Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/110693
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Building Environment and Energy Engineeringen_US
dc.creatorWong, Pen_US
dc.creatorLai, Jen_US
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-03T07:10:09Z-
dc.date.available2025-01-03T07:10:09Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/110693-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMDPI AGen_US
dc.rightsCopyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Wong, P., & Lai, J. (2025). Energy Transitions in Cities: A Comparative Analysis of Policies and Strategies in Hong Kong, London, and Melbourne. Energies, 18(1), 37 is available at https://doi.org/10.3390/en18010037.en_US
dc.subjectClimate changeen_US
dc.subjectEnergy transitionen_US
dc.subjectSustainabilityen_US
dc.subjectUrban decarbonizationen_US
dc.titleEnergy transitions in cities : a comparative analysis of policies and strategies in Hong Kong, London, and Melbourneen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume18en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/en18010037en_US
dcterms.abstractThis paper reports a comparative analysis of energy transition policies in Hong Kong, London, and Melbourne, highlighting their approaches to achieving carbon neutrality. Utilizing a qualitative research approach, the study combines desktop research and policy analysis to examine secondary data from academic literature and policy reports. A structured policy analysis was developed to compare the strategies of each city, focusing on legislative tools, regulatory mechanisms, and decarbonization goals. The findings reveal that, while all three cities aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through energy transition policies, they adopt different strategies shaped by their socio-economic contexts. Hong Kong emphasizes regulatory measures like the Buildings Energy Efficiency Ordinance, London uses market-based instruments such as carbon pricing, and Melbourne prioritizes community engagement and renewable energy integration. Despite progress, challenges remain, including compliance with standards, funding, and public awareness. Recommendations include developing benchmarking strategies, fostering public–private partnerships, and investing in education. This analysis provides actionable insights for future policy development, emphasizing adaptability and innovation in combating climate change and fostering sustainable urban environments.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationEnergies, Jan. 2025, v. 18, no. 1, 37en_US
dcterms.isPartOfEnergiesen_US
dcterms.issued2025-01-
dc.identifier.eissn1996-1073en_US
dc.identifier.artn37en_US
dc.description.validate202501 bcchen_US
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumbera3338-n01-
dc.description.fundingSourceSelf-fundeden_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
energies-18-00037.pdf731.86 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

42
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

Downloads

11
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.