{"title":"模拟四种租赁法政策的改造激励和分配效应:在德国监管背景下使用混凝土建筑和改造方案的模型分析","authors":"Leo Reutter , Bernadetta Winiewska","doi":"10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.115805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The primary landlord-tenant dilemma arising from rent control prevents landlords from recovering costs of energy-efficiency retrofits, which mainly benefit tenants if the landlord undertakes the retrofit. This requires tenancy law to allocate retrofit and energy costs adequately. Previous research discusses the dilemma generally or examines policy options without numeric estimations of their long-term effects. This paper addresses this research gap by conducting a thorough comparative quantitative analysis of several policy options. The study analyzes the impact of Germany’s current system and three reform options on landlords’ and tenants’ financial costs and benefits using simulations across various building sizes and retrofit ambitions. Investment costs exceed energy savings in 12 of the 15 retrofit projects examined. The discounted project payoff — the lifetime benefit of the retrofit compared to maintaining the status quo — ranges from −1.07 to 0.11 €<sub>2023</sub>/m<sup>2</sup>/month. The status quo system and one reform option almost always incentivize landlords to forego retrofits. Only two reform options consistently incentivize landlord investment, albeit at tenants’ expense. A sensitivity analysis shows these systems’ effectiveness is not affected by the details of German general tenancy law and local rent markets’ characteristics (rent levels and their inflation, valuation of energy efficiency). Designing landlords’ retrofit premia to depend on the technically estimated energy demand cost savings is especially promising as it incentivizes retrofits when profitable. Seven cases where a retrofit is profitable for the landlord but not from a project perspective are primarily due to the rebound effect. Under this system, landlords’ and tenants’ benefits from the retrofit, compared to continued maintenance, range from −0.28 to 0.42 and −1.10 to −0.02 €<sub>2023</sub>/m<sup>2</sup>/month, respectively.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11641,"journal":{"name":"Energy and Buildings","volume":"341 ","pages":"Article 115805"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simulating retrofit incentives and distributional effects of four tenancy law policies A model analysis using concrete buildings and retrofit options within the German regulatory context\",\"authors\":\"Leo Reutter , Bernadetta Winiewska\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.115805\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The primary landlord-tenant dilemma arising from rent control prevents landlords from recovering costs of energy-efficiency retrofits, which mainly benefit tenants if the landlord undertakes the retrofit. This requires tenancy law to allocate retrofit and energy costs adequately. Previous research discusses the dilemma generally or examines policy options without numeric estimations of their long-term effects. This paper addresses this research gap by conducting a thorough comparative quantitative analysis of several policy options. The study analyzes the impact of Germany’s current system and three reform options on landlords’ and tenants’ financial costs and benefits using simulations across various building sizes and retrofit ambitions. Investment costs exceed energy savings in 12 of the 15 retrofit projects examined. The discounted project payoff — the lifetime benefit of the retrofit compared to maintaining the status quo — ranges from −1.07 to 0.11 €<sub>2023</sub>/m<sup>2</sup>/month. The status quo system and one reform option almost always incentivize landlords to forego retrofits. Only two reform options consistently incentivize landlord investment, albeit at tenants’ expense. A sensitivity analysis shows these systems’ effectiveness is not affected by the details of German general tenancy law and local rent markets’ characteristics (rent levels and their inflation, valuation of energy efficiency). Designing landlords’ retrofit premia to depend on the technically estimated energy demand cost savings is especially promising as it incentivizes retrofits when profitable. Seven cases where a retrofit is profitable for the landlord but not from a project perspective are primarily due to the rebound effect. Under this system, landlords’ and tenants’ benefits from the retrofit, compared to continued maintenance, range from −0.28 to 0.42 and −1.10 to −0.02 €<sub>2023</sub>/m<sup>2</sup>/month, respectively.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11641,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy and Buildings\",\"volume\":\"341 \",\"pages\":\"Article 115805\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy and Buildings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778825005353\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy and Buildings","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778825005353","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Simulating retrofit incentives and distributional effects of four tenancy law policies A model analysis using concrete buildings and retrofit options within the German regulatory context
The primary landlord-tenant dilemma arising from rent control prevents landlords from recovering costs of energy-efficiency retrofits, which mainly benefit tenants if the landlord undertakes the retrofit. This requires tenancy law to allocate retrofit and energy costs adequately. Previous research discusses the dilemma generally or examines policy options without numeric estimations of their long-term effects. This paper addresses this research gap by conducting a thorough comparative quantitative analysis of several policy options. The study analyzes the impact of Germany’s current system and three reform options on landlords’ and tenants’ financial costs and benefits using simulations across various building sizes and retrofit ambitions. Investment costs exceed energy savings in 12 of the 15 retrofit projects examined. The discounted project payoff — the lifetime benefit of the retrofit compared to maintaining the status quo — ranges from −1.07 to 0.11 €2023/m2/month. The status quo system and one reform option almost always incentivize landlords to forego retrofits. Only two reform options consistently incentivize landlord investment, albeit at tenants’ expense. A sensitivity analysis shows these systems’ effectiveness is not affected by the details of German general tenancy law and local rent markets’ characteristics (rent levels and their inflation, valuation of energy efficiency). Designing landlords’ retrofit premia to depend on the technically estimated energy demand cost savings is especially promising as it incentivizes retrofits when profitable. Seven cases where a retrofit is profitable for the landlord but not from a project perspective are primarily due to the rebound effect. Under this system, landlords’ and tenants’ benefits from the retrofit, compared to continued maintenance, range from −0.28 to 0.42 and −1.10 to −0.02 €2023/m2/month, respectively.
期刊介绍:
An international journal devoted to investigations of energy use and efficiency in buildings
Energy and Buildings is an international journal publishing articles with explicit links to energy use in buildings. The aim is to present new research results, and new proven practice aimed at reducing the energy needs of a building and improving indoor environment quality.