner countries, along with

significant differences and peculiarities (if detected) among them. Section 5 provides the final conclusion

of this guidance note.

2 What are the target groups of EmBuild? EmBuild’s main target groups include a primary target group (public officers which need to be influenced

directly by project activities) and secondary target group that will be indirectly influenced by activities such

as dissemination on local, regional and national level or through cooperation with other projects such as

BuildUpon. A detailed list of the project’s target groups is below.

Primary target groups:

Local and regional public officers directly involved in decision making process on local and regional level regarding the energy efficiency sector. These groups are directly involved in EmBuild project and their municipalities/cities/counties are highlighted by project partners as target areas for implementing the “Long term strategy for mobilizing investment in the energy efficient renovation of the public building stock”;

Secondary target groups:

Local and regional actors directly/indirectly influenced by EmBuild project: These are the municipalities/cities/counties which are likely to follow up in establishing their strategies;

National authorities, associations, agencies- for dissemination purposes;

EU and international level- for dissemination purposes.

3 Introduction to the survey and methodology To effectively influence the network of EmBuild stakeholders it is highly important to understand their

position, level of interest, level of influence and field of expertise regarding energy efficiency and deep

renovation. To obtain this information and to check stakeholder’s opinion and experience with the EU’s

policy goals a comprehensive survey was conducted. It further helped to promote renovation approaches

of building stocks in general and EmBuild in particular.

At the same time, participants were asked to join the EmBuild network of experts, to help us effectively

target our information, findings and insights. So far, more than 50% of the respondents accepted this

invitation and will form the basis of the EmBuild expert network. 62% of all participating stakeholders are

willing to join EmBuild events and enrich the project with their expert knowledge.

Participants were asked not to express their private opinion during the survey, but to represent the view of

their departments. As a result, the answers provided, illustrate mostly the opinion of whole departments

and institutions and reflect as a sum the intentions and knowledge of the public officers within these

departments. As expected, mostly team-leaders (50%) and experts provided feedback. It is assumed that

their answers reflect the official direction of the departments and the public officers involved.

http://buildupon.eu/


The survey was distributed by all partners within their national networks and in their local language.

Primarily the data were acquired by means of a brief online-based survey. EmBuild used OneClickSurvey, an

online platform developed by the Centre for Social Informatics of the University of Ljubljana.

EmBuild focuses on policy and decision makers. Thus, it is crucial for the success of the project to create

results, which perfectly fit the needs of the target groups. By knowing the current state of implementation

and understanding of energy efficiency and deep renovation strategies of each stakeholder within his scope

of action, it will be possible to create guidelines and lists of measures that can be adjusted to their position

and involvement. The survey evaluated barriers that hinder the implementation of energy efficiency and

deep renovation measures, and assessed how these barriers influenced public officers in their daily work.

The survey highlighted the differences between public and private bodies, and among local, regional,

national and European involvement of stakeholders. In addition, it evaluated knowledge and opinions about

wider benefits of refurbishment and retrofitting as well as on investment climate.

The survey design covered four parts:

An introduction with personal questions, like title or job positon, to get an overview of the stakeholders, where they are based, the organizations which they belong to and local information about their area of action and impact.

The main part covered existing knowledge and working proficiency about how energy action plans, renovation measures and EU-regulations were implemented in the specific municipality, city or county. Questions span from knowledge about the European Energy Efficiency Directive (EED), the European Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) and other European policies, to how these regulations affect the daily work of the participants and how much they are interested in other sustainability and energy efficiency topics.

The following part consists of questions regarding the participant’s experiences with practical implementation of deep renovation and energy efficiency measures. In addition, lessons learnt and observations regarding wider benefits of renovation and climate-related investment were evaluated.

The last part of the questionnaire assesses the monitoring and evaluation of existing and already implemented energy efficiency and deep renovation projects.

The questionnaire consisted mainly of carefully selected ordinal-polytomous (respondent has more than

two ordered options), yes and no answers and continuous (respondent is presented with a continuous

scale) question types and took in average 10 min to be completed. Some open questions with “free”

answers were translated to English in order to facilitate the evaluation. The survey focuses on the work of

the departments/ institutions as a whole and their experiences, knowledge and influence regarding energy

efficiency and building renovation measures.

The questionnaire could only generate a first overview; further analysis will be completed through personal

consultation, webinars and direct interviews in following up work packages (e.g. WP 6, WP 5, etc.).

3.1 Participation and Participants

In total 267 participants from all six partner-countries and international institutes have been counted. The

participation by country is shown in Figure 3-1. Overall a well distributed feedback from various institutions

and departments was collected. Only two respondent answered in English, and they represent EU

organizations.


Figure 3-1: Q1 - Number of participants by country

As seen in Figure 3-2 most of the participating offices were actively involved in local policy making. 236 (out

of 267) regional and local institutions provided feedback to questions about energy efficiency and deep

renovation, covering mostly construction, energy or development departments in cities and municipalities.

Figure 3-2: Q4 - Participation by institution type

The survey reached 115 different Municipalities and cities. This assures that many public officers,

departments and institutions from various regions of the focus countries were contacted and a wide range

of feedback was collected.

Most respondents see their focus of work and impact of their projects in the local area, followed by national

and regional areas (see Figure 3-3).


Figure 3-3: Q10 - Main area of impact when making decisions or performing tasks and projects

When looking at this distribution from a country perspective some variations can be observed. Especially in

Serbia, the majority of respondents focus on work at national level. In Romania, Bulgaria and Germany

regional and national activities are second important, which fosters the crucial role for stakeholder’s

activities in local surroundings.

Figure 3-4: Q10 - Main impact area of work by country

Some information about the position of the participants in their current departments could also be

collected. Depending on their seniority (e.g. senior, director or head- position), a number of 133 out of 236

respondents were marked as working in an executive position (56%).


4 Results of the survey

4.1 Existing Knowledge and Working Proficiency

It is to assume that a main driver to implement energy efficiency at local and regional level is that decision

makers are familiar with European energy-efficiency concepts and policies. EU-Regulations like EED or

EPBDs have to be implemented in all steps of the policy making process. So how deep is the knowledge of

the stakeholders in the participating countries? Is the knowledge sufficient to actively integrate energy

efficiency and deep renovation into daily decisions and action plans?

Figure 4-1: Q6 - Knowledge of EU-regulations like EED, EBPD or others

Figure 4-2 shows that 20 % of respondents have a detailed knowledge about EU or other regulations dealing

with energy efficiency. Only 5 % indicated that they never heard of these policies. When cross-analysing it

with the type of institutions, especially the public authorities at a local and regional level indicate to 40%

that they have an average knowledge on EU-regulations. Only 9-15% think they have detailed knowledge.

This should be changed amongst others with this project. On the opposite, national authorities and

surprisingly private bodies state to 37 % that they know in detail about energy efficiency policies.

When analysing it with the local area of work and impact, similar results are visible. Whilst only 13% of the

stakeholders working mainly in local and regional frameworks have indicated to have a detailed knowledge

of EU-regulations, 50% of stakeholders working mainly on a national or European base indicate a detailed

knowledge about these policies.


Figure 4-2: Q6 - Knowledge about EU-regulations and policies by type of institute

When asked if they are already adopting energy action plans (EAP) in their municipality, city or county the

answers are spread (Q: see Figure 4-3). 20% have already implemented EAP and even evaluated them, 17%

are only at the beginning. Also when looking at the type of institutions or their local impact, the answers

are almost equally distributed.

Figure 4-3: Q7 - Commitment in adopting energy action plans into the municipality , city or county.


Figure 4-4: Q7 - Commitment in adopting energy action plans by participating country

When it comes to a country-based analysis, the results vary significantly. In Slovenia and Croatia, most of

the stakeholders (31% and 36% respectively) have already implemented EAP, whilst in Germany only 7%

have reached this status (see Figure 4-4).

When asking stakeholders about the importance of energy efficiency and deep renovation for their

departments, 36% answered that these concepts are already part of their daily work (see Figure 4-5). In

general, the importance of these topics is very high through all countries and types of organizations. The

survey showed a general high interest for energy efficiency, with higher results shown by participants who

work at European (75%) and national level (52%). In contrast, at local level only 34% of respondents declare

that energy efficiency regulations are part of their daily work.

Figure 4-5: Q8 - Importance of energy efficiency and deep renovations for all participants respective their departments


At first sight, the situation does not change when going one-step further (see Figure 4-6). The participants

were asked if implementing EE regulations and policies into their daily tasks, influences the work of their

departments and, in case of an affirmative response, how strong this influence is. Same patterns regarding

the impact in local areas could be found. The more local the public authorities (local and regional public

authorities), the less impact they see of energy efficiency regulations in their daily work (only 20 %-24 %

voted for deep impact). When analysing the topic from a country perspective, the trend is almost the same

with two exceptions, Germany and Croatia, where only 15 % and 19 % of the participants respectively

indicated that they feel a deep impact on their department’s work (see Figure 4-7: Q9 - Influence of

implementing EE and DR on work of the department by country

).

Figure 4-6: Q9 - Influence of implementing EE and deep renovation on work for all participants respective their departments

Figure 4-7: Q9 - Influence of implementing EE and DR on work of the department by country


To get a more detailed picture of the preferences of EmBuild stakeholders, they were asked to rate their

interest in each of the following topics:

Cost-effective approaches and technologies to building renovation

Policies to stimulate cost-effective deep renovations of buildings

No-cost energy efficiency (e.g. nudging, behavioural energy efficiency, motivational measures, societal changes etc. )

Public participation and round tables regarding future energy efficient projects

The results are shown in the following graph (see Figure 4-8):

Figure 4-8: Q11 - Interest of stakeholders in various topics regarding EE and deep renovation

Highest interest (40 %) was found in cost effective approaches and technologies to building renovations. All

other topics were rated almost equally (21 % and 28 % respectively).

When comparing the highest interests, some differences between countries become visible. Participants

from Croatia have more interest in no cost- energy efficiency measures and participants from Serbia and

Romania share more interest in public participation measures than other respondents.

Figure 4-9: Q11 - Interest of stakeholders in various topics regarding EE and deep renovation by country


4.2 Experiences with Deep Renovation and Energy Efficiency

Knowledge plays an important role in the implementation of energy efficiency policies and programs.

However, practical experience and on-the ground expertise are needed to deeply integrate energy

efficiency into the daily work and decision-making schemes of (local) authorities/stakeholders. In order to

design guidelines that are relevant for EmBuild target groups and stakeholders, it is important to get an

overview of the practical knowledge these experts have in each of the project’s target countries.

Figure 4-10 shows the experience that stakeholders and their departments from all participating countries

have in deep renovation or energy efficiency policies of public buildings stock.

Figure 4-10: Q13 - Experience with EE and DR implementation of the public building stock, total of all

participants

Only 5 % of all participants do not have any experience with EE and DR measures. Almost 50 % do it

frequently, of which 23 % do it on a regular basis.

Figure 4-11: Q13 - Experience with EE and DR implementation by country


Some slight differences among surveyed countries have been identified (see Figure 4-11): the experience

in Germany, Croatia and Slovenia is significantly higher than in countries like Bulgaria or Romania.

Figure 4-12 shows the barriers indicated as the strongest reason for not implementing energy efficiency or

deep renovation strategies in each municipality, city or county of each participating country.

Most participants see fiscal and financial barriers as the strongest and hard to overcome obstacles for the

implementation of energy efficiency and deep renovation strategies. In Croatia, 85% of all respondents

voted for that option. Only 6% of all participants find that technical and R&D hinders energy efficiency

processes. Combined with the high interest of all participants in the topic (40%) this reflects the demand

for increased improvement on optimized and cost-effective technical solutions (which is consistent with

the need of better financial opportunities – barrier D)

Figure 4-12 shows also some general differences between the countries. Whilst participants from Germany

and Romania see all options as crucial barriers, the Croatian participants do not see communication and

technical/ R&D barriers as hindering issues for their renovation strategies.

Figure 4-12: Q14 - Strongest barriers that hinder the implementation of EE and DR strategies


Figure 4-13: Q14 - Least relevant barriers that hinder the implementation of EE and DR strategies

Surprisingly strategic barriers, like political and or regulative barriers are also indicated as less relevant

barriers. However, the high number of public officers and authorities among the responded could have

skewed this result, since they likely would not consider their core activities as a potential barrier. When

analysing this topic by organisation type, none of the participants of private bodies see strategic barriers as

low obstacles.

Figure 4-14 presents the investment climate, thus the investment conditions, financing opportunities and

funding schemes in participant areas. Just 7% of respondents consider that investment climate is very good,

while around 35% considers that investment climate is average.

Figure 4-14: Q17 - Investment climate in surveyed countries.

Awareness raising, fiscal incentives and less bureaucracy have been recognised as the most important areas

of intervention (see Figure 4-15).


Figure 4-15: Q18 - main areas of intervention to improve investment climate

4.3 Existing Project and implemented Energy Efficiency Measures?

The last section of the survey focused on the monitoring and evaluation of the energy efficiency and deep

renovation projects. The questions in this section examined policies and programme evaluation strategies

and how stakeholders, so far, handled it. There are considerable differences between national institutions

and their local authorities in each country.

60% of all participants have already a documented inventory of the building stock in their municipality, city

or county. However, whilst in Slovenia 85% of all participants indicated that they have and use building

inventories, in Germany and Romania only 46% and 48% respectively have developed such a database. In

Serbia the rate is even lower (26%) (see Figure 4-16). Thus, EmBuild’s future guidelines and

recommendations on monitoring and data collection will have to take into account these differences and

be applicable in each country.

Figure 4-16: Q20 - Public inventory of building stock implemented by country

A further step in evaluating implemented measures consists of monitoring and assessing schemes for

energy efficiency projects. Since this task is from experience more complicated and asks for additional


technology and financial effort, only 40% of all participants indicated that they have implemented such an

evaluation scheme. 38% did not integrate it and 22% did not answer to this question.

Like the building inventory results, monitoring schemes differ a lot among countries. Figure 4-17 shows that

especially in Serbia (73% of participants stated No), Romania (48%) and Croatia (46%) the integration of

evaluation schemes is a task for the future. However, in Slovenia 66% of the respondents stated that they

have such strategies and assessment method already implemented (see Figure 4-17)

Figure 4-17: Q21 - Monitoring or evaluation scheme to assess EE and DR projects by country

The final question of this section digs even one step deeper into assessment schemes. The participants were

asked to indicate if they use energy consumption monitoring for their public building stock. Surprisingly,

more stakeholders (52%) have these monitoring systems in place than evaluation schemes. It is to analyse

in the next steps of the EmBuild project in what kind of schemes these monitoring measures are

implemented and how they participate to the evaluation process of the municipality, city and county.

Figure 4-18: Q22 - Monitoring of energy consumption of public buildings by country


From a country perspective, Slovenia has the highest rate of implemented energy monitoring systems

(82%). In Romania (36%) and Serbia (26%) there is only a low rate of installed energy monitoring concepts.

Another interesting finding is the strong focus on measurement of energy consumption, especially in local

and regional public authorities. As indicated in Figure 4-19, 72% of local and 75% of regional public

authorities measure the energy consumption of their public building stock, versus only 50% at national level

and a significantly lower share of private bodies (26%) (SMEs, investors, banks, researchers, universities,

institutes).

Figure 4-19: Q22 - Monitoring of energy consumption of public buildings by organization type

5 Conclusion

The main purpose of making the Guidance note on stakeholders involvement at an early stage of the project

was to have a document illustrating the needs, wishes, current understanding of energy efficiency policies

and in the end, the interest of primary and secondary target groups (jointly called the stakeholders) in

EmBuild’s future activities. Through the survey, we have reached them for the first time under the EmBuild

banner. This document is a result of the conducted online survey and analysis afterwards. The main findings

of the survey can be summarized as follows:

Almost 50 % of the EmBuild stakeholders (respondents of the survey) work in local areas. They already have

an average knowledge about regulations, while the differences are clearer when it comes to

implementation of these strategies. Whilst Slovenia and Croatia indicate an advanced knowledge, in

Germany and Bulgaria the priority is the adaption of EU regulations rather than identifying other fields of

action. This could have a strong influence on the stakeholders’ ability to develop and implement new EE

policies and programs respectively it has an impact on the guidelines and recommendations addressed by

EmBuild. It is further to remark that these overall positive results could represent a distorted picture of the

real situation. We assume that a certain percentage of participants of this survey is more motivated and

aware than other public officers. To evaluate this influence is part of upcoming work packages and

consultation and interview rounds.

Nevertheless, the interest in energy efficiency is generally high: 35% of all participants find energy efficiency

and deep renovation as important topics for their departments and daily work. Only 0.3% think these fields

are of none and 6% of almost no interest to them. All countries are mainly interested in cost effective


approaches and technologies to building renovation and energy efficiency. Work Package 6 will explore this

element further, by providing guidelines and detailed information about wider benefits of renovation and

energy strategies, and its long-term benefits, even with higher initial investment costs. Especially in Croatia,

where 37% indicated an interest in no-cost energy efficiency measures, the whole variety of co-benefits

and behavioral change measures need to be addressed.

The knowledge of European policies such as EED, EPBD or other energy related regulations varies a lot.

According to the survey results, the project should focus on local and regional authorities, since only 10%

of these respondents show detailed knowledge. Whilst country differences need to be taken into account,

it is crucial for the project to provide a holistic overview about all the benefits of energy efficiency. Especially

when formulating policies, it is not sufficient to take only short-term, financial gains through energy savings

into account.

The investment climate in the various regions plays a crucial role for the ability to address energy efficiency

issues. 35% of all participants see an average investment climate for energy efficiency projects. However,

at the same time 22% see a bad or less than average conditions and only 7% consider the investment

situation very good.

In addition, wider benefits and especially the introduction of low/ no-cost measures may boost the market

towards energy efficiency. The experience with implementing energy efficiency projects is widely spread

between countries and stakeholders. However, 23% are performing these projects on a regular basis, while

24% do it at least frequently. It remains to be seen, if the implementation is performed in an efficient and

satisfactory way. Especially the answers to evaluation questions indicate that there is room for

improvement. By identifying main barriers that hinder energy efficiency measures, some focus points for

further knowledge exchange and fields of acting have been identified. Financial and fiscal barriers are

crucial topics that hinder implementation. Decision-makers need to be convinced of the positive pay back

of energy efficiency instruments and measures, as well as their positive outcome, which include wider

benefits than usually expected. Again, wider benefits and long-term effects on the whole society need to

be communicated and placed in prominent position.

Three questions in the survey discussed the evaluation of energy efficiency and deep renovation measures

in different steps. 60% of the participants indicated to have an existing inventory of the building stock. This

is crucial in order to have a baseline and database for further evaluation schemes. Except for Serbia, most

of the respondent departments are working on these inventory databases or already have them

implemented. The type of inventory or monitoring will be assessed in personal interviews and due to our

expert network. The next step is the development and design of monitoring and evaluation schemes. 40%

of respondents indicate that they already use such schemes to evaluate their projects. How these schemes

work and what they consist of will be analysed at a later stage of the project.

5.1 Next steps

The survey results for each participating country gave solid insights in local/regional/national specific

problems, which provide the desired basis for upcoming work packages and tasks. The results presented

and interpreted in this document will help the EmBuild consortium to define further actions and address

the most relevant issues to the right target groups. The identified differences by country will also help to

produce flexible and useful guidelines for specific need of our stakeholders in different positions and

regions. A main concern of the survey was financial barriers, for which WP6 and its distinct study about

wider benefits of renovation will provide some solutions and deeper insights.


6 Annex: questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR INVESTIGATING THE STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT

Private and public buildings are responsible for 40% of all energy consumption and 36% of CO2 emissions in the

European Union. We, as public authorities, will most likely fail to reach the EU’s climate and energy targets, if no

changes or improvements are made. Energy-efficient buildings will contribute to our shared vision of secure,

affordable and climate-friendly energy for citizens and businesses as well as generating additional societal,

environmental and economic benefits. EmBuild is a European project within the Horizon 2020 framework and

involves institutions from Germany, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Macedonia, Belgium and Slovenia. It

was established to empower public authorities at local, regional and national level, to formulate renovation

strategies for the building sector that foster deep renovation and facilitate a higher rate of renovations. In order to

achieve the ambitious EU goals and to improve the energy situation in Europe we need you and your departments

as participants, as sources of knowledge and expertise. Your experiences and influence within the decision-making

process can be the beginning of the necessary changes. To build our network of experts and stakeholders and to

more effectively target our information, findings and insights, we have developed the following questionnaire. It

will only take you a few minutes to complete it. The questions consist of yes and no answers as well as 1-5 scales.

The survey focuses on the work of your departments/ institutions and your experiences, knowledge and influence

regarding energy efficiency and building renovation measures. It is best if the personal opinions reflect your

institutions views, rather than your personal views.

Q2 - DISCLAIMER[Data collected by this questionnaire will only be used for the purpose of the EmBuild project

and will not be used for other purposes.]

Q3 - PERSONAL DATA

1

Title

Position

Department/Unit

City

Region/Country

Q4 - What type of organizations do you belong (please choose one) to?

Public authority at national level (national government (ministry of development, environment, finance etc.),

national energy regulators, national energy efficiency funds, national energy sector organizations etc.)

Public authority at regional level (regional decision makers that are involved or responsible for renovation

strategies on regional level, ministry at regional level, regional energy regulators, regional l energy efficiency

funds, regional energy sector organizations)

Public authorities at local level (Representatives of local governments and their associations, Municipality

representative, Municipality department for investments, Municipality department for buildings, local

administration officials, Public utility services, etc.)

Intermediary (energy agencies, development agencies, EU/ECC agencies etc., associations of municipalities,

other public entities

Private bodies (SMEs, investors, banks, researchers, universities, institutes…)

Other:


Q5 - EXISTING KNOWLEDGE AND WORKING PROFICIENCY We would like to obtain a short

feedback about how youimplemented energy action plans, renovation measures and EU-regulations in

yourmunicipality/ city/ county.

Q6 - How deep, on a scale from 1 to 5, would you consider the knowledge about EED, EPBD or any other

European policies regarding energy efficiency of buildings in your department?

1 - never heard of it

2

3

4

5 - detailed knowledge

Q7 - How does your department handle the EU-commitment to adopting energy action plans in your

municipality/city/county (LEAP, SEAP)?

1 - early beginning of development

2

3

4

5 - already implemented and evaluated energy action plans

Q8 - Would you consider energy efficiency and deep renovation of buildings a topic that is of high

importance for you and your department.

1 - no importance

2

3

4

5 - part of daily work

Q9 - How much do you feel that implementing energy efficiency regulations and policies into your daily

tasks and projects influences the work of your department?

1 - no influence

2

3

4

5 - has deep impact on our work

Q10 - When making decisions or performing tasks and projects, on which level would you consider the

work of your department has the most impact?

Local

Regional

National

European


Q11 - Your department operates in a decision making environment, dealing with building stock and

regional development. How would (or does) your department rate its interest in the following areas?

Please note that 1 stands for poor interest and 5 for high interest. 1 - poor

interest

2 3 4 5 - high

interest

Cost-effective approaches and technologies to

building renovation

Policies to stimulate cost-effective deep

renovations of buildings

No-cost energy efficiency through changed

behavior or monitoring

Public participation/ round tables regarding future

energy efficient projects

Q12 -

EXPERIENCES WITH DEEP RENOVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY Now we move away from

policy making towards the practical implementation of deep renovation of the building stock and energy

efficiency measures. Could you tell us about your experiences and lessons learned from the measures you have

already implemented?

Q13 - Please indicate on the scale below how much experience you and your department have with deep

building renovation or energy efficiency policy regarding the public building stock?

1 - we did nothing

2

3

4

5 - we are doing it on a regular basis

IF (1) Q13 = [2, 3, 4, 5] Q14 – If you indicated 2-5 on the scale, please choose which barriers are preventing the faster

implementation of energy efficiency measures on public buildings. [please grade each kind of barrier

according to the 1-5 scales, 1 = strong barrier, 5=almost no barrier] 1 - strong

barrier

2 3 4 5 - almost

no barrier

strategic (e.g. political barriers, main focus on

other subjects etc.)

legislative/regulatory (e.g. cultural heritage, too

many regulations etc.)

technical and R&D (no reasonable technical

solution, cost-benefit barriers etc.)

fiscal/financial (e.g. not enough budget, subsidies

etc.)

communication/capacity building


IF (1) Q13 = [2, 3, 4, 5] Q15 - If your department has implemented energy efficiency and renovation measures, could you observe

appositive or negative impact of these measures not only in energy savings but also in some of the

following examples? (multiple answers are applicable but max. 3)

Social impact (e.g. reduced health issues, better working quality/indoor climate) Economic impact (e.g. reduced cost of operation, higher productivity etc.) Environmental impact (e.g. lower CO2 Emissions, less air pollution) Energy system impact (efficient energy grids, lesser outages, better energy security) Direct impacts for the occupant/user (behaviour change, private investments in energy efficient technology

or even renovation etc.) Other:

IF (2) Q15 = [Q15a, Q15b, Q15c, Q15d, Q15e, Q15f] Q16 - What did you observe in the selected field? Was there something you did not expect? 1

Social impact

Economic impact

Environmental impact

Energy system impact

Direct impacts for the occupant/user

if you selected other

Q17 - Normally renovation and energy efficiency measures require a certain budget or investment. How

would you evaluate the investment climate in your area of work/decision making?

1 - poor climate

2

3

4

5 - for very good climate

Q18 - If the investment climate in your area of work/decision making had to improve or remain at a high

level, what would be the main areas of intervention? (multiple answers are applicable)

Awareness raising amongst stakeholders Quality of service of the information provider (e.g. local energy agencies/info points) Information flow between municipality and private sector SEEAP and its links with national strategic documents (e.g. NEEAP) Access to investment capital (including local borrowing) Coordination between levels of governance (vertical and horizontal) Fiscal incentives for the local government to apply energy efficiency measures Cutting down bureaucracy/simplifying public procurement procedures Public-private partnership schemes Other:


Q19 - EXISTING PROJECTS AND IMPLEMENTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY We would like to conclude

the survey with short questions about the projects you have already implemented in your

municipality/city/county.

Q20 - Does your municipality/city/county have documented inventory of the building stock which is

operated and owned by public authorities?

Yes

No

Q21 - Do you have a monitoring or evaluation scheme which assesses the energy efficiency projects you

have implemented in your area?

Yes

No

Q22 - Do you have any energy consumption monitoring of the public building stock of

your municipality/city/county

Yes

No

Q23 - We would like to stay in contact with you, inform you about news around the energy efficiency and

renovation sector and most important, to have you as an expert in our knowledge network. We thank you

for every input and insights into your daily work you will share with us.

Q24 - Are you interested to participate in events under the EmBuild banner?

Yes

No

Q25 - Would you like to be part of our future expert and knowledge network

Yes

No

IF (3) Q24 = [1] or Q25 = [1] Q26 - Please, enter your email address: (ex. [email protected])

guidance note on stakeholder involvement › site › assets › files › 1313 › ... · involves...

Documents