BARRIERS TO PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES TO SMIs IN ASIA

BARRIERS
TO PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENT AND
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES TO SMIs IN ASIA

BARRIERS
TO PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENT AND
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES TO SMIs IN ASIA
S. Kumar C. Visvanathan Sizhen Peng R. Rudramoorthy Alice B. Herrera Gamini Senanayake Ly Dinh Son
 ARRPEEC

The Asian Regional Research Programme in Energy, Environment and Climate (ARRPEEC) is organised
as a regional network involving 22 national research institutes from China, India, Indonesia, Philippines,
Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. ARRPEEC is funded by the Swedish International Development
Cooperation Agency (Sida) and coordinated by the Asian Institute of Technology. The first and second
phases of ARRPEEC started in 1995 and 1999.

ARRPEEC’s third phase began in 2002 and involves four regional research projects:

1. Biomass Energy in Asia: Assessment and Strategy Formulation

2. Small and Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy, Environment and Climate Interrelation
(SMIs in Asia)
3. Strategies for Promotion of Energy Efficient and Cleaner Technologies in the Urban
Transport System
4. Strategies for Promotion of Energy Efficient and Cleaner Technologies in the Power Sector.

The broad objectives of ARRPEEC are:

• Production of high quality policy oriented outputs in the selected areas of energy,
environment and climate research.
• Capacity mobilisation and enhancement at NRI level through project level joint activities
and fellowships.
• Linkage of project level activities in the participating countries with national, regional and
global initiatives for reducing GHG and other hazardous emissions.
• Dissemination results of the programme among policy personnel with a view to creating
an impact on policy making.

Details regarding ARRPEEC and its publications are available at www.arrpeec.ait.ac.th

SMIs in Asia
Small and Medium scale Industries in Asia (SMIs in Asia) is one of the projects under ARRPEEC. It was
aimed at studying five SMI sectors :- brick/tiles/ceramic, desiccated coconut, foundry, tea and textiles -
in China, India, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam with the following objectives:

· Greenhouse gas emission estimation

· Review of barriers inhibiting adoption of energy efficient and environmentally sound
technologies (E3STs)
· Techno economic assessment of E3STs

The participating institutions of SMIs in Asia project are

• Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand

• Center for Environmentally Sound Technology Transfer, Beijing, China
• PSG College of Technology and Industrial Institute, Coimbatore, India
• Industrial Technology Development Institute, Metro Manila, Philippines
• Industrial Services Bureau of North Western Province, Kurunegala, Sri Lanka
• Consulting Center for Cooperative Promotion and Capacity Building, Hanoi, Vietnam
Learn more about SMIs in Asia projects and publications at
www.serd.ait.ac.th/smi2/smi/roadmap
Barriers
to Promoting Energy Efficient and
Environmentally Sound Technologies
to SMIs in Asia

S. Kumar
C. Visvanathan
Sizhen Peng
R. Rudramoorthy
Alice B. Herrera
Gamini Senanayake
Ly Dinh Son
Barriers
to Promoting Energy Efficient and
Environmentally Sound Technologies
to SMIs in Asia

PUBLISHED BY
School of Environment, Resources and Development
Asian Institute of Technology
PO Box 4, Klong Luang
Pathum Thani 12120
Thailand
Fax: (66) 2 524 5439
Email: kumar@ait.ac.th and visu@ait.ac.th

DISCLAIMER
Neither the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) nor the Asian
Institute of Technology (AIT) and its partners, the National Research Institutes of the
study countries, make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assume any legal liability for
the accuracy or completeness of any information, apparatus, products, or represents that its
use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any trademark or
manufacturers or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation,
or favoring by Sida or AIT.

ISBN: 974-8208-60-5
600 copies

 Asian Institute of Technology, 2005

Printed in Thailand
Project Team
Principal Investigators

Dr. S. Kumar, Professor, Energy Field of Study, School of Environment, Resources and
Development, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand (kumar@ait.ac.th)

Dr. C. Visvanathan, Professor, Environmental Engineering and Management Field of Study,

School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology,
Thailand (visu@ait.ac.th)

National Research Institute (NRI) Team Leaders

Dr. Sizhen, Peng, Director, Center for Environmentally Sound Technology Transfer,
Administrative Center for China’s Agenda 21, Beijing, China (pengsz@acca21.org.cn)

Dr. R. Rudramoorthy, Professor, Energy Engineering Department, PSG College of

Technology and Industrial Institute, Coimbatore, India (rudra@mail.psgtech.ac.in)

Dr. Alice B. Herrera, Fuel and Energy Division, Industrial Technology Development Institute,
Department of Science and Technology, Metro Manila, Philippines (aherrera@dost.gov.ph)

Mr. Gamini Senanayake, Director, Industrial Services Bureau of North Western Province,
Kurunegala, Sri Lanka (gaminisn@isb.lk)

Mr. Ly Dinh Son, Director, Consulting Center for Cooperative Promotion and Capacity
Building, Hanoi, Vietnam (cbcvietnam@hn.vnn.vn)

Research Staff
Mr. Aruna Manipura (March 2002 - December 2003)
Ms. Priya Ambashankar (December 2003 - August 2004)
Mr. Prajapati Shapkota (September 2003 - November 2004)
Mr. Prantik Bordoloi (Since May 2004)

Research Fellows
Mr. I.S.B.P. Ratnakumara (June 2004)
Mr. Oscarlito Malvar (June 2004)
Mr. R. Kannan (March - May 2005)
 Preface
The Asian Regional Research Programme on
Energ y, Environment and Climate
(ARRPEEC) funded by Swedish
International Development Cooperation
Agency (Sida) and coordinated by Asian
Institute of Technology (AIT), is aimed at
policy-oriented research in selected areas of
energy, environment and climate change.
Other objectives include capacity
mobilization and enhancement of the
participating research institutions and linkage
of the project activities with national,
regional and global initiatives for reducing
greenhouse gases and other hazardous
emissions. Small and Medium Scale
Industries in Asia (SMI in Asia) project is
one of the regional research projects under
ARRPEEC and involves the following
research institutions: Center for
Environmentally Sound Technolog y
Transfer, China; PSG College of Technology
and Industrial Institute, India; Industrial
Services Bureau of North Western Province,
Sri Lanka; Industrial Technolog y
Development Institute, Philippines; and
Consulting Center for Cooperative
Promotion and Capacity Building, Vietnam.
Phase I of ARRPEEC focused on the
assessment, adoption and propagation of
energy efficient and environmentally sound
technologies (E3STs) among the selected
developing countries, (China, India,
Philippines and Sri Lanka) and a cross
country analysis was made on large industry
sectors representing steel, cement and pulp
& paper.
In phase II, the focus was narrowed down to
SMIs in participating countries, with the
IV
addition of Vietnam. Phase II analyzed the
energy and environmental issues of the
desiccated coconut, tea, foundry & metal
casting, textile, and brick, tile & ceramic
sectors and studied the policy issues to
promote E3STs concerning the above sectors
in these participating countries.
The current phase, as a continuation from
Phase II, addressed the following issues for
the same sectors as in Phase II:
• Estimation of the greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions in selected SMIs
• Study and prioritization of barriers that
inhibit the promotion of E3STs in SMIs
• Techno-economic evaluation of E3STs
available for mitigating GHG emissions,
improving energy efficiency and abating
environmental pollution
This report discusses the availability, degree
of impedance, and provides a comparison
of barriers inhibiting the promotion of
E3STs for the selected sectors based on the
studies carried out in the study countries.
Ranking the barriers from the perspective of
industry personnel and policy personnel has
been done and recommendations are made
to incorporate the mechanisms to remove
these barriers while formulating national
policies for promoting the use of E3STs in
SMIs.
Documentary research indicates that no
previous studies had been carried out with a
specific focus on SMIs and E3STs. Therefore,
this report will act as a start up document
for providing the impetus to further remove
barriers that inhibit the promotion of
environmentally sound energy technologies.

We would like to acknowledge the support

of Mr. Ar una Manipura, Ms. Priya
Ambashankar, Mr. Prajapati Shapkota and
Mr. Prantik Bordoloi, Research Associates
of SMI Asia Project of the School of
Environment Resources and Development
of the Asian Institute of Technology,
Thailand; and Research Fellows Mr. I.S.B.P.
Ratnakumara, Mr. Oscarlito Malvar and Mr.
R. Kannan, who contributed to this study.

The financial support of the sponsor, Swedish

International Development Cooperation
Agency (Sida), is gratefully acknowledged.
We would like to thank Dr. Gity Behravan,
Senior Research Advisor, Sida, without
whose support and guidance this study could
not have been carried out.

S. Kumar
C. Visvanathan
Sizhen Peng
R. Rudramoorthy
Alice B. Herrera
Gamini Senanayake
Ly Dinh Son

September 2005

V
 Executive Summary
The contribution of SMIs to the national
economies of the selected countries is
significant. The energy and environmental
performance of SMIs, however, is poor. SMIs
contribute 7-9% to the national GHG
inventories in the study countries, in addition
to significant environmental pollution from
wastewater and solid wastes. Because they
face a number of barriers, the use of energy
efficient and environmentally sound
technologies (E3STs) is limited to a few
demonstration projects.
This report presents the results of a study
carried out to identify the barriers faced by
SMIs for E3ST application and their
prioritization. This is expected to assist policy
makers develop mechanisms for the removal
of these barriers by formulation of suitable
policies focused on SMIs.
Views regarding the barriers to promote
E3STs vary amongst the SMI stakeholders
i.e., policy makers, SMI management,
representatives from financial institutions
and technocrats. The study has found that
the most significant barriers are financial and
policy barriers. The degree of significance
varies from country to country.
The most significant barrier in India, Sri Lanka
and the Philippines is the high cost of E3STs;
in China it is the lack of financial incentives;
and in Vietnam it is the management’s fear
of the high cost of production due to E3STs.
In none of the countries is the non-
availability or the lack of technical or
managerial skill seen as a major barrier for
adoption of E3STs.
VI
In China, the lack of financial and fiscal
incentives such as tax exemptions or
subsidies for installation of E3STs is an
important barrier. Weak enforcement of
environmental regulation is also an important
barrier.
In India, the high capital cost of E3STs and
poor returns are identified as important
barriers. SMI management appears to be
satisfied with their current processes and
technologies and are wary of adopting new
technologies. Their investment priority is for
expansion of production capacity rather than
improving technologies.
In the Philippines, high capital cost of E3STs
and difficulties in accessing finance are
identified as important barriers.
Management’s priorities are towards
expansion of production capacity and
increasing market share rather than
implementing E3STs.
In Sri Lanka, high capital cost of E3STs,
difficulties in accessing finance and poor
returns on capital are identified as major
barriers. Lack of information and non-
availability of E3STs and service are also
important barriers.
In Vietnam, management is deeply
concerned that adoption of E3STs would
incur additional costs and undermine their
competitiveness in the marketplace. Lack of
information on E3STs is identified as the
second most important barrier although non-
availability is not seen to be a barrier. Lack
of enforcement of regulations is also
identified as an important barrier.
The following broad recommendations are
suggested:

• Re-evaluation of existing energy and

environmental policies, impacts and
constraints in promoting E3STs in all
sectors.
• Integration of energy and environment,
financial and technical policies, so that
they are constructive in application,
monitoring and enforcement.
• Assess the introduction of market-based
instruments backed by fiscal policies
across sectors.
• Include financial institutions in existing
and future capacity building programmes
on E3STs.
• Develop mechanisms to carry available
finances to lower level strata of the
industry sector.
• Enrolment of public support into the
energy and environmental dialogue to
strengthen the enforcement and
acceptance of innovative policies to
promote E3STs in the SMI sector.

VII
 Table of Contents
Project Team ................................................................................................................................. III
Preface ............................................................................................................................................. IV
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... VI

Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Status of the Study Sectors ..................................................................................................... 2
1.2.1 Foundry & metal castiing ..................................................................................................... 3
1.2.2 Texttile sector ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.2.3 Brick, tile & ceramic sector ................................................................................................. 5
1.2.4 Tea production sector ........................................................................................................... 7
1.2.5 Desiccated coconut sector ................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Rationale and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 8
1.4 Organization of the Report .................................................................................................... 9

Chapter 2 An Overview Of Barriers ........................................................................ 11

2.1 Barriers to Promoting E3STs in the Study Countries ...................................................... 11
2.1.1 China ..................................................................................................................................... 11
2.1.2 India ....................................................................................................................................... 12
2.1.3. Philippines ........................................................................................................................... 13
2.1.4 Sri Lanka ............................................................................................................................... 13
2.1.5 Vietnam ................................................................................................................................. 14
2.2 Types of Barriers .................................................................................................................... 14
2.2.1 Managerial barriers .............................................................................................................. 14
2.2.2 Human resource barriers .................................................................................................... 16
2.2.3 Technical barriers ................................................................................................................ 16
2.2.4 Financial barriers ................................................................................................................. 16
2.2.5 Market barriers ..................................................................................................................... 17
2.2.6 Regulatory barriers .............................................................................................................. 17
2.2.7 Information barriers ............................................................................................................ 18
2.2.8 Research and development ................................................................................................ 18
2.3 Earlier Studies on Barriers Inhibiting Adoption of E3STs ............................................. 19
2.4 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 21

Chapter 3 Study Approach & Activities................................................................... 25

3.1 Identification and Finalization of the Barriers .................................................................. 25
3.2 Tools for Prioritization of Barriers ...................................................................................... 25
3.3 Procedure of the Study .......................................................................................................... 29
3.4 Allocation of Weights for Judgments .................................................................................. 32
3.5 Consolidation of Responses ................................................................................................. 33
3.6 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 33

VIII
Chapter 4 Results & Discussion .............................................................................. 35
4.1 Overall Assessment ................................................................................................................ 35
4.2 Assessment of Barriers by Policy Personnel ...................................................................... 37
4.3 Sector Specific Overall Ranking of Barriers ...................................................................... 37
4.4 Country Specific Factors ....................................................................................................... 42
4.5 Enhancement of Energy and Environment Performance by Removal of Barriers .... 45
4.6 Incorporation of Barrier Removal in National Policy Implementation ......................... 47
4.6.1 Policy Framework ................................................................................................................ 47
4.6.2 Regulations and Standards ................................................................................................. 50
4.6.3 Financing E3STs ................................................................................................................. 50
4.6.4. Strategies/Drivers .............................................................................................................. 55
4.7 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 55

Chapter 5 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 57

5.1 Prioritized Barriers .................................................................................................................. 57
5.2 Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 59

References.................................................................................................................. 61
Appendix A: Sample Questionnaire used in Ranking of Barriers ......................................... 65
Appendix B: Weights and Ranking of Barriers for each Study Sector and Country .......... 69

IX
 List of Abbreviations
AHP Analytical Hierarchy Process
AIT Asian Institute of Technology
APCTT Asian and Pacific Center for Transfer of Technology
APEC Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation
ARRPEEC Asian Regional Research Program in Energy, Environment and Climate
AWPLR Average Weighted Prime Lending Rate
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
CDM Clean Development Mechanisms
CP Cleaner Production
DC Desiccated Coconut
DNA Designated National Authority
DOE Department of Energy
E3ST Energy Efficient and Environmentally Sound Technology
ECP Endless Chain Pressure
EMB Energy Management Bureau
FBD Fluidized Bed Dryer
FRP Fiber Reinforced Plastics
GEF Global Environment Facility
GERIAP Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction from Industry in Asia and Pacific
GHG Greenhouse Gases
ISB Industrial Services Bureau
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
MBI Market Based Instruments
MCDM Multi-criteria Decision Making
NDB National Development Bank
NRI National Research Institute
SETC State Economic and Trade Commission
SIDBI Small Industry Development Bank of India
SLR Sri Lanka Currency, Rupees
SMI Small and Medium Scale Industries
TERI The Energy and Resources Institute
TVE Town and Village Enterprises
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization
UPASI United Planters’ Association of Southern India
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VND Vietnamese Currency, Dong

X
XI

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Small and medium scale industries (SMIs) are
a significant sub-sector of the industrial
economy in Asia and play an important role
in national economies in terms of
contribution to Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) and employment creation. They are
found in all major manufacturing sectors.
Usually they employ traditional, labour
intensive and inefficient technologies and are
not very much concerned about the impact
of their energy use (Visvanathan and Kumar,
1999; Kumar et al., 2005; Thiruchelvam et
al., 2003). Despite this lack of concern, there
have been no significant efforts undertaken
to address SMI energy-environment issues.
The Small and Medium Scale Industries in
Asia: Energy, Environment and Climate
Interrelations (SMI in Asia) is one of four
components of the Asian Regional Research
Programme in Energy, Environment and
Climate (ARRPEEC) to address the energy-
environment issues of SMIs (Box 1.1).
The industry sector study of ARRPEEC
Phase I addressed the status of technologies
in energy intensive and environmentally
polluting industries in Asia. It also assessed
the impacts and the pollution mitigation
potential of energ y efficient and More information on ARRPEEC and its
activities are available at www.arrpeec.ait.ac.th
environmentally sound technologies (E3STs)
in large-scale industries in China, India, Sri Industries (SMIs) in Asia and carried out
Lanka and the Philippines. ARRPEEC Phase cross-country evaluations on energy and
II concentrated on Small and Medium Scale environment issues with a focus on processes
Introduction
Box 1.1 Asian Regional Research
Programme in Energy, Environment and
Climate
The Asian Regional Research Programme in
Energy, Environment and Climate (ARRPEEC)
is a regional network involving 22 national
research institutes (NRIs) from seven Asian
countries. ARRPEEC is funded by the Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency
(Sida) and coordinated by the Asian Institute
of Technology (AIT), Thailand.
The main objectives of ARRPEEC are:
• Production of high quality policy oriented
outputs in the selected areas of energy,
environment and climate research.
• Capacity mobilization and enhancement at
NRI level through project level joint activities
and fellowships.
• Linkage of project level activities in the
participating countries with national,
regional and global initiatives for reducing
GHG and other hazardous emissions.
• Dissemination of results among policy
personnel with a view to creating an impact
on policy making.
ARRPEEC carried out research on the power,
industrial technologies, urban transport and
biomass sectors and focused on policy
aspects of GHG mitigation emissions and
pollution reduction. The first and second
phases of ARRPEEC started in 1995 and 1999
and the third phase began in 2002.
Chapter 1 1
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
in five SMI sectors: foundry and metal
casting, textile, desiccated coconut, brick, tile
& ceramic and tea processing. The study
countries were China, India, the Philippines,
Vietnam and Sri Lanka. The project activities
were focused on capacity building, analyzing
and benchmarking energy use patterns of
selected SMI sectors, and identification of
E3STs for SMIs (AIT, 2002a; 2002b; 2002c).
In the current phase (ARRPEEC III), the SMI
in Asia Project continuing from Phase II
addressed the following issues:
• Greenhouse gas emission estimation in
selected SMIs,
• Study and prioritization of barriers that
inhibit the promotion of E3STs in SMIs,
and
• Techno-economic evaluation of E3STs
available for mitigating GHG emissions,
improving energy efficiency and abating
environmental pollution.
As an outcome of the project, the GHG
emissions from the selected SMI sectors and
their mitigation potentials were estimated
and reported elsewhere (Kumar et al., 2005).
This document presents the results of the
research carried out to study the barriers
inhibiting the adoption of E3STs in SMIs.
Overviews of the energy and environmental
status in the study countries relevant to the
selected SMI sectors are presented. This
report discusses previous studies in barrier
analysis and the details of the methodology
adopted in this study and the activities carried
out. The barriers were prioritized based on
inputs from policy makers, SMI management,
representatives from financial institutions and
technocrats. Based on the activities carried
2 Chapter 1
out, the results of the prioritization are
presented and recommendations suggested.
1.2 Status of the Study Sectors
The selected SMI sectors were foundry &
metal casting, textiles, desiccated coconut,
tea processing and brick, tile & ceramics in
China, India, Philippines, Sri Lanka and
Vietnam (Table 1.1). These sectors were
selected based on their importance in the
study countries. A brief summary of their
industrial status in the countries and the
relevant energy and environment issues is
presented below.
1.2.1 Foundry & metal castiing
Foundry & metal casting is one of the oldest
industries in the world and is an important
base for the manufacturing world.
Technology improvements in the foundry
sector have led to improved product quality,
efficient use of resources and reduction in
environmental pollution. Variations in
technology use and production costs make
the foundry industry diverse from one country
to another.
Foundry & metal casting industries in China
and India consist of both large and small-

scale industries. There has been a steady
increase in the production of foundry
products over the years in these two
countries, while in the Philippines there is a
decrease due to increasing costs of
production. Table 1.2 summarizes the state
of the sector in the study countries. In India,
the sector contribution to GDP is estimated
at 0.4%. The foundry & metal casting sector
in China and India is still dominated by
ferrous casting with almost 80% dedicated
to cast iron products and the remaining 20%
shared by cast steel and non-ferrous products.
In the Philippines, about 50-60% are cast
iron (Gray iron products), while 40-50% are
cast steel and non-ferrous products.
Medium scale foundry in India
Foundries are highly energy intensive
processes and pollute significantly if
inefficient technologies are used. In India
and China the main fuels are coke, coal, oil,
natural gas and electricity, while in the
Philippines LPG is used.
The melting furnace is the main equipment
in a foundry. Cupola furnaces and electric
induction furnaces are the most common.
Cupolas are widely used mainly because they
are cheap and a variety of metal, including
Introduction
scrap, can be melted and used. The main
disadvantages of this type of furnace include
the low capacity of the system and the
environmental pollution caused by dust and
slag produced during operation.
The foundry industry mainly contributes to
air pollution. The degree may vary with the
type of resource and raw material use and
the technology adopted. The use of low-
grade fuel, especially coal with high sulfur
content, is the main reason for air pollution.
The amount and quality of emission also
depends on the type of cupola used. Small-
scale foundries do not have the capacity to
employ soot or ash recovery equipment or
use better fuel with efficient combustion
technologies.
In India, air pollution problems are the main
concern though there is also significant
inorganic solid waste. Chinese foundries have
problems meeting national standards for dust
emission, waste residue and noise. In the
Philippines, emissions of dust and harmful
gases with bad odors are the main problems.
CO2 emission in China’s foundry sector was
estimated to be about 16.69 million tonnes
in 2000. For India and the Philippines it was
about 1.6 and 0.24 million tonnes of CO2
respectively (Kumar et al., 2005).
Chapter 1 3
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
Introduction of E3STs such as replacing 1.2.2 Texttile sector
conventional cupolas with cokeless cupolas
or converting them to burn natural gas (Box The textile process consists of several unit
1.2) will help reduce energy consumption, operations and involves a large amount of
thereby making the sector more competitive machinery of varying scale and uses both
while reducing GHG emissions. electrical and thermal energy. The Indian
textile industry is characterized by its
innovativeness and growth in terms of the
Box 1.2 Selected technologies available
technology and scale. India produces and
for improvement of energy and
environmental performance exports a substantial amount of the world’s
textile requirements. The Indian textile
Foundry sector industry encompasses both large enterprises
• Replacement of main frequency induction
and SMIs. Table 1.3 shows the details of the
furnace, medium frequency furnace
• Replacement of cupola furnaces with textile sector in the study countries.
electric induction furnaces
• Conversion to natural gas from coal The textile industry is energy intensive.
Energy accounts for nearly 20% of the total
Brick and tile sector
• Autoclave aerated concrete block instead production cost. The Indian textile sector
of clay brick consumes about 9-10% of the industrial
• Insulation of inner walls with ceramic fiber energy use in India. Thermal and electrical
• Replacement of traditional kilns with vertical
energy demands are met by using coal,
continuous kilns
firewood and electricity.
Tea sector
• In-house power generation
• Two-stage motors for withering troughs
• Replacement of indirect oil fired heater with
direct oil fired heater

Desiccated coconut sector

• Flash steam recovery in dryer
• Use of dual fuel boilers
• Use of energy efficient motors for processing
& materials handling units
Textile sector
• Installation of photocells for speed frame
• Installation of soft starter cum energy saver
in simplex frame
• Use of FRP (fiber reinforced plastic) fan
blades for humidification fans in weaving
Source: Kumar et al., 2005
The main environmental issues for the textile
industry are emissions from energy use and
water pollution, of which the latter is
significant. The textile industry uses water
as the principal medium in removing
impurities, applying dyes and finishing agents,
and steam production. The effluents from
textile processes have a high level of
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), high
dissolved solids and high temperature. When
released to ground or common water channels
without proper treatment, they damage water

4 Chapter 1

quality, kill or damage fish and living
organisms and make water sources unusable.
The other aspect is air pollution from the
combustion of fossil fuels. The total CO2
emission from textile industries in India in
the year 2000 was about 18.12 million tonnes
(Kumar et al., 2005).
Introduction
considered under cottage industry status.
Only brick and roofing tile manufacture are
discussed here. Table 1.4 shows details of
the brick, tile & ceramic sector.

Lack of modernization of textile mills

through the introduction of E3STs has been
the main reason for continued pollution in
the sector. Installation of energy efficient
pneumatic fans in spinning mills,
implementation of soft-flow dyeing, and use
of equipment for recovery of chemicals
otherwise discharged as effluents are some
of the technology options for improvement
of energy and environmental performance.
The Chinese brick-making industry is mainly
under Town and Village Enterprises (TVEs).
1.2.3 Brick, tile & ceramic sector The total number of enterprises involved has
been declining steadily over the years. About
The brick, tile & ceramic sector by definition 77% of the total brick production is solid clay
includes manufacture of all clay products, bricks and the rest hollow bricks. In the
including bricks, roofing tiles and small-scale Philippines, the brick, tile & ceramic sector
ceramic manufacture. The brick, tile & has its base in the traditional manufacture of
ceramic sector is considered a cottage terra cotta products and pottery by small-
industry and uses traditional technologies. scale and cottage type operations.

The roofing tile industry, even though it still In India, about 65-70% of the bricks are
uses traditional technologies, is no longer made in the northern and eastern plains. In
Vietnam, the brick industry is widely
dispersed in four key economic regions in the
northern part of the country. Sri Lankan tile
manufacturing is centered in the western part
of the country and the total monetary value
of tile production was around SLR 600
million (US$ 6 million) in 2000.

The major energy source in China, India and

Vietnam is coal. In Sri Lanka it is firewood
and in the Philippines LPG is used in ceramic
Speed frame of a textile mill in India

Chapter 1 5
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
tile production. The Indian brick industry natural woodlands.
consumes about 20 million tonnes of coal
(TERI, 2003). Sri Lanka consumes around The type of kilns used has an effect on the
40 m3 of fuel wood per batch (i.e. 15,000 energy efficiency and level of pollution (Box
tiles). The average, production is 3-4 batches1.3). Brick production uses only 25% of the
per month. heat supplied to the kiln while the rest is lost
in exhaust and losses due to imperfect
The main pollution issues from brick and tile burning, radiation and convection from the
production are GHG emissions and the kiln walls. Some heat loss in the flue gas could
destruction of agricultural land due to clay be recovered and used for drying.
extraction. Most of the brick and tile kilns
are inefficient in combustion and hence emit The industry represents a substantial
high amounts of GHG. The use of coal in component of SMIs. If technology can be
China, Vietnam and India creates significant introduced to increase energy efficiency, the
pollution. In 2000, the total CO2 emissions savings in money, resources and reduced
from the SMI brick, tile & ceramic sector was pollution will be substantial.
about 197, 35, 1.8 and 0.04 million tonnes
of CO2 in China, India, Vietnam and Sri
Box 1.3 Improvement of energy efficiency
Lanka, respectively (Kumar et al., 2005). in the brick industry

The brick industry is flexible in energy sourcing

Stacking bricks in a continuous fired tunnel kiln in
Vietnam
The destruction of agricultural land is a
serious environmental impact of this industry
and brick makers prefer certain fuels (notably
fuelwood and coal). However, these are not
always available at competitive prices and
hence they use lower grade fuels. Little is
known about specific energy consumption in
different kilns among brick makers or
technology providers. Hence, possibilities to
improve the energy efficiency by relatively
simple measures are disregarded. The newly
developed kilns appear to be attractive and offer
larger production capacity, but often require
higher investments. The better technologies
offer better energy efficiencies and less
pollution.
Energy Statistics of commonly used brick kilns
Kiln type Capacity ('000 bricks) Specific energy Investment
Per firing Per day consumption (US$ '000)
(MJ/kg)
Clamp kiln 5 - 1,000 2.0 - 8.0

in all countries. Production of 5 million solid Scove kiln 5 - 100 2.0 - 8.0
Scotch kiln 5 - 40 2.0 - 8.0 <5
clay bricks needs around 12,000 m3 of clay, Downdraft kiln 10 - 40 2.0 - 6.0 < 20

rendering the land unusable for agricultural Hoffman kiln 2 - 24 1.5 - 2.8 > 80
Bull's Trench kiln 10 - 48 1.5 - 2.8 >7
purposes for a long time after extraction. This High Draught kiln 20 - 40 1.2 - 1.8 > 15

is in addition to soil erosion, localized Tunnel kiln

Vertical Shaft Brick kiln
50 - 150
4 - 30
1.2 - 2.5
0.8 - 0.9
> 1,000
>4
pollution and reduced aesthetic value of
Source: FAO, 1993

6 Chapter 1

1.2.4 Tea production sector
India is the largest producer and consumer
of tea in the world. Sri Lanka is the largest
exporter of black tea. Export is an important
source of foreign exchange and an
employment generator (Table 1.5).
Energy is required for tea processing during
drying (ther mal energy) and withering
(electrical energy). The thermal energy
requirements are supplied by coal, fuel oil or
firewood. Electrical energy is most often
supplied by the power grid. In Sri Lanka, the
tea sector consumes annually about 2.3 TWh
of energy (AIT, 2002c). Thermal energy is
supplied by firewood (80-85%) and fuel oil
(15%) while electricity is obtained from the
grid. Annually, the Indian tea industry
consumes about 0.632 million tonnes of
firewood, 0.274 million tonnes of coal,
64,000 tonnes of oil and 550 million kWh
of electricity (estimates based on data from
UPASI Tea Research Foundation, India,
2002).
The environmental concerns in the tea
processing sector are related to emissions. For thermal energy consumption is 23 MJ/kg
drying, thermal energy is required and this is
obtained by using fuel wood or coal in India
and Vietnam, and by fuelwood in Sri Lanka.
The use of inefficient heat transfer DC processes generate solid waste and
equipment results in the consumption of effluents. From the environmental point of
higher amounts of fuel. For example, many view, the effluents are the main concern. The
Introduction
Sri Lankan tea factories still use Endless
Chain Pressure dryers (ECP) with 32%
efficiency. However, Fluidized Bed Dryers
(FBD) can provide 49% efficiency. Changing
dryers from ECP to FBD in the entire sector
would reduce energy consumption and GHG
emissions. There are technologies available
for the tea industry (Box 1.2) that would
reduce the GHG emissions while increasing
the energy efficiency.
1.2.5 Desiccated coconut sector
The desiccated coconut (DC) industry is one
of the major export earners for Sri Lanka and
the Philippines. The DC sector in Sri Lanka
belongs to the SMI sector while in the
Philippines they are classified as medium to
large industries in terms of production. A
summary of DC sector statistics for these
countries is shown in Table 1.6.
Electrical energy is used by processing
equipment. Of the electrical energy
consumption, 60% is used for drying and
about 30% is used for size reduction. Of the
thermal energy, over 65% is consumed in the
drying operation. The average specific
and the specific electrical energy
consumption is 1 kWh/kg (AIT, 2002b).
Chapter 1 7
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
Sri Lankan DC industry generates an
estimated 0.5 million cubic meters of
wastewater annually with around 10 tonnes
of suspended solids and 3,850 tonnes of
BOD.
1.3 Rationale and Objectives
E3STs address the energy and environmental
concerns of industries, but many barriers
prohibit their adoption. Due to scarcity of
resources (funds, labour and time), all the
barriers cannot be addressed simultaneously,
hence, priority must be given to the most
serious and pervasive barriers.
Though general studies on the various
barriers inhibiting the promotion of E3STs
are available, prioritization of barriers from
the perspective of SMIs, technocrats and
policy makers would provide an important
basis for introducing E3STs and thus lead to
energy efficiency, reduced pollution and
GHG emissions. By prioritizing the barriers
in terms of their importance, appropriate
strategies and action plans can be developed
to use the limited resources. This approach
will be beneficial to SMIs and will yield
positive impacts that could be translated to
a bigger scale as energy savings and emission
reductions at the national level (Box 1.4).
The main objectives of the study are:
• To identify the prominent barriers
inhibiting the promotion of E3STs in the
SMI sectors in the study countries
• To prioritize these barriers according to
the views of the stakeholders, and
• To disseminate the outcomes among
policy makers and other stakeholders for
necessary action in formulation of
environmentally friendly policies.
8 Chapter 1
Box 1.4 Institutional intervention to
promote E3STs in SMIs through
identification and prioritization of barriers
Case study: Firozabad glass industry cluster
in India
To save the famous Taj Mahal, situated close
to Firozabad, the Indian Supreme Court passed
a landmark judgment and directed 292 specified
industries using coke/coal as fuel to switch over
to natural gas, relocate outside the zone, or
shut down.
Through detailed diagnostic studies carried out
in various SMI clusters in 1995, it was found
that there is tremendous scope for increasing
energy efficiency in the glass industry cluster.
The cluster accounts for roughly 70% of the
total glass production in the small-scale sector.
A new design focused on the pot and muffle
furnaces in view of their high share of coal use
(48% for pot furnaces and 27% for muffle
furnaces), very low operating efficiency and
inability of the segment to mobilize support for
technology upgrades.
The demonstration pot furnace using natural gas
was commissioned in February 2000. The
specific energy consumption was found to be
2,460 kcal/kg of glass, a reduction of nearly 60
per cent while meeting environmental standards.
Natural-gas fired TERI furnace
Source: TERI, 2000
 Introduction
The study used Analytical Hierarchy Process
(AHP), a multi-criteria decision tool, for
prioritizing barriers. Once the barriers are
prioritized, issues that lie within the
enterprise or factory level, industry level and
national level can be segregated and targeted
for elimination or mitigation by factory
owners, SMI associations or policy makers
as appropriate.

1.4 Organization of the Report

The report is organized in five chapters with

the structure shown in Figure 1.1. The
objectives are organized for clarity within the
structure of the report.

Fig 1.1 Organization of report

Chapter 1 9

Chapter 2
AN OVERVIEW
OF BARRIERS
This chapter describes the various barriers
that inhibit the promotion of E3STs and their
significance from the viewpoint of SMI
stakeholders. This initial assessment of
barriers has been consolidated using similar
studies done elsewhere.
2.1 Barriers to Promoting E3STs in the
Study Countries
Despite their significant contribution to
economic development in the Asian region,
SMIs are energ y inefficient and cause
environmental pollution. Under these
circumstances, E3STs provide sustainable,
adoptable and affordable technology
solutions that will conserve energy, mitigate
pollution and reduce unfavorable impacts on
climate. Application of E3STs in industries
ensures that energy resources are used more
efficiently, eco-efficiency is improved and the
environment is preserved and is therefore an
important means of achieving the dual goals
of energy conservation and emission
prevention and reduction. Many developed
countries have adopted cleaner production
technologies and gained the economic
benefits. However, E3STs are not widely
adopted in developing countries outside of
large industries that can easily adopt them
and benefit financially. SMIs are still hesitant
An Overview of Barriers
to adopt E3STs due to their reluctance to
change and other barriers. To promote the
dissemination of E3STs, the barriers in
adopting them were identified. They include
lack of awareness, education and training on
E3STs; financial and economic factors; lack
of coordination and slackness; and lack of
infrastructure (Thiruchelvam et al., 2003).
The following sections provide an overview
of the barriers inhibiting the promotion of
E3STs in the study countries. The key
elements and diversity of the environmental
issues in relation to energy and environmental
performance vary from one country to
another.
2.1.1 China
As one of the fastest growing economies in
the world, China experiences the ill effects
of rapid development in the most obvious
way. The environmental pollution in China
has been unprecedented, especially in the
industrial areas, and the Chinese government
has given a high priority to abating
environmental pollution due to
industrialization (Jonathan, 1999).
• Increased employment requirements
focused more on workers’ skills and
physical abilities than on their ability to
Chapter 2 11
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
cope with the consequences of poor
environmental management. Managerial
staff lack capacity to educate workers
because they themselves have a low
awareness of E3STs and their positive
impacts.
• Chinese SMIs lack capacity in identifying,
assessing, introducing and applying
E3STs at factory level. Even when capital
is available it is often accompanied by
introduction of obsolete process
technologies and inefficient equipment
that pollutes the environment.
• Lack of experience and resources,
including capital, is the main reason for
difficulties in technology transfer options.
• The brick and tile industry finds it difficult
to access new technologies and market
infor mation and still operates in a
traditional way.
Box 2.1 Growth of consumption of energy
and GHG emissions in India
India’s high concentration of pollution is not
due to the absence of a sound environmental
legal regime, but due to lack of environmental
enforcement at the local level. Regulatory
reforms aimed at improving the air pollution
problem in cities such as New Delhi have been
difficult to implement.

2.1.2 India

The Indian economy is growing rapidly and

pollution has increased, fueled by industrial
production (Box 2.1).

The industrial value chain consists of cottage

level manufacturing, subcontracting by SMIs,
and outsourcing by medium to large
companies. However, the SMI sector still
uses outdated technologies although some
larger manufacturers have upgraded their
technologies and improved their efficiencies.

• The SMI sector in India is grappling with

problems of outdated management
practices and use of inefficient and
polluting processing technologies. Many
employees are not skilled or technically
competent to operate and maintain
advanced energy saving technologies.
• The foundry sector in India generates
heavy environmental pollution and wastes
resources and energy because of outdated
technologies and equipment.

12 Chapter 2

2.1.3. Philippines
The SMI sector in the Philippines lacks
awareness of energy and environmental
issues.
• At enterprise level, lack of collateral has
been a major obstacle in obtaining
finances from banks for implementation
of E3STs. Due to a lack of financial
records and collateral requirements,
assessing credit risk is difficult for lenders.
The tedious procedures for
documentation, processing and reporting
requirements are also obstacles for
procuring funds. Lack of expertise to
appraise E3STs is a barrier for lending
institutions.
• The use of E3ST initiatives as a political
tool by pressure groups that claim that
these initiatives are trade barriers retard
investment in E3STs. Industries succumb
to these pressure groups because of their
limited knowledge and understanding.
2.1.4 Sri Lanka
SMIs in Sri Lanka are faced with unfavorable
conditions locally and from high competition
from neighboring countries. Increasing cost
of inputs and insufficient economies of scale
have decreased their profit margins.
• Reasons for not implementing E3STs are
primarily cost oriented. Additional capital
deployment, increased operational costs
and non-realization of net financial-gains
from E3STs are some of the important
reasons. Even the implemented E3STs or
those proposed to be implemented are
more or less compliance driven rather
than needs driven.
An Overview of Barriers
• High cost of equipment for E3ST
application is an impediment, as most of
these items are imported. This raises the
issue of technology transfer related to
E3ST technologies such as locally
manufacturing these technologies. The
obstacle here is the lack of competent
technical service providers.
• Policy level barriers come from either not
having a mechanism for SMIs for adopting
better technologies or having an equal
policy for all industries irrespective of
Box 2.2 Non-enforcement of regulations is
a barrier to promoting E3STs
Sri Lanka
The Sri Lankan Desiccated Coconut sector
faces the continuing problem of treating
wastewater. Some research institutions have
developed solutions for treatment, but these
are not adopted widely. Further development
and promotion of available methodologies is
not progressing since the factory owners do
not consider them a necessity. Measures like
E3STs can only be developed or marketed if
there is a strong need at industry level.
Philippines
The Department of Energy and Environmental
Management Bureau (EMB) are two key
institutions, which oversee the energy and
environment sector in the Philippines. DOE has
no regulatory power and activities are mainly
limited to raising awareness and information
dissemination. They cannot force a company
to be energy efficient. EMB is the
environmental regulatory agency, which carries
out monitoring and enforces environmental
laws. Due to the wide scope of EMB, it cannot
comprehensively conduct monitoring and
enforcement activities on all industries. SMIs
also pose difficulties for the enforcement
agency due to their fragmented nature and
large number.
Chapter 2 13
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
their size or sector. These perceived
anomalies at policy level prevent SMIs
from taking action in implementation of
E3STs (Box 2.2).
2.1.5 Vietnam
The Vietnamese economy is in a transition
from central control to a market economy.
Still, the government owns most of the
enterprises, although private investments are
picking up. Government enterprises mostly
use outdated technologies. During the period
of a centrally controlled economy, the
principle had been to build the largest possible
factories with the aim of providing
employment. Revamping these enterprises
will be a major task in terms of technology
and investment.
• Enforcement of environmental
regulations has had a low profile and is
one of the reasons that SMIs, both existing
and new, are reluctant to invest in E3STs.
• Cost of new technologies and difficulties
in obtaining finances are barriers in
Vietnam for the promotion of E3STs.
• During this transition from centralized to
market economy, many industrial sectors
resist introducing E3STs. However, the
brick sector has been an exception (Box
2.3).
2.2 Types of Barriers
Barriers can mainly be categorized as market,
technical, financial, management,
environmental, information and regulatory.
These categorizations also have perspectives
at enterprise, industry or national levels.
Hence, a fundamental categorization of
14 Chapter 2
Box 2.3 Lack of government assistance is
a barrier to promoting E3STs
An assessment on the Vertical Shaft Brick Kiln
(VSBK) Technology in Vietnam focused on its
technology status, performance and
government policy in promoting it. Some of the
findings of the study are highlighted below:
• In the short span of two years about 100
new VSBKs were added. The technology
seems to have become firmly established
in the country. This has been a noteworthy
achievement given the history of slow and
often-difficult introduction in several other
countries.
• VSBK is the most efficient kiln among the
different types of brick kilns used in
Vietnam, with a specific energy
consumption of 0.85-1.1 MJ/kg of fired brick.
Stack emissions from VSBK are lower
compared to other kilns.
VSBKs are replicating very quickly in different
locations in Vietnam, but at the central level,
there is no clear policy to support the
technology.
Source: TERI, 2003
barriers that inhibits the promotion of E3STs
could be illustrated as follows (Table 2.1),
with some examples at each level.
The following sections describe these barrier
categories specific to the promotion of
E3STs through examples.
2.2.1 Managerial barriers
Promotion of E3STs in SMI sub-sectors faces
many barriers due to management at the
enterprise level. Specific examples of these
managerial barriers are as follows:
Resistance to Change. SMIs inherently resist
change. Any alteration to achieve a (positive)

change is often perceived as a disruption of
the present status. This is common for both
managerial staff and employees. In such a
situation, efforts to adopt E3STs are not
likely to be well received. In the case of non-
compliance of standards, SMIs may prefer
to pay the penalties rather than to adopt
An Overview of Barriers
cleaner production technologies.
Inadequacies in Internal Management. SMIs, in
trying to achieve cost advantages, tend to
hire managers or staff who may not have the
capacity to appreciate the complexities of the
global or national environmental aspects
Chapter 2 15
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

related to the business they are engaged in. sometimes costly, especially the initial
These inadequacies hinder the adoption of investment. Environmental technologies
E3STs in SMIs. undergo substantial research and enterprise
level prototyping is required, and these add
2.2.2 Human resource barriers to costs. For SMIs, it is not merely the cost
of new technologies that matter but also the
Lack of technical education and training of cost of retrofitting, as these enterprises have
SMI employees on E3STs make its promotion already invested in equipment and
and implementation difficult. These are the technologies that are not E3STs. Box 2.4
human resource barriers, a primary example gives an example of how high cost associated
of which is: with import of technologies is a barrier to
the promotion of E3STs in Sri Lanka.
• Inadequate Education of Employees. E3STs
and their benefits are sometimes beyond 2.2.4 Financial barriers
the understanding of employees of SMIs
because they represent a new concept in Financial barriers constitute a principal barrier
energy and environmental performance. faced in promoting E3STs. Some financial
Their understanding is important for barriers are as follows:
proper installation and functioning of
E3STs at factory level. Poor understanding Limited Access to Funding. Both development
of the functionalities of E3STs will banks and commercial banks offer funding
increase costs, hamper the achievement for the implementation of E3STs under
of desired results and disrupt production. various schemes. Although sources of credit
and finance are available, few SMIs use these
2.2.3 Technical barriers facilities because either they are unaware of
them or are unable to fulfill the criteria of
Availability and cost of E3STs constitute the lending organizations. SMIs often have
technical barriers. These barriers affect the no reliable financial records and have
sustainability of E3STs in relation to their difficulties with security and collateral
adoption in SMIs. requirements. Hence, from the lenders point
of view, assessing an SMI’s credit risk is
Limited Availability of Technology. SMI sectors difficult, considering the long payback
are diverse and in most cases are process periods related to E3STs.
oriented where solid wastes, effluents and
emissions are generated as part of the process. Procedural Setbacks. Even SMIs that can
SMIs have not kept up with technical establish their creditworthiness need to
innovations, such as the use of Information follow tedious procedures. This is more
Technology (IT), for better resource control common when interest rates are low. SMIs
and Cleaner Production (CP) for better do not feel comfortable with these delays and
environmental control. they do not want to obtain commercial loans
at high interest rates, which would offset the
Cost of Technology. Upgrading using E3STs is enterprise finances.

16 Chapter 2
 An Overview of Barriers

Box 2.4 High cost associated with import

of technologies is a barrier to promoting
E3STs
To meet rising demand, raw steel is imported
into Sri Lanka. Due to the limited supply of
finished products, the effect of value addition
is very important in Sri Lanka where finished
products are nearly four times the price of raw
material. Thus, steel fabrication factories in
Sri Lanka get maximum benefit from increased
productivity rather than from energy
conservation. Initial investment is high in Sri
Lanka due to the:
• necessity to import all equipment and
technologies for making improvements
• time required for improvements to be
implemented
• high cost of borrowing capital
level, in either scale or added features. This
makes it difficult for some E3ST application
providers to design and manufacture
equipment in a way that makes it possible to
reap the benefits of economies of scale.
Emphasis on Green Products. The importance
or requirements customers place on products
manufactured using E3STs have an impact
on SMIs adopting E3STs. If a particular SMI
caters to green product markets, they have
to adopt E3STs. But often, green products
give more importance to product features
than to processing techniques.
2.2.6 Regulatory barriers

Source: UNEP, 2002 Regulatory policies and their enforcement at

the national level constitute some major
Conventional Appraisal Criteria. Lending barriers to promoting E3STs. Some examples
institutions operate on a risk minimization are as follows:
approach and often they prefer collateral to
cash flow. Under such circumstances, E3ST Inconsistent Enforcement of Laws and Policies.
projects do not always produce acceptable Inconsistent enforcement of laws reduces
appraisal results. The lack of technical the credibility of both the environmental laws
competencies of staff to appreciate the and the agencies responsible for
broader economic and environmental enforcement. The result is that SMIs - and
impacts of E3STs results in lending other polluters - disregard the need for
institutions relying entirely on financial compliance. From the promoter’s point of
factors. view, without a strong regulatory requirement,
E3STs may not have a place in the market.
2.2.5 Market barriers
Capacity of the Regulating Agencies. Regulating
Limited markets for products manufactured agencies, policy makers, environmental
with E3STs and also limited demand for pressure groups and the government need to
E3STs act as a barrier for adoption. Primary advise and assist SMIs by promoting E3STs.
market barriers are: Enforcement and penalizing defaulters have
not addressed the promotion and adoption
Limited Market for E3STs. The market size is of E3STs. Field level staff and regulatory
a barrier for the promotion of E3STs. Being personnel are not technically knowledgeable
specialized applications, E3STs need to be enough to advise on the improvement of
customized for each enterprise at factory processes or equipment to reduce waste,

Chapter 2 17
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

effluents and emissions (Box 2.5). This is not research institutions.

a conducive situation for promotion of
E3STs from the policy or national Lack of Dissemination. Research institutions
perspective. and universities conduct research on
industrial pollution, publicise their studies in
2.2.7 Information barriers various forms and come up with solutions
including E3STs. But dissemination of these
The inability of SMIs to access information findings to the appropriate industries is at a
on E3STs and their applicability is a primary very low scale. Without dissemination,
inhibitor. Information barriers include: technology providers, E3ST developers and
SMIs have no way of knowing about work
Limited Access to Information. Lack of technical done in the area.
understanding of energy and environmental
issues in SMIs leads to distortion and
misinterpretation of facts with the result that
Box 2.5 Lack of institutional coordination
the best option may not be chosen. One of and implementation as barrier
the main reasons for this lack of technical
understanding is due to limited access to Coordination among agencies and
information on E3STs and SMIs’ inability departments is important in implementing
policies. Lack of coordination may lead to
to evaluate the best options available. Non- haphazard solutions.
availability of sector specific norms and
benchmarks make it difficult, not only for In the case of acid processing firms in Calcutta,
SMIs but also for advisors, to compare in- India, inefficient operations resulted in indoor
and outdoor pollution. Due to lack of
plant situations with desired situations that coordination between energy and environment
could be achieved by the adaptation of departments, the proposed solution of
E3STs. constructing a central effluent treatment plant
was not beneficial and did not yield results
Inadequate Communication. Information on the since the solution did not address the main
non-professional perspective from the use of source of pollution — inefficiency in process
E3STs is an important criterion for flow, work practices and poor knowledge of
health and safety. Authorities disregarded the
promotion. An issue like greenhouse gas core issues and addressed peripheral issues
emissions endangering society cannot be well due to lack of expertise (Das Gupta, 1998).
understood unless it is translated into
financial terms such as reduced fuel costs, In contrast, in one of the textile clusters in
Tirupur, South India where there are about 750
or benefit terms such as increased incentives, dyeing and bleaching units in operation, the
financial or social. units have joined through association and
constructed common wastewater treatment
2.2.8 Research and development facilities. There are now eight common
wastewater treatment plants operating
successfully in the cluster.
Barriers to the promotion of E3STs also arise
from inefficiency in disseminating
information from research and development
activities carried out at universities and

18 Chapter 2
 An Overview of Barriers

2.3 Earlier Studies on Barriers Inhibiting level, made only through discussion, had not
Adoption of E3STs been prominent. None of the studies were
sector specific and they did not address
In the past decades, more attention has been sustainability issues in detail.
given to SMIs as a catalyst to improve
economies. The scope of earlier studies Some studies (UNEP, 1989; UNIDO, 1999)
indicates that they have focused more on focused on cleaner production (CP) rather
business promotion or overall than E3STs. These studies emphasized
competitiveness of SMIs. The introduction energy conser vation and resource
of technologies (not only energy efficient consumption reduction and environmental
technologies) is one key area these studies technologies in general, but they were not
addressed. These served as a baseline for specific to industry or SMIs and addressed
further elaboration at policy level not only technological aspects rather than policy
for SMIs but also for larger industries as well. options. Even though there are no specific
studies with regard to the promotion of
The ADB (2003) study reveals that the E3STs or barriers hindering them, the barriers
primary barriers inhibiting the adoption of for the promotion of CP (Box 2.6), energy
technologies by SMIs were financial, efficiencies and SMI promotion also fall in
followed by technological barriers. Figure 2.1 line with the barriers for E3STs. The barriers
further elaborates the survey results. that have been discussed in these studies can
be classified under the various barrier
Table 2.2 summarizes previous studies on categories described in section 2.2.
bariers that used more conventional
techniques for assessment of inhibitors. Since Vine (2005) has shown that lack of
these previous studies are used as a baseline government policy, subsidized energy cost
or cross-country comparison at various and unfavorable tax regimes are barriers for
levels, the techniques used are more promoting energy efficiency through energy
conventional than scientific and involved ser vice companies (ESCO) which are
mainly the beneficiaries of the policies, i.e. expected to play an important role in
industrialists. Involvement of the policy promoting energy efficiency.

Figure 2.1 Response for adopting technologies in SMEs

Chapter 2 19
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

To overcome barriers in improving energy
efficiency, Gruber and Brand (1991)
recommended a set of activities. These
include the motivation of company
managers, improved energy consultation, the
use of the multiplier function of associations,
and stronger engagement from the
government and the utilities. Su et al. (2004)
concluded that four major barriers, namely,
technology, information, training and policy,
should be addressed to promote energy
efficiency in the Chinese foundry sector.

20 Chapter 2
 An Overview of Barriers

Box 2.6 Barriers for promotion of CP to availability of finance, affordability of

technologies
UNEP training material for the promotion of
Cleaner Production shows that political and
regulatory barriers contribute to the non-
adoption of CP technologies. The study
concludes that addressing these issues
through training and awareness will promote
application of CP.
Source: Huisingh, 2002
finance, cost/benefit from investments,
attitudes of managers and lenders on
investing in technology. This is relevant also
in the context of developed countries (Box
2.8).
Technical and Information Barriers. Barriers
related to the existence and appropriateness
of technology, availability of information of
procuring, evaluation and adoption, technical
competence in assessing needs, and additional
requirements needed for implementation.
Policy and Market Barriers. Barriers related to
government recognition and acceptance of
E3STs, policy options and directions for
adaptations, mechanisms of enforcement,
and public opinion about products that
address environmental concerns.

Furthermore, previous studies did not focus

on sustainable technology adoption by SMIs 2.4 Summary
as a policy option for mitigating GHG
emissions, or address issues related to energy Barriers for the promotion of energ y
efficiency or environmental pollution. They efficiency and reducing pollution in all
were not oriented towards SMI needs for industrial sectors appear to have much in
fulfilling the broader goal of GHG mitigation common. In the overall industry sector, larger
through either technical options or policy companies have the resources and the
options at national level. expertise to invest in E3STs and have
benefited financially, socially and
For this study, barriers are grouped under four environmentally.
broad categories as follows:
Though some achievements have been seen
Managerial and Organizational Barriers. Barriers in the SMI sector in Asia, it has dealt with
related to internal management, operational barriers related to development and business
requirements, capacities of human resources expansion rather than the adoption of E3STs.
and attitudinal issues. The type of industry
and ownership governs these parameters and Increasing competition in global markets and
they have an effect on the adoption of E3STs declining government support have lowered
(Box 2.7). the priority given to implementation of
E3STs. The most prominent barriers are
Financial and Economic Barriers. Barriers related financial, technical, managerial and policy

Chapter 2 21
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Box 2.7 The effect on adopting E3STs by the type of ownership of enterprise

A study carried out by the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of
California for the World Bank in 2002 on Industrial Ownership and Environmental Performance in
Chinese Enterprises, highlights the following findings.

The table shows that application of environmental mitigation measures is effective when the state
has less control over enterprises. The study concludes that ownership affects industrial
environmental performance. Economic efficiency, production and pollution abatement technology,
willingness to internalize environmental externality, and bargaining power with government and
communities in environmental enforcement were identified as the major reasons why firms with
different types of ownership perform differently in terms of pollution.

The study also found that the pollution charge instrument was effective in terms of providing
incentives for pollution reduction. Citizen complaints are found to have a strong positive role in
pushing polluters to reduce pollution discharges. This shows the great potential to use community
pressure approaches to promote industrial pollution control in China.

Pollution Intensity by Ownership of Enterprises in China

Note: The number of firms by

ownership is shown in the
parentheses. (10,000 Yuan = 1,200
US$, approx.)
TSS: Total Suspended Solids,
COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand,
SO2: Sulfur Dioxide, TSP: Total
Suspended Particles.
Source: Wang, 2002a

related. The studies of UNIDO (2003) and

Huisingh (2002) reinforce these observations.

Considering the diverse nature of the barriers

and the necessary measures needed to
overcome them, they have been grouped into
four categories: managerial and
organizational; financial; technical; and
policy and market barriers. They were
prioritized based on inputs from stakeholders
and are described in the next chapters.

22 Chapter 2
 An Overview of Barriers

Box 2.8 Barriers to promoting E3STs in the EU and the USA

EU Action Plan to Boost Environmental Technologies

The European Commission has released an action plan to help new environmental technologies
overcome barriers to their development such as difficulty in access to capital. The action plan
includes the launch of ‘technology platforms’, establishing environmental performance targets for
products and services and making the most of funding schemes and public and private procurement.
(Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, News item 06 February 2004)

Barriers to Integrating Energy & Environmental Approaches, USA

While there are numerous benefits associated with integrating energy and environmental
approaches, states and localities are still faced with a number of challenges when transitioning
from single-agency, single-pollutant strategies to more collaborative multiple-agency, multiple-
pollutant solutions. Some of these barriers include:

• Jurisdictional boundaries that separate energy, environmental and public utility agencies;
• Regulatory provisions in energy, air and utility statutes that purposely or inadvertently impede
integrated, innovative approaches;
• Political impediments imposed by partisan or interest group actions;
• Resource and time limitations facing state and local energy, environmental and public utility
agencies that already have too much on their plates;
• Large scale, scope and complexity of issues that can be daunting if not examined in smaller,
focused pieces; and
• Rapidly changing power situation that has unpredictable impacts on the focus for other energy
and environmental issues in states and local communities.

These impediments, while presenting varying degrees of challenge, do not necessarily represent
permanent barriers to success. (Extract from Whitepaper on Taking Steps Toward Integrated
Approaches on Energy and Environmental Issues for State and Local Policy-Makers. Available
from Energy, Environment & Transportation Clearing House, http://www.eandeclearinghouse.com
(Accessed 20 June, 2004)

Chapter 2 23

Chapter 3
STUDY
APPROACH &
ACTIVITIES
3.1 Identification and Finalization of the
Barriers
This chapter elaborates the approach and
methodology adopted in this study. It
provides a description of the study
methodology, tools used, rationale for
selection of tools, composition of the
stakeholders in each study country and the
potential for replication of the methodology
for similar studies. Figure 3.1 illustrates the
overall framework of the study, which is
described in the following sections.
Figure 3.1 Framework of Research Methodology
Study Approach & Activities
An initial list of barriers was developed in
each country based on discussions with the
stakeholders of SMIs and from the literature
(Chapter 2). During the discussions, SMI
management, policy makers and other
stakeholders highlighted the major barriers
inhibiting the adoption of E3STs. This was
found to complement the findings of Phase
I and II of the ARRPEEC Programme
industry sector projects.
The list of barriers was identified and
finalized through consultation workshops
attended by the major stakeholders. The final
list of barriers was grouped into four major
categories: management and organizational,
financial and economic, technical and
information, and policy and market barriers,
with sub-categories as depicted in Table 3.1.
3.2 Tools for Prioritization of Barriers
For the identified barriers, each stakeholder
attaches his or her own relative importance.
Chapter 3 25
 B arriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

26 Chapter 3
Study Approach & Activities

Chapter 3 27
 B arriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
Therefore, the priority varies among the MCDMs are used for a variety of applications,
stakeholders and also among the industrial such as strategic and programme planning,
sectors. To achieve a common prioritization, resource allocation, technology selection and
a conventional criteria-ranking method based prioritization and consensus building. Several
on point allocation, percentage weighting or MCDM tools are used as decision support
qualitative ranking could not be used, and tools and a sample list is given in Box 3.1.
so for this study a Multi-criteria Decision
Making (MCDM) methodology was used. The MCDM method employed for this study
The benefits of using an MCDM model are was the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
that it (Denis, 2003): introduced by Saaty (1980), which is a
pairwise comparison method. It provides a
• provides a formal decision process and proven, effective means to deal with complex
focuses on key issues and uncertainties decision-making and can assist with
• helps identify non-critical issues and identifying and weighing selection criteria and
provides immediate feedback expediting the decision-making process. It is
• helps identify and evaluate tradeoffs and a powerful and flexible decision-making
benefits methodology to help set priorities and make
• builds consensus and encourages the best decision when both qualitative and
accountability quantitative aspects of a decision need to be
considered (Saaty, 1999). By reducing

Box 3.1 Multi-criteria decision tools

A Selected List of Multi-criteria Decision Tools

Source: http://www.evergladesplan.org/

The following list gives an overview on the various MCDM tools:

Curriculum assessment: http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie98/papers/1370.pdf

Portfolio management: http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/Research/1999/WDSI/99wds230.htm

Sub contractor evaluation: http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build02/PDF/b02143.pdf

Product, process, environment matching:

http://www.environmental-center.com/magazine/inderscience/ijetm/art5.pdf

28 Chapter 3

complex decision problems to a series of one-
on-one comparisons (pairwise) and then
synthesizing the results, AHP not only helps
decision-makers arrive at the best decision,
but also provides a clear rationale for arriving
at that decision (Liberatore and Nydick,
2003). Research on the application of AHP
techniques for decision-making specific to
renewable energy and energy efficiency is
available. For example, Pohekar and
Ramachandran (2004) have provided an
extensive review of the application of AHP
techniques in the energy sector.
In the AHP methodology, the stakeholders
determine their preference between two
barriers and specify their relative importance
with respect to their contribution to the
desired objective. Stakeholders indicated the
relative importance for each barrier using a
r a t i n g s c a l e ( Ta b l e 3 . 2 ) . T h e A H P
methodolog y provides an indication of the
inconsistency of the comparison as well. The
inconsistency level indicates the degree of
understanding of the issues by the respondent
and how that understanding (or lack of
understanding) contributes to the final
judgment. If the inconsistency is more than
0.1 (i.e. consistency ratio of greater than 10%)
it is suggested to revisit the problem and
revise the judgments (Merit Decisions; Saaty,
1999).
Study Approach & Activities
3.3 Procedure of the Study
A hierarchy structure based on AHP was
developed to prioritize the barriers inhibiting
the promotion of E3STs in SMIs (Box 3.2).
Based on the hierarchy structure, the listed
barriers (Table 3.1) were transformed into a
questionnaire (Appendix A) which was
completed by the stakeholders (managers/
owners of SMIs, technicians, bank managers,
personnel from industrial associations, policy
personnel, etc.) in the five countries. The
questions were framed in such a way as to
extract responses based on a pairwise
comparison of all the barriers. To complete
the questionnaire, the stakeholders used one
of the three rating scales shown in Table 3.2.
For example, if barrier ‘A’ is more important
than barrier ‘B’ for non-implementation of
E3STs, the stakeholder could rate (i) 7 or (ii)
very strong or (iii) 175 for A versus B.
To complete the questionnaires, workshops
were organized for stakeholders. The
workshop agenda included an introduction
to the SMI in Asia project, the purpose of
the study, guidelines to complete the
questionnaires, and the expected outcomes
of the exercise.
Policy makers in the Philippines engaged in
filling in the questionnaire
Chapter 3 29
 B arriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Box 3.2 Hierarchy model for prioritization

After the identification and finalization of the prominent barriers that hinder the promotion of E3STs,
a tree-hierarchy based on AHP methodology can be structured to facilitate the prioritization process
(figure below). The tree is segmented into four levels: the top level is the overall barriers inhibiting
the promotion of E3STs; the second level has the four barrier categories; the third level includes
five specific sub-barriers under each barrier category, 20 in total, and the last level is the final goal
of this study—prioritization of the barriers inhibiting E3ST promotion in SMIs.

* For details on specific barriers refer to Table 3.1.

Adapted from Peng et al., 2005

The workshops were also helpful for

discussing barriers with stakeholder groups.
Other methods used to complete the
questionnaire included:

• One-on-one interviews with managers

(India, Sri Lanka)
• Facsimile and direct mailing of
questionnaires to stakeholders, who were
identified and selected through the list of
AHP methodology workshop for desiccated
institutional clients (Philippines) and
coconut millers in Sri Lanka

30 Chapter 3

mailing lists of participants of earlier
events (China)
• Interviews with experts from selected sec-
tors (Vietnam)
• Workshops to obtain the views of policy
makers (Philippines, Vietnam and Sri
Lanka)
In the workshops, the stakeholders were
provided with details to familiarize them with
the study objectives and methodology and
the AHP approach in particular. The
participants were also given presentations on
the use of AHP to explain the complex
nature of the pairwise comparisons with an
example based on a comparison of cars
(Liberatore and Nydick, 2003).
Considering the diverse nature of the stake-
holder group, their responses were grouped
into four categories: managerial, technical,
financial and policy personnel. Table 3.3
shows the number of responses in each cat-
egory in each country.
Study Approach & Activities
 software
Box 3.3 Expert Choice
Expert Choice is intuitive, graphically based
and structured in a user-friendly fashion to for
conceptual and analytical thinkers, novices
and category experts. Because the criteria are
presented in a hierarchical structure, decision-
makers are able to drill down to their level of
expertise and apply judgments to the
objectives deemed important to achieving their
goals. At the end of the process, decision-
makers are fully cognizant of how and why
the decision was made, with results that are
meaningful, easy to communicate, and
actionable.
The software automates the decision-making
process by enabling organizations to structure
and justify decisions. Expert Choice helps
groups to structure their objectives into a
decision model, prioritize using pairwise
comparisons, and justify decisions using
graphical reports and sensitivity analyses.
With Expert Choice, organizations can focus
on the strategic value of alternatives rather than
making decisions over table conversations. It
can be used to: predict likely outcomes, plan
projected and desired futures, facilitate group
decision-making, exercise control over
changes in the decision-making system,
allocate resources, select alternatives, do cost/
benefit comparisons, evaluate employees and
allocate wage increases.

Source: http://www.expertchoice.com

The stakeholders in the technical category

included managers and technicians of SMIs,
energy auditing consultants, and technical
project appraisers of financial institutions.
The financial category stakeholders were
managers or representatives of banks, fund-
ing agencies and financial institutions. Policy
The managerial category stakeholders were personnel were from Ministries, statutory
owners or senior management of SMIs who boards and industrial associations.
take decisions on implementation of E3STs.

Chapter 3 31
 B arriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
3.4 Allocation of Weights for Judgments
The next step in the methodology (Figure 3.1)
was the allocation of weights to the
response/judgment of the stakeholders. Ex-
pert Choice, a multi-criteria software pack-
age was used (Box 3.3). The rating given by
the stakeholders for each pair of barriers was
entered into the logical matrix provided in
the software. The software facilitates this by
displaying a sliding scale so that any type of
Figure 3.2 Sample output of pairwise comparison
32 Chapter 3
rating score can be entered, and delivers
weights for each barrier by converting the
pairwise rating score based on a matrix
algebra algorithm (explained in Appendix B).
The weight is indicative of the significance
of the criteria against other criteria. The sum
of all the weights adds to unity. It also displays
their inconsistency ratio. Figure 3.2 shows a
typical output from the analyzed
questionnaire.
 Study Approach & Activities

3.6 Summary

A methodology for prioritization of barriers

for the promotion of E3STs has been
established based on a pairwise comparison
using an AHP approach with participation
from major stakeholders of the SMI sectors.
A significant outcome was the use of AHP
at a lower level of the industry and in
industrial sectors where traditional thinking
prevails. For many policy makers who
participated in this study, this was their first
3.5 Consolidation of Responses exposure to AHP. The simplified approach,
quickness in processing results and versatility
As the final step in the process, Step 4 (Figure of the methodology shows its potential for
3.1), for the four main categories of barriers replication in other sectors.
and their twenty sub-categories, pairwise
comparisons were made and all the
stakeholders’ responses were weighted by the
software. The weighted results were
tabulated for each barrier, corresponding to
stakeholder categories and the sectors, and
the average weights were obtained. Based on
these averaged weights, the barriers were
ranked for each sector and for each study
country representing each stakeholder group
(See Appendix B for all weights and ranks).
The availability of the summarized responses
is shown in Table 3.4. The ranking results
are presented and discussed in Chapter 4.

Chapter 3 33

Chapter 4
RESULTS &
DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the results of the study
(Step 4 of Fig 3.1). The AHP provided a
weight for each criterion (barrier) and for each
stakeholder. The study countries
consolidated all responses for each study
sector according to stakeholder category. The
rankings were based on the responses for each
sector and stakeholder group depending on
the averaged weights.
As discussed in Chapter 3, the study took
into account twenty barriers under four major
categories (Table 3.1). In the case of China,
an additional four barriers (given in italics) that
were not considered by other countries were
included.
4.1 Overall Assessment
An overall assessment of the four major
categories of barriers in terms of their
importance in inhibiting the promotion of
E3STs is given in Table 4.1. This was
obtained by considering the preferences of
all stakeholders and shows the overall
perspective of the stakeholders on the major
categorization of barriers.
• In all the countries studied except China,
financial barriers were ranked as the major
inhibitor for the promotion of E3STs. In
China, policy and market barriers were
ranked first and financial barriers were
ranked second.
Results & Discussion
• In India, the Philippines and Vietnam, the
management and organization barrier was
ranked second.
• China and Sri Lanka ranked the
managerial and organizational barrier as
the least important, while in India, the
Philippines and Vietnam, the policy and
market barrier was ranked as the least
important.
• In all five countries, the technology and
information barrier was not found to be a
significant inhibitor to the promotion of
E3STs.
The obser vations highlight only the
significance (or lack of it) and the findings
from the observations are discussed in later
sections.
Table 4.2 shows the overall ranking of all 20
barriers. It indicates the relative ranking of
the barriers by all stakeholders. For the
purpose of the analysis and findings, only
extreme ranking ends are discussed, i.e. the
three most and least important barriers for a
Chapter 4 35
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

36 Chapter 4
 Results & Discussion
particular country. In the detailed ranking information barriers are considered to be
tables, the top-most three barriers, i.e. ranks insignificant except in the Philippines.
of 1, 2 and 3, and the three least important
barriers, i.e. ranks of 18, 19 and 20, are shown • All policy personnel agree that financial
in bold. Exceptions are also noted. and economic barriers are decisive and
factors like high capital cost, difficulty in
• The stakeholders consider that high initial assessing finance, poor returns and
capital cost is the major barrier in Sri tendency to invest in short term projects
Lanka, India, the Philippines and Vietnam. are contributive.
Other financial related barriers are also • Policy personnel in China and Sri Lanka
ranked high in these countries. In China, believe that technical barriers contribute
financial related barriers are of secondary least to the promotion of E3STs, while
nature. Sri Lankan, Indian and the Philippines
• The most prominent barriers in China are policy makers think that lack of
the lapses in enforcement of regulations government assistance, self-regulation and
and lack of government benefits, both weak public pressures do not inhibit
being related to policy issues that inhibit promotion.
the promotion of E3STs. • In China and Vietnam, government
• In general, the least important barriers are assistance and enforcement are key
the managerial issues. Sri Lanka, India and elements for promotion of E3STs.
the Philippines show a common consensus
on weak public pressure, self-regulation,
and inadequate management capacity, 4.3 Sector Specific Overall Ranking of
while in China a similar observation was Barriers
made. Lack of technical training at the
shop floor level is not considered a barrier. To compare the views of the different
• The barriers in Vietnam show a wide stakeholder groups, sector specific rankings
variance over the major categories. for each selected sector were performed.
Tables 4.4 - 4.7 show the most and least
significant rankings for each study sector by
4.2 Assessment of Barriers by Policy sector personnel. From the views of industry
Personnel personnel,

An analysis was done to ascertain the views • The financial and economic barrier is the
of policy makers towards the barriers. These most important one inhibiting the
policy personnel are involved in the industry adoption of E3STs in all countries except
sector or particular SMI sectors. Table 4.3 China, where the policy and market barrier
shows the responses of the policy makers. was ranked as most important.
• Responses vary for the least important
• The policy personnel in China, India, the barriers but the management and
Philippines and Vietnam believe that the organizational barrier was the common
financial barrier is prominent, while in Sri least rank. The market and policy barrier
Lanka it is the policy barrier. In all was also considered a low priority in the
countries, these barriers are considered Philippines and India.
significant, while technical and

Chapter 4 37
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

38 Chapter 4
 Results & Discussion

Table 4.5 gives the ranking for all the barriers significant barriers.
by industry personnel of the brick and tile • In Sri Lanka, India, and the Philippines,
sector. The following observations can be the least important is the management and
made: policy barrier, while in China and Vietnam
it is the technical barrier.
• Industry stakeholders in the brick and tile • One important obser vation is that
sector of Sri Lanka, India and the industrialists in the brick and tile sector
Philippines agree that high initial cost, of all the study countries except India
poor returns from E3STs, difficulty of more or less agree that inadequate
accessing finance and increased cost of management capacity is not a barrier.
production are significant barriers, while
in China, though these are important, Table 4.6 gives the ranking by industry
weakness in enforcement of regulations personnel in the foundry and metal casting
and lack of government assistance are

Chapter 4 39
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

40 Chapter 4
Results & Discussion

Chapter 4 41
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
• In China and India, the managerial and
organizational barrier is the least
important. In the three countries,
infrastructure requirements, training, non-
availability of technologies and weak
public awareness are not prominent.
Inadequate management capacity is one
of the most insignificant.
• The financial and economic barrier is the
most prominent barrier in India and the
Philippines, whereas in China, the policy
and market barrier is the most important.
High initial capital cost, poor returns and
increased cost of production are some of
the most significant barriers in the foundry
sector.
• The policy and market barrier is significant
for non-adoption of E3STs, and in some
countries and sectors this could be the
major barrier.
• The technical and information barrier
together with the management and
organizational barrier do not pose a
significant barrier for the promotion of
E3STs. However, they cannot be
disregarded as insignificant.
As evident from sections 4.1 to 4.3, the
different stakeholders in the study countries
have differing opinions on the role of barriers
inhibiting the promotion of E3STs. Box 4.1
presents a case study from China.

Table 4.7 gives the rankings for all the barriers

by industry personnel in the tea processing, 4.4 Country Specific Factors
desiccated coconut and the textile sectors.
The results obtained with respect to ranking
• In the tea and textile sectors in India and in specified sectors for study countries are
the tea and DC sectors in Sri Lanka, the based on the views of industry and policy
most important barrier is financial and personnel. The analysis of these results,
economic. The sub-barriers are high initial based on observations of how rankings
cost, difficulty in accessing finance, poor compare, however, need not be limited to
returns, and increased cost of production their views. Country specific factors, such as
with the adoption of E3STs. macro economic conditions, level of
• Even though not ranked as prominent, technology development, capabilities of
poor financial returns from E3STs and supporting institutions and government
management desire for short term intervention also have an effect and need to
investment are important barriers to the be considered. It is important to focus on
promotion of E3STs. how relevant the E3ST needs of the SMIs
• The managerial and policy barrier was the are in the above context. Table 4.8 highlights
least significant, particularly lack of self- country specific situations with regard to the
regulation at factory level, inadequate external environment. The scale in Table
management capacity and satisfaction 4.8 indicates the level of availability or
with existing technologies. intervention for the specific factors. These
factors were rated by the project team in the
Based on observations from Tables 4.4-4.7, study countries based on their experiences
according to industry personnel, and in consultation with national experts.

• The financial and economic barrier is the The country specific factors also contribute
most significant barrier inhibiting the to the findings mentioned in the earlier
promotion of E3STs in SMIs. sections. An overview shows that:

42 Chapter 4
Results & Discussion

Chapter 4 43
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

44 Chapter 4

Box 4.1 Perspectives of different
stakeholder groups in China
The perspectives of the three stakeholders
regarding the barriers are shown in the figure.
There seems to be a common consensus
among the different stakeholder groups in China
that external barriers (policy & market and
financial & economic barriers) are much more
important for adoption of E3STs than internal
barriers (technical & information, management
& organizational barriers). All stakeholders
believe that awareness of energy and
environmental performance of E3STs in the
management level and the technological
operational hurdles are not the most prominent
barriers for the adoption of E3STs.
Although the differences between the
stakeholders are not significant, the three
different stakeholder groups assigned
considerably different weights for each of the
barrier categories. For example, the technical
stakeholders gave the highest weight to the
policy and management barriers (0.419), while
the management and policy stakeholders
ranked them second (0.320 and 0.311,
respectively). This might mean that the
technical stakeholders are expecting policy
and market factors to play a greater role than
the other two stakeholders are in the promotion
of E3STs.
It can be seen that management stakeholder
opinions were the nearest to the overall result.
Hence, while formulating policies for promoting
E3STs, the views of different stakeholders
should be considered.
Source: Peng et al., 2005
Results & Discussion
• Environment regulations are in place, but
enforcement is inadequate.
• Commercial availability of E3STs is low
even with a high level of development in
the engineering sector and a moderate
level of research and development
activities.
• Financial markets are developed or in the
process of development. However, need
for collateral is still emphasized.
• Strong supporting institutional
frameworks exist for industry and
environmental affairs, but outreach to
SMIs is poor.
• Information flow to SMIs is still in the
development stage.
4.5 Enhancement of Energy and
Environment Performance by Removal of
Barriers
The removal of prominent barriers for
implementing E3STs, i.e. financial barriers
and policy barriers, will help SMIs adopt the
technology options available. Equipment
suppliers can make use of the increased
market to develop and market efficient
technologies.
It is not only policy interventions that will
promote the adoption of E3STs as means to
reducing GHG emissions. Through good
operation and maintenance practices,
adoption of E3STs and fuel substitution,
SMIs will increase energy efficiency and
reduce environmental emissions. A study has
been carried out under the SMI in Asia project
to estimate GHG emissions and mitigation
options for SMI sectors (Kumar et al., 2005).
A summary on estimated CO2 mitigation
potentials is given in Table 4.9. The
incremental reductions in GHG emissions by
adopting technology options and policy
options will be as much as 45% to 84%.
Chapter 4 45
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

46 Chapter 4
 Results & Discussion
For example, in Vietnam, application of aspects will enlarge the scope of these
technology options for the brick and tile policies beyond monitoring and enforcement.
industry provides the best GHG emission This will require a more proactive and
reduction potential of more than 40% (Box collective approach from all industrialists,
4.2). financial organizations, technology providers,
policy makers and the general public in
By switching to low carbon fuels such as formulating policies for removal of barriers
furnace oil and natural gas, the foundry sector for the promotion of E3STs.
can also effect significant reductions in GHG
emissions. In the brick and tile sector,
replacement of traditional kilns with vertical Box 4.3 Low investment, quick returns
continuous kilns, application of ceramic Many E3STs have provided quick returns as
wool insulation on the walls of traditional shown in the textile industry (India) and the
tile kilns and use of process monitoring ceramic tile industry (Sri Lanka)
devices will lead to lower emissions.

Box 4.2 Adoption of technology options

in the brick & tile industry

Shown below is a comparison of fuel and

corresponding CO2 reduction by replacement
of traditional Clamp kilns with continuous
Vertical Shaft Brick Kilns in Vietnam for an
4.6 Incorporation of Barrier Removal in
annual production of 7.2 billion pieces (2000): National Policy Implementation

The global GHG emission reduction

Fuel switching options in the DC sector
could reduce 7.5% of the GHG emissions
for Sri Lanka and 21% for the tea sector in
India. The GHG savings for the textile sector
in India from fuel switching will be a
remarkable 25.4%.
But technology options are costly in terms
of new investments and retrofitting (Box
4.3). This is where a sound policy framework
backed by fiscal, energy and environmental
policies can create a conducive climate for
SMIs to seek and invest in E3STs.
Assessment of the benefits of adopting
E3STs, not only from the financial and
economic viewpoint, but also from social
requirements, increased awareness of
sustainability issues and growing public
pressure for establishment of a pollution free
environment are encouraging governments to
put in place pertinent environmental
regulations. The following section highlights
key issues in the policy framework, regulation
and financial aspects that will help in the
promotion of E3STs in SMIs.
4.6.1 Policy Framework
Key economic policy issues aimed at energy
and environmental perfor mance
improvement by adopting E3STs include
energy pricing, market-based instruments and
financing.
Energy Pricing Policy
Power purchased from electric utilities

Chapter 4 47
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
contributes significantly to the cost of
production for SMIs. If industries tend to
conserve energy by reducing their demand
for electricity, the utility company will
consume less fuel and reduce pollution. This
is increasingly being promoted in developed
countries. In Japan there has been a sustained
reduction in the use of energy in the past
few years (Matsuo, 2004).
However, due to insufficient installed power
capacity in developing countries, industries
seek alternative power generation sources.
For example, industries commonly invest in
diesel generators (USAID, 1999). Diesel is
usually subsidized in many countries.
Therefore, unless energy pricing policy
encourages use of cleaner fuels and
alternative power sources with a focus on
energy saving methods (E3STs), industries
will continue to use energy resources that are
least expensive irrespective of environmental
damage. If attractive policies are in place,
industries could invest in cleaner electricity
generation such as wind power.
Market-Based Instruments
Market-based instruments (MBIs) can be
defined as proxies for market signals in the
form of changes to relative prices or a
financial transfer (Andersen, 1998). They are
aimed at forcing producers and consumers
to take into account the pollution
implications. At the same time, MBIs allow
them the freedom to choose and adapt their
activities and enable them to consider and
apply least cost solutions.
Market-based instruments (MBI) impose fees
and provide incentives to achieve the same
objective as regulatory policies. The various
types of market-based instruments include
user charges, emission charges or taxes,
deposit-refund systems, subsidies, emission
reduction credits and tradable permits. The
48 Chapter 4
most common is the “polluter pays” emissions
fee system.
Market-based instruments are most likely to
be successful when:
• Decision-makers are aware of the
lobbying asymmetry between polluters and
tax-payers so exemptions can be avoided.
Although opponents to MBIs argue about
competitiveness as a reason for
exemptions, these exemptions are often
provided for the largest polluters.
• The level of the tax or charge is high
enough to accurately reflect external costs
but not too low to provide adequate
incentives for polluters. The revenue
could be ear-marked to support polluters’
technical adaptations.
• There are no free allocations of tradable
permits; these have negative affects on the
cost-effectiveness and fairness of the
instrument.
• MBIs are not introduced to replace direct
regulations. Charges are used not to
replace regulations but to supplement
them. Regulations should be kept in place
as ‘safety-nets’.
By way of example, the Laguna Lake
Development Authority in the Philippines
charges fees on effluent discharge into the
lake or tributary streams. For reducing
pollution, industries are rewarded by lower
fees and fewer penalties. This approach has
contributed to measurable improvements in
the quality of Laguna Lake (USAID, 1999).
China has introduced MBIs to curtail
pollution. However, the mechanism did not
achieve its objectives due to a low fee
structure and lack of incentives. Polluters will
pay low fees but avoid investments, as
observed in Vietnam. In India and Sri Lanka,
MBIs are yet to be implemented.

Financing E3STs
Investing in E3STs is a new approach for both
industry and financial institutions. Industries
are either not familiar with or lack the capacity
to make cost-benefit analyses and
preparation of bankable documents. Bankers
are unaccustomed to appraising credit request
proposals for E3STs. As financial institutions
are isolated from policy issues related to
energ y and environment, a working
partnership between policy makers and
financial institutions will be useful for
exchanging experiences, purposes and
objectives.
Though many financing schemes and
institutions designed to assist SMIs are
available, their effectiveness in attracting
SMIs to invest in E3STs is low. The
Countryside Loan Fund of the Land Bank
of the Philippines, the Small Industrial
Development Bank of India (SIDBI) and the
National Development Bank (NDB) of Sri
Lanka target SMIs to adopt environmentally
friendly technologies through provision of
concessional loans. SIDBI was set up as a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Industrial
Development Bank of India (IBDI) in April
1990. SIDBI is the principal financial
institution for promotion, financing and
development of industry in the small-scale
sector and co-ordinates the functions of
institutions engaged in similar activities. The
NDB Bank in Sri Lanka acts as the
administrative body for the implementation
of a credit line provided by the Overseas
Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF) of
Japan for the promotion of energy savings
and pollution control projects for industrial
enterprises in Sri Lanka. This loan scheme is
known as the Environmentally Friendly
Solution Funds (e-friends). Box 4.4 describes
the e-friend scheme. Financing issues as a
barrier to E3ST promotion is further
discussed in Section 4.6.3.
Results & Discussion
Box 4.4 Environmentally friendly solution
funds (e-friends) by NDB Bank in Sri Lanka
Any financially viable enterprise in operation
or scheduled to commence operation at the
time of the loan application is eligible for
assistance under the e-friends scheme of the
NDB. An enterprise seeking to implement a
pollution control project should be able to
conform to the regulations of the National
Environmental Act. An enterprise implementing
an energy savings project should justify the
savings achieved.
Any industry in any sector is eligible for this
loan, which is mainly for acquiring equipment
that contributes to reductions in energy
consumption, end-of-pipe treatments and lower
waste production, equipment that substantially
improves the safety of the workplace, and
relocation of highly polluting industries to
industrial estates equipped with waste
treatment plans. The principal terms and
conditions of the loan are given below.
Under the credit component
Loan Amount: Up to 100% of the project cost
subject to a maximum of Rs. 20 million.
Equipment that, in addition to pollution control
results in a substantial increase in profitability,
will be eligible for a loan covering 70% of the
cost.
Payment period: Maximum of 10 years
Interest rate: 8.5% (revised biannually)
Security: Usually a mortgage over the project
assets
Grace period: Up to a maximum of 24 months
Under the technical assistance component
Up to 75% of the project cost subject to a
maximum of Rs 750,000. Technical assistance
loans available to cover consultancy costs
directly related to the project and implemented
under the e-friends loan scheme.
Payment period: Maximum of 5 years
Interest rate: Interest free
Security: Usually a mortgage over the project
assets
Grace period: Up to a maximum of 12 months
Source: Environmental Unit, National
Development Bank, Sri Lanka
Chapter 4 49
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
4.6.2 Regulations and Standards
Cost savings alone may not always be
sufficient to persuade industries to implement
E3STs. Some regulations may be necessary
to motivate industries to take action.
Environmental laws and regulations
supported by applicable standards and
government’s capacity and willingness to
enforce them for the benefit of the broader
public are pivotal factors for successful
implementation (USAID, 1999).
Monitoring and enforcement
Monitoring and enforcement of
environmental regulations are not observed
in most instances because of insufficient
resources and overlap of purviews. There are
several agencies and institutions that
overlook different sections of the industry
in the context of energy and environment.
They have insufficient resources and there
are some ambiguities of pur view in
implementation. The industries are therefore
not clear or aware of the type of activities to
be undertaken. Even though MBIs are
implemented in China, lower pollution fees
and lack of enforcement have made them
ineffective.
Variations and exemptions
The availability of exemptions is a negative
incentive for adopting E3STs. An empirical
study done in China (Wang, 2002b )
concludes that privately owned enterprises
have less bargaining power with the
authorities than state owned enterprises in
relation to pollution charges, and hence
exemptions are possible for state enterprises,
i.e. a low priority for pollution abatement.
But, at present, the law on promotion of
Cleaner Production encompasses all sectors.
The enactment of the law forbidding the use
of clay bricks by 2005 is applicable to all
provincial capitals in China and will be
50 Chapter 4
extended to other cities as well. Thus, strict
enforcement without variations and
exemptions delivers results. In other cases,
SMIs need support to comply with
regulations. This may require technical as
well as financial support. The case of the
foundry sector in India (Box 4.5) shows that
measures to reduce pollution through
improved energy efficiency need to be
demonstrated to potential users for
widespread implementation.
Lobbying power of the public to assist enforcement
Creation and strengthening of public
environmental councils as a means of
pressuring industry is not new. In Europe,
pubic interest bodies exist for looking at
environmental issues and for other public
services as well. The Carbon Trust forum in
the UK1 provides subscribers, industrialists
and the general public with energy saving
advice and information on technology while
acting as an energy watchdog.
This kind of pressure group helps push
regulatory authorities beyond enforcement
and offer public recognition measures like
eco-labelling and industry coding schemes.
These are often voluntary mechanisms that
drive industries to surpass the standards and
seek public acceptance as a competitive
advantage (Box 4.6). Existence of such
pressure groups will move the monitoring and
enforcement of environmental regulations
closer towards the pubic interest rather than
policy or penalty oriented measures.
4.6.3 Financing E3STs
As the most significant barrier inhibiting the
promotion of E3STs, financial and economic
barriers obstruct innovation and create
unwillingness to adopt E3STs and be part of
a broader environmental agenda in pollution
prevention. Key considerations of
1
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk

Box 4.5 Stringent environmental controls
result in development and adoption of
better technology
The Indian foundry sector has over 6000 cupola-
based foundry units located mostly in clusters.
The energy intensity of these units is high as
shown by the charged coke percentage. After
strict imposition of emission standards, most
small-scale foundry units found it extremely
difficult to comply, primarily due to the lack of
availability of ready-made gas cleaning
systems.
To address this issue, a demonstration plant
was commissioned in August 1998 by TERI.
The cupola they developed is an intermittent
type and is used for production of ingot moulds.
The demonstration cupola was 33% more
energy efficient with a coke saving of nearly
65%. The degree of abatement in stack
emissions was also substantial and emission
of suspended particulate matter was reduced
by two-thirds. A second unit was installed in
2001 and saved 45% on coke, produced higher
metal temperature and fewer casting rejects.
Reduction in Suspended Particle Matter
Source: TERI, 1999
Results & Discussion
industrialists, lenders and policy makers
towards financing E3STs are as follows:
Techno-economic assessment
The high cost of E3STs is one of the
financial barriers to implementing E3STs.
From the policy makers’ point of view, it is
important to identify whether the high cost
is due to its technical features or due to
costs added during transactions. If the
former, then policy options should focus on
financing instruments; whereas if it is the
latter, policy interventions should be
through fiscal policies such as import
guarantees, duty waivers, reduced or no
taxes, and incentives for implementation of
E3STs. If the capital cost is high due to
the high transaction cost of lending
organizations, interventions of a different
sort are required. The specialized nature of
E3STs raises the issue of adaptability.
Sustainability of a technolog y in a
developing economy depends on its
adaptability to the society and adaptability
is deter mined by the complex
interrelationships of various factors
(Dunmade, 2002; Box 4.7). Careful
evaluation of a technology in terms of its
contributions will ensure that only
sustainable technologies are acquired.
Financial instruments
Introduction of financial instruments
supported by fiscal policies and energy and
environment policies will encourage
financing institutions to come-up with
attractive financial packages particularly
targeted for SMIs. Difficulty in accessing
financing is often not from the lack of
money but from difficulties associated with
the process. To support SMIs, lending
institutions like SIDBI in India have come
up with appropriate methods (Box 4.8). In
the Philippines, the Development Bank of
Philippines operates a credit window
Chapter 4 51
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Box 4.6 Eco labeling / industry coding as a catalyst for adopting E3STs

The Singapore Green Labeling Scheme

Singapore’s Green Label scheme was launched in May 1992

by the Ministry of the Environment, with the objective to raise
the environmental consciousness of consumers and to promote
“green” consumerism. It also encourages manufacturers to
design, manufacture and supply environmentally friendly
products. The Singapore Environment Council (SEC) has
administered the scheme since June 1999. The criteria for the
award of the Green Label is set by an advisory committee of
representatives from government, private sector organizations,
academic institutions and statutory boards and an industry
review by responsive manufactures who formulate and agree
on standard criteria and inputs from the Global Ecolabelling Network (GEN) and affiliated members
on standards creation and agreements between international eco-labels. Once criteria are set for
a particular category of products, manufacturers, importers and retailers of that product may apply
for the Green Label by submitting an application along with supporting evidence. The scheme is
voluntary and fully backed by the public.

Source: Singapore Environment Council, 2005 Industry compliance at the start of the
Programme
Going public on polluters in Indonesia

The Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation and

Rating (PROPER PROKASIH) is a landmark
initiative in Indonesia. It assigns environmental
performance ratings to industries which are then
announced to the public. The main objectives of
this program are to increase compliance with
environmental regulations, promote adoption of
clean technologies, create incentives for polluters
to strengthen their in-house environmental
management capabilities, and to prepare
companies for ISO 14000 certification.

The introduction of PROPER PROKASIH has

sent a strong signal to polluters who have come
under greater pressure to change their
complacent attitudes towards pollution control.
The program has received extensive coverage in
the local and international media, and groups
ranging from citizens to senior enterprise managers have become aware of the ratings of individual
factories. In the six months since the publication of the ratings, about ten polluters succeeded in
improving their rating to the next scale. Half of the Black plants improved their rating to the next
scale.

52 Chapter 4

Box 4.7 Adaptability of technology in
developing countries
One primary objective of importing technology
is for improving the industrial development base
to achieve technological advancement.
However, many such efforts by developing
countries have failed because imported
technologies are not suitable. A number of
indices that decision-makers can use are
available to assess the suitability of a
technology and its likely sustainability over the
long term. By identifying and examining
sustainability factors in relation to the techno-
economic level of development, the promotion
of appropriate technologies can be greatly
enhanced with supportive policies. The figure
below illustrates the underlying factors that
promote the adaptability of specialized
technologies.
Source: Dunmade, 2002
scheme to facilitate SMIs. If the technology
is appropriate and provides the desired
results it is only a case of proper financial
and technical appraisal. The decision of
financing can be left to the financial
institutions if industry provides assurances
regarding technology sustainability.
Results & Discussion
Policy interventions will be needed to secure
investment through fiscal policies tied to
performance-based energy and environment
policies. For instance, financial schemes could
be linked to parameters of MBIs. Industries
earn credits or subsidies through energy
savings or pollution prevention and these
could be exchanged for reduced interest rates
for investments made in E3STs. A new
approach is needed in appraising E3STs
which includes the evaluation of
environmental and social benefits within its
full life cycle. Banks in study countries are a
good platform for launching for these efforts
considering the factors listed in Table 4.8.
Availability and access to funds
Making finances available at a level below
commercial financial institutions will help
SMIs obtain finances more easily. This is a
lesson learnt and frequently disseminated by
SMI development agencies (UNCTAD,
1999). Even though there are moderate
successes in SMI development through
financial assistance (Box 4.9), the
achievements are not significant. One of the
reasons for the failure of financial assistance
in making SMIs grow is cited as the
indifference of the financial institutions
towards the SMI sector. It was noted by
development agencies that availability of
finances through rural banks might have
shown better results (PECC, 2003).
In the context of SMIs, the above
observations are an important indication that
SMI financing facility disbursements should
be directed towards lending institutions
closer to the SMIs. Together with state
support, SIDBI in India, Bank Rakyat in
Indonesia and Land Bank of Philippines have
developed mechanisms to make finances
available to SMIs (PECC, 2003).
Chapter 4 53
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
Box 4.8 Small Industry Development
Bank of India (SIDBI)
Technology Upgrading Programme (TUP)
of SIDBI
The competitiveness of the products of small-
scale industrial units depends to a large extent
on their productivity levels, price factors and
quality characteristics. SIDBI’s technology
upgrading and modernization programme
(TUP) is aimed at improving the technical
capabilities and competitiveness of SSI units
in clusters by introducing commercially proven
technologies which will result in significant
improvement in quality, productivity, cost
reduction, saving of energy and raw materials,
and reduction in the level of pollution.
SIDBI provides support and co-ordinates the
services of consultants, and backs up their
efforts for arranging financial assistance,
through banks or State Financial Corporations
(SFCs) under its refinance assistance
schemes. The Bank also provides direct
financial assistance through its Technology
Development and Modernization Fund
scheme. Regular follow-up and monitoring is
undertaken by SIDBI and implementing
agencies are suitably compensated by way
of professional fees for undertaking an
assignment.
TUP has been launched by SIDBI in more than
25 clusters, which range from the seafood
processing industry (Coastal Kerala) to the
brass and bell metal industry (Hajo, Assam)
and from the scientific instrument industry
(Ambala, Haryana) to artisan-based
blacksmith units (Mylliem, Meghalaya).
Impact assessment studies in selected
clusters have revealed that:
• Earnings of artisans has gone up from
Rs. 30 to Rs. 75 in the brass and bell
metal industry of Hajo, Assam.
• Fuel savings of Rs. 20,000 per month per
unit were achieved by the foundry units of
Howrah, West Bengal.
• Annual savings of Rs. 2.3 million were
achieved by the units manufacturing
bicycle and bicycle parts in Ludhiana.
Source: www.sidbi.com
54 Chapter 4
Box 4.9 Sustainable Guarantee Facility
(SGF) for energy efficiency and
renewable energy projects in Sri Lanka
The Sri Lankan Government is in the process
if establishing a Sustainable Guarantee
Facility (SGF) aimed at improving access to
finance for energy projects in Sri Lanka. The
SGF is expected to be operational in 2005.
The South Asian Regional Initiative for Energy
and Nexant, Inc., on behalf of the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID)
is providing SGF for energy investments in Sri
Lanka. The Energy Conservation Fund (ECF)
of Sri Lanka is to provide repayment
guarantees to Participating Financial
Institutions (PFI) for loans made, and is
targeted to non-conventional/renewable energy
and energy efficiency projects. It is to overcome
the major barrier faced by energy efficiency
projects, namely the lack of collateral, by
providing a comprehensive repayment
guarantee that will act as a collateral substitute.
PFIs that provide funds to the projects will have
the option of requesting repayment guarantees.
The total guarantee from the SGF for a
particular project will not exceed 75% of the
total loan offered.
SGF as a general principle seeks to support
projects:
• which demonstrate the economic and
productivity advantages of energy
efficiency and non-conventional energy
investments,
• display technical viability of non-
conventional renewable energy systems
and have a high probability of replication
in the future,
• that are using technology that is proven
in terms of its feasibility and
effectiveness, and
• that have a clear payback period and are
financially capable of repaying the
principal and interest amount of the
project loan.
Source: Energy Conservation Fund of Sri
Lanka
 Results & Discussion
4.6.4. Strategies/Drivers

Three broad categories of environmental

policy instruments have evolved over the past
two decades (Andersen, 1998), namely:

• Regulatory instruments whereby public

authorities mandate the environmental
perfor mance to be achieved or the Figure 4.1 Convergence of Policy, Regulations
technologies to be used by industries. and Public Acceptance for improvement of
• Economic instruments whereby firms or environmental performance (Helby, 2001).
consumers are given financial incentives
to reduce environmental damage. 4.7 Summary
• Voluntary approaches whereby firms make
commitments to improve their Four categories of barriers — management
environmental performance beyond what and organizational barriers, financial and
the law strictly demands. economic barriers, technical and information
barriers, and policy and market barriers —
The framework within which an industry were prioritized using a multi-criteria
operates is illustrated in Figure 4.1 in the decision-making tool based on inputs from
context of these instruments. Industries stakeholders. The most significant barrier in
approach environmental challenges in India, Sri Lanka and the Philippines is the
different ways. Some see these as costly and high cost of E3STs; in China it is the lack of
choose to ignore them as much as possible, financial incentives; and in Vietnam it is
i.e. environmental rearguards. Others see management’s fear of the high cost of
superior environmental performance as a production due to E3STs. In none of the
competitive advantage that will put them countries is the non-availability of E3STs or
ahead of others, i.e. environment vanguards. the lack of technical or managerial skill seen
as a major barrier for adoption of E3STs. The
Environmental policies tend to address these barriers were also prioritized based on specific
groups in different ways. The rearguard feels stakeholder groups (policy and industry
the weight of regulations, enforcement and personnel) and SMI sectors. Key issues in
taxes, while the vanguard is stimulated by policy frameworks and regulatory and
policies that raise public awareness, labelling financial aspects that will help in the
schemes and industry coding that promotion of E3STs in SMIs were also
differentiates them from the rest (Helby, described with examples.
2001).

Policy framework backed by appropriate

energy and environmental policies, market
measures and financial instruments will push
SMIs to adopt E3STs to achieve compliance
(rearguards) and motivate them to go beyond
compliance and achieve public acceptance
and recognition (vanguards).

Chapter 4 55
 Conclusions & Recommendations

Chapter 5

CONCLUSIONS
SMIs are an important sub-sector of Asian Having prioritized the important barriers
developing economies and will play a crucial through a more participative approach, this
role in the years to come. Whilst their current study serves as a platform for further action
level of technology use is traditional and by SMI stakeholders, policy makers in
inefficient and causes unnecessary energy particular. The study provides scientifically
consumption and emissions, there have been supported information on key areas that need
no significant efforts undertaken to address to be addressed for the promotion of E3STs
their energy-environmental issues. Therefore, in the SMI sector.
SMIs need attention in technology upgrading.
5.1 Prioritized Barriers
Adoption of energ y efficient and
environmentally sound technologies (E3STs) The following section presents the important
is one of the major actions that can be taken barriers in general and for each country.
to improve their energy-efficiency to reduce
emissions and cost, thereby improving their General
competitive position in the world market.
However, the adoption of E3STs is The most important barrier is the high capital
hampered by financial, technical, managerial cost of E3STs in India, Sri Lanka and the
and other barriers. Philippines; lack of financial incentives from
the government in China; and management
The five Asian countries in this study already fears of higher costs of production due to
have sufficient policy frameworks to improve E3STs in Vietnam.
the energy and environmental performance
in the SMI sectors considered in this study. In China and Vietnam, lack of enforcement
What has been lacking is the convergence of of regulations is also an important barrier
mechanisms for a direction that achieves the whereas they are not considered significant
purpose that these policies are meant to in other countries. Inadequate information on
serve. Case studies show that focused efforts E3STs is the second ranked barrier in
with appropriate strategies can bring results. Vietnam but in other countries it is not so
Therefore, to develop appropriate strategies significant. In none of the countries was non-
for overcoming them, barriers have been availability of E3STs or lack of technical or
prioritized based on inputs from stakeholders managerial skill seen as a barrier for adoption.
including policy makers, SMI management
and financial institutions.

Chapter 5 57
 Barriers t o Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
In China
Policy and market related barriers are by far
the most important in hindering the adoption
of E3STs. Under this category, lack of
financial and fiscal incentives such as tax
exemptions or subsidies for installation are
the main barriers. At the same time, weak
enforcement of environmental regulation is
also an important barrier for non-adoption
of E3STs.
Financial and economic barriers are the
second most important. High capital cost of
E3STs and their poor returns are particular
barriers under this category. Although
technical and information or management and
organizational barriers are not significant,
lack of information on E3STs and
management’s investment priority for the
expansion of production facilities hinders
adoption.
Neither lack of technical skills nor the
infrastructure to incorporate E3STs in
existing facilities are reasons for non-adoption
of E3STs in China.
In India
Financial and economic barriers are the most
important barriers hindering the adoption of
E3STs in India, particularly high capital costs
and poor returns. The fear of increasing cost
of production due to implementation is
another important barrier.
Management and organizational barriers are
the second most important. SMI management
staff are satisfied with their current processes
58 Chapter 5
and technologies and afraid of adopting any
changes in technology. At the same time,
their investment priority is for expansion of
production capacity rather than improving
technologies. Lack of public awareness or
demand for green products or non-availability
of E3STs is not considered a barrier.
In the Philippines
Financial and economic barriers are the most
important barrier to adoption of E3STs in
the Philippines, of which high capital costs
and difficulties in accessing financing are
identified as the most important.
Management attitudes towards E3STs is an
important barrier as their priorities are
towards expansion of production capacity
and increasing market share rather than
implementing E3STs. However,
management’s technical or managerial
capacity is not a hindrance.
In Sri Lanka
Financial and economic barriers are the most
important in Sri Lanka. These include high
capital cost of E3STs, difficulties in
accessing financing and poor returns on
capital. At the same time, fear of increased
production cost due to adoption of E3STs
is also one reason for non-adoption.
Policy and market related barriers are the
second most important in Sri Lanka,
particularly low demand for green products.
Lack of information, non-availability and
service are also important barriers in Sri
Lanka.

In Vietnam
In the Vietnamese SMI sector, management
is concerned that adoption of E3STs will
incur additional costs and under mine
competitiveness in the marketplace. This is
found to be the major barrier in Vietnam.
High capital cost is also a factor.
Lack of information is identified as the
second most important barrier. Non-
availability is not seen to be a barrier. Lack
of enforcement of regulation is also
identified as an important barrier.
5.2 Recommendations
Addressing all the barriers may not be
possible in a single step and so a step-by-step
approach should be taken, starting from the
immediate concerns to the least important
barriers. Such a task is not easy, given the
different prevailing economic environments
of the participating countries. Nonetheless,
immediate measures should be taken,
otherwise the less significant barriers of today
may become more significant tomorrow.
Policy makers should be urged to formulate
appropriate policy measures based on these
findings. Some broad recommendations are
given below.
In general, SMIs suffer primarily from
financial and technological barriers. The
present financial system does not put
sufficient emphasis on the soundness of
technology and merely concentrates on
monetary returns, whereas technology
evaluation concentrates only on technological
feasibility without financial consideration.
Conclusions & Recommendations
These barriers could be addressed by a single
window system, wherein an individual
technology board or institution with
sufficient resources could assess the
technology and finance the projects. This
would avoid the ambiguity of the present
system with a separate technology evaluation
and financial assessment.
Credit mechanisms and funds flow to banks
and other financing agencies should be tailor-
made so that they can provide financial
assistance to SMIs in the most flexible and
least-cost manner. This would overcome
barriers to E3ST adoption due to non-
availability or difficulties in accessing
finance. Guarantee funds or similar
mechanisms to minimize the perceived risk
and to ease the strict collateral requirements
of lending organizations are recommended.
Participation of financial institutions should
be encouraged in developing energy and
environmental policies or financial
mechanisms for the promotion of E3STs.
They can share their experiences and
evaluation practices from the lenders
perspective. Lending institutions should:
• go beyond traditional evaluation
approaches and adopt changes in their
ter ms and conditions for financial
assistance, and
• enhance their existing financial
instruments with more performance-
based attributes derived from market-
based instruments so that financial
instruments are environmentally and
investor friendly.
Chapter 5 59
 Barriers t o Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Revising financing schemes for acquiring and

emloying E3STs should be encouraged. A
carful review of existing and proposed
finncial instruments and mechanisms needs
to be done. In this respect, building capacity
of banking staff to understand the unique
nature of SMIs and E3STs is essential for
their promotion. Sharing experiences among
lending institutions, study countries and
regional economies would help to build the
confidence needed by lenders in financing
SMIs.

Energy service companies (ESCO) are

playing an increasing role in promoting
E3STs in large industries and the commercial
sector. Similarly, their involvement in SMIs
can also promote E3STs by providing
necessary guarantees regarding their
performance. Thus, financial institutions and
SMIs could reduce their financial risk .

60 Chapter 5
 References

References
ADB (2003). SME Baseline Survey: Results and Key Findings Report (TA No. 3822-SRI), Asian
Development Bank, Sri Lanka.

AIT (2002a). Policy interventions to Promote Energy Efficient and Environmentally Sound
Technologies in SMI, SMIs in Asia: Energy and Environment, Asian Institute of Technology,
Thailand. ISBN 974-8209-01-6.

AIT (2002b). Small and Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy and Environment – Desiccated
Coconut Sector, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand. ISBN 974-8208-47-8.

AIT (2002c). Small and Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy and Environment – Tea Sector,
Asian Institute of Technology. ISBN 974-8208-49-4.

Andersen M.S. (1998). Institutional aspects of Market-based Instruments: Environment Policy

Research Brief, European Union Research Network, Environmental Institute, University College,
Dublin (http://www.ucd.ie/~envinst/index.html).

APCTT (1996). APCTT Barriers on Environmentally Sound Technologies (E3STs), workshop in

India, 1996.

APEC (1997). Eco-Efficiency in Small and Medium Enterprises. Best Practices Manuals for
SMEs. November, 1997.
http://www.apec.org/apec/publications/all_publications/small_medium_enterprises.html
(Accessed on June, 2004).

APEC (2001). Joint Ministerial Statement, 8th APEC Small and Medium Enterprises Ministerial
Meeting, Shanghai, China, 29-30 August 2001. Available from http://www.apec.org/apec/
ministerial_statements/sectoral_ministerial/small_medium_enterprises/2001_small_medium.html
(Accessed on June, 2004).

Das Gupta N. (1998). Tall blunders: Present strategies do more harm than good, Down to Earth,
30 September, 22-25.

Denis H.D.R. (2003). Decision making support to Jacksonville District, USA, Dennis Cannon,
HDR Inc. USA. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/projects/project_docs /pdp_44_regional/
101701_decisionmaking_pres.pdf (Accessed on June, 2004).

Dunmade I. (2002). Indicators of sustainability: Assessing the suitability of a foreign technology

for a developing economy, Technology in Society 24(4) 461-471.

EIA (2004). India: Environmental Issues - February 2004, Department of Energy, USA. Available
from http://www.eia.doe.gov (Accessed on June 2004).

FAO (1993). Status and Development Issues of the Brick Industry in Asia, Food and Agricultural
Organization, GCP/RAS/154/NET, Field Document 35. Available from http://www.rwedp.org /
acrobat/fd35.pdf (Accessed on June 2004).

References 61
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Gruber E. and Brand M. (1991). Promoting energy conservation in small and medium-sized
companies, Energy Policy, 19(3), 279-287.

Helby P. (2001). EKO-Energi - a public voluntary programme targeted at Swedish firms with
ambitious environmental goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 10, Issue 2, April 2002,
143-151.

Huisingh D. (2002). Technical Background Papers,

http://www.unep.org/unep/regoffs/roap/nettlap/Products/TrainingMaterials/CleanerProduction/Part-
III1.html (Accessed on June 2004).

Jonathan S. (1999). Status Report on energy and environment, policy and programmes in China,
Environmental Energy Technologies Division, Berkeley National Laboratory.

Kumar S., Visvanathan C., Peng S., Rudramoorthy R., Herrera A.B., Senanayake G., Son L.D.,
(2005). Greenhouse Gas Emission from Small and Medium Scale Industries in Asia, Asian
Institute of Technology.

Liberatore M.J. and Nydick R.L. (2003). Decision Technology Modeling, Software and
Applications, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Matsuo N. (2004). Issues mapping for CDM: An Asian Perspective, IGES-URC Regional
Workshop in Asia on Capacity Development for the Clean Development Mechanism. 24-26
March, 2004, Siem Reap, Cambodia.

PECC (2003). Financing Small and Medium Enterprises: Challenges and Options, Pacific
Economic Cooperation Council. Available from www.pecc.org/finance/papers/FF-financing-
smes(2003).pdf (Accessed on June 2004).

Peng S., Liu Y., Shi H. and Ping Z. (2005). Studies on Barriers for Promotion of Clean Technology
in SMEs of China, Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment, Vol. 3, No. 1.

Pohekar S.D. and Ramachandran M. (2004). Application of multi-criteria decision making to

sustainable energy planning - A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 8(4), 365-
381.

Saaty T. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation,
McGraw-Hill International.

Saaty T. (1999). Decision Making for Leaders – The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in
a Complex World (1999/2000 edition), University of Pittsburgh.

Sathaye J., Gadgil A. and Mukhopadhyay M. (1999). Role of Development Banks in Market
Transformation: India Case Studies (LBNL-43191), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Available from http://ies.lbl.gov/iespubs/43191.pdf (Accessed on June 2004).

SETC (2000). An Introduction to Cleaner Production, State Economic and Trade Commission,
Chinese Inquisition Press, Beijing, 39-43, ISBN 7-80086-668-8/D.669.

Singapore Environment Council (2005). Green Label. Available from http://www.sec.org.sg/

greenlabel_htm/greenlable_frameset.htm (Accessed on March 2005).

62 References
 References

SPRU (2000). Barriers to Energy Efficiency to Public and Private Organizations: Final Report to
the European Commission, SPRU (Science and Technology Policy Research), University of
Sussex.

Su M., Deng J. and He J. (2004). Energy efficiency and CO2 abatement in China township and
village foundries, International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 21(1/2) 69-78.

TERI (1999). Improving the energy performance of small scale foundries, The Energy and
Resources Institute. Available from http://www.teriin.org/case/foundry.htm (Accessed on June
2004).

TERI (2000). Experience in small-scale glass industry in Firozabad, The Energy and Resources
Institute. Available from http://www.teriin.org/case/glass.htm (Accessed on June 2004).

TERI (2002). Resource utilization improvements in brick industry, The Energy and
Resources Institute. Available from http://www.teriin.org/case/brick.htm (Accessed on June
2004).

TERI (2003). Vertical Shaft Brick Kiln Technology in Vietnam (Report No. 2003CR41), The Energy
and Resources Institute. Available from http://www.teriin.org/reports/rep197/rep197.htm
(Accessed on June 2004).

Thiruchelvam M., Kumar S. and Visvanathan C. (2003). Policy options to promote energy efficient
and environmentally sound technologies in small- and medium-scale industries Energy Policy,
31(10), 977-987.

UNCTAD (1999). Providing sustainable financial and non-financial services for SME development,
Expert Meeting on Sustainable Financial and Non-Financial Services for SME Development,
Geneva, 2-4 June 1999. Available from http://r0.unctad.org/en/special/c3em7ag.htm#items
(Accessed on June 2004).

UNEP (1989). Cleaner Production Assessment in Industries - Barriers for Cleaner Production
from the Perspective of Industries, United National Environmental Programme. Available from
http://www.uneptie.org/pc/cp/understanding_cp/cp_industries.htm (Accessed on June 2004).

UNEP (2002). Review of Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Target Sector Information, Greenhouse
Gas Emission Reduction from Industry in Asia and Pacific (GERIAP), UNEP, June 2002.
Available from http://www.geriap.org/, (Accessed on June 2004).

UNIDO (1999). Energy Conservation and GHG Emissions Reduction in Chinese TVEs, UNIDO
Project Documents. Available from http://www.unido.org (Accessed on June 2004).

UNIDO (2003). EGM on Industrial Energy Efficiency, Co-generation and Climate Change
Mitigation: Conclusions & Recommendations, UNIDO. Available from http://www.unido.org
(Accessed on June 2004).

USAID (1999). Reducing urban and industrial pollution in the Philippines, Center for Development
Information and Evaluation (CDIE), USAID. Available from www.dec.org/usaid_eval (Accessed on
June 2004).

Vine E. (2005). An international survey of the energy service company (ESCO) industry, Energy
Policy, 33(5), 691-704.

References 63
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Visvanathan C. and Kumar S. (1999). Issues for better implementation of cleaner production in Asian small
and medium industries, Journal of Cleaner Production 7(2), 127-134.

Wang H. (2002a). Incomplete Enforcement of Pollution Regulation: Bargaining Power of Chinese Factories,
April 2002. Available from http://www.worldbank.org/nipr/work_paper/ (Accessed on June 2004)

Wang H. (2002b). Industrial Ownership and Environmental Performance: Evidence from China, World Bank.
Available from http://www.worldbank.org/nipr/china/ownership-paper.htm (Accessed on June 2004)

Wheeler D. and Afsah S. (1996). Going Public on Polluters in Indonesia: BAPEDAL’s Proper Prokasih
Program. East Asian Executive Reports, International Executive Reports, Washington, DC. May 1996.
Available from http://www.worldbank.org/nipr/work_paper/proper/ (Accessed on June 2004)

64 References
 Appendix A

APPENDIX A: SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE USED IN RANKING OF BARRIERS

Name of Company (Optional) ______________________

Name (Optional) ____________________ Designation / Type of Work _________________
Address (Optional) _____________________________
Contact number (Optional) ______________________
Email (Optional) _______________________________

Directions:

The aim of this questionnaire is to solicit your response by ranking the barriers in the promotion of
Energy Efficient and Environmentally Friendly Technologies in the tea manufacturing industry. The
questionnaire is divided into four major classifications. Each classification has at least 5 questions.
Please analyze the barriers and rank them comparatively as given below:

Sample

Appendix 65
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

66 Appendix
Appendix A

Appendix 67
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

68 Appendix

APPENDIX B: WEIGHTS AND RANKING
OF BARRIERS FOR EACH STUDY SECTOR
AND COUNTRY
Ranking the barriers
Step 1
All the barriers are first listed and categorized
into four major barrier categories. Table 3.1
explains the barrier categories and the
individual barriers.
The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was
used to rank the barriers. A hierarchy
structure (shown below) was developed for
ranking the barriers.
The barriers (Table 3.1) were transformed
into a questionnaire, (Appendix A).
Responses to the questionnaire were
obtained from stakeholders in all the selected
five countries.
Step 2
To rank the barriers, an overall weight for
each of the individual barriers needs to be
established in terms of its contribution to
inhibiting the promotion of E3STs.
Appendix B
First, a weight for each of the individual
barriers within a particular barrier category
is established. For this, pairwise comparisons
are done for each barrier within a particular
barrier category. The scale used for pairwise
comparisons is described in Table 3.2.
After the pairwise comparisons are
completed, which results in a comparison
matrix, there is a need for mathematical
evaluation to deduce weights for each barrier.
The weights can be determined by
normalizing the pairwise comparison matrix.
For example, the pairwise comparison matrix
between the barriers under the barrier
category Management and Organizational
Barriers can be represented as follows:
Based on the above pairwise comparison
matrix, the weight for the barrier, B1.i , can be
determined by the formula
where
WB1.i = Weight for barrier B1.i
B1.i 1.j = Pairwise comparison result of
barrier B1.i and B1.j
Similarly, the weights for barriers of the other
three barrier categories can also be found.
Appendix 69
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
Next, the weight for each barrier category in
terms of its contribution to inhibiting the
promotion of E3STs is established. A
pairwise comparison is done again for each
barrier category. The scale used for pairwise
comparisons is described in Table 3.2. The
pairwise comparisons result in a comparison
matrix, which is then normalized for
determining the weights for each barrier
category.
The pairwise comparison matrix between the
barrier categories can be represented as
follows:
Step 3
The overall weight of the individual barriers
can now be found by
OWB i. j = WBi * WBi. j
where,
WBi = Weight of barrier category Bi
(i varies from 1-4, the four
major barrier categories)
WBi.j = Weight of individual barrier
Bi.j (j varies from 1-5, the five
individual barriers within
each barrier categories)

Thus, the individual barriers for this sample

Based on the above matrix, the weight for
the barrier category Bi can be determined by
the formula
response can then be obtained. Based on the
overall weights of all the barriers, the
individual barriers can now be ranked.
The overall weights are consolidated for
multiple responses and ranking is obtained
based on stakeholder categories.

where,
WBi = Weight for barrier category Bi
bij = Pairwise comparison result of
barrier category Bi and Bj

A ranking of the overall barrier categories

can also be done based on the weights of the
barrier categories.

70 Appendix
 Appendix B
An Illustration

For a single stakeholder’s response to the questionnaire, the results can be obtained as
shown in the following table for the four categories of barriers.

Appendix 71
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia
The overall weight of the individual barriers as well as their ranking for this one completed
questionnaire is as follows:

72 Appendix
 Appendix B

Appendix B1: Weights and Rankings of Barriers for China

Appendix 73
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Appendix B2: Weights and Rankings of Barriers for India

74 Appendix
 Appendix B

Appendix B3: Weights and Rankings of Barriers for Philippines

Appendix 75
 Barriers to Promoting E3STs to SMIs in Asia

Appendix B4: Weights and Rankings of Barriers for Sri Lanka

76 Appendix
 Appendix B

Appendix B5: Rankings of Barriers for Vietnam

Appendix 77
 ARRPEEC

The Asian Regional Research Programme in Energy, Environment and Climate (ARRPEEC) is organised
as a regional network involving 22 national research institutes from China, India, Indonesia, Philippines,
Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. ARRPEEC is funded by the Swedish International Development
Cooperation Agency (Sida) and coordinated by the Asian Institute of Technology. The first and second
phases of ARRPEEC started in 1995 and 1999.

ARRPEEC’s third phase began in 2002 and involves four regional research projects:

1. Biomass Energy in Asia: Assessment and Strategy Formulation

2. Small and Medium Scale Industries in Asia: Energy, Environment and Climate Interrelation
(SMIs in Asia)
3. Strategies for Promotion of Energy Efficient and Cleaner Technologies in the Urban
Transport System
4. Strategies for Promotion of Energy Efficient and Cleaner Technologies in the Power Sector.

The broad objectives of ARRPEEC are:

• Production of high quality policy oriented outputs in the selected areas of energy,
environment and climate research.
• Capacity mobilisation and enhancement at NRI level through project level joint activities
and fellowships.
• Linkage of project level activities in the participating countries with national, regional and
global initiatives for reducing GHG and other hazardous emissions.
• Dissemination results of the programme among policy personnel with a view to creating
an impact on policy making.

Details regarding ARRPEEC and its publications are available at www.arrpeec.ait.ac.th

SMIs in Asia
Small and Medium scale Industries in Asia (SMIs in Asia) is one of the projects under ARRPEEC. It was
aimed at studying five SMI sectors :- brick/tiles/ceramic, desiccated coconut, foundry, tea and textiles -
in China, India, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam with the following objectives:

· Greenhouse gas emission estimation

· Review of barriers inhibiting adoption of energy efficient and environmentally sound
technologies (E3STs)
· Techno economic assessment of E3STs

The participating institutions of SMIs in Asia project are

• Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand

• Center for Environmentally Sound Technology Transfer, Beijing, China
• PSG College of Technology and Industrial Institute, Coimbatore, India
• Industrial Technology Development Institute, Metro Manila, Philippines
• Industrial Services Bureau of North Western Province, Kurunegala, Sri Lanka
• Consulting Center for Cooperative Promotion and Capacity Building, Hanoi, Vietnam
Learn more about SMIs in Asia projects and publications at
www.serd.ait.ac.th/smi2/smi/roadmap
 BARRIERS TO PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES TO SMIs IN ASIA
BARRIERS
TO PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENT AND
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES TO SMIs IN ASIA

BARRIERS
TO PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENT AND
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES TO SMIs IN ASIA
S. Kumar C. Visvanathan Sizhen Peng R. Rudramoorthy Alice B. Herrera Gamini Senanayake Ly Dinh Son