Attitudes, Ability and Willingness: Rethinking Split-Incentives of Non-domestic Building Tenure to Overcome Energy Inertia

  • Kay Emblen-PerryEmail author
Part of the Climate Change Management book series (CCM)


Split-incentives of non-domestic building tenure that divide the benefits of implementing energy efficient technologies and behaviours between property owners and users are generally recognised to act as a financial barrier to the adoption of energy efficient interventions in UK non-domestic properties. Despite the extensive availability of cost effective energy efficient interventions that could overcome financial spilt-incentives for UK non-domestic building owners and users, widespread energy inertia prevails. This suggests the barriers presented by split-incentives of ownership exert an influence beyond financial decision making. Rethinking the impact of split-incentives may therefore assist in unlocking energy inertia and contribute to the mitigation of climate change. This paper reports the findings of a qualitative survey undertaken to investigate the impact of non-domestic building ownership on the owners’ and users’ ability and willingness to adopt energy efficient and conservation technologies and behaviours. It explores the impacts of ownership beyond the reach of financial disincentives to adopt energy efficiency improvement and identifies four types of constraint affecting non-domestic building owners’ and users’ energy behaviours; ownership constraints, financial constraints, knowledge constrains and regulatory constraints. The paper extends the understanding of the scale and scope of split-incentives of non-domestic building ownership for energy performance improvement within non-domestic buildings and presents a wider scope of the split of incentives of ownership than previously established. It also explores the opportunity this new understanding offers for reforming UK energy policies. Findings suggest the impacts of tenure are influential beyond monetary considerations for non-domestic building owners and users and include practical and attitudinal barriers from relationships, contractual constraints and ownership concerns which drive energy inertia through the Owner-User Stalemate.


Energy efficiency Non-domestic buildings Tenure Owners Users Energy inertia Owner–user stalemate 


  1. Axon, C. J., Bright, S. J., Dixon, T. J., Janda, K. B., & Kolokotroni, M. (2012). Building communities: Reducing energy use in tenanted commercial property. Building Research and Information, 40(4), 461–472. Accessed October 14, 2016.
  2. Bright, S, (2010). Carbon reduction and commercial leases in the UK. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 2(3), 218–223. Accessed October 14, 2016.
  3. Carbon Trust. (2013). Energy efficiency in non-domestic buildings. Accessed September 15, 2016.
  4. Committee on Climate Change. (2015a). 2010 to 2015 government policy: Greenhouse gas emissions. Report for Department of Energy and Climate Change. Accessed November 3, 2016.
  5. Committee on Climate Change. (2015b). Reducing emissions and preparing for climate change: 2015 Progress Report to Parliament. Accessed December 12, 2016.
  6. de Groot, H. L., Verhoef, E. T., & Nijkamp, P. (1999). Energy saving by firms: Decision-making, barriers and policies. Energy Economics, 23(6), 717–740. Accessed November 22, 2016.
  7. de Jong, R. (2013). Green premium or grey discount: What’s the value of green workspaces for commercial building occupiers? Accessed June 14, 2015.
  8. DeCanio, S. J. (1993). Barriers within firms to energy-efficient investments. Energy Policy, 21(9), 906–914. Accessed November 22, 2015.
  9. Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. (2015). Small business survey 2014: SME employers. Accessed October 12, 2016.
  10. Dixon, T. (2009). Urban land and property ownership patterns in the UK: trends and forces for change. Land Use Policy, 26, 43–53. Accessed November 22, 2015.
  11. Emblen-Perry, K. (2016). Building owner vs. energy user: A split incentive for energy reduction. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
  12. Emblen-Perry, K., & Duckers, L. (2016). Energy management in non-domestic buildings—a new perspective to provoke reduced carbon emissions. In Sustainability Development Research at Universities in the United Kingdom World Sustainability Series. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Environmental Audit Committee. (2011). Budget 2011 and environmental taxes. Accessed 23 October, 2016.
  14. Fawcett, J. (2010). Department of energy and climate change: Non constrained sector research. Accessed 12 October, 2016.
  15. Federation of Small Businesses. (2016). Small business statistics. Accessed December 19, 2016.
  16. Janda, K. B. (2008). Implications of the ownership of buildings in the U.S. and U.K.: An exploration of ENERGY STAR buildings and the energy efficiency accreditation scheme.…/7_358. Accessed 14 June, 2015.
  17. Janda, K. B. (2009). Buildings don’t use energy: People do. Architectural Science Review, 54, 15–22. Accessed 14 June, 2015.
  18. Janda, K. B. (2014). Building communities and social potential; between and beyond organisations and individuals in commercial properties. Energy Policy, 67, 48–55. Accessed November 22, 2015.
  19. Kelly, M. J. (2010). Energy efficiency, resilience to future climates and long term sustainability: The role of the built environment. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 368, 1083–1089. Accessed November 29, 2015.
  20. Kontokosta, C. E. (2016). Modeling the energy retrofit decision in commercial office buildings. Energy and Buildings, 131, 1–20. Accessed April 15, 2017.
  21. Low Carbon Innovation Co-ordination Group. (2012). Technology innovation needs assessment non-domestic building summary report. Accessed June 21, 2015.
  22. Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2007). Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Climate Change, 17, 445–459. Accessed June 21, 2015.
  23. Lyon, T. P., & Maxwell, J. W. (2002). Voluntary approaches to environmental regulation. In M. Franzini & A. Nicita (Eds.), Economics institutions and environmental policy (pp. 75–120). Vermont: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. McAllister, I., Quartermaine, R., & McWilliams, F. (2009). Costing energy efficiency improvements in existing commercial buildings. Accessed June 23, 2016.
  25. Peacock, A., Banfill, P. F., Turan, S., Jenkins, D., Ahadzi, G., Bowles. G., et al. (2008). Reducing CO2 emissions through refurbishment of non-domestic UK buildings. Accessed November 18, 2016.
  26. Schleich, J., & Gruber, E. (2008). Beyond case studies: Barriers to energy efficiency in commerce and the services sector. Energy Economics, 30, 449. Accessed November 12, 2016.
  27. Scottish Government. (2015). Improving energy performance and emissions in existing non-domestic buildings. Accessed October 28, 2016.
  28. Sorrell, S. (2015). Reducing energy demand: A review of issues, challenges and approaches. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 47, 74–82. Accessed June 22, 2015.
  29. UK Green Building Council. (2011). Carbon reductions in existing non-domestic buildings. Accessed October 12, 2016.
  30. Unruh, G. (2013). The sweet spot of sustainability strategy. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(1), 16–19. Accessed October 19, 2016.
  31. Warde, P. (2010). Low carbon futures and high carbon pasts: Policy challenges in historical perspective. Accessed September 18, 2015.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Worcester Business SchoolUniversity of WorcesterWorcesterUK

Personalised recommendations