Local Heat and Energy Efficiency Strategy (LHEES) pilot programme: synthesis evaluation

3. Challenges in developing LHEES

Local authority buy-in, lack of clarity on the LHEES process, and the skillsand resourcing required have been key challenges for local authorities.

Data collation and analysis has been hindered by limited data skills and knowledge, availability of datasets, and issues in data access and sharing.

Stakeholder engagement has been a particular challenge, impacted by limited engagement skills/experience andresourcing , a lack of clarity around the role of engagement, and (in phase 3) COVID-19 restrictions.

This chapter considers the main challenges experienced by local authorities in developing LHEES. Feedback across the pilot programme made clear that issues and challenges have arisen across all aspects of LHEES development.

Setup and scoping

Local authorities faced challenges in making key decisions at the initial scoping stage for their LHEES. For example, some reported difficulties identifying a regional focus for the pilot that would be representative of the wider area, while others found data access a challenge dependent on their focus (non-domestic buildings, and SMEs in particular, were highlighted as a challenge). For some, these difficulties reflected a lack of clarity on the LHEES development process, with some reliant on their consultant’s understanding of the process. This appeared to be a particular issue at phase 1.

Securing buy-in

Some local authorities reported difficulty securing buy-in and support from senior management and elected officials, despite work to share knowledge and guidance from consultants to encourage interest and buy-in. Feedback suggests that buy-in could be dependent on whether senior officers and elected officials recognised how LHEES fits with other local authority strategies and plans, and on the ability of officers to effectively communicate LHEES objectives.

Skills and resourcing

"It’s a multitude of different skills - understanding energy, building survey EPC, understanding of how planning works, influencing policy and strategy, and taking a strategy through to implementation.

Phase 1 local authority"

Feedback has made clear that LHEES development requires a diverse range of skills and knowledge. For example, pilots required officers to use multiple data sources, often across multiple service areas. Data collation and mapping was a particularly complex process.

Local authorities indicated that production of LHEES also requires skills in project management, managing data sharing agreements, business engagement and wider stakeholder engagement. As a result, many LHEES pilots required input from multiple officers to secure the necessary expertise and skills. In this context, some highlighted the value of local authority officers contributing their local knowledge to the core analysis and development work for LHEES, but others lacked the necessary in-house skills and were more reliant on consultants to lead the LHEES development process.

Local authorities also found that LHEES development is a resource-intensive process, requiring significant time input from local authority officers even to produce a pilot LHEES focused only on a relatively small part of the local authority area. Data collation/analysis and stakeholder engagement were identified as particularly resource intensive elements. The resourcing required by LHEES was also reflected in the positive experience of local authorities with a dedicated LHEES officer. Those without a dedicated officer reported having struggled to support the LHEES development process.

Local authorities’ experience through the pilot programme suggested that development and management of LHEES will require a dedicated role within the local authority.

Data collation and analysis

The extent to which officers felt capable of delivering the range of data skills and knowledge required by LHEES varied considerably. Most local authorities referred to limited skills and capacity having impacted the development process, with GIS skills a particular challenge. There were also significant challenges around availability of the data and analysis tools required for LHEES. This included suggestions that investment would be required to upgrade software and to improve the evidence base to support rollout of LHEES.

"Heat map data gives an estimate of expected heat demand for each place. Beyond that, we’ve really got no data for commercial property energy use…that’s our biggest gap.

Phase 1 local authority"

Local authorities raised several issues around access to accurate datasets. These included concerns regarding whether the Scotland Heat Map provides sufficiently granular data to inform LHEES delivery planning. It should be noted that the Heat Map was designed to aid strategic planning, and is not expected to deliver 100% accurate building-level data. However, feedback reflected wider concerns from local authorities regarding limited access to building-level data. This was particularly the case for non-domestic buildings and the private rented sector; for example, several local authorities referred to a lack of robust Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) data for non-domestic buildings. Some also raised concerns regarding the accuracy of available data, including perceived variation in the robustness of Home Analytics data across Scotland. Some local authorities undertook limited data collection exercises to address deficiencies in the available evidence base. These typically involved site visits to a small sample of properties to verify building data and assess potential energy efficiency or decarbonisation options.

" We had worked with the consultants previously, so we had data sharing agreements in place. We decided to keep our focus on public buildings where we had access to data.

Phase 2 local authority"

Concerns around data accuracy were compounded by data sharing challenges. Data sharing was relatively straightforward if partnerships were already in place, or where data was held by the local authority and/or publicly available. However, where this was not the case, data sharing between stakeholders was a significant challenge with potential to delay LHEES development. Concerns around the quality of datasets and disclosure risks appear to have limited willingness to share data, including examples of data protection concerns leading to partners sharing only aggregate data. In this context, some saw data protection legislation and data sharing protocols as too onerous. Data access and sharing also appear to have influenced the content of LHEES in some cases; for example, some based decisions around the focus of their LHEES on access to relevant datasets.

Work is required to ensure equity in local authorities’ access to key datasets, to avoid differences in the range of issues that local authorities can address through their LHEES.

Target setting and delivery planning

Challenges in access to and use of data also impacted local authorities’ ability to complete the later stages of LHEES. Limited target setting was a particular issue for phase 1 pilots, many of which were insufficiently detailed to identify new opportunities for action or to support delivery planning. This improved through the pilot programme; by phase 3 the majority of pilots provided detailed suggestions for energy efficiency and decarbonisation improvements, including examples of LHEES drawing on learning from activities across the UK.

This progression over the three phases of the pilot programme is consistent with the reported improvement in understanding of the LHEES process, and capacity to undertake the required data collation and analysis. Local authorities also indicated that the strategic positioning of LHEES amongst other local authority plans can be significant for delivery planning. For example, where LHEES had a clear role as part of the local authority’s wider approach to energy and climate change, feedback was more positive about prospects for delivery of the LHEES.

There appears to be a need for greater clarity and support around how local authorities should approach delivery of LHEES actions at a local level.

Stakeholder engagement

Engagement with external stakeholders has been frustrated by a range of challenges. Insufficient skills and capabilities limited stakeholder engagement, with some local authorities struggling to resource the communication skills, in addition to skills in social surveys and workshop facilitation. Engagement with SMEs and other businesses was highlighted as particularly difficult, requiring an understanding of how businesses work which many LHEES teams did not have. Engagement with businesses was also limited in some cases by difficulties accessing contact data due to data protection concerns.

"We don’t have sales experience. We need the ability to sell energy and sell heat. If we’re going to have more heat networks, we want to expand the networks we’ve got. How do we sell to these people?

Phase 2 local authority"

There also appeared to be some lack of clarity around which external stakeholders have a role to play in LHEES, and at what stage stakeholders should be involved. Resourcing was also a significant barrier to effective engagement; for example, some found that one-to-one engagement was necessary for external stakeholders, requiring significant time input from officers. Several local authorities also felt that they lacked the tools or leverage to incentivise stakeholders who may not otherwise share the commitment to energy efficiency and decarbonisation. This included housing developers, private landlords, non-domestic property managers and social housing providers.

Feedback suggests that the impact of these and other issues has varied over the pilot programme. For example, a lack of clarity around stakeholder engagement was an issue for phase 1 local authorities. In contrast, phase 2 local authorities saw a role for resident engagement but typically felt that this would be premature during the pilot phase. At stage 3, the COVID-19 pandemic significantly restricted scope for engagement – although it is unclear whether other factors may have limited stakeholder engagement in the absence of the pandemic.

Several local authorities suggested that challenges in securing stakeholder engagement – and identifying the most effective approaches - is a key finding for future rollout of LHEES.

Wider issues and challenges

The pilot programme identified a range of other issues and challenges which had an impact on the LHEES development process. These are summarised below.

" I think the only issue has been their slight tendency to not really give enough cognisance to the real variations that there are in remote and rural areas.

Phase 1 local authority"

• While external support was widely recognised as crucial for pilots, some raised concerns regarding whether consultants’ work was fully tailored to their local circumstances. These local authorities felt that greater recognition of the specific local circumstances would have added value to the consultant’s outputs. Some acknowledged that scope for local authority officers to work with consultants to tailor the approach had been limited by available resources and (in phase 3) the COVID-19 pandemic.
• The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on multiple aspects of the LHEES process for phase 3 pilots, including preventing local authorities from conducting necessary housing stock checks, and diverted resources from LHEES development as other functions were prioritised.