Implementing energy retrofits in existing hotel buildings using in-house teams: the decision-making process

Abstract

Purpose Among the existing buildings, hotels use as much as 50% of their total expenses on energy and offer significant opportunities for energy efficiency improvement. Yet, comparatively the level of implementation of energy retrofits (ER) in hotels appear to be low. This has been mainly attributed, inter alia, to the absence of clearly defined process for ensuring the delivery of ER and lack of proactive guidance for project teams to make right decisions. Hence, this study aims to propose an effective decision-making process, which could support the successful adoption and implementation of in-house-led ER projects in existing hotel buildings. Design/methodology/approach Two in-depth case studies were carried out focussing on ER projects led by in-house teams in existing hotel buildings. Data was collected via 14 semi-structured interviews and was analysed through code-based content analysis. Findings The decision-making process for ER projects led by in-house teams was developed, which presents 39 key activities to be performed and 16 key decisions to be made. The parties responsible for these identified actions and decisions as well as the points at which each decision should be made to ensure the success of ER projects was also identified. Originality/value A total of 21 new activities and 10 decisions relevant for in-house team led ER decision-making processes previously not found in literature were identified. It is hoped that the decision-making process developed in this study will serve as a roadmap for the effective adoption and implementation of ER in existing hotel buildings.

Green Retrofitting Simulation for Sustainable Commercial Buildings in China Using a Proposed Multi-Agent Evolutionary Game

“…Zheng et al [54] defined a new angle for utilizing the internal energy rate with varying retrofit levels. Based on an actual case study of existing hotel buildings, Fasna et al [73] developed a decision-making process to assist in the retrofitting process; however, the investment amount requires core consideration. Although this method is feasible for onsite retrofitting, they could not technically determine the best option, and it may ignore life-cycled beneficial options for high investment price.…”