Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Analysing co-benefits of the energy conservation and carbon

reduction in China’s large commercial buildings
Ping Jiang a, b, *, Wenbo Dong a, YiHsiu Kung c, Yong Geng d
a
Department of Environmental Science & Engineering, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China
b
United Nations University, Institute of Advanced Studies, Yokohama 220-8502, Japan
c
Urban Affairs & Public Policy, University of Delaware, USA
d
Key Lab of Pollution Ecology and Environmental Engineering, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Energy consumption keeps increasing in China’s building sector with the constant growth of urban
Received 29 June 2012 population and people’s living standard. In order to achieve co-benefits of reducing energy use, green-
Received in revised form house gas (GHG) emissions and energy costs effectively, all respects related to the energy performance in
14 April 2013
the building sector need to be addressed. Considering the fact that over 80% of total energy use in a
Accepted 30 April 2013
Available online 18 May 2013
building’s lifecycle is contributed by the operation stage, the study’s focus is put on this stage for well
understanding the energy consumption and carbon emissions and exploring the approach to achieve the
effectiveness of co-benefits. The energy use in large commercial buildings is 4e6 times higher than
Keywords:
Energy consumption
residential buildings in China, thus IKEA Xuhui Store as one of large shopping malls in Shanghai is
GHG emissions selected as the case study by using the method formed in the study. The outcomes of research show that
Co-benefits the benefit of annual 170 MWh of energy use and 150 tons of CO2e reduction as well as the significant
Large commercial buildings economic benefit have been achieved by implementing different measures in IKEA Xuhui Store between
China 2008 and 2011. Existing investment, technology and capacity barriers to co-benefits approach in a wider
consideration of China’s building sector are described. The assessment for evaluating co-benefits of
cutting energy use and CO2 emissions in the production and demolition stages in a building’s lifecycle are
also addressed by the paper. However, it is very complicated to make a lifecycle assessment on the overall
co-benefits in the building sector because of the complexity and the lack of available data for the
research.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
More than 70% of primary energy is consumed in supporting all
sectors related to the rapid growth urbanization in developing
countries (The UN Population Division, 2011). These sectors include
energy, land use, transportation, building, and water. Among these
sectors, a significant proportion of energy consumption is from the
building sector. Beside energy use for maintaining normal opera-
tion in buildings and keeping occupies’ comfortable living condi-
tions, the materials and services used on constructing buildings,
such as the concrete, steel and plastics that consume energy in their
manufacture and transport process, and the water consumption,
* Corresponding author. Department of Environmental Science & Engineering,
Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China. Tel./fax: þ86 21 65642030.
E-mail addresses: jp338@163.com, jiangping@fudan.edu.cn (P. Jiang).
1
Public buildings refer to non-residential buildings, e.g. office, shopping mall,
hotel, school, hospital buildings except buildings of factory and plant in GB50189-
2005.
wastewater and waste disposal in the building sector also need
energy for running (Reinhard, M. and Yasin, 2011). Using China as
an example, approximately 25% of total energy is consumed in
urban buildings (National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2010; Qiu
et al., 2007). This energy use is associated with over 5 billion
tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) emissions in 2010. With 11% of
annual growth of energy consumption in buildings in recent years,
it is predicated to continue in next decades with the rapid urban
development (Qiu et al., 2007). According to the China’s Statistical
Yearbook 2011, the coal shared about 70% of the total primary en-
ergy consumption in China in 2010(National Bureau of Statistics of
China, 2010). This coal dominated situation makes the consump-
tion of per unit of energy in China would emit higher greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions and other air pollution (e.g. SO2 and NOx) than
many developed countries. For example, the generation of one kWh
electricity in China produces about 0.8 kg CO2e (National
Development and Reform Commission of China, 2009). However,
to generate one kWh electricity in the UK just makes about 0.69 kg
CO2e (Hawkes, 2010).

0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.039
 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
With the people’s increasing demands for comfortable, safe and
healthy buildings, it is clear that fossil fuels consumption and GHG
emissions will constantly increase in the building sector in China. In
order to keep sustainable development and also achieve the energy
conservation and mitigation of climate change, the building sector
should be addressed in the low carbon sustainable development
strategy. In order to achieve the overall energy saving and carbon
reduction effectively, the priority need to be put on well under-
standing of the energy performance and GHG emissions in the
building sector so that an effective approach can be raised to ach-
ieve effectiveness of co-benefits, namely, saving both energy use
and GHG emissions.
However, under the different contexts and purposes, different
organizations made different definitions on co-benefits in terms
GHG emissions reduction and environment protection. US EPA
(2004) defined that co-benefits refers to two or more benefits
resulted from one or one set of measures. IPCC (2001, 2007) also
made their concept on co-benefits: “non-climate benefits resulted
from GHG mitigation policies, and these benefits were clearly
included in the preliminary mitigation policies”. In recent years, the
mainstream of relevant studies in China mainly focus on co-
benefits policies of GHG emissions reduction and energy saving at
national or local (e.g. province and city) levels in China (He et al.,
2010; Xu and Masui, 2009; Aunan et al., 2004; Cao et al., 2008).
Very few works have been given the attention to specific sectors
such as the building sector. Therefore, there are no definitions of co-
benefits that have been made to the building sector. This study puts
the focus on assessing the energy use and carbon emissions and
exploring the approach of achieving the effectiveness of co-benefits
in China’s buildings.
Aspects related to the energy use and GHG emissions in a
building’s lifecycle are very complicated. They have direct and in-
direct connections with other sectors such as land-use, trans-
portation, industry, water and waste. And also the period of whole
building’s lifecycle is very long (e.g. normally over 50 years). It is
extremely difficult to make an accurate assessment on the energy
use and carbon emissions in a lifecycle of building. Thus few studies
on the lifecycle assessment of the co-benefits in terms of energy
conservation and carbon reduction in buildings have been under-
taken. Basically, a building’s lifecycle includes three main stages (i.e.
the production stage, operation stage and the demolition stage)
(Davies, 2006). The operation energy consumes over 80% of total
energy use (Ramesh et al., 2010). Therefore, this paper aims to
evaluate the benefits of both energy conservation and carbon
emissions reduction, as well as highlight the associated energy cost
saving benefit in the operation stage through implementing policy,
management and technology measures. A case studydIKEA Xuhui
shopping mall in Shanghai China is selected for supporting this
analysis. The paper also intends to recommend a lifecycle assess-
ment which also includes the methods of analysing the energy use
and carbon emissions in the production and demolition stages for
comprehensively evaluating the potential co-benefits in the
building sector in China. Relevant barriers to achieve co-benefits
are described in the paper.
2. Opportunities to achieve co-benefits in China’s building
sector
China has issued several energy conservation or GHG emissions
reduction policies in recent years. The most important one is the
national energy saving and emission reduction policy released by
the State Council (Geng, 2011). Such a policy was integrated into
national five-year plan. For instance, within its 11th five-year plan
(2006e2010), this policy targeted energy consumption reduction
per unit GDP by 20% and main pollutants reduction (COD and SO2)
113
per unit GDP by 10%. Such a policy was successfully implemented
during 2006e2010, with a result of significant COD (from 25.49 to
22.95 million tons) and SO2 (from 14.14 to 12.73 million tons)
reduction (Geng and Sarkis, 2012). Therefore, the national govern-
ment sought to continue the pollutant emissions reduction policy in
its 12th five-year plan (2011e2015) and added two new indicators,
ammonium nitrogen and nitrogen oxide pollutants. It also stipu-
lates that the total emission of heavy metals, total phosphorus (TP)
and total nitrogen (TN) will be controlled in sensitive watersheds,
coastal areas, and regions, although without a detailed quantitative
target. Another important national policy is the national climate
change policies and actions which was issued in November 2010,
with a more ambitious objective of reducing the intensity of carbon
dioxide emissions per unit of GDP in 2020 by 40e45% compared
with the level of 2005 (Liu et al., 2012). The National People’s
Congress also approved “Energy Conservation Law of China” in
October 2007, which includes specific rules on energy saving in the
building sector. Under this law, local energy saving regulations and
design standards relevant to the building sector shall be compliant
to this law (Standing Committee Meeting, 2007).
The above policies and laws have fundamental influence on
China’s overall energy conservation and GHG emissions reduction
in all sectors, covering the building sector at both national and local
levels. More specific requirements relevant to energy efficiency in
the building sector have also been issued by China’s central and
local governments, including a series of energy saving and effi-
ciency standards. These standards contain mandate energy saving
objectives in the building sector. For example, the energy con-
sumption in all new and refurbished public buildings1 should be
reduced by 50% compared to the energy performance in public
buildings in 1980s under the standards of GB50189-2005 (Chinese
Construction Ministry, 2005). Some local municipal governments
have also issued their own building energy efficiency design stan-
dards by referring to the national standards and considering the
local realities. For instance, Beijing government issued “Beijing
Public Building Energy Saving Design Standards” which came into
effect in June 2006. The Beijing standards are designed to achieve
the energy saving objective of a 65% reduction in energy con-
sumption compared to the energy use in the same public building
sector in 1980s (Beijing Construction Bureau, 2005).
Many technological measures have also been adopted for saving
energy, such as improving use of environmentally friendly mate-
rials, reusing and reducing waste materials, and applying renew-
able energy. Energy saving and GHG emissions reduction by
technical measures could come from the lifecycle of buildings,
including improving energy efficiency in heating, ventilation, air-
conditioning (HVAC) systems, adopting local materials and recy-
cling materials, etc. More importantly, improving energy manage-
ment, encouraging environmental friendly behaviour change and
awareness rising are cost-effective measures which can lead to
significant co-benefits of reduction of energy use and carbon
emissions (Jiang, 2009).
Under such circumstances, it is important to well understand
the energy performance and raise an approach to gain the effec-
tiveness of co-benefits under the current policies and regulations of
energy saving and carbon reduction in China’s building sector.
Existing barriers to achieve co-benefits in China’s buildings are
described, and how to overcome these barriers is also discussed.
3. Research methodology
3.1. Aspects related to achieve co-benefits in buildings
Generally, there are three stages in one building’s lifecycle: i) the
production stage, ii) the operation stage and iii) the demolition
114 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
stage (Davies, 2006). Energy flow runs through every stage of the
whole lifecycle, generating both GHGs and other pollution.
Theoretically, three main kinds of energy consumption in the
lifecycle of a building (Fig. 1) can be described as follows:
 Embodied energy is the energy utilized during production
stage of the building which includes energy content of all
materials used, transportation to the site, manufacturing, and
construction/erection.
 Operation energy is consumed during the occupation/man-
agement period. It includes energy consumed for heating,
ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC), running appliances
and indoor hot water. Operation energy consumes over 80% of
total energy use in the building’s lifecycle (Ramesh et al., 2010).
The levels of operation energy consumption in the building
sector vary between different countries and even within one
country under different weather zones.
 Demolition energy refers to energy consumed for demolishing
the building and disposing of waste materials
Most of GHG emissions are generated directly and indirectly by
consuming fossil fuel based energy sources. The processes of en-
ergy consumption and carbon emissions are complex in these three
stages. For example, the embodied energy use in the production
stage includes energy consumed from materials manufacturing and
delivery, to on-site construction, in which many other sectors
involved in. In order to achieving the overall co-benefits of energy
conservation and GHG emissions reduction, all relevant aspects in
the lifecycle of one building need to be addressed.
Fig. 1. Lifecycle of the building related to the energy consumption and GHG emissions.
Basically, there are two main kinds of elements which influence
energy performance in the building sector, they are:
 The policy, management and technology capacity aspects. All
national and local policies, such as the energy-efficiency design
standards and building codes, energy saving technologies and
management measures, can influence the energy performance
and should lead to the energy conservation and carbon
reduction.
 All kinds of energy sources used in buildings. From energy
demand side, all the energy resources including the composi-
tion and scale of energy sources, and the costs of energy use are
key elements that should be covered within an evaluation
system with the aim of cutting energy use and carbon
emissions.
Based upon these two elements, a diagram which includes all
aspects related to energy consumption and GHG emissions is
presented in Fig. 2. Under this diagram, the main research
questions are how to evaluate the co-benefits of energy
saving and carbon reduction and how to find an approach to
achieve the effectiveness of co-benefits in buildings. Considering
the fact that 80% of total energy consumption in the building’s
lifecycle is from the operation stage, the focus of analysis is
given to assess the co-benefits in the operation by using the
case study. A lifecycle assessment to evaluate the overall
co-benefits not only from the operation stage, but also from the
production and demolition stages is also recommended in
Section 5.
 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120 115

Fig. 2. Aspects related to achieve co-benefits in the building sector.

Several aspects with the wider context of co-benefits are also
contained in this diagram, such as the public health and pollution
elimination (e.g. the air pollution reduction) benefits. This kind of
co-benefits achieved should be addressed in a building’s lifecycle.
However, the analysis on these benefits is out the range of this
study because the research focus is put on the assessment of energy
use, CO2 emissions and energy cost in the buildings’ operation stage
from the energy demand side in this paper.
HVAC systems, lighting system, equipment and appliances in a
certain period within the metered building/buildings are widely
used for making the assessment and comparisons (Jiang, 2009).
This kind of evaluation can be made by using the following
equations.
Firstly, according to the different energy sources used for the
operation, the total energy use (Eo) and CO2 emissions (Co) can be
determined by:

3.2. Method of evaluating co-benefits in the operation stage of a X

n
Eto ¼ Eoi (1)
building
i¼1

Comparing the production and demolition stages in a building’s

X
n
lifecycle, the operation stage shares a much longer period, and the Cto ¼ Eoi  foi (2)
operation energy use contributes more than 80% of total energy i¼1
consumption (Ramesh et al., 2010). Therefore, most co-benefits of
energy saving, carbon reduction and costs cutting should be ach- Where Eoi is the consumption for the ith energy source (kWh), foi is
ieved in this stage. In order to achieve co-benefits, more attention the local overall emission factor for ith energy source supply which
should be put on the assessment of energy performance in this weights the contribution from renewable energy source (kg
stage. Generally, per square meter energy use and GHG emissions of CO2e/kWh). The regularly updated emission factors for different
116 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
Table 1
Energy-efficiency measures in IKEA Xuhui Store thereafter 2008.
No. Item
1 Energy efficiency improvement
in the lighting system
2 Energy efficiency improvement
in the basement lighting system
3 Energy efficiency improvement
in the storage lighting system
4 Energy efficiency improvement
in air-conditioning and
ventilation systems
5 Energy efficiency improvement
in the escalator system
6 Central solar water heating system
energy resources in different climate zones are issued by the local
governments regularly in China.
Then the energy use and GHG emissions per square meter can
be calculated by:
Eop ¼ Eto=S
Cop ¼ Cto=S
Where Eop is the energy use per m2 (kWh/m2)
Cop is the GHG emissions per m2 (kg CO2e/m2)
S is the total floor area of metered building/buildings (m2).
If adopting one year for comparing the energy use and GHG
emissions per m2 in the metered building/buildings, the units of
Eop and Cop can be expressed as kWh/m2.yr or kgCO2e/m2.yr.
Depending on the benchmarking requirement, these units also can
be weekly and monthly expressed.
Similarly, the baseline of energy use and carbon emission in the
operation stage can be established, and the objectives of energy
saving and carbon reduction can also be set up based on the results
of such evaluations. Furthermore, energy cost reduction (Eor) can
be calculated by:
ESorc ¼ Eoss  Ros
Where Eos is the total energy saving (kWh), Ro is the average cost of
energy use in the operation stage (RMB/kWh).
3.3. Method of case study selection
There are two main categories of buildings in China: residential
buildings and non-residential buildings (e.g. commercial buildings,
factory and plant buildings) (Qiu et al., 2007). According to the
regulations from Chinese Construction Ministry, the commercial
buildings (e.g. shopping malls, offices, and hotels) with floor area is
over 20,000 m2 is defined as the large commercial buildings
(Chinese Construction Ministry, 2005). Jiang and Tovey (2010) point
out that the energy use and carbon emissions in large commercial
building are 4e6 times higher than residential buildings in China.
To achieve overall energy conservation and carbon reduction
within the building sector, priority must thus be given to this type
of building. Thus the core objective of this study intends to assess
Description Year
 179 metal halide lamps replacing. 2008
 79 normal lighting lamps replacing.
 2900 halogen lamps replacing.
1200 fluorescent lamps were 2010
replaced by 708 lamps with
more energy efficiency. The
automatic induction system
was installed.
The Infrared induction lighting system 2010
was installed for 95 lamps. And 20
normal fluorescent lamps were replaced
by low energy Solatube lamps.
Installation of the heat recovering utility 2008
and natural ventilation system.
Installation of the automatic frequency 2008
induction system for the escalators.
Installation of the central solar water 2008
heating system for supplying hot water.
the co-benefits in large commercial buildings in China and explore
the approach to energy saving and carbon reduction as well as the
cost saving benefit through implementing measures of policy,
management and technology based on well understanding on the
energy performance.
(3) Since the operation stage shares the longest period in the life-
cycle of a building and consumes over 80% of total energy, most of
(4) co-benefits can be achieved in this stage (Cheng and Wu, 2009). In
order to test its feasibility, a case study approach is employed. Case
study area is selected from one IKEA shopping mall in Shanghai
China. IKEA Company is the world’s largest furniture and home
products retailer which is controlled by the Dutch corporation
INGKA Holding B.V. There are two IKEA shopping malls in Shanghai,
namely Xuhui Store and Beicai Store. The Xuhui Store was selected
as the case study building with good characters of large commercial
buildings. It is located in Xuhui District, containing one furniture
and home products retail store and one Swedish food restaurant.
The total floor area of IKEA Xuhui Store is 35,000 m2.
Most of data including quantitative and qualitative data adopted
in this study were collected between October and December 2011.
The quantitative data such as the electricity and natural gas con-
sumption and energy costs between 2004 and 2011 were provided
by the Energy Conservation Team of IKEA Shanghai Company which
is responsible for planning and implementing energy saving mea-
sures in IKEA stores in Shanghai. Five equations presented in Sec-
(5) tion 3.2 above are used as the method of quantifying the co-
benefits achieved under the measures undertaken by IKEA Xuhui
Store between 2008 and 2011. In order to further understand how
IKEA Xuhui Store has achieved the co-benefits, four interviews and
seminars were made with staff of the Energy Conservation Team of
IKEA Shanghai Company with questions related the energy saving
measures presented in Table 1. The qualitative data including the
energy management regulations, energy management procedures
and energy saving investment plans were also collected during the
interviews and seminars.
4. The case study
The total energy consumption in IKEA Xuhui Store, including
both the electricity and natural gas consumption between 2004
and 2011 is shown in Fig. 3 based on the calculating results by using
Equation (1).
In 2009, the energy use increased by 8% compared to the level of
2008 because the store increased 2000 m2 retail area in 2009.
 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
Fig. 3. The energy use in IKEA Xuhui Store between 2004 and 2011.
Fig. 4. The energy consumption per m2 in IKEA Xuhui Store between 2004 and 2011.
Based on the local realities, six main energy saving technological
measures have been adopted since 2008 (Table 1). Through
implementing these energy saving measures, the total energy
consumption in IKEA Xuhui Store was reduced by 3.2% between
2009 and 2011, and the annual energy use has been reduced by 1.5%
since 2004.
As mentioned above, even the retail area was increased by
2000 m2 in 2009 and more energy was requested for operating
their business, IKEA Xuhui Store has kept the energy saving rate of
1.5% since 2004. More importantly, one indicator (i.e. the energy
use per square meter of floor area) can give a clear review about
how the energy efficiency IKEA Xuhui Store has achieved for seven
years (Fig. 4) based on the results made through Equation (3). The
energy consumption was reduced by 4.1% per m2 since 2004. It also
means the energy efficiency per unit of floor area (m2) has been
improved at the same rate between 2004 and 2011. Because the
energy sources and composition were kept same rate during 2004e
2011, it also means that the associated carbon intensity has also
been reduced.
Each energy saving measure in Table 1 has achieved significant
co-benefits of reduction of energy consumption and GHG
Table 2
The energy saving and carbon reduction by taking energy-efficiency measures in IKEA Xuhui Store between 2008 and 2011.
No. Item
1 Energy efficiency improvement in the lighting system in the retail area
2 Energy efficiency improvement in the basement lighting system
3 Energy efficiency improvement in the storage lighting system
4 Energy efficiency improvement in air-conditioning and ventilation systems
5 Energy efficiency improvement in the escalator system
6 Central solar water heating system
Total
117
emissions. For instance, about 170,000 kWh is saved per annum by
improving the energy efficiency of air-conditioning and ventilation
systems. Choosing 0.8825 kg.CO2 e/kWh as the carbon emission
factor for the city of Shanghai (National Development & Reform
Commission of China, 2009), the GHG emissions reduction is
about 150,000 kg CO2e every year by using Equation (2). Detailed
information of cutting energy use and carbon emissions through
technical measures is presented in Table 2.
Before adopting the energy saving measures, the investment
plan has been carefully worked out with reasonable action plan and
acceptable risks based on the local conditions in this store. For
instance, the investment to the energy efficiency improvement in
the storage lighting system was RMB11,000 (USD1,736). After tak-
ing this measure, adopting the electricity price in 2008(State
Electricity Regulation Commission, 2008), 32,000 kWh were
saved per annum, that was about saving RMB19,744 (USD3,118) of
energy cost through Equation (5). The investment could be fully
returned within one year. Another example is the investment to the
central solar water heating system was RMB660,000 (USD104,216),
the energy cost saving was RMB120,932 (USD19,096) per year.
Thus, the investment can be returned in 5.46 years with the fixed
price of electricity and no consideration other financial aspects
such as the discounted rate.
If all measures listed in Table 1 were implemented, the whole
investment would have been RMB 5,189,000 (USD819,359), and
according to the total reduction of energy consumption (i.e.
1,493,500 kWh/year, see Table 2), the annual energy cost saving
would have been RMB 921,490 (USD145,506). The return on in-
vestment period could be 5.63 years with no consideration of in-
vestment discounted rate. It was acceptable for the investors such
as IKEA.
IKEA Xuhui Store has made significant achievements of co-
benefits in cutting energy use, reducing carbon emissions and
saving energy cost by taking the energy-efficiency measures since
2008. The investment and technology obstacles have been
completely overcome with the goal of long-term energy conser-
vation and carbon reduction in IKEA Xuhui Store. According to the
information from the interviews and seminars with the energy
managers from this store, the co-benefit approach which has been
taken by IKEA’s is described as follows:
 Complying with the national and local policies to the energy
conservation and environmental protection, taking close col-
laborations with local governments. IKEA Xuhui Store works
closely with the local government of Xuhui District. It has
applied for the funding from the Bureau of Finance of Xuhui
government for supporting its further activities in saving en-
ergy and reducing carbon emissions. Even the funding has not
been approved till this study was finished (i.e. March 2012),
IKEA keeps very good collaboration with the government of
Xuhui District and also gets substantial support such as
consulting services from the local government.
 Besides utilizing technical measures in improving energy effi-
ciency in lighting, air-conditioning, ventilation, and escalator
Energy saving (kWh/year) Carbon reduction (kg.CO2e/year)
1,107,500 977,400
170,000 150,000
20,000 17,650
196,000 173,000
1,493,500 1,318,050
118 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
systems, and using solar energy for supplying hot water, this
store has its own energy management system which contains
procedures and schemes for effectively managing energy per-
formance in this store. In order to make sound monitoring and
valuation on the energy performance, a third audit agent has
been appointed for this. All investment plans have been formed
carefully and implemented based on local realities with the
reasonable and acceptable return period.
 Establishing an energy management team that is responsible
for the energy performance. The general manager of this store
is also the leader of the energy management team. The annual
energy saving objectives, feasibility studies and action plan are
made by the team. Related awareness raising, information
sharing and basic training are undertaken regularly among the
whole staff. Special training programmes are also designed for
the team members. All these measures have strengthened the
capacity of implementing the energy saving and carbon
reduction activities.
 Actively engaging in the activities to low carbon sustainability
in the local community. Some events have been made by IKEA
for awareness raising in local schools, district centers, and
youth centers. Environmental protection and energy saving
campaigns and advertisements have been taken in this store
for encouraging more public engagement with IKEA.
IKEA Xuhui Store is a special case in this research for analysing
the implementation of co-benefits approach with very positive
outcomes in achieving the reduction of energy consumption, car-
bon emissions and energy cost in the building sector. However,
studies find that over 80% of urban buildings in China haven’t
adopted or just taken least energy saving measures (Jiang, 2009;
Jiang et al., 2007). And three main kinds of investment, technology
and capacity barriers still exist in the process of taking activities of
energy saving and carbon reduction. In order to overcome these
barriers and achieve the long-term low carbon sustainable devel-
opment in China’s building sector, the co-benefits approach must
be addressed with the comprehensive consideration of the energy
consumption and carbon emissions in the building section in China.
5. Lifecycle assessment on co-benefits in buildings
Energy is used directly for maintaining normal operation in
buildings and keeping occupants’ comfort living conditions and
indirectly for the materials and services on constructing buildings
in the manufacture and transport process, and the water con-
sumption, wastewater and waste treatment in the building sector.
Considering the high GHG emissions and air pollution generated in
the building sector because of the coal dominated energy con-
sumption in China, it is more meaningful to address the co-benefits
approach to reduce energy consumption, GHG and pollution
emissions in the overall urban sustainable development strategy.
All aspects related to the energy performance in the lifecycle of
buildings should be assessed with the aim of achieving the co-
benefits effectively.
The energy flow and performance are very complex in the
production, operation and demolishment stages in the lifecycle of
buildings. Basically, two main kinds of elements significantly in-
fluence the energy consumption in buildings, including the mea-
sures of policy, technology and management, and the energy
sources used in the lifecycle of buildings. In order to achieve the co-
benefits in the building sector, the well understanding on the
interconnection of energy use, carbon emissions and air pollution
in buildings is necessary.
As presented in Figs. 1 and 2, many aspects related to the energy
performance in three stages in the lifecycle of buildings especially
in the production and demolition stages are very complicated and
they also have direct and indirect connections with other sectors
such as the land-use, transport, industry and waste. A compre-
hensive lifecycle assessment method to evaluate overall co-benefits
in a building’s lifecycle should be given more attention.
For the energy use and associated CO2 and air pollution emis-
sions in the production stage, it is important to consider all aspects
related to the co-benefits achieved from producing and trans-
porting materials, as well as on-site construction/erection by using
the lifecycle assessment method. However, a huge database which
includes the energy use for each material’s producing and trans-
porting, and the on-site construction/erection is needed. The en-
ergy sources used and related emission factors for each energy
source are also necessary in the database. Without sufficient data, it
is impossible to make the analysis on co-benefits in the production
stage. This is why the study didn’t find a suitable case study for
evaluating co-benefits in the production stage of building.
For the demolishment stage of buildings, there are three main
categories of energy consumption: the energy use from on-site
demolition, the energy use for transporting wastes and the en-
ergy use for wastes disposal. As the same problem of data avail-
ability exists in adopting the lifecycle assessment method, it is
extremely difficult to undertake the research for analysing the
energy consumption and carbon emissions in the demolishment
stage because of the lack of data. Therefore, there are no available
cases can be used in this study.
However, it is important to achieve the overall co-benefits in the
building sector through addressing the energy conservation, car-
bon and air pollution reduction in the whole lifecycle of buildings,
which would be the focus of the future research.
6. Barriers and constraints to achieve co-benefits in buildings
The increasing urban population and their growing demand on
higher living conditions is a great challenge for the long-term low
carbon sustainable development in China’s building sector. In order
to understand the existing barriers and constraints substantially
prevent the achievement of the co-benefits of energy conservation,
GHG emissions and air pollution reduction, a wider consideration is
made to China’s both non-residential and residential buildings
based on further literature review and empirical analysis under-
taken in this study.
Firstly, some of current national and local policies are not sound
enough and need to be updated and improved for gaining
continued reduction of GHG emissions and pollution with the
process of urban development. For example, the energy efficiency
design standards (GB50189-2005), should be updated and reflect
the latest situation of energy performance in public buildings
(Jiang, 2011).
Another issue that should be addressed is that many local pol-
icies’ focus is only on the elimination of air, water and waste
pollution, but not the reduction of GHG emissions. For example, 218
projects designed to reduce the local pollution have been imple-
mented under the main policy entitled “Three-Year Action Plan” on
the environmental protection in Baoshan District Shanghai be-
tween 2009 and 2011 (Shanghai Municipal Development and
Reform Commission, 2012). However, the GHG emissions reduc-
tion perspectives have been ignored in most of these projects under
the “Three-Year Action Plan”.
In 1998, the Chinese State Council promulgated “The Notice on
Accelerating the Urban Housing System Reform and Hosing Con-
struction”, which firstly established a market-oriented building and
construction industry. This industry has become a key contributor
to the whole urban economic development in China, and it keeps
the growth by approximately 30% every year (Zhang et al., 2007).
 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
However, the energy efficiency and carbon reduction are always
considered as “second issues” or “less important points” in the
building sector (Li et al., 2009). Therefore, investment barriers have
prevented the co-benefits of energy saving, GHG and pollution
reduction. Three financial barriers include:
i) Most investors do not regard energy efficiency improvements
in the building sector as their priority unless strong legislative
and attractive financial incentives have been provided to
them.
ii) Applying new and advanced technologies for saving energy
consumption in buildings requires higher investment and
face more risks than normal and popular measures. Both
maintenance and operation costs in energy efficient buildings
are higher than normal buildings.
iii) A lack of knowledge or experience in developing and utilizing
energy saving technologies. Limited knowledge and infor-
mation on the costs and benefits of energy saving and envi-
ronmental protection in the building sector in China further
impeded the investors to adopt these measures.
About 80% of buildings haven’t taken any measures at all or
just adopt least activities to the energy conservation, carbon
reduction and pollution elimination because of technology bar-
riers (Jiang, 2009; Jiang et al., 2007). Normally, new technologies
often need high investment in R&D, high costs of purchasing and
operating. The adoption of new and advanced energy saving
technologies and equipment may bring higher risks for investors
and operators. Furthermore, the integration of different new
technologies in a system and the effective operation with regards
to energy performance in buildings require higher investment. In
addition, a lot of old or prevailing technologies have been
adopted for a long period, preventing the application of new
technologies. Finally, the lack of knowledge, experiences, and
skills is another barrier to the utilization and operation of these
new technologies and systems for achieving co-benefits in cut-
ting GHG emissions, pollution and energy costs in buildings in
China.
The capacity barriers, such as the lack of effective management
and professional knowledge and abilities, also need to be
addressed. The good management to the overall improvement of
energy performance can be made through not only the good
operation and adoption of technologies and systems, but also car-
rying out comprehensive action plans to achieve the long-term of
co-benefits in buildings. According to the surveys made by Jiang
(2011), around 70e80% of current urban buildings, especially the
public buildings in China haven’t taken any effective energy man-
agement with the co-benefits objective. The lack of good energy
management and professional staff cause the capacity barriers.
Otherwise, the lack of active engagements from stakeholders (e.g.
investors, developers, usurers of buildings) who have different
benefits in energy saving and carbon reduction activities also cause
more or less capacity barriers.
7. Conclusions
Considering the fact that over 80% of total energy consumption
of a building’s lifecycle is shared by the operation stage, the pri-
ority should be given to assess the co-benefits in this stage and
also address barriers to achieve the effectiveness of co-benefits.
Because the energy use in China’s large commercial building is
4e6 times higher than residential buildings, these large com-
mercial buildings play an important role in the long-term low
carbon sustainable development in the building sector in China,
the focus of study is put on analysing the co-benefits achieved
119
under various measures and exploring the approach to achieve co-
benefits effectively by using a case study from IKEA Xuhui Store in
Shanghai China. The analysis is made in the paper by adopting the
method formed in the paper for evaluating the co-benefits in the
operation stage. The outcomes show that 170 MWh of energy
consumption was saved per annum which is equivalent to 150
tons of CO2e reduced through implementing 6 technological
measures between 2008 and 2011 in IKEA Xuhui Store. And the
annual energy efficiency has been improved by 4.1% between 2004
and 2011 through measures of policy, management, and technol-
ogy. More importantly, IKEA Xuhui Store has achieved the energy
cost saving benefit during implementing the measures under the
reasonable investment plans and good energy performance man-
agement. Based on the further literature review and empirical
analysis, the barriers to the co-benefit approach including the
investment, technology and capacity barriers are discussed for the
building sector in China. Thus more integrated efforts needed to
be made for tackling these barriers by considering the local
realities.
Based on outcomes of this study, it is worthy to make further
research to investigate the approach to achieve the effectiveness of
co-benefits not only in large commercial buildings, but also in other
non-residential and residential buildings in China. Furthermore, in
order to achieve overall co-benefits in China’s building sector, all
aspects related to the energy use, carbon emissions and pollution in
a building’s lifecycle should be addressed. A comprehensive life-
cycle assessment method is necessary and it is worthy to find
suitable case studies with sufficient data for testing the method in
the future research.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the Ministry of the
Environment Government of Japan (MOEJ) and the United Nations
University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) for their sup-
port in this study. This study was also supported by Chinese
Academy of Sciences (2008-318), Natural Science Foundation of
China (71033004) and the Ministry of Science and Technology
(2011BAJ06B01).
References
Aunan, K., Jinghua, F., Haakon, V., Kenneth, O., Hans, M.S., 2004. Co-benefits of
climate policydlessons learned from a study in Shanxi, China. Energy Policy 32
(4), 567e581,.
Beijing Construction Bureau, 2005. Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Public
Buildings. China Architecture and Building Press, Beijing.
Cao, j., Mun, S., Dale, W., 2008. Co-benefits of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies in
China: An Integrated Top-down and Bottom-up Modeling Analysis. http://
www.rff.org/rff/Documents/EfD-DP-08-10.pdf (accessed 19.12.12.).
Cheng, M., Wu, T., 2009. Researh on the Building Energy Consumption and Energy
Saving Based on Life-cycle Analysis. http://wenku.baidu.com/view/f82b485e
312b3169a451a4fb.html (accessed 09.10.12.).
Chinese Construction Ministry, 2005. Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of
Public Buildings (GB50189-2005). China Architecture and Building Press,
Beijing.
Davies, T., 2006. Developing Fully-integrated Approaches to Low Carbon Design,
Practice and Management. Report of UEA, p. 45.
Geng, Y., 2011. Eco-indicators: improve China’s sustainability targets. Nature
477, 162.
Geng, Y., Sarkis, J., 2012. Achieving national emission reduction target: China’s
new challenge and opportunity. Environmental Science and Technology 46,
107e108.
Hawkes, A.D., 2010. Estimating marginal CO2 emissions rates for national electricity
systems. Energy Policy 38 (10), 5977e5987.
He, K., Lei, K., Pan, X., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Q., Chen, D., 2010. Co-benefits from energy
policies in China. Energy 35 (11), 4265e4272.
IPCC, 2001. Chapter7, IPCC Third Assessment Report. http://www.grida.no/
publications/other/ipcc_tar/ (accessed 09.10.12.).
IPCC, 2007. Chapter 4,7,11, IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007
(AR4). http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_rep
orts.shtml.
120 P. Jiang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 58 (2013) 112e120
Jiang, P., 2009. A Low Carbon Sustainable Strategy Using CDM Methodological
Approach to Large Commercial Buildings in Beijing and Shanghai (PhD thesis).
University of East Anglia.
Jiang, P., 2011. Analysis of national and local energy-efficiency design standards in
the public building sector in China. Energy for Sustainable Development 15,
443e450.
Jiang, P., Tovey, K., 2010. Overcoming barriers to implementation of carbon reduc-
tion strategies in large commercial buildings in China. Building and Environ-
ment 45 (4), 856e864.
Jiang, Y., Li, Q., Li, Z., Gao, Y., Zhu, X., We, i Q., Yan, D., 2007. Energy Saving in Building
Sector in China. Building Energy Saving Workshop Tsinghua University, Beijing.
Li, j., Colombier, M., Barbier, C., 2009. Shaping Climate Policy in Urban Infrastruc-
ture: An Insight into the Building Sector in China. http://www.iddri.org/
Publications/Collections/Analyses/an_0903_JunLi_BuildingChina.pdf (accessed
08.01.12.).
Liu, Z., Geng, Y., Lindner, S., Guan, D., 2012. Uncovering China’s greenhouse gas
emission from regional and sectoral perspectives. Energy 45, 1059e1068.
National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2010. China Statistical Yearbook. http://www.
stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2010/indexch.htm (accessed 08.02.12.).
National Development and Reform Commission of China, 2009. Released in 2009 on
China’s Regional Power Grid Baseline Emission Factor of Announcement. http://
qhs.ndrc.gov.cn/qjfzjz/t20090703_289357.htm (accessed 25.01.12.).
National Development & Reform Commission of China, 2009b. 2008 Baseline
Emission Factors for Regional Power Grids in China. http://www.sepacec.com/
cecen/cdm1/Information/Domestic_Information/200807/
P020080731475294834048.pdf (accessed 09.12.11.).
Qiu, B., Jiang, Y., Lin, H., Peng, X., Wu, Y., Cui, L., et al., 2007. Annual Report on China
Building Energy Efficiency. China Architecture and Building Press, Beijing,
pp. 23e45.
Ramesh, T., Ravi, P., Shukla, K.K., 2010. Life cycle analysis of buildings: an overview.
Energy and Buildings 42, 1592e1600.
Reinhard, M., Yasin, S., 2011. Impacts of urbanization on urban structures and en-
ergy demand: what can we learn for urban energy planning and urbanization
management? Sustainable Cities and Society 1 (1), 45e53.
Shanghai Municipal Development & Reform Commission, 2012. Report of Three-
year Action Plan in Boshan District. http://fgw.sh.gov.cn/main?main_
colid¼366&top_id¼316&main_artid¼19895 (accessed 12.01.12.).
Standing Committee Meeting, 2007. Energy conservation law of China. In: The 28th
National People’s Congress of China.
State Electricity Regulation Commission, 2008. Shanghai Electricity Company’s
Electrcity Prices in Shanghai. http://www.12398.gov.cn/html/information/
133405300/133405300201100011.shtml (accessed 11.10.12.).
The UN Population Division, 2011. The National Accounts Statistics Database. http://
unstats.un.org/unsd/snaama/introduction.asp (accessed 20.12.11.).
US EPA, 2004. Integrated Environmental Strategies Handbook. http://nepis.epa.gov/
EPA/html/DLwait.htm?url¼/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey¼P10033EF.PDF (accessed 08
.10.12.).
Xu, Y., Masui, T., 2009. Local air pollutant emission reduction and ancillary carbon
benefits of SO2 control policies: application of AIM/CGE model to China.
European Journal of Operational Research 198 (1), 315e325.
Zhang, H., Weng, S., Zhou, X., 2007. Housing price Fluctuations across China: an equi-
librium mechanism perspective. Tsinghua Science and Technology 12 (3), 302e308.