Review and Critical Analysis of International UHI Studies

These issues have meant that in some areas such as pavements and urban greening, policy
development is in its infancy compared to cool roofs which appears to be the most developed.
4.4.3 Policy/Strategic Assessment Literature Review
There are 24 references which discuss the use of policy and strategy as a vehicle to enforce UHI
mitigation [025, 027, 034, 040, 045, 047, 060, 061, 066, 071, 073, 074, 076, 081, 093, 101, 108, 201, 210,
211, 212, 213, 214 ,215]. Of these just under 30% emanate from LBNL [025,027,034,061,066,071,201]
and over 60% are studies focusing on North America [025, 027, 034, 061, 066, 071, 073, 074, 076,
081, 093, 101, 201, 212, 213]. Thus here we present the North American efforts and lessons
separate from the examples from the rest of the world.
15 studies examine the policy in North America and strategy efforts. The studies indicate a strong
drive across much of the stakeholder value chain with respect to addressing the UHI mitigation.
It is apparent that there have been a range of initiatives from voluntary (in the form of
demonstration projects) through to formal policy – in the form of codes and standards and often
the implementation of voluntary standards has resulted in the adoption of more formal
mandatory standards. A study conducted by LBNL in 1995 highlights the policy steps that have
to be taken in order to implement such mitigation measures and uses cool surfaces (roofs and
pavements) and shade tree programs as examples. It describes how a comprehensive program
requires seven steps outlined in [061]:
i) Creating test procedures, ratings and labels for cool materials: this seeks to rate different
paints and surface materials under a standard set of centrally controlled tests. This has
helped to separate both the high from low grade materials but also drive the market
towards researching and delivering high standard products that perform well in the
ratings. This has been successful in the US as many manufacturers have invested heavily in
achieving the ‘cool status’ for example: through the Energy Star for Roofing Products;
ii) Increasing information in the market by generating a cool materials central database
system available to all the UHI influential value chain (e.g. from architects to contractors) –
working example: the non‐profit organization Cool Roofs Rating Council (CRRC) database;
iii) Integration of cool roofs and shade trees into building energy performance standards; in
the US this has successfully been achieved in setting minimum requirements for
commercial and residential buildings through the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air‐Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE);
iv) Offering utility rebates to incentivize meeting or exceeding the performance standards;
v) Establishing well grounded information channels to distribute information at the primary
level e.g. building owners;
vi) Public facility demonstrations (leading by example from the top) – throughout the US local
governments have implemented or set in place demonstration and adaptation projects to
promote the benefits of cool materials and other mitigation initiatives (e.g. tree planting
programs); and
vii) Creating policies for the procurement of cool roofing materials by the governments from
national to local level.
Review and Critical Analysis of International UHI Studies
Page 43