Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
International Conference – Green Urbanism, GU 2016
Unlocking the Human Dimension of Energy Efficiency and
Conservation: the Case of Tourist Accommodation Providers in
Coron, Palawan in the Philippines
Geomilie S.Tumamao-Guittapa1, Ma. Sheilah G. Napalangb
a
University of the Philippines School of Urban and Regional Planning, Quezon City 1101, Philippines
b
University of the Philippines School of Urban and Regional Planning, Quezon City 1101, Philippines
Abstract
In the light of mounting concerns related to climate change, energy efficiency and conservation (EEC) presents a cost-effective
strategy that can propel the Philippines’ energy-intensive tourist accommodations sector towards sustainability. This warrants the
examination of barriers that prevent capture of EEC potentials and the identification of factors that will drive adoption at a sociallyoptimal rate.
Coron, Palawan’s small and medium enterprise (SME) dominated hospitality sector was studied using post-only correlation design.
Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare perceptions, practices, energy awareness, and willingness to participate in EEC between
members of the Zero Carbon Resorts project; a voluntary program aiding tourism SMEs reduce energy consumption (Case Group),
and non-members (Control Group). Pearson Chi-Squared test was employed to determine factor association with membership in
the program, while Ordered Logistic Regression was used to determine participation drivers in EEC.
Research revealed vast uncaptured energy-savings potential compounded with the absence of EEC laws targeting this sector. The
study found that: (1) provisions for amenities, facilities and support services for guests; (2) high dependence on the grid and the
prevalent use of generators; (3) low market penetration of renewable energy (RE) and energy-efficient technology; and (4) lack of
knowledgeable personnel within organizations contribute to high energy expense within this sector. Despite having very little
difference in perceived energy savings, energy awareness and self-reported energy-saving practices vary widely. Policy and
institutional changes are required to address: (1) perceived high cost of energy-efficient technology and knowledge gap, (2) put in
place necessary regulations; and (3) incentivize EEC to increase its adoption.
* Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap. Tel.: +632-926-2120; fax: +632-929-1637.
E-mail address: [email protected]
1878-0296 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of GU 2016.
2
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of GU 2016.
Keywords: energy efficiency and conservation (EEC); sustainable tourism; climate change mitigation; small and medium enterprise (SMEs)
1. Background
According to UN HABITAT (2012) “energy is all pervasive; for everything we produce or consume require
energy.” Since “80 percent of our energy supply come from fossil fuels – a finite resource that is getting scarcer,
increasing in price and contribute largely to global warming” (UN HABITAT 2012) economic expansion and
population growth will further drive climate change under business as usual (BAU) scenario.
Widespread and irreversible impacts of global warming is expected at the end of the 21 st century if no mitigation
efforts are added beyond those that are currently in place (IPCC 2014). It is also estimated that adaptation measures to
climate change such as building flood defenses, transporting water for agriculture and rebuilding infrastructure affected
by climate change will cost the global community more than USD 200 billion per annum in 2030 (IIED 2009 cited in
UN HABITAT 2012). In order to avoid this, Pew Center on Global Climate Change (2009) suggests that integrated
and deliberate mitigation efforts be taken for “global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to peak no later than 2015 and
decline rapidly thereafter to a level between 50-85 percent below 2000 levels by year 2050”. Energy efficiency and
conservation (EEC) is seen as a cost-effective intervention that will result to both economic and environmental gains.
Despite being a stack-less industry, tourism and travel sector contribute around five percent of global carbon dioxide
emissions (UNWTO 2009, 3). Out of this amount, hotels and other types of accommodations account for a fifth (HES
2011, 7). After transportation, accommodation is the most energy-intensive component of the tourism industry “due
to its demand for heating or cooling, lighting, cooking (in restaurants), cleaning, pools, and; in tropical or arid regions,
the desalination of seawater. In a wide review of studies, energy use in hotels range between twenty five to 284
MJ/guest night” (Peeters et al. 2010 quoted by UNEP 2011, 417). Based on a forecast of an average annual growth
rate of four percent in international tourist arrivals, it was predicted that under BAU scenario that emissions from the
global tourism sector will increase by 161 percent in 2035 (WTO and UNEP 2008, 36). This projected growth in
emissions from tourism run counter to the deep emission cuts needed to address climate change.
On the other hand, tourism is a highly climate-sensitive economic sector, as tourist destinations are affected by
climate variability in many ways. As such, the cumulative effects of climate change are anticipated to have far-reaching
impacts on tourist destinations and travel businesses, most especially the communities dependent upon the industry.
Given the energy-intensive nature of tourist accommodations, it is necessary to change the way these facilities are
built and operated in order to reduce the amount of emissions produced (mitigation) while maintaining the same quality
of service and amenity in an environmentally-sustainable and economically-sound manner (adaptation).
Despite the availability of energy efficient technology and practices, large energy savings potential have yet to be
captured at socially optimal rate to effectively arrest climate change. According to Mc. Kinsey and Company (2009),
fundamental attributes of energy efficiency such as: (1) significant amount of upfront investment needed with savings
that accrue over time, (2) fragmentation (3) less prioritization; and (4) difficulty in measuring energy that is not
consumed; prevent the capture of benefits available EEC. Thus, understanding the human dimension of EEC is crucial
in program and policy formulation in order to unlock participation.
As the Philippines aims to improve its position as the tourist destination of choice in Southeast Asia, world-class
infrastructure to support existing natural attractions is also required. This include quality accommodations in sufficient
numbers. Given the country’s vast tourism opportunities, the tourist accommodations sector exhibits large, untapped
energy savings and GHG reduction potentials. However, the absence of laws and regulations that directly mandate the
implementation of demand-side energy efficiency in the Philippines has resulted in sluggish adoption of energy-saving
measures in the private sector. Since the tourist accommodations sector is dominated by small and medium businesses,
there is a need to understand how tourism SMEs can shift towards energy-efficient practices.
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
3
2. Situationer
Due to its variety of marine and terrestrial habitats, high diversity of flora and fauna in the island as well as the rich
cultural heritage of its indigenous people which provides a solid base for its thriving eco-tourism industry, Coron,
Palawan was recently named "The Top Island in the World" by Conde Nast Traveler's Reader Choice Awards (Conde
Nast Traveler, 2015).
With the development of its airport in 2008, the island opened up to travelers and a huge shift from agriculturebased to tourism-driven economy occurred. The tourism sector’s annual growth rate exceeds 100 percent from 2006
to 2009, and has since continued to show no slowing down (MTO of Coron, 2013). The number of accommodations
grew from less than 100 rooms in 2006 to over 400 rooms in 2011. It is expected that demand for accommodation will
continue to increase given growth in tourist arrivals and expansion of tourism in the locality.
Coinciding with this period of growth, Busuanga Island Electric Cooperative (BISELCO) reported that power
demand in the municipality steadily rose from 2005 until consumption outstripped the National Power Corporation’s
(NPC) dependable capacity of 1.48 Megawatts (MW) in 2008 which resulted in twelve-hour long rotating brownouts
and heavy economic losses for Coron (ERC 2012). Power demand exceeded the provider’s rated capacity of 2.1 MW
in 2010 which resulted to persistently longer power interruptions in areas being serviced by BISELCO. The same
report indicated an average growth rate of 30 percent per annum in power demand, projecting the need for electricity
in the locality to increase to 4.5 Kilowatt-hour (KWh) by 2030. Given increasing cost of energy and lack of power
supply in the locality, conserving energy is a necessity.
Launched in 2010, the Zero Carbon Resorts (ZCR) Project is appropriate and timely, given the energy situation in
Coron. Aimed at making the tourism industry energy-efficient in a sustainable and competitive manner, this four-year
project provided operators a cost-effective means of coping with the energy crisis while safeguarding the fragile
environment on which the local tourism industry is hinged upon. It fostered structural changes in the operations and
practices of tourist accommodation providers in a step-wise approach using low cost, locally available carbon neutral
technologies (ZCR 2010). With the exception of time and effort, joining the initiative required little initial investment
from operators. In 2013, three years after its inception, the study found that there were 20 ZCR members in the locality
–roughly a third of the tourist accommodations sector. The study noted that despite all the advantages that may be
derived from participating in the program, few establishments are buying in. It is also apparent that energy savings
potential and carbon emissions cuts from this sector were not fully realized given such small participation rate.
3. Study Methodology
Using post-only correlational design, the research sought to understand the push-and-pull factors for the adoption
of EEC in Coron, Palawan’s hospitality sector through a six-part self-administered survey of local tourist
accommodation facility operation managers. The study examined and compared perceptions, practices, energy
awareness and willingness to participate between members of the ZCR project (Case Group), and non-members
(Control Group) using Mann-Whitney U test. Pearson Chi-Squared test was employed to determine factors association
with membership in the program, while Ordered Logistic Regression was used to determine participation drivers in
EEC.
The Municipal Tourism Office (MTO) of Coron listed 72 tourist accommodation providers in the locality of which
only 61 establishments were operating in September 2013. The study pursued all 61 operating establishments and
yielded 72 percent survey response rate. Of the 44 respondents, 14 are from Zero Carbon Resorts members (Case
Group) while 30 are non-members (Control Group). It was also found that 60 percent of the respondents were aware
of the ZCR Project, but only 31 percent joined the initiative.
4
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
4. Profile of Coron, Palawan’s Tourist Accommodations Sector
4.1. Self-reported type of accommodations and room occupancy
A survey of establishments in September 2013 indicated a wide variety of accommodation choices available which
could cater to varying preferences of tourists. Self-reported classification include: (a) 12 resorts; (b) 9 pension houses;
(c) 7 hotels; (d) 2 guest houses; (e) 6 lodges; (f) 4 inns; and (g) 4 bed and breakfast establishments.
In terms of number of rooms, 16 out of 44 tourist accommodation facilities have ten or less rooms, 20 establishments
have between 11 to 20 rooms, while only 8 establishments have more than 21 rooms. Medium-scale facilities (11 to
20 rooms) make up majority of the respondents at 46 percent; with seven Case Group participants and 13 Control
Group participants under this classification. Small-scale facilities (ten or less rooms) is made up of four Case Group
participants and 12 Control Group participants comprise 36 percent. Large-Scale facilities (21 or more rooms) make
up the remaining 18 percent with three Case Group participants and seven Control Group participants under this
classification.
Together, the surveyed facilities represent over 700 rooms of varying sizes and capacities. Of these, more than half
are single to double occupancy, while the remaining 47 percent are divided as follows: (a) 106 rooms are triple
occupancy; (b) 139 rooms are quadruple occupancy; (c) 57 rooms cater to up to 5 persons in a room; and (d) 28 rooms
can accommodate 6 or more persons.
Average self-reported room occupancy rate among tourist accommodations in the study area during peak season is
around 67 percent. This can dwindle to 33 percent during off-peak season. Responses indicate that the mean occupancy
rate for the Case Group was 9 points higher than the Control Group at 84 percent occupancy rate versus 75 percent
respectively, during the peak season. The difference in occupancy rate during off-peak season between the Case Group
and the Control Group increased to almost 12 points at 45 percent occupancy rate versus 34 percent respectively.
4.2. Room Amenities and Facilities
Fig. 1. Room Amenities per Study Group
Fig. 2. Available of Support Services and Facilities Study Group
Due to the country’s warm, humid climate, good ventilation is necessary for comfort. As such, foremost among
appliances provided inside guest rooms are mechanical means of air conditioning and cooling. Among 44 tourist
accommodations surveyed: (a) 36 establishments provided both electric fan and air conditioning unit inside the room;
(b) five provided electric fans only; (c) three establishments provided only air conditioning units; while (d) a single
facility relied solely on natural ventilation. Majority (82 percent) of the respondents attributed this practice to the need
to provide mechanical cooling even during power outage; in which case, electric fans are used to cool the room in lieu
of air conditioning units to lower the demand on their generators. This practice has higher adoption rate among ZCR
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
5
members (93 percent) compared to non-members (77 percent). The study also noted that establishments that relied
solely on air conditioning units to cool guest rooms are from the Control Group.
Aside from these, the top three appliances provided inside guestrooms are: (1) television, (2) water heater in guest
bathrooms; and (3) refrigerators. All of the participants reported that they provide electric fan, television set in guest
room as well as water heater in bathroom. The notable difference is that Case Group members did not provide electric
stoves, DVD players, WIFI/ Internet Access and exhaust fans in guest rooms. (Figure 1)
A common practice in this sector is the provision of more than just lodging for guests. They incorporate services
that cater to meetings, conferences and event requirements for groups of varying sizes in their facility. Some operators
also provide services for incentive tourism such as in-house fitness and wellness facilities, tours and diving equipment
centers to cater to individuals and groups requiring planned itinerary. These facilities are broadly categorized under:
(a) banquet and conference, (b) food and beverage; as well as (c) fitness and wellness facilities (Figure 2).
5. Energy Sources and Consumption Profile
In terms of energy sources, respondents may be classified into two broad categories: (1) those whose facilities are
situated in locations within the municipal grid; and (2) those whose facilities are off-grid. Three out of 44 respondents
are off-grid, while the rest are connected to the municipal electricity grid. Due to constant power interruptions, 82
percent of the respondents connected to the grid also use generator sets to meet their energy needs. Three respondents
reported using solar energy in addition to having both electricity from the grid and generator set. Two respondents
reported sole reliance on the grid. Meanwhile, out of three off-grid tourist accommodation facilities which participated
in the survey, two respondents indicate using both solar energy and generator sets to power their facilities, while one
is solely dependent on generator set for lighting, heating, cooling, and air conditioning requirements.
Thirty-six out of 44 respondents reported the use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) for cooking in their respective
establishments. Five respondents mentioned that they use charcoal as well as LPG for cooking, while one respondent
reported the use of firewood in addition to charcoal and LPG. A single respondent reported the exclusive use firewood
for cooking while another respondent did not indicate any answer since their facility does not provide food and
beverage service.
Based on self-report expenditure, Coron’s hospitality sector spends PhP2.4 million (+/-USD50,880*2) monthly on
energy alone, with electricity and petroleum products accounting for PhP1.4 million (+/- USD29,680*) and PhP
900,000 (+/- USD19,080*) respectively. With 82 percent of tourist accommodations using both electricity and
generator sets to meet their energy needs as well as LPG for cooking, monthly energy related expenses comprise on
average: (a) 65 percent for electricity; (b) 34 percent for petroleum products including LPG; and (c) less than 1 percent
for biomass products.
In order to compare energy related expenditure using uniform set of parameters, energy expenditure data was
classified based on respondents’ (1) self-reported tourist accommodation classification, as well as (2) number of rooms.
On average, monthly energy expenditure among small scale tourist accommodations cost about PhP20,000.00 (+/USD420*) with over 62 percent of the total spent on electricity, 36 percent on petroleum products and less than 1
percent on biomass. Among medium scale tourist accommodations, energy expenditure costs about PhP47,000.00 (+/USD 987*) monthly with 70 percent of this amount spent on electricity, 30 percent on petroleum products, and less
than 1 percent on biomass. Among large scale tourist accommodations average energy expenditure cost about
PhP138,000.00 (about USD2,900*) monthly, with 57 percent of the total amount spent on electricity, 40 percent on
petroleum products, and a little over 2 percent on biomass. The study determined the monthly expenditure per room
by dividing the monthly energy expense with the number of rooms in their respective facility. The average monthly
energy related expense per room is between PhP 2,700 to PhP 4,000 (+/- USD 54 to 87*). (Tables 2 and 3)
Information on energy expenses were grouped according to self-reported type of accommodation facility and the
average consumption per room was computed. Among these classifications, inns have the highest average monthly
energy expense per room, averaging PhP5,600 (+/- USD118*) per room, while guest houses indicate the lowest
2 *USD 1.00= PhP 47.17 (Source: XE Currency Converter July 8, 2016)
6
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
monthly energy expense per room at PhP3,300 (+/- USD69.5*3). Pension houses, bed and breakfast establishments,
lodges, hotels and resorts fall within the range of Php4,200 to Php4,800.00 (+/- USD88 to 101*). The mean monthly
energy expense per room in Coron is Php4, 568.69 (+/- USD96*). (Figure 3)
Table 1. Self- Reported Energy Related Expense
among Tourist Accommodation Providers in Coron, Palawan
Energy Source
Electricity
Petroleum
based products
Biomass
products
Monthly Energy Related
Expense
from PhP 1,500.00 to
PhP 140,000.00
(+/- $31.80 to 2967.99*)
from PhP 1,000.00 to
PhP 158,000.00
(+/- $21.20 to 3349.59*)
from PhP 200.00 to PhP
30,000.00
(+/- $4.24 to 636.00*)
Table 2. Mean Monthly Expenditure
on Energy per Room by Cluster
Average
Expenditure
Respondents
Clustered by Number
of Rooms
Average
Energy
Expense
per Room
Highest
Energy
Expense
per Room
Lowest
Energy
Expense per
Room
PhP 31,018.42
(+/- $657.59*)
SMALL SCALE
(1to 10 rooms)
2,783.06
($ 58.5*)
11,125.00
($ 234*)
333.33
($ 7*)
PhP 21,994.01
(+/- $466.27*)
MEDIUM SCALE
(11 to 20 rooms)
3,054.05
($ 64*)
8,578.13
($ 180*)
416.67
($ 8.75*)
PhP 753.41
(+/- $15.97*)
LARGE SCALE
(21 or more rooms)
4,174.25
($ 58.5)
7,257.14
($ 152.5*)
1,875.00
($ 39.5*)
The study also determined the average energy related expenditure for tourist accommodation providers based on
the facilities and amenities they provide. Figures indicate that tourist accommodations that provide food and beverage
services, as well as fitness and wellness facilities tend to have higher average monthly energy expense as these facilities
are available daily to cater to the guests. Support facilities such as staff housing and sewage treatment plant on the
other hand, operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, contributing significantly to energy consumption in tourist
accommodations. Establishments which provide only banquet and conference facilities tend to spend less as these
facilities are used only on demand. This indicates that number of rooms per facility is not the sole determinant of
energy consumption. Amenities, facilities, and services in establishments influence energy consumption. (Figure 3)
Study results also suggest vast untapped energy savings potential is available within the sector should they adopt
the Department of Energy’s (DOE) ten percent energy savings target. This can positively impact operating cost and
extend energy resources available in the locality as well as actively contribute in the country’s efforts to reduce carbon
emissions.
Fig. 3. Mean Monthly Energy Expense
by Type of Facilities Provided
3 *USD 1.00= PhP 47.17 (Source: XE Currency Converter July 8, 2016)
Fig. 4. Ranking of Energy Saving Practices Employed by Tourist
Accommodation Providers in Coron, Palawan
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
7
6. Energy Saving Practices (ESP)
Respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale (1=not at all to 5=always) how often an energy
efficiency/ conservation measure is employed in their facility. Mean scores for statements on behavior-based energy
saving practices indicate that these are among the most widely used energy-saving measures with: (1) switching off
equipment/ lighting when not in use on the top spot; followed by (2) educating and encouraging staff to conserve
energy; and, (3) encouraging and informing guests to participate in energy conservation. Almost 12 percent of the
respondents suggested seldom implementation of a formal energy management program as this energy saving practice
ranked seventh among 14 energy-saving measures.
Building design-related energy saving practices followed behavior based energy saving practices in terms of
adoption. Respondents indicated that utilizing and harnessing natural ventilation to cool rooms and common areas,
utilizing solar radiation to dry laundry, and shading building openings such as doors and windows (ranked 4th, 5th and
6th) are common practices in the locality.
Among technology-related energy saving practices, replacement of old lighting fixtures with energy efficient
lighting fixtures such as LEDs and CFLs is widely adopted, ranking 8th out of 14. Cleaning and replacement of air
conditioning unit filters every 60 days is also being practiced, ranking 9th, while purchasing equipment and appliances
with moderate to high energy efficiency rate ranked 10th out of 14. Low-flow shower heads, room key cards, motion
sensors and solar water heaters are not widely employed in Coron as these technologies ranked 11th to 14th
accordingly (Figure 4).
The difference between the average individual ratings provided by both Case and Control Groups participants range
from 0.82 point to none. In terms of distribution, the Case Group rated 79 percent of the energy saving practices higher
than the Control Group. After calculating the Individual Energy Saving Practice (ESP I) score per respondent per study
group, the mean was computed to obtain the Group Energy Saving Practice (ESPG) score. Comparing energy savings
practices per group, it was found that while the Case Group scored higher than the Control Group, the difference in
ESPG scores is minimal at only 2.65 points.
In comparing ESPI scores for systematic difference between study groups’ energy-saving practices, Mann-Whitney
U test revealed that the Case Group‘s energy saving practice score is higher (Mean rank (N=44) =24.46) than the
Control Group (Mean rank (N = 44) =21.58). In both cases, results indicate no significant difference in energy saving
practices between study groups at 0.05 level of significance ((N = 26) U = 78.00, p= 0.781) ((N = 44) U= 207.00, p=
0.795).
7. Perceived Energy Savings
Respondents were also asked to indicate the amount of energy they believed they have saved in relation to the
energy conservation practices employed in their facility. Perceived energy savings are expressed in terms of
percentages ranging from: (a) 1-5 percent, (b) 6-10 percent, (c) 11-15 percent, (d) 16-20 percent, (e) 21-25 percent;
and, (f) 25 percent above.
Individual scores were computed in order to obtain the average perceived energy savings per group (APES G). Both
Case and Control Groups believe their current operation and management practices save them approximately 11-15
percent energy. While the Case Group scored higher than the Control Group, there is minimal difference (1 percent)
in how both study groups perceived their energy savings in relation to the energy-saving methods they employ.
Pearson Chi-Square test was used to determine if perceived energy savings is associated with membership in the
Zero Carbon Resorts Project. Results indicate that being a member of the program is not associated with the perceived
energy savings at 0.05 level of significance (χ2 (1, N = 44) =0.570, p = 0.450).
8. Energy Awareness
To test their awareness, respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree to 5=
strongly agree) the degree to which they agree or disagree with the statements on the relationship between energy
conservation and: (P3 S1) climate change, (P3 S2) energy crisis, (P3 S3) energy security in the Philippines; and, (P3
S4) one’s concern for the environment; and (P3 S5) patriotism.
8
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
Overall, the statement relating excessive energy consumption in commercial buildings to global warming (P3 S3)
garnered the highest awareness rating of 4.55 (90.91 percent) among the respondents. This was closely followed by
the statement regarding global energy crisis (P3 S1) which scored 4.50 (90 percent); and, the statement which links
love for one’s country and the environment with energy conservation (P3 S5) at 4.48 (89.55 percent). Answer
regarding the statement which falsely depict the energy situation in the country as abundant therefore relieving people
from the responsibility of conserving energy (P3 S2) was given inverse scoring; with strongly disagree obtaining the
highest score (5) and strongly agree obtaining the lowest score (1). This statement garnered a score of 4.27 or 85.45
percent among the respondents. The statement relating energy consumption with the provision of quality service,
comfort and convenience to guests among tourist accommodations (P3 S4) scored lowest among the five at 3.43 (68.64
percent). The Case Group registered a total score of 22.21 out of 25 points (88.86 percent) compared to the Control
Group’s score of 20.75 (83.00 percent).
Mann-Whitney U test results indicate significant difference in the level of awareness between the Case and Control
Group at 0.10 level of significance ((N = 44) U= 144.00 p= 0.065). Further examination of energy awareness scores
found that those who are unaware of the Zero Carbon Resorts Project also registered low energy awareness scores.
9. Perceptions on energy efficiency and conservation benefits, barriers and drivers
Respondents were asked to rank (1=lowest to 5=highest) general statements about: (1) economic, environmental
and social benefits of energy efficiency measures/ practices, (2) technical, technological and social barriers to the
adoption of energy conservation; as well as, (3) policy, market and social factors that may influence the rate of adoption
of energy conservation measures according to perceived importance or urgency.
9.1. Perceptions on EEC Benefits
Both Case and Control Groups ranked environmental benefit of energy conservation (P4B5) highest but they do
not share the same opinion about the rest. The Case Group ranked fair access to energy resources (P4B4) second while
the Control Group favored increased competitiveness (P4B1) in its place. The Case Group ranked contribution to the
improvement of the society through engagement and education (P4B3) third while the Control Group ranked return
on investments (P4B2) in the same place. This statement (P4B2) ranked fourth for the Case Group while social
engagement and education (P4B3) was in its place for Control Group members. Increase competitiveness (P4B1) was
ranked last among the Case Group’s priorities, while fair access to energy resources (P4B4) ranked last among
respondents from the Control Group.
Mann-Whitney U test revealed that there is a significant difference in the ranking between the Case and Control
Group only for the benefit statement on increased competitiveness (P4B1) at 0.10 level of significance ((N = 26) U =
50.00, p= 0.085). The Case Group ranked this benefit significantly higher compared to the Control Group (Mean rank
(N=26) =15.93) which indicate an internal motivation participating in EEC.
9.2. Perceptions on EEC Barriers
Both Case and Control Groups considered high cost of energy efficient devices and technology (P4BA1) as the
greatest barrier to the adoption of energy efficiency. Both groups cited the lack of knowledgeable people within the
organization (P4BA5) as the penultimate barrier. While the Case Group ranked limited access to reliable information
(P4BA2) third, the Control Group ranked lack of experts (P4BA3) the same. The Case Group ranked lack of support
from relevant decision makers (P4BA5), while the Control Group ranked limited access to information (P4BA2) fourth.
Considered least among the barriers is the lack of experts (P4BA3) for the Case Group, and lack of support from
relevant decision makers (P4BA3) for the Control Group.
Mann-Whitney U test results indicated no significant difference in the ranking between study groups for all five
barriers. However, the Control Group ranked the following higher: (a) P4BA1 high cost of energy-saving devices and
technology (Mean rank (N=44) =23.88) and P4BA3 Lack of experts/ guidance (Mean rank (N=44) =23.21). These
results indicate negative perceptions about the investment required to undertake EEC as a deterrent for non-ZCR
members.
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
9
9.3. Perceptions on EEC Drivers
In terms of what can be done to drive energy efficiency among tourist accommodation providers, opinions between
study groups vary widely. The presence of mechanisms to profit from energy efficiency programs (P4D5) gained
highest preference among respondents from the Case Group, while respondents from the Control Group believe that
the presence of government laws and regulations regarding energy usage (P4D3) will be the greatest driver towards
energy efficiency. Both groups agree that increasing cost of energy services and products will drive stakeholders to
conserve resources (P4D1) and ranked this factor second among five. For the Case group, however, service
interruption or power shortage (P4D4) is the third greatest driver for energy conservation, while for the Control Group
it is the presence of mechanisms to profit from energy efficiency programs (P4D5). Respondents from the Case Group
believe that as more operators practice energy conservation, many will follow suit (P4D3) thus band wagon effect
ranked fourth. Among members of the Control Group, service interruption or power shortage (P4D4) is the fourth
driver of energy conservation. Members of the Case Group considered the presence of government laws and
regulations regarding energy usage (P4D3) the least among the factors that could drive their sector towards energy
efficiency while for the Control Group it is the bandwagon effect (P4D4).
Mann-Whitney U Test results indicate a significant difference in the ranking between the Case and Control group
for (P4D3) presence of government laws and regulations regarding energy usage ((N = 44) U = 147.50, p= 0.075);
and (P4D5) presence of mechanism to profit from energy efficiency program ((N = 44) U = 138.50, p= 0.043) at 0.10
level of significance. The Control Group ranked the former significantly higher (Mean rank (N=44) =24.91). When
those who are unaware of the program were excluded from the unit of analysis, the results indicated significant
difference in the ranking between the Case and Control Groups only for (P4D5) presence of mechanism to profit from
energy efficiency program ((N = 26) U = 46.50, p= 0.053). The Control Group ranked this driver significantly higher
compared to the Case Group (Mean rank (N=26) =16.63). These results indicate that while there are distinct
motivators for each group, desire for profit is a distinct motivator for non-ZCR members.
10. Willingness to Participate in Energy Conservation
The respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale (1=indifferent to 5=very willing) how energy
conservation is viewed by their establishment. More than half of the respondents indicated that they are ‘very willing
to participate’- they pro-actively save energy and believe their decision to do so have an impact. Twenty respondents
chose ‘willing to participate’ as their answer; believing they conserve energy frequently. Only one respondent
characterized their company’s level of willingness as ‘neutral’ and indicated that they conserve energy whenever
possible and pass on information to others. None of the respondents chose ‘occasionally willing’ or ‘indifferent’ as
their level of awareness regarding energy conservation. In terms of distribution, ten out of 23 of those who responded
that they are ‘very willing and pro-active’ are from the Case Group while four out 20 who responded that they are
‘willing to participate’ are from also from the same group. The lone respondent who answered ‘neutral’ is from the
Control Group.
Given the respondents’ high willingness to participate in energy conservation, the study also sought to establish if
this translated to participation in EEC among local tourist accommodations. Since the ZCR Project targeted
stakeholders in Palawan as early as 2010, this initiative would have provided ample opportunity to participate in EEC.
The sixth part of the survey questionnaire inquired on: (1) whether or not the respondent is aware of the Zero Carbon
Resorts Project, as well as (2) whether their establishment joined the initiative or not. Out of 44 respondents, 26
indicated awareness of the Zero Carbon Resorts Project (60 percent). However, only 14 of these establishments (31
percent) joined the initiative. Pearson Chi-Square test result indicates that no association between the respondents’
willingness to participate in energy conservation and actual membership in the Zero Carbon Resorts Project at 0.10
level of significance (χ2 (1, N = 44) = 1.890, p = 0.169).
11. Predictors of Willingness to Participate in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Efforts
In comparing the scores of both study groups, members of the ZCR Project consistently scored better than nonmembers. However, the gap between scores in self-reported energy-saving practices between study groups is very
10
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
narrow at only 2.65 points. This gap doubles at 5.86 points in terms of energy awareness and increases still to twice
and a half at 6.29 points in terms of willingness to participate. As such, it is important to understand factors that
increase willingness to participate in EEC.
The proportional-odds cumulative logit model- a linear model describing the relationship of an ordinal categorical
response variable with other explanatory variables, was used for the purpose of seeing how well an ordinal dependent
variable (willingness to participate) can be predicted by responses to other explanatory variables such as: (a) the
energy saving practices; (b) level of energy awareness; (c) membership to the program; (d) perceived energy savings;
(e) size of the accommodation facility; as well as (f) the ranking of statements on benefits, barriers, and drivers related
to energy conservation were considered.
Among these factors, (1) energy saving practices (ESPI), and (2) level of importance given to returns on investment
as a benefit from energy efficiency and conservation (P4B2) significantly affect level of willingness to participate in
EEC. The test for the global null hypothesis based on three Chi-square tests, namely the: (1) Likelihood Ratio test, (2)
Score test and (3) Wald test conclude that at least one of these predictors can significantly explain the response variable
at 5 percent level of significance.
Results indicate that in every unit increase in the energy saving practices score (ESPI) the probability of having
higher level of willingness will increase by 12.4 percent. This confirms positive relationship between energy saving
practices and willingness to participate in energy conservation measures. This reinforce earlier findings that local
tourist accommodation providers generally exhibited high energy saving practice scores. In general, willingness to
participate in energy conservation in this sector translated into actual energy saving practices even among those who
were not members of the Zero Carbon Resorts Project.
However, for every unit increase in the ranking for returns on investment in the form of savings in utility bills
(P4B2), the probability of having higher level of willingness will decrease increase by 87.1 percent. This finding
relates to earlier response among participants that the greatest barriers to the adoption of EEC are: (1) high cost of
energy efficient devices and technology (P4BA1); as well as (2) lack of experts (P4BA3). Perceptions that significant
amount of upfront investment is required to acquire energy efficient devices and build the capacity of the staff increase
resistance among operators. Since energy savings typically accrue over the lifetime of the measures employed, risk
aversion constrain tourist accommodation providers to prioritize measures with shorter pay-back criteria or those that
require little or no investment. While tourist accommodation providers believe that increasing cost of energy services
and products will drive establishments and operators to seek more efficient ways of meeting their energy needs,
uncertainty of return on investment is a major deterrent in increasing participation among members of the hospitality
sector.
12. Summary of Findings
The study established that there is a vast uncaptured energy savings potential in Coron’s hospitality sector. Factors
that contribute to high energy expense and consumption in this sector are: (1) provisions for amenities, facilities and
support services for guests; (2) high dependence on the grid and the prevalent use of generators as alternative energy
source; (3) low penetration rate of renewable energy (RE) and energy-efficient technology; and (4) implementation
of energy management program is hampered by lack of knowledgeable personnel within organizations.
In general, there is high willingness among tourist accommodation providers to participate in energy conservation.
In order to increase participation, there is a need to address the following barriers to EEC: (1) perceived high cost of
energy efficient technology; and (2) lack of knowledge in energy management and conservation among tourist
accommodation providers.
Stakeholders perceive EEC efforts positively in terms of: (1) conserving natural tourism assets, as well as (2) return
on investments through savings in utility bills. Therefore it is important to leverage perceived benefits and market
EEC as a “future-proofing” investment.
The research also revealed that: (1) making energy conservation mandatory through the presence of rules and
regulations, and (2) providing mechanisms that will result to monetary gains for those who engage in energy
conservation are viewed as effective means of driving EEC in this sector. Finally, the study uncovered that EEC
adoption is not a mere issue of availability of technological interventions. Rather, the key lies in how decision makers
perceive and frame EEC in the context of their business and the larger issue of climate change. Overcoming social
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
11
resistance must consider such push-pull factors in mainstreaming energy efficiency among tourist accommodations
providers.
13. Unlocking Participation in Energy Efficiency and Conservation
When tapped at an optimal level, curbing energy consumption in this sector will allow tourism to grow sustainably
while mitigating climate change and preserving the fragile ecology of Coron. Such can only be gained by addressing
the core issue of risk aversion among stakeholders through the following:
 Information, education and communication (IEC)
Extensive information, education and communication (IEC) is needed to: (1) cure knowledge deficit, (2) elicit
adoption of EEC; and (3) promote behavioral change among stakeholders. Social marketing, done in a step-wise
manner, is necessary to reach out to the stakeholders’ effectively and build the capacity of local facility managers and
staff to design and implement energy management plans. The study also recognizes the need to include information
on financing schemes, incentives as well as relevant codes and standards.
 Incentives and Financing
In response to earlier findings that perceived high cost of energy efficient technology is a deterrent to the uptake of
EEC, there is a need to incentivize green retrofits. This may be done through:
1. A review and revision of relevant sections of the Municipal Tourism Code to incorporate provisions for tax
incentives as well as non-fiscal incentives (e.g. “express lane” for permits, allowable floor area ratio
adjustments, etc.);
2. The adoption of local or international standard eco-label or rating systems to aid tourists find environmentfriendly accommodations;
3. Development of a municipality- or province-wide EEC program wherein carbon credits may be collected and
sold through a third party arrangement;
4. Development of a program for recognizing and awarding high-performing establishments within the
municipality to foster implementation of energy management plans;
5. Creating a municipal tourism webpage as a venue for advertising tourist attractions, products and services as
well as provide extended marketing advantage to complying firms by highlighting their environmentallysustainable practices; and
6. Facilitate formation of funding institution/s and mechanisms to facilitate micro finance for energy-related
retrofits.
 Codes and Standards
At the national level, the passage of the National Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act will provide the impetus
for significant reduction in energy consumption as well as costly fuel imports.
The Department of Tourism (DOT) as well as the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA)
should consider the adoption of the Department of Energy (DOE) ten percent energy savings target to scale up climate
change mitigation efforts. The DOT provides the overall development framework through the Philippine Tourism
Plan and prescribes the standards for tourism-related establishments and services. Similarly, TIEZA provides
oversight functions for tourism enterprise zones. At the very least, provisions related to EEC may be incorporated
among their accreditation requirements, thus providing the minimum standard for compliance for tourism-related
establishments and developments. The DOT may also explore crafting a green labeling system for the hospitality
sector which incorporates EEC among its criteria.
Recently, the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) incorporated principles espoused by the ZCR
Project among the compliance requirements in the release of the Strategic Environmental Plan (SEP) Clearance for
Hotels and Resorts through Provincial Resolution 8831-11 (Martinez, 2013). This legal instrument may be broadened
to encompass even existing tourist accommodation establishments to make EEC mandatory in Palawan.
The development of a Municipal Tourism Master Plan that incorporates EEC as an appropriate mitigating action
against climate change will play a pivotal role as is the adoption of a Municipal Green Building Code to supplement
existing referral codes in the locality. Resolutions to supplement the Local Revenue and Incentives Code which will
encourage green investments and retrofits will go a long way in promoting EEC adoption.
12
Geomilie S. Tumamao-Guittap / Procedia Environmental Sciences 00 (2017) 000–000
 Institutional Arrangement
A multi-stakeholder partnership from the public and private sector that will drive the market toward better
management and stewardship of its energy resources is necessary in the integration of EEC into mainstream practice
in the hospitality sector.
1. National Government Agencies (NGAs) can provide general direction and prescribe the over-all framework and
policies related to EEC adoption.
2. Local Government Unit (LGU) offices can provide localized strategies, harmonize efforts among stakeholders
and create an enabling environment for the adoption of EEC.
3. Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) may create linkages among stakeholders; facilitate exchange and
dissemination of knowledge and resources, as well as encourage the adoption of energy efficiency and
conservation among constituents, and enable the development of potential arrangements for financing among
members.
4. Academic institutions can meet the urgent need for integrating environmental management, and sustainable
development into all hospitality courses and tourism-related training programs by providing a venue for training
and capacity building to interested individuals and firms as well as undertaking researches on these subjects.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Dr. Jun T. Castro and Prof. Carmeli Marie C. Chaves of UP School of Urban and
Regional Planning for their valuable inputs in this research as well as Prof. Stephen Jun V. Villejo of the UP School
of Statistics for his diligent assistance with the statistical analysis of the survey results.
References
1. Alarcon, Corrine P. representing Municipal Tourism Office of Coron (MTO). Discover Coron Presentation for The Coron Initiative 2013
Conference held on September 2013; 2013
2. Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann,
J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Summary
for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
USA; 2014
3. Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC). Decision on ERC Case 2012- 005 RC: Petition for the Approval of the Power Supply Agreement and
Amendatory Agreement and NPP True Cost generation Rate (NPP TCGR) with prayer for Provisional Approval as petitioned by Busuanga
Island Electric Cooperative, Inc. (BISELCO) and Calamian Island Power Corporation (CIPC); 2012
4. Hotel Energy Solutions (HES). Fostering Innovation to fight climate change Hotel Energy Solutions; 2011
5. Lehmann, Steffen and Robert Crocker. Designing for Zero Waste, Earthscan, New York, USA; 2012
6. Martinez, Maria Luz. Ensuring Sustainability of ZCR Initiatives in Palawan Thru the SEP Clearance System Palawan Council for Sustainable
Development’s Presentation during the 3rd Zero Carbon Resorts Conference held last April 16, 2013; 2013
7. Mc Kinsey and Company. Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the US Economy, Executive Summary; 2009
8. Municipal Planning and Development Office of Coron. Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2010-2020; 2010
9. Pew Center on Global Climate Change. Climate Change 101: Understanding and Responding to Global Climate Change; 2009
http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/Climate101-Complete-Jan09.pdf (accessed January 18, 2010)
10. Scherer, Jenna. Best Islands in the World: Readers' Choice Awards 2015; 2015 http://www.cntraveler.com/galleries/2014-10-20/top-30islands-in-the-world-readers-choice-awards-2014/1 posted on October 19, 2015 Conde Nast Traveler (accessed February 16, 2016)
11. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Green Economy Report, Chapter 8: Tourism: Investing in energy and resource efficiency;
2011
12. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN HABITAT). Sustainable Urban Energy: A Sourcebook for Asia; 2012
13. United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). From Davos to Copenhagen and Beyond: Advancing Tourism’s Response to
Climate Change; 2009 http://www.unwto.org/pdf/From_Davos_topercent20Copenhagen_beyond_UNWTOPaper_ElectronicVersion.pdf.
(accessed January 5, 2012)
14. World Tourism Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme (WTO and UNEP). Climate Change and Tourism –
Responding to Global Challenges Sustainable Development of Tourism; 2008
15. World Tourism Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme (WTO and UNEP). Tourism in the Green Economy
Background Report; 2012
16. Zero Carbon Resorts. Basic Course – Reduce Training Handbook; 2010. Zero Carbon Resorts Website
http://www.zerocarbonresorts.eu/data/Handbook_REDUCE_Basic%20Course.pdf (accessed August 5, 2014)