Review evaluates data challenges for non-residential building energy policies in Ireland, suggesting improvements for better outcomes.
Non-residential buildings account for a significant share of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions across the EU, yet evidence-based policy development remains hindered by fragmented and non-interoperable building data systems. This study evaluates the suitability of publicly available electronic datasets for characterising Ireland’s non-residential building stock and supporting bottom-up energy modelling in the context of the recast Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD 2024/1275/EU). A systematic scoping review of national government and institutional datasets was conducted using an adapted PRISMA-ScR approach. The analysis identified the national Energy Performance Certificate database and GeoDirectory as the only datasets with sufficient scale and detail to support national non-residential stock analysis. However, substantial limitations were identified, including incompatibilities between economic activity classifications (NACE) and building energy typologies (NEAP), incomplete stock representation, and EPC-triggered sampling bias. Frequently transacted building categories such as retail and warehouses are over-represented, while public-sector, healthcare, recreational, and small service buildings remain under-represented. The findings demonstrate that the principal barrier to effective non-residential stock modelling in Ireland is not data availability, but deficiencies in data governance, interoperability, standardised building identifiers, and energy-relevant classification systems. Addressing these structural limitations will be critical for effective implementation of the EPBD and for developing reliable national building stock models. While focused on Ireland, the methodological approach and identified challenges are transferable to other EU member states.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mitra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: