survey of consumer awareness and use of energy rating …...1 contents 1 introduction.....4 2...

Survey of consumer awareness and use of energy rating labels in PICs: REGIONAL REPORT Prepared for

The Pacific Community (SPC)

1

Contents 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................................... 4

2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY .............................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 How did labels come about? ........................................................................................................................ 4

2.2 Regulatory development .............................................................................................................................. 5

2.3 PICs Energy Rating Labels ............................................................................................................................. 6

3 SURVEY OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................................. 7

4 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................... 8

4.1 Questionnaire ............................................................................................................................................... 8

4.2 Informed consent and professional standards ............................................................................................. 8

4.3 Sampling ....................................................................................................................................................... 8

4.4 Fieldwork in action ....................................................................................................................................... 9

4.5 Quality control and data security ................................................................................................................. 9

4.6 Survey sample design ................................................................................................................................. 10

4.7 Project sample size ..................................................................................................................................... 11

4.8 Project field dates ....................................................................................................................................... 11

5 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 13

5.1 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 13

5.2 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 17

5.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 19

5.4 Detail Results .............................................................................................................................................. 20

5.4.1 Awareness of energy labels ................................................................................................................ 20

5.4.2 Understanding and use of energy labels ............................................................................................ 24

5.4.3 Appliances in household – whitegoods .............................................................................................. 30

5.4.4 Appliances in household – cooling ..................................................................................................... 31

5.4.5 Appliances in household – entertainment ......................................................................................... 32

5.4.6 Appliances in household – clothes washing ....................................................................................... 33

5.4.7 Appliances in household – water heaters .......................................................................................... 34

5.4.8 Appliances in household – cooking .................................................................................................... 35

5.4.9 Appliance purchase behaviour and intentions ................................................................................... 36

5.4.10 Lighting ............................................................................................................................................... 39

6 LEARNINGS.......................................................................................................................................................... 41

7 ANNEX 1 – QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................................................................................................... 42

8 ANNEX 2 – SHOWCARDS ..................................................................................................................................... 54

2

Tables and Figures Figure 1. Map of Oceania............................................................................................................................................ 12

Table 1. Status of PICs in developing legal framework for MEPSL ............................................................................... 5

Table 2. Survey coverage by country .......................................................................................................................... 10

Table 3. Sample sizes by country ................................................................................................................................ 11

Table 4. Fieldwork dates by country ........................................................................................................................... 11

Table 5. Awareness of non-price labels ...................................................................................................................... 20

Table 6. Label communication .................................................................................................................................... 20

Table 7. AS/NZS label – recognition ........................................................................................................................... 21

Table 8. Awareness of AS/NZS label ........................................................................................................................... 22

Table 9. Asia / USA / Europe label recognition ........................................................................................................... 23

Table 10. Stars communication .................................................................................................................................. 24

Table 11. Stars communication (related to energy use or energy efficiency)............................................................ 24

Table 12. Stars importance ......................................................................................................................................... 25

Table 13 .Red box numbers communication .............................................................................................................. 25

Table 14. Running costs - label use for estimating ..................................................................................................... 26

Table 15. Running costs - source of information ........................................................................................................ 26

Table 16. Running costs - importance ........................................................................................................................ 26

Table 17. Tariff - awareness........................................................................................................................................ 27

Table 18. Tariff – source of information ..................................................................................................................... 28

Table 19. Red box - used for estimation ..................................................................................................................... 28

Table 20. Label use for future purchase ..................................................................................................................... 29

Table 21. Refrigerators in home. ................................................................................................................................ 30

Table 22. Freezers in home......................................................................................................................................... 30

Table 23. Food cooling devices in home ..................................................................................................................... 30

Table 24. Air conditioners in home ............................................................................................................................ 31

Table 25. Electric fans in home ................................................................................................................................... 31

Table 26. Cooling in home .......................................................................................................................................... 31

Table 27. Television in home ...................................................................................................................................... 32

Table 28. Number of twin-tub clothes washers in home ........................................................................................... 33

Table 29. Number of automatic clothes washers in home......................................................................................... 33

Table 30. Presence of clothes washers in home ........................................................................................................ 33

Table 31. Number of electric water heaters in home ................................................................................................ 34

Table 32. Number of solar water heaters ................................................................................................................... 34

Table 33. Number of electric cookers......................................................................................................................... 35

Table 34. Number of gas cookers ............................................................................................................................... 35

Table 35. Presence of electric / gas cookers in home ................................................................................................ 35

Table 36. How recently the last major appliance was purchased .............................................................................. 36

Table 37. Last major appliance purchase ................................................................................................................... 36

Table 38. Next major appliance to be purchased ....................................................................................................... 37

Table 39. Next major appliance to be purchased (major appliance of interest) ........................................................ 37

Table 40. Future purchase timing ............................................................................................................................... 38

Table 41. Lighting types ever used ............................................................................................................................. 40

Table 42. Lighting types currently being used ............................................................................................................ 40

Table 43. Main type of lighting ................................................................................................................................... 40

3

GLOSSARY of ACRONYMS

AS/NZS Australian Standard / New Zealand Standard

CFL Compact Fluorescent Light

LFL Linear Fluorescent Light

LED Light Emitting Diode

MEPS Minimum Energy Performance Standards

MEPSL Minimum Energy Performance Standards and Labelling

PALS Pacific Appliance Labelling and Standards

PICs Pacific Island Countries

SPC Pacific Community

ICC International Chamber of Commerce

ESOMAR the name of the peak body publishing professional standards for market research (formerly an

acronym)

4

1 INTRODUCTION SPC commissioned Tebbutt Research to undertake the Survey of consumer awareness and use of energy rating labels in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). The survey was completed in 10 PICs during December 2016, January 2017 and February 2017:

Fiji,

Cook Islands,

Kiribati,

Niue,

Papua New Guinea,

Samoa,

Solomon Islands,

Tonga,

Tuvalu, and

Vanuatu. This report is one of the deliverables for the project. It summarises the key findings for the region, showing results comparing each of the ten countries.

2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

2.1 How did labels come about? Energy efficiency targets are an important means of realizing energy savings everywhere and PICs are no exception. Regional Leaders gave their support to this at the 42nd meeting of Pacific Islands Forum Leaders in September 2011, especially supporting the expansion of the existing electrical appliance labelling and standards programme. The implementation of labels and standards underpins the energy savings program. Various potential and feasibility studies have confirmed the potential of implementing energy labelling and/or minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for selected appliances in PICs. The potential savings on offer are significant. A 2011 study, “The costs and benefits of introducing standards and labels for electrical appliances in Pacific Island countries” (SPC, September 2011) projected a saving of approximately 12%, or 359 GWh per year by 2025. The monetary benefits of the energy savings were estimated to be in the range of USD 582 to 895 million (undiscounted) over the period 2010 to 2025, depending on the oil price. This study also revealed that MEPS makes good economic sense, with the projected economic benefits greatly exceeding the project costs, both for product buyers and for PICs as a whole; this is because it is far less costly for PICs to import more efficient refrigerators, air conditioners and lights than to import diesel fuel. The report further recommended that the PICs standards and labelling program be aligned with Australian and New Zealand programs. The Pacific Appliance Labelling and Standards (PALS) Programme was implemented in 2012, being funded by the Government of Australia and implemented by the Pacific Community (SPC).

5

2.2 Regulatory development Worldwide there are now more than 80 countries with MEPS and Labelling (MEPSL) programmes. Fiji was the first country in the South Pacific to implement a legally enforceable MEPSL program, starting in 2012 (applying to refrigerators and freezers only). This has since been followed by the Solomon Islands (January 2016), Tuvalu (April 2016), and Vanuatu (March 2017). The other PICs are currently at different stages of regulatory development as indicated in the table below

Table 1. Status of PICs in developing legal framework for MEPSL PIC Status of

Legislation /

Regulations

MEPS &

labelling

Refrigerators &

Freezers

MEPS &

labelling

Air

conditioners

MEPS &

labelling

Lighting

(b)

MEPS only

Other

MEPS &

labelling

Fiji Enacted Covered from

January 2012

Under

consideration

Under

consideration

Televisions

under

consideration

Cook Islands Draft Covered (a) Covered (a)

Kiribati Draft Covered (a) Covered (a) Covered (a)

Samoa Draft Covered (a) Covered (a) Covered (a)

Solomon

Islands

Enacted Covered from

January 2016

Covered (a) Covered (a)

Tonga Draft Covered (a) Covered (a) Covered (a)

Tuvalu Enacted Covered from

April 2016


Vanuatu Enacted Covered from

March 2017


PNG No progress

Niue No progress

(a) Included in current legislation/regulations or draft legislation/regulations for MEPS and energy labelling.

(b) Incandescent lamps, compact fluorescent lamps, linear fluorescent lamps and ballasts.

These PICs are adopting Australian and New Zealand standards (AS/NZS) for the testing, MEPS and energy labelling of the categories of electrical products indicated. Even before the legislation takes effect, many of the products listed in Table 1 already carry the AS/NZS label, because many global suppliers send the same models to the Pacific as they send to Australia or New Zealand. However, products with energy labels of different types (e.g. from China, Singapore or Europe) or no energy label at all are also common in PICs. Even after legislation takes effect, such ‘non-standard’ labels may continue to appear on product types not covered by the legislation, such as clothes washers1. Therefore, consumers are also exposed to (and aware of) ‘non-standard’ labels, and may continue to be exposed to them, for products not covered by the MEPSL legislation. Mandatory labelling and standards are relatively new in the Pacific. Therefore, the PALS Programme has an important role to ensure success, through ensuring: (a) that national and regional capacities are developed and/or strengthened to be able to manage appropriate programmes; (b) the necessary administrative and supporting frameworks are in place; and (c) that all stakeholders have a good understanding of what they need to do when the legislation is enacted and implemented. Apart from developing legislations for MEPSL, the PALS Programme supports PICs through activities focussed on training, capacity enhancement and public awareness.

1 The MEPSL legislation targets those appliances and products that are significant electricity users in each PIC, and where there is significant scope to improve efficiency. Clothes washers as a group use relatively little energy in PICs, largely because nearly all washing is done with unheated water and clothes are dried in the sun rather than tumble dried.

6

Some of the key indicators of success for MEPSL are2:

rising awareness of energy labels among appliance buyers;

an increasing tendency to use the energy labels in the purchase decision; and

increasing preference for more efficient products. The main aim of this research project is to establish baselines from which these trends can be tracked in future.

2.3 PICs Energy Rating Labels A mandatory energy rating label must be attached to an appliance when it is displayed for sale, to make potential buyers aware of its energy efficiency and energy use, and so buyers can compare competing products on a consistent basis. Only the one standard label type will be able to be displayed once the labelling legislation comes into force. There are many benefits to taking the ‘one label family’ approach, including: (1) consumers only need to be familiar with one type of label; and (2) consumers can compare the energy efficiency, energy use, and running costs of different products because they all have the same type of standard energy label. The MEPSL legislation for PICs require that all products must meet the relevant Australian/New Zealand (ANZ) standard, and that they must also carry an energy rating label of the type specified in the ANZ Standard. No other energy labels will be permitted to be displayed on the products indicated once the legislation in each PIC takes effect. There are different types of labels.

The one used for refrigerators, freezers and televisions, is a standard label containing an energy efficiency rating (the number of stars) and the amount of electricity used each year under standard operating conditions (the kWh per year value).

The air conditioner label is in two parts – the star ratings in the blue section show the energy efficiency when cooling, and the star rating in the red section shows the energy efficiency when heating. There is no standard kWh/yr value (due to the high variability in hours of use between climate zones). If an air conditioner is only capable of cooling, it only needs to carry the part of the label with the blue scale.

For products that carry labels, it is only lawful to label products that meet the MEPS level. For lighting products, there is no mandatory labelling, but the MEPS are intended to prevent the import of products below the minimum acceptable level of efficiency. Consumers may therefore not be aware that MEPS are in place, but may notice that certain types of lights disappear from the market.

2 There are also other key indicators such as accuracy of performance claims, and rate of compliance with labelling at point of sale.

7

3 SURVEY OBJECTIVES In October 2016, the SPC commissioned Tebbutt Research to carry out surveys of consumer awareness and use of energy rating labels in 10 PICs. The core objective of the surveys is to establish a baseline for tracking the awareness of electrical appliance efficiency promotion activities and awareness of energy labels by householders in the 10 countries of interest: Fiji, Cook Islands, Kiribati, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. As the survey is intended to be repeated in future to measure impact and change following legislation, awareness programs and educational activities, the baseline must be reliable and robust. The survey measures:

Awareness of energy efficiency labels overall and by type/source market;

Label communication, or what they tell the householder about the product;

Label/rating importance;

Usefulness of labels in estimating/managing costs;

Knowledge about costs and sources of information;

Household appliance inventory for refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, televisions;

How recently major appliances were purchased;

Appliance most likely to be next purchased; and

Familiarity and usage of lighting types. The survey also collected basic demographic information on the householders, including age group, gender, household size, household type and household ownership. This information was used for cross-tabulation purposes to extract further information from the data.

8

4 METHODOLOGY The project was a quantitative face to face survey conducted at households throughout the 10 PICs. This methodology section covers details of the survey to explain the approach, process, fieldwork and data analysis.

4.1 Questionnaire SPC supplied a draft questionnaire (Pacific Appliance Labelling and Standards Program Survey Form on the use of Energy Rating Labels) and Tebbutt Research, as part of their scope of works, revised and refined the document using their expertise in questionnaire design. While the overall goal was to ensure all information needed was collected efficiently, consideration was also given to the respondent experience to increase the likelihood of completing the survey. The following guidelines were used to frame the final questionnaire:

Developing an appropriate opening preamble explaining about the survey;

Obtaining consent after the pre-amble so that respondents can either agree to be interviewed or refuse (as is their right);

Developing a suitable close for the survey, including thanking the respondents for their time;

Changes to text/wording to maximize comprehension by respondents;

Question ordering to ensure good flow and a better experience for the respondent;

Question ordering that places questions involving spontaneous responses before those questions containing information that could prompt answers;

Suggesting possible additional questions that might augment our understanding;

Checking that numbering and coding used a consistent approach;

Where open-ended questions appeared, pre-coding for all clear response options while maintaining space for open verbatim responses; and

Checking that all information was collected in line with ESOMAR3 guidelines. The final questionnaire was approved by SPC before fieldwork commenced. All results presented in this document include the wording of questions. A copy of the questionnaire is included as Annexe 1 and the associated show-cards are included as Annexe 2 of this report.

4.2 Informed consent and professional standards Tebbutt Research adheres to the ICC/ESOMAR code of practice4 which includes upholding confidentiality. For this reason, Tebbutt Research included an informed consent section at the beginning of each interview, prior to determining participant eligibility in the study. Respondents were assured of the anonymity of their responses. The names of individuals were not included in client data sets; rather, a unique ID was assigned and used to distinguish between individual interviews and their corresponding data in the data set.

4.3 Sampling As the survey was household based, and households were required to have electricity to qualify for participation, the areas of survey were restricted to those with electricity. Areas were chosen to provide a broad cross-section of households. This process was completed using known Census data, population maps and local knowledge. Due to the requirement for electrification, the survey was restricted to the main cities, islands, or population centres in each PIC.

3 ESOMAR is the global body representing the market and social research industry. It publishes a code of practice and ethical guidelines that members agree to adhere to. Tebbutt Research holds corporate membership, and senior staff also hold individual memberships. 4 The ICC/ESOMAR code of practice is a professional standards document co-owned and developed by ESOMAR in conjunction with the International Chamber of Commerce.

9

Clusters were allocated for each location, comprising a specific area. Each cluster had a designated start point and households were selected using the left-hand rule5, choosing every third house. No more than ten households were interviewed in any one cluster. The interviewers sought to identify and interview the household decision-maker (or one of the household decision makers) on purchasing appliances, like refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, televisions or clothes washers, and aged between 20 and 50 years.

4.4 Fieldwork in action Interviewing was conducted face-to-face in respondent households (door-to-door) using the Tebbutt Research field team. In some PICs, Tebbutt Research had an existing field team, while in others interviewers were recruited. In all cases, staff underwent thorough training (or retraining) on the theory and practice of interviewing, as well as specific project briefing. The training covered general practice and standards, briefing on the survey and interview guides, protocols for the project, and trial interviews. Fieldwork was conducted at flexible hours to maximise the chances of finding a qualifying respondent at home. In some markets this meant working from 6.30am, while in others this meant working up to 8pm. Field teams generally comprised three people, one Field Supervisor and two Interviewers. In smaller and more remote locations the approach was to either have smaller teams (comprised two people rather than three), or to have the area completed by Field Supervisors alone. There were no significant incidents during the fieldwork, with all interviews completed safely and the team returning safely each day. The field team reported that respondents were welcoming and enjoyed participating in the interviews. There were no issues approaching houses in any country, and all field teams were well received. On numerous occasions respondents went to extra lengths to provide information, especially relating to model numbers and makes of household appliances.

4.5 Quality control and data security Tebbutt Research employed quality control at multiple points during the project including the following. Training - Field staff were all trained in the proper use of the data collection instruments, including confirmation of unlikely or inconsistent responses, ensuring completion of all questions and routing through the questionnaire. Supervision - Field Supervisors oversaw each field team, observing a sample of each interviewer’s work, and conducting quality control checks on the ground (before teams left the area). Typically, a minimum of 10% of interviews were observed. Dedicated QC - A dedicated QC team reviewed completions independently. This was done progressively, enabling systemic issues or comprehension errors to be addressed promptly while field was still in progress. Logic checks - Data entry programs were designed with logic checks, automatic routing, and restrictions on data types and ranges to minimize logic errors and internal inconsistencies in the responses. Data validation - A portion of the data entry was repeated by a different operator to the one who originally entered the data). Typically, 10% of data is double entered. Tebbutt Research staff completed all data entry.

5 This is a random-walk methodology. First, the respondent goes to the designated start point. Next, a pen is tossed in the air, and the interviewer walks in the direction it points upon landing. Every questionnaire has a unique ID number and the interviewer looks at the first digit and walks past (skips) that number of dwellings. The interviewer will then attempt to survey the household in that dwelling, and thereafter every third dwelling on the left-hand side, turning left when any intersection is found, until ten households have been interviewed. The interviewer will then proceed to the next start point.

10

In-house storage - Tebbutt Research maintains its own data entry and analysis facility so all data was handled in-house. Data was stored on a server, with permissions restricted to those who needed access. Survey responses stored on the server were anonymous, with no identifying information stored on the server against any survey response. Daily backups were maintained, and files copies were held off-site to protect against catastrophic data loss.

4.6 Survey sample design The sample design selected for the study was based on population. Statistics based on households have been

calculated retrospectively and are summarised in Table 2.

The ‘National’ statistics are population and average household size (from census data), from which the

approximate number of households in the country have been calculated.

The ‘Sampled Locations’ shows the population and number of households in the urban areas derived from census

data, and the average household size has been calculated (except for Fiji, where population and average

household size were known from census data and the approximate number of households has been estimated).

The ‘Survey’ columns record the number of households surveyed, along with the average number of people

actually living in those households. ‘Estimated Coverage’ is the number of households surveyed divided by the

number of households in the sampled locations. Note that in many cases the available census data does not

correspond exactly with the survey sample locations, and in these countries the coverage estimate will be slightly

lower than the actual coverage.

Table 2. Survey coverage by country

NATIONAL SAMPLED LOCATIONS SURVEY

Country

Po

pu

lati

on

Ho

use

ho

lds

Avg

. HH

Siz

e

Po

pu

lati

on

Ho

use

ho

lds

Avg

. HH

Siz

e

Ho

use

ho

lds

Avg

. HH

Siz

e

Est.

Co

vera

ge

Fiji 837721 174525 4.8 319662 67259 4.8 518 5.6 0.8%

PNG 7275324 1322786 5.5 364125 47559 7.7 507 8.8 1.1%

Solomon Islands 518870 94340 5.5 64609 8981 7.2 199 6.1 2.2%

Vanuatu 234023 48755 4.8 57195 11606 4.9 206 5.2 1.8%

Cook Islands 14974 4372 4.0 13095 3154 4.2 206 4.5 6.5%

Niue 1611 477 3.1 1611 447 3.6 50 4.5 11.2%

Samoa 187820 26831 7.0 143527 20280 7.1 204 6.1 1.0%

Tonga 103252 18033 5.7 90338 15631 5.8 197 6.1 1.3%

Tuvalu 10782 1797 6.0 3962 639 6.2 91 7.0 14.2%

Kiribati 110136 18356 6.0 56388 7877 7.2 140 7.8 1.8%

There is some difference between the average household size in census data and the average found during the

survey. It should be noted that the criteria for inclusion in the survey (e.g. requirement for electrification) along

with a higher concentration of surveys in more urban areas may account for the variance.

11

4.7 Project sample size The proposed sample size for the project was n=2,275, and the final number of completions was more than this at 2,318. The breakdown by country was as follows:

Table 3. Sample sizes by country

Country Proposed

Sample Size

Achieved

Sample Size

Fiji 500 518

Papua New Guinea 500 507

Solomon Islands 200 199

Vanuatu 200 206

Kiribati 150 140

Cook Islands 200 206

Niue 50 50

Samoa 200 204

Tonga 200 197

Tuvalu 75 91

Total 2,275 2,318

4.8 Project field dates Fieldwork for all ten countries was completed between 25 November 2016 and 19 February 2017. The table below outlines the fieldwork dates for each country. Table 4. Fieldwork dates by country

Country Start Date End Date

Fiji 25/11/2016 9/12/2016

Papua New Guinea 30/11/2016 13/12/2016

Solomon Islands 6/12/2016 15/12/2016

Vanuatu 12/12/2016 20/12/2016

Kiribati 15/12/2016 20/12/2016

Cook Islands 14/12/2016 22/12/2016

Niue 11/2/2017 16/2/2017

Samoa 7/2/2017 18/2/2017

Tonga 2/2/2017 19/2/2017

Tuvalu 7/2/2017 13/2/2017

12

Figure 1. Map of Oceania Source: GeorgeTheGeographer.co.uk, used with permission

13

5 RESULTS

5.1 Summary ENERGY LABEL AWARENESS / RECOGNITION The table below summarises specific responses from four different survey questions:

Spontaneous awareness of energy labels records any unprompted mention of energy labels in response to the two questions, “Have you seen any labels (other than price labels) on new appliances?” and “What do these labels tell you about the product?”

Prompted recognition of AS/NZS label records affirmative answers to the question, “Have you seen this label before?” (with a show-card of AS/NZS labels).

Prompted recognition of any other energy label records affirmative answers to the question, “Have you seen any of these types of energy labels before?” (with a show-card of energy labels from Singapore, China, USA, Thailand, Europe, Korea, and Japan).

There are significant differences between countries on these measures.

Spontaneous recall of energy labels was much higher than average in Fiji and Niue, and was significantly lower in Tuvalu, Kiribati, Tonga, and PNG.

Prompted recognition of the AS/NZS label was near universal in Fiji, and Niue, and over 9 in 10 for Cook Islands and Vanuatu. Awareness was lowest in Tuvalu and Tonga.

A large majority of those in the Cook Islands, Niue, Fiji, Tonga, and the Solomon Islands have not seen energy labels from other markets of interest. Vanuatu is the most likely to recall any other label.

TOTAL Fiji PNG Sols Vanuatu Kiribati Cooks Niue Samoa Tonga Tuvalu

% % % % % % % % % % %

Spontaneous awareness of energy labels

31.1 63.9 14.6 33.2 26.2 10.0 37.4 48.0 27.0 10.7 6.6

Prompted recognition of AS/NZS label

80.2 98.5 64.7 77.4 93.7 65.7 90.8 98.0 86.8 58.9 57.1

Prompted recognition of any other energy label

30.5 14.9 38.9 29.6 64.1 42.9 4.4 8.0 34.3 26.9 49.5

NOTE: Heat map colours in this table highlight differences for each row independently of other rows

Fiji – spontaneous awareness of energy labels is very high (64%), and the AS/NZS label is universally recognised when shown (99%). Only 15% recognised any other energy label.

PNG – spontaneous awareness of energy labels was low (15%), and recognition of the AS/NZS label was moderate (65%). 39% recognised at least one other energy label (China, Japan, and USA labels were most common).

Solomon Islands – a third (33%) spontaneously mention seeing an energy label on an appliance, and 77% recognised the AS/NZS label. 30% recognised at least one other energy label (17% China, 11% USA).

Vanuatu – just over a quarter (26%) spontaneously mentioned seeing an energy label on an appliance, and recognition of the AS/NZS label was very high (94%). Recognition of other energy labels was the highest of all PICs surveyed (64%), with Europe and China most common (34% each) followed by Japan (16%) and Korea (11%).

Kiribati – spontaneous mentions of energy labels was low at 10%, and there was only moderate recognition of the AS/NZS label (66%). 43% recognised at least one other energy label (China 38% and Japan 13% were most common).

Cook Islands – 37% mentioned energy labels without prompting, and 91% recognised the AS/NZS label. Only 4% recognised the energy labels of any other country (the lowest of all PICs surveyed).

Niue – just under half (48%) mentioned seeing energy labels, and recognition of the AS/NZS label was universal (98%). Very few have seen other energy labels (8%).

Samoa – 27% spontaneously mentioned energy labels on appliances, and recognition of the AS/NZS label was high (87%). Over one in three (34%) have seen at least one other energy label before, with Japan, China, Singapore, and USA each mentioned by 10% to 14% of respondents.

14

Tonga – spontaneous mentions of energy labels were low at 11%, and recognition of the AS/NZS label was significantly lower than the regional average (59%). 27% recognised at least one other energy label (11% China, 8% USA, 8% Thailand).

Tuvalu – spontaneous mentions of energy labels were the lowest in the region at 7%, and recognition of the AS/NZS label when shown was also the lowest recorded (57%). Half, however, recognised at least one other energy label; the Chinese label was recognised far more frequently (39%) than other country labels.

STAR RATING / CONSUMPTION / LABEL USE The table below summarises specific responses to multiple survey questions:

More stars = more efficient indicates the proportion of people correctly identifying that a higher star rating communicates higher energy efficiency or lower electricity consumption when asked the question, “What do the stars mean? If the appliance has more stars what does it tell you about the appliance?”

Star rating is important measures the proportion of people who said the star rating is either “important” or “very important” when asked the question, “How important is the star rating to you?”

Numbers show consumption is the proportion of people who said the numbers in the red box on the AS/NZS label show the annual electricity consumption of the appliance when asked the question, “What do the numbers in the red box mean?”

Label can estimate costs records the proportion of affirmative answers to the question, “Can you use the label to tell your annual estimated running costs of the appliance?”

Cost = consumption * tariff records the number of correct answers to the question, “How can you find out your annual running costs?” (NOTE: only those who claimed the label could be used to estimate costs were asked this question).

Running costs are important measures the proportion of people responding “important” or “very important” to the question, “How important are the running costs to you?”

Plan to use the label is the proportion of people who responded to the question, “How will you use the information on the label next time you or your family buys an appliance” by saying they would use it in some form, either by buying an appliance with more efficiency / higher star rating, or by working out total cost of ownership (price plus running costs).


% % % % % % % % % % %

More stars = more efficient 66.8 81.7 38.2 74.8 72.9 65.0 78.7 90.9 53.3 80.6 66.7

Star rating is important 88.1 97.1 85.6 80.4 94.7 74.3 78.6 80.0 98.5 83.8 84.6

Numbers show consumption 52.8 63.5 60.6 68.8 46.1 45.0 51.0 62.0 46.1 22.3 22.0

Label can estimate costs 20.2 20.5 17.9 26.6 21.4 22.1 21.8 28.0 34.8 4.1 5.5

Cost = consumption * tariff 24.1 30.2 20.9 41.5 11.4 9.7 6.7 21.4 33.8 25.0

Running costs are important 91.3 93.6 93.3 93.0 96.6 89.3 89.3 92.0 94.1 80.2 75.8

Plan to use the label 47.3 66.8 26.8 76.9 61.2 55.0 42.7 40.0 20.1 33.5 47.3


Fiji – The star rating and running costs are considered very important (97% say the star rating is important, and 94% say running costs are important). Understanding of the star rating is good (82% correctly interpret the stars). 64% understand the red box numbers indicate energy consumption, but only 21% believe the label can be used to estimate running costs. A moderate majority (67%) intend to use the label in some capacity for their next purchase.

PNG – The star rating and running costs are considered important (86% for star rating and 93% for running costs). Understanding of the stars, however, is poor, with only 38% associating more stars with using less energy. In contrast, 61% understand the red box numbers indicate power consumption, but only 18% believe the label can be used to estimate running costs. Intention to use the label for the next purchase is quite low at 27%.

Solomon Islands – Three quarters (75%) understand the star rating, and 69% understand the red box numbers indicate consumption. 42% correctly identify the running cost formula (the highest of all countries surveyed), however only 27% believe the label can be used to estimate running costs. Intention to use the label for next purchase was the highest in the region (77%).

Vanuatu – The star rating and running costs are almost universally considered important, and there is quite good understanding of the star rating. Understanding of the red box numbers and how to calculate

15

running costs is considerably lower (46% know the number indicates consumption, 21% say the label can be used to estimate costs, and just 11% know to multiply consumption by the tariff). Intention to use the label at next purchase is among the highest of countries surveyed at 61%.

Kiribati – While a clear majority (74%) say the star rating is important, it is lower than other PICs surveyed. Understanding of the star rating is moderate (65%). A majority (55%) intend to use the label to inform their next purchase.

Cook Islands – Almost 4 in 5 (79%) understand the star rating system, but there is little understanding of how to calculate running costs (7% correctly identify the formula to do so). 43% plan to use the label during their next purchase.

Niue – There is a clear understanding of the star rating system (91% is higher than all other countries surveyed), and understanding of the red box numbers was also towards the higher end for the survey, and 92% say running costs are important to them. Despite this, only 40% intend to use the label to inform their next purchase (38% claim affordability is a barrier to using the label).

Samoa – Only a slight majority (53%) showed an understanding of the star rating, and there is evidence of confusion in the data. Understanding that the label can be used to estimate running costs, however, was among the highest in the region (35%), along with the knowledge of how to perform the calculation (34%). The star rating and running costs are both almost universally important, however only 1 in 5 (20%) intend to use the label for their next purchase (the lowest incidence in the survey). 40% say the label is of no use to them because they can only buy what they can afford. The lack of interest in using the label may also stem from the possible misunderstanding of the star rating among some households.

Tonga – More than 4 in 5 (81%) understand the star rating, however belief that the label can be used to estimate running costs was the lowest in the region (4%), and only 22% showed an understanding of the consumption figures in the red box. Despite the clear understanding of the star rating, only a third (34%) intend to use the label, with 43% claiming affordability as a barrier.

Tuvalu – Two thirds (67%) understand the star rating, but understanding of the red box numbers and how to calculate running costs was the lowest in the region. A minority (47%) intend to use the label for their next purchase (32% cite affordability as a barrier).

MAJOR APPLIANCES IN HOMES The table below summarises incidence of the presence of various major appliances in households.

There are individual responses for refrigerators and stand-alone freezers, as well as a net for having either/both.

There are individual responses for having air-conditioning and electric fans, as well as a net for having either/both.

There is a response for having a television in the household.

There are individual responses for having a twin-tub clothes washer and an automatic clothes washer, as well as a net for having either/both.

In all cases the percentage represents the proportion of homes having one or more of each appliance.


% % % % % % % % % % %

Have refrigerator 73.9 93.4 67.5 67.8 80.1 35.7 88.8 98.0 76.0 54.8 45.1

Have freezer 41.7 23.9 34.9 27.6 55.3 67.9 77.7 82.0 35.8 40.1 52.7

Have either fridge or freezer

88.3 95.8 85.2 77.9 87.9 84.3 97.1 100.0 89.7 81.7 76.9

Have air-conditioning 20.2 20.1 34.9 10.6 31.1 7.1 2.4 10.0 25.0 14.7 3.3

Have fan 82.5 80.7 89.0 81.9 80.6 82.1 84.0 94.0 89.7 57.4 91.2

Have either air-con or fan 84.5 82.8 91.7 82.4 84.0 84.3 84.5 96.0 90.2 61.4 91.2

Have television 82.4 95.0 82.8 66.8 79.6 56.4 93.2 96.0 93.6 76.1 44.0

Have twin-tub clothes washer

34.7 53.7 29.8 11.1 31.1 28.6 4.9 2.0 31.9 62.9 54.9

Have automatic washer 38.5 45.8 36.5 13.6 22.8 27.1 87.9 90.0 33.8 25.9 14.3

Have any clothes washer 68.4 88.4 61.5 22.6 50.5 47.9 90.3 92.0 64.7 88.8 67.0


16

Refrigerators are most common in Niue, Fiji, and the Cook Islands. A majority in Vanuatu, Samoa, Solomon Islands, PNG, and Tonga have a refrigerator. In each of these countries a larger number of households have a refrigerator than a stand-alone freezer. Conversely, it is more common to have a freezer than a refrigerator in Kiribati (68% freezer, 36% refrigerator) and Tuvalu (53% freezer, 45% refrigerator).

Having either a refrigerator or stand-alone freezer (or both) is universal in Niue (100%) and near universal in both the Cook Islands (97%) and Fiji (96%). Over 4 in 5 have at least one device in Samoa (90%), Vanuatu (88%), PNG (85%), Kiribati (84%) and Tonga (82%). Solomon Islands and Tuvalu were just slightly behind on this measure (78% and 77%, respectively).

The proportion of homes with air-conditioning was highest in PNG (35%), Vanuatu (31%) and Samoa (25%). It was very uncommon in homes in the Cook Islands (2%), Tuvalu (3%) and Kiribati (7%). With the exception of Tonga, electric fans were present in at least 80% of homes (57% for Tonga).

The presence of televisions varied widely between countries, however a majority of homes had a television except for Tuvalu (44%). Kiribati (56%) and Solomon Islands (67%) were the next least-likely to have a television, while the highest incidences were recorded in Niue (96%), Fiji (95%), Samoa (94%), and the Cook Islands (93%).

Clothes washers were found in 23% of homes in the Solomon Islands, 48% in Kiribati, and 51% in Vanuatu. In all other countries surveyed at least 3 in 5 homes had a clothes washer. The highest incidences were recorded in Niue (92%), Cook Islands (90%), Tonga (89%) and Fiji (88%). In Both Niue and Cook Islands automatic clothes washers far outnumbered twin-tub washers, while in Fiji incidence of the two types was roughly even (54% twin-tub vs. 46% automatic), and in Tonga there were over twice as many twin-tub washers (63%) than automatic machines (26%).

LIGHTING USED IN HOMES Respondents were given show-cards of four different types of lighting – incandescent, compact fluorescent lamps, linear fluorescent lamps, and LED lamps – and for each they were asked to state which of several responses were true of their household (I have never seen this before; I have seen this but don’t know much about it; I have seen this and know about it, but have never used it in this household; I have used this in this household in the past, but we are not using it at the moment; we are using this in our household). The households indicating current use in the household of each of these four types of lighting are shown in the table below.


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Using - Incandescent 17.3 9.5 4.9 25.1 13.6 5.7 14.1 20.0 62.3 28.9 19.8

Using - CFL 59.1 75.1 9.5 77.9 77.7 67.9 88.8 96.0 59.3 56.9 64.8

Using - LFL 81.9 77.0 96.4 95.5 69.4 89.3 64.1 66.0 80.4 85.8 59.3

Using - LED 16.1 30.1 5.1 25.1 14.6 14.3 15.5 16.0 13.2 6.1 14.3

NOTE: Heat map colours in this table highlight differences for the entire table In households were more than one type of lighting was in use, a supplementary question was asked to ascertain the main type of light used. This was automatically coded if only one type was in use. The table below summarises the proportion of households having each type of light as their main type.


% % % % % % % % % % %

Main type - Incandescent 4.5 1.2 0.8 3.0 2.4 4.4 12.0 21.1 9.1 8.8

Main type - CFL 31.1 45.9 3.7 33.2 46.6 20.0 68.9 64.0 13.2 15.7 45.1

Main type - LFL 58.3 40.5 93.5 58.3 43.2 78.6 21.4 22.0 60.8 72.1 35.2

Main type - LED 5.7 12.2 1.4 5.5 5.3 1.4 5.3 2.0 4.9 2.5 11.0

NOTE: Heat map colours in this table highlight differences for the entire table

17

Incandescent lighting is used significantly more in Samoa (62%) than in other countries (18% average). It is the main source in 21% of homes in Samoa, and 12% in Niue. It was the main source in fewer than 10% of households in other countries surveyed.

CFL is used in more than 3 in 4 homes in Niue, Cook Islands, Solomon Islands, and Fiji. It is the predominant main source in the majority of homes in the Cook Islands (69%), and Niue (64%).

LFL is used in a large majority of homes in PNG, Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Tonga, Fiji, and Samoa. It is the dominant main light source is PNG (93%), Kiribati (79%), Tonga (72%), and Samoa (61%).

LED lighting was most prevalent in Fiji (30%) and Solomon Islands (25%), and was the main light source for 12% of homes in Fiji and 11% in Tuvalu.

5.2 Conclusions Fiji

o There is excellent recognition of the AS/NZS label, with little competition from other labels. o A majority understand the label and intend to use it for their next purchase. o Fiji is significantly above average when it comes to having a refrigerator, but had fewer homes

with a stand-alone freezer than other countries surveyed. It has among the highest incidences recorded for televisions and washing machines in the home.

o Both CFL and LFL lighting is common and main light source is almost evenly divided between these two. Fiji had the highest incidence of LED lights in the home, and also the highest incidence where LED is the main type of lighting.

PNG o Moderate recognition of AS/NZS label with moderate competition from several other labels. o There is poor understanding of the star rating, and only a minority intend to use the label for their

next purchase. o PNG had the highest incidence of air-conditioning in the survey, and has a relatively high

incidence of television ownership. o LFL is very dominant and near universal in homes, and is the main light source in the

overwhelming majority.

Solomon Islands o Very good recognition of the AS/NZS label, with some competition from China and USA labels. o A majority intend to use the label for their next purchase (highest in the region). o Solomon Islands had among the lowest incidences of fridge/freezer and television ownership, and

the ownership of clothes washers was significantly lower than all other countries surveyed. o LFL is near universal, and CFL is also very commonly found in households, however LFL has

significantly more use as the main source than CFL. A quarter have LED lighting.

Vanuatu o Very high recognition of the AS/NZS label, but considerable competition from other energy labels. o Intention to use the label is higher than average, and understanding of the star label is quite

good. Knowledge of how to calculate operating costs, however, is at the low end of countries surveyed.

o Vanuatu has higher than average incidence of air-conditioning, and lower than average incidence of washing machines.

o CFL and LFL are both common, and vie for dominance as the main source.

Kiribati o Moderate recognition of the AS/NZS label, and quite strong competition from other labels. o Understanding of the star rating and intention to use the label are around average.

Understanding how to calculate running costs was quite poor relative to most other countries. o Most households have a stand-alone freezer, but relatively few have a refrigerator. Incidence of

televisions, washing machines, and air-conditioners is lower than average. o LFL is by far the most commonly used type of lighting as the main source in homes, but CFL is

commonly found as well.

18

Cook Islands o Very high recognition of the AS/NZS label, and very little competition from other energy labels. o Understanding of the star rating is quite good, however the perceived importance is lower than

other countries, understanding how to calculate running costs was significantly lower than average, and intention to use the label for the next purchase was average.

o Cook Islands has among the highest incidences of refrigerators, freezers, televisions, and washing machines, but had the lowest proportion of air-conditioning in the survey.

o CFL and LFL are both found in a majority of homes, but CFL is most commonly used as the main source.

Niue o Excellent recognition of the AS/NZS label, and very little competition from others. o Niue demonstrated excellent understanding of the star rating and better comprehension of the

red box numbers than most. Despite this, intention to use the label in future was below average. o Refrigerators are universal in homes, and incidence is very high for freezers, televisions, and

washing machines. o CFL is almost universal in homes, and the majority use it as their main source of light. LFL was also

found in a significant majority of households.

Samoa o Very good recognition of the AS/NZS label, and moderate competition from other energy labels. o The star rating and running costs are viewed as more important than average, however Samoa

recorded the lowest understanding of the star ratings compared to other surveyed countries. Intention to use the label in future was the lowest seen, possibly as a result of misunderstanding or confusion around the meaning of the label.

o Televisions and air-conditioning were relatively more common than the regional average. o LFL is the most commonly used main light, and is found in a strong majority of homes. Both

incandescent and CFL feature strongly and are found in a majority of households.

Tonga o Moderate recognition of the AS/NZS label, and moderate competition from other labels. o Understanding of the star rating is high, however relatively few believe the label can be used to

estimate running costs. Intention to use the label in future was among the lowest of surveyed countries.

o Clothes washers were found in more homes than the regional average, however all other major appliances included in the survey were less common than average.

o LFL is by far the major type of lighting. CFL is found in a slight majority of homes, but is not often the main source.

Tuvalu o Moderate recognition of the AS/NZS label, and strong competition from the Chinese energy label. o Understanding of the star rating, and intention to use the label in future were average.

Understanding of the red box numbers and how to estimate running costs was low. o Tuvalu had the lowest incidence of televisions in the survey, and was among the lowest for food

cooling devices (especially refrigerators) and air-conditioning. o CFL and LFL are both commonly used as the main light source, with CFL a little more dominant.

LED lighting also features as the main source by a minority.

19

5.3 Recommendations The recommendations below consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of each country compared to the average, and aim to highlight where efforts may be focused to improve comprehension of the energy rating label and intention to use it to make informed purchases. More complete recommendations are contained in each individual country report.

Fiji o Focus on the red box numbers (awareness, understanding, and plans to use the label are

generally good, but awareness the label can be used to estimate running costs is only average).

PNG o Improve recognition of the AS/NZS label (there is moderate competition from other labels). o Improve understanding of the star rating (there may be misunderstanding of the term “energy

efficient”). o Improve intention to use the label in future.

Solomon Islands o Improve recognition of the AS/NZS label. o Improve understanding and perceived importance of the star rating.

Vanuatu o Highlight the importance of the AS/NZS label (recognition is good, but other energy labels are also

widely known). o Communicate how to estimate running costs using the label and provide tariff information.

Kiribati o Improve recognition of the AS/NZS label (recognition is below average, while recognition of other

energy labels is above average). o Improve understanding of the star rating and its importance. o Improve understanding of the tariff and how to estimate running costs.

Cook Islands o Improve understanding of the tariff and how to estimate running costs. o Improve intention to use the label in future.

Niue o Focus on intention to use the label in future (knowledge and understanding are good, but

affordability is a barrier).

Samoa o Improve understanding of the star rating (it is universally seen as important, but there may be

misunderstanding by some that a higher star rating equates to worse energy performance). o Improve intention to use the label in future (the possible misunderstanding of the star rating may

partially drive the low intention).

Tonga o Improve recognition of the AS/NZS label (recognition is significantly lower than average in the

region). o Improve understanding of the red box numbers (tariff information and how to estimate running

costs). o Improve intention to use the label in future.

Tuvalu o Improve recognition of the AS/NZS label (lowest in the region, and there is significant recognition

of other energy labels). o Improve understanding of the energy label in general (meaning of the star rating, meaning of the

red box numbers, importance of running costs) o Improve intention to use the label in future.

20

5.4 Detail Results

5.4.1 Awareness of energy labels

Table 5. Awareness of non-price labels


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Yes 62.5 82.2 55.2 77.4 58.3 40.7 70.9 86.0 49.0 42.6 42.9

No 18.4 7.3 22.5 8.0 12.1 30.7 14.6 10.0 29.9 37.6 22.0

Not sure 19.1 10.4 22.3 14.6 29.6 28.6 14.6 4.0 21.1 19.8 35.2

Spontaneous recall of non-price labels was significantly higher than average in Niue, Fiji, Solomon Islands, and Cook Islands.

Table 6. Label communication


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Energy label 31.1 63.9 14.6 33.2 26.2 10.0 37.4 48.0 27.0 10.7 6.6

Product info 13.4 2.3 30.8 36.2 4.4 7.1 7.3 12.0 2.5 12.7 1.1

Promotion 1.9 4.2 2.8 0.5 1.0 0.7 1.0 2.0 1.0

Other 3.8 3.3 2.2 3.5 4.9 6.4 5.8 6.0 4.9 1.5 6.6

Don't know 13.8 8.7 9.3 11.1 18.0 15.0 22.8 22.0 13.7 17.8 28.6

No response (not aware) 39.0 19.1 45.8 26.1 46.1 60.7 30.1 16.0 51.0 57.9 57.1

Spontaneous recall of energy labels was much higher than average in Fiji and Niue, and was significantly lower in Tuvalu, Kiribati, Tonga, and PNG.

Label awareness - unspecified

Have you seen any labels (other than price labels) on new refrigerators, freezers or other appliances such as air conditioners and televisions?

Label communication - unspecified

What do these labels tell you about the product? [OPEN-ENDED] [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%]

21

Table 7. AS/NZS label – recognition


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Yes 80.2 98.5 64.7 77.4 93.7 65.7 90.8 98.0 86.8 58.9 57.1

No 19.8 1.5 35.3 22.6 6.3 34.3 9.2 2.0 13.2 41.1 42.9

Prompted recognition of the AS/NZS label was near universal in Fiji, and Niue, and over 9 in 10 for Cook Islands and Vanuatu. Awareness was lowest in Tuvalu and Tonga.

AS/NZS label - recognition

Have you seen this label before?

22

NOTE: This was an open-ended question, and was subsequently coded into the following categories:

On an appliance in your home “NET APPLIANCE EXCL SHOWROOM” combines any mention of these five responses.

In someone else’s home

At work / office

On an appliance overseas

On another appliance

In an appliance showroom

On TV or other advertisements

Somewhere else

Don’t know / not sure Table 8. Awareness of AS/NZS label


RESPONDENTS 1858 510 328 154 193 92 187 49 177 116 52

% % % % % % % % % % %

On an appliance in your home

50.7 66.7 26.5 42.9 43.5 51.1 75.9 79.6 33.9 37.1 65.4

In someone else's home 21.5 22.2 10.7 25.3 25.4 33.7 28.9 14.3 19.2 23.3 19.2

Work/office 2.4 2.2 1.5 8.4 2.6 2.2 1.6 4.1 0.6 1.7

Overseas 0.3 1.3 1.1 1.7

On another appliance 1.3 2.4 0.9 3.1 1.6 0.9

NET APPLIANCE EXCL SHOWROOM

65.9 73.7 37.8 67.5 68.4 75.0 91.4 83.7 53.1 61.2 80.8

In appliance showroom 71.6 89.0 83.5 79.9 57.0 59.8 60.4 79.6 46.3 45.7 51.9

On TV or other advertisements

58.2 49.8 45.4 57.8 71.0 58.7 57.8 40.8 82.5 80.2 59.6

In Fiji, PNG, and Solomon Islands awareness of the AS/NZS label was more likely to have come from an appliance in a showroom than on a device outside a store environment. Awareness from a home or office environment was highest in the Cook Islands, Tuvalu, and Kiribati.

AS/NZS label – source of recognition

Where did you see this label before? [OPEN-ENDED] [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%]

23

Table 9. Asia / USA / Europe label recognition


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Have not seen any of these labels

69.5 85.1 61.1 70.4 35.9 57.1 95.6 92.0 65.7 73.1 50.5

China 16.1 4.1 21.9 16.6 33.5 37.9 0.5 6.0 12.7 11.2 38.5

Japan 9.5 3.1 19.1 7.0 15.5 12.9 2.4 13.7 3.6 4.4

USA 7.2 2.1 15.8 11.1 5.3 1.4 10.3 8.1 3.3

Europe 6.9 3.9 6.5 3.5 34.0 5.0 0.5 2.0 2.9 5.1 6.6

Singapore 5.1 3.5 6.3 7.0 6.8 6.4 0.5 2.0 12.7 1.0 1.1

Korea 4.2 1.7 8.7 3.5 10.7 1.4 1.0 1.5 2.5 3.3

Thailand 4.1 1.7 4.9 7.0 1.5 8.6 1.0 5.9 7.6 2.2

Chart 1. Prompted awareness of energy labels

A large majority of those in the Cook Islands, Niue, Fiji, Tonga, and the Solomon Islands have not seen energy

labels from other markets of interest. Vanuatu is the most likely to recall any other label, and the only country

with a significant showing for the European Union label. The Chinese label is prominent in Tuvalu, Kiribati,

Vanuatu, and to a lesser extent in PNG.

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0


Prompted awareness of energy labels

AS/NZS China Japan USA Europe Singapore Korea Thailand

Asia / USA / Europe label recognition

Have you seen any of these types of energy labels before? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%]

24

5.4.2 Understanding and use of energy labels

Table 10. Stars communication TOTAL Fiji PNG Sols Vanuatu Kiribati Cooks Niue Samoa Tonga Tuvalu

RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

It is more energy efficient 50.2 67.0 60.6 49.7 19.9 45.0 50.5 74.0 47.1 24.9 22.0

It uses less electricity 23.2 27.4 9.7 8.5 47.6 22.1 14.1 20.0 18.1 46.7 35.2

It is less expensive to use 8.3 5.6 5.9 6.0 18.4 17.1 11.2 8.0 6.4 8.1 3.3

NET POSITIVE 69.5 84.2 64.7 56.3 72.8 69.3 60.2 88.0 62.7 70.6 59.3

It uses more electricity 19.2 5.8 48.5 15.6 8.7 15.0 3.9 38.7 3.6 5.5

It is less energy efficient 11.5 12.5 8.3 2.5 16.0 20.0 12.6 8.0 10.8 10.7 22.0

Is more expensive to use 11.3 3.1 22.7 9.5 8.7 5.0 4.4 16.2 11.7 24.2

NET NEGATIVE 36.2 21.2 62.1 25.1 30.6 35.0 18.9 8.0 56.9 24.4 50.5

Other 2.5 0.8 4.3 3.0 6.3 2.0 0.5 4.6 2.2

Nothing / no meaning 1.0 0.2 0.4 8.5 1.9

Don't know 6.4 1.7 5.9 12.6 2.9 1.4 18.9 10.0 1.5 11.7 6.6

NOTE: The answers “it is less expensive to use” and “it is more expensive to use” may have been interpreted as inclusive of the purchase price by some respondents rather than only the energy cost. Due to this, the data has been re-analysed into the following categories:

Positive message Respondent has selected “uses less electricity” and/or “is more energy efficient”, and has not selected “uses more electricity” or “is less energy efficient”

Negative message Respondent has selected “uses more electricity” and/or “is less energy efficient”, and has not selected “uses less electricity” or “is more energy efficient”

Contradictory messages

Respondent has selected both a positive meaning (“uses less electricity” and/or “is more energy efficient”) and a negative meaning (“uses more electricity” and/or “is less energy efficient”)

Other responses Any respondent that doesn’t fit into any of the above categories.

Table 11 is based only on those providing an answer related to the amount of electricity used or the energy efficiency of the appliance. Table 11. Stars communication (related to energy use or energy efficiency)


RESPONDENTS 1890 481 395 139 170 120 141 44 184 144 72

% % % % % % % % % % %

Positive message 66.8 81.7 38.2 74.8 72.9 65.0 78.7 90.9 53.3 80.6 66.7

Negative message 21.7 12.3 26.6 21.6 25.3 32.5 17.0 2.3 40.8 9.0 30.6

Contradictory messages 11.4 6.0 35.2 3.6 1.8 2.5 4.3 6.8 6.0 10.4 2.8

Of those who have related the stars to energy use or energy efficiency, understanding appears to be significantly better than average in Niue, Fiji, and Tonga, while understanding was much poorer in PNG.

Stars communication

What do the stars mean? If the appliance has more stars what does it tell you about the appliance? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%]

25

Table 12. Stars importance


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Very important 63.5 74.7 49.9 58.8 75.2 57.1 57.8 54.0 81.4 51.8 71.4

Quite important 24.6 22.4 35.7 21.6 19.4 17.1 20.9 26.0 17.2 32.0 13.2

NET IMPORTANT 88.1 97.1 85.6 80.4 94.7 74.3 78.6 80.0 98.5 83.8 84.6

Not very important 8.3 2.3 11.6 13.6 3.9 22.9 13.6 8.0 0.5 7.1 7.7

Not important at all 3.7 0.6 2.8 6.0 1.5 2.9 7.8 12.0 1.0 9.1 7.7

A strong majority in each country say the star rating is important to them. The strength of belief, however, varies

considerably, from 50% in PNG saying it is “very important” to 81% in Samoa. In Kiribati, 1 in 4 said it wasn’t

important to them.

Table 13 .Red box numbers communication


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

It shows the annual electricity or energy consumption of the appliance

52.8 63.5 60.6 68.8 46.1 45.0 51.0 62.0 46.1 22.3 22.0

It is the model number of the appliance

9.1 5.8 19.7 5.0 7.3 6.4 2.4 18.1 0.5 5.5

Other 0.8 0.2 0.6 1.5 1.5 2.9 2.0 1.0

Not sure / don't know 39.3 30.9 26.4 26.6 45.1 48.6 43.7 36.0 38.7 76.1 72.5

A majority in the Solomon Islands, Fiji, Niue, PNG and the Cook Islands correctly stated the meaning of the numbers in the red box. At least a third in every country except the Solomon Islands are either unsure or incorrect. In Tonga, 76% don’t know, and similarly in Tuvalu 73% were unsure of the meaning.

Stars importance

How important is the star rating to you?

Red box numbers communication

What do the numbers in the red box mean? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%]

26

Table 14. Running costs - label use for estimating


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Yes 20.2 20.5 17.9 26.6 21.4 22.1 21.8 28.0 34.8 4.1 5.5

No 31.9 38.2 21.9 25.1 20.9 30.0 39.8 44.0 26.0 57.4 28.6

Not sure 47.9 41.3 60.2 48.2 57.8 47.9 38.3 28.0 39.2 38.6 65.9

Only a minority believe they can use the label to estimate running costs. The number of people who are not sure is significant in all countries. In all countries, even among people who say the numbers in the red box show the annual electricity consumption or claim to know the unit cost of power, only a minority believe the label can be used to estimate running costs.

Table 15. Running costs - source of information


RESPONDENTS 468 106 91 53 44 31 45 14 71 8 5

% % % % % % % % % % %

Annual electricity consumption multiply by your electricity tariff

24.1 30.2 20.9 41.5 11.4 9.7 6.7 21.4 33.8 25.0

Annual electricity consumption multiply by your monthly electricity bill

62.6 57.5 62.6 49.1 81.8 67.7 77.8 71.4 56.3 37.5 80.0

Not sure / don't know 13.2 12.3 16.5 9.4 6.8 22.6 15.6 7.1 9.9 37.5 20.0

The majority of those who claim they can use the label to estimate running costs give an incorrect answer when asked how they would calculate it. In every country, a higher proportion said they would multiply by their monthly bill instead of using the tariff. Correct responses were more common in the Solomon Islands, Samoa, and Fiji, and significantly lower in Tuvalu, Cook Islands, Kiribati, and Vanuatu.

Table 16. Running costs - importance


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Very important 63.0 70.8 56.2 65.3 64.6 75.0 64.6 74.0 69.1 38.6 59.3

Quite important 28.3 22.8 37.1 27.6 32.0 14.3 24.8 18.0 25.0 41.6 16.5

NET IMPORTANT 91.3 93.6 93.3 93.0 96.6 89.3 89.3 92.0 94.1 80.2 75.8

Not very important 5.4 5.2 4.7 4.5 2.9 10.7 5.8 6.0 2.9 8.6 7.7

Not important at all 3.3 1.2 2.0 2.5 0.5 4.9 2.0 2.9 11.2 16.5

Running costs are “very important” for the majority in all countries except Tonga. 17% in Tuvalu and 11% in Tonga said they are “not important at all”.

Running costs - label use for estimating

Can you use the label to tell your annual estimated running costs of the appliance?

Running costs - source of information

How can you find out your annual running costs? [ASKED OF THOSE WHO CLAIM THE LABEL CAN BE USED TO ESTIMATE RUNNING COSTS]

Running costs - importance

How important are the running costs to you?

27

Table 17. Tariff - awareness


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Yes 40.9 15.4 79.3 48.7 33.0 37.9 31.6 52.0 56.4 13.2 16.5

No 59.1 84.6 20.7 51.3 67.0 62.1 68.4 48.0 43.6 86.8 83.5

The claimed knowledge of the unit price of electricity was highest in PNG, followed by Samoa and Niue. In all other countries the majority said they didn’t know.

Fiji: Only 15% claimed to know the unit price of electricity. When asked for the unit price, some people stated their monthly total rather than the tariff (7.5% of those who said they knew the unit price). In the subset who gave a unit price (n=74), 72% gave an accurate figure and the remainder were within 50% of the correct price. PNG: Almost 4 in 5 stated they knew how much they pay for each unit of electricity, however the clear majority were actually thinking of their total bill, not the tariff. Only 20 people gave an actual unit price – the majority who said they knew their unit price actually stated their weekly or monthly spend. Of those 20, only 6 were close to correct (within 25% of the correct tariff). This translates to 1.2% of the total sample surveyed. Solomon Islands: Half claim to know the unit price of electricity. Only 39% gave a response that was actually a unit price rather than their monthly bill or similar. 82% of these gave an incorrect figure, and most gave a price that was higher or much higher than the actual tariff. Vanuatu: Out of all those who said they knew the unit price or electricity, only n=3 people gave an actual unit price, rather than the usual amount they pay for power. Kiribati: None of the people who claimed to know the tariff gave an actual unit price – all responded with the total amount they pay for electricity. Cook Islands: Of the n=65 people who claimed to know the unit price, only n=26 gave a figure that was an actual tariff rather than the total amount they pay. Half of those 26 gave an accurate figure, and almost the entire remainder gave a lower figure than the actual tariff. Niue: Of the n=26 people who claimed to know the tariff, only 12 gave an actual unit price rather than the total amount they pay for electricity. 11 of these 12 gave an accurate figure (exact or almost exact). Samoa: Of the n=115 people who claimed to know the tariff, only n=2 gave an actual unit price rather than the amount they pay. Tonga: Only 13% claim to know the unit price of electricity. All people (n=25) who claimed to know the unit price of electricity gave an accurate answer (the exact or almost exact tariff). Tuvalu: Only 17% claim to know the unit price of electricity. Of these n=15 people, n=9 gave an actual unit price, rather than the total amount they pay for electricity. Of the n=9 people who gave a unit price, only 2 were accurate.

Tariff - awareness

Do you know how much you pay for each unit of electricity?

Tariff - price

How much do you pay for a unit of electricity? [ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO CLAIM TO KNOW THE TARIFF]

28

Table 18. Tariff – source of information


RESPONDENTS 1365 437 104 102 135 87 140 24 89 171 76

% % % % % % % % % % %

From the electricity provider

46.2 28.4 21.2 73.5 26.7 87.4 65.7 16.7 75.3 48.0 69.7

From the bill / invoice 25.6 48.7 1.9 1.0 6.7 1.1 25.0 58.3 1.1 42.7

From the meter 4.2 1.1 47.1 0.7 2.1

Other people 2.3 0.7 8.7 2.0 0.7 1.4 1.1 17.1

From the government / department / ministry

1.8 4.8 1.0 2.0 1.3

From the meter reader / electrician

1.2 1.8 3.8 0.7 2.3 1.1

Somewhere else 2.6 0.7 20.7 16.7

Don't know 18.4 15.3 23.1 24.5 45.2 9.2 8.6 12.5 21.3 9.9 19.7

Most people in Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands, and the Cook Islands would seek tariff information from their electricity provider. A significant number in Niue, Fiji, and Tonga would find it on their bill. Almost half in PNG believe they can find the tarrif on the meter. Over 2 in 5 in Vanuatu don’t know where they would find the electricity tariff, and 1 in 5 or more in the Solomon Islands, PNG, Samoa, and Tuvalu are also unsure where to look.

Table 19. Red box - used for estimation


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Yes 11.7 9.1 14.2 8.5 14.1 15.0 7.8 6.0 27.0 3.6 4.4

No 88.3 90.9 85.8 91.5 85.9 85.0 92.2 94.0 73.0 96.4 95.6

Very few people in any country have ever used the number in the red box to estimate running costs.

Red box - used for estimation

Have you ever used the number in the red box to estimate the annual running costs of an appliance?

Tariff - source of information

Where would you get this information? [ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO SAY THEY DON’T KNOW THE TARIFF] [OPEN-ENDED] [MULTIPLE RESPONSE – columns may add to more than 100%]

29

Table 20. Label use for future purchase


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Will try to buy the most efficient (highest star rating)

39.6 63.3 32.9 34.2 34.0 35.0 41.7 32.0 21.1 30.5 33.0

Can only buy what I can afford, so no help to me

29.1 20.8 40.2 11.6 8.3 23.6 40.3 38.0 30.9 48.2 31.9

Not likely to use it 23.6 11.8 35.1 7.5 23.8 15.7 14.6 24.0 49.0 32.5 18.7

Will use the numbers in the red box to work out running cost and combined cost (price + running cost)

17.9 7.5 15.2 55.8 30.1 27.9 11.2 18.0 12.3 7.6 16.5

Other 0.7 0.4 1.0 0.5 6.4 1.5

Don't know 2.0 0.8 2.2 3.0 6.3 2.4 2.0 2.0 0.5 2.2

Chart 2. Intended use of label for future purchase

A majority plan to use the label in the Solomon Islands (77%), Fiji (67%), Vanuatu (61%), and Kiribati (55%). Countries where the majority plan not to use the label are Samoa (67%), Tonga (63%), and PNG (57%). These figures exclude those who gave mixed responses (14% in PNG and 11% in Samoa gave both a positive and negative answer). Those in Kiribati and Tuvalu are divided over whether they will use the label to facilitate their next purchase or not.

Label use for future purchase

How will you use the information on the label next time you or your family buys an appliance? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE – columns may add to more than 100%]

47%

67%

27%

77%

61%55%

43% 40%

20%34%

47%

44%

30%

57%

18%

32%32%

46% 50%

67%

63%48%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Will use the label Won't use the label Mixed response Other

30

5.4.3 Appliances in household – whitegoods

Table 21. Refrigerators in home.


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 67.0 84.6 63.5 61.8 68.9 32.9 73.3 80.0 72.5 51.3 45.1

Two or more 6.9 8.9 3.9 6.0 11.2 2.9 15.5 18.0 3.4 3.6

NET ANY 73.9 93.4 67.5 67.8 80.1 35.7 88.8 98.0 76.0 54.8 45.1

None 26.1 6.6 32.5 32.2 19.9 64.3 11.2 2.0 24.0 45.2 54.9

Refrigerators are most prevalent in Niue, Fiji, Cook Islands and Vanuatu. Fewer than half have one in Kiribati and Tuvalu.

Table 22. Freezers in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 37.9 23.4 32.0 25.6 47.6 61.4 66.0 62.0 33.3 40.1 50.5

Two or more 3.8 0.6 3.0 2.0 7.8 6.4 11.7 20.0 2.5 2.2

NET ANY 41.7 23.9 34.9 27.6 55.3 67.9 77.7 82.0 35.8 40.1 52.7

None 58.3 76.1 65.1 72.4 44.7 32.1 22.3 18.0 64.2 59.9 47.3

While Kiribati and Tuvalu are least likely to have a fridge, they are among the countries with the highest incidence of stand-alone freezers. Niue stands out, having the highest ratio of both fridge and freezer appliances. Table 23. Food cooling devices in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Have fridge only 46.6 71.8 50.3 50.3 32.5 16.4 19.4 18.0 53.9 41.6 24.2

Have freezer only 14.4 2.3 17.8 10.1 7.8 48.6 8.3 2.0 13.7 26.9 31.9

Have both 27.3 21.6 17.2 17.6 47.6 19.3 69.4 80.0 22.1 13.2 20.9

Have neither 11.7 4.2 14.8 22.1 12.1 15.7 2.9 10.3 18.3 23.1

A majority in Niue and the Cook Islands have both fridge and freezer, and almost half in Vanuatu have both. Over 1 in 5 have neither in Tuvalu and the Solomon Islands. Having only a freezer is relatively more common in Kiribati (49%), Tuvalu (32%) and Tonga (27%). Having a freezer without a fridge is rare in Niue and Fiji (2% fit this description in both countries).

Refrigerators in home

How many refrigerators do you have, including refrigerators with freezer compartments?

Freezers in home

How many stand-alone freezers do you have?

31

5.4.4 Appliances in household – cooling

Table 24. Air conditioners in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 17.0 16.2 32.1 8.0 21.4 7.1 1.5 8.0 20.6 13.2 3.3

Two or more 3.2 3.9 2.8 2.5 9.7 1.0 2.0 4.4 1.5

NET ANY 20.2 20.1 34.9 10.6 31.1 7.1 2.4 10.0 25.0 14.7 3.3

None 79.8 79.9 65.1 89.4 68.9 92.9 97.6 90.0 75.0 85.3 96.7

Air-conditioning is most common in PNG, followed by Vanuatu, Samoa, and Fiji. Incidence is very low in the Cook Islands and Tuvalu.

Table 25. Electric fans in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 41.2 51.0 35.9 32.2 55.3 35.0 37.4 18.0 40.7 42.1 33.0

Two 18.8 17.2 22.3 16.1 11.2 20.7 20.9 18.0 25.5 8.6 30.8

Three 11.9 8.9 14.2 14.6 9.7 12.1 14.1 24.0 12.3 5.6 17.6

Four or more 10.6 3.7 16.6 19.1 4.4 14.3 11.7 34.0 11.3 1.0 9.9

NET ANY 82.5 80.7 89.0 81.9 80.6 82.1 84.0 94.0 89.7 57.4 91.2

None 17.5 19.3 11.0 18.1 19.4 17.9 16.0 6.0 10.3 42.6 8.8

While only 3% of homes in Tuvalu have air-con, over 9 in 10 have a fan. More than three-quarters in Niue have more than one fan.

Table 26. Cooling in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Have air-con only 2.0 2.1 2.8 0.5 3.4 2.1 0.5 2.0 0.5 4.1

Have fan only 64.3 62.7 56.8 71.9 52.9 77.1 82.0 86.0 65.2 46.7 87.9

Have both 18.2 18.0 32.1 10.1 27.7 5.0 1.9 8.0 24.5 10.7 3.3

Have neither 15.5 17.2 8.3 17.6 16.0 15.7 15.5 4.0 9.8 38.6 8.8

Tonga is the country least likely to have either air-con or fans. In PNG, almost 1 in 3 homes have both.

Cooling appliances in household

Cooling in home

How many air-conditioners do you have?

How many electric fans do you have?

32

5.4.5 Appliances in household – entertainment

Table 27. Television in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 72.2 81.9 77.1 64.3 70.4 55.0 63.6 66.0 80.4 71.6 44.0

Two or more 10.1 13.1 5.7 2.5 9.2 1.4 29.6 30.0 13.2 4.6

NET ANY 82.4 95.0 82.8 66.8 79.6 56.4 93.2 96.0 93.6 76.1 44.0

None 17.6 5.0 17.2 33.2 20.4 43.6 6.8 4.0 6.4 23.9 56.0

Tuvalu is the only country where fewer than half had a TV. 30% in Niue and the Cook Islands have more than one.

Television in home

How many televisions do you have?

33

5.4.6 Appliances in household – clothes washing

Table 28. Number of twin-tub clothes washers in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 32.8 52.3 27.8 10.1 28.2 20.7 4.9 2.0 30.4 60.9 53.8

Two or more 1.9 1.4 2.0 1.0 2.9 7.9 1.5 2.0 1.1

NET ANY 34.7 53.7 29.8 11.1 31.1 28.6 4.9 2.0 31.9 62.9 54.9

None 65.3 46.3 70.2 88.9 68.9 71.4 95.1 98.0 68.1 37.1 45.1

Table 29. Number of automatic clothes washers in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 37.0 44.6 35.5 13.6 22.3 25.7 83.0 76.0 32.8 24.9 14.3

Two or more 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.5 1.4 4.9 14.0 1.0 1.0

NET ANY 38.5 45.8 36.5 13.6 22.8 27.1 87.9 90.0 33.8 25.9 14.3

None 61.5 54.2 63.5 86.4 77.2 72.9 12.1 10.0 66.2 74.1 85.7

Table 30. Presence of clothes washers in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Have twin-tub only 29.9 42.7 25.0 9.0 27.7 20.7 2.4 2.0 30.9 62.9 52.7

Have auto only 33.7 34.7 31.8 11.6 19.4 19.3 85.4 90.0 32.8 25.9 12.1

Have both 4.8 11.0 4.7 2.0 3.4 7.9 2.4 1.0 2.2

Have neither 31.6 11.6 38.5 77.4 49.5 52.1 9.7 8.0 35.3 11.2 33.0

Solomon Islanders are least likely to have a washing machine (fewer than a quarter have one), compared to Niue

(92% have one). Cook Islands, Tonga, and Fiji are also very likely to have a washing machine in the home.

Clothes washers in home

How many twin-tub clothes washers do you have?

How many automatic clothes washers do you have?

34

5.4.7 Appliances in household – water heaters

NOTE: It is likely that some respondents may have misinterpreted this question as referring to electric kettles,

rather than devices which supply hot water to taps and showers (as the question intended). Therefore, these

results should be treated with caution.

Table 31. Number of electric water heaters in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 37.8 58.1 32.0 57.3 34.5 18.6 24.8 12.0 21.6 44.2 16.5

Two or more 2.8 3.1 5.3 6.0 1.5 1.5 2.5

NET ANY 40.7 61.2 37.3 63.3 35.9 18.6 26.2 12.0 21.6 46.7 16.5

None 59.3 38.8 62.7 36.7 64.1 81.4 73.8 88.0 78.4 53.3 83.5

Table 32. Number of solar water heaters


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 13.8 15.6 12.0 13.1 3.4 2.1 41.7 68.0 2.0 8.1 2.2

Two or more 0.6 1.4 1.0 1.5 0.5

NET ANY 14.4 15.6 13.4 13.1 4.4 2.1 43.2 68.0 2.0 8.6 2.2

None 85.6 84.4 86.6 86.9 95.6 97.9 56.8 32.0 98.0 91.4 97.8

Electric water heaters in home

How many electric water heaters do you have?

Solar water heaters in home

How many solar water heaters do you have?

35

5.4.8 Appliances in household – cooking

NOTE: It is likely that some respondents may have misinterpreted this question as referring to any cooking device that uses electricity (e.g. electric frypan, microwave oven, rice cooker) rather than electric cooktops (as the question intended). There may also be confusion over the number of devices versus the number of elements/burners. Therefore, these results should be treated with caution. Table 33. Number of electric cookers


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 45.3 46.9 53.6 51.3 57.3 25.0 33.0 38.0 42.2 41.6 26.4

Two 11.9 11.4 21.1 10.1 14.1 5.0 2.4 16.0 6.9 10.7 6.6

Three 9.5 16.4 16 2.5 1.9 1.4 1.5 36 5.4 3.0 5.5

NET ANY 66.7 74.7 90.7 63.8 73.3 31.4 36.9 90.0 54.4 55.3 38.5

None 33.3 25.3 9.3 36.2 26.7 68.6 63.1 10.0 45.6 44.7 61.5

Table 34. Number of gas cookers


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

One 73.8 84.0 51.9 65.3 79.6 49.3 86.9 66.0 87.3 95.4 78.0

Two 4.4 3.7 1.8 10.1 8.7 7.9 2.4 12.0 2.0 1.5 8.8

NET 3 or more 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 1.9 0.5

NET ANY 78.7 88.2 54.2 75.9 88.3 57.1 91.3 78.0 89.7 97.0 86.8

None 21.3 11.8 45.8 24.1 11.7 42.9 8.7 22.0 10.3 3.0 13.2

Table 35. Presence of electric / gas cookers in home


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Have electric only 15.2 7.3 41.0 16.6 6.3 11.4 6.3 22.0 6.4 1.0 5.5

Have gas only 27.3 20.8 4.5 28.6 21.4 37.1 60.7 10.0 41.7 42.6 53.8

Have both 51.5 67.4 49.7 47.2 67.0 20.0 30.6 68.0 48.0 54.3 33.0

Have neither 6.1 4.4 4.7 7.5 5.3 31.4 2.4 3.9 2.0 7.7

31% of those in Kiribati have neither gas nor electric cooking facilities. Electric cooking appliances are prevalent in PNG, Niue, and Fiji.

Cooking in home

How many electric cookers do you have?

How many gas cookers do you have?

36

5.4.9 Appliance purchase behaviour and intentions

Table 36. How recently the last major appliance was purchased


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

This year 2016 23.9 31.7 16.4 20.1 15.0 17.9 48.1 44.0 25.0 7.6 27.5

Last year 2015 27.4 26.4 30.4 15.6 27.2 28.6 12.6 32.0 34.3 42.1 25.3

NET LAST 2 YEARS 51.4 58.1 46.7 35.7 42.2 46.4 60.7 76.0 59.3 49.7 52.7

In 2014 17.2 13.1 20.3 16.6 22.8 15.7 8.3 16.0 18.6 23.9 16.5

In 2013 9.7 7.7 10.8 10.1 7.8 10.0 8.7 4.0 11.8 14.7 7.7

In 2012 5.8 5.4 7.9 6.5 4.9 8.6 5.8 3.4 4.1 5.5

Before 2012 15.7 15.6 14.0 29.6 21.4 19.3 16.5 4.0 6.9 7.6 17.6

Don't know 0.3 0.2 1.5 1.0

In Niue, 3 in 4 homes had purchased a new major appliance in the last year. In the Solomon Islands this figure is 36%.

Table 37. Last major appliance purchase


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Television 44.3 45.6 44.4 46.2 58.7 30.7 49.0 58.0 53.9 25.4 23.1

Refrigerator 32.3 27.2 28.2 47.7 64.6 22.1 31.1 22.0 42.6 15.2 15.4

Clothes washer 26.6 29.7 17.8 11.1 29.1 22.1 26.2 28.0 26.5 55.3 30.8

Freezer 22.0 7.9 20.1 19.1 44.7 59.3 20.4 24.0 20.6 8.6 44.0

Air conditioner 4.3 3.7 1.6 3.5 9.2 6.4 3.9 4.0 11.8 0.5 2.2

Don't know 0.6 0.6 0.4 3.0 1.5 1.1

Televisions were the most likely purchase in Fiji, PNG, Cook Islands, Niue, and Samoa.

Television competed with refrigerator for dominance in Solomon Islands.

In Kiribati and Tuvalu, freezers were most common, while clothes washers were significant for Tonga.

Major appliance – how recently last purchase was

made When was the last time you bought any of the following appliances new? Refrigerator, Freezer, Television, Clothes washer, Air-conditioner

Major appliance - last purchase

What was the appliance you bought? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%] Refrigerator, Freezer, Television, Clothes washer, Air-conditioner

37

Table 38. Next major appliance to be purchased


RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Clothes washer 11.1 6.6 14.0 11.1 8.3 12.1 11.7 22.0 17.6 5.1 17.6

Freezer 10.4 7.5 10.5 15.6 7.3 16.4 10.7 6.0 12.3 6.6 17.6

Television 9.2 5.8 8.1 18.6 10.2 10.0 8.3 12.0 4.9 10.2 19.8

Refrigerator 9.1 7.3 11.0 15.1 5.3 7.1 13.1 10.0 7.8 7.6 3.3

Air conditioner 5.5 4.6 3.7 1.5 5.3 5.7 6.8 8.0 18.1 1.5 5.5

Other 8.6 10.6 8.3 7.0 4.4 7.1 10.2 20.0 3.4 15.2 2.2

Don't know 46.0 57.5 44.4 31.2 59.2 41.4 39.3 22.0 35.8 53.8 34.1

Table 39. Next major appliance to be purchased (major appliance of interest)

Excluding “other” and “don’t know”


RESPONDENTS 1051 165 240 123 75 72 104 29 124 61 58

% % % % % % % % % % %

Clothes washer 24.5 20.6 29.6 17.9 22.7 23.6 23.1 37.9 29.0 16.4 27.6

Freezer 22.8 23.6 22.1 25.2 20.0 31.9 21.2 10.3 20.2 21.3 27.6

Television 20.4 18.2 17.1 30.1 28.0 19.4 16.3 20.7 8.1 32.8 31.0

Refrigerator 20.1 23.0 23.3 24.4 14.7 13.9 26.0 17.2 12.9 24.6 5.2

Air conditioner 12.2 14.5 7.9 2.4 14.7 11.1 13.5 13.8 29.8 4.9 8.6

Chart 3. Next appliance purchase intention

Major appliance - future purchase

What is the appliance that you are most likely to buy next? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE - columns may add to more than 100%]

11% 7%14% 11% 8% 12% 12%

22% 18%5%

18%10%

8%

11% 16%7%

16% 11%6% 12%

7%

18%9%

6%

8%19%

10%

10%8%

12% 5%

10%

20%

9%

7%

11%

15%

5%

7%13%

10%8%

8%

3%

6%

5%

4%

2%

5%

6% 7%8% 18%

2%

6%

9%

11%

8%

7%

4%

7% 10%

20%3%

15%

2%

46%58%

44%31%

59%

41% 39%

22%36%

54%

34%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Next appliance intent

Clothes washer Freezer Television Refrigerator Air conditioner Other Don't know

38

Table 40. Future purchase timing


RESPONDENTS 1251 220 282 137 84 82 125 39 131 91 60

% % % % % % % % % % %

In 3 months time 20.1 32.3 17.4 14.6 23.8 15.9 9.6 15.4 19.8 20.9 26.7

In 6 months time 18.7 25.9 22.7 14.6 14.3 15.9 12.8 7.7 23.7 14.3 8.3

NET WITHIN 6 MONTHS 38.8 58.2 40.1 29.2 38.1 31.7 22.4 23.1 43.5 35.2 35.0

In 9 months time 8.9 11.8 12.1 6.6 11.9 8.5 4.0 7.7 8.4 2.2 6.7

In 12 months time 16.8 22.3 9.6 19.7 16.7 13.4 21.6 38.5 11.5 22.0 8.3

Don't know 35.5 7.7 38.3 44.5 33.3 46.3 52.0 30.8 36.6 40.7 50.0

Renters are somewhat more likely to be planning a purchase in the next 6 months than home owners.

Major appliance - future purchase timing

When are you likely to purchase this appliance? [ASKED ONLY OF THOSE WHO KNEW WHAT THEY WOULD BUY]

39

5.4.10 Lighting

Incandescent lamps - familiarity and usage

Please have a look at this light type and tell me which of the answers is true for your household.

Compact fluorescent lamps - familiarity and usage


Linear fluorescent lamps - familiarity and usage


LED lamps – familiarity and usage


40

Table 41. Lighting types ever used TOTAL Fiji PNG Sols Vanuatu Kiribati Cooks Niue Samoa Tonga Tuvalu

RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Incandescent 52.3 63.5 29.2 71.9 53.9 35.0 50.5 54.0 70.6 62.4 37.4

CFL 73.3 88.0 30.4 85.9 90.3 70.7 93.7 100.0 73.0 88.8 73.6

LFL 89.8 90.9 98.6 97.5 79.6 92.9 76.2 84.0 85.8 92.4 73.6

LED 25.2 42.5 16.0 28.6 27.2 20.0 21.4 20.0 19.1 12.7 27.5

Table 42. Lighting types currently being used TOTAL Fiji PNG Sols Vanuatu Kiribati Cooks Niue Samoa Tonga Tuvalu

RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Incandescent 17.3 9.5 4.9 25.1 13.6 5.7 14.1 20.0 62.3 28.9 19.8

CFL 59.1 75.1 9.5 77.9 77.7 67.9 88.8 96.0 59.3 56.9 64.8

LFL 81.9 77.0 96.4 95.5 69.4 89.3 64.1 66.0 80.4 85.8 59.3

LED 16.1 30.1 5.1 25.1 14.6 14.3 15.5 16.0 13.2 6.1 14.3

Table 43. Main type of lighting TOTAL Fiji PNG Sols Vanuatu Kiribati Cooks Niue Samoa Tonga Tuvalu

RESPONDENTS 2318 518 507 199 206 140 206 50 204 197 91

% % % % % % % % % % %

Incandescent 4.5 1.2 0.8 3.0 2.4 4.4 12.0 21.1 9.1 8.8

CFL 31.1 45.9 3.7 33.2 46.6 20.0 68.9 64.0 13.2 15.7 45.1

LFL 58.3 40.5 93.5 58.3 43.2 78.6 21.4 22.0 60.8 72.1 35.2

LED 5.7 12.2 1.4 5.5 5.3 1.4 5.3 2.0 4.9 2.5 11.0

Don't use any 0.4 0.2 0.6 2.4 0.5

CFL is clearly the main type of lighting for Cook Islands (69%), and Niue (64%). LFL is clearly the main type of lighting for PNG (94%), Kiribati (79%), Tonga (72%), Samoa (61%), and Solomon Islands (58%). There is near-equal use of CFL and LFL as the main source in Fiji (46% vs. 41%) and Vanuatu (47% vs 43%). LED is used as the main light source significantly more in Fiji (12%) and Tuvalu (11%) than other countries. Incandescent use as the main type of lighting is significantly higher in Samoa (21%), Niue (12%), Tonga (9%) and Tuvalu (9%) than other countries.

41

6 LEARNINGS

We have several suggested improvements to the data collection tool:

Collect additional socio-economic classification variables (e.g. household income, education)

Air-conditioners: need to distinguish between air-conditioners and evaporative coolers

Televisions: may be useful to include computer monitors as well in future (which also carry the same energy labels)

Water heaters: need to describe these in more detail to eliminate the possibility that electric kettles or jugs are counted as a “water heater”.

Water heaters: electric and solar water heaters were included in the instrument, but not gas. We are unable to determine the number of people with any water heater (and therefore the likely potential for additional units in future).

Electric cookers & gas cookers: need to explicitly define what to count here – appliances, or hotplates – and what to exclude (e.g. toaster ovens, rice cookers).

Possibly adjust the question “what is the appliance that you are most likely to buy next” to “major appliance” or “large appliance”.

There may be some confusion between CFL lights and incandescent, because the showcard had a picture of a clear incandescent (with obvious filament). Respondents with frosted incandescent globes may have selected the more similar-looking CFL bulb, and CFL may therefore be over-represented in the data.

When asking about the star rating on energy labels, some respondents may be conflating the purchase price with the operating cost when claiming that an appliance is “more expensive to use”. We recommend a review of wording to clarify the difference between the cost of energy and the cost of the appliance.

42

7 ANNEX 1 – QUESTIONNAIRE

PACIFIC APPLIANCE LABELLING AND STANDARDS PROGRAMME

SURVEY FORM ON THE USE OF ENERGY RATING LABELS

Good morning/afternoon/evening. My name is _________________ and I’m from TEBBUTT RESEARCH. Today

we are doing a survey in this area and we were wondering if you would like to take part? The survey is completely

confidential and you will never be able to be identified for taking part. It’s really easy and takes about 20 to 30

minutes. Will you help me?

S1. First, I need to check that I am talking to the right person. Would you be the household decision-maker or one

of the household decision makers on purchasing appliances, like a refrigerator, freezer, air conditioner, television or

clothes washer?

If yes, Ask S2 and CONTINUE

If no, ASK: Would you please introduce me to the person or one of the people who makes those decisions for the

household? START AGAIN AT BEGINNING

S2. Are you the sole decision maker for the household or do you share the decision-making with another person?

Sole decision maker 1 Go To OBTAIN CONSENT

Share decision making 2 Ask S3

S3. Do you share the decision-making with a male or female or both?

Share with Male 1

Share with Female 2

Share with Both male and female

3

OBTAIN CONSENT BEFORE STARTING INTERVIEW

The survey is being conducted for THE PACIFIC COMMUNITY and the topic area is energy. We are inviting a

number of households in your country to take part. The information will be used to help develop activity programs

on efficient use of energy. As already mentioned, it is confidential and what you tell us remains private.

Shall we get started?

1A. Would you please let me know which of these age groups you are in? READ OUT.

19 years or younger CLOSE

20 to 29 years 1

30 to 39 years 2

40 to 50 years 3

51+ years 4

1B. RECORD GENDER

Male 1

Female 2

43

1C. RECORD LOCATION

Fiji Suva 1

Lami 2

Nasinu 3

Nausori 4

Nadi 5

Lautoka 6

Labasa 7

Savusavu 8

Papua New Guinea Port Moresby 9

Solomon Islands Honiara 10

Vanuatu Port Vila 11

Luganville 12

Kiribati South Tarawa 13

Cook Islands Rarotonga 14

Niue Alofi 15

Samoa Apia 16

NW Upolu 17

Savai’i 18

Tonga Tongatapu 19

Vava’u 20

Tuvalu Funafuti 21

2. Have you seen any labels (other than price labels) on new refrigerators, freezers or other appliances such as

air conditioners, and television?

Yes 1 Continue

No 2 Go To Q4

Not sure 3 Go To Q4

3 What do these labels tell you about the product? (do not prompt). Record verbatim.

Nothing / does not tell me anything 97

Don’t know 99

44

4. SHOW CARD A. Have you seen this label before?

Yes 1 Continue

No 2 Go To Q6

5. Where did you see this label before?

In appliance showroom 1

On TV or other advertisements 2

On an appliance in your home 3

In someone else’s home 4

Other (specify)

5

6. SHOW CARD B. Have you seen any of these types of energy labels before? Note all recognised. MR

Singapore 1

China 2

USA 3

Japan 4

Europe 5

Korea 6

Thailand 7

Have not seen any of these labels 8

7. SHOW CARD C. Have you seen this label before?

Yes 1 Continue

No 2 Go To Q9






Other (specify)

5

9. SHOW CARD D. Have you seen this label before?

Yes 1 Continue

No 2 Go To Q11

45






Other (specify)

5

11. SHOW CARD A. What do the stars mean? If the appliance has more stars what does it tell you about the

appliance? MR

It uses more electricity 1

It is more energy efficient 2

Is more expensive to use 3

It uses less electricity 4

It is less energy efficient 5

It is less expensive to use 6

Other (specify)

7

12. How important is the star rating to you? Would you say it is very important, quite important, not very important

or not important at all?

Very important 4

Quite important 3

Not very important 2

Not important at all 1

13. SHOW CARD A What do the numbers in the red box mean? MR

It shows the annual electricity or energy consumption of the appliance

1

It is the model number of the appliance 2

Other (specify)

3

Not sure / don’t know 9

14. Can you use the label to tell your annual estimated running costs of the appliance?

Yes 1 Continue

No 2 Go To Q16

Not sure 3 Go To Q16

46

15. How can you find out your annual running costs? READ OUT

Annual electricity consumption multiply by your electricity tariff 1

Annual electricity consumption multiply by your monthly electricity bill

2

Not sure / don’t know 3

16. How important are the running costs to you? Would you say they are very important, quite important, not very

important or not important at all?

Very important 4

Quite important 3

Not very important 2

Not important at all 1

17. Do you know how much you pay for each unit of electricity?

Yes 1 Ask 17B

No 2 Ask 17C

17B. If yes in 17A ASK: How much do you pay for a unit of electricity? (Write in)

17C. If no in 17A ASK: Where would you get this information? MR

Don’t know

18. SHOW CARD A. Have you ever used the number in the red box to estimate the annual running costs of an

appliance?

Yes 1

No 2

19. How will you use the information on the label next time you or your family buys an appliance? MR

Not likely to use it 1

Can only buy what I can afford, so no help to me 2

Will try to buy the most efficient (highest star rating) 3

Will use the numbers in the red box to work out running cost and combined cost (price + running cost)

4

Other (specify)

5

47

20. Appliance inventory – refrigerator

How many refrigerators do you have, including refrigerators with freezer compartments?

One 1 Continue

Two 2 Continue

Three 3 Continue

More (write in number)

4 Continue

None 9 Go To 21

ASK QUESTIONS FOR UP TO 3 REFRIGERATORS.

IF MORE THAN 3 THEN CHOOSE THE 3 MOST RECENTLY PURCHASED.

Refrigerator #1 Refrigerator #2 Refrigerator #3

Does it have an energy label of the type we have shown ? (Check SHOW CARD A)

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

If yes, how many stars?

Does it have a different type of energy label? Y/N

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

If yes, SHOW CARD B with the range of non-standard labels and ask: Which one does it look like?

Country: 1. Singapore 2. China 3. USA 4. Japan 5. Europe 6. Korea 7. Thailand 8. Other (specify)



Brand name:

Model number:

Annual energy consumption (kWh/yr) on the label:

48

21. Appliance inventory – freezer

How many freezers do you have? (Must be stand-alone freezer, not part of refrigerator)

One 1 Continue

Two 2 Continue

Three 3 Continue


4 Continue

None 9 Go To 22

ASK QUESTIONS FOR UP TO 3 FREEZERS.


Freezer #1 Freezer #2 Freezer #3

Does it have an energy label of the type we have shown ? (Check SHOW CARD A)

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No



1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No





Brand name:

Model number:


49

22. Appliance inventory – air conditioner

How many air conditioners do you have?

One 1 Continue

Two 2 Continue

Three 3 Continue


4 Continue

None 9 Go To 23

ASK QUESTIONS FOR UP TO 3 AIR CONDITIONERS.


Air conditioner #1 Air conditioner #2 Air conditioner #3

Does it have an energy label of the type we have shown ? (Check SHOW CARD C)

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No



1. Yes 2. No 3.

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No





Brand name:

Model number:

Cooling output (kW) on the label:

Label energy input (kW):

50

23. Appliance inventory – television

How many televisions do you have?

One 1 Continue

Two 2 Continue

Three 3 Continue


4 Continue

None 9 Go To 24

ASK QUESTIONS FOR UP TO 3 TELEVISIONS.


Television #1 Television #2 Television #3

Does it have an energy label of the type we have shown ? (Check SHOW CARD D)

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No



1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No

1. Yes 2. No





Brand name:

Model number:


51

24. Do you have any of the following large appliances? READ OUT ONE AT A TIME

If yes, ask how many.

Appliance Number Circle if NOT in household

twin-tub clothes washer 97

automatic clothes washer 97

water heater – electric 97

water heater – solar 97

electric cooker 97

gas cooker 97

electric fan 97

25. SHOW CARD E. When was the last time you bought any of the following appliances new?

This year 2016 1

Last year 2015 2

In 2014 3

In 2013 4

In 2012 5

Before 2012 6

26. What was the appliance you bought? MR

Refrigerator 1

Freezer 2

Television 3

Clothes washer 4

Air conditioner 5

27. What is the appliance that you are most likely to buy next?

Refrigerator 1

Freezer 2

Television 3

Clothes washer 4

Air conditioner 5

Other (specify) 6

Don’t know 9

28. When are you likely to purchase this appliance?

In 3 months time 1

In 6 months time 2

In 9 months time 3

In 12 months time 4

Don’t know 9

52

29. SHOW CARDS F, G, H, I - ONE AT A TIME.

Please have a look at this light type and tell me which of the answers is true for your household. READ OUT.

Incandescent bulb

Compact Fluorescent

lamps

Linear Fluorescent

lamps

LED lamps

I have never seen this before 1 1 1 1

I have seen this but don’t know much about it

2 2 2 2

I have seen this and know about it, but have never used it in this household

3 3 3 3

I have used this in this household in the past but we are not using it at the moment

4 4 4 4

We are using this in our household

5 5 5 5

IF MORE THAN ONE TYPE CURRENTLY USED IN HOUSEHOLD (Code 5) ASK Q30.

IF ONLY ONE TYPE USED GO TO DEMOGRAPHICS

30. SHOW CARD J. You said you are currently using these types of lights… [POINT TO TYPES CURRENTLY

USED. What would be the main type of light you are using in this household?

Incandescent bulb 1

Compact Fluorescent lamps 2

Linear Fluorescent lamps 3

LED lamps 4

DEMOGRAPHICS

31. Finally, we would like to ask you some questions about this household for classification purposes. How many

people live in this household altogether, including yourself and any babies?

Babies under 1 year

1 to 6 year olds

7 to 11 year olds

12 to 17 year olds

Adults 18+ year olds

Total

32. Is this a rented property or is it being paid off by someone who lives here or is it owned by someone who lives

here?

Rented 1

Buying it – being paid off 2

Own it 3

Don’t know 4

53

33. Household type measure – RECORD the best description of the household from the list below

Brick or concrete 1

Timber 2

Fibro or particle board 3

Tin or lean-to 4

Thatched / natural materials 5

Other (specify) 6

We are finished with our interview now. Thank you very much for taking part in this survey. We really appreciate

your help.

Just in case my supervisor needs to check that I did this interview, can I please have your first name and telephone

number? Nobody will ever see this information; it is just for our checking purposes.

NAME: _______________________ TELEPHONE: ______________________

HOUSEHOLD ADDRESS: ________________________________________________

________________________________________________

INTERVIEWER DECLARATION - This interview was conducted in accordance with the Tebbutt Research quality

standard.

NAME SIGNATURE DATE

INTERVIEWER

/ /

SUPERVISOR

/ /

54

8 ANNEX 2 – SHOWCARDS

survey of consumer awareness and use of energy rating …...1 contents 1 introduction.....4 2...

Documents