For the past decade+, See Change Institute (SCI) has been asking a stubborn question about behavioral energy programs: if every program defines things differently, measures things differently, and reports things differently, how does the field ever actually learn anything?
Earlier this year, that question got a little closer to an answer when CSA Group released CSA/ANSI C555:26 – Definitions and Minimum Requirements for Energy Behaviour Programs. Our research helped lay the groundwork for this publication: in 2023, CEO Beth Karlin, Principal Scientist Sea Rotmann, and Research Associate Kady Cowan conducted the preliminary research that informed the standard’s development. This work included a deep dive into existing literature and standards and interviews with 17 experts spanning utilities, government agencies, research organizations, implementers, training organizations, and industry associations across Canada and internationally.
The picture that emerged was both familiar and striking. Behavioral energy programs can drive 20-30% reductions in residential electricity use, but the field’s inconsistent definitions, evaluation methods, and data collection approaches make those savings nearly impossible to compare, replicate, or defend to decision-makers. Existing energy frameworks don’t help much either: the 2015 National Building Code of Canada mentions occupant behavior exactly twice across 1,412 pages, and both times only to exclude it from performance calculations. LEED v5, one of the premier building certification systems in North America, doesn’t account for it at all.
Our preliminary research pointed toward four areas where standards could help most: shared definitions of energy behavior, minimum requirements for program design, standardized evaluation and data collection approaches, and practical guidance for practitioners. A volunteer team of international experts then spent a year turning those recommendations into C555:26.
This work connects to a longer thread in SCI’s research. Our review of behavior-based data collection methods through IEA-DSM’s Task 24, the Usability Perception Scale, and the Beyond kWh Toolkit kept running into the same gap: without common language and measurement approaches, the field loses hard-won knowledge every time a program ends. A standard gives practitioners something to build from rather than starting over.
Working on behavior-based energy programs? We’re always up for a good conversation about what’s working, what isn’t, and why. Get in touch.