176 Lei Song et al.
China, and explores the risks and uncertainties in the green building transition
pathway, drawing on examples from cities in northern and southern climatic
regions.
Implementation risks identified differed according to stakeholders’ perspectives,
from governments, construction firms, public residents, and the area experts. That
said that implementation risks are mainly derived from four clusters including:
policies, technology innovation, financing, and energy consumption behaviour. In
the low- carbon building pathways, the stakeholders highlighted the lack of policies for green building operation and financial policies to incentivise renewableenergy use as a priority risk. However, the locked- in behaviour of building end
users and technological innovation would be the main barriers in the future transitions of green new buildings and retrofitting buildings.
Stakeholders also mentioned that energy- efficient building technologies for
the enclosure structure and equipment systems did not often consider local
needs to control indoor temperature based on the local climate zone. Energy
efficiency measures in northern regions, which has relatively dry cold and hot
conditions, cannot be directly replicated in the more humid southern regions
where building require additional ventilation.
Aside from different user needs, awareness of cost–benefit analysis for green
buildings is still weak in the design of Chinese buildings. Besides this, stakeholders from the government and public groups considered that the efficiency of
equipment systems still suffer from a lack of innovation. This especially applies
to passive energy- saving technology and heating (air conditioning) systems
based on the full use of renewable energy such as solar and wind (Zhang, Kang,
and Jin, 2018). For instance, most buildings still rely on air conditioning for
cooling, but buildings can be more effectively designed to keep cool by natural
winds. Stakeholders indicated that the technological innovation in equipment
systems (heating or cooling) needs to move forward in this direction.
Furthermore, the consequential risks considered by stakeholders mainly
focused on economic and environmental impacts from the low- carbon transition process. They especially highlighted how the potential cost burdens of
green building may play a negative role on social and economic development,
such as increasing unemployment and inequality. In addition, stakeholders were
concerned that green building developments that do not allow user control
could also reduce the environmental benefits. The scaling up of building development could place pressure on land use in the transition process.
Regarding uncertainties, stakeholders argued more about the impact of
increasing climate change and extreme climate events such as heat waves and
floods on urban environments. Even though we still cannot be sure if climate
shocks will bring negative impacts on a low- carbon transition in the building
sector, stakeholders still mentioned the potential possibility of increasing exposure of renewable energy installations under climate shock. There were also
some uncertainties which prevented market participation, due to perceived
investment risks in green buildings and the low acceptance and awareness of
green buildings.
China, and explores the risks and uncertainties in the green building transition
pathway, drawing on examples from cities in northern and southern climatic
regions.
Implementation risks identified differed according to stakeholders’ perspectives,
from governments, construction firms, public residents, and the area experts. That
said that implementation risks are mainly derived from four clusters including:
policies, technology innovation, financing, and energy consumption behaviour. In
the low- carbon building pathways, the stakeholders highlighted the lack of policies for green building operation and financial policies to incentivise renewableenergy use as a priority risk. However, the locked- in behaviour of building end
users and technological innovation would be the main barriers in the future transitions of green new buildings and retrofitting buildings.
Stakeholders also mentioned that energy- efficient building technologies for
the enclosure structure and equipment systems did not often consider local
needs to control indoor temperature based on the local climate zone. Energy
efficiency measures in northern regions, which has relatively dry cold and hot
conditions, cannot be directly replicated in the more humid southern regions
where building require additional ventilation.
Aside from different user needs, awareness of cost–benefit analysis for green
buildings is still weak in the design of Chinese buildings. Besides this, stakeholders from the government and public groups considered that the efficiency of
equipment systems still suffer from a lack of innovation. This especially applies
to passive energy- saving technology and heating (air conditioning) systems
based on the full use of renewable energy such as solar and wind (Zhang, Kang,
and Jin, 2018). For instance, most buildings still rely on air conditioning for
cooling, but buildings can be more effectively designed to keep cool by natural
winds. Stakeholders indicated that the technological innovation in equipment
systems (heating or cooling) needs to move forward in this direction.
Furthermore, the consequential risks considered by stakeholders mainly
focused on economic and environmental impacts from the low- carbon transition process. They especially highlighted how the potential cost burdens of
green building may play a negative role on social and economic development,
such as increasing unemployment and inequality. In addition, stakeholders were
concerned that green building developments that do not allow user control
could also reduce the environmental benefits. The scaling up of building development could place pressure on land use in the transition process.
Regarding uncertainties, stakeholders argued more about the impact of
increasing climate change and extreme climate events such as heat waves and
floods on urban environments. Even though we still cannot be sure if climate
shocks will bring negative impacts on a low- carbon transition in the building
sector, stakeholders still mentioned the potential possibility of increasing exposure of renewable energy installations under climate shock. There were also
some uncertainties which prevented market participation, due to perceived
investment risks in green buildings and the low acceptance and awareness of
green buildings.