Abstract
Purpose
In the era of climate change, the need to ensure that buildings are energy efficient cannot be overemphasised. Studies have shown that building retrofitting can improve energy efficiency (EE) and sustainability. There may be hindrances to retrofitting for energy efficiency. Extant literature and policy documents on Zimbabwe suggest a better framework to help stakeholders manage their existing buildings by addressing challenges and policy inconsistencies. This study appraises and critically discusses the challenges facing retrofitting Zimbabwe’s buildings for energy efficiency.
Design/methodology/approach
The research adopted a quantitative research design using a questionnaire survey distributed to the respondents knowledgeable in building retrofitting and energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. The data were analysed through various statistical approaches (descriptive and inferential). The inferential tests include the Shapiro–Wilk test, Kruskal–Wallis H-test, exploratory factor analysis and heterotrait-monotrait ratio analysis to develop the structural equation model that validated the challenges for retrofitting buildings.
Findings
The results revealed the challenges of retrofitting buildings for EE in Zimbabwe, and a structural equation model was developed that clustered the key challenges into three main groups. This includes inadequate finance to invest in energy, outdated building by-laws and the unavailability of raw materials to achieve energy efficiency.
Originality/value
By appraising the challenges facing retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe, this study provides insights into the contextual factors that can enhance energy efficiency and sustainability in other developing countries. The study’s practical implications will positively impact the Green Building Council and other stakeholders interested in improving energy efficiency in the built environment.
Keywords
Citation
Mapfumo, E.T., Emuze, F., Smallwood, J. and Ebekozien, A. (2024), "Appraising challenges facing Zimbabwe’s building retrofitting for energy efficiency using structural equation model approach", International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 76-92. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-05-2024-0105
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2024, Ericcson Tunashe Mapfumo, Fidelis Emuze, John Smallwood and Andrew Ebekozien
License
Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
1. Introduction
Globally, the construction sector, including the building industry, generates about 39% of energy and process-linked carbon emissions (International Energy Agency (IEA), 2019). Prabatha et al. (2020) reported that in 2018, 11% of emissions were linked to construction materials production and associated products. Tokede et al. (2023) highlighted that building installations and accessories create a portion of embodied energy in buildings, which has been shown to be linked with other construction related industries (de Oliveira Fernandes et al., 2021). Several studies (Costa-Carrapiço et al., 2020; Tokede et al., 2023) have shown how retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency is part of the sustainability agenda. In addition, there is need to retrofit buildings to improve energy efficiency, especially in cold climates such as the United Kingdom, and this paper argues that when it comes to places such Zimbabwe, there is need to find ways in which this can be done, taking into account the contextual factors (Heo et al., 2012; Oladokun and Aigbavboa, 2018; Costa-Carrapiço et al., 2020; Steskens et al., 2015). In their study, Oladokun and Aigbavboa (2018) emphasised how a change of mindset among stakeholders regarding retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency can enhance sustainability and save future costs related to space heating. Southern Africa is not exempted from reassessing the traditional development practices and mechanisms in energy economics; thus, there is a pressing need to retrofit buildings given the cost of constructing new buildings. This is complicated by the large existing housing stock (and buildings more generally) without energy efficiency principles considered during the design and construction phases. In Sub-Saharan Africa, Okorafor (2019) opined that energy efficiency in buildings is not a priority since the emphasis is mostly on cooling buildings, given that this is a hot climate region.
A proper understanding of retrofitting buildings is important to guide countries in retrofitting efforts. Langston et al. (2008, p. 18) make us aware that retrofitting for energy efficiency is about the “installation of an individual or multiple energy efficiency measures to an existing building.” In another context, besides improving external aesthetics and thermal comfort in buildings, there is no motivation to upgrade buildings for energy efficiency, sometimes due to the high cost of some of the technologies involved, especially if one thinks of using solar panels to improve heating or as an alternative to electricity from the grid (Steskens et al., 2015). The foregone discussion highlights the complexities of attempting to convince Southern African countries and their various stakeholders to embrace retrofitting for energy efficiency. This calls for concern and is one of the motivations for the study. When it comes to the internal conditions of buildings, there is a need to ensure that the occupants are comfortable, and this has been highlighted in the reviews of the literature as thermal comfort, which is normally measured using surveys to assess a predicted percentage of people dissatisfied (PPD) or mean vote (PMV) index (McMullan, 2007). It is also worth mentioning that thermal comfort in buildings can also be measured using a wet and bulb thermometer, comparing temperature readings and evaluating how this recorded temperature differs from the internal conditions found in building regulations guidebooks. The index is used to appraise the thermal comfort of inhabitants, using a 7-point scale, as shown in Figure 1. Table 1 also reveals the factors that affect thermal comfort in buildings and grouped (physical or personal variables). This study seeks to identify Zimbabwe’s main challenges when retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. This may be about understanding different business models that are applicable in different contexts. Prabatha et al. (2020) argue that models employed in cold climates might not work in hot climatic regions, such as in Zimbabwe, and this study sought to find some of the barriers encountered with retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency to lay the foundation to re-imagine different models that can be used in a Zimbabwean context. The evolution of the model and its validation will be reported in another paper. This paper highlights the project’s success, but the application and performance issues still need to be addressed in developing countries. This is one of the gaps (locational) this study will fill.
In Southern Africa, Aigbavboa (2013), Moschetti and Brattebo (2016), and Okorafor (2019) identified inadequate institutional framework and enabling business models as the factors hindering successful building project implementation. Failure to consider uncertainty in a project life cycle is one of the reasons why retrofitting for energy efficiency in sub-Saharan Africa is a challenge (Okorafor, 2019; Oke et al., 2024b). The absence of a framework has hindered building retrofit project implementation, thus necessitating a need to identify challenges that may hinder energy-building projects in Zimbabwe. Ncube et al. (2021) and Moyo (2020) opined that energy efficiency can improve housing stock and mitigate carbon emissions. Hence, this study uses data from a questionnaire survey to identify and evaluate Zimbabwe’s building retrofitting challenges for energy efficiency.
2. Literature review
2.1 Building retrofit
Retrofitting offers prospects to enhance structures’ energy and emission performance, especially buildings (Prabatha et al., 2020; Tokede et al., 2023). Tokede et al. (2023) described retrofitting as altering structures (buildings) to enhance their sustainability regarding carbon and emission related. Several authors have looked at the importance of retrofitting, including Jo et al. (2022), who affirmed that sustainability offers prospects for upcoming climate situations, mitigates environmental emissions, and optimises economic building advantages. Similarly, Menassa (2011) opined that retrofitting is a considerable intervention that enhances performance and enables building certainty usage over a prolonged duration. Tokede et al. (2018) make us aware that retrofit creativities help converse energy and promote building energy efficiency and sustainability. Using an example of Dutch residential buildings, Berg and Fuglseth (2018) showed the usefulness of retrofitting in reducing the environmental impact on buildings by 60%. Given the foregone discussion, it becomes clear, as acknowledged by Hasik et al. (2019), that retrofitting can be one of the ways to produce innovation in construction. Retrofitting buildings also includes exploring some of the privileges of having water and waste efficiency measures in a building (Dixon et al., 2014).
2.2 Retrofitting building in hot climates
Foruzanmehr’s study in Iran sought to understand thermal comfort in hot climate and observed that houses were not examined to confirm compliance with the state’s rules and regulations. Foruzanmehr (p. 2) found, “ …. in hot climates, without electro-mechanical cooling systems, most 20th century buildings are not suitable, even for present climatic conditions …”. What is significant in Foruzanmehr’s study is that awareness of the context is critical regarding traditional thinking approaches. Foruzanmehr’s study, to some extent, agrees with that of Konya (p. 7), who argues that “Modern dwellings have been designed largely to keep natural phenomena outside and to separate conditions indoors from outdoors as much as possible.” Being aware of the internal condition of buildings is important since it can go a long way to ensure that energy savings can be made. Eriksson et al. (2020) wrote in a Swedish context, finding that historic structure preservation can influence the energy saving potential. The foregone discussions highlight the need for policy revision to enable community transformation about retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. Besides decarbonising the built environment, upgrading buildings for energy efficiency through retrofitting can mitigate fuel poverty among building occupants. The benefits of retrofitting buildings include increased thermal comfort, occupant satisfaction, and reduced energy bills (Whitman et al., 2020).
In Zimbabwe, housing is varied, and construction workers might lack adequate training in pertinent skills, especially skills that address energy efficiency implementation. Moyo identified inadequate research skills, education, and resources as basic issues that may hinder the indigenous Zimbabwe population from participating in empirical research that would assist in gaining knowledge of how to improve household energy efficiency. Listening to the inhabitants’ opinions regarding building thermal comfort is pertinent, especially when retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. This study focuses on the survey results, which were aimed at policymakers knowledgeable about retrofitting building in Zimbabwe. The questionnaire survey was used since it gave the researchers a general idea of the opinions of the policymakers and key stakeholders were before an in-depth interview and focus group were undertaken. As such, the questionnaire survey was exploratory since no study focused on retrofitting buildings in the Zimbabwean context.
2.3 Retrofitting in Zimbabwe
Some measures to improve energy efficiency in developed countries, such as the United Kingdom (UK), are not applicable in countries like Zimbabwe, given the differences in environmental conditions (Chirisa et al., 2021). For example, the UK experiences cold winters that might sometimes result in snow and ice, which is not a frequent phenomenon in Africa. However, in Zimbabwe, there have been recent instances of snow falling; this has been attributed to the impact of climate change more globally. Being aware of contextual factors in Zimbabwe will facilitate an understanding of what needs to be put in place if buildings are to be retrofitted for energy efficiency. Gabriel and Kirkwood acknowledged that, in some developing countries, delays in project start and finish times will have an impact on completion times. Such delays are thought to be a result of inefficient transport systems, as well as lack of clear communication during retrofit projection some countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, such as Zimbabwe, “extreme climatic events such as hurricanes, prolonged droughts and floods are considered to have dramatic impacts on the unfortunate people in developed countries, but more so, on the poor as even small climatic changes can present an extreme burden by bringing hunger, disease and even death”. Extreme weather conditions also impact how buildings are constructed and what retrofit measures need to be implemented to resolve the issues and challenges described in this study. A systematic review of the literature on housing in Zimbabwe suggests that the Government of Zimbabwe and other stakeholders have yet to holistically not consider energy efficiency in buildings. If retrofitting buildings is to be successful in Africa, there is a need for government policies to reflect what is happening ‘on the ground’; this will mean revising some outdated policies and encouraging research so that policies can be changed as new evidence emerges. Policies are very important in influencing countries’ focus and informing practitioners of what must be done. Most countries in Africa have, at times, relied on expertise from the West that has been detrimental to their progress, and this has meant that some of the concepts that they have learned when implemented uncritically, have not resolved some of the challenges faced in retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency.
2.4 Challenges facing building retrofitting
The challenges of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe may hinder the vision of sustainable development in Southern Africa since the environmental conditions and challenges are similar. Aghimien et al. (2021) identified several factors as contributing to successful retrofitting programmes, such as inadequate housing plans, poor return on investment in the housing market, unavailable funds for developing outdated policies, and insufficient budget allocation for construction projects. Others are inadequate parties’ input in the planning stage, hindrances encountered in procuring land for construction projects, high cost of land, unsuitable land for development, construction professionals lacking the capacity to implement policies, and lack of awareness of energy efficiency measures. The work of Moyo (2020) and Nyoni and Bonga (2017) consistently showed how a high rise in construction materials in Zimbabwe resulted in the delay in the retrofitting of building energy efficiency, given the high cost of building materials. The excessive cost of construction raw materials was attributed to the dwindling economy and alleged past corruption. Several scholars have noted the importance of societal resilience, and among them have Zulu and Khosrowshahi (2021), Lee (2021), and Booth et al. (2021), who argued that resilience thinking makes societies better able to cope with challenges faced when retrofitting for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe and other countries more generally.
In the opinion of ZIMSTAT (2017), Zimbabwe’s increasing urban population growth at about 32% may have contributed to the housing demand-supply gap. This trend reversed during COVID-19, with people preferring rural locations (Roggema, 2019; Haupt and Azevedo, 2020). Clark et al. (2019), Ujunwa et al. (2021), and Ncube et al. (2021) found that a growing population of adult people create housing needs because of the migration from their parents’ houses to start their homes. Mavhura (2020), Ncube et al. (2021), and Kativu and Oskarsson (2021) affirmed that the housing shortage impact is putting the Zimbabwean Municipal Councils under pressure regarding the housing needs of the growing population.
3. Research method
A case study was selected as the best means to answer the research question and objectives of this study, which was focused on understanding the barriers and challenges of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. Data was then collected using a questionnaire survey (Ebekozien et al., 2023). The paradigm that guided this study was pragmatism, which uses different techniques to collect the data and answer the research questions. Quantitative data was based on the positivist paradigm, based on cause and effect. Cluster sampling was also chosen to target the Ministry of Energy and Power Development (MoPD) since it is a cluster of professionals interested in energy efficiency in buildings and other industries. It was thought the multidisciplinary approach or stakeholders of the MoPD would help to get useful information to guide the development of policies to retrofit buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe.
As stated earlier, the main study’s objective was to identify and evaluate the challenges of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. The choice of Zimbabwe is based on extant literature and policy documents that suggest the need for a better framework to help critical stakeholders manage their existing building stock by addressing challenges and policy inconsistencies in the country (Aghimien et al., 2021). By appraising the challenges facing building retrofitting for energy efficiency within the context of Zimbabwe, this study seeks to shed light on factors that enhance in energy efficiency retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in hot climate. The questionnaire survey was distributed by the gatekeeper at Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Energy and Power Development (MoEPD), who also shared it with key stakeholders involved in retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. The design of the questionnaire was undertaken after an extensive desk survey, which sought to identify some of the challenges faced by countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Given the study’s exploratory nature, it employed a positivist paradigm that believed in cause and effect. The respondents from the questionnaire were then triangulated with results from the semi-structured and focus group discussions (which will be reported in another paper).
Regarding the questionnaire design, the first section collected demographic information, capturing information such as the respondents’ years of experience, gender, and area of specialisation. To allow for inference statistics, the questions were designed using the Likert scale to give an overview of the respondents’ perceptions of what they felt were the main challenges or issues faced in energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. The researchers conducted a pilot study to ensure the efficiency and precision of the questionnaires. This aligned with Quiles et al. (2019) and Ebekozien et al. (2019), who emphasised the need for a pilot study to refine and validate the survey instruments before distributing the questionnaire. The questionnaire was then slightly modified based on the pilot study’s results to enhance the reliability and trustworthiness. The questionnaire comprised two sections (background and the section that addressed the challenges). The face-to-face, email, and Google Forms means the questionnaire administration was distributed to the gatekeeper, who then shared it with other respondents. Based on 120 possible respondents who were experts in energy efficiency policies in retrofitting buildings, based on the gatekeeper’s information due to their ease of accessibility, 56 of them were completely filled by the respondents out of a total sampling frame of 120, which was undertaken using purposive sampling technique that covered key stakeholders. This includes academia, engineering, and engineering departments involved with retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. The study achieved a response rate of 46%. This range of rates is anticipated for construction projects in Africa. A six-point Likert scale was adopted to measure the level of agreement of the identified barriers, with 5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neutral, 2 = disagree, 1 = strongly disagree, and 0 = unsure.
Also, the researchers adopted inferential statistics. Factor Analysis was thought would help to identify factors that needed to be considered when it comes to understanding the retrofitting of buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. Factor analysis (FA) was then followed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to confirm the results of the factor analysis. Various other tests were undertaken to ensure that these statistics were possible and would yield a good result. The statistical data was also used in the triangulation of the different sources of data that formed part of this study. The advantage of inferential statistics was not only in describing the responses but also in being interested in underlying motivations and getting beneath the surface regarding energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. In addition, using a questionnaire survey enabled a much higher reach to stakeholders to be undertaken relatively quickly. In addition, this study was also exploratory, giving insight into the thoughts and opinions of the respondents.
The study conducted a reliability evaluation of the study’s instrument through the calculation of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (Oke et al., 2024a). This mechanism offered an empirical perception of the internal uniformity of the questionnaire dimensions/items. An adequate Cronbach’s alpha value shows a strong level of reliability (Bujang et al., 2018; Oke et al., 2024a). It implies that the study’s instrument consistently measured the envisioned variables. In this research, 16 identified challenges were examined, and Cronbach’s alpha values ranged between 0.895 and 0.945. This signifies a high level of acceptance and reliability of the study’s instrument because the values are above the 0.7 threshold suggested by Tseng et al. (2006). The researchers examined the first phase of the questionnaire using descriptive statistical measures. Also, the data normality was evaluated using the Shapiro–Wilk test (Hanusz et al., 2016). Mean score ranking and standard deviation were used to rank challenges regarding the level of agreement.
Next, exploratory factor analysis was employed to discover items and patterns within the assembled data (Luo et al., 2019). It will aid in promoting the depth of the analysis. The researchers employed Kaiser– Meyer–Olkin (KMO) test and Bartlett’s sphericity test to enhance the collected data’s appropriateness for factor analysis. The KMO test was used to assess the sampling suitability by measuring the proportion of variance in the constructs. Bartlett’s test of sphericity assesses whether the constructs in the data set are linked to a sufficient degree to continue with factor analysis. If the p-value linked with Bartlett’s test is statistically significant (below 0.05), it is recommended that the connections between constructs are significant for factor analysis. Also, a model was developed using the structural equation model (SEM) technique to better appreciate the challenges.
4. Results
The respondents’ demographic information includes their professions, academic qualifications, membership status, and years of experience. The respondents had at least ten years of experience retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. Table 1 shows the summarised responses about the main challenges of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. Table 1 shows 15 challenges with mean scores (MS) above the midpoint of 3.00. There was a consensus among the respondents on the challenges of retrofitting building projects in Zimbabwe. The last item can be seen to be above the midpoint of 3.00 marginally. This suggests that the respondents marginally agree that this item is a challenge that influences retrofit building projects. The MS and standard deviation (SD) were calculated for each item to determine the ranks of the statements. According to the respondents, the results show that in terms of policy, there is a need to focus on energy efficiency regulations since it has a direct impact on retrofitting projects and is the highest-ranked challenge influencing retrofitting of buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe (mean = 4.45, SD = 0.76). The second-ranked challenge was limited funding from the Zimbabwean Municipality Council, which might reduce energy efficiency (mean = 4.45, SD = 1.02). Reliance on past business models being able to reduce energy efficiency in buildings was the least ranked challenge (mean = 3.14, SD = 1.23).
4.1 Results of factor analysis
This section presents findings from exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Initially, EFA was undertaken, followed by CFA to confirm the results of EFA and to take note of the key challenges faced when retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine the constructs (factors) responsible for the challenges of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. First, the researchers assessed all sixteen items (challenges); eight items were removed on account of low factor loadings (less than 0.6) and cross-loadings (ref). The remaining eight items were tested for sample adequacy and factorability using the KMO and Bartlett’s test of sphericity measures, respectively (ref). The KMO was observed to be 0.698, above the 0.6 threshold set by Kaiser. Thus, the sample was adequate for EFA. Also, regarding Bartlett’s test of sphericity, it had a p-value of 0.000, less than 0.05, showing that the items were significantly correlated. Thus, they were factorable, as presented in Table 2. Table 2 shows the rotated component matrix results of factor loadings for retrofit project challenges in Zimbabwe. The first factor, the unavailability of raw materials to achieve energy efficiency, comprised three items with factor loadings ranging from 0.778 to 0.866 and corresponding communalities ranging from 0.729 to 0.776. The second challenge was determined to be outdated buildings with factor loadings from 0.937 to 0.955 and commonalities of 0.921 and 0.924. The last challenge identified was the lack of finance to invest in energy efficiency, with factor loadings of 0.905 and 0.895, having commonalities of 0.894 and 0.867. Since the factor loadings were positive and above 0.700, the items strongly correlated to the factors they pertained to. The established factors had Cronbach alpha values greater than 0.700, as presented in Table 2, implying the underlying items showed internal consistency.
4.2 Structural equation model (SEM) in retrofit projects for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe
Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to validate the challenges established by EFA for retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. The researchers used the robust maximum likelihood (RML) estimation since the data for the study does not conform to normality, as presented in Table 3. Table 3 presents the GFI with a value of 0.944, above the minimum threshold of 90%, confirming that the retrofit project challenges captured adequate variance. The CFI and NFI had values of 1.000 and 0.943, respectively, implying that the proposed SEM adequately explains the retrofit project challenges. Moreover, the RMSEA was 0.000, less than 0.008, showing no discrepancy between the implied and observed covariance matrices indicative of good SEM. Lastly, the CMIN/DF was 0.789, less than 5, demonstrating a good SEM.
4.3 Discriminant validity in retrofit projects for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe
The researchers conducted the discriminant validity using HTMT to assess the extent to which the challenges are distinct for retrofit project challenges. Table 4 shows the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) results for the discriminant validity. The results show that the off-diagonal HTMT values ranged from 0.316 to 0.799, which is less than 0.850, proving that retrofit project challenges of lack of finance to invest in energy efficiency, outdated building by-laws and unavailability of raw materials to achieve energy efficiency are distinct thereby, enhancing their credibility. Table 5 shows the SEM in retrofit projects for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. This includes the standardized estimates, the level of significance (p-value), average variance explained (AVE), and composite reliability (CR). The first challenge shown is the unavailability of raw materials to achieve energy efficiency with four items. The factors have estimates ranging from 0.587 to 0.845, showing positive and moderate to strong correlations with the unavailability of raw materials for energy efficiency. The second challenge is outdated building by-laws, made up of two items with estimates of 1.118 and 0.728. The last challenge, the lack of finance to invest in energy efficiency, has two items with factor loadings of 0.916 and 0.684, as presented in Table 5. The AVE values were 0.682, 0.895, and 0.810 for the unavailability of raw materials to achieve energy efficiency, outdated building by-laws, and the lack of finance, respectively, to invest in energy efficiency. Since the values are above 0.5, the three challenges could adequately capture the variance in the observed items on retrofit project challenges. Thus, there was convergence validity.
Lastly, CR was assessed to determine the internal consistency in each established challenge, resulting in values ranging between 0.895 and 0.945, as presented in Table 5. Since the CR values are above the 0.7 threshold, Tseng et al. (2006) suggested, it reveals that the identified challenges had internal consistency. Figure 2 shows that the major challenges clustered from the emerged issues are the unavailability of raw materials to achieve energy efficiency, outdated by-laws, and lack of finance to invest in energy efficiency. The three clustered main challenges form part of the study’s novelties. This model emphasized the reflection of the challenges to the stakeholders regarding the red flag so that policymakers could take necessary actions to mitigate them. The findings cohere with other challenges faced by many developing countries when it comes to retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency. Thus, validating other existing findings.
5. Discussion of results
Africa has the largest growing urban population, which means that the existing buildings in urban areas also need to be upgraded to increase the thermal comfort of building occupants and to have green building standards related to energy efficiency. The negative impact of climate change has influenced local weather patterns, resulting in drought and extreme temperature, which means that existing buildings in Zimbabwe remain leaky, and cold in winter and warm in summer months. While Owning property is an aspiration for most Zimbabweans, especially those in the diaspora, Moyo highlights the high cost of buying a property in Zimbabwe, which makes it a challenge for low-income earners. Low remuneration continues to hurt how people adopt energy-efficient retrofit solutions, and this must be considered by policymakers since energy-efficient buildings do cost money. In addition, the aftermath of COVID-19 has adversely affected the health and well-being of construction workers, resulting in long time off work. COVID-19 might have revealed to the Zimbabwean population the need to develop homegrown solutions to their challenges. Similarly, considering the circumstances, the challenge of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency needs a home-grown solution, considering local environmental conditions and context. Figure 2 findings, especially the three clustered challenges, disagree with Oke et al. (2024b), who identified the criteria driving energy efficiency adoption in Nigeria’s context. They identified financial, technological, government, behavioural, environmental, and social-related issues. Also, the findings slightly disagree with Eriksson et al. (2020), who opined that energy renovation approaches need to consider the life cycle cost of buildings. In Zimbabwe, the challenge has always been some of the buildings were constructed with old building bylaws, and the challenge is not only about retrofitting. Still, it is about actually demolishing the building to build energy-efficient building.
As such, the study’s results largely agree with Matamanda et al. (2022), who advocate for the Zimbabwean government and its various stakeholders to prioritise increasing their housing stock to accommodate its increasing population. Only by constructing new buildings that are energy efficiency can the government of Zimbabwe and its key stakeholders hope to create a green revolution in Zimbabwe. Trying to upgrade for energy efficiency can work with some buildings, but given the construction of some buildings and their state, upgrading will not be worthwhile in the long run. Hence, the need for new energy-efficient buildings is an essential finding that will aid policymakers and building professionals in embarking on a nationwide housing development. One thing to bear in mind is to ensure that the new housing being constructed is energy efficient, even though the cost of raw materials continues to be in foreign currency (such as US dollars), thus creating a situation where only those who earn in US dollars can afford to retrofit for energy efficiency. The outcome of this study as well is that given the contextual factors in Zimbabwe, there has to be an impetus to think of indigenous ways of constructing buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe using easily available materials, learning from the Zimbabwean ancestors, such as those who built the Great Zimbabwe. This drive to develop indigenous methodologies and use of local building materials provides an opportunity for the Ministry of Higher Education in Zimbabwe to revise and develop curriculum at polytechnical colleges and university level to encourage critical thinking and for a focus to be made on green buildings (sustainable buildings) and retrofit measures for energy efficiency. Such conceptualisation highlights and supports the work of Chirikure, who is a proponent of “taking the university to the village,” which to some extent makes it plain that knowledge (in this case about retrofit buildings for energy efficiency must be made easily available even to grandparents or those in rural parts of Zimbabwe. One important issue to remember is the medium in which this knowledge is shared and the language used. This calls for using Ndebele and Shona, among many others, which are widely used as vernacular languages. This will increase the impact of the knowledge on the local community as opposed to storing it in journals or other scholarly publications.
A re-look at the history of the pre-colonial times does show that the ancestors of the Zimbabwean people believed to have built Great Zimbabwe, coming from Mapungubwe, were aware of the energy efficiency of buildings, based on some of the monuments that they constructed, which required precision, to some extent showing that perhaps they were skilled in geometry principles. Some higher education institutions have started to conduct energy research, and the MoPD needs to do more in funding and encouraging such research activities. In addition, this will also mean the MoPD taping into the talent of its diaspora community. This study implies a need for awareness raising when it comes to retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe, as well as assessing the resilience of buildings for future use. Regarding the ongoing review of the energy policies by the Ministry of Energy, there is a need to focus on renewable technologies, wholesale use of affordable solar panels, solar geysers, and rural electrification programmes emphasising energy efficiency, as well as introducing assessment criteria to measure the effectiveness of these approaches. The essence is to promote energy efficiency retrofits in Zimbabwe’s buildings.
This study also highlighted the need for the Zimbabwe construction industry to look at the building holistically, considering its thermal performance and the fabric elements, such as windows, floors, and roof structures. For instance, considering if secondary- or double-glazed windows can be used and taking note of their contribution to energy efficiency in buildings when compared to single-glazing, which has historically been used, this will be critical, especially during cold weather months. However, it is also important that the cost of purchasing such windows can be discouraging for locals. As noted in the study, the cost of construction raw materials continues to be prohibited and policymakers can contribute to energy efficiency in buildings by encouraging local institutions to focus on the internal condition of buildings, including a focus on making some of the fabric elements such as windows and figuring out ways to manufacture/make them use locally available materials such as using oak trees. This may mean departing from specifications from the Western world and considering different window sizes appropriate to local housing standards. This could be a study on its own, but it would highlight another interesting avenue for further study. Another thing that this study has highlighted is that fuel poverty from leaky windows and roofs has primarily affected the health and well-being of Indigenous Zimbabweans, which has been exacerbated by high inflation rates, which has increased the cost of living, making it a challenge for occupants of buildings in Zimbabwe to achieve thermal comfort. This study implies that it reveals the need to pay attention to this area, which has not been looked at before due to financial constraints and other pressures from the government. However, suppose Zimbabwe is to become a middle-income economy by 2030; in that case, there is a need for new ways of thinking to be adopted to ensure the health and well-being of its people through retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency.
6. Conclusion
This study presented the challenges of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency in Zimbabwe. The findings suggest that financial challenges are a major barrier since they prohibit construction professionals from procure necessary construction materials for energy efficiency housing. Despite the challenges encountered when retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency, the findings make us aware of an opportunity to learn from the past and to re-imagine solutions that can be aimed at improving the internal condition of buildings in Zimbabwe. The findings suggest a need for the government of Zimbabwe and the community at large to think of green buildings through education so that they can retrofit buildings for energy efficiency and create sustainable communities. Given the involvement of stakeholders in the study as respondents, the study reinforced the view that energy-efficient buildings also contribute to the health and well-being of the nation. This study has shown that retrofitting for energy efficiency of buildings in Zimbabwe is evolving as new information is being discovered from research.
The study advocates community projects where building retrofitting occurs for the whole community. Also, affording the indigenous Zimbabweans more awareness of energy efficiency measures to improve the thermal performance of their dwelling. While this is easier said than done, it is essential to realise that construction projects are complex, and there is a need to pay attention to the context in which the building is situated since this will determine its resilience. Policies relating to energy efficiency tend to focus on mitigating gas emissions, especially carbon emissions. Still, the study highlights the need to consider alternative solutions to Zimbabweans challenges. Traditional cooking methods that rely on firewood do answer the heating needs, and there will be a need to consider alternative energy sources for heating and cooking. This means that the policies developed should be feasible with a focus on African context settings (such as Zimbabwe); otherwise, they will not be followed and will not be long-lasting. The study has highlighted the need for future studies to consider the materials used to make windows, which should be sourced locally through intensive research to encourage Zimbabwean people to embrace indigenous ways of constructing buildings for energy efficiency. There has been a focus on renewable technologies, such as solar panels, solar geysers, and rural electrification programmes in Zimbabwe, and these solutions have been effective to some extent. However, this study has also shown the need to focus on the physics of buildings (internal condition), which has been neglected, and this could be enhanced through thinking of ways to better insulate fabric elements such as walls, roofs, and windows. As such, this paper contributes to learning, teaching, research, and practice in the Zimbabwean construction industry.
Figures
Figure 1
Thermal comfort index
Figure 2
Structural equation model to highlight key challenges facing energy efficiency in Zimbabwe’s retrofitting buildings
Summary of responses relating to the main challenges
| Mean | Standard deviation | Rank | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strongly disagree …... Strongly agree | |||||||||
| Unsure | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||||
| Limited funding from Zimbabwean Municipality Council can reduce energy efficiency (EE) | 0 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 23 | 66 | 4.45 | 1.02 | 1 |
| EE is important in retrofitting projects | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 38 | 54 | 4.45 | 0.76 | 2 |
| Lack of research | 0 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 34 | 59 | 4.43 | 0.97 | 3 |
| Energy efficient retrofit reduces carbon emissions from buildings | 4 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 41 | 45 | 4.32 | 0.87 | 4 |
| Raw Materials support can improve energy efficiency | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 34 | 50 | 4.32 | 0.99 | 5 |
| Energy efficient retrofit projects should ensure that buildings are thermally comfortable for occupants (not too cold or hot) | 0 | 2 | 0 | 9 | 48 | 41 | 4.29 | 0.78 | 6 |
| Technical knowledge support can improve energy efficiency | 0 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 46 | 43 | 4.21 | 1.00 | 7 |
| Energy retrofit of buildings reduce water and energy consumption | 5 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 34 | 43 | 4.20 | 1.05 | 8 |
| Energy efficient retrofit of buildings is scarce in Zimbabwe | 2 | 2 | 11 | 11 | 32 | 43 | 4.14 | 1.06 | 9 |
| Limited use of existing procedures on the internet of things (IoT) | 4 | 2 | 11 | 7 | 34 | 43 | 4.14 | 1.06 | 10 |
| Building Byelaws are a barrier EE | 4 | 5 | 11 | 5 | 46 | 29 | 3.88 | 1.13 | 11 |
| Western business models cannot solve Zimbabwean problems | 4 | 9 | 7 | 14 | 32 | 34 | 3.84 | 1.27 | 12 |
| Building performance standards and regulations are barriers to EE | 4 | 9 | 7 | 13 | 45 | 23 | 3.71 | 1.19 | 13 |
| Underutilisation of appropriate business models | 4 | 4 | 11 | 16 | 54 | 13 | 3.66 | 0.98 | 14 |
| There is complexity inZimbabwean retrofit projects | 14 | 5 | 16 | 16 | 32 | 16 | 3.54 | 1.13 | 15 |
| Reliance on past business models can reduce energy efficiency in buildings | 5 | 14 | 18 | 14 | 43 | 5 | 3.14 | 1.23 | 16 |
Source(s): Authors’ work
Rotated matrix of the established challenges in retrofit projects
| Factors | Items | Factor loading | Communalities | Cronbach alpha |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unavailability of raw materials to achieve EE | Underutilisation of appropriate business models | 0.866 | 0.776 | 0.841 |
| ER can reduce water and energy consumption | 0.840 | 0.764 | ||
| Government support through raw materials | 0.819 | 0.809 | ||
| Limited use of existing procedures on the internet | 0.778 | 0.729 | ||
| Outdated building by-laws | Appropriateness of building performance standards | 0.955 | 0.921 | 0.915 |
| Obsolete retrofit by-laws | 0.937 | 0.924 | ||
| The lack of finance to invest in EE | Lack of research | 0.905 | 0.894 | 0.916 |
| Limited funding | 0.895 | 0.867 |
Source(s): Authors’ work
Model fit indices for the SEM
| Index | GFI | CFI | NFI | RMSEA | CMIN/DF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cut off value (x) | x ≥ 0.900 | x ≥ 0.900 | x ≥ 0.900 | x ≤ 0.08 | <5.000 |
| Final model | 0.944 | 1.000 | 0.943 | 0.000 | 0.789 |
Source(s): Authors’ work
Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)
| Retrofit project challenges | Lack of finance to invest in EE | Outdated building by-laws | Unavailability of raw materials to achieve EE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lack of finance to invest in EE | 0.826 | ||
| Outdated building by-laws | 0.422 | 0.946 | |
| Unavailability of raw materials to achieve EE | 0.799 | 0.316 | 0.900 |
Source(s): Authors’ work
SEM for the challenges in retrofit projects in Zimbabwe
| Factors | Items | Estimate | p-value | AVE | CR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unavailability of raw materials to achieve EE | Raw Materials support can improve energy efficiency | 0.845 | 0.682 | 0.896 | |
| Limited use of existing procedures on the internet of things (IoT) | 0.689 | *** | |||
| Energy retrofit of buildings reduce water and energy consumption | 0.587 | *** | |||
| Underutilisation of appropriate business models | 0.689 | *** | |||
| Outdated building by-laws | Building by-laws are a barrier to EE | 1.118 | *** | 0.895 | 0.945 |
| Building performance standards and regulations are barriers to EE | 0.728 | ||||
| The lack of finance to invest in EE | Lack of research | 0.916 | *** | 0.810 | 0.895 |
| Limited funding reduces energy efficiency (EE) | 0.864 |
Note(s): Key *** means it is significant at 0.05% significance level
Source(s): Authors’ work
References
Aghimien, D.O., Ikuabe, M., Aigbavboa, C., Oke, A. and Shirinda, W. (2021), “Unravelling the factors influencing construction organisations' intention to adopt big data Analytics in South Africa”, Construction Economics and Buildings, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 262-281, doi: 10.5130/ajceb.v21i3.7634.
Aigbavboa, C. (2013), An Integrated Beneficiary Centred Satisfaction Model for Publicly Funded Housing Schemes in South Africa, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, PhD.
Berg, F. and Fuglseth, M. (2018), “Life cycle assessment and historic buildings: energy- efficiency refurbishment versus new construction in Norway”, Journal of Architectural Conservation, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 152-167, doi: 10.1080/13556207.2018.1493664.
Booth, C.A., Rasheed, S., Mahamadu, A., Horry, R., Manu, P.A., Awuah, K.G.B., Aboagye-Nimo, E. and Georgakis, P. (2021), “Insights into public perceptions of earthship buildings as alternative homes”, Buildings, Vol. 11 No. 9, pp. 1-15, doi: 10.3390/buildings11090377.
Bujang, M.A., Omar, E.D. and Baharum, N.A. (2018), “A review on sample size determination for Cronbach's alpha test: a simple guide for researchers”, Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 85-99, doi: 10.21315/mjms2018.25.6.9.
Chirisa, I., Mavhima, B., Nyevera, T., Chigudu, A., Makochekanwa, A., Matai, J., Masunda, T., Chandaengerwa, E.K., Machingura, F., Moyo, S., Chirisa, H., Mhloyi, M., Murwira, A., Mhandara, L., Katsande, R., Muchena, K., Manjeya, E., Nyika, T. and Mundau, L. (2021), “The impact and implications of Covid-19: reflections on the Zimbabwean society”, Social Sciences and Humanities Open, Vol. 4, 100183, doi: 10.1016/j.sscho.2021.1000183.
Clark, V.R., Vidal, J.D. Jr, Grundy, I.M., Fakarayi, T., Childes, S.I., Barker, N.P. and Linder, H.P. (2019), “Bridging the divide between intuitive social-ecological value and sustainability in the Manica Highlands of Southern Africa (Zimbabwe-Mozambique)”, Ecosystem Services, Vol. 39, pp. 1-17, doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100999.
Costa-Carrapiço, I., Raslan, R. and González, J.N. (2020), “A systematic review of genetic algorithm-based multi-objective optimisation for building retrofitting strategies towards energy efficiency”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 210, 109690, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109690.
de Oliveira Fernandes, M.A., Keijzer, E., van Leeuwen, S., Kuindersma, P., Melo, L., Hinkema, M. and Gutierrez, K.G. (2021), “Material-versus energy-related impacts: analysing environmental trade-offs in building retrofit scenarios in the Netherlands”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 231, 110650, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110650.
Dixon, T., Britnell, J. and Watson, G.B. (2014), “‘City-wide’or ‘city-blind’? Emergent retrofit practices in the UK commercial property sector”, available at: https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/35596/ (accessed 20 June 2022).
Ebekozien, A., Abdul-Aziz, A.-R. and Jaafar, M. (2019), “Housing finance inaccessibility for low-income earners in Malaysia: factors and solutions”, Habitat International, Vol. 87, pp. 27-35, doi: 10.1016/j.habitantint.2019.03.009.
Ebekozien, A., Aigbavboa, C., Samsurijan, M.S., Duru, O.S. and Amadi, C.G. (2023), “Moderating effect of Nigerian government policy support on the relationship between project management framework and emerging construction contractors' sustainability”, International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 269-289, doi: 10.1108/IJBPA-01-2023-0007.
Eriksson, P., Milić, V. and Brostrom, T. (2020), “Balancing preservation and EE in building stocks”, International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 356-373, doi: 10.1108/IJBPA-02-2019-0025.
Hanusz, Z., Tarasinska, J. and Zielinski, W. (2016), “Shapiro–Wilk test with known mean”, REVSTAT-Statistical Journal, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 89-100.
Hasik, V., Escott, E., Bates, R., Carlisle, S., Faircloth, B. and Bilec, M.M. (2019), “Comparative whole-building life cycle assessment of renovation and new construction”, Building and Environment, Vol. 161, 106218, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106218.
Haupt, B. and Azevedo, L. (2020), “Crisis communication planning and non-profit organizations”, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 163-178, doi: 10.1108/dpm-06-2020-0197.
Heo, Y., Choudhay, R. and Augenbroe, G.A. (2012), “Calibration of building energy models for retrofit analysis under uncertainty”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 47, pp. 550-560, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.12.029.
IEA (2019), Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a Zero-Emission, Efficient and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector, International Energy Agency, UNEP, Switzerland, available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-status-report-for-buildings-and-construction-2019
Jo, H.H., Nam, J., Choi, J., Yang, S., Kang, Y. and Kim, S. (2022), “Building retrofit technology strategy and effectiveness evaluation for reducing energy use by indoor air quality control”, Building and Environment, Vol. 216, 108984, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.108984.
Kativu, S.N. and Oskarsson, P. (2021), “Our own land is making us beggars: understanding experiences of governed, mine-side communities in Mutoko district in Zimbabwe”, The Extractive Industries and Society, Vol. 8, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1016/j.exis.2021.101003.
Langston, C., Wong, F.K.W., Hui, E.C.M. and Shen, L.Y. (2008), “Strategic assessment of building adaptive reuse opportunities in Hong Kong”, Building and Environment, Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 1709-1718, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2007.10.017.
Lee, H. (2021), “Changes in workplace practices during Covid-19 pandemic: the role of emotion, psychological safety and organisational support”, Journal of organisational effectiveness: People and Performance, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 97-128, doi: 10.1108/joepp-06-2020-0104.
Luo, L., Arizmendi, C. and Gates, K.M. (2019), “Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) programs in R”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 819-826, doi: 10.1080/10705511.2019.1615835.
Matamanda, A.R., Chirisa, I., Rammile, S. and Marais, M. (2022), “Towards sustainable policies for housing and technology in Zimbabwe”, in Housing and Technology: Special Focus on Zimbabwe, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 95-110.
Mavhura, E. (2020), “Dam induced displacement and resettlement: reflections from Tokwe-Murkorsi flood disaster, Zimbabwe”, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 44, 101407, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101407.
McMullan, R. (2007), Environmental Science in Building, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Menassa, C.C. (2011), “Evaluating sustainable retrofits in existing buildings under uncertainty”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 43 No. 12, pp. 3576-3583, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.09.030.
Moschetti, R. and Brattebo, H. (2016), “Sustainable business model for deep energy retrofitting of buildings: state-of-the-art and methodological approach”, Energy Procedia, Vol. 96, pp. 435-445, doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.174.
Moyo, T. (2020), “Integrating sustainability dimensions into construction labour productivity determinants in Zimbabwe”, PhD Thesis, East London, Nelson Mandela University.
Ncube, A., Matsika, R., Mangori, L. and Ulgiati, S. (2021), “Moving towards resource efficiency and circular economy in the brick manufacturing in Zimbabwe”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 281, 125238, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1016/j.clepro.2020.125238.
Nyoni, T. and Bonga, W.G. (2017), “An empirical analysis of the determinants of private investment in Zimbabwe”, Dynamic Research Journals Journal of Economics and Finance (DRJ – JEF), Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 38-54.
Oke, E.A., Aliu, J., Ehiosun, U.L., Ebekozien, A. and Rotimi, A.A. (2024a), “From hurdles to heights: blueprint for tackling distributed ledger technology challenges in the construction sector of a developing economy”, Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, doi: 10.1108/JFMPC-08-2023-0055.
Oke, E.A., Aliu, J., Ebekozien, A., Akinpelu, M.T., Olatunde, M.T. and Ogunsanya, A.O. (2024b), “Strategic drivers for the deployment of energy economics principles in the developing construction industry: a Nigerian perspective”, Environmental Progress and Sustainable Energy, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 1-16, doi: 10.1002/ep.14351.
Okorafor, C. (2019), “Retrofitting to reduce carbon emissions from existing buildings in Bloemfontein, South Africa”, Doctor of Engineering Free State: Central University of Technology.
Oladokun, M. and Aigbavboa, C.O. (2018), Simulation-Based Analysis of Energy and Carbon Emissions in the Housing Sector: A System Dynamic Approach, Green Energy and Technology, Springer, London.
Prabatha, T., Hewage, K., Karunathilake, H. and Sadiq, R. (2020), “To retrofit or not? Making energy retrofit decisions through life cycle thinking for Canadian residences”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 226, 110393, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110393.
Quiles, N.N., McCullough, A.K. and Piao, L. (2019), “Validity and reliability of the exercise vital sign questionnaire in an ethnically diverse group: a pilot study”, Journal of Primary Care and Community Health, Vol. 10, 2150132719844062, doi: 10.1177/2150132719844062.
Roggema, R. (2019), “Towards sustainable cities: about redundancy, voids and the potentials of the land”, Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 283-306, doi: 10.1108/sasbe-07-2019-0092.
Steskens, P., Van Hellemont, Y., Roels, S. and Van Den Bossche, N. (2015), “A decision-making tool for the energy efficient refurbishment of residential buildings”, Energy Procedia, Vol. 78, pp. 997-1002, doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.043.
Tokede, O.O., Love, P.E. and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D.D. (2018), “Life cycle option appraisal in retrofit buildings”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 178, pp. 279-293, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.08.034.
Tokede, O., Boggavarapu, M.K. and Wamuziri, S. (2023), “Assessment of building retrofit scenarios using embodied energy and life cycle impact assessment”, Built Environment Project and Asset Management, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 666-681, doi: 10.1108/BEPAM-07-2022-0103.
Tseng, W.-T., Dörnyei, Z. and Schmitt, N. (2006), “A new approach to assessing strategic learning: the case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition”, Applied Linguistics, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 78-102, doi: 10.1093/applin/ami046.
Ujunwa, A.I., Ujunwa, A. and Okoyeuzu, C.R. (2021), “Rethinking African globalization agenda: lessons from COVID-19”, Research in Globalisation, Vol. 3, pp. 1-6.
Whitman, C.J., Prizeman, O., Walker, P. and Gwilliam, J.A. (2020), “Heritage retrofit and cultural empathy; a discussion of challenges regarding the energy performance of historic UK timber-framed dwellings”, International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 386-404, doi: 10.1108/IJBPA-02-2019-0023.
ZIMSTAT (2017), “Inter-censal demographic Survey”, Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency, Harare, p. 192, available at: http://www.zimstat.co.zw/sites/default/files/img/ICDS_2017.pdf
Zulu, S. and Khosrowshahi, F. (2021), “A taxonomy of digital leadership in the construction industry”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 1-14, doi: 10.1080/01446193.2021.1930080.
Further reading
Ahmed, A., Mateo-Garcia, M., Arewa, A.O. and Caratella, K. (2021), “Integrated performance optimization of higher education buildings using low-energy renovation process and user engagement”, Energy, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 1-23, doi: 10.3390/en14051475.
Aliu, J., Agbaje, D., Oke, A. and Ebekozien, A. (2024), “Driving forces behind the adoption of IEQ principles in building design: evidence from Nigerian quantity surveying firms”, International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, doi: 10.1108/IJBPA-11-2023-0163.
Chipango (2020), “Re-theorising the relationship between electricity scarcity and social injustice: evidence from Zimbabwe”, Journal of Poverty, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 99-118.
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to the respondents for providing scholarly contributions to enhance the findings of this paper. Also, the authors appreciate the comments, suggestions, and recommendations provided by the anonymous reviewers, which helped hone and strengthen the quality of this manuscript during the blind peer-review process.
Funding: Financial support from the Department of Construction Management, Nelson Mandela University, South Africa.