COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EVALUATION EVALUATION OF DIRECTIVE 2012/27/EU ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY Accompanying the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on energy efficiency (recast)
Date: 2021-07-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Energy, European Commission
Subjects: EU energy policy, adaptation to climate change, energy consumption, energy cooperation, energy efficiency, energy saving, energy use, reduction of gas emissions

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 14.7.2021  SWD(2021) 625 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EVALUATION  EVALUATION OF DIRECTIVE 2012/27/EU ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY Accompanying the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council   on energy efficiency (recast) {COM(2021) 558 final} - {SEC(2021) 558 final} - {SWD(2021) 623 final} - {SWD(2021) 624 final} - {SWD(2021) 626 final} - {SWD(2021) 627 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 6 

1.1. 

Purpose and scope of the evaluation ............................................................ 7 

2. 

BACKGROUND TO THE INTERVENTION ..................................................................................... 9 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.2.1. 

2.2.2. 

Description of the policy intervention and its objectives ............................. 9 

Baseline ...................................................................................................... 13 

Problems at the time of the adoption of the EED ....................................... 13 

How would the situation evolve without the EED in place........................ 14 

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EED / STATE OF PLAY ................................................................. 15 

3.1. 

3.2. 

Description of the current situation ............................................................ 15 

Status of transposition and infringements .................................................. 17 

4.  METHOD............................................................................................................................................ 18 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

Short description of methodology .............................................................. 18 

Data collection and tools ............................................................................ 20 

Limitations and robustness of findings....................................................... 20 

5.  ANALYSIS AND ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS .......................................... 21 

5.1. 

Effectiveness............................................................................................... 21 

Evaluation Question 1: To what extent has the objective of the EED to 

5.1.1. 
promote energy efficiency in the EU in view of reaching the Union’s headline targets 
on energy efficiency for 2020 and 2030 been achieved? .............................................. 21 

5.1.1.1. 
the intervention? ........................................................................................................... 22 

Sub-question a: What have been impacts in different sectors achieved with 

5.1.1.2. 
Sub-question b: To what extent are the EU and the Member States on track 
to achieve their 2020 and 2030 targets? ...................................................................... 23 

Sub-question c: Did the EED have other positive or negative impacts 

5.1.1.3. 
beyond its main objective, such as reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and 
energy imports. ............................................................................................................. 26 

5.1.2. 
Evaluation question 2: To what extent can the observed effects be credited 
to the EED? In what areas was the intervention more / less successful and what were 
the drivers/ impeding factors behind successes / failures? .......................................... 27 

5.1.3. 
affect reaching the objectives of the EED? ................................................................... 52 

Evaluation question 3: What external factors have affected / continue to 

5.2. 

Efficiency ................................................................................................... 54 

5.2.1. 
Evaluation question 4: To what extent the costs involved in the 
implementation of the EED have been justified given the changes/effects that have been 

1 

 
 
achieved (including wider benefits)? To what extent were the costs borne by different 
stakeholder groups proportionate to the benefits it has generated? ............................ 55 

Evaluation question 5: To what extent were the scale of costs and 

5.2.2. 
administrative burden borne by different stakeholder groups proportionate to the 
benefits it has generated? ............................................................................................. 59 

5.2.3. 
Evaluation question 6: What were the factors that influenced the efficiency 
of policy intervention and the implementation of the EED? ......................................... 61 

Evaluation question 7: Are there significant differences in costs (or 

5.2.4. 
benefits) amongst Member States, and if yes, what is causing them? How do these 
differences link to the intervention?.............................................................................. 61 

5.3. 

Relevance ................................................................................................... 63 

5.1.8. 
Evaluation question 8: Did the Directive provide the right framework to 
reach the 20% energy efficiency target? To what extent is the EED framework still 
relevant in promoting energy efficiency in the EU? ..................................................... 63 

5.1.9. 
Evaluation question 9: How well do the original objectives for promoting 
energy efficiency (including its role in achieving GHG emission reduction objectives) 
to ensure the achievement of the EU headline 2020 and 2030 targets still correspond 
to the needs and the latest technological or environmental developments in the EU, in 
particular in the context of the European Green Deal? ............................................... 68 

5.1.10. 
citizens?  72 

Evaluation question 10: How relevant is the EU intervention to EU 

5.4. 

Coherence ................................................................................................... 74 

Evaluation question 11: To what extent is the EED internally coherent? To 

5.1.11. 
what extent are the different articles and provisions of the EED working together 
coherently to achieve the overarching objective if the EED? ...................................... 74 

5.1.12. 
Evaluation question 12: To what extent is the EED coherent with other EU 
interventions on energy efficiency? .............................................................................. 75 

5.1.13. 
Evaluation question 13: To what extent is the EED coherent with other EU 
interventions in a wider energy and climate domain? .................................................. 77 

5.5. 

EU added value........................................................................................... 83 

5.1.14. 
Evaluation question 14: What is the additional value resulting from the EU 
intervention(s) having an EU level target and EU measures, compared to what would 
be achieved by Member States acting at national level without EU intervention? ...... 83 

5.1.15. 
stopping or withdrawing the EED? .............................................................................. 86 

Evaluation question 15: What would be the most likely consequences of 

5.1.16. 

Evaluation question 16: Are there any parts of the EED that are obsolete?
86 

6. 

CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 88 

ANNEX 1: PROCEDURAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 92 

2 

 
 
ANNEX 2: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ....................................................................................... 93 

ANNEX 3: METHODS AND ANALYTICAL MODELS ........................................................................ 102 

ANNEX 4: FIGURES AND TABLES ....................................................................................................... 105 

3 

 
Glossary 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

AR 

CA EED 

CBA 

CHAP 

CHP 

Energy Efficiency Annual Reports under the EED 

Concerted Action of the Energy Efficiency Directive 

Cost-benefit analysis 

Central registry for complaints and enquiries 

Combined heat and power generation, or cogeneration 

Commission 

European Commission, unless specified otherwise 

CTP 

Directive 

EE 

EED 

EPBD 

EEOS 

EnPC 

ESCO 

ESR 

ESIF 

ETS 

Climate Target Plan 

Energy Efficiency Directive, unless specified otherwise 

Energy efficiency 

Energy Efficiency Directive (2012/27/EU)  

Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (2010/31/EU) 

Energy efficiency Obligation Schemes 

Energy performance contracting 

Energy services company 

Effort Sharing Regulation 

European Structural and Investment Funds 

Emissions Trading System 

EU PDA 

EU Project Development Assistance 

FEC 

GHG 

GPP 

HVAC 

H2020 

IEM 

Final energy consumption 

Greenhouse gas  

Green public procurement 

Heating, ventilation and air conditioning 

Horizon 2020 

Internal Energy Market legislation 

4 

 
 
 
ICT 

IRR 

ktoe 

MS 

Mtoe 

M&V 

NAV 

NECP 

NEEAP 

NZEB 

OPC 

PEC 

RES 

REDII 

SME 

SWD 

TCO 

Information and Communication Technologies 

Internal Rate of Return  

kilotonnes of oil equivalent 

Member State(s) 

Million tonnes of oil equivalent 

Monitoring and verification 

Net Present Value 

National Energy and Climate Plan 

National Energy Efficiency Action Plan 

Nearly Zero Energy Building 

Open public consultation 

Primary energy consumption 

Renewable Energy 

Renewable Energy Directive (2018/2001/EU) 

Small- and medium-sized enterprise  

Staff Working Document 

Total Costs of Ownership 

5 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Efficient use of energy is key to achieve the European Green Deal1 objectives. It allows 
cost-effective delivery of the EU’s current and future climate and clean energy ambitions 
and  contributes  to  other  EU  policy  objectives.  Energy  Efficiency  First2  is  a  guiding 
principle of EU energy policy, and is highlighted in  the European Green Deal as a key 
means  to  decarbonise  the  energy  system  by  2050.  The  EU  has  set  headline  targets  to 
increase energy efficiency by 20% for 2020 and by at least 32.5% for 2030. These targets 
are embedded in the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED)3.  

The European Union has set the goal to decarbonise its economy by 2050. To this end, , 
the  Commission  has  proposed  in  the  Communication  on  the  European  Green  Deal  to 
increase the EU greenhouse gas emissions target to at least 50% and towards 55% in a 
responsible way by 2030. In this context, the Commission also announced that it would 
present an impact-assessed plan to increase the EU’s greenhouse gas emission reductions 
target  for  2030  and  committed  to  “review  and  propose  to  revise,  where  necessary,  the 
relevant  energy  legislation  by  June  2021”,  including  Directive  2012/27/EU  on  energy 
efficiency (EED)4. 

The  Commission  adopted  the  Climate  Target  Plan  Communication  on  17  September 
20205,  putting  forward  an  emissions  reduction  target  of  at  least  55%  by  2030  as  a 
balanced,  realistic,  and  prudent  pathway  to  climate  neutrality  by  2050.  The  Plan  also 
highlights that, to achieve the 55% level of greenhouse gas emission reductions, there is a 
need to significantly step up energy efficiency efforts (to 36-37% for final and 39-41% 
for primary energy consumption) by 2030, from the current EU headline target of at least 
32.5%. In this context, the Commission confirmed the need to revise the relevant climate 
and energy legislation, including the EED. 

In addition, on 17 September 2020, the Commission also published its assessment of the 
final National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) of the Member States. The assessment 
shows  that  Member  States’  national  contributions  in  these  Plans  do  not  add  up  to  the 
existing  2030  headline  EU  energy  efficiency  target  of  32.5%6.  The  gap  is  equal  to  2.8 

1 COM(2019) 640 final 

2 Definition provided in Article 18(2) of the Regulation, EU(2018)1999 on the Governance of the Energy 

Union and Climate Action 

3 Directive 2012/27/EU 

4 Annex to the Green Deal Communication, page 2 
5 COM(2020) 562 final  

6 COM/2020/564 final 

6 

 
 
  
                                                 
percentage  points  for  primary  energy  consumption  and  3.1  percentage  points  for  final 
energy consumption. 

In  case  the  Member  States’  contributions  do  not  reach  the  required  ambition  level  of 
32.5%,  the  Commission  may  propose  additional  EU-wide  measures  in  line  with  the 
Governance Regulation7. 

Therefore,  because  of  the  Green  Deal  and  the  Climate  Target  Plan  and  the  recognised 
role energy  efficiency needs to  have to  achieve the 2050 decarbonisation objective, the 
process to review and revise the EED formally started in August 2020.  

This  evaluation  report  concludes  the  review  process  of  the  EED.  The  report  serves  as 
input for the impact assessment of the EED revision. Chapter 1 introduces the EED and 
describes the purpose and the scope of the evaluation. Chapter 2 outlines the background 
of the policy intervention that the EED represents. It sets out the baseline of the EED and 
describes  what  would  happen  without  the  EED  in  place.  Chapter  3  provides  a  short 
overview  of  the  current  situation,  including  the  status  of  the  transpositions  by  Member 
States and infringement procedures. Subsequently, Chapter 4 describes the method used 
for this evaluation and gives a brief overview of the stakeholder consultations. In Chapter 
5,  the  actual  evaluation  takes  place,  based  on  the  evaluation  criteria  of  the  better 
regulation  guidelines.  Chapter  6  summarises  the  concluding  findings  of  this  evaluation 
report. 

1.1. 

Purpose and scope of the evaluation 

The EED was adopted in 2012 to promote energy efficiency across the EU, and remove 
barriers and overcoming market failures that impede efficiency in energy supply and use 
in different sectors with a view to achieve the EU headline energy efficiency targets for 
2020  and  2030.  It  was  subject  to  a  first,  limited  revision  in  2018  as  part  of  the  Clean 
Energy for all Europeans package, which added the EU target for 2030, modified a few 
provisions  and  also  included  a  requirement  for  a  further  review  of  the  Directive  every 
five years, and a possible upwards revision of that target.  

This  evaluation  covers  the  full  scope  of  the  EED,  except  for  those  elements  already 
revised  as  part  of  the  Clean  Energy  for  all  Europeans  package8.  It  assesses  the 
implementation of the EED in all 28 Member States since its entry into force in 20129.  

This  evaluation  will  consider  whether  the  framework  of  the  EED  is  fit  to  achieve  its 
objectives  of  reaching  the  headline  EU  energy  efficiency  targets  for  2020  and  2030 
especially in the context of the higher climate target for 2030. In addition, the evaluation 

7 Regulation (EU) 2018/1999  

8 Amending Directive EU/2018/2002 

9 Article 24(15) of the amending Directive EU/2018/2002 requires to carry out a general evaluation by 28 

February 2024 

7 

 
 
                                                 
will  examine  whether  the  EED  is  fit  to  overcome  remaining  regulatory  and  non-
regulatory barriers, and market failures, preventing energy efficiency to be fully part of 
the  energy  system.  It  will  also  assess  whether  there  are  shortcomings,  gaps  and 
weaknesses for the existing measures to deliver on their expected results.  

More specifically, as part of the general evaluation of the EED, the Commission has also 
assessed the following aspects (as required by Article 24(15)): 

(a)    “Whether  to  adapt,  after  2020,  the  requirements  to  renovate  3%  of  central 
government  buildings  to  minimum  standards  and  the  alternative  approach  laid 
down in Article 510;  

(b)  The need to adjust further the Union's energy efficiency policy in accordance 
with the objectives of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change following the 
21st  Conference  of  the  Parties  to  the  United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on 
Climate Change and in the light of economic and innovation developments”11.  

In  addition,  for  example,  this  evaluation  will  assess  the  effectiveness  of  the 
implementation of the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises for the purposes 
of Article 8(4)12, and the provisions related to metering, billing and consumer information 
for  natural  gas,  with  the  aim  of  aligning  them,  where  appropriate,  with  the  relevant 
provisions for electricity in Gas Directive 2009/73/EC13. 

The evaluation of the EED will provide the basis for what needs to be streamlined and 
strengthened in order to a) address the remaining ambition gap to the existing 2030 target 
of 32,5% given that the national contributions in the final NECPs submitted by Member 
States do not add up to achieve14, and b) deliver on the potential contribution of energy 
efficiency  to  a  higher  greenhouse  emissions  reduction  target  for  2030  [footnote  to  a 
communication].  

Overall, the evaluation aims to assess the policy intervention in the Member States (EU-
27) based on the evaluation criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, relevance,  coherence  and 
EU  added  value,  in  line  with  the  Better  Regulation  guidelines.  The  findings  and 
recommendations  of  the  evaluation  will feed into the impact assessment  for the  further 
amendments of the EED. 

10 Article 24(15)a) of the amending Directive EU/2018/2002 

11 Article 24(15)b of the amending Directive EU/2018/2002 

12 Article 24(12) of the amending Directive EU/2018/2002 

13 Article 24(14) of the amending Directive EU/2018/2002 
14 COM(2020) 564 final 

8 

 
 
                                                 
2.  BACKGROUND TO THE INTERVENTION 

2.1.  Description of the policy intervention and its objectives 

Energy efficiency was set as one of the priorities of the Europe Union's 2020 Strategy for 
smart, sustainable and inclusive growth15, put forward by the Commission in 2010. It is 
also  one  of  the  key  pillars  of  the  2030  EU  Climate  and  Energy  framework16  and  the 
Energy  Union.  This  framework  aims  at  improving  the  security  of  energy  supply, 
implementing the internal energy market, putting energy efficiency first, decarbonisation 
(including  renewable  energy  development),  research,  development  and  facilitating 
technological innovation and improving competitiveness.  

Directive  2012/27/EU  on  Energy  Efficiency  (EED)  builds  on  Directive  2006/32/EC  on 
energy  end-use  efficiency  and  energy  services.  It  establishes  a  common  framework  of 
measures for the promotion of energy efficiency within the EU, in view of achieving the 
Union’s headline targets on energy efficiency of 20%17 for 2020 and of at least 32.5%18 
for  2030,  and  paves  the  way  for  further  energy  efficiency  improvements  beyond  that 
date. The EED was published in the Official Journal on 14 November 2012 and entered 
into  force  on  4  December  2012.  Member  States  had  to  transpose  the  EED  by  5  June 
2014.  

The EED is part of the broader EU energy efficiency policy framework, which comprises 
other  key  instruments  including  the  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive 
(2010/31/EU,  as  amended  by  Directive  2018/844/EU)  (EPBD),  the  Energy  Labelling 
Framework Regulation  ((EU) 2017/1369) and Ecodesign Directive (2009/125/EC). The 
EED is interlinked with other energy and climate policy areas, notably, the ETS and non-
ETS, and security of supply and internal energy market.  

Overall, the set of measures are aimed to  step up Member States’ efforts to use energy 
more efficiently at all stages of the energy chain, from the generation of energy and its 
distribution to its final use. The measures are summarised below (see Table 7 in Annex 4 
for a more detailed overview): 

Table 1 Overview of the Articles in the EED 

Article 
Articles 1& 3 

Objective 
To set the EU headline energy efficiency targets for 2020 (of 20%) and for 
2030 (of 32.5%) and to set reporting obligations for Member states 

15 COM(2010) 2020 

16 COM(2014) 15 final 
17 It equals to energy consumption of no more than 1483 Mtoe of primary energy and no more than 1086 

Mtoe of final energy in 2020. 

18 It equals to energy consumption of no more than 1273 Mtoe of primary energy and no more than 956 

Mtoe of final energy in 2030. 

9 

 
                                                 
 
Article 419 

Article 5 

Article 6 

Article 7 
Article 8 
Articles 9 to 
1120 
Article 12 

Article 13 

Article 14 

Article 15 

Article 16 

Article 17 

Article 18 

Article 19 

Article 20 

Article 21 
Article 24 

Member States had to establish long term renovation strategies for mobilising 
investment in the renovation of national building stock (until this article was 
moved to the EPBD in 2018) 
To require Member States to renovate 3% of their central government 
buildings of over 250 m² 
To oblige Member States to purchase energy efficient products, buildings and 
vehicles 
To oblige Member States to achieve new energy savings each year 
To ensure that large companies perform an energy audit every 4 years 
To provide requirements for metering and billing of energy use 

To encourage Member States to promote and facilitate behavioural change 
towards energy efficiency 
To make sure Member States implement penalties for breaching transposed 
energy efficiency policy 
To oblige Member states to carry out comprehensive assessments of the 
potential for efficient heating and cooling 
To require Member States to take energy efficiency into account in energy 
transformation, transmission and distribution 
To require availability of qualification and accreditation schemes for providers 
of energy services, energy audits and installers 
To require Member States to disseminate information on available energy 
efficiency mechanisms and financial and legal frameworks to market actors 
To require Member States to promote the energy services market, including 
through the use energy performance contracting 
To require Member States to remove regulatory and non-regulatory barriers to 
energy efficiency including split incentives 
To ensure that Member States facilitate the establishment of financing 
facilities for energy efficiency 
Refers to conversion factors set out in Annex IV of the Directive 
Reporting obligations for the Member States and the Commission21 

A partial review of the EED was carried out in 2018 as part of the Clean Energy for all 
Europeans  package22.  In  this  context,  the  Commission  proposed  a  binding  EU  energy 
efficiency  target  of  30%  for  2030  and  a  number  of  focused  amendments  to  selected 
elements of the EED (and of the EPBD) to align the energy efficiency framework to the 
2030 perspective. The package also included a proposal for a Regulation on an integrated 
climate  and  energy  Governance  framework  to  facilitate  the  achievement  of  the  2030 

19 Member States had to notify their long-term renovation strategies under Article 4 twice: in 2014 and 

2017 until Article 4 was transferred to the EPBD (by amending Directive EU/2018/844 (and became 
Art. 2a) 

20 Provisions for electricity were transferred to the Electricity Directive in 2019 by the recast Electricity 

Directive (EU) 2019/944 

21 The reporting obligations for the period as of 2021 have been transferred to the Governance Regulation 

22 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/news/commission-proposes-new-rules-consumer-centred-clean-energy-

transition 

10 

 
                                                 
climate  and  energy  targets  through  the  streamlining  of  the  existing  reporting  and 
planning obligations. The planning and reporting obligations contained in the EED were 
transferred  to  the  Governance  Regulation23,  which  replaced  the  three-yearly  national 
energy efficiency action plans with the integrated national energy and climate plans for a 
10-year period (the first plans should have been submitted by end 2019). The provisions 
on long-term renovation strategies were moved to Directive 2010/31/EU, where they fit 
more  coherently.  The  provisions  were  also  strengthened  to  ensure  that  the  long-term 
renovation  strategies  deliver  the  necessary  progress  towards  the  transformation  of 
existing buildings. 

This  process  resulted  in  amending  Directive  EU/2018/2002,  adopted  on  11  December 
201824, which includes amendments to Articles 1 and 3 on the headline energy efficiency 
targets  (setting  the  EU  headline  energy  efficiency  target  for  2030),  and  to  Article  7  on 
extending  the  energy  savings  obligation  to  2021-2030  period.  It  also  strengthens  the 
requirements for billing and metering in Articles 9-11 by adding new, more precise and 
specific provisions applicable for thermal energy (heating and cooling)25.  

Moreover,  a  number  of  new  review  clauses  were  introduced  in  Article  24  of  the  EED 
(e.g. to review the implementation of the definition of small and medium size enterprises 
for  the  purposes  of  Article  8(4),  and  introducing  the  general  review  clause  of  the  EED 
with the first review required by 28 February 2024).  

All modified provisions had to be transposed by Member States by 25 June 2020, but for 
the provisions on metering and billing, for which the transposition date was 25 October 
2020. 

Subsequently,  the  Commission  published  a  Recommendation  on  25  September  2019  to 
support Member States in transposing the amended provisions of Article 7, 7a, 7b, 20 (6) 
and  Annex  V  of  the  Directive.  At  the  same  time,  the  Commission  published  a 
Recommendation  on  the  implementation  of  the  new  metering  and  billing  provisions  of 
the  EED,  and  on  the  content  of  the  comprehensive  assessment  of  the  potential  for 
efficient heating and cooling under Article 14 of the Directive.  

It should be noted that the EED framework provides a great deal of flexibility to Member 
States on how the required measures are implemented (given that a number of provisions 
contain  conditionalities  and  derogations)  and  allows  taking  into  account  the  national 
context.  In  addition,  the  EED  was  amended  to  highlight  the  need  to  alleviate  energy 
poverty and the interlinkages with other sectors, e.g. the Water-Energy-Nexus. 

The intervention logic of the EED and its articles is provided in Annex 4. 

23 Regulation (EU) 2018/1999  

24 Entered into force together with the recast Renewable Energy Directive and a new Governance 

Regulation on 24 December 2018 

25 While removing thermal energy from the original provisions thereby restricting their scope to electricity 

and gas. Subsequently also electricity has been removed from their scope and instead regulated under 
the provisions of the recast Electricity Directive: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2019.158.01.0125.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2019:158:TOC  

11 

 
                                                 
In addition to the planning and reporting provisions moved the Governance Regulation26 
specific  provisions  of  the  EED  were  also  removed  or  modified  by  other  legislative 
instruments,  such  as  Articles  9-11  on  metering  and  billing  for  electricity  and  Article 
15(8)  on  demand  response  services  to  the  Electricity  Directive27,  and  Article  4  on  the 
long-term  renovation  strategies  to  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive  by  the 
amending  Directive  EU  2018/844.  (in  the  context  of  the  “Clean  Energy  for  All 
Europeans” Package).  

Against this background, the Commission  has not  evaluated  yet  the EED  in  its entirety 
since its entry into force in December 2012 (Figure 1).  

Figure 1 - Overview of key milestones of the EED 

2006 
Directive 
on end-
use 
efficiency 
and 
energy 
services 

2012 
EED 
entered 
into force 

2016 
focussed 
EED 
review: 
32,5% 
target & 
Art 7, 
9,11 

2019 
First 
NECP's by 
Member 
States 

2010 
EU 2020 
strategy: 
20% EE 
target 

2014 
First 
NEEAP's 
by 
Member 
States 

2019 
Green 
Deal with 
increased 
climate 
target 

2020 
Review 
and 
revision 
of EED 
regarding 
increased 
targets 

Source: DG ENER 

26 Regulation (EU) 2018/1999  
27 Directive (EU) 2019/944 

12 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
2.2.  Baseline 

In 2007, the EU committed itself to a 20% energy efficiency target in 202028, which was 
embedded in  the Europa 2020 Strategy  for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth29  in 
2010. At that time, the energy efficiency framework30 consisted of Directive 2006/32/EC 
on energy services (ESD) and Directive 2004/8/EC on promotion of cogeneration (CHP 
Directive) and Directive 2002/91/EC on the energy performance of buildings (preceding 
the Directive 2010/31/EU. The ESD targeted energy demand and contained an indicative 
end-use energy savings target of 9%31 that had to be achieved by each Member State by 
201632.  Together,  the  ESD  and  CHP  Directives  were  amongst  the  first  legislative 
instruments to tackle the barriers to energy efficiency investments and could be regarded 
as milestones in energy efficiency policy development. They have contributed to action 
taken at national level thanks to introduction of a number of concrete policies. However, 
because of the 'soft' and open provisions, both Directives failed to sufficiently overcome 
the barriers to energy efficiency existing at that time33. 

2.2.1.  Problems at the time of the adoption of the EED 

The  problems  and  drivers  that  the  EED  was  expected  to  address  were  identified  in  the 
impact assessment of 2011 (accompanying the Commission proposal for the EED).  

The main problem was that the EU 20% energy efficiency objective for 2020 would 
not have be met with the policies and measures in place at the time34, thus preventing 
the related environmental, social, economic and security of supply benefits to be realised 
due to many prevailing market and regulatory failures35. 

Based on the evaluation of the ESD and CHP Directive, the Commission concluded that 
both directives, if unchanged, would not lead to the sufficient action needed to tackle the 
problems described in the accompanying impact assessment. 

The impact assessment of 2011 outlined the following problem drivers: 

1.  Insufficient  political  commitment,  policy  coordination  and  long-term  political 

planning to reduce investment insecurity; 

28 7224/1/07, REV 1 

29 COM(2010) 2020 final 

30 Add that EPBD 2010 and Ecodesign/ Energy labelling  was also there 
31 Mtoe saved against the average of a five year base period 

32 Directive 2006/32/EC, Article 4(1) 

33 Indicatively, the mid-term evaluation of the ESD showed that it had not succeeded in tapping the full 

energy saving potential of the sectors it covered, SEC(2011) 779 final and its Annex III 

34 Those were national measures and EU measures adopted until 2009 including stemming from the ESD, 

CHP Directives, and the recast EPBD in 2010 and the Ecodesign and Energy labelling measures that 
were adopted in 2010. 

35https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:4bc8ec58-3689-4044-811c-

0435b28f8464.0001.01/DOC_2&format=PDF 

13 

 
                                                 
2.  Insufficient  incentives  for  consumers  to  realise  energy  efficiency  improvements 

and to tackle high upfront costs and the split incentives problem; 
3.  Insufficiently developed markets for energy efficiency improvements; 
4.  Insufficient price incentives for the uptake of energy efficiency measures among 

energy suppliers; 

5.  High  transaction  costs  because  of  lengthy  administrative  procedures  e.g.  for 
cogeneration)  or  a  high  number  of  separate  units  (e.g.  energy  efficiency 
improvements in households); 

6.  Higher  transaction  costs  and  investment  risk  for  the  deployment  of  the  co-

generation technology; 

7.  Low awareness of energy saving opportunities and existence of cultural  barriers 
like mistrust of new technologies and lack of willingness to adopt energy savings 
measures  and  a  historic  low  penetration  of  district  heating  because  of  the 
prevalence of individual heating solutions. 

2.2.2.  How would the situation evolve without the EED in place 

The  impact  assessment  of  2011  considered  the  scenario  of  taking  no  further  legislative 
action  for  the  ESD  and  the  CHP  Directive.  However,  according  to  the  mid-term 
evaluation  of  the  ESD,  even  if  Member  States  had  continued  their  efforts  on  energy 
savings  beyond  the  ESD's  target  year  of  2016,  leaving  the  situation  unchanged  would 
lead to primary energy savings of 50-95 Mtoe in 2020, leaving a significant gap towards 
the 20% saving target (savings of 368 Mtoe). 

The  progress  report  of  the  CHP  Directive36  had  also  shown  the  Directive’s  limited 
efficiency  and  effectiveness.  The  share  of  electricity  from  high  efficiency  CHP  had 
increased  only  from  10.5%  in  2004  to  11.0%  in  2008.  This  showed  that  the  lack  of 
concrete  obligations  in  the  Directive  regarding  the  real  uptake  of  the  CHP  and  its  soft 
wording had failed to create the necessary investment security, to decrease the burden of 
the  numerous  administrative  procedures  and  to  create  a  playing  level  field  for  this 
technology and its operators. 

The  impact  assessment  of  2011  analysed  a  number  of  policy  options  to  address  the 
problem and its drivers encompassing the following target areas: 

  National targets and objectives; 

  Energy Saving Obligations; 

  Further measures to realise potential at the end-use stage; 

  Measures  to  realise  potential  at  the  stage  of  energy  transformation  and 

distribution; 

  National reporting; 

36 SEC(2011) 779 final and its Annex IV 

14 

 
                                                 
  Options  concerning  the  purpose  and  scope  of  the  legislative  proposal  and  the 

choice of legal instrument. 

In  all  six  areas,  the  impact  assessment  showed  that  the  baseline  scenario  (‘Retain  the 
current  approach’)  had  the  worst  impact  compared  to  the  proposed  policy  options  in 
terms  of  effectiveness,  efficiency,  coherence  with  the  overarching  objectives  of  EU 
policy and respect of subsidiarity/proportionality. 

The impact assessment provided a qualitative description of the expected developments 
and confirmed that the package of policy measures put forward with the legal proposal 
was  capable  of  reaching  the  20%  objective  and  reaping  additional  benefits  that  would 
remain  tangible  beyond  2020.  The  additional  costs  of  achieving  the  overall  20%  target 
through  the  set  of  measures  proposed  was  estimated  as  proportionately  small  to  the 
expected benefits.  

With  the  introduction  of  the  EED,  the  Commission  aimed  at  creating  the  right  market 
conditions and legal framework to enable the achievement of the new headline EU 20% 
energy  efficiency  target  for  2020,  covering  all  end-use  (residential,  commercial  and 
industry) and energy generation sectors with the exception of transport37. 

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EED / STATE OF PLAY 

3.1.  Description of the current situation  

The EED entered into force in 2012, but builds on the measures already introduced in the 
ESD and CHP Directives.  

The  EED  requires  different  reporting  obligations  with  different  implementation 
deadlines. These obligations are described in Table 2below: 

Table 2: Key obligations 2013 – 2020 for Member States 

Key obligations 2013 – 2020 for Member States 
General transposition of the EED 
Notification of 2020 national indicative targets under Article 3 
(in line with Article 24(1) and Annex XIV) 
Notification of long-term renovation strategies under Article 438 
as part of the NEEAP 
Notification of inventory of government buildings subject to 
renovation under Article 5 
Notification of national cumulative energy savings and policy 
measures under Article 7 
Notification of National Energy Efficiency Action Plans  

Deadline 
5 June 2014 
30 April 2013 

30 April 2014 and every three 
years thereafter 
5 December 2013 

5 December 2013 

1st plan by 30 April 2014 and 
the 2nd in 2017 

37 Transport was subject to the various measures included in the White Paper on transport adopted in 2011 
38 Member States had to notify their long-term renovation strategies under Article 4 twice: in 2014 and 
2017 until Article 4 was transferred to the EPBD (by amending Directive EU/2018/844 (ie. Art. 2a) 

15 

 
                                                 
Notification of Annual Progress Reports 
Notification of comprehensive assessments on energy 
efficiency potential in heating and cooling under Article 14  
Obligations under the revised EED39 
Transposition of new rules on energy efficiency obligation 
schemes (Amended Articles 7, 7(a) and 7(b) and Annex V) 
Transposition of new rules on metering and billing (Articles 9, 
10, 11 and a new Annex VII(a)) 
Submission of National Climate and Energy Plans including 
detailed plans on implementation of Article 7 in line with 
Annex III 

Each year by 30 April  
December 2015, December 
2020 
Deadline 
25 June 2020 

25 October 2020 

December 2019 

The general transposition deadline of the EED was 5 June 2014.  

In line with Article 3 of the EED, Member States had to notify their national indicative 
energy efficiency targets by December 2013 in view of achieving the EU level target for 
202040  (1483  Mtoe  of  primary  energy  consumption  and  1086  Mtoe  of  final  energy 
consumption). 

In  line  with  Article  4  of  the  EED,  Member  States  had  to  notify  their  first  long-term 
strategy for mobilising investment  in  the  renovation  of the national  stock of residential 
and commercial buildings, both public and private by 30 April 2014. An updated strategy 
was due every three years thereafter, submitted to the Commission as part of the National 
Energy Efficiency Action Plans. 

In  addition,  separate  notifications  were  required  under  Article  5  (inventory  of  central 
government  buildings  that  was  subject  to  renovation  under  the  default  approach)  and 
under Article 7 (energy savings obligation).  

Member  States  were  required  to  notify  by  December  2013  their  plans  calculated 
cumulative  energy  savings  for  the  period  2014-2020  and  the  policy  measures:  energy 
efficiency  obligation  schemes  or  alternative  policy  measures  to  be  implemented  to 
achieve the required amount by end 2020.  

Reporting obligations for the 2030 framework 

The  national  contributions  to  achieve  the  Union’s  energy  efficiency  targets  for  2030 
referred to in the amended EED had to be notified by the end 2019 as part of National 
Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) of the Governance Regulation41. Although with some 
delays,  all  Member  States  notified  their  contributions  in  the  course  of  2020.  However, 
not  all  Member  States  properly  met  the  requirements  related  to  the  notification  of  the 

39 All reporting obligations have been transferred to the Governance Regulation (EU/2018/1999) 
40 https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2020_en 
41 Regulation (EU) 2018/1999  

16 

 
 
                                                 
 
contributions and, in quite a few cases, the information about the trajectory, methodology 
used  or  translation  of  the  contributions  into  absolute  values  of  PEC  and  FEC  was 
missing. 

Similarly,  the  notification  on  the  energy  savings  requirements,  planned  measures  and 
detailed methodologies to implement Article 7 for the next period 2021-2030 had to be 
notified under the Governance Regulation as part of the NECPs (Annex III).  

3.2. 

Status of transposition and infringements 

The  Commission  monitors  how  the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive  is  transposed  and 
implemented  and  works  closely  with  the  Member  States  to  this  end.  After  the 
transposition  deadline  of  the  Directive  2012/27/EU  (EED)  of  5  June  2014,  the 
Commission  services  carried  out  transposition  checks  to  assess  whether  the  EED  had 
been properly transposed into the national legal orders of all Member States. As a result 
of  this  exercise,  the  Commission  launched  infringements  for  the  cases  where  Member 
States  failed  to  communicate  transposition  measures  covering  all  provisions  of  the 
Directive. All of these infringements have been closed. 

Furthermore,  in  order  to  clarify  certain  questions  regarding  the  transposition  and 
implementation  of  the  EED,  in  2017  the  Commission  services  launched  a  structured 
dialogue with Member States, via EU Pilot information requests. 

Following  an  assessment  of  replies  from  EU  pilots,  the  Commission  launched 
infringement proceedings between July 2018 and January 2019 under Article 258 of the 
Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  against  all  Member  States  for  their 
failure to comply with obligations under the Energy Efficiency Directive.  

In February 2021 the state of play of these infringements was as follows: 

-  Thirteen  cases  have  been  closed  (Denmark,  Estonia,  Finland,  France,  Ireland, 
Italy, Netherlands, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden); 

-  Fifteen ongoing cases, at different stages. 

The  infringement  proceedings  progressed  at  different  speed,  but  Member  States’ 
clarifications and commitments have resolved a majority of the concerns the Commission 
raised. The following issues have been raised in most infringement proceedings: 

  Renovation of public buildings under Article 5; 

  Calculation  of  energy  savings  claimed  from  the  implementation  of  alternative 

policy measures under Article 7(9)42; 

  Energy audits under Article 8(4); 

  Metering and billing rules under Articles 9 to 11; 

42 According to the amending Directive (EU)2018/2002, Art. 7(9) have been replaced by the new Art. 7b. 

17 

 
                                                 
 

Individual  metering  (or  “sub-metering”)  of  heat  in  multi-apartment  buildings 
required under Article 9(3); and 

  Comprehensive  assessments  and  cost-benefit  analysis  for  energy  efficiency  in 

heating and cooling under Article 14; 

Other  significant  points  raised  were  the  minimum  requirements  for  establishing 
functioning  of  energy  services  markets  under  Article  18  of  the  EED,  also  demand 
response rules required under Article 15(8), and split of incentives under Article 19(1). 

Finally,  there  was  an  infringement  case  against  Spain,  originated  from  a  complaint, 
which  concerned  the  implementation  of  sub-metering  obligations  under  Article  9(3) 
EED.  The  case  was  brought  to  the  Court  of  Justice  (C-347/19)  and  the  judgement  was 
delivered in December 2020. 

Transposition of the provisions of the amended Directive (EU) 2018/2002 

Following  the  amendment  of  the  EED  in  201843,  Member  States  had  to  transpose  new 
rules on energy savings obligation (i.e. the new Articles 7, 7(a) and 7(b) and Annex V by 
25 June 2020.  

In addition, by 25 October 2020, Member States had to transpose new rules on metering 
and billing (i. e., new Articles 9, 9(a), 9(b) and 9(c), 10 and 10(a) and 11 and 11(a) and a 
new Annex VII(a)).  

In  the  light  of  Member  States  notifications  with  respect  to  the  transposition  of  those 
amended  provisions,  the  Commission  sent  23  letters  of  formal  notice  to  the  Member 
States that had notified partial transposition, to the Member States that had not notified 
any transposition measures and to the United Kingdom. 

4.  METHOD 

4.1. 

Short description of methodology 

The  Commission  used  several  information  sources  to  evaluate  the  EED,  notably  the 
analysis  of  the  implementation  and  transposition  of  the  EED  in  all  Member  States, 
national energy efficiency action plans and annual energy efficiency reports submitted by 
Member States, and various studies and reports available on the EED. The work carried 
out in the EED Concerted Action also proved to be very valuable. 

The Commission commissioned an external study to support it with data collection and 
the evidence-based assessment. The study was carried out during the period of June 2020 
to March 2021. A dedicated smaller study was also carried out to support the analysis of 
the open public consultation (launched on 17 November 2020 until 9 February 2021). 

The  evaluation  was  supported  by  an  inter-service  group  consisting  of  the  following 
Commission  Directorates  General:  SG,  ECFIN,  GROW,  JUST,  CLIMA,  MOVE, 

43 Directive (EU)2018/2002 

18 

 
                                                 
REGIO,  ENV,  AGRI,  RTD,  TRADE,  CNECT,  ESTAT,  COMP,  and  also  JRC  and 
EASME. The inter-service group met five times between June 2020 and March 2021, and 
it provided feedback on the most relevant deliverables of the evaluation and its process.  

The evaluation followed the Commission better regulation guidelines and examined the 
following five evaluation criteria in line with better regulation guidelines: effectiveness, 
efficiency, relevance, coherence and EU added value, as described below. 

  Effectiveness 

The  evaluation  looked  at  the  overall  effectiveness  of  the  EED  and  to  what  extent  the 
objectives of promoting energy efficiency were achieved in view of reaching the Union’s 
headline  targets  on  energy  efficiency  for  2020  and  2030,  by  analysing  the  quantitative 
and qualitative impacts (per target group and sectors). In addition, the evaluation looked 
at which factors were behind the effects of the intervention including which areas of the 
intervention  were  more  /  less  successful  and  what  were  the  drivers  /  barriers  behind 
successes / failures, and what external factors have affected/ continue to affect reaching 
the objectives of the EED. 

  Efficiency 

Efficiency  refers  to  what  extent  the  costs  involved  in  the  implementation  of  the  EED 
have  been  justified  given  the  changes/effects  that  have  been  achieved  (including  wider 
benefits),  and  to  what  extent  were  the  costs  borne  by  different  stakeholder  groups 
proportionate to the benefits it has generated. 

  Relevance 

In  relation  to  the  relevance,  the  evaluation  looks  at  the  extent  to  which  the  EED 
framework and its measures are still relevant for promoting energy efficiency to ensure 
the achievement of the EU headline 2020 and 2030 targets. It assesses whether the EED 
still corresponds to the needs and the latest technological or environmental developments 
in  the EU, and to  what  extent the EED is  fit  to achieve the higher climate target  (of  at 
least 55% for 2030), in particular in the context of the objectives of the European Green 
Deal. 

  Coherence 

The  evaluation  examines  whether  the  EED  is  internally  coherent  and  whether  it 
complements or conflicts with other existing policies and strategies, as well as new ones, 
particularly  in  the  context  of  policies  adopted  and  planned  under  the  European  Green 
Deal. 

  EU Added value 

The  evaluation  looks  at  the  additional  value  that  the  EU  level  energy  efficiency  target 
and EU measures have, compared to what would be achieved by Member States acting at 
national or regional levels without EU intervention. 

A detailed overview of the evaluation questions per criterion is provided in Annex 3. 

19 

 
4.2.  Data collection and tools 

More in details, the following data collection tools were used in evaluating the EED: 

  Analysis  of  the  National  Energy  Efficiency  Action  Plans  of  2014  and  2017 
submitted in line with Article 24(2) and Member State annual energy efficiency 
reports submitted from 2014 to 2020 submitted in line with Article 24(1)44; 

  Analysis of national measures notified by Member States to transpose the EED; 

  Analysis  of  the  final  National  Energy  and  Climate  Plans  submitted  under  the 

Governance Regulation45; 

  Analysis  of  the  Long-Term  Renovation  Strategies  submitted  under  Article  4  of 
the EED (2014 and 2017) as part pf the National Energy Efficiency Action Plans. 

  Targeted stakeholder  consultation  with  broad range of stakeholders identified in 
the  Consultation  strategy,  including  national  authorities,  interest  groups,  civil 
society  and  academia.  The  targeted  stakeholder  consultation  was  carried  out  in 
the form of stakeholder workshops, evaluation questionnaires and interviews with 
the aim to gather inputs on assessing the different provisions of the EED. In total 
nine workshops were held during the period from September to November 2020;  

  A dedicated Energy Efficiency Directive Expert Group was held on 10 November 
2020  with  the  aim  to  present  and  discuss  with  the  Member  States  and 
stakeholders  the  preliminary  findings  of  the  evaluation  with  an  aim to  fine-tune 
the analysis; 

  An  internet  based  public  consultation  was  launched  on  17  November  2020  and 
lasted for 12 weeks until 9 February 2021, targeting a broad stakeholder audience 
and the general public46; 

  Literature  review  of  relevant  documents,  reports  and  studies  to  support  the 

evaluation. 

More details on the stakeholder consultation activities can be found in Annex 2 and the 
technical assistance study. 

4.3.  Limitations and robustness of findings 

Member States’ annual reports 

44 The National Energy Efficiency Action Plans (were submitted under the EED in 2014 and 2017) were 
required to cover significant energy efficiency improvement measures and expected and/ or achieved 
energy savings, including those in the supply, transmission and distribution of energy as well as energy 
end-use,  in  view  of  achieving  the  national  energy  efficiency  targets  referred  to  in  Article  3(1).  The 
National  Energy  Efficiency  Action  Plans  shall  be  prepared  in  line  with  Part  II  of  Annex  XIV.  The 
Annual reports should be prepared in line with Part I of Annex XIV of the EED. 

45 COM(2020) 564 final 
46  https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-evaluation-fitness-checks.pdf 

20 

 
 
                                                 
The last Commission progress report was published in October 2020 and covers the 2018 
data47 based on Member States’ annual reports submitted in 2020. Even though the full 
assessment  on  the  achievement  of  the  2020  targets  and  thus  the  complete  overview  of 
implementation  of the EED would be available  only in  the spring 2022, when Eurostat 
will be publishing the 2020 data, the latest Commission progress report gives indications 
on  progress  towards  the  achievement  of  the  EU  energy  efficiency  target  and  national 
indicative 
the 
includes  quantitative  and  qualitative 
implementation of some of the key provisions of the EED that contain annual reporting 
obligations: Article 3 on national energy efficiency targets, Article 5 on exemplary role 
of public bodies’ buildings and Article 7 on energy savings obligation48. 

information  on 

targets.  It 

Availability of data 

It should be stressed that quantification of the impacts attributed to the EED intervention 
taking  into  other  energy  efficiency  interventions  and  contributing  to  the  EU  targets  is 
challenging.  There  is  limited  data  available  on  ex-post  evaluation  of  national  energy 
efficiency measures, including, data on costs and benefits for most of the measures. The 
most  complete  information  on  energy  savings  and  costs  is  available  for  measures 
implemented under Article 7 for which the EED sets specific reporting  and monitoring 
requirements.  

Therefore,  major  limitations  were  related  to  assessing  the  effectiveness  of  the  EED  on 
basis  of  decomposition  analysis  by  attributing  specific  benefits  and  quantified  impacts 
(energy  savings,  contribution  to  energy  efficiency  targets,  etc.)  to  individual  EED 
measures or articles. 

The  gaps  in  quantification  of  impacts  have  been  filled  by  input  received  from 
stakeholders (targeted consultations and open public consultation). 

5.  ANALYSIS AND ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

5.1.  Effectiveness 

5.1.1.  Evaluation Question 1: To what extent has the objective of the EED 
to  promote  energy  efficiency  in  the  EU  in  view  of  reaching  the 
Union’s  headline  targets  on  energy  efficiency  for  2020  and  2030 
been achieved?  

As reflected in the intervention logic, the EED consists of a set of common measures that 
aim at promoting energy efficiency in the EU across the different sectors with a view to 
achieve the EU energy efficiency targets for 2020 and for 203049.  

47 COM(2020) 954 final 
48 In line with requirements of Annex XIV(1) of the EED 

49 The scope of this evaluation is assessing the 2020 targets. The 2030 target was introduced with the 

amending Directive (EU)2018/2002. 

21 

 
                                                 
The  achievement  of  the  EU  energy  efficiency  targets  depends  not  only  on  the 
implementation of the measures in the EED, but also on other EU legislative acts such as 
the  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive,  the  Ecodesign  Directive,  the  Energy 
Labelling  and  Tyre  Labelling  Regulations,  and  other  measures  taken  at  national  level. 
Therefore, the EED is not the only instrument contributing to the EU energy efficiency 
targets, and the evaluation of its effectiveness in contributing to achieving the targets also 
needs  to  take  into  account  external  factors  that  are  not  always  linked  to  the 
implementation of the EED. 

The  majority  of  stakeholders  that  shared  their  views  consider  that  the  Directive  has 
largely achieved its objectives, thanks to the wide sectoral coverage of the Directive, as if 
it were to be a framework Directive. They shared the view that  the EED contributed to 
improved energy efficiency, reduction of GHG  emissions, and numerous other benefits 
such  as  improved  energy  security,  reduced  energy  bills  for  consumers  and  greater 
awareness  of  the  benefits  associated  with  energy  efficiency  (e.g.  health  improvements, 
energy poverty alleviation).  

5.1.1.1.  Sub-question a: What have been impacts in different sectors achieved 

with the intervention? 

The  developments  in  sectors  are  quite  different  when  looking  at  energy  consumption 
trends.  This  is  related  to  the  fact  that  different  factors  drive  energy  consumption  in 
different sectors. Besides, policy instruments also do not focus on all sectors in the same 
manner. It should be noted that there is no exact data available on what impact specific 
measures of the EED had on the different sectors, except for Article 5 and Article 7 for 
which the EED has specific reporting requirements.   

The final industry energy consumption50 in the EU-28 decreased in absolute terms from 
332 Mtoe in 2005 to 285 Mtoe in 2018 (-14%). After 2015 an increase in consumption 
can  be  observed  again,  though.  Compared  to  2017,  the  EU’s  final  industry  energy 
consumption increased by 0.8% in 2018. 

The  final  energy  consumption  in  residential  sector  (calculated  using  the  old  energy 
balances  methodology)  sharply  fell  by  10.4%  from  310  Mtoe  in  2005  to  278  Mtoe  in 
2018  (but  only  by  4.6%  when  applying  the  weather  correction).  However,  energy  use 
rose by 0.1% between 2015 and 2018 (with a -1.6% year-on-year fall in 2018). In 2018, 
higher energy consumption was mainly observed in the transport (+1.3% year-over-year 
increase  compared  to  2017)  and  industry  sectors  (+0.6%).  By  contrast,  energy 
consumption declined in the residential sector (-1.6%) and in the services sector (-1.4%). 
The  services  sector  recorded  a  small  increase  in  energy  consumption  (calculated  using 
the  old  energy  balances  methodology)  between  2005  and  2018  (+1.5%).  However,  a 
year-on-year drop in energy consumption of 1.4% was recorded in 2018. The EU’s final 
transport energy consumption increased by 3.6% from 368 Mtoe in 2005 to 381 Mtoe in 

50 Calculated with the old methodology of energy balances 

22 

 
                                                 
2018.  The  growing  trend  accelerated  in  recent  years  and  compared  to  2017  the  energy 
consumption rose by 1%51. 

As regards the impact of specific energy efficiency policies on energy sectors, the EED 
requirements targets both the supply and end use sectors. As mentioned above, most of 
the data is available for measures implemented under Article 5 (exemplary role of public 
bodies’  buildings)  and  Article  7  (energy  savings  obligation)  received  from  Member 
States  in  their  annual  reports.  Most  of  the  energy  savings  have  been  achieved  in  the 
buildings  sector  thanks  to  the  measures  under  Article  5  and  Article  7  aiming  at 
renovations or upgrading of heating systems (some 50% of energy savings are achieved 
in buildings sector).  

However,  other  sectors  also  observe  positive  effects  which  could  be  attributed  to  some 
extent to the EED. For example, the requirement for large companies to carry out energy 
audits  (in  Article  8)  have  increased  awareness  amongst  enterprises  of  energy  savings 
potential,  which  in  some  cases  followed  by  energy  efficiency  improvement  measures. 
However, there is not much information on the extent Article 8 had contributed to energy 
efficiency impacts in industry (more analysis in chapter 5.1.2). 

5.1.1.2.  Sub-question b: To what extent are the EU and the Member States on 

track to achieve their 2020 and 2030 targets? 

According to  the latest  Commission  progress  report52 on the achievement of the EU-28 
energy efficiency targets for 2020, the Eurostat figures for 2018 indicate that final energy 
consumption  in  the  EU-28  fell  by  5.9%,  from  1194  Millions  of  tons  of  oil  equivalent 
(Mtoe) in 2005 to 1124 Mtoe in 2018. However, this is still 3.5% above the 2020 final 
energy consumption target of 1086 Mtoe.  In 2018, it increased by 0.1% compared to 
the  previous  year.  Primary  energy  consumption  in  the  EU-28  dropped  by  9.8%,  from 
1721 Mtoe in 2005 to 1552 Mtoe in 2018, which is 4.6% above the 2020 target of 1483 
Mtoe.  Following  three  years  of  increase,  a  year-on-year  drop  in  primary  energy 
consumption of 0.6 % was recorded in 2018. For both indicators, the trend in 2018 was 
above a linear trajectory to the 2020 targets.  

It should be noted that the achievement of the EU level target is influenced by a set of 
different  factors,  which  are  described  in  more  detail  below  (see  chapter  5.1.2).  The 
growth in economic activity continues to be one of the main factors contributing to the 
increased  energy  consumption.  Policies  and  measures  implemented  by  the  Member 
States in 2018 were not sufficient to offset it. To this end, it seems increasingly unlikely 
that the 2020 targets could be reached without a strong impact of external factors, such as 
the COVID-19 crisis. The impact of COVID-19 on energy consumption in 2020 has been 
assessed as significant in the above mentioned progress report.  

51 `Cf COM(2020) 326 final and COM(2020) 954 final 

52 COM(2020) 954 final 

23 

 
 
                                                 
Member States indicated in their annual energy efficiency reports that stable and growing 
final energy consumption in 2018 was driven by economic growth and an increase in: (i) 
production/ value added (industry); (ii) transport of passengers and goods (transport); (iii) 
the number of households and disposable income (residential); and (iv) value added and 
employment (services). 

Figure 2: Progress towards 2020 targets at EU-28 level  

Source: Eurostat data, DG ENER’s own calculations 

The Commission monitors progress towards the achievement of the national 2020 energy 
efficiency targets and the implementation of the EED in line with the reporting obligation 
under Article 24(3)53. The Commission assessment is based on energy efficiency annual 
reports submitted by Member States, in line with Article 24(1)).  

The achievement of the  EU targets  also  depends on the commitment made by Member 
States in  setting the national  indicative targets  (in line with  Article 3 of the EED). The 
recent analysis shows a gap to the EU 2020 targets (see Table 8 in Annex 4). 

In response to  the  growing  energy consumption trends, the Commission  had set  up the 
dedicated Task Force 2020 to mobilise efforts to reach the EU energy efficiency targets 
for 202054, which looked into the causes of an increased energy consumption and looked 
for  potential  solutions 
incomplete  and  sometimes  delayed 
implementation of the energy efficiency legislation (including the EED) together with the 

remedy.  The 

for 

53  The  Commission  reporting  obligations  for  2030  energy  efficiency  targets  are  part  of  the  Governance 
Regulation EU/2018/1999.  

54 Report_of_the_work_of_task_force_mobilising_efforts_to_reach_eu_ee_targets_for_2020.pdf 

(europa.eu) 

24 

111815261 0001 1001 2001 3001 4001 5001 6001 7001 800MtoePECPEC linear trajectoryFECFEC linear trajectory2.3% (25Mtoe)2.9% (32 Mtoe)1.9% (2 Mtoe)2.9% (43 Mtoe)1483 Mtoe1086 Mtoe 
 
                                                 
observed  difference  in  the  estimated  energy  savings  and  the  energy  savings  achieved 
were mentioned by Member States as one of the possible causes that have contributed to 
the increased energy consumption over the recent years, which have put the achievement 
of the EU energy efficiency target for 2020 at risk.   

In  relation  to  the  EU  2030  targets,  the  assessment  of  the  national  energy  and  climate 
plans  (NECPs)55  identifies  a  collective  ambition  gap  of  national  contributions  of  2.8 
percentage points for primary and 3.1 percentage points for final energy consumption.  

Figure 3: Progress towards 2030 targets at EU-27 level 

Source: Eurostat data, DG ENER’s own calculations 

Due to the insufficient progress towards the 2020 targets until 2018, the distance to the 
2030  targets  is  also  bigger  than  expected  and  stands  at  22%  for  primary  energy 
consumption and 17% for final  energy consumption (Figure  3). The delivery  gap to  the 
2020 targets and the ambition gap to the 2030 targets indicate that additional efforts are 
needed. 

The  2020  progress  report  also  showed  that  progress  towards  achieving  the  indicative 
national energy efficiency targets (assuming a linear trajectory that is the same level of 
efforts  each  year)  was  insufficient  in  twelve  countries  (Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Denmark, 
Germany, Ireland, Spain, France, Cyprus, Austria, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden) 
for  primary  energy  consumption,  and  in  fifteen  (Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Germany,  Estonia, 
Ireland,  France,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Hungary,  Malta,  Austria,  Poland,  Slovakia, 
Sweden and the United Kingdom) for final energy consumption.  

55 COM(2020) 564 final  

25 

 
 
                                                 
JRC  analysis  shows  that  several  Member  States  have  updated  their  national  targets 
(notified  in  the  annual  reports)  which  gives  the  sum  of  national  2020  absolute 
consumption  targets  of  1536.8  Mtoe  in  terms  of  primary  energy  and  1090.4  Mtoe  in 
terms of final energy (which is 0.4% above of the EU target compared to 1086 Mtoe). In 
addition, the sum of the indicative national targets for primary energy is 3.6% above the 
EU target (1483 Mtoe) and corresponds to 17.1% savings (instead of 20%) compared to 
the PRIMES baseline projections56. 

5.1.1.3.  Sub-question c: Did the EED have other positive or negative impacts 
beyond  its  main  objective,  such  as  reducing  greenhouse  gas  (GHG) 
emissions and energy imports. 

Energy  efficiency  delivers  a  number  of  benefits  further  to  improvements  in  energy 
efficiency and energy savings. Notably energy efficiency and the EED have contributed 
to  the  reduction  of  GHG  emissions,  both  in  terms  of  direct  emissions  from  fossil  fuel 
combustion or consumption and indirect emissions reduction from electricity generation. 
Overall,  energy  efficiency  plays  an  important  role  in  tackling  climate  change,  with  the 
EED being one of the key instruments contributing to the EU GHG emissions reduction 
targets.  

It  The  CO₂   emissions  reduction  is  depicted57  for  all  energy  efficiency  policies  as  the 
precise effect of the EED on GHG emissions cannot be accurately quantified. Table 10 in 
Annex  4  presents  the  total  GHG  emission  reduction  generated  by  energy  efficiency 
policies including the EED which points to a positive effect of energy efficiency policies 
in terms of their contribution to GHG emissions reduction.  

As regards specific sectors, similar conclusions  can be drawn as those presented in  the 
section on energy consumption trends). More specifically, the analysis indicates that the 
estimated reductions in CO₂  emissions in the building sector can be attributed to a large 
extent to the implementation of measures under Article 7. On the other hand, the largest 
part  of  the  estimated  reductions  of  CO₂   emissions  in  the  transport  sector  and  industry 
could be attributed to other measures not reported under Article 7. The detailed results of 
the  analysis  of  GHG  emissions  reduction  by  sector  are  presented  in  the  support  study 
(Appendix E).  

Based on Eurostat data, the decrease of primary energy production in the EU28 over the 
past  decades  was  accompanied  by  an  increase  in  the  imports  of  primary  energy  and 
energy products. More than half (55.6 %) of the EU28’s gross available energy in 2018 

56 JRC analysis of Member States annual energy efficiency reports under the EED, Tsemekidi-Tzeiranaki, 
S., Paci, D., Cuniberti, B., Economidou, M. and Bertoldi, P., EUR 30517 EN, Publications Office of 
the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-27416-2, doi:10.2760/180952, JRC122742 

57 To calculate the CO₂  emissions reductions achieved, the emissions factors by fuel (in tonCO2/ toe) 
were used corresponding to the observed energy consumption and the ones that correspond to the 
counterfactual scenario (as presented in the above section). By deducting the two (i.e. counterfactual 
minus observed), the reduction in CO₂  emissions was derived. 

26 

 
 
                                                 
came from imported sources. However as illustrated in the section below, without energy 
efficiency  measures  energy  demand  would  be  much  higher  and  would  also  have  to  be 
met  with  additional  energy  imports.  Consequently,  a  reduction  of  energy  consumption, 
which  was  to  a  large  extent  a  result  of  the  EED  measures,  also  contributed  to  a 
moderation of the energy products import needs.  

Energy  efficiency  thus  remains  a  key  contributor  to  energy  security.  A  2019 
Eurobarometer survey58 shows that 9 out  of 10 EU citizens agree that the EU’s  energy 
policy  priorities  should  aim  to  ensure  secure,  clean,  and  affordable  energy  for  all 
Europeans.  

In  addition,  analysis  shows  the  wider  socio-economic  benefits  such  as  reduced  energy 
bills,  reduced  energy  poverty  and  improved  health  that  are  associated  to  the  energy 
efficiency improvement measures. However, it is challenging to quantify those benefits 
in  relation  to  the  implementation  of  the  EED.  A  more  detailed  analysis  on  benefits  is 
provided in chapter 5.2.1 on efficiency. 

5.1.2. 

Evaluation question 2: To what extent can the observed effects be credited 
to the EED? In what areas was the intervention more / less successful and 
what were the drivers/ impeding factors behind successes / failures?  

The analysis from  the evaluation  study59 shows that  overall the EED has contributed to 
promoting  energy  efficiency  in  the  EU  and  to  the  achievement  of  the  EU  2020  energy 
efficiency targets.  

The majority of stakeholders agree that the EED contributed to the increased awareness 
of  energy  efficiency  and  its  role  to  decarbonisation  objectives,  also  the  EED  led  to 
greater  access  to  energy  efficiency  funding  and  uptake  of  energy  services  market.  As 
regards the negative effects, a significant number of stakeholders held the view that the 
obligations under the EED complicated further the existing rules at national level or led 
to rather diverging implementation across Member States. 

To  better  understand  the  impacts  associated  to  the  implementation  of  the  EED,  the 
decomposition  analysis  was  performed 
the 
counterfactual  scenario  and  the  observed  energy  consumption  by  type  of  measure 
contributing  to  energy  efficiency.  Data  on  different  energy  efficiency  measures  and 
estimated energy savings60 was used from the MURE database and other studies. A top-
down  modelling  approach  taking  into  account  energy  statistics  and  macroeconomic 

the  difference  between 

to  obtain 

58    Eurobarometer (2019) Europeans' attitudes on EU energy policy. 

https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/survey/getsurveydetail/instruments/spe
cial/surveyky/2212   

59    Chapter 4.1 of the final report of technical assistance study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2021 

60  Estimations are based on a bottom-up methodology and rely on calculations provided by the Member   

States in their annual reports. Data is mostly available for Article 7 measures. 

27 

 
 
                                                 
drivers (i.e. energy intensity of GDP) was applied to estimate the counterfactual scenario 
to assess the impact of energy efficiency policies for the period 2014-201861. 

The main conclusions are as follows: 

‒  The counterfactual scenario used for estimating total energy savings from policy 
measures over the period 2014-2018 indicates that energy efficiency policies (not 
limiting  only  to  the  EED)  have  had  significant  energy  consumption  reductions 
over those reference years.  

‒ 

It  could  be  concluded that  Article 7 was  responsible for the majority of  savings 
delivered under the EED (see Figure 4). In addition, measures implemented under 
Article  7  have  mostly  contributed  to  energy  savings  in  the  buildings  sector 
(households and services) and to a lesser extent in transport and industry sectors 
(see  Figure  28  in  Annex  4).  Significant  contribution  of  savings  in  buildings 
comes from energy efficiency obligation schemes, fiscal and financial incentives 
and the standards and norms (e.g. building codes). 

Figure  4  -  Energy  consumption  reduction  calculated  via  the  counterfactual  scenario  and 
decomposed by type of measures, in Mtoe for EU 28 

Source: Technical assessment study on evaluating the EED, COWI (2020) 

This  is  also  reflected  in  the  Commission’s  annual  energy  efficiency  progress  report62, 
which assessed the implementation of some of the key EED provisions.  

61 Results of this analysis should be interpreted with caution as the estimated energy savings may not be     
fully  realised,  they  may  not  take  into  account  rebound  effects  and  possible  overlaps,  thus  leading  to 
overestimation of impacts. 

62 SEC(2011) 779 final 

28 

02040608010012014020142015201620172018MtoeEnergy consumption reduction calaculated via the counterfactual scenario and decomposed by type of measure, in Mtoe for EU28Art. 7: otherArt. 7: training andeduactionArt. 7: energy labellingschemeArt. 7: standard/normArt. 7: regulationArt. 7: energy or CO2 taxArt. 7: fiscal incentiveArt. 7: financingscheme/instrumentArt. 7: voluntaryagreementArt. 7: energy efficiencyobligation schemeOther policy measures(outside the EED)Non identified measures02040608010012014020142015201620172018MtoeEnergy consumption reduction calaculated via the counterfactual scenario and decomposed by type of measure, in Mtoe for EU28IndustryTransportServicesHouses 
 
 
                                                 
The EED requires that Member States introduce national measures to fulfil the different 
obligations  covering  both  the  supply  and  demand  sectors.  Those  energy  efficiency 
improvement  measures 
the 
achievement  EU  energy  efficiency  target  for  2020.  To  answer  this  question,  to  what 
extent the observed effects can be attributed to the EED intervention, the evaluation takes 
into  account  the  assessment  of  specific  articles  having  major  impact  as  they  have 
different objectives and target different stakeholder groups. 

implemented  at  national 

level  have  contributed 

to 

  Article 5 on exemplary role of public bodies buildings  

According  to  the  data  available,  only  11  Member  States  chose  to  apply  the  default 
approach63  under  Article  5(1),  while  17  Member  States  chose  to  fulfil  the  renovation 
obligation via the alternative approach (Article 5(6)), through a set of measures such as  
renovations,  energy  management,  information  campaigns  and  behavioural  change,  etc., 
see Table 3. These alternative measures should attain an equal amount of energy savings 
as under Article 5(1).  

Amongst  those  Member  States  that  chose  the  default  approach,  only  three  Member 
States:  Bulgaria,  Lithuania  and  Luxemburg  achieved  their  annual  targets  for  renovated 
floor area (out of those that had available reports in 2020). Four countries (Spain, Italy, 
Luxembourg and Lithuania) fulfilled their total targets for the period 2014-2019. Among 
the  Member  States  that  implemented  the  alternative  approach,  only  three  countries 
(Austria,  Poland  and  Slovakia)  achieved  their  annual  energy  saving  targets  in  2019. 
Croatia  and  France  achieved  their  targets  for  2018.  At  the  same  time,  six  countries 
(Austria, Finland, Ireland, Slovakia, Poland and United Kingdom) provided data showing 
that  they  fulfilled  their  total  target  for  2014-2019.  France,  Belgium,  Croatia  and  the 
Netherlands fulfilled their total target for the period 2014-2018. 

Table  3  -  Achievement  of  obligations  under  default  approach,  Article  5(1)  and  alternative 
approach, Article 5(6)) of the EED 

DEFAULT APPROACH 

ALTERNATIVE APPROACH 

Member States 
applying default 
/ alternative 
approach 

11 Member States 

17 Member States 

Bulgaria,  Estonia,  Greece,  Spain, 
Hungary,  Italy,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg, 
Latvia, Romania, Slovenia 

Austria,  Belgium,  Cyprus,  Czechia, 
Germany,  Denmark,  Finland,  France, 
Croatia,  Ireland,  Malta,  Netherlands, 
Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Slovakia, UK 

63 The default approach refers to measures taken to renovate 3% of the total floor area of heated and/or 
cooled buildings over 250 m2 owned and occupied by central government, which do not meet 
minimum energy requirements. The alternative approach refers to other cost-effective measures taken 
to achieve equivalent energy savings 

29 

 
 
                                                 
DEFAULT APPROACH 

ALTERNATIVE APPROACH 

Member States 
achieving their 
targets for 
period 2014-2019 

3 Member States 
Spain,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  Lithuania 
achieved targets for 2014-2019 

6 Member States 

Austria,  Finland, 
Ireland,  Slovakia, 
Poland,  UK  achieved  targets  for  2014-
2019 

4 Member States 

France,  Belgium,  Netherlands,  Croatia 
achieved targets for 2014-2018 

Source: Technical assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

As can be seen from the analysis, the EED led to increased energy efficiency of central 
government buildings although the impact differs per country.  

Even  though  a  substantial  part  of  the  energy  savings  under  alternative  approach  was 
achieved  through  renovations,  overall  most  of  the  savings  were  reached  through  other 
measures  such  as  energy  management,  information  campaigns  and  behavioural  change. 
There  are  two  limitations  related  to  the  current  reporting  requirements.  First,  the 
reporting requirements  pose challenges that impair the effective monitoring of progress 
towards  targets.  Specifically,  Article  5  does  not  include  the  requirement  to  report  on 
energy savings delivered under the alternative approach. This makes difficult assessment 
of progress and the comparison of achievements of Member States that have chosen the 
alternative approach.  

Second, Article 5 does not require Member States that apply the alternative approach to 
develop an inventory of buildings (as required under the default approach) which would 
be essential for designing further measures.  

Another  risk  to  the  effectiveness  of  Article  5  is  related  to  the  possibility  to  fulfil  the 
obligation  by  taking  out  of  use  of  buildings  by  more  intensive  use  of  other  buildings 
(Article 5 (4)), which may evolve further if not properly addressed. Following new ways 
of working established due to Covid-19 pandemic, some public bodies were looking into 
possibilities to reduce their number of buildings linked to more teleworking. This could 
lead to not having to undergo renovation of inefficient buildings that remain in use.  

The  majority  of  stakeholders  consider  that  Article  5  has  contributed  to  making  central 
government  buildings  in  Member  States  more  energy  efficient.  However,  many 
stakeholders mentioned insufficient enforcement of regulatory measures and insufficient 
national  budget  as  limiting  factors  of  effective  and  efficient  renovations  of  central 
government buildings (see Figure 5). 

Figure 5 - What are the main factors limiting central government in effective and 
efficient renovation of its buildings 

30 

 
 
Insufficient enforcement of the regulatory
framework in my country

45% 

Insufficient national budget earmarked for
renovation

Requirement to renovate can be achieved by
alternative measures that are not clearly defined
and are hard to monitor

Requirement to renovate does not apply to rented
buildings and central government authorities
often rent their buildings

67% 

34% 

37% 

Other

41% 

Source: Feedback from public consultation 

A large number of stakeholders believe that further efforts would be necessary to ensure 
the achievement of the targets and obligations under Article 5 in all Member States, for 
example through extending renovation obligation to other public administration levels.  

In addition, stakeholders consider that insufficient progress was achieved at regional and 
local  level  due  to  the  limitations  of  the  legal  framework  -  there  is  no  obligation  to 
renovate other buildings than those owned and occupied by central government, also lack 
of incentives, resources and technical assistance. In addition, alternative approach proved 
hard to monitor and led in many cases to short term energy savings. To address the issue, 
some  stakeholders  pointed  out  to  the  need  for  stricter  requirements  to  the  alternative 
approach. 

  Article 6 on public purchasing  

Analysis shows that central governments are applying energy efficiency requirements in 
public procurement, albeit  to  the greater extent for products  and to  a lesser extent for 
services and buildings64. 

The  application  of  high  energy  efficiency  criteria  goes  hand  in  hand  with  the  use  of 
award  criteria  other  than  the  lowest  purchase  price  such  as  further  energy-efficiency 
criteria  or  Total  Costs  of  Ownership  (TCO)  where  the  energy  costs  over  lifetime  and 
optionally  also  costs  related  to  impact  on  external  environment  have  been  assessed. 
However,  the  Single  Market  Scorecard  for  Public  Procurement  on  award  criteria65 

64 Final report of technical Assessment study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2020 

65 European Commission (2019), Scoreboard Performance per policy area. See: 

https://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/scoreboard/performance_per_policy_area/public_procurement/ind
ex_en.htm  

31 

 
 
 
                                                 
indicates that a large share of public procurement is carried out with the price as the only 
award  criteria.  It  also  showed  that  in  2019,  more  than  60%  of  the  procurement 
procedures  in  16  Member  States  were  awarded  solely  on  the  basis  of  the  lowest  price 
criterion.  The  scoreboard  data  still  give  an  indication  of  a  large  amount  of  public 
institutions  not  using  TCO  as  award  criteria  with  the  annual  energy  costs  taken  into 
account,  or  considering  higher  levels  of  energy  efficiency  as  award  criteria  above  the 
minimum requirements referred to in accompanying Annex III to Article 6, which shows 
that the intervention was less successful in this area. 

Article 6 was subject to a first evaluation in 201666. The evaluation concluded that it was 
too early at that stage to judge the achievement of the objectives of Article 6 (including 
achievements by central governments) given that the transposition deadline for the article 
was 5 June 2014 and there was insufficient time and experience in the Member States on 
implementing the requirements of Article 6. The evaluation further found that there was 
no data allowing the quantification of progress in the rate of public procurement applying 
energy efficiency criteria, which is due to the lack of clear reporting requirements in the 
legal basis.  

To this date, it remains a key limitation. Feedback received from public authorities show 
that due to the absence of systematic monitoring and reporting requirements in Article 6, 
there  is  no  sufficient  information  on  the  impacts.  In  addition,  studies67  and  feedback 
received from stakeholders show that there are still some barriers to taking into account 
energy  efficiency  requirements  into  public  procurement  practices  (complexity  of 
procedures,  legal  and  institutional  barriers,  higher  initial  costs  of  energy  efficiency 
works,  equipment,  buildings,  services,  lack  of  resources  and  budget,  knowledge  and 
tools,  time  constraints),  and  a  high  proportion  of  tender  procedures  in  the  EU  are 
awarded on the basis of the lowest price. The conditionalities in Article 6 also limit the 
effectiveness  of  the  uptake  of  energy  efficiency  requirements  as  Member  States  can 
bypass  them  on  grounds  of  cost-effectiveness,  economic  or  technical  feasibility,  which 
was widely recognised by stakeholders in the public consultation feedback. 

The  stakeholders’  feedback  also  revealed  that  regional  and  local  public  bodies  are 
generally aware of the benefits of applying energy requirements in public purchasing, but 
very often they lack sufficient resources, tools, financing and skilled staff to apply them. 
To address these barriers, specific legislation, guidance and support tools are needed. 

The stakeholder feedback points out that legislation is one of the key factors incentivising 
the  application  of  energy  efficiency  criteria  in  public  procurement,  but  also  support 
measures contribute to the application of energy efficiency criteria in public procurement 
such as awareness raising, training, guidance, financial resources etc. 

66 SWD (2016) 402 final 

67 European Commission (2019), Public procurement of energy efficient works, supplies and services. 

See: https://ec.europa.eu/easme/sites/easme-
site/files/easme_public_procurement_projects_study_2020.pd 

32 

 
                                                 
Nevertheless,  some  Member  States  have  introduced  the  specific  rules  or  guidance  to 
require that energy efficiency criteria have been taken into account68.  

For example, in Portugal the National Strategy for Ecological Public Procurement 2020 
(ENCPE  2020)  as  a  main  objective  includes  environmental  criteria  in  public  contracts, 
aligned them with economic and social aspects69. Thus, the Portuguese authorities expect 
that  these  criteria  will  be  considered  in  public  purchases.  In  Estonia,  energy  efficiency 
criteria are applied for instance when procuring IT equipment, such as laptops, computers 
and  printers,  and  also  for  new  buildings70.  Guidelines  for  public  procurement  are  also 
integrated  as  part  of  Green  Public  Procurement  National  Action  Plan  in  Malta  that 
launched  it  in  September  2019  which  included  guidelines  for  the  application  of  energy 
efficiency criteria for different product categories71.  

It should be noted that the expiry of the Energy Star programme72 has led to an absence 
of standards for office equipment in particular, as far as they are not covered by the EU 
provisions on energy labelling or ecodesign, so public procurement for such items has no 
baseline  unless  the  Member  States  are  seeking  to  take  into  account  the  standards 
published by the US authorities on voluntary basis. 

  Article 7 on energy savings obligation  

Article 7 is  a  key provision  of the EED estimated to  contribute to  the EU 2020 energy 
efficiency  target  by  about  half  of  expected  energy  savings  stemming  from  the  EED73. 
This  is  also  confirmed  by  stakeholders  that  view  Article  7  as  a  central  element 
contributing to the achievement of the EED objectives.  

Energy  efficiency  improvements  have  been  largely  achieved  thanks  to  the  measures 
introduced  by  Member  States  to  achieve  the  energy  savings  obligations74  in  end-use 
under Article 7 for the period 2014-2020 (see Table 13 in Annex 4).  

According  to  the  latest  energy  efficiency  progress  report75,  Member  States  achieved  by 
the end of 2018 about 55% (126 Mtoe) of the total sum of the cumulative end-use energy 
savings obligations for 2014-2020 (230 Mtoe), which overall is a positive indicator at EU 
level. However, the progress at national level varies. A more detailed overview of energy 
savings achieved per Member State is provided in Table 13 in Annex 4. 

68 SWD/2013/0446 final 
69 According to the General Directorate for Energy and Geology, Portugal 
70 According to the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications, Estonia 
71 MIEMA, Energy Agency, Malta 
72 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-products/energy-star_en 

73 EED Impact assessment of 2011 
74 New annual energy savings of 1.5% of annual energy sales for the period 2014-2020, and new annual 

savings of 0.8% of final energy consumption for the period 2021-2030. 

75 COM(2020) 954  

33 

 
                                                 
The Commission  forecasted the likelihood of  achieving the required cumulative energy 
savings  per  Member  State  by  31  December  2020,  the  basic  assumption  is  that  all 
implemented policy measures continue delivering new annual savings in 2019 and 2020 
as  they  did  in  2018.  The  cumulative  energy  savings  are  then  compared  to  the  required 
energy savings by 31 December 2020 per Member State. The analysis did not consider 
potential concerns about eligibility and additionality. Besides, the possible impacts of the 
COVID-19 crisis on the amount of new annual savings achieved in 2020 are difficult to 
estimate at this stage.  

According  to  the  analysis,  six  Member  States  (Bulgaria,  Croatia,  Czechia,  Luxemburg, 
Portugal,  and  Romania)  will  very  likely  not  achieve  the  required  amount  of  energy 
savings  by  31  December  2020,  if  they  do  not  take  additional  actions.  Another  eight 
(Estonia,  Germany,  Greece,  Hungary,  Italy,  Slovenia,  Spain,  Sweden)  are  unlikely  to 
achieve the required amount of energy savings without additional actions taken. And the 
remaining fourteen Member States will likely or very likely achieve the required amount 
of cumulative energy savings76. 

The  majority  of  the  savings  are  achieved  by  the  energy  efficiency  obligation  scheme 
(EEOS) currently implemented in 15 Member States which provides about 35%  energy 
savings according to 2018 data reported by Member States. Other types of measures are 
financing  schemes  that  contribute  around  13%  of  the  energy  savings.  Taxes  on  energy 
and CO2 taxes account for 16% of total achieved energy savings (see Figure 6).  

Figure 6 - Share of reported energy savings by type of policy measure at EU-level 

Source: DG ENER’s own calculations based on the 2020 national annual reports. 

76 COM(2020) 954 final 

34 

 
 
 
                                                 
On the sectors targeted by the implemented policy measures, the largest share of energy 
savings reported by Member States results from cross-cutting measures, which cannot be 
attributed to a single sector. Most of the measures (by count of reported measures) target 
services and industry, and the public sector (except for housing owned by public bodies, 
which  is  included  in  the  private  households  sector  (see  Figure  7).  In  total  36  new 
measures were reported in 2020 annual reports (for the year 2018) under Article 7. 

Figure 7 - Share of reported savings by sector 

Source: DG ENER’s own calculations based on the 2020 national annual reports 

  Article 8 on energy audits and energy management systems  

Literature  review  and  feedback  received  from  stakeholders  reveal  that  Member  States 
have  established  mandatory  schemes  for  energy  audits  for  non-SMEs,  which  have 
carried out the energy audits in line with requirements in Annex VI of the EED. Around 
750,000 enterprises in  the EU fall within the scope of these schemes,  and the potential 
energy  savings  from  these  schemes  are  estimated  to  be  approximately  7%  of  the  total 
energy consumption of all enterprises77.  

As  regards  the  impact  of  the  provisions  aiming  at  SMEs,  the  Member  States  have 
implemented  various  schemes  that  include  regulatory  instruments,  information  based 
instruments, financial instruments and voluntary agreements78. Almost 80% are related to 
information dissemination or financial or economic incentives.  

77 Technical assistance on assessing the effectiveness of the implementation of the definition of small and 

medium-sized enterprises for the purposes of Article 8(4) of the Energy Efficiency Directive 

78 A Study on Energy Efficiency in Enterprises: Energy Audits and Energy Management Systems - Report 
on the fulfilment of obligations upon large enterprises, the encouragement of small- and medium-sized 
companies and on good-practice 

35 

 
 
 
                                                 
The  EED  does  not  contain  any  specific  reporting  obligation  for  Member  States  on  the 
implementation  and  impact  of  Article  8,  which  poses  difficulties  to  measure  the 
effectiveness  of  this  measure.  In  particular,  the  extent  to  which  energy  audits 
recommendations are followed up, which is not required under Article 8, and the extent 
to which these yield energy savings are not systematically monitored and analysed in the 
Member  States.  Furthermore,  analysis  retrieved  only  gives  limited  information  about 
energy audits carried out by SMEs and households. 

Even though this information is not directly reported under Article 8, some indications of 
the  types  of  programmes  implemented  and  the  magnitude  of  their  impact  for  specific 
stakeholder groups is reported under Article 7 of the EED (e.g. voluntary agreements and 
white  certificate  schemes).  For  example,  Member  States’  annual  energy  efficiency 
reports reveal that overall 20 Mtoe cumulative energy savings have been achieved in the 
period  2014-2018  through  the  different  programmes  and  schemes  targeting  different 
stakeholder  groups  having  energy  audits  or  energy  management  systems  as  an  integral 
part.  Evidence  provided  by  then  five  Member  States  (Germany,  Latvia,  Romania, 
Slovakia  and  the  United  Kingdom)  indicates  that  over  the  period  2014-2018,  total 
cumulative energy savings of 1,686 ktoe were achieved from the measures implemented 
as a result of mandatory energy audits in large enterprises79 . 

The most detailed source of information on how audits have been implemented and their 
impacts available from Germany80.  

In terms of the impact of the provisions of Article 8 on SMEs not much evidence on the 
implementation or the impacts is available in the literature. According to the findings of 
the  dedicated  study  on  the  implementation  of  Article  8(4)  on  energy  audits81,  Member 
States  apply  different  approaches  to  support  the  implementation  of  energy  audits  in 
SMEs.  Some  examples  point  to  voluntary  approaches  in  line  with  Article  8(5),  e.g. 
Finland, the Netherlands and the UK. In Germany, Austria and Croatia, SMEs are given 
tax  reductions  in  return  of  conducting  energy  audits.  In  Denmark  and  Sweden,  the 
approach has been to provide the SMEs with relevant information. On the other hand, for 
example,  in  Latvia  it  is  mandatory  that  the  undertakings  with  electricity  consumption 
exceeding 500 GWh per year (most of them are SMEs) should carry out an energy audit 
and  implement  certain  measures  indicated  in  the  energy  audit  (on  which  they  need  to 

79 Technical Assistance study on assessing progress in implementing Article 7 of the EED and preparing 
the policy implementation in view of the new obligation period 2021-2030, Fraunhofer, 2020 

80 Analyse der Entwicklung des Marktes und Zielerreichungskontrolle für gesetzlich verpflichtende 

Energieaudits and PwC (2018). Evaluierung der Förderprogramme „Energieberatung im Mittelstand“ 
und „Energieberatung für Nicht-wohngebäude von Kommunen und gemeinnützigen Organisationen“. 
Endbericht Frankfurt, September 2018 

81 European Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (2016), Enhancing the impact of energy audits and 

energy management in the EU, A Review of Article 8 of the Energy efficiency Directive, See: 
https://tech-action.unepdtu.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/04/eceeereport-article8review-
correctedformat.pdf  

36 

 
                                                 
report annually). In the Netherlands, large companies should also carry out certain energy 
efficiency measures with a payback period up to five years. 

The effectiveness of the provisions on SMEs was also addressed as part of the targeted 
stakeholder  consultation.  The  20  Member  States  that  responded  to  the  questionnaire 
mentioned  some  36  different  schemes  targeting  SMEs.  Of  these  40%  are  related  to 
information  activities  and  35%  are  financial  or  economic  schemes.  Some  stakeholders 
stated  that  the  article  has  contributed  to  a  higher  uptake  of  energy  audits  and  energy 
management systems in SMEs.  

Regarding  awareness  raising  on  energy  audits  in  households,  Member  States  have 
implemented a number of different measures including information activities or financial 
or economic incentives, which are implemented for the purposes of other articles of EED, 
e.g. Article 7, 9, 10, 12 and 17 and for the purposes of provisions in the EPBD.  

In conclusion, despite the positive impact observed due to Article 8, the analysis reveals 
the following limitations to reaping energy savings potential:  

‒  Lack  of  monitoring  and  reporting  requirements  for  energy  audits  and  on  the 

measures implemented as a result of the energy audit; 

‒  Difficulties related to application of the SMEs definition (Article 8(4)); 

‒  Lack of requirements/ incentives for implementing energy management systems; 

‒  No  requirements  for  enterprises  to  implement  the  energy  saving  opportunities 

identified in an energy audit; 

‒  Lack of energy auditors and low technical competence in some Member States.  

Feedback  received  in  stakeholder  consultation  indicate  significant  support  for  energy 
audit obligation to be based on energy consumption. A large number of stakeholders also 
point out that the obligation should be accompanied by requirements to carry out certain 
measures identified in the audit, and that energy audits should include recommendations 
on use of renewable energy and resource efficiency. 

More specifically in relation to the assessment of Article 8(4) in line with Article 24(12), 
a  detailed  assessment  of  the  implementation  of  the  non-SME  definition  has  been 
carried  out82.  This  highlights  the  main  difficulties  encountered  by  Member  States  in 
implementing the Article 8(4) provision. In practical terms the main challenges relate to 
the  difficulty  of  establishing  connections  between  different  SMEs,  in  particular  cross-
border ones, that might bring them within the scope of Article 8(4). From an economic 
perspective,  it  appears  that  the  use  of  the  current  definition  brings  a  proportion  of 
enterprises within its scope for whom the economic costs of carrying out an energy audit 
are  not  justified  by  the  potential  energy  savings.  The  assessment  explores  alternative 

82 Technical assistance on assessing the effectiveness of the implementation of the definition of small and 

medium-sized enterprises for the purposes of Article 8(4) of the Energy Efficiency Directive 

37 

 
                                                 
definitions  based  upon  energy  use  or  cost  or  a  mixture  of  size  and  energy  use.  It 
concludes  that  most  alternatives  offer  a  lower  administrative  burden,  however  in  some 
cases  these  result  in  a  significant  shift  in  the  types  of  enterprises  within  the  scope  – 
primarily covering more transport companies. 

  Articles 9-11 on metering and billing 

Requirements on metering and billing contributed to achieving energy savings, thanks to 
the increased awareness  of energy consumption patterns at an end-user level. However, 
certain  gaps  that  impeded  the  full  tapping  of  the  energy  savings  were  identified  in  the 
dedicated evaluation in 201683 and were subjected to revision in 2018. Examples of gaps 
and areas of improvement included the definition of the end user to complement that of 
the final customer, the availability of transparent heat cost allocation rules, the frequency 
of billing information to consumers, etc. 

The  impact  of  the  new  provisions  cannot  be  assessed  at  this  stage  as  the  transposition 
deadline was only 25 October 202084. 

Castellazzi85 and Zangheri, Serrenho & Bertoldi86 studied the impact of the provisions of 
these  Articles  and  concluded  that  metering  of  energy  consumption  can  contribute  to 
reducing  a  household’s  energy  consumption  in  a  range  of  5  to  10%.  The  Empirica 
guidelines for sub-metering87 refer to a meta-study that found a median of 3% reduction 
in  heating  consumption  when  using  basic  consumption  information  services.  They  also 
refer to a pilot where a median of almost 6% reduction was found when using advanced 
consumption information services. Thus, it confirms the findings of the EED evaluation 
in  2016  that  metering  and  billing  have  contributed  to  the  achievement  of  the  overall 
energy efficiency targets.  

  Article 12 on consumer information and empowerment 

In  terms  of  promoting  consumer  information  and  empowering  programmes,  the 
stakeholder  consultation  showed  that  Article  12  had  a  moderate  effect  in  terms  of 
empowering consumers and tackling energy poverty. Although Member States take many 
measures  at  national  level  to  raise  awareness  and  provide  information  to  energy 

83 SWD(2016) 399 final 
84 Revised provisions for the metering and billing of electricity have been included in the Electricity 

Directive 2019/944 and their transposition deadline is 31 December 2020 

85 https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/analysis-member-states-rules-allocating-heating-cooling-and-hot-

water-costs-multi-apartmentpurpose 

86 https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/19/3788/htm 
87 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies/specific-guidance-sub-metering-thermal-energy-multi-unit-buildings-

implementation-articles-9_en?redir=1 

38 

 
                                                 
their  effectiveness  and 

consumers, citizens, and energy stakeholders88, there is no concrete data to allow for the 
the  overall 
measurement  of 
achievements  of  the  objectives  of  the  EED  as  a  whole.  In  addition,  exchange  of  good 
practices and coordination between Member States and stakeholders is incidental due to 
the non-binding form of the Article. 

their  contribution 

towards 

  Article 14 on energy efficiency in heating and cooling  

Interim  findings  indicate  that  Article  14  helped  increase  the  awareness  of  energy 
efficiency  potentials  in  the  heating  and  cooling  sector  in  the  Member  States  leading  to 
implementation of energy efficiency measures. This is mainly due to the requirement to 
carry out a comprehensive assessment of the potential for efficient heating and cooling, 
in line with Article 14(1). Assessments of the high-efficiency cogeneration and efficient 
district  heating  potentials  were  performed  in  most  Member  States,  and  significant 
economic  potential  of  high  efficiency  cogeneration  and  efficient  district  heating  and 
cooling  were  identified  in  most  cases.  Important  potential  to  reduce  losses  in  existing 
heat networks were also identified by many Member States. However, in general, no or 
only  very  few  heating  and  cooling  policies  and  measures  implemented  in  the  Member 
States  are  directly  linked  to  the  comprehensive  assessments.  Stakeholders’  feedback 
largely confirm this finding. 

Analysis shows that almost all Member States have introduced policies in the heating and 
cooling  sector  either  aimed  at  improving  energy  efficiency  or  increasing  use  of 
renewable  energy  and  therefore  also  primary  energy  efficiency.  However,  most  of  the 
measures targeting heating and cooling at an end-use level have been introduced for the 
purposes  of  energy  savings  obligation  in  line  with  Article  7  (e.g.  installation  of  more 
efficient  heating  systems  at  building  level)  or  provisions  under  the  Renewable  Energy 
Directive.  On  the  contrary,  a  vast  majority  of  Member  States  have  not  identified  new 
measures to realise the identified potential for high efficiency cogeneration and efficient 
district  heating  and  cooling,  in  line  with  Article  14(2)  and  (4)89.  An  overview  of  the 
measures reported in the final NECPs submitted in 2019-2020 is presented in Table 14 in 
Annex 4. 

The  requirements  in  Article  14  have  to  some  extent  contributed  to  promoting  high 
efficiency  cogeneration  and  efficient  district  heating  and  cooling,  mainly  as  a  result  of 
the identification of potential in the comprehensive assessments, the cost-benefit analysis 
requirement in Article 14(5) and mandating public support exclusively to high efficiency 

88 Examples can be found in: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-
reports/effective-information-measures-promote-energy-use-reduction-eu-member-states; Rivas 
Calvete S.; Cuniberti B.; Bertoldi P. Effective information measures to promote energy use reduction 
in EU Member States . EUR 27997 EN. Luxembourg (Luxembourg): Publications Office of the 
European Union; 2016. JRC100661. 

89https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC112225/jrc112225_synthesis_report_final.p
df 

39 

 
                                                 
cogeneration in line with Article 14(11). However, economic potential for cogeneration 
identified by Member States in 2011 has in most cases not been achieved90. The situation 
differs  among  Member  States.  While  in  some,  the  construction  of  new  cogeneration 
facilities  is  promoted  and  the  share  is  growing,  some  Member  States  expect  reduced 
capacity  in  cogeneration  due  to  more  difficult  competitive  situation  in  their  national 
markets.  

In  particular,  the  cost-benefit  analysis  requirement  in  line  with  Article  14(5)  is  lacking 
impact  on  increasing  efficient  supply  of  heating  and  cooling.  There  are  several 
shortcomings  influencing  the  overall  effectives  of  this  requirement.  These  analyses  in 
practice  focus  mostly  on  power-only  installations  and  are  not  applied  to  heat-only 
installations, thus preventing improvements e.g. in process heat  generation. In addition, 
the analysis for potential utilization of waste heat is limited only to industrial installation, 
thus leaving a range of potential sources of waste heat from other business activities in 
the  service  sector.  Moreover,  the  effectiveness  of  the  link  between  the  results  of  the 
analysis and authorization criteria in line with Article 14(7) is questionable, taking into 
account the overall awareness of this requirement is considered as low. In addition, the 
wide use of the existing exemptions to the requirement in line with Article 14(6) without 
justification reduces the overall effectiveness of the requirement. Finally, the requirement 
does not address the whole range of potential efficient heating technologies and solutions 
and  therefore  reduces  the  effectiveness  in  increasing  primary  energy  efficiency  of  heat 
supply. 

As regards efficient district heating and cooling, despite being defined in the EED, it is 
addressed  in  Article  14  only  to  a  limited  extent,  in  particular  by  the  requirements  in 
Article  14(1)  and  (4).  However  in  light  of  the  abovementioned  low  impact  of  these 
provisions  and  taking  into  account  the  fact  that  NECPs  do  not  foresee  a  significant 
expansion of (efficient) district heating and cooling in the period of 2021 to 2030 either, 
the effectiveness of Article 14 in increasing of the uptake of efficient district heating and 
cooling remains somewhat limited.  

Indirectly, Article 14 has contributed to the use of EU funds to upgrade district heating 
systems.  For  measures  to  promote  high  efficiency  co-generation  and  reconstruction  of 
district heating systems planned under the ERDF and CF funds for the period 2014-2019 
were 5028 billion euro, total amount of funds decided during the same period were 2,153 
billion euro. 

Despite  its  established  scope  of  heating  and  cooling,  the  overwhelming  majority  of 
provisions  in  Article  14  address  solely  heating  supply  without  addressing  cooling. 
Although  heating  currently  represents  a  much  larger  share  of  energy  consumption  than 

90https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC112225/jrc112225_synthesis_report_final.p
df 

40 

 
                                                 
cooling, energy consumption associated with cooling is steadily increasing91. Despite its 
increasing importance, only a minority of Member States address cooling wzith specific 
policy  measures.  A  comprehensive  framework  for  addressing  cooling  is  missing  in 
Article 14 and the whole Directive, e.g. measures promoting energy system integration or 
utilization of waste heat from cooling systems and processes in buildings and industries. 

Utilisation of waste heat is to some extent in the current scope of Article 14, most notably 
in terms of increasing the awareness of the existing potential in waste heat utilization by 
the way of carrying out  the comprehensive assessments and the cost-benefit analysis in 
case of industrial installations (Article 14(5)). However, the overall effectiveness of the 
current  provisions  is  insufficient,  due to  its limited scope. The  existing requirements in 
Article 14 are limited to waste heat produced in industrial installations, thus leaving out 
some  sources  of  waste  heat,  such  as  data  centres  or  other  services  such  as  shopping 
centres  or  buildings  in  general.  In  general,  the  support  for  waste  heat  reuse  is  not  very 
common among Member States, however the assessment of the NECPs shows that some 
Member  States  have  implemented  or  are  planning  to  implement  measures  in  order  to 
support waste heat utilisation. 

In  some  Member  States,  district  heating  services  are  subject  to  a  price  regulation. 
Possibilities to promote energy efficiency through price regulation have not been utilized 
in EED. Some of these regulation frameworks address also the efficiency aspects through 
obligations  to  undertake  energy  efficiency  measures,  and  some  of  them  incentivize 
operators to improve energy efficiency of the district heating service.  

The stakeholder consultation, including the stakeholder workshop on heating and cooling 
revealed that many Member States believe that Article 14 has contributed only to  small 
efficiency  improvements  and  that  relevant  areas  are  left  out  of  Article  14  such  as  data 
centres, higher system integration (use of waste heat, electrical and thermal efficiencies), 
building-level  measures  (heating  systems  and  heat  pumps)  and  local  planning  and 
development.  Furthermore,  the  comprehensive  analysis  have  been  lacking  on  the 
implementation side i.e. the utilization of the identified potential has not been supported 
by implementation of policies and measures. 

Article 15 on energy transformation, transmission and distribution  

Some  provisions  with  a  view  to  improve  efficiency  of  energy  transformation, 
transmission  and  distribution  (Article  15)  have  been  effectively  implemented  in  the 
Member  States,  for  example,  treating  energy  losses  as  a  separate  item  in  the  national 
efficiency  regulations  and  incentivising  demand-side  resources  in  Member  States. 
However, the use of common methodologies and reporting is still not in place and their 
impact  therefore  cannot  be  assessed.  In  fact,  there  is  no  uniform  definition  of  energy 
losses across the EU which results into a sub-optimal data quality. 

91 According to estimates a three- to five- fold increase by 2030 

41 

 
                                                 
Even  though  the  available  information  shows  a  gradual  increase  in  energy  efficiency 
(equivalent  to  a  reduction  in  energy  losses  –  see  Table  4),  the  feedback  obtained  from 
stakeholders show limited evidence to fully evaluate the effectiveness of Article 15.  

Table 4: Energy losses as a percentage of energy available for consumption in the EU 

Energy source 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

Gas 

0.96% 

0.83% 

0.84% 

0.85% 

0.72% 

0.72% 

0.75% 

Electricity 

7.53% 

7.60% 

7.43% 

7.51% 

7.39% 

7.28% 

7.44% 

Source: Eurostat 

A  study  in  201592  shows  various  technical  solutions  for  improving  grid  efficiency:  in 
electricity  networks  for  example  as  confirmed  by  other  studies93,94    the  most  relevant 
potential  lays  in  transformers;  Commission  Regulation  2019/1783  establishes  higher 
efficiency standards (Tier 2) for all transformers installed since July 2021 thus  steering 
the  network  development  towards  better  efficiency.  Although  there  is  no  common 
definition  of  “non-technical  losses”,  in  some  countries  they  are  significant;  and  the 
gradual deployment of smart meters will help substantially reduce losses by making their 
detection easier and faster. Article 19 of the new Electricity Directive 2019/944 gives a 
strong  impulse  to  this  evolution;  the  current  state  of  play  is  the  object  of  a  specific 
report95.  Other  more  technical  instruments,  like  replacing  the  conductors  or  raising  the 
voltage should be addressed on a case by case basis, as their effectiveness depends on the 
specific punctual condition and are therefore unfit for an EU action. 

In  gas  networks  the  circumstances  are  more  complex,  as  energy  losses  take  different 
forms96,  which  can  be  divided  into  two  groups:  the  first,  and  most  likely  the  largest,  is 
represented by the energy contained in the methane released as such into the atmosphere, 
the second is gas own consumption i.e. used as an energy source within the networks to 
move or heat the gas itself. The first issue is already actively addressed by the “Methane 
Strategy97”,  as  the  methane  leaked  in  the  atmosphere  (not  only  in  gas  networks)  is  a 

92 Study on Identifying Energy Efficiency improvements and saving potential in energy networks, 

including analysis of the value of demand response, in support of the implementation of Article 15 of 
the EED, Tractabel, 2015 
(https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/GRIDEE_4NT_364174_000_01_TOTALDOC
%20-%2018-1-2016.pdf) 

93 https://setis.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/reports/Report-on-saving-potentials-energy-transmission-and-

distribution.pdf 

94 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies/identifying-energy-efficiency-improvements-and-saving-potential-

energy-networks-and-demand_en  

95 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies_main/final_studies/benchmarking-smart-metering-deployment-eu-

28_en 

96 Chapters 5 & 6 : https://ec.europa.eu/energy/studies_main/final_studies/benchmarking-smart-metering-

deployment-eu-28_en 

97 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/eu_methane_strategy.pdf  

42 

 
                                                 
powerful  greenhouse  gas  in  its  own  merit  as  well  as  for  safety  reasons.  The  second, 
which  only  occurs  in  the  transmission  system  and  represents  a  smaller  share,  can  be 
addressed by replacing the existing compressors with more efficient ones, incurring high 
investment costs. 

The  literature  review  indicates  that  most  European  regulations  targeting  gas  and 
electricity tariffs do not treat energy losses as a separate item (instead, energy losses are 
included in the costs subject to the general regulatory benchmarks). Hence, the evidence 
indicates that most of the Member States incentivize the energy transmission operators to 
reduce energy losses if those reductions are economically efficient98.  

The analysis shows that implementing a common methodology to measure energy losses 
across  Member  States  poses  a  number  of  challenges.  One  of  the  reasons  is  that 
implementing a common methodology can be too prescriptive as the regulatory systems 
and  starting  points  of  each  Member  States  are  different,  also  confirmed  by  the 
stakeholders that participated in the workshop, which was held to discuss the findings of 
the study.  

In  addition,  there  is  a  trade-off  between  flexibility  and  efficiency  that  should  be 
considered in a local context, e.g., of how increased flexibility can incur costs to the end-
consumers  and  negatively  affect  energy  poverty99.  A  majority  of  stakeholders  thus 
showed reluctance to introducing  additional common efficiency requirements supported 
only by the minority of the respondents100.  

Article 15 also contained requirements for promoting demand side resources before they 
were  repealed  by  the  new  Electricity  Directive  in  2019  (to  be  transposed  by  Member 
States  by  1  January  2021).  In  meeting  the  requirements  for  balancing  and  ancillary 
services,  TSOs  and  DSOs  must 
including 
aggregators,  in  a  non-discriminatory  way  with  Member  States  engaging  in  defining 
technical  parameters  to  promote  access  and  participation  of  demand  response  in 
balancing,  reserve  and  other  system  services  markets.  National  Regulatory  Authorities 
should also guarantee that clear technical rules and operational requirements (tendering, 
contractual arrangements, etc.) are disclosed, based on which demand response can take 
part in the balancing market and in other system services102. 

treat  demand  response101  providers, 

98 https://www.ceer.eu/documents/104400/-/-/fd4178b4-ed00-6d06-5f4b-8b87d630b060 

99 Based on results from the workshop held on 16 September 2020 

100 Outcome of the stakeholder workshop on Article 15 of the EED, held on 16 September 2020 
101 According to Electricity Directive (Article 2(20)) “Demand response means the change of electricity 
load by final customers from their normal or current consumption patterns in response to market 
signals, including in response to time-variable electricity prices or incentive payments, or in response 
to the acceptance of the final customer's bid to sell demand reduction or increase at a price in an 
organised market as defined in point (4) of Article 2 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 
No 1348/2014 (17), whether alone or through aggregation”. 

102 JRC report: Demand Response Status in the Member States, 2016. Zancanella, P., Bertoldi, P. and Kiss, 
B., EUR 27998 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2016, ISBN 978-92-79-
59818-0, JRC101191 

43 

 
                                                 
According to the JRC study of 2016 and information collected from the Member States, 
the  EED  constitutes  a  significant  step  towards  the  development  of  demand  response  in 
Europe.  Even  though  a  majority  of  Member  States  faced  challenges  to  introduce  the 
necessary parameters for ensuring demand response in their countries, this trend has been 
changing  positively  with  more  Member  States  taking  necessary  steps  to  overcome  the 
barriers. While back in 2013 demand response was almost non-existent in Europe, today 
consumers  have  the  opportunity  to  participate  in  demand  response  services  in  many 
Member States in accordance to the EED and now in line with the provisions of the new 
Electricity Directive103. 

For example, in the Netherlands a scheme has been developed to ensure that providers of 
demand  side  response  services  can  compete  in  the  market  for  the  provision  of  system 
services if, by switching installations  on and off, can contribute to  the balancing of the 
system. Similar schemes have been adopted in other European countries104. 

More  recently,  the  Electricity  Directive  (Article  17)105  sets  forth  a  more  detailed 
framework for transmission and distribution operators.  

Moreover,  analysis  shows  that  the  Article  15(1)  EED  requires  that  national  energy 
regulatory authorities pay due regard to energy efficiency in carrying out the regulatory 
tasks 106,  and  provide  suitable  incentives  to  network  operators,  due  to  the  interpretation 
given in several Member States the role played to date has been modest.  

Despite  evidence  on  energy  efficiency  potential  in  energy  grids  and  on  technical 
instruments,  the pursuit for an EU level  action has been inconclusive so far, due to  the 
following factors:  

‒  The natural evolution of the grids will lead towards energy efficiency, especially 

the electricity ones; 

‒  The results of the CBA often advise against a massive elective intervention; 
‒  Concern that energy efficiency investments may ultimately result in higher prices 

for the final consumers; 

‒  Gas network operators are reluctant to invest because of the uncertainty about the 

long term role of this energy source;  

‒  Reluctance to have a “common methodology” given the diversity of grids.  

  Article  16  on  availability  of  qualification,  accreditation  and  certification 

schemes   

103 Demand Response Status in the Member States, JRC 2016 

104 Based on Concerted Action – Energy Efficiency Directive (2016), National EED Implementation Re-

ports (NIR), see https://www.ca-
eed.eu/content/download/3519/file/National%20Implementation%20Report%20-
%20Consolidated%20document%202016.pdf 

105 Directive EU/2019/944 
106 And also, indirectly, Articles 58 and 59 of Directive 2017/944/EU 

44 

 
 
                                                 
Findings  suggest  that  the  majority  of  Member  States  have  established  qualification, 
accreditation  and  certification  schemes  covering  energy  services,  energy  audits,  energy 
managers and installers107. Overall, it seems that the Directive has contributed to setting 
up the schemes, although in some Member States the schemes existed before.  

There  is  limited  information  available,  though,  on  whether  the  qualification  and 
certification schemes are effective in ensuring the right level of technical competence in 
Member States for all energy efficiency specialists (required by Article 16).  

Article 16 does not contain any specific requirement for Member States to report in the 
level of qualifications nor on the availability of schemes. However, Member States were 
required  to  assess  whether  the  level  of  technical  competence  was  sufficient  before  end 
2014. The information received from Member States in the 2014 Annual Reports showed 
that  10  Member  States  have  reported  to  have  sufficient  schemes  available  (Belgium, 
Bulgaria, Cyprus,  Denmark, Croatia,  Lithuania,  Malta, the Netherlands,  Poland and the 
United Kingdom).  

Feedback received from stakeholders show that the EED largely contributed to setting up 
the  schemes,  and  this  was  mostly  due  to  the  other  EED  provisions  such  as  the 
requirements to carry out energy audits in non-SMEs in line with Article 8 and ensure the 
need for certified energy services providers in line with Article 18 of the EED. 

The  majority  of  stakeholders  hold  view  that  qualification  and  certification  schemes  are 
effective to some extent, and the effectiveness of the schemes varies across the Member 
States (see Figure 8 below). 

Figure 8 - Effectiveness of the existing certification and/or accreditation schemes in the EU  

23 

10 

70 

Effective to some extent

Not effective

Effective

Source: feedback from the open public consultation  

In  addition,  the  level  of  technical  competence  varies  across  the  category  of  specialists 
(see Figure 9) and the technical competence seems to be satisfactory for energy auditors 

107 Final report of technical assistance study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2021 

45 

 
 
                                                 
given the high demand for these specialists linked also to the obligation for non-SMEs to 
carry out energy audits every four years.  

Figure 9 – Do you think the level of technical competence of providers of energy services, energy 
auditors, energy managers and installers of energy-related building elements is sufficient in your 
country?  

Installers of energy-related building elements

6 

0 

2 

Energy managers

Energy auditors

Providers of energy services

6 

5 

5 

0 

7 

0 

1 

1 

2 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Yes

No

Do not know

Source: Technical assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

Given that the greater focus is placed on boosting skills and technical competence of the 
renovation sector in the context of the Renovation Wave, there is a scope for streamlining 
the provisions in Article 16 to bring them in line with the new policy context.  

  Article 18 on energy services and energy performance contracting   

The EED largely contributed to functioning of energy services markets and to promoting 
the  use  of  energy  performance  contracting  in  renovation  practices  in  the  EU  both  in 
public  and  private  sectors108,  thanks  to  the  requirements  for  Member  States  to  provide 
information  to  SMEs  and  consumers  about  the  available  contracts  and  financing 
instruments  and  the  available  energy  services  providers  that  are  certified  (in  line  with 
Article 16).  

Before the entry into force the concept of energy performance contracting was a novelty 
for  most  of  the  Member  States.  Provisions  in  Article  18  triggered  the  basis  for 
establishing the necessary market conditions and regulatory framework that were vital to 
establish trust to this business model109. However, the EED provisions were implemented 
at  a  varying  level  (see  Table  15  in  Annex  4)  and  it  was  not  the  only  instrument  to 
promote  the  energy  services  markets.  Supportive  financing  framework  and  measures 
introduced at EU level and national level have also largely contributed such as measures 
promoted  under  the  Smart  Finance  for  Smart  Buildings  initiative,  ELENA  project 

108 JRC Report on energy services markets in the EU, 2019. Bertoldi, P., Boza-Kiss, B. and Toleikyte, A., 
Energy Service Market in the EU, EUR 29979 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-76-13092-5, doi:10.2760/45761, JRC118815JRC 

109 JRC Report on energy services markets in the EU, 2019. Bertoldi, P., Boza-Kiss, B. and Toleikyte, A., 
Energy Service Market in the EU, EUR 29979 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-76-13092-5, doi:10.2760/45761, JRC118815 

46 

 
 
                                                 
development  assistance,  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds,  Horizon  2020  and 
EIB guarantee funds. 

Overall, requirements of Article 18 have been implemented to some extent by most of the 
Member States110. However, success  in  addressing  regulatory and market  barriers since 
the entry into force of the EED was somewhat modest as there are still important barriers 
that  impede  the  functioning  of  energy  services  markets  and  the  uptake  of  energy 
performance contracting (see Table 16 in Annex 4)111, namely: 

‒ 

Inexperience  of  actors:  lack  of  technical  knowledge,  lack  of  experience  in 
procurement etc.; 

‒  Low trust  to  energy service providers and energy performance contracting from  the 
(potential)  clients:  absence  of  credible  reference  cases,  lack  of  standardisation  of 
measurement and verification of savings; 

‒  Ambiguities  in  the  legislative  framework:  ambiguities  in  the  legislative  framework 

supporting the development of the ESCO market; 

‒  Low  level  of  awareness:  lack  of  information  among  consumers  on  the  potential  of 

energy savings. 

Uptake of energy performance contracting in public sector proved to be to some extent 
effective  thanks  to  the  specific  obligations  requiring  Member  States  to  provide  model 
contracts  and information on best practices on available contracts  and tools such as the 
cost-benefit  analysis.  However,  the  implementation  of  these  obligations  depended  very 
much on the political commitment and measures taken at national level (see Table 17 in 
Annex 4). More specifically barriers encountered by the public sector are mostly related 
to trust and ambiguities of the legislation framework, also lack of expertise to prepare the 
projects,  especially  as  regards  to  complex  tendering  procedures),  but  also  competing 
contracts  – cheap loans and grants  are preventing the public authorities to  take risks of 
entering contract with the energy services provider. 

As  demonstrated  in  the  recent  JRC  analysis,  the  updated  Eurostat  Guide  in  September 
2017 on the treatment of EnPC in government accounts (and the EIB Practitioners’ Guide 
on  the  updated  Eurostat  guidance  in  May  2018)  have  facilitated  the  appetite  for 
concluding more energy performance contracts112 in the public sectors even though some 

110 JRC Report on energy services markets in the EU, 2019. Bertoldi, P., Boza-Kiss, B. and Toleikyte, A., 
EUR 29979 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-76-
13092-5, doi:10.2760/45761, JRC118815 

111 More detail could be found in JRC reports on energy services markets of 2019 and of 2020 (i.e. Moles-

Grueso, S., Bertoldi, P. and Boza-Kiss, B., Energy Performance Contracting in the Public Sector of the 
EU, 2020, EUR 30614 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2021, ISBN 
978-92-76-30877-5, doi:10.2760/171970, JRC123985) 

112 Allowing EnPC to be treated “off-balance sheet of government accounts” or “Maastricht neutrality” if 

specific conditions are ensured. 

47 

 
                                                 
Member States reported that they still face difficulties to apply the rules at national level 
(due to complexity of rules, ambiguities of national legislation and lack of experts)113.  

Over  75%  of  respondents  to  the  JRC  survey  2018114  underlined  that  the  Energy 
Efficiency  Directive  has  been  instrumental  in  promoting  the  energy  services  market  in 
the Member States, and has contributed to achieving energy savings in Europe.  

Stakeholders  feedback  confirm  that  Article  18  contributed  to  the  functioning  of  energy 
services  markets  even  though  the  provisions  ought  to  be  strengthened  to  ensure  better 
enforcement and tackling of remaining barriers. Amongst the most important factors that 
contributed  to  the  development  of  the  energy  services  market  in  Member  States, 
stakeholders point out  to awareness raising measures and access to  financing, followed 
by certification and qualification of energy services providers. There is a need to consider 
setting requirements of minimum qualifications of service providers, or measurement and 
verification procedures to ensure better enforcement of Article 18 in the future.  

  Article 19 on split of incentives & public purchasing and annual budgeting and 

accounting 

Feedback from stakeholders, during the targeted consultation, indicated that the EED has 
a  small  extent  contributed  to  addressing  the  split  of  incentives  and  to  removing  of 
market  and  other  types  of  barriers  for  public  purchasing,  annual  budgeting  or 
accounting (see  

Figure 10).  

113 JRC report on Energy Performance Contracting in the Public Sector of the EU, 2020. Moles-Grueso, S., 

Bertoldi, P. and Boza-Kiss, B., EUR 30614 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg, 2021, ISBN 978-92-76-30877-5, doi:10.2760/171970, JRC123985 

114 JRC Report on energy services markets in the EU, 2019. Bertoldi, P., Boza-Kiss, B. and Toleikyte, A., 
Energy Service Market in the EU, EUR 29979 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-76-13092-5, doi:10.2760/45761, JRC118815 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Figure 10  - How do you perceive the existence of regulatory, legal or administrative barriers to 
energy efficiency in the following areas? 

Split incentives between the owner and the
tenant(s) of a building

119 

48 

20 

Split incentives between owners in multi-owner
properties

98 

66 

19 

Investments in energy efficiency by individual
public bodies prevented due to national or
regional rules on public purchasing annual…

42 

43 

31 

Very significant

Somewhat significant

Not significant

Source: Feedback from the public consultation 

Stakeholders  assessed  existing  barriers  as  significant  in  relation  to  both  the  split  of 
incentives  (Article  19(1))  and  the  legal  and  regulatory  provisions,  and  administrative 
practices,  regarding  public  purchasing  and  annual  budgeting  and  accounting  (Article 
19(2)). It is difficult to quantify the impact due to the implementation of Article 19. 

In  2019,  JRC  carried  out  a  study115  to  assess  the  progress  made  by  Member  States  in 
relation to Article 19(1). The study found that 20 Member States had taken measures to 
address the issue of the split of incentives, whereas considering the criterion of multiple 
measures,  less  than  half  of  the  Member  States  (12)  had  implemented  more  effective 
policy mixes. 

Concerning the removal of barriers related to (Article 19(1)b), 12 Member States had not 
provided information concerning the removal of these barriers or deemed it not relevant. 
Moreover, 14 Member States had not taken any measures in this regard.  

  Article 20 on National Energy Efficiency Fund and financing mechanisms  

The findings show that provisions in Article 20 have partially contributed to establishing 
financing  facilities  across  Member  States.  However,  the  lack  of  available  data  on  the 
level of energy efficiency investments and financing in the Member States does not allow 

115 JRC report on assessement of progress made by Member States in relation to Article 19(1) of the EED, 
2019. Economidou, M. and Ribeiro Serrenho, T., EUR 29653 EN, Publications Office of the European 
Union, Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-79-99649-8, doi:10.2760/070440, JRC115314 

49 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
to fully assess the magnitude of the financing measures put in place.  In particular, due to 
its  voluntary,  coordinating  and  non-binding  nature  effects  of  provisions  in  Article  20 
have not be widespread to all Member States.  

On  the  other  hand,  the  requirement  for  the  Commission  to  assist  the  Member  States  in 
setting up financing facilities and technical support has been effective. To a large extent 
this is due to the active role the Commission had played over the past years through the 
EU  funding  programmes,  in  particular  through  the  ESIF  (European  Structural  and 
Investments  Funds)  and  EFSI  (European  Fund  for  Strategic  Investments)    and  various 
projects supported  under the Horizon 2020, in particular the ELENA technical assistance 
facility.  In  this  regard,  the  Commission  has  been  particularly  active  also  via  a  set  of 
support measures to step up energy efficiency financing, in particular the Smart Finance 
for  Smart  Buildings  initiative,  the  national  roundtables  of  Sustainable  Investment 
Forums, and the different working groups of the Energy Efficiency Financial Institutions 
Group (EEFIG). 

It should be pointed out that Article 20 contributed to keeping a high focus on challenges 
and barriers to energy efficiency financing in the Member States. Despite the number of 
financing  facilities  in  Member  States  have  not  significantly  grew  in  the  period  under 
assessment, the number of cross-Member States initiatives and forums for the exchange 
of  best  practices  have  notably  improved,  contributing  to  the  general  streamlining  and 
standardization of energy efficiency financing measures across Member States.   

Furthermore, it should be underlined that the provisions of Article 20 allow for the use of 
the National Energy Efficiency Funds as an alternative to fulfil the renovation obligation 
of central government buildings under Article 5(1) through the contribution to the Fund 
or permitting the obligated parties to make contributions to the fund for the purposes of 
achieving the energy savings obligation under Article 7(1). There is not much evidence 
though available in relation to the contributions made for fulfilling the obligation under 
Article 5(1); however, in relation to Article 7(1) Spain has made an explicit use of this 
possibility in the context of its EEOS. Slovenia also uses the National fund for collecting 
payments from the obligated parties as an alternative to the EEOS to implement energy 
efficiency improvement measures. 

According  to  the  available  data116,  Member  States  have  introduced  financial  measures 
including  national  energy  efficiency  funds  and  financial  and  fiscal  measures  (such  as 
taxation) and market-based instruments to one or more sectors in 2017 compared to 2014 
indicating that  the  contribution to  the establishment  of  financing  facilities has not  been 
widespread to all Member States.  

Although  Article  20  does  not  contain  any  specific  obligations  for  monitoring  and 
reporting on the implementation and the impacts, according to literature Member States 

116 Final report of technical assistance study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2021 

50 

 
                                                 
have  established  and  made  use  of  different  financial  instruments  for  the  purpose  of 
energy efficiency improvements.  

Figure  11  provides  an  overview  of  the  market-based  instruments  (including  white 
certificates) that were operational in 2017 compared to 2014 in selected sectors. 

Figure 11 - Overview of the market-based instruments 

10a: Application of Funds, financial and fiscal 
measures (including taxation) 

10b: Application of market-based instruments (e.g. 
EEOS) 

Source: Technical assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

Information  received  from  Member  States  in  the  (NEEAPs)117  show  that  all  Member 
States  have  introduced  financial  and  fiscal  measures  with  a  view  to  promote  energy 
efficiency  in  their  country,  targeting  different  end  use  sectors:  buildings,  industry  and 
transport sectors118. Information obtained in the annual reports also confirm the trend that 
implementation  of  the  financial  measures  were  relatively  prioritized  in  all  three  years 
compared to other types of measures119.  

More  specifically,  around  130  public  financial  and  fiscal  schemes  supporting  energy 
renovations  in  buildings  have  been  identified:  around  61%  of  these  are  in  the  form  of 

117 The UK and EU-28 are included in the analysis in order to obtain larger data set for ex-post evaluation. 

118 JRC assessment of the first and second NEEAPs under the EED, see: 

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC110304/110304_neeap_2017_synthesis_f
inal.pdf and 
http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC102284/jrc102284_jrc%20synthesis%20re
port_online%20template.pdf 

119 Analysis of the annual reports under the EED, JRC, 2017 and 2018 see  

http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC115238/kjna29667enn.pdf, and Joint 
Research Centre (2020), Analysis of the annual reports 2019 under the Energy Efficiency Directive, 
http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC120194/synthesis_report_final.pdf  

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
grants and subsidies, 19% soft loans, 10% tax incentives and the rest 10% combination of 
the above120. 

About  half  of  the  stakeholders  consider  that  Article  20  have  contributed  to  facilitated 
access  to  finance  for  energy  efficiency  projects.  As  regards  the  specific  provisions  of 
Article 20, stakeholders did not see that they would have led to the significant impact (as 
confirmed in feedback from the public consultation, see Figure 12).  

Figure 12 - What was the impact of Article 20 in your country in the following areas? 

Using revenues from annual emission

allocations under Decision No 406/2009/EC…

Dissemination of best practice in the field of
financing energy efficiency

Setting up specific technical support schemes
for increasing energy efficiency in different…

Setting up specific financing facilities for
increasing energy efficiency in different sectors

Setting up an Energy Efficiency National Fund
or a similar national financial support scheme…

25 

9 

8 

6 

2 

16 

19 

23 

6 

5 

13 

19 

27 

5 

7 

9 

17 

22 

9 

6 

16 

13 

13 

13 

2 

Very low

Low

Moderate

High

Very high

Source: Feedback from public consultation 

5.1.3. 

Evaluation question 3: What external factors have affected / continue to 
affect reaching the objectives of the EED? 

Energy consumption trends are affected by various external factors that can strengthen or 
offset  the  impacts  of  energy  efficiency  policies.  The  Odyssee-Mure  decomposition 
analysis121  confirms  that  energy  savings  played  a  major  role  in  reducing  final  energy 
consumption  since  2005,  but  structural  effects  and  climate  effects  were  also  leading  to 
additional energy savings. These impacts were largely offset by growth in activity and to 
a lesser extent by changes in lifestyles and other effects.  

According to Member States reporting, the recent increases in final energy consumption 
were  driven  by  growth  and  an  increase  in:  (i)  production/  value  added  (industry);  (ii) 
transport  of  passengers  and  goods  (transport);  (iii)  the  number  of  households  and 
disposable income (residential); and (iv) value added and employment (services).  

For the residential and services sector were space heating is an important use of energy, 
weather fluctuations also play a role and warmer winters in recent years helped to lower 

120 Report on accelerating energy renovation investments in buildings, JRC, 2019 
121 http://www.indicators.odyssee-mure.eu/decomposition.html 

52 

 
 
                                                 
energy demand in those sectors. In transport, fuel prices affect to some extent transport 
activity  in  particular  in  for  passenger  transport.  In  addition,  the  growing  share  of  new 
registrations  for  petrol  cars,  in  particular  sport  utility  vehicles  (SUVs),  seems  to  be 
another  factor  contributing  to  the  increased  energy  consumption  in  road  transport.  The 
impact of COVID-19 on energy consumption in 2020 will be significant, mainly through 
the  reduction  of  economic  activity  and  mobility.  This  impact  will,  nonetheless,  most 
likely  be  temporary  and  the  subsequent  recovery  may  lead  to  a  rebound  of  energy 
demand. 

Summary on findings of the effectiveness: 

  The EED led to  energy efficiency improvements across the EU thanks to its targets 
and binding measures  (notably Article 7). However, the analysis (2018 data) shows 
that energy consumption both for final & primary are falling short of the EU targets 
for 2020 (1483 Mtoe – PEC, 1086 Mtoe – FEC). 

 

In  2018,  progress  towards  the  indicative  national  targets  was  insufficient  in  12 
Member States for PEC and in 15 Member States for FEC. 

  Energy  efficiency  delivers  a  number  of  benefits  further  to  improvements  in  energy 
efficiency  and  energy  savings.  Notably  energy  efficiency  and  the  EED  have 
contributed  to  the  reduction  of  GHG  emissions,  both  in  terms  of  direct  emissions 
from  fossil  fuel  combustion  or  consumption  and  indirect  emissions  reduction  from 
electricity generation 

  Evaluation shows that different factors drive energy consumption in different sectors. 
The EED targets both the supply and end use sectors, through a set of measures and 
obligations.  It  should  be  noted  that  there  is  no  exact  data  available  on  what  impact 
specific  measures  of  the  EED  had  on  the  different  sectors,  except  for  Article  5 
(exemplary role of public buildings) and Article 7 (energy savings obligations) which 
show that most of the energy savings have been achieved in the buildings sector.   

  Article  7  (energy  savings  obligations)  remains  an  effective  measure.  Despite  the 
sufficient progress at EU level (according to 2018 data), 14 Member States risk not to 
reach their requirements by end 2020. 

  Obligations  for  public  sector  (Articles  5  &  6)  proved  key  to  demonstrate  its 
exemplary  role  of  central  governments  in  promoting  energy  efficiency  via 
renovations  and  public  procurement;  however,  the  measures  had  overall  a  narrow 
scope and were implemented at a limited scale, and there are a number of limitations 
that prevent reaping energy savings potential in the public sector. 

  The  EED  was  key  to  promoting  the  use  of  energy  audits  across  the  EU,  however 
important  limitations  remain  such  as  lack  of  monitoring  requirements  for  energy 
audits  and  the  follow  up,  difficulties  related  to  application  of  the  SMEs  definition 
(Art.  8(4)),  lack  of  requirements/  incentives  for  implementing  energy  management 
systems amongst others; 

53 

 
  Article 14 on heating and cooling in particular the comprehensive assessments helped 
to increase the overall importance and awareness of heating and cooling in Member 
States; however, overall impact of Article 14 is rather low due to the several factors 
such  as  lack  of  follow-up  policies  and  measures  for  implementing  the  potential 
identified in the comprehensive assessments, waste heat reuse not being sufficiently 
addressed, lack of focus on local aspects of planning and development of heating and 
cooling amongst others. 

  Some  provisions  with  a  view  to  improve  efficiency  of  energy  transformation, 
transmission  and  distribution  (Article  15)  have  been  effectively  implemented  in  the 
Member  States,  such  as  treating  energy  losses  and  incentivising  demand-side 
resources.  However,  the  use  of  common  methodologies  and  reporting  is  still  not  in 
place and therefore their impact cannot be assessed. There is no uniform definition of 
energy losses across the EU which results into a sub-optimal data quality. 

  The EED contributed to setting up the certification and qualification schemes (Article 
16)  to  some  extent,  and  the  majority  of  Member  States  have  established  schemes 
covering  energy  services,  energy  audits,  energy  managers  and  installers.  However, 
effectiveness  of  the  schemes  varies  across  the  countries  (the  level  of  technical 
competence varies across the category of specialists).  

  The  EED  largely  contributed  to  the  development  of  energy  services  markets  and 
energy performance contracting (Article 18), however important barriers still remain 
and  impede  the  uptake  of  EnPC  such  as  ambiguities  in  the  legislative  framework,   
complex procurement procedures, lack of facilitators and technical capacity and lack 
of certified energy services providers, grants competing with public funding. 

  Evaluation shows that the EED had a moderate effect to empower consumers as well 
as to tackle societal challenges like energy poverty given that a lot of measures have 
been  taken  at  national  level  to  raise  awareness  and  provide  information  to  general 
public,  but  difficulty  to  assess  their  effectiveness.  Analysis  shows  that  the  EED 
contributed  to  some  extent  to  address  the  issue  of  split  incentives  (Article  19),  but 
their impact is strongly determined by the national context and the legal framework.  

  The findings show that Article 20 on financing mechanisms has partially contributed 
to establishing financing facilities  across Member States. The lack of available data 
on  the  level  of  energy  efficiency  investments  and  financing  does  not  allow  to  fully 
assess the magnitude of the financing measures put in place in Member States.  The 
requirement for the Commission to assist the Member States in setting up financing 
facilities and technical support has been effective. 

54 

 
 
5.2.  Efficiency 

In examining the evaluation questions on efficiency, a distinction, where appropriate and 
feasible, is made between the direct costs, the indirect costs, and the enforcement costs122. 
Each of these three types of costs cover a number of more specific sub-types of costs and 
are  to  a  different  degree  borne  by  different  stakeholder  groups  such  as  public 
administrations, business, and citizens and consumers. 

5.2.1. 

Evaluation  question  4:  To  what  extent  the  costs  involved  in  the 
implementation of the EED have been justified given the changes/effects 
that have been achieved (including wider benefits)? To what extent were 
the  costs  borne  by  different  stakeholder  groups  proportionate  to  the 
benefits it has generated? 

The counterfactual evaluation baseline established as part of the evaluation methodology 
has allowed to evaluate what would have been the outcome in terms of energy efficiency 
improvements, GHG emissions and other related benefits in the EU if the EED had not 
been implemented. 

In order to understand the scale of costs and benefits attributed to the EED, it is necessary 
to  assess  the  cost-efficiency  of  the  various  measures  of  the  EED  given  their  specific 
nature aiming at reaching different objectives. 

The lack of data to  quantify the impacts  of multiple benefits123 of the energy  efficiency 
action  has  been  recognised  as  an  important  obstacle  in  this  evaluation,  beyond  the 
monetary value of energy  savings. A magnitude  of the impacts is  provided by the EU-
funded COMBI project124. The project showed that including monetised multiple impacts 
to a cost-benefit analysis of energy efficiency actions can increase the annual benefits by 
at least: 

  50% for a mix of energy efficiency actions125; 

  70% for the residential buildings refurbishment actions. 

The COMBI project modelled the ex-ante benefits of energy efficiency measures for the 
period 2020-2030, even though the qualitative findings of the positive multiple benefits 
of  energy  efficiency  can  show  the  positive  impacts  of  already  implemented  energy 
efficiency measures. 

In terms of costs Article 5 on exemplary role of public buildings generates a number of 
costs, which are borne principally by the national authorities implementing the obligation 
to  renovate  central  government  buildings  or  implement  alternative  measures.  These 
include  both  costs  related  to  administration  (direct  and  enforcement),  and  investment 

122 According to the BRG Tool #58 
123 Indicatively air pollution, use of resources, social welfare, macroeconomic impacts and energy security 
124 https://combi-project.eu/ 
125 Actions in 18 categories (4 for residential buildings, 4 for non-residential buildings, 4 for transport and 

6 for industry) 

55 

 
                                                 
costs  associated  with  the  renovation  of  buildings.  Under  alternative  approach  Member 
States  incurred  administrative  costs  linked  to  implementing  various  measures  such  as 
information  campaigns,  behavioural  measures,  optimisation  of  building  use  and  energy 
management. The scale of costs varies between the measures. 

In  terms  of  benefits,  those  are  the  achieved  energy  savings  and  the  reduction  of  GHG 
emissions  as  a  result  of  the  implemented  energy  efficiency  improvement  measures.  In 
addition,  wider  socio-economic  benefits  such  as  improved  work  conditions  and 
productivity  of  the  buildings’  users,  and  improved  health  of  users  and  visitors  are  also 
expected to have arisen from the implementation of Article 5. 

The  DEEP  database126  shows  the  median  avoidance  costs  (average  cost  in  Eurocent  for 
each kWh energy saved over the lifetime of the measure) of energy efficiency projects in 
public  buildings  is  of  7.89  c/kWh  (75%  percentile  is  12.24  c/kWh),  in  health  care 
buildings of 2.53 c/kWh (75% percentile is 8.05 c/kWh) and in educational buildings of 
2.77 c/kWh (75% percentile is 7.71 c/kWh).  

The DEEP also shows the building fabric measures to be the most cost efficient and the 
integrated renovation as less cost efficient. The median simple payback time of verified 
energy  efficiency  projects  in  health  care  buildings  is  of  4.54  years  in  educational 
buildings is of 5.79 years and in public buildings is of 4.59 years. In the public buildings, 
at  4% discount rate and  costs of  energy  of 0.11  Eurocents/kWh, integrated renovations 
show the highest net present value per investment and internal rate of return, followed by 
building  fabric  measures  HVAC  and  lighting.  Also  in  health  care  and  educational 
buildings  the  integrated  renovations  show  the  highest  IRR  and  NPV/Investment,  with 
HVAC second and building fabric measures third, which lighting has a negative IRR. On 
the  basis  of  the  projects  collected  in  the  DEEP  database,  it  can  be  concluded  that  at  a 
discount rate close to interest rate accessible to public bodies, integrated renovations of 
public,  health  care  and  educational  buildings  are  cost  effective  and  provide  a  higher 
return on investment than lighter energy efficiency measures.  

In  2018,  BPIE  quantified  the  benefits  of  energy  renovation  investments  in  schools, 
offices  and  hospitals127.  It  calculated  that  energy  renovation  investments  could  boost 
labour force productivity by up to 12%, worth up to 500 billion euros per year, improve 
educational performance of students and reduce the average length of stay in hospitals by 
11%, potentially saving the European health sector up to 42 billion euros per year. 

Feedback received from stakeholders, as part of the targeted consultation, suggests that 
the  costs  and  benefits  of  implementing  Article  5  are  well  balanced  (see  Figure  13). 
Stakeholders also highlighted that the benefits arising from energy efficiency measures in 

126 https://deep.eefig.eu/ . In the DEEP database, public buildings, health care buildings and educational 

buildings best correspond to the public bodies’ buildings among the 13 categories that those who fill in 
their projects can choose. 

127 http://www.bpie.eu/publication/building-4-people-valorising-the-benefits-of-energy-renovation-

investments-in-schools-offices-and-hospitals/ 

56 

 
                                                 
public  buildings  include  other  benefits  that  are  not  always  factored  into  cost-benefit 
analyses, e.g. improved indoor air quality, increased comfort, better lighting, etc.  

Figure 13 - To what extent do you agree with the following statement “The costs and benefits of 
implementing Article 5 are well balanced”? 

Source: Technical Assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

Stakeholders  also  indicated  which  types  of  measures  to  ensure  energy  efficiency  in 
public  buildings  they  consider  as  the  most  cost-effective  (see  Figure  14  below).  These 
include energy management, and use of energy performance contracting (ESCO/EnPC). 

Figure 14 - Which types of measures to achieve energy efficiency in public buildings are most 
cost-effective? 

Source: Technical Assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

The implementation of the EED on purchasing of public bodies (Article 6), is based on 
the principle that even if the initial purchase cost for energy efficient products, services 
and buildings is higher, extra costs usually are paid back over the lifetime thanks to the 
lower energy consumption. Examples of how this principle is effectively applied include 
the  Ecodesign  Directive 
the  Energy  Labelling  Regulation  appliances  covering 
appliances128. 

128 https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/sustainability/product-policy-and-ecodesign_en 

57 

 
 
 
                                                 
Some  small  additional  costs  (indirect  administrative  costs)  by  implementing  the 
legislation and changing procurement procedures, using internal or external support are 
expected  to  be  very  small  compared  to  the  benefits  over  time129.  Until  now,  no  public 
administration has raised the issue of these additional costs being a barrier. 

As  regards  energy  efficiency  obligation  schemes  (EEOS)  and  alternative  policy 
measures  under  Article  7  on  energy  savings  obligations,  the  costs  (programme  and 
administrative  costs)  usually  are  distributed  among  programme  users,  obligated  and 
participating parties, and public authorities. 

Fraunhofer  calculated  the  average  weighted  programme  cost  at  EUR  0.011  per  kWh 
lifetime  energy  savings.  Adding  both  societal  and  administrative  cost,  the  total  cost  is 
assessed  to  reach  EUR  0.030/kWh  saved.  This  is  significantly  lower  than  the 
corresponding  average  retail  price  of  supplied  energy,  making  the  EEOS  as  very  cost-
efficient policy instrument130. 

The 2016 evaluation of the EED concluded that the alternative policy measures can also 
be cost-effective, depending on the level of the ambition of the measure, type of measure, 
its design and targeted sector131. 

When  it  comes  to  the  wider  benefits  stemming  from  the  EEOS,  in  addition  to  the 
achieved energy savings, EEOS trigger utility system benefits (for example reduced line 
losses resulting  from  load reduction within the electricity  grid) and wide  range of non-
energy  related  benefits  (such  as  GHG  emission  reductions  and  improvements  of  air 
quality)132. 

As regards energy audits and energy management systems (Article 8) the costs can be 
divided  into  three  types:  the  administration  of  the  relevant  provisions  by  the  public 
authorities, the cost of the energy audits and, if applicable, the necessary investments by 
the enterprises to  implement the energy saving  measures identified in  the energy audit. 
There are no consistent data on the implementation of energy saving measures, primarily 
because  Member  States  are  not  required  to  gather  and  report  this  data.  Since 
implementation  of  the  recommendations  is  voluntary  it  can  reasonably  be  assumed 
enterprises will only implement those measures  that make economic sense. Information 
on  TIPCHECK  industry  heat  audits  shows  that  payback  periods  for  the  TIPCHECK 
insulation projects initiated typically were in most cases 2 years or less133. 

129 Final report of technical assistance study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2021 
130 Technical Assistance study on assessing progress in implementing Article 7 of the EED and preparing 
the policy implementation in view of the new obligation period 2021-2030, Fraunhofer, 2020 

131 SWD(2016) 403 final 
132 Final report of technical assistance study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2021 
133 https://www.eiif.org/tipcheck/tipcheck-benefits-industry 

58 

 
                                                 
As  part  of  the  feedback  received  during  the  targeted  workshops,  two  Member  States 
(Germany and Denmark) provided data that shows that energy audits in enterprises is not 
cost-effective for relatively small or large but non-energy intensive enterprises. 

Provisions  concerning  the  metering  and  billing  (Articles  9-11),  especially  the  ones 
asking for the installation of (smart and/or remotely readable) individual meters are being 
implemented  by  each  Member  State  under  the  condition  of  cost  effectiveness  and 
technical feasibility. Thus, benefits are expected to surpass costs in all cases134. 

During the targeted consultation, stakeholders indicated that the costs associated with the 
implementation of Article 14(1) and (3) in relation to comprehensive assessments of the 
potential  for  efficient  heating  and  cooling,  are  proportionate  to  the  achieved  energy 
savings and other benefits (see Figure 15). 

Figure  15  -  To  what  extent  were  the  costs  associated  with  the  implementation  of  Article  14 
(including  related  annexes  and  definitions)  proportionate  to  the  achieved  energy  savings  and 
other benefits? (n=7, 1: disproportionate -> 5: proportionate) 

Source: Technical assistance study on evaluating the EED 

The relevant JRC studies135,136,137 and the feedback received from stakeholders during the 
targeted  consultation  suggest  that  measures  under  Article  19  (split  of  incentives  & 
public  purchasing  and  annual  budgeting  and  accounting)  are  cost-efficient  as  they 
include  either  (low-scale)  administrative  costs  and  legislative  actions,  or  technical  help 
and financial schemes that lead to the unlocking of important energy savings potential. 

134 Directive (EU) 2018/2002 amending Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency 
135 https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/assessement-progress-made-member-states-relation-article-191-

directive-201227eu 

136 https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/overcoming-split-

incentive-barrier-building-sector 

137 https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC101251 

59 

 
 
                                                 
5.2.2.  Evaluation  question  5:  To  what  extent  were  the  scale  of  costs  and 
stakeholder  groups 

administrative  burden  borne  by  different 
proportionate to the benefits it has generated? 

The available evidence does not allow to capture the complete scale of costs and benefits 
per stakeholder group. Hence, the assessment is mainly done on basis of literature review 
and stakeholder feedback received from the targeted consultation. 

In  fact,  stakeholders  pointed  out  that  they  have  difficulties  in  providing  information 
concerning  the  scale  of  the  administrative  costs  and  burden  associated  with  the 
implementation of the EED. When specifically asked, the majority of stakeholders either 
had no opinion, or otherwise, considered that  the costs and benefits  were proportionate 
(see Figure 16). 

Figure  16  -  How  do  you  assess  the  administrative  burden  related  the  transposition  and 
implementation  of  the  EED?  To  what  extent  were  these  costs  proportionate  to  the  achieved 
energy savings and other benefits? 

Source: Technical assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

Similarly, stakeholders responded that they had difficulties in assessing the scale of the 
costs for market actors that were generated by the EED. Most stakeholders (15 out of 20) 
indicated that they could not provide such information. 

These results  were confirmed by the public consultation feedback.  A mere 22% shared 
the  view  that  the  costs  associated  with  the  implementation  of  the  EED  were  (highly) 
disproportionate to the benefits. This implies that the great majority considers these costs 
to be proportionate to the outcome. 

Figure 17 - To what extent were the costs associated with the implementation of the EED 
proportionate to the achieved energy savings and other benefits? 

60 

 
 
8 

36 

36 

40 

84 

1 (disproportionate)

2

3

4

5 (proportionate)

Source: feedback from the public consultation 

Table  18  in  Annex  4  summarises  the  main  findings  for  the  costs  and  benefits  for  the 
different stakeholder groups. 

5.2.3.  Evaluation  question  6:  What  were  the  factors  that  influenced  the 

efficiency of policy intervention and the implementation of the EED? 

Lack  of  quantitative  data  hinders  the  effort  to  understand  the  factors  that  influence  the 
efficiency of the EED and all its Articles. 

On  the  purchasing  of  public  bodies  (Article  6),  the  main  factor  influencing  the 
efficiency  is  how  public  bodies  interpret  and  implement  the  requirements  for  cost-
effectiveness or what capacity they have to make the initial investment. This is because 
the most energy-efficient solutions are typically more expensive to buy even if a lifecycle 
analysis makes the case for their cost-benefit efficiency. 

For  energy  audits  and  energy  management  systems  (Article  8),  the  majority  of  the 
Member States does not any longer see the barrier of the insufficient number of qualified 
energy auditors, a situation that could create bottlenecks and artificial delays or increased 
prices.  More  than  75%  of  the  stakeholders  responded  during  the  consultation  that  the 
number  of  qualified  energy  auditors  is  sufficient  to  meet  the  demand  of  mandatory 
energy audits in non-SMEs. 

On  the  implementation  of  the  metering  and  billing  provisions  (Articles  9-11),  the 
efficiency  of  policy  intervention  is  mainly  influenced  by  the  national  realities  (e.g. 
tenancy  and  ownership  norms)  and  condition  of  the  building  stock  and  how  these 
determine the cost-benefit analysis that defined the technical or regulatory approach that 
each Member State followed138,139. 

138 SWD(2016) 399 final 

61 

 
 
                                                 
5.2.4.  Evaluation  question  7:  Are  there  significant  differences  in  costs  (or 
benefits) amongst Member States, and if yes, what is causing them? How 
do these differences link to the intervention? 

Little  evidence  on  differences  in  costs  amongst  Member  States  has  until  now  been 
provided and analysed.  

On the exemplary role of public buildings (Article 5), Member States and stakeholders 
have reported a range of costs for the renovation of buildings, mostly determined by the 
level of renovation, the interventions that are typically included and differences in costs 
such as labour and building materials. 

On  the  energy  savings  obligation  (Article  7),  information  received  from  several 
Member  States  indicate  a  range  of  costs  depending  on  the  country  and  the  policy 
measure. Differences in costs among Member States result from differences in the design 
of the policy measures, which entail the following: 

  Whether the programme is focusing on one fuel or more; 

  Sectoral coverage; 

  Graphical coverage; 

  Different evaluation, measurement and verification processes;  

  Level of programme ambition; 

  Programme objectives and support to beneficiaries 

As  a  result,  programme  costs  can  vary  from  an  average  of  €0.005  per  kWh  of  lifetime 
savings in Austria, Denmark, France and Italy up to €0.035 per kWh of lifetime savings 
in the United Kingdom140. 

The  implementation  of  the  metering  and  billing  provisions  (Articles  9-11)  depend  on 
the  cost-benefit  analysis  that  each  Member  State  carried  out.  This  means  that  for  all 
Member  States  benefits  are  expected  to  outweigh  costs  regardless  of  the  degree  and 
technical approach to implement the provisions141. 

The  implementation  of  Article  14  on  promotion  of  efficiency  in  heating  and  cooling 
and  in  particular  the  comprehensive  assessments  have  incurred  different  scale  of  costs 
depending on the scope of the assessment and actions identified and taken142. 

Conclusions on efficiency: 

139 JRC, “Analysis of Member States' rules for allocating heating, cooling and hot water costs in multi-

apartment-purpose buildings supplied from collective systems”, 2017 

140 Technical Assistance study on assessing progress in implementing Article 7 of the EED and preparing 

the policy implementation in view of the new obligation period 2021-2030, Fraunhofer, 2020 

141 Directive (EU) 2018/2002 amending Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency 
142 Final report of technical assistance study on evaluating the EED, COWI, 2021 

62 

 
                                                                                                                                                 
  Overall,  the  EED  had  contributed  to  achieving  energy  savings  in  the  EU  in  a  cost-

effective manner. 

  Energy  Efficiency  Obligation  Schemes  under  Article  7  have  been  a  cost-efficient 
instrument in countries that have chosen to implement it. The costs largely depend on 
the level of ambition, type and design of measures. 

  The  implementation  of  several  of  the  obligations  in  the  EED  is  subject  to 
“conditionalities”  (e.g.  Articles  5,  6,  9-11,  14),  so  that  Member  States  are  only 
required to act if it is cost-effective/ economically feasible/ technically possible. This 
allows Member States significant flexibility and allows them to adopt cost-effective 
measures (however Member States have not always demonstrated how the feasibility 
was established). 

 

In  terms  of  efficiency,  there  are  no  indications  for  significant  differences  in  the 
magnitude  of  costs  amongst  the  Member  States  for  most  of  the  provisions  of  the 
EED, except for Article 7. 

5.3.  Relevance 

The  primary  needs  that  the  EED  addressed  was  to  tackle  climate  change  thanks  to  the 
increased energy  efficiency, take action to  decrease dependence on energy imports  and 
scarce  energy  resources,  and  overcome  the  economic  crisis  by  improving  the 
competitiveness  of  the  European  industry.  These  needs  remain  as  relevant  as  when  the 
Directive entered into force in 2012. 

The  key  consideration  under  this  criterion  is  whether  the  right  market  conditions  and 
legal environment to enable the achievement of the EU 20% energy efficiency target for 
2020  have  been  ensured  or  whether  there  remains  a  need  and  scope  for  further 
improvements in the future.  

In  addition,  the  evaluation  examined  whether  the  EED  is  able  to  adapt  to  new  and 
emerging  challenges  and  policy  objectives,  including  the  existing  EU  headline  energy 
efficiency  targets  for  2030  of  at  least  32.5%143  and  the  need  to  increase  the  energy 
efficiency  efforts  to  achieve  the  higher  climate  target  of  at  least  55%  for  2030,  as 
proposed by the Commission in the in the Climate Target Plan for 2030144. 

143 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-strategy/clean-energy-all-europeans_en 

144 https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/eu-climate-action/2030_ctp_en 

63 

 
 
                                                 
5.1.8.  Evaluation question 8: Did the Directive provide the right framework 
to reach the 20% energy efficiency target? To what extent is the EED 
framework still relevant in promoting energy efficiency in the EU? 

As indicated above, the EED contributes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-
effective way. EU greenhouse gas emissions have declined partly thanks to the EED145. 
Analysis from the European Environment Agency146 shows that these reductions in GHG 
emissions have been  achieved by  a  combination of factors including  energy  efficiency. 
The 2030 targets and the recent Climate Target Plan, which announced an increase of the 
climate  ambition  to  at  least  55%  in  a  responsible  way  by  2030,  continues  to  call  for 
effective  and  efficient  policy  interventions  to  increase  energy  efficiency  and  reduce 
primary and final energy consumption across the EU.  

The  Impact  Assessment  accompanying  the  Climate  Target  Communication,  clearly 
shows that achieving a GHG target of at least 55% requires a moderate or a high increase 
of energy efficiency across all energy system sectors147. 

The  study  on  Article  7148  investigated  how  the  different  energy  efficiency  policies  at 
national and EU level contribute to the achievement of the EU energy efficiency target 
for 2030 and the EU 2050 decarbonisation goals. The study assessed the gap to the 2030 
targets  using  data  from  the  updated  PRIMES  Reference  Scenario  for  EU28  and  a 
EUCO32/32.5 scenario,  designed to  correspond to  a 32% share of renewable energy in 
gross final energy consumption and a 32.5% energy efficiency target149 in the EU. 

For 16 Member States (adding up to 91% of the of final energy demand of the EU28), the 
impacts of energy efficiency measure result in a sum of 2053 PJ savings in 2030 in the 
baseline  (excluding  correction  factors  such  as  rebound  effect  and  overlaps  between  the 
measures). This leaves a gap of 4310 PJ (more than two thirds) based on the results of the 
updated EUCO32/32.5 scenarios, making the case that EED is not only still relevant but 
in addition, needs to be strengthened to meet the 2030 targets150 (see Figure 18). 

Figure 18 - Impact of energy savings from energy efficiency measures (“Top1-5” & “Other 
measures” part of the bar) and gap for 2030 (yellow part of the bar) as compared to the updated 
EUCO scenarios for a select group of 16 Member States 

145 COM/2020/326 final 

146 EEA, 2020  
147 SWD(2020) 176 final 
148  Interim  Report  of  technical  Assistance  study  on  assessing  progress  in  implementing  Article  7  of  the 
Energy  Efficiency  Directive  and  preparing  the  policy  implementation  in  view  of  the  new  obligation 
period 2021-2030 

149 The energy efficiency target in the EU, calculated as a reduction from the projections for the year 2030 
compared to the 2007 baseline scenario (i.e. a 32.5% reduction from a primary energy consumption of 
1887  Mtoe  in  2030  and  a  final  energy  consumption  of  1416  Mtoe  projected  for  2030  in  the  2007 
baseline). 

150 Interim Report of technical assistance study  to develop a tool for assessing energy efficiency policies 

and measures, Fraunhofer, 2020 

64 

 
 
                                                 
Source: Fraunhofer technical assistance study on assessing the energy efficiency policies (2020) 

In  the  feedback  received  from  stakeholders  (as  part  of  targeted  consultation)  it  was 
suggested that the EED  is  a key legislative act,  and there is  a need for  more ambitious 
energy  efficiency  targets  for  2030  to  achieve  at  least  55%  greenhouse  gas  emissions 
reduction by 2030. 

Participants in the public consultation were asked to assess the relevance of the EED to 
increase  energy  efficiency  and  remove  barriers  and  market  failures.  A  majority  of 
stakeholders agreed that the EED has contributed positively to increase energy efficiency 
(see Figure 19Error! Reference source not found.). 

Figure 19 - To what extent do you agree with the following statement? “The original objectives 
of  the  EED  -  to  increase  energy  efficiency  across  the  EU  and  to  remove  barriers  and  market 
failures in energy supply and energy use - are still relevant? 

Strongly agree

Agree

164 

132 

Neither agree nor disagree

23 

Disagree

Strongly disagree

3 

5 

Source: Feedback from the public consultation 

65 

 
 
 
The provisions of the EED remain relevant as they set out a variety of instruments that 
lead  to  concrete  energy  efficiency  actions  and/or  address  a  wide  range  of  market  and 
regulatory failures to enable energy efficiency services and investments. These objectives 
become  even  more  relevant  in  the  context  of  the  2030  ambitious  climate  and  energy 
objectives151. 

Looking  closer  to  the  provisions  on  the  exemplary  role  of  public  bodies  (Article  5  and 
Article  6),  the  relevance  of  EED  in  improving  the  energy  performance  of  public 
buildings  (Article  5)  and  purchasing  the  most  energy  efficient  products,  services, 
buildings  and  vehicles  (Article  6)  is  still  present.  The  public  sector  is  responsible  for 
around 5% to 10% of the total final energy consumption in EU Member States  152. Both 
EU  interventions  are  providing  better  value  for  money  in  the  operations  of  public 
administrations by reducing energy costs. This encourage manufacturers and suppliers to 
place more energy efficient products, services and buildings on the market. In addition, 
the  intervention  also  supports  a  market  transformation  towards  greater  efficiency 
allowing  final  consumers  to  reduce  their  energy  costs  and  providing  a  further  market 
pull. 

Specifically  for  Article  5  (exemplary  role  of  public  bodies’  buildings),  stakeholders 
mentioned during the targeted workshop that since a large proportion of public buildings 
across the Member States still do not meet the minimum energy performance standards, 
the need for obligations in Article 5 remain strong, supporting the continued relevance of 
the  Article.  Moreover,  the  stakeholders  emphasised  that  the  current  scope  of  Article  5 
leaves  out  a  large  volume  of  public  buildings  (for  example,  schools,  hospitals  and 
administrative buildings under the responsibility of regional and local authorities), with a 
significant savings potential. 

In 2018, Article 7 on energy efficiency obligations  was amended153, so the intervention 
remains appropriate and relevant in light of the current policy context. As almost half of 
the  savings  of  the  EED  are  expected  to  be  delivered  through  Article  7,  the  provisions 
play an essential role in unlocking the energy saving potential in the end use sectors154 - 
buildings, industry and to some extent transport.  

Given  the  untapped  energy  saving  potential,  energy  audits  and  energy  management 
systems as stipulated in Article 8 remain also relevant in all end-use sectors throughout 
the  EU,  given  the  still  untapped  energy  savings  potential.  The  ongoing  CEPS  study155 
estimates  that  the  energy  savings  potential  for  non-SMEs,  within  the  scope  of  Article 

151 COM(2020) 562 final: Climate Target Plan 

152  Energy Performance Contracting in the Public Sector of the EU, JRC, 2020 

153 SWD (2016) 402 final 

154 SWD (2016) 402 final 

155 CEPS (2020), Technical assistance on assessing the effectiveness of the implementation of the 

definition of SMEs for the purposes of Article 8(4) of the EED 

66 

 
                                                 
8(4),  amounts  to  7%  of  total  company  final  energy  consumption  as  an  EU  average. 
Moreover, energy audits and management systems have proven to be an effective tool for 
specifically  identifying  energy  saving  opportunities  and  their  financial  feasibility  in 
enterprises. 

The  relevance  of  the  provisions  on  metering  and  billing  (Articles  9-11)  was  evaluated 
positively  in  2016  during  the  targeted  revision  of  the  EED.  The  revised  provisions 
concerning heating, cooling and domestic hot water came into force on 25 October 2020. 

During the targeted consultation, stakeholders not only agreed that Article 12 (consumer 
information and empowerment) is still relevant but that it should also be strengthened to 
deliver more impact, particularly in tackling social challenges like energy poverty. 

The  strong  focus  is  put  on  heating  and  cooling  (referred  to  in  Article  14)  to  reach  the 
higher  climate  targets  for  2030,  as  set  out  in  the  European  Green  Deal.  In  fact,  energy 
consumption  in  heating  and  cooling  amounts  for  80%  of  energy  consumed  in  the 
residential  buildings  in  the  EU156.  To  improve  energy  efficiency  in  this  sector,  heating 
and cooling strategies in Member States very crucial. Comprehensive assessments on the 
potential  for  high-efficiency  cogeneration  and  district  heating/cooling  (Article  14  and 
Annex  III  of  EED),  is  a  very  relevant  tool  to  support  these  strategies.  In  addition, 
improving  energy  efficiency  in  transformation,  transmission  and  distribution  sector  in 
Member States, as required by Article 15, will remain a relevant area as well. However, 
stakeholders feedback received in the targeted consultation suggests that the objectives of 
Article 15 have not been fully appropriate and should better reflect how the different grid 
elements can contribute to the improvement of the overall energy system efficiency, for 
instance, in terms of smart grid deployment. 

Article 16 (availability of certification and qualification schemes) and Article 18 (energy 
services) remain relevant in light of the increased climate ambition and in support of the 
implementation  of  the  Renovation  Wave  initiative157.  Article  16  aims  to  ensure  a 
sufficient number of necessary professionals competent in the field of energy efficiency. 
Its  relevance  lies  mainly  in  the  need  for  Member  States  to  ensure  the  necessary 
competences for the energy services providers, auditors and energy managers at national 
level158.  Article  18  on  energy  services  has  been  a  key  contributor  to  developing  energy 
services markets in the EU and still remains relevant to reap the energy savings potential 
in the building sector. 

The  effectiveness  assessment  of  Article  19  on  regulatory  and  non-regulatory  barriers, 
concluded that the EED contributed to a limited extent to addressing split incentives, and 
that  the  barriers  for  public  purchasing,  annual  budgeting  or  accounting  are  still 

156 COM(2020) 662 final: A Renovation Wave for Europe 
157 COM(2020) 562 final: Climate Target Plan 

158 Assessment of the Second NEEAPs under the Energy Efficiency Directive, JRC 2018 

67 

 
                                                 
considered as being significant. Removing these barriers is therefore still relevant given 
its  original  need  to  increase  energy  efficiency  in  buildings  and  the  public  sector, 
especially in the context of the Renovation Wave initiative.  

In relation to Article 20 on Energy Efficiency National Funds, Financing and Technical 
Support, there is still a prevailing perception that financial measures and facilities should 
be  developed  and  adapted  in  the  Member  States.  Several  financial  initiatives  have 
evolved  after  (and  possibly  because  of)  the  introduction  of  the  Article  20159.  This 
indicates that the Article 20 is still relevant to develop the necessary market and mobilise 
private investments towards energy efficiency. 

During  the  targeted  consultation,  a  majority  of  stakeholders  agreed  that  the  objectives 
and  the  provisions  of  the  EED  still  correspond  to  the  needs  within  the  EU  (see  Figure 
20). 

Figure 20 - To what extent do you agree with the following statement: “The objectives and the 
provisions of the EED [still] correspond to the needs within the EU”? 

Source: Technical Assessment study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

Stakeholders  that  disagreed  that  the  objectives  correspond  to  the  needs  of  the  EED, 
clarified that the main reason of disagreement is the fact that the energy efficiency targets 
are not in line with the 2030 climate objectives and consider that those targets should be 
increased. 

5.1.9.  Evaluation  question  9:  How  well  do  the  original  objectives  for 
promoting  energy  efficiency  (including  its  role  in  achieving  GHG 
emission  reduction  objectives)  to  ensure  the  achievement  of  the  EU 
headline  2020  and  2030  targets  still  correspond  to  the  needs  and  the 
latest  technological  or  environmental  developments  in  the  EU,  in 
particular in the context of the European Green Deal? 

The objectives for promoting energy efficiency remain pivotal to meet the overall energy 
and climate targets for 2030. Moreover, the EED remains relevant in the context of the 
implementation of the European Green Deal, as the EED is expected to play a substantial 
role in  contributing to  the increased climate target  for 2030 as proposed in  the Climate 
Target Plan160. 

159 More information on the effectiveness of Article 20 can be found in Paragraph 5.1 (effectiveness of the 

EED) 

160 COM(2020) 562 final: Climate Target Plan 

68 

 
 
                                                 
There  is  a  considerable  potential  for  enhanced  and  expanded  measures  under  the  EED 
that could deliver higher amount of energy savings161. The Climate Target Plan calls for 
effective  and  efficient  policy  interventions  to  increase  energy  efficiency  and  reduce 
primary  and  final  energy  consumption  across  the  EU.  The  Impact  Assessment 
accompanying the Climate Target Plan stressed that energy efficiency is a key avenue of 
action, without which full decarbonisation of the EU economy cannot be achieved in the 
longer term (see Table 5). 

Table 5 - Interaction of 2030 GHG ambition with renewable energy share and energy savings 

Source: Impact Assessment accompanying Climate Target Communication162 

The  System  Integration  Strategy163  defines  two  challenges  in  relation  to  energy 
efficiency: 
  Applying  the  energy-efficiency-first  principle164  consistently  across  the  energy 

system;  

  Untapping the full potential of local energy sources, such as the reuse of waste heat 
from  industrial  sites,  which  are  so  far  insufficiently  used  in  buildings  and 
communities. 

The Energy Efficiency Directive in addition to the EBPD and RED, is clearly mentioned 
as a regulatory framework to effectively address these recent needs for system integration 
(for example, Article 14 on heating and cooling). Further strengthening will be required 

161 Interim report of technical assistance study to develop a tool for assessing energy efficiency policies and 

measures, Fraunhofer, 2020 

162 SWD(2020)176 
163 COM(2020) 299 final 
164 The Energy Efficiency First Principle includes giving priority to demand-side solutions whenever they 
are more cost effective than investments in energy supply infrastructure in meeting policy objectives, 
but also properly factoring in energy efficiency in generation adequacy assessments. 

69 

 
 
                                                 
though,  to  remove  the  barriers  hampering  a  wider  application  of  this  strategy  and 
facilitating the application of the energy efficiency first principle across energy system. 

The  Renovation  Wave  Strategy  acknowledges  that  public  (and  privately-owned)  social 
infrastructure,  public  administrative  buildings,  social  housing,  cultural  institutions, 
schools,  hospitals  and  healthcare  serves  as  a  role  model  that  can  trigger  renovations  of 
residential  and  commercial  buildings.  The  objective  of  the  exemplary  role  of  public 
bodies  (Article  5  and  6),  therefore  remains  even  more  relevant  in  this  context.  The 
requirements for purchasing and renovation of existing public buildings currently cover 
only  central  governments,  which  is  limited  in  scope  given  the  estimated  potential  of 
extending the obligation to all public administration levels (would allow achieving about 
2.6 Mtoe by 2030)165. 

Participants in the open public consultation also agreed that EED should be strengthened 
in the context of a higher energy efficiency ambition for 2030 (see Figure 21). 

Figure 21 - Do you agree that the EED should be strengthened by introducing new measures and 
stricter requirements in the context of a higher energy efficiency ambition for 2030?  

95 

190 

No

Yes

Source: Feedback from the public consultation 

This agreement is more substantial amongst EU citizens and the civil society according 
to the public consultation (see Figure 22). 

165 Interim Report of technical assistance study to develop a tool for assessing energy efficiency policies 

and measures, Fraunhofer, 2020 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Figure 22 - Do you agree that the EED should be strengthened by introducing new measures and 
stricter requirements in the context of a higher energy efficiency ambition for 2030?  

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

No

Yes

Public authorities

Business

Civil society

EU citizens

Source: Feedback from the public consultation (results per stakeholder group) 

Specifically for Article 5, the results of the stakeholder questionnaire support this finding 
indicating  that  the  majority  of  stakeholders  that  responded  to  the  questionnaire 
considered the level of obligation (3%) to be adequate. However, stakeholders pointed to 
several shortcomings in Article 5 and proposed the strengthening of the Article. 

The energy efficiency obligation schemes and alternative policy measures under Article 7 
are  expected  to  contribute  by  half  of  the  energy  savings  expected  from  the  EED,  if 
implemented in full compliance with the requirements. In the 2018 review of Article 7 of 
the EED166 the original objectives of Article 7 were assessed to remain appropriate and 
relevant  in  light  of  ongoing  needs  related  to  the  achievement  of  the  EU  energy  and 
climate objectives of 2030. 

The European Green Deal stressed energy efficiency in industrial sectors as a priority and 
hence the objectives of the intervention for Article 8 on energy audits and management 
systems still correspond to the decarbonisation needs in the EU. The intervention is still 
relevant  as  an  energy  saving  potential  remains  untapped  in  all  sectors  given  the 

166 SWD (2016) 402 final 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
technological  developments  and  innovative  solutions  for  energy  efficiency  (e.g.  thanks 
also to digitalisation). 

Heating  and  cooling  technologies  have  become  increasingly  important  over  the  recent 
years, and any system installed today, in buildings and utility systems, will last for a long 
period and thus can result in a lock-in for the 2030 ambitions. Therefore, apart from the 
efficient  heating  and  cooling,  Article  14  should  also  reflect  these  techno-economic 
innovations as well as explore new areas, such as improved system integration promoting 
the use of waste heat (from data centres), electrical and thermal efficiencies, as confirmed 
by stakeholders in the consultation. 

Article 16 does not state any specific level of technical competences needed apart from 
ensuring  a  sufficient  level  of  technical  competences  at  national  level,  objectivity  and 
reliability.  The  higher  climate  ambition  and  the  Renovation  Wave  Initiative  call  for 
updated  competences  and  boosting  the  skills  to  increase  the  renovation  rates  by  2030. 
Therefore,  it  is  important  to  ensure  the  continuation  of  updating  the  qualifications  of 
energy  efficiency  related  professions  and  ensuring  the  their  certification  (or  part  of  a 
specific  scheme)  will  allow  ensuring  the  effective  implementation  of  energy  efficiency 
improvements. 

Provision of information to market actors on energy efficiency mechanisms (Article 17), 
on financial and legal frameworks, on benefits, practicalities and possibilities concerning 
improvement  measures,  remains  also  relevant. 
financing  of  energy  efficiency 
Stakeholders have confirmed the relevance of this Article, during the consultation. 

The development of the energy service market (Article 18) has been and remains relevant 
in  tapping  the  energy  efficiency  potentials  across  the  building  sector  and  the  public 
sector. 

Article  19  is  still  relevant,  as  only  a  fraction  of  the  Member  States  acknowledged  the 
existence of barriers, let alone take and/or report relevant measures. Both issues it tackles 
still  exist  and  are  considered  among  the  most  important  obstacles  for  the  energy 
renovation  of  buildings,  and  public  procurement  and  investments  in  energy  efficiency. 
The  Renovation  Wave  Strategy  puts  a  strong  emphasis  on  addressing  the  issue  of  split 
incentives and identifies possible solutions. Stakeholders’ feedback confirm this and call 
for strengthening the Article 19. 

Cross-border initiatives and forums in Member States have (and will have) a significant 
impact on the mobilising financing for energy efficiency (such as Sustainable Investment 
Forums). Several financing initiatives have evolved (partly because of Article 20) since 
the entry into force in 2012. Furthermore, in order to close the investment gap to achieve 
the  higher  2030  energy  efficiency  targets,  there  is  a  clear  need  to  mobilise  additional 
private  capital.  Therefore,  provisions  on  the  establishment  and  use  of  financing 
mechanisms for promoting energy efficiency investments are even more relevant. 

72 

 
5.1.10.  Evaluation  question 10: How relevant  is  the EU intervention to  EU 

citizens? 

The results from  recent  Eurobarometer surveys167,168,169 illustrate that the EED addresses 
key concerns relevant to EU citizens, such as climate change mitigation, energy security 
and energy poverty. These surveys also show a high support for EU intervention in these 
areas.  

The  EED  contains  several  provisions  that  are  relevant  to  the  empowerment  of  citizens 
and  consumers  through  the  establishment  of  more  frequent  and  transparent  billing 
regimes  based  on  the  actual  consumption  patterns  at  the  end  use  level  (Articles  9-11), 
information  and  empowerment  programmes  (Article  12),  and  the  exchange  and 
dissemination of information and awareness raising (Article 17). In addition, it contains 
provisions  that  aim  to  tackle  long-standing  socio-economic  challenges  like  energy 
poverty (in Article 7) and the split of incentives between tenants  and owners or among 
owners (in Article 19). 

During the targeted stakeholder consultation, stakeholders confirmed the relevance of the 
EED and asked for strengthening of Articles 12 and 17 as a means to further empower 
citizens,  and  consumers  but  also  their  associations  and  energy  cooperatives.  They  also 
suggested the further strengthening Article 7 and Article 19 to help citizens better tackle 
energy poverty. 

Articles  9-11  were  revised  in  2018  with  a  view  in  becoming  even  more  relevant  to 
citizens and consumers through the clarification of several provisions170 and the addition 
of  technical  and  regulatory  options  that  will  give  to  citizens  access  to  more  frequent, 
transparent and empowering energy billing information171. 

The  Renovation  Wave  Strategy172  has  also  put  the focus  on  citizens,  especially  on  how 
bottom-up  initiatives  and  projects  can  play  an  active  role  in  delivering  the  renovation 
targets and on how vulnerable citizens are not be left behind. 

Conclusions on relevance: 

167 Eurobarometer (2020) Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment. 

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_331 

168 Eurobarometer (2019) Europeans' attitudes on EU energy policy. 

https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/survey/getsurveydetail/instruments/spe
cial/surveyky/2212 

169 Eurobarometer (2019) Climate change. 

https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files/support/docs/report_2019_en.pdf   

170 SWD(2016) 399 final  
171 Directive (EU) 2018/2002 amending Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency and more specifically 
the inclusion of an obligation for the installation of remotely readable meters for thermal energy, the 
definition of transparent rules for heat cost allocation, etc. 

172 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-buildings/renovation-wave_en 

73 

 
                                                 
  The  EED  remains  relevant  in  delivering  increased  energy  efficiency  in  EU  and 
contributing  to  an  increased  climate  target  of  55%,  and  reap  other  benefits  such  as 
decreasing dependence on energy imports and spur innovation and competitiveness. 

  Nevertheless, there is a scope for strengthening and streamlining certain provisions of 
the EED so that they better reflect the policy context and Green Deal objectives (e.g. 
in relation to exemplary role of public sector and heating and cooling).   

  The EED remains relevant to EU citizens and their efforts to become well-informed 
and  empowered  energy  consumers  especially  in  the  context  of  the  European  Green 
Deal  objectives.  There  is  a  potential  for  better  tackling  socio-economic  challenges 
like energy poverty. 

  There is a need to ensure that the energy efficiency targets and instruments consider 

wider benefits and barriers to energy savings.  

5.4.  Coherence 

The  evaluation  looks  at  how  well  the  intervention  works  internally  within  the  EED 
provisions, as well as with other interventions with similar objectives. External coherence 
focus  on  synergies  and/or  potential  overlaps  between  the  EED  and  other  energy  and 
climate  policy  initiatives  at  EU  level.  It  is  important  for  the  evaluation  to  consider 
external coherence as it is expected that energy efficiency could contribute to other EU-
wide energy and climate policies. This is illustrated in the intervention logic in Annex 4).  

5.1.11. 

Evaluation question 11: To what extent is the EED internally coherent? 
To  what  extent  are  the  different  articles  and  provisions  of  the  EED 
working together coherently to achieve the overarching objective if the 
EED? 

The  EED  is  overall  internally  coherent  and  consistent,  as  articles  of  the  EED  cover 
different  issues  and  measures  and  are  to  a  large  extent  independent  from  one  another, 
while all of them contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the EED.  

A  strong  complementarity  and  coherence  can  be  observed  among  the  objectives  of  the 
specific provisions, as they aim for implementing a broad range of measures that lead to 
specific  energy  efficiency  improvements  and  address  a  wide  range  of  market  and 
regulatory barriers. For example, Article 6 has strong synergies with Article 5 (provisions 
on the exemplary role of public buildings). Article 5 sets the target for achieving energy 
savings  from  renovating central  government  buildings, while Article 6 sets  the specific 
including 
energy  efficiency  requirements  for  products,  services,  and  buildings, 
renovation  projects  procured  by  public  authorities.  Savings  achieved  from  central 
government renovations and alternative measures under Article 5 can, since the adoption 
of the 2018 revised EED, be counted under Article 7 for the energy savings obligation. 
Where Member States will do so, Article 5 will not generate further savings on top of the 
savings  accounted  under  Article  7,  however  Article  7  strong  obligation  and  detailed 
monitoring  and  verification  requirements  is  expected  to  increase  the  effectiveness  of 
Article 5 measures.  

74 

 
In  addition,  strong  internal  coherence  is  observed  between  the  provisions  on  energy 
services and qualification and certification/ accreditation schemes (Article 16 and Article 
18).  Article  16  requires  that  Member  States  ensure  the  availability  of  certification 
schemes for providers of energy services, energy audits and installers of energy-related 
buildings elements to secure a sufficient level of technical competences, while Article 18 
on  energy  services  requires  that  energy  services  providers  are  certified  in  line  with  the 
requirements of Article 16 of the EED.  

Moreover,  Article  18  contains  requirements  for  Member  States  to  support  the  public 
sector  in  promoting  the  uptake  of  energy  performance  contracting  through  providing 
model  contracts,  information  on  available  financing  schemes  and  instruments  and  best 
practices, while Article 5 and Article 6 contain provisions on encouraging public bodies 
to  conclude  energy  performance  contracts  under  certain  conditions.  Article  20  on 
financing mechanisms in this regard aims at facilitating the energy efficiency investments 
including promoting functioning of energy services markets. 

The  energy  savings  obligation  in  (Article  7)  is  an  important  driver  of  energy  services 
markets  and  energy  services  companies  thanks  to  the  requirement  to  carry  out  energy 
efficiency improvement measures notably in the buildings sector, and specifically in the 
heating  and  cooling  sector.  Despite  its  overall  positive  impact  on  energy  efficiency  in 
heating  and  cooling  supply,  the  overall  impact  on  primary  energy  efficiency  in  heating 
and cooling and thus the coherence with Article 14 on promotion of efficiency in heating 
and cooling has been limited by the strict focus on end-use energy savings. The energy 
savings  obligation  has  led  in  some  instances  to  higher  uptake  of  recommendations 
identified  energy  audits  carried  out  in  line  with  Article  8,  strengthening  the  overall 
impact of the energy audit obligation.  

The review in 2018, reinforced the internal coherence between Article 8 on energy audits 
and  Article  20  on  financing  mechanisms.  Article  20  was  amended  with  provisions 
requiring  Member  States  to  consider  ways  to  make  better  use  of  energy  audits  under 
Article 8 to influence decision-making for the purpose of mobilising private financing of 
energy efficiency improvement measures notably renovation of buildings.  

Stakeholders  confirm  that  the  EED  is  overall  internally  coherent;  however,  some 
provisions could be further clarified and streamlined to increase the effectiveness of the 
Directive. This is the case, for example in relation to provisions on energy performance 
contracting between Article 5 and Article 18 which could better clarify conditions for use 
of  energy  performance  contracting  in  the  central  government  buildings.  Also  links 
between Article 8  and 18 could  be reinforced through obligations to  implement  certain 
measures  identified  in  the  energy  audits,  which  would  in  turn  promote  the  energy 
services market.  

75 

 
5.1.12.  Evaluation question 12: To what extent is the EED coherent with other 

EU interventions on energy efficiency? 

The  evaluation  shows  that  overall  the  EED  is  coherent  with  other  energy  efficiency 
legislation, i.e. the EPBD, Ecodesign Directive, Energy and Tyre Labelling Regulations, 
given  that  each  instrument  is  addressing  different  energy  efficiency  aspects,  while 
ultimately leading to the same goal i.e. improving energy efficiency. 

  The Energy Performance of Buildings Directive  

The  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive  (EPBD),  together  with  the  building-
related  provisions  of  the  EED,  promotes  policies  that  aim  to  achieve  a  highly  energy 
efficient  and decarbonised building stock by 2050, create a favourable  environment  for 
energy  efficiency  investments,  and  enable  consumers  and  businesses  to  make  more 
informed choices to save energy and money.  

The EPBD evaluation173  in 2016 already recognised that the building-related provisions 
in the EED support the implementation of the EPBD by aiming to provide and optimise 
financial  support  for  the  renovation  of  the  building  stock  and  triggering  increased 
renovation  rates.  For  example,  Article  7  of  the  EED  plays  a  key  role  in  this  regard 
through  the  requirement  to  achieve  annual  energy  savings  of  1.5%  with  the  final 
customers174.  Energy  efficiency  obligation  schemes  (or  alternative  policy  measures)  are 
an effective way to aggregate small-scale investments, thus stimulating higher renovation 
rates.   

The existing EPBD sets minimum energy requirements for new or renovated buildings, 
but contains no requirements as to how many buildings must be renovated, or by when. 
By contrast, Article 7 requires actual energy savings, and therefore encourages building 
renovations  to  take  place  in  practice.  The  EBPD  can  therefore  be  seen  as  driving  an 
increase  in  the  depth  of  renovation  of  existing  buildings,  complemented  by  Article  7 
which helps to increase their rate. Almost half of the savings notified under Article 7 are 
reported to be generated in the buildings sector175 thus contributing to accelerated rate of 
renovation  thanks  to  the  specific  measures  (i.e.  financing  schemes  and  programmes) 
introduced by Member States to target renovation of residential and tertiary buildings. 

The revised EED176 clarified the application of the ‘additionality’ principle in relation to 
measures  targeting  existing  buildings,  thereby  improving  consistency  and  better  links 
with the EPBD.  

173 SWD(2016) 408 final 
174 0.8% for the next obligation period 2021-2030 
175 Technical Assistance study on assessing progress in implementing Article 7 of the EED and preparing 
the policy implementation in view of the new obligation period 2021-2030, Fraunhofer, 2020 

176 Annex V(2)b) of the amending Directive EU/2018/2002 

76 

 
                                                 
There is some overlap between the provisions under Article 8 of the EED (scope and the 
target groups) and the provisions of Articles 11, 14 and 15 of the EPBD regarding energy 
performance certificates and inspections for technical building installations.   

The  long-term  renovation  strategies  (Article  2a  of  the  revised  EPBD)  bring  together 
different  elements  and  measures  of  the  EED  and  of  the  EPBD  –  e.g.  measures 
implemented under Article 7 of the EED and financing mechanisms linked to Article 20 
of  the  EED.  In  addition,  the  comprehensive  assessments  of  the  potential  for  efficient 
heating and cooling carried out under Article 14 of the EED provide important input into 
the  building  decarbonisation  planning  outlined  in  the  long-term  renovation  strategies, 
taking into consideration that heating and cooling supply plays an important role in both 
of  these  documents.  However,  this  link  has  not  been  sufficiently  exploited  due  to  the 
inconsistency  in  notification  obligations  (The  Long  Term  Renovation  strategy  under 
Article  2a  of  the  EPBD  had  to  be  submitted  by  10  March  2020,  while  the  updated 
compressive assessments under Article 14 of the EED had to be submitted by December 
2020).  

Stakeholders acknowledged numerous interlinkages between the EED and the EPBD. In 
total,  twelve  respondents  out  of  20  (that  participated  in  the targeted  survey)  referred  to 
the complementary interlinkages between the EPBD and the EED, specifically as regards 
the EED Articles 5, 6, 7, 8, and 14.  

  Ecodesign Directive / Energy Labelling Regulation 

The  Ecodesign  Directive  and  the  Energy  and  Tyre  Labelling  Regulations  have  been 
instrumental for the development of higher energy efficiency standards for energy-related 
products.  While  the  Ecodesign  Directive  allows  for  the  setting  of  minimum  energy 
performance  requirements  that  products  have  to  fulfil  before  being  placed  on  the  EU 
market,  energy  and  tyre  labelling  provide  information  to  consumers  allowing  them  to 
choose  more  energy  efficient  products.  The  EED  complements  this  framework  by 
focusing  on  public  procurement.  Together  they  drive  product  energy  efficiency  by 
addressing different actors.  

The  strongest  link  with  the  product-related  energy  efficiency  framework  is  through 
Article 6 of the EED (and Annex III), which specifies that central governments may only 
purchase products that belong to the highest energy efficiency class on the energy label 
and,  for  those  products  not  covered  by  an  energy  label,  only  procure  products  that 
comply  with  energy  efficiency  benchmarks  specified  in  the  relevant  Ecodesign 
implementing measure. However, some of the references in Annex III are outdated (e.g. 
on  Energy  star)  and  would  require  a  review  in  light  of  the  latest  development  in 
Ecodesign and in the Energy Labelling Framework. In addition, Article 7 of EED creates 
positive synergies with the Ecodesign and Energy labelling thanks to its ‘additionality’177 
principle.  This  requires  that  Member  States  count  towards  the  Article  7  savings 

177 Additionality is referred to in Annex V (2), (3), and in Article 7(9)(d) and (e) 

77 

 
                                                 
requirement  only  those  end-use  energy  savings  that  exceed  the  minimum  requirements 
originating  from  the  implementing  regulations  under  the  Ecodesign  Directive  and  the 
Energy  Labelling  Regulation.  In  this  regard,  Article  7  reinforces  the  uptake  of  more 
efficient products in the Member States. 

The findings match with the stakeholder feedback (obtained in the survey as part of the 
targeted  workshops).  Six178  respondents  out  of  20  confirmed  that  the  EED  is  coherent 
with the Ecodesign Directive and the Energy Labelling Regulation.  

5.1.13.  Evaluation question 13: To what extent is the EED coherent with other 

EU interventions in a wider energy and climate domain? 

The EED is largely coherent with other EU energy and climate-related interventions with 
similar objectives – e.g. the Renewable Energy Directive, the Effort Sharing Regulation 
and Internal Market Legislation. It is also coherent with the energy saving aspects of the 
Industrial  Emissions  Directive.  The  dedicated  sections  below  examine  the  coherence 
criterion in relation to each policy instrument. 

  Renewable Energy Directive (REDII)   

There  are  important  interlinkages  between  increasing  renewable  energy  and  improving 
energy efficiency. Significant deployment of renewable energy results in a reduction in 
primary  energy  consumption  through  the  replacement  of  fossil  fuel  plants  with  lower 
primary  energy  efficiency.  The  Renewable  Energy  Directive  therefore  has  also 
contributed to the reduced primary energy consumption, which in turn has contributed to 
the  achievement  of  the  EU  energy  efficiency  target  for  2020.  Vice  versa,  decrease  in 
energy consumptions positively influences the overall share of renewables as a results of 
a progressively larger displacement of non-renewable energy sources179. 

In a paper by Reuter et al. (2017)180, index decomposition analysis was used to assess the 
contribution  of  different  drivers  of  changes  in  primary  energy  consumption.  Overall, 
changes  in  the  structure  and  efficiency  of  the  transformation  sector  and  its  electricity 
generation drove down the EU’s primary energy consumption, contributing towards the 
2020 energy efficiency target. These dynamics were mainly linked to the penetration of 
renewable energy sources and the substitution of other technologies, although there were 
substantial  differences  among  EU  Member  States.  This  implies  that  the  decrease  in 
primary  energy  consumption  in  the  EU  may  be  closely  related  to  policies  encouraging 
renewable  energy  and  CHP.  This  interaction  between  the  Renewable  Energy  Directive 

178 National representatives of Portugal, Cyprus and Malta, CAN Europe, the Coalition for Energy Savings, 

Solar Heat Europe/ESTIF 

179 SWD(2016) 416 
180 Reuter, M., Patel, M.K., Eichhammer, W. (2017), Applying ex-post index decomposition analysis to 
primary energy consumption for evaluating progress towards European energy efficiency targets. 
Energy Efficiency 10:1381-1400 

78 

 
 
                                                 
and the EED led Strambo et al.181 to the conclusion there is also a risk that it could draw 
attention  away  from  demand-side  energy-saving  measures  in  sectors  such  as  transport, 
industry and buildings. 

The  strong  coherence  between  the  EED  and  the  REDII  is  particularly  evident  in  the 
heating and cooling policy area, in which the two directives are strongly interlinked and 
complementary.  Article  14  of  the  EED  sets  the  framework  of  the  heating  and  cooling 
planning in terms of identifying the energy efficiency and renewable energy potential in 
heating  and  cooling,  and  requires  the  Members  States  to  implement  policies  and 
measures  to  exploit  this  potential.  These  policies  and  measures  directly  support  the 
achievement of the renewable energy target in heating cooling laid out in Article 23 of 
REDII. Vice versa, these targets  contribute to  the achievement of the energy  efficiency 
objectives laid out in Article 14 of the EED and the whole EED. In addition, the REDII 
refers to specific provisions of the EED, most notably links multiple requirements to the 
definition of efficient district heating and cooling (Article 2(41) of the EED) and at the 
same  time  this  definition  directly  promotes  the  deployment  of  renewable  energy  in 
district heating and cooling. 

Stakeholders  confirm  the  coherence  between  the  EED  and  the  REDII.  The  majority  of 
respondents  highlighted  the  mutually  reinforcing  nature  of  the  EED  and  the  REDII, 
noting that the reduction of energy demand facilitates the integration of renewables in the 
energy mix, while renewable energy in turn improves the energy efficiency of the energy 
system.  

  Internal market legislation for gas and electricity  

Provisions under Articles 9-11 (for  electricity) of the EED have been transferred to the 
Electricity  Directive182  as  part  of  the  Clean  Energy  for  all  Europeans  Package  in  2018, 
which allowed to address the existing overlaps in  relation  to  metering and billing rules 
between the two Directives. The amended EED183 requires  assessing the need to  do the 
same  by  end  2021  where  appropriate  for  the  provisions  related  to  gas.  This  will  be 
examined under the revision of the Gas Directive184. 

In addition, some provisions under Article 15 on energy transformation, transmission and 
distributions  have  been  transferred  to  the  Electricity  Directive  (notably  1st  and  2nd  sub-
paragraphs of Article 15(5) and also paragraph (8). The provisions under the Electricity 
Regulation already allow for energy efficiency improvements, although they may not be 
compatible  with  the  economic  efficiency  of  the  grids.  The  impact  of  those  provisions 

181 Strambo, C., Nilsson, M., Mansson, A. (2015) Coherent or inconsistent? Assessing energy security and 
climate policy interaction within the European Union. Energy Research & Social Science 8: 1–12.  

182 Directive (EU) 2019/944 
183 Article 24(14) of Directive (EU)2018/2002 
184 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12766-Revision-of-EU-rules-

on-Gas- 

79 

 
                                                 
cannot  be  assessed  for  the  time  being  as  the  transposition  deadline  of  the  Electricity 
Directive is end 2021. However, the synergies of the remaining provisions under Article 
15 are could be enhanced. 

A  number  of  stakeholders  that  took  part  in  the  targeted  stakeholder  survey  noted  that 
articles 9-11 would be better placed in the legislation on the internal market in natural gas 
(given  that  the  provisions  on  electricity  have  been  repealed  by  the  revised  Electricity 
Directive)185.  Further  harmonisation  was  deemed  necessary  in  relation  to  Article  15  to 
ensure that the national regulatory authorities are mandated to make the energy savings 
happen in these regulated assets. 

Several respondents noted that the internal market legislation on gas and electricity does 
not fully capture the energy efficiency first principle and is therefore not  coherent with 
the revised EED. In addition, respondents pointed out some important inconsistencies of 
the Electricity Regulation with the overall objectives of the EED.  

  Energy Taxation Directive  

Energy or CO2 taxation is potentially effective and efficient instrument to reduce energy 
consumption via price signals, which in turn contribute to the achievement of the energy 
efficiency  targets.  The  closest  interlinkages  between  the  EED  and  the  Energy  Taxation 
Directive  (ETD)  are  related  to  the  implementation  of  energy  efficiency  measures  to 
achieve the energy savings obligation under Article 7 (in line with Article 7b). The ETD 
lays  down  the  minimum  levels  of  taxation  of  electricity  and  energy  products  used  for 
heating and transport, while Article 7 allows counting energy savings from these taxation 
measures if the levels introduced by the Member State are exceeding the minimum EU 
level.  In  that  respect,  the  EED  allows  complementarity  with  the  ETD  thanks  to  the 
additionality  principle  embedded  in  the  Article  7186.  On  the  other  hand,  the  energy 
efficiency  effect  is  limited  as  the  EU  minimum  taxation  levels  are  low  and  Member 
States claim savings from the existing taxation measures which in reality do not induce a 
substantial reduction of energy use187.  

185 Directive (EU) 2019/944 
186  Annex  V  point  (2)(a)  EED.  Additionality  concept  in  the  meaning  of  Article  7  refers  to  the  need  for 
savings only to be counted beyond those that would have occurred in absence of the policy measure in 
question.  This  means  taking  account  of  how  energy  use  would  have  evolved  in  the  absence  of  the 
policy  measure,  taking  into  account  trends  in  consumption,  behaviour,  technological  progress  and 
other policy measures. This would need to take into account effects of other policy measures at the EU 
and national level. Regarding existing Union law which entered into force, the additionality principle 
assumes that these results would have been achieved in any case, since Member States are obliged by 
the  acquis  to  transpose  and  implement  what  is  required  under  EU  law  (e.g.  energy  performance 
requirements for buildings under the EPBD), and thus, may not count towards national energy savings 
requirements under Article 7. 

187 https://www.stefanscheuer.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/201914-EED-Article-7-and-energy-taxes-

RAP-STS-study.pdf 

80 

 
                                                 
The  Commission  evaluation  on  the  Energy  Taxation  Directive188  points  out  that  in 
general, the ETD could play a role as an environmental instrument that enhances energy 
efficiency, due to the fact that taxes have an impact on consumer behaviour and they can 
incentivise a more efficient use of energy. However, there is a room for further aligning 
the  two  Directives  to  ensure  the  greater  impact  from  energy  taxation.  In  addition, 
findings of the study by the Technical University of Delft suggest that the current ETD 
sends wrong price signals, discouraging users from choosing greener and more efficient 
energy sources. 

  The Effort Sharing Regulation and the Emissions Trading System 

In general, the Emissions Trading System (ETS) and energy efficiency measures are not 
competing  but  mutually  reinforcing  instruments.  One  of  the  effects  of  a  carbon  price 
created by the ETS is that it opens up new markets and applications for energy efficient 
products  and  technologies.  Energy  efficiency  policy  is  also  aimed  at  overcoming  non-
price barriers/market failures.  

The  EED  other  than  Article  8(4)  does  not  primarily  affect  EU  ETS  installations  and 
therefore  the  additionality  with  the  EU  ETS  could  be  considered  high.  The  EED  is 
mainly  achieving  GHG  emission  reductions  that  are  complementary  to  the  emission 
savings from the ETS. However, similar to the Renewable Energy Directive, increasing 
the share of renewable energy sources and fuel switching in the transformation sector are 
incentivized  by  the  EU  ETS  as  well,  and  therefore  the  EU  ETS  also  overlaps  and 
contributes to the achievement of the EED targets. 

The  evaluation  of  the  Effort  Sharing  Decision189  concluded  that  it  was  coherent  with 
energy  policies.  Feedback  received  from  stakeholders  (as  part  of  the  dedicated 
workshops)  indicate  high  level  of  agreement  that  the  EED  is  coherent  with  the  Effort 
Sharing Regulation. Stakeholders however also expressed the view that better incentives 
or  stricter  rules  are  required  to  support  the  Effort  Sharing  in  delivering  additional 
emissions reductions to reach the 2030 climate objectives (for example, prohibit counting 
savings  from  measures  incentivising  fossil  fuel  boilers,  which  is  not  fully  compatible 
with the climate targets). 

  Other EU legislation 

Other legislation having interactions with the EED are the legislation on CO2 standards 
for  light  vehicles  and  vans190,  CO2  standards  for  heavy  duty  vehicles,  Clean  Vehicles 
Directive191,  the  Industrial  Emissions  Directive  (IED)192,  the  legislation  on  waste 

188 SWD(2019) 329 final 
189 Ricardo, Trinomics, VITO (2016) Supporting study for the Evaluation of Decision No 406/2009/EC 

(Effort Sharing Decision)  

190 (EU) 2019/631 
191 (EU) 2019/1161 

81 

 
                                                 
management  and  legislation  on  water  management  and  other  environmental  legislation 
such as on air pollution .  

The  findings  of  the  evaluation  of  the  Industrial  Emissions  Directive193  suggest  that  the 
IED  requires  certain  abatement  measures  and/or  process  changes,  which  can  increase 
energy  consumption,  which  go  against  the  objectives  of  energy  efficiency  policies.  For 
example, compliance with Best Available Technologies may contradict with technologies 
which  are  more  energy  efficiency  friendly.  This  aspect  between  energy  efficiency  and 
improving  environmental  protection,  increasing  material  and  resource  efficiency,  and 
recycling was also reflected in the responses from the stakeholders as part of the targeted 
consultation.  Some  stakeholders  pointed  to  increasing  complexity  of  the  need  for 
recycling raw materials and the energy intensity of some production processes. 

Regarding other environmental legislation, in general reducing energy consumption has 
positive co-benefits  in  terms of reducing pollutant  emissions due to  less  combustion of 
fuels  and  reducing  the  need  for  additional  energy  supply  or  transmission  infrastructure 
with consequently lower environmental impacts such as on biodiversity.  

It  should  be  noted  that  there  are  also  important  linkages  with  the  Public  Procurement 
Directive194. The Public Procurement Directive sets the framework for how procurement 
should be undertaken with the aim of ensuring the principles such as fair competition and 
getting  best  value  for  taxpayers’  money.  It  leaves  to  the  EED  to  define  more  specific 
requirements  in  relation  to  energy  efficiency  for  purchasing  products,  buildings  and 
services  with  high  energy  efficiency  performance.  The  principles  of  'acting  fairly'  and 
'getting value for money' are ensured by the fact  that the minimum requirements of the 
procured  items  must  be  openly  available/non-proprietary  and  common  and  they  aim  at 
minimising the life-cycle cost of these items.  In this regard, the requirements of Article 6 
of the EED are in line with and complement the general provisions (notably Articles 67 
and 68) laid down in the Public Procurement Directive. 

Stakeholders  pointed  out  that  there  is  room  for  enhancing  synergies  with  the  public 
procurement  legislation  including  on  encouraging  Member  States  to  develop  and  use 
Green Public Procurement (GPP) criteria as part of the EED taking into account circular 
economy  aspects.  Stakeholders  also  stressed  that  Member  States  authorities  need  more 
support  tools  in  their  public  purchasing  practices  such  as  common  methodologies  and 
information on the cost evaluation of a product over its life cycle. 

Summary of findings on coherence 

192 2010/75/EU 
193 Grebot, B. et al. (2019) Support to the evaluation of the Industrial Emissions Directive (Directive 

2010/75/EU). See: https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/06f33a94-9829-4eee-b187-
21bb783a0fbf/library/df5b7d87-2bd9-47f3-b3d3-de41d402476d?p=1&n=10&sort=modified_DESC  

194 Directive 2014/24/EU 

82 

 
                                                                                                                                                 
  The  EED  is  overall  internally  coherent;  however,  there  is  a  room  for  further 
improvement.  Those  areas  for  improvement  do  not  point  to  fundamental 
contradictions or inconsistencies. 

  The EED is overall coherent with broader energy and climate policies. 

  The  increasing  interlinkages  with  the  RED  and  the  ETS  require  proper 

streamlining and closer look at reducing administrative burden. 

  The EED provisions need to be adapted to support the decarbonisation objectives 

in the context of the initiatives under the European Green Deal. 

5.5.  EU added value 

5.1.14. 

Evaluation question 14: What is the additional value resulting from the 
EU  intervention(s)  having  an  EU  level  target  and  EU  measures, 
compared  to  what  would  be  achieved  by  Member  States  acting  at 
national level without EU intervention? 

As  assessed  under  the  effectiveness  criterion,  the  Member  States  have  taken  national 
action  stemming  from  the  requirements  and  measures  of  the  EED  that  would  not  have 
been taken without the EED and the EU targets. 

The majority of stakeholders (obtained as part of the targeted workshops) have affirmed 
that the EED served as an important driver in promoting energy efficiency in the EU (see 
Figure 23). 

Figure 23 – To what extent the EED contributed to more actions being taken in the field of 
energy efficiency, than what would have been the case if the EED did not exist 

Source: Technical Assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

Even though policies and actions were implemented by Member States prior to the EED, 
this was certainly not the case throughout the EU and the EED helped to secure EU-wide 
action  by  increasing  the  ambition  and  national  commitment  towards  energy  efficiency. 
This is due to both EU level and national energy efficiency targets (Articles 1 and 3), and 
EED  measures,  while  leaving  sufficient  flexibility  to  Member  States  to  choose  the 
national  measures  in  line  with  specific  national  circumstances,  thus  respecting  the 
subsidiarity principle. 

For Article 7 alone, Member States have notified (as part of the dedicated notifications 
and the NEEAPs) more than 400 policy measures aimed at achieving the national savings 
requirements for the first period 2014-2020. Most of those national measures have been 

83 

 
 
implemented  because  of  the  binding  requirement  to  achieve  new  1.5%  energy  savings 
each year amongst final customers. In fact, thanks to Article 7, ten Member States have 
established  an  energy  efficiency  obligation  scheme  that  contributed  with  a  significant 
share of energy savings under Article 7 (amount to 35% energy savings in 2018).  

Similarly,  Member  States  had  to  take  action  to  achieve  the  annual  3%  target  for 
renovating  central  government  buildings  under  Article 5,  while  having  a  possibility  to 
achieve the target via alternative approach (choosing other measures that allow achieving 
the same amount of savings). Member States that have chosen the alternative approach 
were more likely to fulfil the target of Article 5, as they were able to use a wider range of 
measures,  including  the  renovation  of  central  government  buildings  as  in  the  default 
approach.  Nevertheless,  this  flexibility  has  its  limits  decarbonising  the  public  bodies’ 
buildings,  as  it  allows  to  renovate  less  buildings  to  the  cost  optimal  level.  It  was  also 
identified by a stakeholders as a shortcoming of Article 5, as  it proved hard to monitor 
and led in many cases to short term energy savings.  

In  addition,  analysis  revealed  that  Article  8  on  energy  audits  and  energy  management 
systems supported the uptake of energy audits amongst large enterprises, while there are 
shortcomings in relation to applying the SME definition in Article 8(4). The findings of 
the  study  assessing  the  effectiveness  of  the  implementation  of  the  definition  of  SMEs 
indicate that the scope and subsequent implementation of Article 8(4) on implementation 
of the SME definition varies across Member States195.  

Overall, thanks to the EED-specific monitoring and reporting obligations, Member States 
have to report on national measures and progress on the achievement of national energy 
efficiency targets and the implementation of certain measures. This in turn increased the 
awareness amongst stakeholders and citizens of the efforts taken at national level. This is 
in  particular  relevant  for  Articles  5  and  7,  which  contain  specific  annual  reporting 
requirements on the energy savings achieved196. 

Article 14 on energy efficiency in heating and cooling made Member States more aware 
on the potential for energy efficiency in the heating and cooling sector. Even though the 
regulation and specific implementation of heating and cooling systems are mostly done at 
local  or  regional  level,  the  requirements  under  the  EED  allowed  to  increase  awareness 
and exchange best practices on promoting energy efficiency in this area. 

The EED will remain central as regards the heating and cooling sector which is expected 
to  develop  further  in  the  near  future  thanks  to  the  increased  penetration  of  renewable 

195 CEPS (2020), Technical assistance on assessing the effectiveness of the implementation of the 

definition of small and medium-sized enterprises for the purposes of Article 8(4) of the Energy 
Efficiency Directive 

196 In line with Article 24(1); the annual reporting requirements as of 2021 are part of the Governance 

Regulation. 

84 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
energy  sources  and  the  importance  of  energy  system  integration  in  achieving  the  clean 
energy  transition197.  The  forthcoming  comprehensive  assessments  on  high-efficiency 
cogeneration and district heating required under Article 14, to be submitted by Member 
States  by  end  2020  would  help  identify  the  necessary  measures  that  could  reap  the 
remaining  energy  savings  potential  and  lead  on  new,  more  efficient  energy  uses  and 
innovative technologies and processes, for example reuse of waste heat. 

In  addition,  the  EED  measures  are  key  to  contributing  to  the  implementation  of  the 
recently  published  Renovation  Wave  initiative  through  the  greater  focus  put  on 
renovation of public and private buildings.  

Moreover,  the  comprehensive  impact  assessment  accompanying  the  Climate  Target 
Plan198  estimates  the  required  level  of  reduction  of  energy  consumption  of  36-37%  for 
final energy and 39-41% for primary energy consumption to achieve the GHG emissions 
reductions target of at least 55% by 2030, with the EED expected to play a key role to 
contribute to this higher ambition level. 

Overall,  the  information  received  from  Member  States  in  line  with  the  reporting 
requirements  illustrates  that  the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive  is  one  of  the  key  Union 
policy  driving  the  implementation  of  national  climate  policies  and  measures  as  can  be 
seen in Figure 24 below (ETC/CME, 2019)199.  

Figure  24  -  Number  of  policies  and  measures  reported  to  be  implemented  in  response  to  EU 
policies with start year up to 2017 (dark) and after 2017 (light blue) 

197 COM(2020) 299 final 
198 COM(2020) 562 final 
199  Dauwe,  T.,  Young,  K.,  Mandl,  N.,  Jozwicka,  M.  (2019)  Overview  of  reported  national  policies  and 
measures on climate change mitigation in Europe in 2019. European Topic Centre on Climate change 
Mitigation  and  Energy  Eionet  report  5/2019  https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-cme/products/etc-
cme-reports/etc-cme-report-5-2019-overview-of-reported-national-policies-and-measures-on-climate-
change-mitigation-in-europe-in-2019  

85 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
5.1.15. 

Evaluation question 15: What would be the most likely consequences of 
stopping or withdrawing the EED? 

The evaluation also assessed the added-value of EU action as compared to Member State 
action  alone.  This  topic  was  explored  in  the  context  of  the  targeted  stakeholder 
consultation (general questions on the EED). Many stakeholders indicated that it would 
have  a  negative  effect  and  would  decrease  the  level  of  engagement,  while  some 
stakeholders did not think it would have an effect (see Figure 25 below).  

Figure 25 - If the EED were to be repealed, what would the effect be on your country’s level of 
engagement to increase energy efficiency? (N=20) 

Source: Technical assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

5.1.16. 

Evaluation  question  16:  Are  there  any  parts  of  the  EED  that  are 
obsolete? 

Overall,  the  feedback  received  from  stakeholders  in  the  targeted  consultation  suggests 
that certain provisions have become obsolete (e.g. requirement under Article 8 on energy 
audits  for  households  and  Article  14  on  certificates  of  origin)  need  to  be  integrated  in 

86 

 
 
 
 
 
other Directives), and that certain provisions need to be streamlined and aligned with the 
policy context of the increased climate ambition (notably as regards the following articles 
1&3, 5, 7, 16, 17, and 20. Specific suggestions for such types of revisions are described 
in sections above (on questions examining relevance). 

Article 8 on energy audits and energy management systems can be seen as an instrument 
that does not really apply for households due to not being cost-effective, if comparing the 
costs of an audit with  the relatively small level  of energy consumption and thereby the 
energy  saving  opportunities.  However,  measuring  the  energy  performance  of  buildings 
through  an  Energy  Performance  Certificate  could  be  considered  as  a  kind  of  energy 
review or audit. According to  Article 12 of the EPBD, it is mandatory to have an EPC 
when a house or building is put up for sale or lease. As this is handled in the EPBD, the 
Article  8  provisions  as  regards  households  might  be  obsolete.  Multiple  stakeholders 
responding to the Article 8 questionnaire (as part of the targeted consultation) indicated 
that  programmes  and  schemes  to  raise  awareness  among  households  of  the  benefits  of 
energy audits are more linked to the EPBD implementation, instead to the EED.  

Article 14 on promotion  of efficiency in  heating and cooling:  the initial desk study did 
not  bring  any  evidence  on  the  impact  gained  from  Article  14(10)  and  14(11)  on  the 
guarantee  of  origin  of  High-Efficiency  CHP  (HECHP).  Also  some  stakeholders 
acknowledged this during the workshop on heating and cooling. These provisions might 
therefore not bring added value to the EED and might be obsolete.   

Figure 26 - Are there any parts / specific provisions of the EED that are obsolete or have proven 
inappropriate? 

46 

182 

No

Yes

Source: Feedback from the public consultation 

Summary of the findings on EU added value: 

‒  EU  intervention  was  key  to  achieve  energy  efficiency  improvements  across  the 
EU. It is clear that without the EU level target and binding measures it would not 
have been achieved to the scale observed. 

87 

 
 
 
‒  Member  States  have  put  in  place  national  measures  to  implement  the  EED 
(notably  Article  7)  targeting  different  actors  and  sectors  that  contributed  to  the 
achievement of the EU targets for 2020. 

‒  There is scope for strengthening and streamlining some provisions to ensure that 
the  EED  delivers  the  required  efforts  in  view  of  the  higher  climate  target  and 
closing the gap of the existing EU target of 32.5%. 

88 

 
 
 
6.  CONCLUSIONS 

The Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency (EED) was evaluated to assess whether 
the framework is fit to contribute to the higher climate target of at least 55% for 2030 and 
whether there are  any  weaknesses in  the legislation which would need to be improved. 
The evaluation was carried out in line with the Commission better regulation guidelines 
and examined the evaluation criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence, EU 
added value. 

The  Directive  covers  a  wide  range  of  measures  and  targets  different  sectors  both  in 
supply and end use, applicable to a wide range of actors – public authorities, enterprises 
and  consumers.  The  evaluation  showed  that  the  EED  has  been  implemented  in  all 
Member States albeit at a varying degree and success. Overall, the EED has contributed 
to promoting energy efficiency in the EU and to the achievement of the EU 2020 and EU 
2030  energy  efficiency  targets.  The  Directive  remains  a  central  policy  instrument  of 
energy efficiency policy; however, there are a number of weaknesses and limitations that 
impede reaping the energy savings potential to its maximum. Those are related to many 
flexibilities and conditionalities allowing Member States to choose alternatives that result 
in the lower amount of energy savings (e.g. Art. 5 and 6). In fact, a number of provisions 
do  not  contain  specific  obligations  but  rather  encourages  Member  States  to  take  action 
voluntarily.  There  is  also  a  lack  of  monitoring  and  measuring  requirements  established 
for  most  of  the  provisions  except  for  Articles  5  and  7,  making  it  challenging  or 
impossible to assess the impacts of energy saving measures. 

The EED requires that Member States put in place national measures and set the national 
targets  for  2020  and  national  energy  efficiency  contributions  for  2030  in  view  of 
achieving the objectives  of the EED (promoting energy efficiency and reaching the EU 
energy efficiency targets).  

The EED obligations were central to national action as shown in the evaluation. Member 
States  had  to  create  the  policy  framework  and  develop  support  mechanisms  for  the 
implementation  of  the  national  measures.  This  allowed  to  increase  expertise  and 
awareness, and also increase commitment towards energy efficiency and its overall role 
towards reaching the climate objectives, as it is also reflected in the stakeholder feedback 
that the EED remains a central policy to achieve the EU energy efficiency targets. 

The overview of the findings per evaluation criteria are provided below. 

Effectiviness 

The EED led to energy efficiency improvements across the EU thanks to its targets and 
binding  measures  (notably  Article  7).  However,  the  analysis  (2018  data)  shows  that 
energy consumption both for final & primary are falling short of the EU targets for 2020 
(1483 Mtoe – PEC, 1086 Mtoe – FEC). In 2018, progress towards the indicative national 
targets was insufficient in 12 Member States for PEC and in 15 Member States for FEC. 

89 

 
As  regards  EU  2030  targets,  the  assessment  of  the  national  energy  and  climate  plans 
(NECPs) identified a collective ambition gap of national contributions of 2.8 percentage 
points for primary and 3.1 percentage points for final energy consumption.  

Energy  efficiency  delivers  a  multiple  benefits  in  addition  to  improvements  in  energy 
efficiency  and  energy  savings.  The  EED  has  contributed  to  the  reduction  of  GHG 
emissions, both in terms of direct emissions from fossil fuel combustion or consumption 
and indirect emissions reduction from electricity generation. 

Evaluation  shows  that  different  factors  drive  energy  consumption  in  different  sectors. 
The  EED  targets  both  the  supply  and  end  use  sectors,  through  a  set  of  measures  and 
obligations.  It  should  be  noted  that  there  is  no  exact  data  available  on  what  impact 
specific  measures  of  the  EED  had  on  the  different  sectors,  except  for  Article  5 
(exemplary  role  of  public  buildings)  and  Article  7  (energy  savings  obligations)  which 
show that most of the energy savings have been achieved in the buildings sector.   

Article  7  (energy  savings  obligations),  a  key  instrument  of  the  EED  to  achieve  energy 
savings  in  end  use,  remains  an  effective  measure.  Despite  the  sufficient  progress 
achieved at aggregate level EU level according to 2018 data), 14 Member States risk not 
to reach their requirements by end 2020. 

The  obligations  for  the  public  sector  (Articles  5  &  6)  proved  key  to  demonstrate  the 
exemplary role of central government in promoting energy efficiency via renovations and 
public  procurement;  however,  the  measures  had  overall  a  narrow  scope  and  were 
implemented  at  a  limited  scale,  and  there  are  still  a  number  of  limitations  that  prevent 
reaping energy savings potential in the public sector. 

The  EED  was  key  to  promoting  the  use  of  energy  audits  across  the  EU;  however, 
important  limitations remain such as lack of monitoring requirements for energy  audits 
and the follow up, difficulties related to  application of the SMEs definition (Art. 8(4)), 
lack of requirements/ incentives for implementing energy management systems amongst 
others. 

Article  14  on  heating  and  cooling  in  particular  the  comprehensive  assessments  helped 
increase the overall importance and awareness of heating and cooling in Member States; 
however, the overall impact of Article 14 is rather low due to the several factors such as 
lack of follow-up policies and measures for implementing the potential identified in the 
comprehensive  assessments,  waste  heat  reuse  not  being  sufficiently  addressed,  lack  of 
focus on local aspects of planning and development of heating and cooling. 

Some  provisions  with  a  view  to  improve  efficiency  of  energy  transformation, 
transmission  and  distribution  (Article  15)  have  been  effectively  implemented  in  the 
Member States, such as treating energy losses and incentivising demand-side resources. 
However,  the  use  of  common  methodologies  and  reporting  is  still  not  in  place  and 
therefore their impact cannot be assessed. There is no uniform definition of energy losses 
across the EU which results into a sub-optimal data quality. 

The EED contributed to setting up the certification and qualification schemes (Article 16) 
to  some  extent,  and  the  majority  of  Member  States  have  established  the  schemes 

90 

 
covering professions for energy services, energy audits, energy managers and installers. 
However, effectiveness of the national schemes varies across the countries (the level of 
technical competence varies across the category of specialists).  

The EED largely contributed to the development of energy services markets and energy 
performance  contracting  (Article  18);  however,  important  barriers  still  remain  which 
impede  the  uptake  of  energy  performance  contracting,  such  as  ambiguities  in  the 
legislative  framework,  complex  procurement  procedures,  lack  of  facilitators  and 
technical  capacity  and  lack  of  certified  energy  services  providers,  and  often  grants 
competing with private funding. 

The evaluation shows that the EED had a moderate effect to empower consumers as well 
as to tackle societal challenges like energy poverty given that a lot of measures have been 
taken at national level to raise the awareness and provide information to general public, 
however  it  is  difficult  to  assess  their  effectiveness.  Analysis  shows  that  the  EED 
contributed to some extent to address the issue of split incentives (Article 19), but their 
impact  is  strongly  determined  by  the  national  context  and  the  legal  framework  of 
Member States.  

The findings show that Article 20 on financing mechanisms has partially contributed to 
establishing financing facilities across the Member States. The lack of available data on 
the level  of  energy  efficiency investments  and financing does not  allow  fully  assessing 
the  impact  of  the  financing  measures  put  in  place  in  the  Member  States.    On  the  other 
hand, action taken by the Commission to assist the Member States in setting up financing 
facilities and technical support has been effective. 

  Efficiency 

Overall,  the  EED  had  contributed  to  achieving  energy  savings  in  the  EU  in  a  cost-
effective manner. 

Energy  Efficiency  Obligation  Schemes  under  Article  7  have  been  a  cost-efficient 
instrument in countries that have chosen to implement it. 

The  implementation  of  several  obligations  in  the  EED  is  subject  to  “conditionalities” 
(e.g. Articles 5, 6, 9-11, 14), so that Member States are only required to act if it is cost-
effective/  economically  feasible/  technically  possible.  This  allows  Member  States 
significant  flexibility  and  allows  them  to  adopt  cost-effective  measures  (however 
Member States have not always demonstrated how the feasibility was established). 

In  terms  of  efficiency,  there  are  no  indications  for  significant  differences  in  the 
magnitude of  costs amongst  the Member States  for most of the provisions of the EED, 
except for Article 7 (the costs depend on the design and scope of the policy measure). 

  Relevance: 

The EED remains relevant in delivering an increased ambition level for energy efficiency 
and contributing to the increased climate target of at least 55% for 2030, and reap other 

91 

 
benefits such as decreasing dependence on energy imports, creating jobs and growth, and 
spur innovation and competitiveness. 

Nevertheless, there is a scope for strengthening and streamlining certain provisions of the 
EED so that they better reflect the current policy context and the European Green Deal 
objectives (notably in relation to increasing the renovation rate and energy efficiency of 
the heating and cooling sector).   

The EED remains relevant to EU citizens and their efforts to become well-informed and 
empowered  energy  consumers  especially  in  the  context  of  the  European  Green  Deal 
objectives. There is a potential for better tackling socio-economic challenges like energy 
poverty. 

There  is  a  need  to  ensure  that  the  energy  efficiency  targets  and  instruments  consider 
wider benefits and barriers to energy efficiency investments.  

  Coherence 

The EED is overall internally coherent; however, there is a room for improvement. Those 
areas for improvement do not point to fundamental contradictions or inconsistencies. 

The EED also is overall coherent with broader energy and climate policies. 

The  increasing  interlinkages  with  renewable  energy  and  the  ETS  require  proper 
streamlining and closer look at reducing administrative burden. The EED provisions need 
to  be  adapted  to  support  the  decarbonisation  objectives  in  the  context  of  the  initiatives 
under the European Green Deal. 

  EU added value 

EU intervention was key to achieve energy efficiency improvements across the EU. It is 
clear  that  without  the  EU  level  target  and  binding  measures  it  would  not  have  been 
achieved to the scale observed. 

Member  States  have  put  in  place  national  measures  to  implement  the  EED  (notably 
Article 7) targeting different actors and sectors that contributed to the achievement of the 
EU targets for 2020. 

There  is  a  scope  for  strengthening  and  streamlining  some  provisions  to  ensure  that  the 
EED delivers the required efforts in view of the higher climate target for 2030. 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
Annex 1: Procedural information 

1.  LEAD DG, DeCIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES 

The evaluation has been led by the European Commission's Directorate-General (DG) for 
Energy, DG ENER Unit B2: Energy Efficiency. 

Decide entry: PLAN/2020/6834 

2.  ORGANISATION AND TIMING 

The  Evaluation  roadmap  was  published  on  3  August  2020  together  with  the  Inception 
impact assessment, with a seven-week period until 21 September 2020 for stakeholders 
and general public to provide feedback.  

3. 

Consultation of the RSB 

A  meeting  with  the  Regulatory  Scrutiny  Board  took  place  on  14  April  2021.  The 
Evaluation SWD was a constituting element of the impact  assessment in the context of 
the  back-to-back  process  carried  out  in  line  with  the  Commission  better  regulation 
guidelines. The comments made by the Board were raised on the impact assessment and 
thus are summarised in Annex I of the impact assessment SWD.  

3.  EXCEPTIONS TO THE BETTER REGULATION GUIDELINES 

n/a 

4.  EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY 

The  Member  States’  annual  reports,  Eurostat  data,  technical  support  study  and 
stakeholder consultations, Commission progress reports and analysis. 

93 

 
 
 
  
Annex 2: Stakeholder consultation 

The  evaluation  of  the  EED  was  supported  by  an  extensive  series  of  stakeholder 
consultations. The targeted stakeholders were identified in the Consultation strategy. The 
stakeholders include: 

  European  public  actors:    European  Parliament,  Committee  of  the  Regions, 

Economic and Social Committee (high interest); 

  National authorities responsible for the implementation of the EED in Member 
States  (e.g.  ministries  of  energy  or  economy  and  other  competent  authorities, 
including potentially at regional and local level) (high interest); 

  Interest groups affected by the implementation of the EED such as companies, 
including small and medium-sized enterprises, regional and local public bodies, 
private organisations and industry associations, NGOs (high interest); 

  Wider interest groups who may have an interest in implementation of the EED 

including civil society and academia (moderate interest). 

Several  tools for engaging stakeholders were used to  ensure a successful  consultation 
on  both  ex-post  evaluation  and  identification  of  further  policy  options  for  the  Impact 
Assessment. They included: 

  Consultation on the evaluation roadmap/inception impact assessment; 

  Nine  stakeholder  workshops  on  specific  topics  and  articles;  the  EED  Expert 

group meeting; 

  Targeted  stakeholder  consultations  including  evaluation  questionnaires  and 

interviews and 

 

the Open Public Consultation (OPC). 

Due  to  the  comprehensive  communication  strategy,  all  stakeholder  groups  could  be 
reached. Consultation activities were tailored to deliver analytically separate insights into 
the  evaluation  of  the  existing  acquis  and  the  impact  assessment.The  received  feedback 
was  analysed  based  on  a  mixed-method  design,  applying  qualitative  and  quantitative 
analysis. This comprised qualitative content analysis, delivering read-outs of stakeholder 
positions. Computer-aided text analysis (CATA) based on MaxQda software allowed for 
an  additional  coding  of  feedback  to  track  salience  of  the  topics.  Quantitative  data 
gathered in the consultations on the Roadmap/Inception Impact Assessment and the Open 
Public Consultation were analysed with MS Excel and IBM SPSS statistical software.   

The following section presents a detailed description of these consultation activities and 
their return. 

94 

 
 
 
1.  Consultation on the evaluation roadmap 

The  evaluation  roadmap  (Roadmap)200  was  published  on  3  August  2020  and  was 
available for feedback until 21 September 2020. It received 189 replies. 99 stakeholders 
annexed supplementary  statements and information to  their replies. The largest  number 
of  replies  (67)  were  received  from  Belgium,  followed  by  France  (20  replies)  and 
Germany  (19  replies).  15  replies  were  anonymous  which  did  not  allow  to  track  the 
geographic location of contributors. The group of Business Associations was the largest 
to reply (80 replies), followed by Companies (36 replies) and NGOs (26 replies). Section 
II presents the detailed read-out of the consultation results.  

the 
the  Roadmap  allowed  stakeholders 
The  consultation  on 
Roadmap/Inception Impact Assessment in an open format. The majority of stakeholders 
used this opportunity to comment on possibilities to reinforce the EED (see section 4.1). 
Few  comments  were  received  regarding  the  evaluation  on  the  present  EED  provisions. 
However, the feedback retrieved allows drawing conclusions on the following points: 

to  comment  on 

  The  present  provisions  of  the  EED  are  seen  as  workable  and  overall  effective. 
However, they are not sufficiently ambitious in view of a stepped up overall energy 
and climate objectives. Reinforcing the EED’s provisions could effectively contribute 
to achieving further energy savings. 

  Synergies and interrelations between the existing energy acquis, notably the Energy 
Performance  of  Buildings  Directive  (EPBD)  and  the  Renewable  Energy  Directive 
(RED II) are not sufficiently established. 

  No  stakeholder  argued  for  the  baseline  scenario  (option  1  –  no  policy  change), 
indicating that a revision of the EED’s provisions is overall accepted by respondents. 

2.  Stakeholder workshops and the EED Expert group 

Nine  dedicated  stakeholder  meetings  were  organised  virtually  in  the  period  from 
September to October 2020 with targeted stakeholder groups on specific topics to ensure 
focussed discussion (see Table 1Error! Reference source not found.). The outcome of 
discussions  contributed  to  both  processes  –  evaluation  and  the  impact  assessment  for 
revising the EED. On average 52 participants attended each workshop. 

Table 1 - Overview of the stakeholder workshops 

No.  Topic 

1 

2 

Heating and Cooling and Article 14 

Energy Efficiency in Networks and Article 15 

Number of 
participants 

Date 

97 

78 

10.09.2020 

16.09.2020 

200 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12552-EU-energy-efficiency-

directive-EED-evaluation-and-review 

95 

 
                                                 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Financing and Article 20 

Energy Efficiency in the Public Sector and Articles 5, 6 and 18 

General Issues and Energy Efficiency Targets 

Energy Audits and Article 8 

Energy Efficiency in Specific Sectors 

Energy Consumers and Articles 12 and 19 

Energy Services and Skills Articles 16 and 18 

61 

61 

71 

59 

65 

44 

50 

17.09.2020 

06.10.2020 

07.10.2020 

08.10.2020 

19.10.2020 

21.10.2020 

22.10.2020 

Workshops  were  split  in  two  parts  to  cover  ex-post  evaluation  aspects  and  possible 
solutions for improvements of the EED and were guided by questions sent in advance to 
participants. 

An overview of the main findings of evaluation of the EED is provided in Table 2. 

Table 2 - Summary of key workshop findings 

Article/ 
Workshop 
topic 
14  (Heating 
and cooling) 

(Grid 

15 
efficiency) 

(Energy 

20 
efficiency 
finance) 

18 

5, 
6, 
(Public 
sector) 

Findings regarding evaluation 

  Especially  Art.  14(1)-(4)  on  identifying  efficient  heating  and  cooling  potential  via 
comprehensive  assessments  have  contributed  to  the  relative  success  of  this  article.  Still 
huge potential on waste heat exists. 

  Many participants see EED leaving out relevant areas in heating and cooling such as data 

centres, supply side efficiency, system integration. 

  Participants gave mixed views on effectiveness to boost efficiency in heating and cooling. 
Some  participants  argued  that  especially  the  potential  on  cooling  is  presently  not 
sufficiently taken into account. 

  Several participants underscored that there is a clear overlap with renewable energies and 
RED II (article 23: Need to consider fossil heating versus renewable sources) and to further 
analyse system efficiency. 

  Participants argued that in contrast to the EED’s focus on in-grid efficiency also efficiency 

of the wider system should be looked at. 

  In  some  countries,  no  specific  incentives  for  decreasing  grid  losses  in  DSO  regulations 

exist, which has so far not been addressed by the EED. 

  Regarding energy efficiency finance,  several  stakeholders saw the  main barriers in (i) the 
return  on  investments  in  energy  efficiency  measures  is  not  large  enough  or  the  payback 
time is too long; and (ii) lack of evidence on the performance of EE investments makes the 
benefits and the financial risk harder to assess. 

  Many  participants  argued  that  article  20  EED  has  contributed  partially  to  developing 
finance for energy efficiency. Subsidies, blending facilities and tax incentives were seen as 
most promising measures. 

  However,  they  stated  that  the  impact  of  the  EED  in  this  field  is  hard  to  assess,  as  many 

provisions are not binding. 

  Participants  stated  that  further  leverage  of  private  capital  is  possible.  Several  potentially 

interesting schemes exist in the Member States and deserve further looking into. 

  Article 5 is perceived as a crucial article in the EED because the public sector should lead 
by example. Some participants expressed the view that it does not deliver according to the 
need. This is due to the issues that (i) the scope is too limited, (ii) there are some limitations 
in the alternative approach, (iii) there is limited information on success cases under Article 
5. Furthermore, (iv) there is no clear link between the regulatory provisions and the funds 

96 

 
 
Findings regarding evaluation 

Article/ 
Workshop 
topic 

available.  One  barrier  related  to  Article  5  is  that  the  decentralised  structure  of  some 
countries could impede the implementation of Art. 5. 

  Some participants argued that Article 6 requires a revision of the scope, possibly extension. 
It is important to raise awareness and raise capacity at local and regional level for applying 
EE criteria in public procurement. 

  In the view of some stakeholders, Article 18 would require more links to Article 5 – on how 
to use EnPC in the public buildings. Some Member States have established targets to assign 
renovation rates to buildings using energy performance contracting.  

  Financing is still an issue, but participants mentioned that with the recovery package more 

buildings will be renovated – especially schools and hospitals. 

  Participants  argued  that  the  present  provisions  are  not  enough  to  address  behavioural 

changes through consumer feedback, notably in rented buildings.  
  Several H2020 projects address this issue and should be looked into. 
  Participants  agreed  that  Article  12  is  a  soft  article  but  has  a  lot  of  potential  if  used 
appropriately – not only for empowerment but also to help the energy poor / lower income 
households.  Some  stakeholders  suggested  that  a  further  linking  to  Article  11  could  be 
useful. 

19 

12, 
(Consumer 
information 
and 
empowering) 

18 

16, 
(Energy 
services  and 
qualification) 

  Many  participants  saw  the  EED  provisions  as  relevant  for  contributing  to  setting  up 
certification  and/or  accreditation  schemes  and/or  equivalent  qualification  schemes  and 
developing energy service markets. 

  However, the present provisions do not sufficiently consider quality checks, and the regular 

continuation and update of training activities. 

(Energy 

8 
saudits) 

  Feedback  on  Article  8  was  mixed.  While  participants  assessed  it  to  contributing  to  the 
uptake of energy audits, many argued that the full potential of this instrument is not reaped. 
  Shortcomings were seen in the linking to the definition of non-SMEs and missing control of 

implementation. 

Two  dedicated  workshops  addressed  the  role  of  the  overall  energy  efficiency  target 
framework and general issues related to the EED (7 October 2020, 90 participants), and 
specific  sectors  (20  October  2020,  90  participants).  The  summary  findings  of  the  two 
workshops are presented in Table  below. 

Table 3 - Summary of key workshop findings on overall EED framework and specific sectors 

Article/ 
Workshop 
topic 
1&3 
(Targets) 

Sectors 
(transport, 
ICT, 
agriculture 
and waste) 

Findings regarding evaluation 

  Some participants expressed support for a higher ambition in the EED, but discussions were 
less conclusive on the technical modalities of setting the targets. Participants stressed the need 
to  have  targets  for  final  and  primary  energy  consumption  ,  with  a  greater  focus  on  final 
energy. 

  The overall framework of the EED is complex. While some issues were clarified in the 2018 
revision  of  the  EED,  some  participants  argued  for  further  simplifications.  Administrative 
burden needs to be also taken into account. 

  Regarding transport, responses were inconclusive regarding whether or not the present EED 
is  addressing  transport  energy  consumption  in  an  adequate  manner.  Whereas  some 
participants  argued  that  Article  7  addressed  this  matter  sufficiently,  others  saw  room  for 
further action in this field.  

  The responses were also inconclusive in relation to agriculture sector.  
  When  discussing  the  impact  on  ICT  energy  consumption,  a  clear  majority  of  respondents 
argued that the EED has not sufficiently contributed towards  increasing energy efficiency in 
the ICT sector.  

97 

 
 
 
Overview of the main findings of the targeted workshops are the following: 

  Overall, the views gathered in the workshops confirmed the feedback to the Roadmap 
consultation: The EED is seen as a cornerstone to support the overall European 
decarbonisation objective. Apart from setting targets, this is clearly seen throughout 
all sectoral provisions contained in the Directive. 

  Furthermore,  the  feedback  also  highlights  that  the  energy  savings  potential  of  the 

existing EED is currently not fully exploited.  

  Feedback  to  the  individual  articles  showed  that  although  a  majority  of  participants 
agreed that the present provisions are effective to a certain extent, strengthening of 
the EED is possible in many cases. 

  This  in particular concerns addressing the potential  for heating and  cooling under 
Article 14 EED and strengthening the exemplary role of the public sector in Articles 
5 and 6 EED. 

A dedicated EED expert group meeting was held on 10 November 2020. The meeting 
was  aimed  to  seek  feedback  on  the  preliminary  findings  of  the  evaluation  of  the  EED 
framework  and  to  discuss  identified  policy  options  for  amending  the  EED.  Over  100 
participants attended the expert group.  

At  the  meeting  of  the  EED  expert  group  of  10  November,  preliminary  results  of  the 
evaluation  of  the  overall  EED  were  presented.  The  results  suggest  that  participants 
overall agreed with the assessment presented largely confirming the conclusions received 
in  the  dedicated  workshops  on  different  topics  of  the  EED.  Article  7  EED  was  singled 
out as being of central importance for the effectiveness of the Directive.  

Overall, the feedback from the participants aligned with the findings from the targeted 
stakeholder workshops and the feedback to the Roadmap/Inception Impact Assessment. 

3.  Evaluation questionnaires and interviews 

The consultation  activities included also  direct interviews as  a follow up on dedicated 
issues.  Stakeholders  were  proposed  to  decide  whether  they  would  like  to  participate  in 
interviews to illustrate their contributions through the questionnaire and the workshops. 
In total eight interviews were conducted. The purpose of the interviews was to validate 
and  clarify  matters,  and  to  gather  additional  information  and  details  where  necessary. 
Summary of the interviews were prepared for the reporting exercise.  

articles, general issues and four sector specific sectors - agriculture, water, ICT, transport. 
Table 4 below presents an overview of the number of responses and feedback received 
from stakeholders.  

Table 4: Feedback response overview to evaluation questionnaires 

Article /topic 

Questionnaire responses 

Additional feedback* 

98 

 
 
Targeted articles of the EED 

Article 1&3 

Article 5 

Article 6 

Article 8 

Article 12 

Article 14 

Article 15 

Article 16 

Article 18 

Article 19 

Sector-specific issues 

General issues 

Agriculture and water 

ICT 

Transport 

21 

19 

15 

25 

11 

12 

5 

9 

21 

10 

30 

5 

5 

8 

- 

- 

- 

4 

2 

16 

2 

1 

- 

2 

8 

1 

- 

-  

*  This  includes  position  papers  and  other  notes  received  via  email  from  stakeholders  that  were  not 
presented in the questionnaire format. 

Main  findings  from  the  evaluation  questionnaires  and  direct  interviews  regarding  the 
evaluation of the EED concerned the following points: 

  The  questionnaire  and  interviews  confirmed  findings  from  the  other  consultation 
tools: Overall, the EED and its specific provisions are effectively working to some 
extent.  However,  the  Directive  in  its  present  form  fails  to  address  the  full  existing 
potential for energy efficiency. 

 

Implementation  of  the  EED  and  the  provisions  under  review  vary  considerably 
among  Member  States.  However,  many  good  practices  for  implementation  exist 
which need further looking into. 

  Public  buildings:  The  EED  contributed  to  making  central  government  buildings 
more efficient, but major barriers against a broader effect of this article continue to 
exist.  These  barriers  are  seen  in:  (i)  the  limited  scope  (only  central  government 
buildings);  uncertainties  about  the  alternative  approach;  (ii)  the  level  of  renovation 
required,  missing  framing  for  setting  up  inventories  of  buildings;  and  (iii)  missing 
requirement  to  report  on  energy  savings  delivered  through  renovation  of  public 
buildings for Member States that apply the default approach.  

99 

 
 
  Central  governments  widely  use  energy  efficiency  criteria  in  public  procurement. 
However, key barriers (lack of capacity, lack of supporting assessment tools, higher 
upfront investment costs) still persist and need to be addressed. 

  The EED has strongly promoted energy audits. However, in many cases, a follow-up 
in terms of monitoring (energy management) and implementation is not sufficiently 
safeguarded. 

  The provisions on heating and cooling as well as supply-side efficiency are seen as 
important  and  relevant,  but  not  sufficient  to  address  the  remaining  energy  saving 
potentials,  e.g.  by  addressing  cooling  or  waste  heat.  In  addition,  synergies  and 
potential  inconsistencies  with  other  Directives  (EPBD,  RED  II,  Eco-design  and 
labelling, ETS) exist that should be better addressed. 

  The  EED  has  played  a  major  part  in  setting  up  certification,  accreditation,  and 
qualification  schemes,  including  training  programmes.  However,  more  systematic 
use of the existing offers is needed.  

 

 A large number of stakeholders shared the opinion that the EED positively affected 
the  development  of  energy  service  markets,  notably  by  ensuring  the  availability  of 
model  contracts,  information  about  providers  and  services  offered.  However, 
especially  energy  performance  contracting  still  faces  considerable  barriers  (public 
procurement rules, uncertainty about minimum quality criteria, quality assurance and 
accreditation, further model contracts). 

  Respondents’  feedback  suggests  that  Article  20  and  the  EED  had  partially 
contributed  to  the  establishment  of  both  public  and  private  financing  facilities. 
However, additional factors not addressed in this article are also hindering the ability 
to  raise  capital  for  financing  energy  efficiency  (lack  of  equity  and  low  consumer 
demand). 

4.  The Open Public Consultation 

An  internet  based  public  consultation  targeted  a  broad  stakeholder  audience.  The 
consultation was launched on 17 November 2020 and lasted until 9 February 2021. The 
questions  of  the  consultation  addressed  aspects  concerning  the  ex-post  evaluation  and 
option for the revision of the EED and specific modification of individual  articles. The 
questions were formulated on basis of the Commission  Better Regulation guidelines201.  

To ensure that the results of this consultation informed the two parallel processes of ex-
post  evaluation  and  impact  assessment  at  both  general  and  expert  level,  the  survey 
contained two parts: 

  Part I with questions of a general nature covering both the evaluation and impact 
assessment. The first sub-section contained questions assessing whether the EED 

201  https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-evaluation-fitness-checks.pdf 

100 

 
 
                                                 
framework and relevant provisions are efficient, effective, and coherent with the 
broader EU legislative framework covering energy efficiency policy. The second 
sub-section investigated the most appropriate policy options to be considered for 
the EED revision as part of the impact assessment, which could allow addressing 
the insufficient  level  of  ambition in  the National Energy  and Climate Plans and 
also delivering on the higher energy efficiency contribution for 2030 to reach the 
GHG emissions reductions target of at least 55%. 

  Part II was of a technical nature on specific articles dedicated to experts. 

The consultation received 344 replies, often accompanied by additional position papers. 
Replies came from 26 Member States and three non-EU countries (Norway, Switzerland, 
and the UK). Replies were submitted in 17 languages. The largest group of respondents 
covered  business  associations  (132  replies),  individual  businesses  and  companies  (92 
replies),  followed  by  NGOs  (34  submissions).  21  respondents  submitted  replies  as 
individual citizen. 24 public authorities replied, including 13 national authorities from 12 
Member  States 
Italy,  Lithuania, 
(Cyprus,  Czechia,  Estonia,  Finland,  France, 
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden). 

 The following points have been raised by respondents in relation to the evaluation of the 
EED: 

  152  (out  of  318)  respondents  estimated  that  the  EED  had  attained  its  objectives  to 
some extent, further 114 estimated it had achieved its object to a moderate extent, for 
34  further  respondents  only  to  a  little  extent.  This  suggests  that  a  revision  of  the 
provisions seems adequate. 

  When  surveying  the  factors  that  helped  the  most  to  achieve  the  objectives  of  the 
EED, 57% of the 281 respondents named the “requirement for planning policies and 
measures  at  national  level”,  53%  the  existence  of  targets  at  EU  level.  This  was 
followed  by  the  wide  scope  of  the  EED  (49%),  binding  measures  (47%),  and  the 
requirement to set national targets (41%). Multiple answers were possible. 

  Participants were asked to rate the extent of positive effects on a 1 (very little extent) 
-5 (very large extent) Likert scale. 161 respondents out of 344 replies estimated that 
the  EED  created  greater  awareness  about  energy  efficiency  and  its  role  for  the 
climate  objectives  (ratings  5  and  6).  117  estimated  that  their  country  is  more 
committed to energy efficiency owing to the EED (rating 5 and 6). 

  58% of the 344 respondents saw the introduction of subsidy and support schemes at 
national  level  as  most  successful  impact  of  the  EED.  This  is  followed  up  by  41% 
assessing  that  the  obligation  for  non-SMEs  to  carry  out  energy  audits  has  been 
successful (multiple answers possible). 

  Regarding sectorial impacts, respondents rated the impact in the building and heating 

and cooling sectors as highest (118 and 109 out of 344 replies, respectively). 

101 

 
  11 common barriers that impede energy efficiency were surveyed. Results show that 
all these barriers, ranging from missing information to lack of financial support are 
still seen as being very important. 

  162 out of 223 respondents clearly see positive synergies of the EED with the Effort 
Sharing Regulation and the Emission Trading System. This view was shared among 
all  stakeholder  groups  with  the  notable  exception  of  Trade  Unions  (n=2).  Similar 
positive synergies were noted with the Renewable Energy Directive (197 out of 267 
stakeholders agreeing) and the EPBD (222 out of 253 stakeholders agreeing). 

  Regarding  target  setting,  stakeholder  groups  agreed  overall  that  the  2020  energy 
efficiency target was appropriately set. However, 115 out of 159 respondents replied 
that the EED has not provided the right monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to 
achieve national energy efficiency targets. 

  Regarding government buildings 76 out of 108 replies stated that the EED had not 
made  central  government  buildings  in  their  country  more  energy  efficient.  67%  of 
174  respondents  attributed  this  to  insufficient  national  budget  earmarked  for 
renovation. 

5.  Summary on the evaluation of the EED 

All  categories  of  stakeholders  identified  in  the  stakeholder  mapping  participated  in 
various  consultation  activities,  which  allowed  validating  and  cross-checking  findings 
retrieved  in  the  individual  stages  of  the  consultation  process.  The  outcomes  of  the 
consultation process proved to be of substantial help in the evaluation of the provisions 
of the present EED, highlighting both successes and shortcomings. 

Stakeholders’ opinions regarding the provisions of the Energy Efficiency Directive under 
evaluation can be summarized as follows: 

 

In principle, the EED is a workable Directive and the provisions under review deliver 
to the Directive’s objectives in a comprehensive manner. 

  The  EED  has  strong  potential  to  support  the  overall  European  decarbonisation 

objective, but its potential is currently not exploited to the fullest. 

  The evaluation of the articles that were not revised under the Clean Energy Package 
have delivered on their objectives at least in a moderate manner, if not successfully.  

  Concerning  almost  all  articles  under  review,  stakeholder  feedback  highlighted 
remaining  barriers  and  options  for  improvement.  As  such,  the  EED  is  a  necessary 
policy  instrument  to  support  the  European  decarbonisation  objective;  however,  it  is 
not sufficient in its present form to attain this objective. 

 

In  consequence,  an  overwhelming  majority  of  stakeholders  favour  an  update  and 
strengthening of these provisions. 

102 

 
 
 
 
Annex 3: Methods and analytical models 

The evaluation followed the Commission better regulation guidelines and examined the 
following five evaluation criteria in line with better regulation guidelines: effectiveness, 
efficiency, relevance, coherence and EU added value. The examination of the criteria was 
based on the set of established questions (listed in Table 1Table 1 below). 

In  addition,  as  part  of  the  evaluation  methodology,  a  counterfactual  scenario  was 
developed under the technical assistance study to quantify energy savings achieved from 
the measures implemented under the EED. The purpose of the counterfactual scenario is 
to  evaluate  how  much  less  energy  efficiency  would  have  occurred  in  the  EU  if  the 
Energy  Efficiency  Directive  was  not  implemented  across  Member  States.  The 
EUROSTAT Energy  Balances and other Eurostat structural  data were used as basis for 
the  dataset.  For  the  quantification  the  following  sources  were  used:  (a)  outcomes  of 
stakeholders’  surveys  and  interviews;  (b)  expert  judgement;  (c)  literature  review.  The 
methodology is elaborated in detail in Appendix C of the technical assistance study.  

Table 6 - Evaluation criteria and evaluation questions202 

EFFECTIVENESS 

•  EQ 1: To what extent has the EED objective to promote energy efficiency in the EU in view 

of reaching the Union’s headline targets on energy efficiency for 2020 and 2030 been 
achieved? What have been impacts in different sectors achieved with the intervention?  

•  EQ 2: To what extent can the observed effects be credited to the EED? In what areas was 

the intervention more / less successful and what were the drivers/ impeding factors 
behind successes / failures? 

•  EQ 3: What external factors have affected / continue to affect reaching the objectives of 

the Directive? 

EFFICIENCY 

•  EQ 4: To what extent the costs involved in the implementation of the EED have been 

justified given the changes/effects that have been achieved (including wider benefits)? 

•  EQ 5: To what extent were the costs borne by different stakeholder groups proportionate 

to the benefits it has generated? 

•  EQ 5: What were the factors that influenced the efficiency of policy intervention and the 

implementation of the EED? 

•  EQ 7: Are there are significant differences in costs (or benefits) between Member States, 
and if yes, what are causing them? How do these differences link to the intervention? 

RELEVANCE 

•  EQ 8: Did the Directive provide the right framework to reach the 20% energy efficiency 

202 An overview of evaluation matrix is presented in appendix B of the technical assistance study. 

103 

 
 
                                                 
target? To what extent is the EED framework to promote energy efficiency in the EU still 
relevant? 

•  EQ 9: To what extent have the objectives of the EED have been appropriate? Did the 
Directive provide the right framework to reach the 20% energy efficiency target? 

•  EQ 10: How well do the original objectives for promoting energy efficiency (including its 

role in achieving GHG emission reduction objectives) to ensure the achievement of the EU 
headline 2020 and 2030 targets still corresponds to the needs and the latest technological 
or environmental developments in the EU, in particular in the context of the European 
Green Deal 

•  EQ 11: How relevant is the EU intervention to EU citizens? 

COHERENCE 

•  EQ 12: To what extent is the EED internally coherent? 

•  EQ 13:  o what extent is the EED coherent with other interventions with similar objectives? 

EU ADDED VALUE 

•  EQ 14: What is the additional value resulting from the EU intervention(s) having an EU 
level target and EU measures, compared to what would be achieved by Member States 
acting at national or regional levels without EU intervention? 

•  EQ 15: What would be the most likely consequences of stopping or withdrawing the EED? 

•  EQ 16: Are there any parts of the EED which are obsolete? 

EFFECTIVENESS 

•  EQ 1: To what extent the EED objectives promoting energy efficiency in the EU in view of 

achieving the Union’s headline targets on energy efficiency (of 20%) for 2020 were 
achieved? 

•  EQ 2: To what extent can factors influencing the observed achievements be linked to the 

EU intervention (i.e. barriers removed including in which areas)? 

•  EQ 3: What external factors have affected / continue to affect reaching the objectives of 

the directive? 

EFFICIENCY 

•  EQ 4: To what extent the costs involved in the implementation of the EED have been 

justified given the changes/effects that have been achieved (including wider benefits)? 

•  EQ 5: To what extent were the costs borne by different stakeholder groups proportionate 

to the benefits it has generated? 

•  EQ 5: What were the factors that influenced the efficiency of policy intervention and the 

implementation of the EED? 

•  EQ 7: Are there are significant differences in costs (or benefits) between Member States, 
and if yes, what are causing them? How do these differences link to the intervention? 

RELEVANCE 

•  EQ 8: To what extent is the EED framework to promote energy efficiency in the EU still 

relevant? 

•  EQ 9: To what extent have the objectives of the EED have been appropriate? Did the 
Directive provide the right framework to reach the 20% energy efficiency target? 

•  EQ 10: How well do the original objectives for promoting energy efficiency (including its 

104 

 
role in achieving GHG emission reduction objectives) to ensure the achievement of the EU 
headline 2020 and 2030 targets still correspond to the needs and the latest technological 
or environmental developments in the EU? 

•  EQ 11: Is the amended EED still relevant to achieve the overall energy and climate targets 

for 2030, in particular given in the context of the Green Deal? How relevant is the EU 
intervention to EU citizens? 

COHERENCE 

•  EQ 12: To what extent is the EED internally coherent?  

•  EQ 13: To what extent is the EED coherent with other interventions with similar 

objectives? 

EU ADDED VALUE 

•  EQ 14: What is the additional value resulting from the EU intervention(s) having an EU 
level target and EU measures, compared to what would be achieved by Member States 
acting at national or regional levels without EU intervention? 

•  EQ 15: What would be the most likely consequences of stopping or withdrawing the EED? 

•  EQ 16: Are there any parts of the EED that are obsolete? 

105 

 
Figure 27 - Intervention logic of the EED203 

Annex 4: Figures and Tables 

203 More detailed overview and description of the intervention logic could be found in the accompanying technical assistance study, appendix A. 

106 

 
 
                                                 
Figure 28 - Energy consumption reduction calculated via the counterfactual scenario and 
decomposed by type of measures and sector, in Mtoe for EU 28 

Source: Technical Assistance study on the evaluation and the impact assessment of the EED 

107 

0500010000150002000025000300003500020142015201620172018Transport for EU28(reduction of energy consumption in ktoe)Non identified measuresOther than Art7othertraining and eduactionenergy labelling schemestandard/normregulationenergy or CO2 taxfiscal incentivefinancing scheme/instrumentvoluntary agreementenergy efficiency obligation scheme050001000015000200002500030000350004000020142015201620172018Industry for EU28(reduction of energy consumption in ktoe)Non identified measuresOther than Art7othertraining and eduactionenergy labelling schemestandard/normregulationenergy or CO2 taxfiscal incentivefinancing scheme/instrumentvoluntary agreementenergy efficiency obligation scheme05000100001500020000250003000035000400004500020142015201620172018Residential for EU28(reduction of energy consumption in ktoe)Non identified measuresOther than Art7othertraining and eduactionenergy labelling schemestandard/normregulationenergy or CO2 taxfiscal incentivefinancing scheme/instrumentvoluntary agreementenergy efficiency obligation scheme050001000015000200002500020142015201620172018Services for EU28(reduction of energy consumption in ktoe)Non identified measuresOther than Art7othertraining and eduactionenergy labelling schemestandard/normregulationenergy or CO2 taxfiscal incentivefinancing scheme/instrumentvoluntary agreementenergy efficiency obligation scheme 
 
 
 
Table 7 - Overview of the articles of the EED 

Articles 1 
& 3 

Article 4 

Article 5 

Article 6 

Article 7 

Articles 1 & 3 sets the EU headline energy efficiency targets for 2020 (of 20%) 
and for 2030 (of 32.5%) and Member States have to set their national indicative 
targets and indicative contributions in view of achieving those headline targets 
for 2020 and 2030 respectively. Member States had to report annually on the 
progress towards their national indicative energy efficiency targets and submit 
National Energy Efficiency Action Plans every three years, starting from 2014.  
For the headline EU 2030 target, Member States shall fulfil the planning and 
reporting obligations under the new Governance regulation (set their national 
contributions towards the EU 2030 target and define the national measures to 
fulfil those contributions in the National energy and Climate Plans which had to 
be submitted to the Commission by end 2018 (as part of the draft Plans) and by 
2019 in the final Plans. Member States shall report every two years on progress 
towards the achievement of the deadline EU target under the Governance 
Regulation (the first progress report required by 15 March 2023) . 
Article 4 required that Member States establish long term renovation strategies 
for mobilising investment in the renovation of national building stock which had 
to encompass certain elements such as an overview of the national building stock, 
identification of cost-effective approaches to renovation, policies and measures 
and a forward looking perspective for renovation. A first long-term renovation 
strategy had to be notified by 30 April as part of the National Energy Efficiency 
Action Plan and thereafter every third year (until this article was moved to the 
Directive 2010/31/EU in 2018 by the amending Directive EU/2018/844). 
Article 5 requires that Member States renovate 3% of their central government 
buildings of over 500 m² which do not meet the cost-optimal energy efficient 
standards. This threshold dropped to 250 m² as of 9 July 2015. 
Under Article 6 central governments have the obligation to purchase energy 
efficient products, buildings and vehicles, and Member States should encourage 
public bodies of local and regional government do so as well. This Article was 
evaluated in 2016204, however the findings were not conclusive given that the 
implementation had just started and it was too early to assess the impact 
(evaluation report: 
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/3_en_autre_document_trav
ail_service_part1_v3.pdf). 
Article 7 sets an obligation on Member States to achieve new energy savings 
each year (of 1.5% of the annual energy sales for the period 2014-2020 and of 
0.8% of the final energy consumption for the period 2021-2030) by putting in 
place an energy efficiency obligations scheme or other policy measures. Article 7 
is responsible for about half of the energy savings the EED is expected to 
deliver.205 As mentioned above, this Article was amended as part of the focused 

204 SWD(2016) 402 final 
205 Based on the internal estimates carried out by the Commission services during the negotiations of the 
EED (in 2012), it was estimated in the impact assessment of the EED that the energy savings 

108 

 
                                                 
 
Article 8 

Articles 9 
to 11 

EED review in 2016 and amendments adopted in December 2018 (amending 
Directive EU/2018/2002). 
Under Article 8 Member States must ensure that large companies have their first 
energy audit by 5 December 2015 and then every four years. The review of the 
implementation of the definition of small and medium size enterprises for the 
purposes of Article 8(4) is included in this evaluation (in line with the amended 
Article 24(12)). 
Articles 9 to 11 provide requirements for metering and billing of energy use. As 
mentioned above those Articles were already amended as part of the focussed 
EED review in 2016 (amending Directive EU/2018/2002) by adding new, more 
precise and specific provisions applicable for thermal energy (heating and 
cooling)206. For an overview and a detailed discussion of the changes made 
please refer to Commission Recommendation (EU) 2019/1660 of 25 September 
2019 on the implementation of the new metering and billing provisions of the 
Energy Efficiency Directive 2012/27/EU207 

Article 12  Article 12 contains general requirements for Member States to take appropriate 

measures to promote and facilitate the behavioural change towards energy 
efficiency. 

Article 13  Under Article 13 Member States must ensure effective, proportionate and 

dissuasive penalties for breaches of the national provisions that transpose the 
Directive. 

Article 14  Article 14 requires that Member States promote efficiency in district heating and 

cooling systems and carry out comprehensive territory-wide assessments of the 
potential for efficient heating and cooling by 31 December 2015 which should be 
updated and resubmitted every five years (on the basis of the updated 
methodology and the amended Annex VIII)208. It also requires individual cost-
benefit analyses to be made in the context of the planning and permitting of 
certain types of installation (cf. Art 14(5) and 14(7)). 

Article 15  Article 15 requires that Member States ensure that energy efficiency is taken into 

account in energy transformation, transmission and distribution and contains 
specific provisions to this end. Certain of these (parts of Article 15(5) and Article 
15(8)) were removed in 2018 as part of the Clean Energy for All Europeans and 
replaced with consolidated provisions in the new Electricity Market legislation. 

Article 16  Article 16 on qualifications and accreditation schemes for providers of energy 

obligation is responsible for more than a half (85 Mtoe of primary energy consumption in 2020 ) of the 
energy savings the Member States should achieve under the EED. 

206 While removing thermal energy from the original provisions thereby restricting their scope to electricity 

and gas. Subsequently also electricity has been removed from their scope and instead regulated under 
the provisions of the recast Electricity Directive: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2019.158.01.0125.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2019:158:TOC  

207 See e.g. section 1.1. and 1.3 of the annex: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?qid=1574946822907&uri=CELEX:32019H1660  

208 C(2019) 6625 final 

109 

 
                                                                                                                                                 
services and energy audits had a later transposition deadline than the rest of the 
Directive (31 December 2014) and it is also closely linked to the implementation 
of Article 17 and Article 18. 

Article 17  Under Article 17 Member States shall ensure that information on available 

energy efficiency mechanisms and financial and legal frameworks is widely 
disseminated to all relevant market actors. The effectiveness of the 
implementation of this Article was assessed in 2017209. The findings of the 
assessment showed that while most of the Member States have put in place 
information and awareness raising measures, it is hard to assess their impact on 
the uptake of energy efficiency improvements and investments due to lack of 
robust monitoring results and ex-post evaluations. 

Article 18  Member States are required to promote the energy services market under Article 
18 with a particular focus put on supporting the public sector including through 
the use energy performance contracting. A number of reports to assess progress 
of energy service markets in the EU including the uptake of the energy 
performance contracting have been carried out by the JRC in the framework of an 
administrative arrangement with DG ENER. 

Article 19  Article 19 requires the Member States to take action to remove regulatory and 

non-regulatory barriers to energy efficiency and to report on this to the 
Commission as part of their first National Energy Efficiency Action Plan 
(NEEAP). Article 19(1) was assessed on basis of the notified NEEAPs 2014 and 
2017 and a report was published in 2019210. 

Article 20  Article 20 provides that the Member States shall facilitate the establishment of 

financing facilities and that they may set up an Energy Efficiency National Fund. 
This Article was amended in the focussed EED review by adding additional 
requirements for the Member States and the Commission (providing guidance on 
how to unlock private investments). 

Article 21  Article 21 on the conversion factors set out in Annex IV was amended for the 

purposes of reviewing the default coefficient - primary energy factor - for 
electricity generation (in footnote 3) and which should be again reviewed by 25 
December 2022 (as required by amending Directive EU/2018/2002). 
Article 24  Article 24 contains reporting obligations for the Commission (while the reporting 

obligations for the Member States have been transferred to the new Governance 
Regulation, (EU)2018/1999). This Article thus has been partially amended to 
ensure the coherence with the new Governance framework and the amendments 
of Articles 3 and 7, and concerns the reporting in the context of the 2030 
framework. 

209 

210 

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/final_report_of_assessment_of_the_implementation_status_
and_effectivenes.pdf 

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC115314/assessement_of_progress_made_
by_member_states_in_relation_to_article_19_final.pdf 

110 

 
                                                 
Table 8 - Indicative national energy efficiency targets for 2020 

MS 

BE 

BG 

CZ 

DK 

DE 

EE 

IE 

EL 

ES 
FR211 

HR 

IT 

CY 

LV 

LT 

LU 

HU 

MT 

NL 

AT 

PL 

PT 

RO 

SI 

SK 

FI 

SE 

UK 

Sum of indicative 
targets EU28 

EU28 target 2020 

PEC Target [Mtoe] 

FEC Target [Mtoe] 

Up to 2016 

Latest value (from 
NEEAP 2017 or latest 
value) 

Up to 2016 

Latest value (from 
NEEAP 2017 or latest 
value) 

43.70 

16.87 

39.60 

17.40 

276.60 

6.50 

13.90 

24.70 

119.80 

219.90 

11.15 

158.00 

2.20 

5.37 

6.49 

4.48 

24.10 

0.70 

60.70 

31.50 

96.40 

22.50 

43.00 

7.30 

16.38 

35.86 

43.40 

43.70 

16.87 

44.31 

17.52 

276.60 

6.50 

13.90 

24.70 

122.6 

219.90 

10.71 

158.00 

2.23 

5.37 

6.49 

4.48 

26.6 

0.82 

60.70 

31.53 

96.40 

22.50 

43.00 

7.13 

16.38 

35.86 

43.40 

32.50 

8.64 

25.32 

14.43 

194.30 

2.80 

11.70 

18.40 

80.10 

131.40 

7.00 

124.00 

1.85 

4.47 

4.28 

4.20 

14.40 

0.50 

52.20 

25.07 

71.60 

17.40 

30.30 

5.10 

9.24 

26.66 

30.30 

32.50 

8.64 

25.32 

15.17 

194.30 

2.80 

11.70 

18.40 

87.24 

131.40 

6.96 

124.00 

1.92 

4.47 

4.28 

4.24 

18.2 

0.63 

52.20 

25.08 

71.60 

17.40 

30.32 

5.12 

10.38 

26.66 

30.30 

177.60 

177.60 

129.20 

129.20 

1526.09 

1536.80 

1077.36 

1090.43 

1483 

1086 

Source: Member States Annual Reports   

211  FR excludes international aviation in the target reported in AR2020.  

111 

 
 
                                                 
Table 9 - Indicative national energy efficiency targets for 2020 

MS 

Art. 5 annual 

Renovated floor 

Obligation 

requirement 

area (m²) 

achieved in 

terms of 

floor area 

(%) 

Sum of 

savings 

2014-

2018 

Total 

Total 

renovated 

obligation 

floor area 

achieved in 

over the 

2014-2018 in 

2014-2018 

terms of floor 

area [%] 

BG 

EE 

EL 

HU 

IT 

LT 

LU 

LV 

RO 

SI 

ES 

55,572 

121,531 

219.1% 

27,604 

22,549 

81.7% 

NA 

NA 

0 

NA 

0% 

NA 

NA 

NA 

0.15 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

42,070 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

414,193 

339,001 

82% 

NA 

3,018,432 

111.2% 

64,624 

64,336 

100% 

NA 

411,251 

108% 

1,955 

4,128 

211% 

0.17 

23,013 

168.9% 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

5,52 

21,387 

17,733 

83% 

0,34 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

279,902 

173,608 

62% 

NA 

1,589,361 

91.5% 

Table 10 - GHG emissions reduction (based on total final energy consumption, excluding 
agriculture) 

CO2 Emissions, ktCO2: Counterfactual minus 

Counterfactual over Observation in % 

Observation   

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

AT 

2,237 

2,545 

2,537 

2,762 

3,979 

4.9% 

5.4% 

5.2% 

5.6% 

8.2% 

BE 

1,110 

944 

2,217 

2,589 

1,496 

1.6% 

1.3% 

2.9% 

3.5% 

2.0% 

FR 

8,900 

10,832 

12,360 

16,306 

20,361 

3.4% 

4.1% 

4.7% 

6.2% 

7.9% 

BG 

841 

1,060 

1,690 

2,122 

2,767 

6.4% 

7.4% 

11.5%  13.7%  17.5% 

112 

 
 
 
 
CO2 Emissions, ktCO2: Counterfactual minus 

Counterfactual over Observation in % 

Observation   

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

CY 

154 

300 

248 

174 

269 

4.3% 

8.3% 

6.5% 

4.4% 

6.9% 

CZ 

2,569 

2,996 

3,321 

3,325 

4,463 

6.3% 

7.1% 

7.7% 

7.5% 

10.1% 

DE 

12,246 

25,514 

29,574 

37,002 

41,578 

3.0% 

6.2% 

7.0% 

8.7% 

10.1% 

DK 

626 

1,183 

1,973 

2,404 

2,244 

3.1% 

5.7% 

9.1% 

10.9%  10.0% 

EE 

EL 

284 

317 

445 

512 

394 

8.2% 

9.3% 

12.6%  14.4%  10.8% 

3,531 

3,471 

3,000 

4,236 

3,912 

11.8%  10.8% 

9.2% 

13.4%  12.5% 

ES 

18,167 

23,257 

25,328 

29,636 

25,314 

11.9%  14.9%  15.8%  17.9%  14.9% 

FI 

752 

1,175 

1,381 

1,579 

1,300 

3.1% 

4.9% 

5.4% 

6.4% 

5.1% 

HR 

596 

477 

829 

572 

948 

5.9% 

4.6% 

7.7% 

5.0% 

8.4% 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LU 

LV 

1,362 

2,295 

2,357 

3,836 

4,463 

5.5% 

9.0% 

8.9% 

14.5%  16.1% 

4,866 

12,373 

17,311 

23,589 

23,652 

2.3% 

5.8% 

8.1% 

11.4%  11.2% 

257 

698 

1,060 

1,220 

1,315 

3.4% 

9.3% 

13.2%  14.5%  14.7% 

815 

1,186 

1,137 

766 

747 

8.4% 

12.3%  11.7% 

7.6% 

7.1% 

319 

414 

556 

597 

582 

6.7% 

8.6% 

11.5%  11.7%  11.2% 

MT 

95 

129 

157 

134 

63 

8.6% 

11.0%  13.2%  10.7% 

4.7% 

NL 

7,161 

8,719 

8,836 

9,910 

10,470 

7.9% 

9.2% 

9.2% 

10.1%  10.8% 

PL 

PT 

9,576 

17,131 

21,759 

21,545 

23,818 

8.1% 

14.4%  16.8%  15.4%  17.0% 

2,381 

2,199 

3,019 

2,422 

1,865 

8.9% 

8.0% 

10.8% 

8.4% 

6.4% 

RO 

2,908 

4,635 

6,204 

5,964 

6,505 

8.0% 

12.6%  16.6%  15.1%  16.4% 

SE 

1,497 

1,729 

2,130 

2,573 

2,571 

4.8% 

5.5% 

7.0% 

8.6% 

8.7% 

SI 

668 

1,115 

1,175 

1,535 

1,715 

8.4% 

14.0%  14.0%  18.1%  20.2% 

SK 

797 

2,046 

1,709 

1,763 

1,974 

3.9% 

10.2% 

8.1% 

7.7% 

8.6% 

UK 

18,252 

16,880 

20,871 

27,314 

29,590 

6.5% 

5.9% 

7.3% 

9.5% 

10.3% 

EU27 

85,883 

129,418  153,217  180,829  192,556 

5.1% 

7.5% 

8.7% 

10.1%  10.8% 

EU28 

103,843  146,738  174,416  208,384  222,250 

5.2% 

7.3% 

8.5% 

10.0%  10.7% 

113 

 
 
Source: Technical Assistance study on the evaluating the EED (2020) 

Table 11 - Achievement of obligations under alternative approach (Article 5(6)) 

MS 

Article 5 

Savings 

Annual 

Sum of 

Total 

Annual 

Annual 

achieved 

obligation 

savings in 

renovated 

obligation 

energy 

[ktoe] 

achieved in 

for 

floor area 

achieved in 

savings 

obligation 

[ktoe] 

terms of 

respective 

over the 

2014-2018 in 

energy 

savings 

[%] 

period 

(2014-

2019) 

2014-2018 

terms of 

energy savings 

[%] 

AT 

BE 

HR 

CY 

CZ 

DK 

FI 

FR 

DE 

IE 

MT 

NL 

PL 

PT 

0.15 

0.89 

608.9% 

4.01 

NA 

356.5% 

0.11 

NA 

0 

3.99 

NA 

742.9% 

(2014-18) 

0.12 

0.78 
(2018) 

616.7% 

3.96 

NA 

677.5% 

(2014-18) 

0.29 

0.25 

89.3% 

1.61 

0.49 

0.29 

58.5% 

1.67 

NA 

2.4 
(2018) 

NA 

33.3 

(2014-18) 

NA 

NA 

NA 

94.1% 

56.4% 

NA 

0.10 

0.08 

79.3% 

1.22 

NA 

233.79% 

35.55 

99.74 
(2018) 

281% 

588.13 

5.583.574 

331% 

(2014-18) 

(2014-18) 

0.61 

0.23 

38% 

3.52 

NA 

89.2% 

0.11 

0.01 

7.2% 

1.09 

NA 

163.2% 

NA 

0.02 

NA 

NA 

4.18 

2.4 
(2018) 

57% 

33.3 
(2014-18) 

NA 

NA 

NA 

159% 

0.37 

0.40 

106% 

2.63 

NA 

117.1% 

NA 

54.80 

NA 

55.02 

NA 

NA 

114 

 
 
MS 

Article 5 

Savings 

Annual 

Sum of 

Total 

Annual 

Annual 

achieved 

obligation 

savings in 

renovated 

obligation 

energy 

[ktoe] 

achieved in 

for 

floor area 

achieved in 

savings 

obligation 

[ktoe] 

terms of 

respective 

over the 

2014-2018 in 

energy 

savings 

[%] 

period 

(2014-

2019) 

2014-2018 

terms of 

energy savings 

[%] 

SE 

SK 

UK 

0.24 

NA 

NA 

NA 

4.49 

7.89 

176% 

34.72 

NA 

NA 

NA 

129% 

3.52 

2.86 

81% 

40.88 

NA 

193.7% 

Source: based on JRC (2020, forthcoming), Analysis of the annual reports (2020) under the EED  

Table 12 - Estimates by stakeholders on the share of public buildings that have adopted energy 
efficiency plans, put in place energy management systems, use of EnPC 

Estimates share of total stock of public buildings that  

Country  

Have  adopted  an  energy 

Put 

in 

place 

energy 

Use 

energy 

service 

efficiency plan  

management 

systems, 

companies 

or 

energy 

including audits 

performance contracting 

Austria 

100% (required by NEKP) 

25% (energy management)  

16.5% (EPC) 

Bulgaria 

More  than  75%  (required  by 

25-50% 

(energy 

Less than 10% 

law) 

management) 

More 

than  75% 

(energy 

audits) 

Cyprus 

Less than 10% 

Less than 10% 

Less than 10% 

Estonia 

10-25% 

10-25% 

(energy 

Not 

used 

by 

central 

management) 

governments, used only by 2 

local governments (EPCs) 

Less than 10% (ESCO) 

Finland 

More than 75% 

50-75% 

10-25% 

Greece* 

Less than 10% 

Less than 10% 

Less than 10% 

Ireland 

Not available  

All 

central 

governments 

Not available  

above 1000 m² (audits)  

Portugal   Not available 

Not available 

Not available 

115 

 
 
 
 
Estimates share of total stock of public buildings that  

Country  

Have  adopted  an  energy 

Put 

in 

place 

energy 

Use 

energy 

service 

efficiency plan  

management 

systems, 

companies 

or 

energy 

including audits 

performance contracting 

Malta* 

10-25% 

10-25% 

Not used 

Slovakia 

Not available  

All large public companies  

Not available  

Spain 

More than 75%  

More than 75%  

Less than 10% 

(central and regional gov.) 

(central and regional gov.) 

(central and regional gov.)  

Source: Technical Assistance study on evaluating the EED (2020) 

 Table 13 - 2018 reported energy savings overview under Article 7 (ktoe) 

New 
savings 

2018 

Total 
annual 
saving
s 

Progress towards the target 

Cumulat
ive 
savings 
in 2014-
2018 

Total 
cumulative 
savings 
required by 
2020 
(target) 

Progress 
towards 
total 
cumulative 
savings 
required by 
2020 

Estimated 
annual 
savings 
required 
for 2014- 
2018 

2014-2018 
compared 
to 
estimated 
annual 
savings 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Croatia* 

Cyprus 

Czechia 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia* 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal* 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

UK 

Total 

372 

234 

32 

3 

77 

176 

173 

88 

543 

1413 

1307 

1176 

175 

73 

83 

577 

1045 

99 

1377 

5698 

2950 

13695 

211 

131 

87 

474 

1731 

466 

4032 

3879 

496 

248 

162 

1634 

3187 

370 

4701 

17429 

28953 

1355 

1731 

1408 

5200 

6911 

1942 

1296 

242 

4565 

3841 

610 
4213 
31384 

41989 

3333 

3680 

2164 

3998 

3998 

12729 

25502 

79 

9 

5 

611 

331 

59 

106 

38 

539 

1436 

1032 

152 

44 

17 

2274 

2977 

366 

466 

133 

2296 

1436 

5056 

436 

511 

113 

47 

7777 

8891 

453 

1343 

1420 

447 

6958 

4654 

18469 

851 

1004 

515 

67 

11512 

14818 

2532 

5817 

2284 

945 

15979 

9114 

27859 

78% 

56% 

26% 

19% 

67% 

36% 

83% 

61% 

112% 

56% 

69% 

41% 

47% 

65% 

50% 

51% 

51% 

22% 

71% 

68% 

60% 

18% 

23% 

62% 

47% 

44% 

51% 

66% 

2786 

3702 

1040 

694 

130 

2446 

2058 

327 

2257 

16813 

22494 

1786 

1971 

1159 

13662 

456 

538 

276 

36 

6167 

7938 

1356 

3116 

1224 

506 

8560 

4883 

14924 

14634  80692  134068 

230169 

58% 

123305 

116 

145% 

105% 

48% 

36% 

125% 

67% 

155% 

113% 

208% 

104% 

129% 

76% 

88% 

121% 

93% 

96% 

95% 

41% 

132% 

126% 

112% 

33% 

43% 

116% 

88% 

81% 

95% 

124% 

109% 

 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
* Data on energy savings achieved in 2018 are not yet available for Croatia, Latvia and Portugal. 
Cumulative savings over 2014-2018 are based on energy savings achieved in previous years up to 2017, 
but do not include new savings for 2018. 

Source:  Information  reported  by  Member  States  and  complemented  by  the  Commission’s 
calculations and estimates where necessary.  

Table 14 - Measures taken by Member States to promote efficient heating and cooling and waste 
heat utilisation at national, regional, and local level 

Measures  and  instruments  addressing  different  sectors  in  the  energy  efficiency  dimension  (Green  colour 
indicates existing measures which are spelled out in a good detail; red colour indicates existing measures 
which lacks detailed information; diagonal down border indicates planned  measures,  white colour means 
that there was no measure found) 

Country 

Measures on Energy Efficiency 

Economic  

Regulatory 

Other 

Buildin
g 
renovat
ion 

Boiler 
moder
n./repl
aceme
nt 

Central. 
Syst. 
modern.
/instal. 

New 
building 
(NZEB) 

Building 
renovati
on  

Centrali
zed 
system 
ren. 

Industry  Waste 

Other 

heat 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech R. 

Denmark 

Germany 

Estonia 

Ireland 

Greece 

Spain 

France 

Croatia 

Italy 

Cyprus 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

117 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country 

Measures on Energy Efficiency 

Economic  

Regulatory 

Other 

Buildin
g 
renovat
ion 

Boiler 
moder
n./repl
aceme
nt 

Central. 
Syst. 
modern.
/instal. 

New 
building 
(NZEB) 

Building 
renovati
on  

Centrali
zed 
system 
ren. 

Industry  Waste 

Other 

heat 

Hungary 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Austria 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovenia 

Slovakia 

Finland 

Sweden 

Source: JRC analysis of the Member States’ measures notified in the final NECP, WEM: With 
existing measures (projection) 

118 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 15 - Implementation and success of Article 18 EED provisions across Member States 

France 

Ireland 

Greece 

Cyprus 

Austria 

Estonia 

Finland 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Hungary 

Germany 

Denmark 

Art.18.1(e) 

Art.18.2(b) 

Art.18.1(b) 

Art.18.1(a)i 

Art.18.1(d)i 

Art.18.1(a)ii 

Art.18.1(d)ii 

Art.18.2(d) 
       
       
       
  
    n/a 
       
Croatia 
Czech Rep.         
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
Latvia 
Lithuania         
       
Luxembour
g 
       

       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

Netherlands        n/a

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Portugal 

Sweden 

Poland 

Malta 

Spain 

Italy 

UK 

Range of 5 levels:  = not implemented according to all survey respondents,  = partially implemented 
(answers vary), with no or limited success, = implemented, but success is either not reported, or 
limited success is reported, = implemented, and most respondents evaluate it as successful,  = 
successfully implemented. Source: own data and assessment (JRC survey 2018).  

119 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 16 - Main barriers limiting ESCO implementation in the Member States 

Czech Rep.  Concerns about the Eurostat rules, 

Netherlands 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Croatia 

Cyprus 

Inexperience of actors; mistrust from 
the (potential) clients 
Mistrust from the (potential) clients; 
unclarity on application of new 
Eurostat rules 
Ambiguities of the legislative 
framework; lack of appropriate forms 
of finance 
Lack of standardisation; lack of co-
financing or financial instruments 
aimed at ESCO projects 
Lack of supply side and experience 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

ambiguities of the legislative 
framework 
Relatively long lifetime of projects, 
saturation of the public sector 

Small size of projects and high 
transaction costs; 
regulative/administrative problems 
Small size of projects and high 
transaction costs; mistrust from the 
(potential) clients 
Mistrust from the (potential) client; 
small size of projects and high 
transaction costs 

Mistrust from the (potential) client; 
small size of projects and high 
transaction costs 
Lack of appropriate forms of finance; 
existence of in-house technical 
expertise 
Legal and regulatory instability, lack of 
trust and low reputation of the sector, 
financing sources (in residential and 
public) 
Lack of experience of actors; lack of 
appropriate forms of finance 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lack of appropriate forms of finance; 
mistrust from the (potential) clients 
Lack of appropriate forms of finance; 
ambiguities in the legislative framework 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Ambiguities of the legislative framework; 
mistrust from the (potential) clients; 
inexperience of actors 
n/a 

Malta 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

Political reluctance, and focus on other 
energy sector solutions; availability of 
alternative sources of finance. 
Small size of projects and high transaction 
costs; ambiguities in the legislative 
framework 
Insufficient promotion of energy services, 
mistrust, incompatibility of ESCOs with other 
financial schemes 
Small size of projects and high transaction 
costs; mistrust from the (potential) clients 

Ambiguities in the legislative framework; 
banking system and their ignorance of the 
ESCO activities 
Low awareness about guaranteed energy 
services, Mistrust towards providers of 
guaranteed energy services, and insufficient 
regulatory framework 
Lack of trust in ESCOs, complex book-
keeping rules and administrative barriers (in 
public sector) 
Small size of projects and high transaction 
costs; mistrust from the (potential) clients 

Mistrust from the (potential) clients; 
collaboration and cultural issues; perceived 
business and technical risk 

United 
Kingdom 

Mistrust from the (potential) clients; lack of 
trust from the ESCO industry 

Source: JRC report on Energy Service Market in the EU (2019) 

Table 17 - Main barriers to the development of EnPCs in the public sector (2020) 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Main barriers to the development of EnPCs in the public sector 

Procurement procedures; Financial issues; Regulatory uncertainty; low push; 
reluctance to develop skills 

Lack of understanding; complexity of the model; lack of knowledge; lack of 
trust between ESCO and authorities; lack of long-term vision; need contract 
model (in use) 

Limited awareness; Availability of investment grants and, previously, 
incompatibility with EnPC projects;  most buildings already renovated through 
grants, legal framework (contracts limited to 10 years, limits in EnPC size for 
municipalities), bad experiences 

120 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Croatia 

Cyprus 

Czech 
Republic 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Main barriers to the development of EnPCs in the public sector 

Time and cost demanding project preparation; building projects need support 
and standardization; disruption by Eurostat and EIB Guide: Need new contract 
for buildings; Lack clarity on M&V rules for off-balance sheet treatment; lack 
of public financing 

Climate; market size (small project size); (Existing contracts only for street 
lighting); Lack of standardization; experience and trust; high transaction 
costs; procurement barriers (rigid budgeting and long procurement 
processes); Need exemplary role 

Lack of trust and state example; need better information & stronger technical 
assistance; Slow decisions; Eurostat rules. 

Low interest from municipalities (public financing & in-house capacity); 
perceived burden and risk; Need locally adapted and updated information; 
"Annual Investment Ceiling"  

(Insufficient information to assess current barriers: potential disinterest. 
Although there is a first project at municipal level taking off ground) 

Laws of public procurement 

Lack of off-balance contracting; Bundling energy supply (>15 years: 
procurement, installation, FM is complex, time consuming). Limits competition 
since not many companies can compete in such RFPs  

Cheap financing; Complexity of the product & the procurement process, Not 
legally aligned with climate goals; unclear refinancing mechanisms depending 
on carbon and renewable energy taxes (fossil supply lobby); disregard 
towards LCA 

Greece 

Lack of capacity and experience, SRSS; unclear procurement law, inertial 
preference for procurement. 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

EU investment grants; mistrust in ESCO models (experiences of corruption) 
and problematic adoption (transparency needs); legal uncertainties for long 
term contracts & accounting issues for municipalities; unknown EU 
mechanisms; complexity of procurement; lack of commitment to energy 
efficiency; Need expertise, examples.  

Limited supply & facilitation; legal and bureaucratic problems; lack of top-
down commitment (providing examples, building trust & awareness, 
producing guidelines, registering actors; model contracts, tendering 
procedures, financial assessments); no list of providers recognized by 
government 

Frequent litigation; Lack of standards for small projects, complexity and cost 
of contracts, lack of knowledge; market fragmentation; settled heating 
system; Need quality standards; targets, incentives and public guarantees 

Strong resistance at various levels and energy sector interest (blocks 
renewables); contradictory legislation (service procurement limit contracts to 
5 years, and energy efficiency law to 20 year); funding vetoed by treasury 
(wrong transposition EED) 

Lithuania 

Low energy prices; need standardization (EnPCs are considered PPPs, making 
lengthy the approval process); lack of competencies in public buildings 
(piloting and assistance from ELENA TA, and external competent teams) 

Luxembourg 

Expectations are put on the development of the private sector first 

121 

 
 
Main barriers to the development of EnPCs in the public sector 

No EnPC market; size, climate, and EU policy exceptions 

Lack of real estate strategy plans (push); preference for in-house solutions, 
perceived as more cost-effective; preference for shorter, more flexible 
contracts, and DB(F)MO in central government 

Decrease of EU Funds in previous period; need a single model contract 
(instead of many); insufficient use of technical advice (unfavourable contracts 
for clients); changing legal context 

Size and climate; lack of expertise in municipalities; legal constrains of public 
tenders for buildings (ECO.AP); buildings perceived as risky; Unclear off-
balance treatment; Complex, burdensome tendering, restrictive for providers 
and for quality of project, technical capacity of clients; excessive financial 
guarantees and penalties (small and medium contracts); complex M&V; lack 
of insurance system for guarantees 

Regulatory and political barriers (transparency); restrictive and complex 
public procurement procedures (Variable value contracts not allowed for 
councils) ; lack of understanding; Part of the performance guarantee needs to 
be returned to the contractor at the end of works - making impossible to 
execute guarantees) 

First movers, were disrupted by Eurostat Guide (limited by rigidity of model 
contract required by Eurostat) 

Central government underperforming, long project preparation phase  

Poor regulatory framework until recently; many public lighting projects are 
already done; relevance of in-house capacity, preference for shorter, 
maintenance contracts; fragmented market; Lack of exemplary role; 
Insufficient information (e.g. off-balance treatment); Short term management 
culture; interest for highly visible hi-tech. 

Lack of trust in model, potential "partnering" model; preference for in-house 
solutions, perceived as more cost-effective; bad experiences; priority to cost 

-  N/A 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

United 

Kingdom 

Source: JRC report on Energy Performance Contracting in the Public Sector of the EU (2020) 

122 

 
 
 
Table 18 - Overview of costs – benefits identified in the evaluation 

Citizens/Consumers  

Businesses 

Administrations 

Qualitative  Quantitative / monetary  Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Article 5  Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Citizens that use rent 
publicly owned houses 
benefit from the lower 
energy bills  

High 
benefits 

Administrations receive the 
economic benefits resulting 
from lower energy bills  

Benefit  Expected 

indirect 
benefits  

Medium 
benefits 

Consumers and citizens that 
use public buildings benefit 
in the form better 
conditions from using and 
working in renovated 
buildings 

High 
benefits 

Companies that operate in 
the related materials, 
constructions and services 
markets benefit from the 
public investment and 
promotion of new solutions. 

Medium 
benefits 

Administrations receive the 
social and environmental 
benefits (better working 
environment, reduced 
emissions, better services to 
public, etc.) 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs  

Article 6  Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

High costs  Administrations bear the 

Medium 
benefits 

main direct costs of the 
Article including the cost to 
implement the renovation of  
public buildings 

Administrations receive the 
main economic benefits of 
the Article resulting from the 
energy cost savings over the 
lifetime 

Medium 
costs 

Administrations bear the 
main costs including the 
potentially higher initial 
purchase costs 

Medium 
benefits 

Economic benefits from 
tackling barriers that hinder 
the market of “energy 
efficiency” related products 
and services 

123 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cost 

Expected 
enforcement 
costs 

Article 7  Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

High 
benefits 

EEOS costs are outweighed 
by the lower energy bills 
due to increased energy 
efficiency 

High costs  In total, the programme 

beneficiaries cover between 
50-75% of the programme 
costs. EEOS costs that are 
passed on consumers 
typically account for 1-5% 
of the average energy bills 

Medium 
costs 

Articles 
9-11 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Direct benefits from lower 
energy bills 

Low 
benefits 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

Low costs  Consumers eventually pay 

the costs for individual/ 
smart meters or cost 
allocation services 

Cost 

Expected 
enforcement 
costs 

Low costs 

Article 
12 

Benefit  Expected 

indirect 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Empowerment and technical 
or economical help to 
realise energy savings 

124 

Small costs  Smaller additional costs from 
implementing the regulation 
such changing procurement 
procedures, training, using 
internal or external advisors, 
etc. 

Low costs 

Administrative costs 
associated with setting-up, 
and running the monitoring 
and verification systems. On 
average, the administrative 
costs are less than 1% of the 
total program costs 

In total, the obligated parties 
(energy companies) cover 
between 25-50% of the 
programme costs. Energy 
company costs vary between 
6 EUR per capita annually 
(France) to 16 EUR per 
capita annually (UK) 

Cost saving from less 
frequent if at all reading 
meters 

Low costs 

Medium 
benefits 

Administrations bear low 
costs to define and publicise 
relevant rules and guidance 

All measures taken under 
this Article lead to the 
unlocking of energy savings 
potential 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

Article 
14(1) 
and (3) 

Benefit  Expected 

indirect 
benefits 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Benefit  Expected 

indirect 
benefits 

Cost 

Expected 
enforcement 
costs 

Article 
15 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

Low/ 
medium/ 
high costs 

Medium 
benefits 

Administrations bear the 
main costs of Article. The 
costs depend on the nature 
and size of the measure 
(ranging from a targeted 
informational campaign to a 
large programme of grants) 

Benefits represent mainly 
increased awareness and 
data about the existing 
energy savings potential in 
heating and cooling that can 
be further targeted by 
policies and measures. 

Low costs 

Administrations bear the 
costs of carrying out the 
comprehensive assessments. 

Medium 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Economic benefits from 
tackling barriers that hinder 
the market of “energy 
efficiency” related products 
and services 

Companies benefit from the 
increased visibility of heating 
and cooling, and most 
notably the identified energy 
savings potential can be 
utilized by the companies 

Medium 
benefits 

Medium 
costs 

Economic benefits from the 
increased efficiency of the 
energy system 

Investments to increase the 
efficiency of the energy 
system 

125 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Article 
16 

Article 
18 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Benefit  Expected 

indirect 
benefits 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

Cost 

Expected 
enforcement 
costs 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Article 
19 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Economic benefits from 
performing audits and 
implementing results 

Low costs  Reasonable costs to follow 
training, accreditation and 
certification schemes 

Medium 
benefits 

Economic benefits from 
tackling barriers that hinder 
the market of “energy 
efficiency” related products 
and services 

Medium 
benefits 

Benefits from the provision 
of proper quality services to 
the market 

Low costs 

Administrations bear low 
costs to define and publicise 
relevant rules and guidance 

Medium 
benefits 

Benefits to the economic 
results of the administration 
due to increase in efficiency 
and lower energy costs 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Citizens benefit from the 
lower energy bills  

Benefit  Expected 

indirect 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Owners benefit from the 
increased value and quality 
of their assets 

Benefit  Expected 

direct 
benefits 

Medium 
benefits 

Economic benefits from 
tackling barriers that hinder 
the market of “energy 
efficiency” related products 
and services 

126 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cost 

Expected 
enforcement 
costs 

Cost 

Expected 
direct costs 

Low costs 

Administrative costs for 
identifying and overcoming 
barriers of Article 19. 

Medium 
costs 

Medium costs for financial 
schemes to overcome split of 
incentives. 

127 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
128