A comparison of impact evaluations ideally to be used for energy efficiency measures and evaluations used in practice: How can we close the gap?

A growing number of energy efficiency (EE) targets at national and European levels make ex-post and ex‐ante evaluations of new and existing EE policies more and more important. Especially for existing measures, a mix of ex‐post evaluations (to determine the actual impact occurred so far) and the expected impacts based on the so far observed impacts (for example up to 2020) are required. National Energy Efficiency Action Plans (NEEAPs) have provided a major drive to the evaluation of energy saving measures. We base our analysis of methods to evaluate energy savings on the MURE database, which contains a structured overview of EE policies in European countries. By comparing impact evaluations actually used with those suggested as best practice, we investigate in this paper progress made with impact evaluation across European countries, which type of impact evaluations are used and which barriers to impact evaluation continue to exist. We discuss practical approaches to enhance EE evaluation by including multiple benefits into EE measures. The MURE database has set up two facilities (impact evaluation facility and multiple benefits facility), which shall support policy makers with easily accessible information on impact evaluation including multiple benefits. In such a manner, good evaluation practices will be spread out further.