Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 3243–3261 | Cite as

A review of studies on urban energy performance evaluation

  • Lei Wang
  • Ruyin LongEmail author
  • Hong ChenEmail author
  • Wenbo Li
  • Jiahui Yang
Review Article
  • 719 Downloads

Abstract

Energy is a foundation for a city to create economic wealth, satisfy people’s desires, and achieve benefits. However, the increasing mismatch between energy supply and demand and the worsening of environmental pollution have highlighted the importance of improving urban energy performance, so the number of studies related to urban energy performance evaluation is increasing. Based on describing the authors, numbers, regional sources, and themes of these studies, this paper reviews and analyzes the conceptions, evaluation indicators, influencing factors, evaluation methods, and evaluation systems related to urban energy performance. Most countries have expressed concern about this topic. Researchers in China, Belgium, and the USA have had the most achievements and collaborations. The concept of urban energy performance further extends to a comprehensive performance. It is measured based on an input-output process. In addition to the original evaluation indicators, new desirable outputs and undesirable outputs are included. Industrial structure, energy price, population density, home car ownership, climate factors, Gini coefficient, health expenditure level, and unemployment rate are regarded as influencing factors. Therefore, a new framework of evaluation indicators and influencing factors is constructed. Stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) and data envelopment analysis (DEA) are commonly used to evaluate. With changes in conceptions, evaluation indicators, and influencing factors, the evaluation method should rather focus on measuring multiple input-output variables, determining the evaluation results and the impacts of factors at the same analysis stage, and highlighting policy orientations. As an important management tool, the evaluation system would continue to be studied and developed.

Keywords

Urban energy performance Concept connotation Evaluation indicator Influencing factor Evaluation method Evaluation system Review 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank everyone who provided constructive advice that helped to improve this paper.

Funding

This study was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (grant number 2017XKZD12).

References

  1. Aigner DJ, Lovell CAK, Schmidt P (1977) Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. J Econ 6:21–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(77)90052-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alp I, Sözen A (2014) Turkey’s performance of energy consumption: a study making a comparison with the EU member states. Energy Sources Part B 9:87–100.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15567241003773218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ang BW, Xu XY, Su B (2015) Multi-country comparisons of energy performance: the index decomposition analysis approach. Energy Econ 47:68–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.10.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 30:1078–1092 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2631725 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Battese GE, Coelli TJ (1992) Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data: with application to paddy farmers in India. J Prod Anal 3:153–169.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00158774 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borman WC, Penner LA, Allen TD, Motowidlo S (2001) Personality predictors of citizenship performance. Int J Sel Assess 9:52–69.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd GA (2017) Comparing the statistical distributions of energy efficiency in manufacturing: meta-analysis of 24 case studies to develop industry-specific energy performance indicators (EPI). Energy Effic 10:217–238.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-016-9450-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyd G, Zhang G (2013) Measuring improvement in energy efficiency of the US cement industry with the energy star energy performance indicator. Energy Effic 6:105–116.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-012-9160-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyd G, Dutrow E, Tunnessen W (2008) The evolution of the energy star energy performance indicator for benchmarking industrial plant manufacturing energy use. J Clean Prod 16:709–715.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.02.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. BP (2018) Statistical review of world energy-all data, 1965–2017. Available from https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html. Accessed 18 Oct 2018
  11. Bruegge C, Carrión-Flores C, Pope JC (2016) Does the housing market value energy efficient homes? Evidence from the energy star program. Reg Sci Urban Econ 57:63–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2015.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carrer MJ, Filho HMDS, Batalha MO, Rossi FR (2015) Farm management information systems (FMIS) and technical efficiency: an analysis of citrus farms in Brazil. Comput Electron Agric 119:105–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2015.10.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cengiz MA, Dünder E, Şenel T (2018) Energy performance evaluation of OECD countries using Bayesian stochastic frontier analysis and Bayesian network classifiers. J Appl Stat 45:17–25.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2016.1257586 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chang IC, Yu YH (2001) Using sustainable development indicators as a supplementary measure for the integrated management of environmental information system in Taiwan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 8:127–137.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02987306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chang MC, Hu JL, Jan FG (2016) Performance estimation of energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions for sustainable development in Baltic Sea countries. J Clean Prod 139:1370–1382.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen S, Chen B (2015) Urban energy consumption: different insights from energy flow analysis, input-output analysis and ecological network analysis. Appl Energy 138:99–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.10.055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chung YH, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1997) Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. J Environ Manag 51:229–240.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1997.0146 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dietz T, Rosa EA, York R (2012) Environmentally efficient well-being: is there a Kuznets curve? Appl Geogr 32:21–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.10.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Färe R, Grosskopf S (2004) Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation: comment. Eur J Oper Res 157:242–245.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00191-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Färe R, Lovell CAK (1978) Measuring the technical efficiency of production. J Econ Theory 19:150–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(78)90060-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Tyteca D (1996) An activity analysis model of the environmental performance of firms-application to fossil-fuel-fired electric utilities. Ecol Econ 18:161–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00019-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fei R, Lin B (2017) The integrated efficiency of inputs-outputs and energy-CO2 emissions performance of China’s agricultural sector. Renew Sust Energ Rev 75:668–676.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fukuyama H, Weber WL (2009) A directional slacks-based measure of technical inefficiency. Socio Econ Plan Sci 43:274–287.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2008.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grimm NB, Faeth SH, Golubiewski NE, Redman CL, Wu J, Bai X, Briggs JM (2008) Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319:756–760.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1150195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hang Y, Sun J, Wang Q, Zhao Z, Wang Y (2015) Measuring energy inefficiency with undesirable outputs and technology heterogeneity in Chinese cities. Econ Model 49:46–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.04.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hu X, Liu C, Si T (2017) Total factor carbon emission performance measurement and development. J Clean Prod 142:2804–2815.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Išljamović S, Jeremić V, Petrović N, Radojičić Z (2015) Colouring the socio-economic development into green: I-distance framework for countries’ welfare evaluation. Qual Quant 49:617–629.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0012-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jorgenson AK, Alekseyko A, Giedraitis V (2014) Energy consumption, human well-being and economic development in central and eastern European nations: a cautionary tale of sustainability. Energy Policy 66:419–427.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keirstead J (2013) Benchmarking urban energy efficiency in the UK. Energy Policy 63:575–587.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.063 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kilkis S (2016) Sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems index for southeast European cities. J Clean Prod 130:222–234.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Knight KW, Rosa EA (2011) The environmental efficiency of well-being: a cross-national analysis. Soc Sci Res 40:931–949.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koohi F, Nedjat S, Yaseri M, Cheraghi Z (2017) Quality of life among general populations of different countries in the past 10 years, with a focus on human development index: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran J Public Health 46:12–22Google Scholar
  34. Kourtit K, Suzuki S, Nijkamp P (2017) Tracing high-sustainability performers among world cities-design and application of a multi-temporal data envelopment analysis. Habitat Int 68:43–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.06.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Li J, Lin B (2017) Does energy and CO2 emissions performance of China benefit from regional integration? Energy Policy 101:366–378.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Li LB, Hu JL, Xia NC (2016) Industrial energy-pollution performance of regions in China based on a unified framework combining static and dynamic indexes. J Clean Prod 131:341–350.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lin B, Du K (2015) Energy and CO2 emissions performance in China’s regional economies: do market-oriented reforms matter? Energy Policy 78:113–124.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lin SJ, Lu IJ, Lewis C (2007) Grey relation performance correlations among economics, energy use and carbon dioxide emission in Taiwan. Energy Policy 35:1948–1955.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lin J, Jacoby J, Cui S, Liu Y, Lin T (2014) A model for developing a target integrated low carbon city indicator system: the case of Xiamen, China. Ecol Indic 40:51–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martchamadol J, Kumar S (2013) An aggregated energy security performance indicator. Appl Energy 103:653–670.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.10.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Martchamadol J, Kumar S (2014) The aggregated energy security performance indicator (AESPI) at national and provincial level. Appl Energy 127:219–238.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Menegaki AN, Marques AC, Fuinhas JA (2017) Redefining the energy-growth nexus with an index for sustainable economic welfare in Europe. Energy 141:1254–1268.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.09.056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Middelkoop MV, Vringer K, Visser H (2017) Are Dutch residents ready for a more stringent policy to enhance the energy performance of their homes? Energy Policy 105:269–282.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moutinho V, Madaleno M, Macedo P, Robaina M, Marques C (2018) Efficiency in the European agricultural sector: environment and resources. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:17927–17941.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2041-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Munier N (2011) Methodology to select a set of urban sustainability indicators to measure the state of the city, and performance assessment. Ecol Indic 11:1020–1026.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.01.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nagata Y (1997) The US/Japan comparison of energy intensity. Estimating the real gap. Energy Policy 25:683–691.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(97)00060-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. O'Mahony T, Escardó-Serra P, Dufour J (2018) Revisiting ISEW valuation approaches: the case of Spain including the costs of energy depletion and of climate change. Ecol Econ 144:292–303.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ouellette P, Vierstraete V (2004) Technological change and efficiency in the presence of quasi-fixed inputs: a DEA application to the hospital sector. Eur J Oper Res 154:755–763.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00712-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pagliaro F, Cellucci L, Burattini C, Bisegna F, Gugliermetti F, Vollaro ADL et al (2015) A methodological comparison between energy and environmental performance evaluation. Sustain 7:10324–10342.  https://doi.org/10.3390/su70810324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Patterson MG (1996) What is energy efficiency?: concepts, indicators and methodological issues. Energy Policy 24:377–390.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-4215(96)00017-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Raggad B (2018) Carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth, energy use, and urbanization in Saudi Arabia: evidence from the ARDL approach and impulse saturation break tests. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:14882–14898.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1698-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shao C, Guan Y, Wan Z, Guo C, Chu C, Ju M (2014) Performance and decomposition analyses of carbon emissions from industrial energy consumption in Tianjin, China. J Clean Prod 64:590–601.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.08.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Song L, Yelin FU, Zhou P, Lai KK (2017) Measuring national energy performance via energy trilemma index: a stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Energy Econ 66:313–319.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Soutter M, Alexandrescu M, Schenk C, Drobot R (2009) Adapting a geographical information system-based water resource management to the needs of the Romanian water authorities. Environ Sci Pollut Res 16:33–41.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-008-0065-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sovacool BK (2013) An international assessment of energy security performance. Ecol Econ 88:148–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.01.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sovacool BK, Mukherjee I, Drupady IM, D’Agostino AL (2011) Evaluating energy security performance from 1990 to 2010 for eighteen countries. Energy 36:5846–5853.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.08.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tan S, Yang J, Yan J (2015) Development of the low-carbon city indicator (LCCI) framework. Energy Procedia 75:2516–2522.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.253 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tone K (2001) A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Eur J Oper Res 130:498–509.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Üstün AK (2015) Evaluating environmental efficiency of Turkish cities by data envelopment analysis. Glob Nest J 17:281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wang JC (2012) A study on the energy performance of hotel buildings in Taiwan. Energy Build 49:268–275.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.02.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wang J, Zhao T (2017) Regional energy-environmental performance and investment strategy for China’s non-ferrous metals industry: a non-radial DEA based analysis. J Clean Prod 163:187–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wang K, Wei YM, Zhang X (2012) A comparative analysis of China’s regional energy and emission performance: which is the better way to deal with undesirable outputs? Energy Policy 46:574–584.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wang Q, Su B, Sun J, Zhou P, Zhou D (2015a) Measurement and decomposition of energy-saving and emissions reduction performance in Chinese cities. Appl Energy 151:85–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.04.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wang Q, Zhao Z, Shen N, Liu T (2015b) Have Chinese cities achieved the win–win between environmental protection and economic development? From the perspective of environmental efficiency. Ecol Indic 51:151–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wang J, Lv K, Bian Y, Cheng Y (2017a) Energy efficiency and marginal carbon dioxide emission abatement cost in urban China. Energy Policy 105:246–255.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wang X, Li Z, Meng H, Wu J (2017b) Identification of key energy efficiency drivers through global city benchmarking: a data driven approach. Appl Energy 190:18–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wang Z, He W, Wang B (2017c) Performance and reduction potential of energy and CO2, emissions among the APEC’s members with considering the return to scale. Energy 138:552–562.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wu J, Zhu Q, Yin P, Song M (2017) Measuring energy and environmental performance for regions in China by using DEA-based Malmquist indices. Oper Res 17:715–735.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-015-0203-z Google Scholar
  69. Yan S (2014) Human resource management. China Machine Press, Beijing (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  70. Yang L, Wang KL, Geng JC (2018) China’s regional ecological energy efficiency and energy saving and pollution abatement potentials: an empirical analysis using epsilon-based measure model. J Clean Prod 194:300–308.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yin Q, Yang W, Ding K, Huang M (2017a) The software design of energy efficiency data acquisition and management of operational ships. 2017 4th International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety (pp. 722–726). IEEE.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTIS.2017.8047847
  72. Yin X, Zhu X, Zhou H, Li Z, Wang A, Liao X (2017b) Technical efficiency of carp polyculture production in Jiangsu, China: a ray stochastic frontier production approach. Aquac Res 48:1629–1637.  https://doi.org/10.1111/are.12998 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yu L (2014) Low carbon eco-city: new approach for Chinese urbanisation. Habitat Int 44:102–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zhang L, Sovacool BK, Yu J, Ren J (2017) Measuring energy security performance within China: toward an inter-provincial prospective. Energy 125:825–836.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.12.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zhou N, He G, Williams C, Fridley D (2015) Elite cities: a low-carbon eco-city evaluation tool for China. Ecol Indic 48:448–456.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zhou DQ, Wang Q, Su B, Zhou P, Yao LX (2016) Industrial energy conservation and emission reduction performance in China: a city-level nonparametric analysis. Appl Energy 166:201–209.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.09.081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementChina University of Mining and TechnologyXuzhouChina
  2. 2.Business SchoolJiangsu Normal UniversityXuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations