An Analysis of Barriers to the Implementation of Energy-Efficient Technologies in Residential Buildings: A Quantitative Approach

Abstract

Building owners and occupants encounter challenges in implementing energy-efficient technologies arising from high upfront costs, limited awareness, and inconsistent policy enforcement. This study aims to investigate the barriers that prevent the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in residential buildings. A case study research design was used to collect quantitative data using a survey questionnaire in the Brandwag area of the Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality in South Africa. The findings reflect building occupants’ perceptions regarding the effectiveness of various barriers encountered during the implementation of energy-efficient technologies in buildings. Notably, the highest-ranked barrier was the limited availability of financial support, which received a mean score of 4.19, while the lowest-ranked barrier was the shortage of qualified or skilled professionals, with a mean score of 3.78. An integrated strategy that simultaneously addresses financial processes, technical capacity building, and standardized regulations is essential for the successful adoption of energy-efficient technologies in residential buildings. However, a limitation of the study is its reliance on a survey-based research methodology for data collection. Although a quantitative approach was prioritized, the low response rate of the survey limits the generalizability of the findings. Future research should address this limitation by employing a mixed-methods research design for comparable evaluations focusing on South Africa, not just a province.

1. Introduction

Buildings are essential for daily living and require energy for lighting, heating, and cooling [1]. Buildings play a critical role in meeting energy demands and addressing environmental issues such as climate change and global warming [2]. For example, buildings contribute approximately 37% of energy-related carbon emissions and 36% of global final energy consumption, establishing them as a vital sector for climate change mitigation [3]. The impacts of climate change are particularly pronounced in Mediterranean regions, which face unique challenges due to their hot, dry summers and wet winters, resulting in heightened energy demands for both heating and cooling [4].

Building types that require energy for both heating and cooling include residential buildings, healthcare facilities, educational institutions, corporate and governmental buildings, shopping malls, and community centers [5]. Energy consumption in buildings encompasses the power used for appliances, lighting, heating, cooling, and other systems that ensure the comfort, functionality, and safety of occupants [6]. The building sector is a significant consumer of energy, and in South Africa, energy is primarily sourced from coal-fired power plants [7]. Consequently, energy generation contributes notably to the country’s prominent levels of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions [3]. To alleviate pressure on the national grid and uphold South Africa’s commitments to addressing climate change, it is essential to enhance building energy efficiency through the implementation of energy-efficient technologies in buildings [7].

One of the primary challenges in the building sector is the limited adoption of energy-efficient technologies, which is attributable to high initial costs, insufficient awareness, and policy barriers that hinder widespread implementation [8]. The adoption of energy-efficient technologies in residential buildings is widely recognized as a critical strategy for reducing energy consumption and mitigating environmental impacts. For example, integrating solar photovoltaic (PV) systems with battery storage is essential, as it addresses the intermittent nature of solar power [6]. This combination ensures consistent and reliable energy supply, enhances grid stability, facilitates off-grid and micro-grid operations, and promotes energy independence [9]. Energy-efficient technologies such as Light-Emitting Diode (LED) lighting, smart Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems, and high-efficiency insulation decrease the energy required for cooling, heating, and lighting buildings in both winter and summer [10,11]. Additionally, innovative windows and eco-friendly roofing materials help regulate indoor temperatures, which reduces the demand for buildings’ HVAC systems [12]. However, while energy-efficient technologies reduce energy consumption and increase building efficiency, building occupants often perceive it challenging to adopt them.

Building occupants in South Africa encounter significant challenges in adopting energy-efficient technologies within their buildings [13]. The high initial costs associated with solar water heaters, despite their long-term benefits, present a barrier for many building owners and occupants due to limited access to affordable financing options for energy-efficient technologies [11]. Furthermore, while energy efficiency regulations are in place in South Africa, their implementation is often hindered by inconsistent enforcement and a lack of technical expertise, particularly in the mass production of low-income housing, where essential insulation measures are frequently neglected [3]. This situation is exacerbated by a critical skills shortage, as the scarcity of certified installers for technologies such as heat pumps results in suboptimal performance and diminished trust, impeding broader market adoption [14].

Despite the well-established benefits of energy-efficient technologies, buildings continue to consume substantial amounts of energy and release carbon dioxide [10]. For instance, the residential and commercial sectors of the European Union account for around 12% of its greenhouse gas emissions, while buildings account for about 41% of its energy consumption [11]. Furthermore, 95% of South Africa’s energy is produced by Eskom (Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd., Johannesburg, South Africa) using coal, which provides 92% of the country’s power [15]. Given that South Africa’s current dependence on fossil fuels results in significant pollution, this underscores the need to reduce building energy use through increased operating efficiency and a shift to more environmentally friendly energy sources. However, the lack of innovative technologies in South African buildings to manage energy consumption presents a significant opportunity to optimize and regulate energy usage [13].

Energy is sustainable if it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs [16]. Energy efficiency in buildings is a pivotal strategy for advancing Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG 7) [17]. The primary aim of SDG 7 is to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable, modern, and sustainable energy [16]. The adoption of energy-efficient technologies in buildings effectively diminishes energy consumption, thereby directly contributing to the objectives of SDG 7 by promoting access to clean and affordable energy. These technologies not only optimize energy performance but also enhance the accessibility of sustainable energy solutions. For example, the installation of solar water heaters in buildings significantly increases access to affordable and reliable renewable energy by decreasing electricity demand from coal-intensive grids, as evidenced in countries such as South Africa [13]. This intervention not only improves energy affordability for occupants but also aids in reducing carbon emissions, thereby furthering the goals of SDG 7 [17].

This study aims to evaluate the barriers to the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in residential buildings, focusing specifically on the Brandwag neighborhood within the Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality in South Africa. The building sector in South Africa is characterized by significant energy consumption sourced from coal-fired power plants, which contributes to greenhouse gas emissions [15]. Therefore, the findings of this study will support the transition of buildings in South Africa from a heavy reliance on coal-generated energy to an integrated approach utilizing energy-efficient technology sources.

2. Literature Review

Integrating energy-efficient technologies into buildings is a critical strategy for addressing climate change and reducing the environmental impact of the building industry [18]. These technologies significantly decrease energy consumption and are associated with carbon emissions. Interventions include the implementation of smart systems, enhancements to building envelopes, and the incorporation of renewable energy sources [18]. For instance, research indicates that improvements to building envelopes, such as the installation of insulated panels and high-performance windows, can lower heating and cooling requirements by minimizing thermal bridging and enhancing airtightness [6,19]. Retrofitting older buildings with smart technologies can further enhance energy efficiency and lower energy costs [20]. In addition to energy savings, these technologies provide essential co-benefits, such as improved indoor environmental quality and increased occupant comfort, which are increasingly recognized as vital components of sustainable building design [21].

The problem of high building energy consumption should be addressed using energy-efficient technologies. These technologies reduce the need for heating and cooling buildings and enhance temperature control. However, the adoption of energy-efficient technologies is sometimes hindered by barriers that building occupants must overcome, including financial, technological, and other barriers [11,22,23]. For example, high upfront costs remain a significant financial barrier. The installation of energy-efficient technologies, such as solar panels, advanced HVAC systems, and intelligent energy management applications, requires substantial financial commitments from building occupants [23]. As a result, the lack of financial support for adopting energy-efficient technologies discourages many building occupants from upgrading their buildings.

In addition to the economic issues mentioned earlier, building occupants face technological challenges. For instance, most older buildings are not designed to incorporate innovative energy-efficient technologies. Consequently, many of these buildings require retrofitting to be improved [9]. Retrofitting an old building is costly, as it involves hiring highly qualified professionals [24]. Additionally, there are challenges related to the accessibility of energy-efficient technology in certain locations, particularly in towns with small populations.

In addition, inadequate knowledge barriers are another issue preventing the adoption of energy-efficient technologies [23]. This is because most building occupants are either unaware of or lack sufficient knowledge about the advantages of these technologies [22]. In addition to ignorance, building occupants’ behavior is also influenced by their level of awareness regarding technological adaptation [25]. Numerous obstacles typically hinder building tenants from adopting energy-efficient technologies. The challenges that building occupants face while trying to implement energy-efficient technology have been the subject of numerous research studies [11]. For example,

Table 1. Barriers preventing building occupants from using energy-efficient technologies.

№	Barriers Encountered by Building Occupants	Code	Sources
1	Lack of awareness and education.	BOO1	[9,22]
2	Older building designs.	BOO2	[9,23,24]
3	Limited access to energy-efficient technologies in certain areas.	BOO3	[9,25]
4	Occupant’s behavior.	BOO4	[11]
5	Limited availability of financial support.	BOO5	[11]
6	An enormous start-up cost.	BOO6	[11,22,23]
7	Shortage of qualified or skilled workers.	BOO7	[9,14]

shows the barriers that building occupants continue to encounter despite the benefits of energy-efficient technologies.

The barriers identified in Table 1 are fundamentally rooted in economic rationality, where decision-makers and policymakers prioritize immediate capital expenditure over uncertain long-term returns, leading to pervasive risk aversion [26]. In addition to their outputs, decision-makers are influenced by principles of behavioral economics, such as status quo bias and reliance on heuristics, which contribute to the undervaluation of future energy savings [27]. A significant structural issue is the principal-agent problem, which creates misaligned economic incentives between building owners and occupants, discouraging investments from which the investor cannot fully benefit [28]. These barriers are perpetuated by a lack of accessible information and transparent data, which exacerbate perceived performance uncertainty and undermine confidence in the claims of the technologies [29].

3. Methodology

3.1. Study Area

The research area under investigation is Brandwag, situated within the Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality in the Free State Province. The geographical coordinates for Brandwag, Bloemfontein, are 29°6′11″ S, 26°11′48″ E, or −29.10306, 26.19667 in decimal notation. Brandwag is a neighborhood located in Bloemfontein, which serves as the capital of the Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality in the Free State Province of South Africa. The Brandwag study area is illustrated in Figure 1.

3.2. Research Design

This study evaluated the barriers to the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in residential buildings, focusing specifically on the Brandwag neighborhood within the Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality in South Africa. The study not only identified barriers but also established the most effective approaches to implementing energy-efficient technologies in buildings. A case study research design was used to collect quantitative data using a survey questionnaire. The case study is situated in the Brandwag area of the Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality, as shown in Figure 1. The single-case study was chosen because of the office complexes, apartment buildings, student housing units for the nearby university, and tourism facilities (such as hotels, lodges, and guest homes) in the Brandwag neighborhood. This area uses a lot of electricity; thus, building owners or managers might benefit from adopting energy-efficient technologies. It is essential for Brandwag, a neighborhood near the university, to adopt energy-efficient building technologies, as electricity in South Africa is both costly and unreliable due to frequent load shedding. Therefore, the correlation between variables within a single case of building occupants in the Brandwag neighborhood was investigated using a quantitative single-case research design.

Respondents to the survey were building occupants in the Brandwag neighborhood. The survey questionnaire was divided into three sections. The first section had a consent form that informed the respondents about the research investigation and their rights, ensuring that they made informed and free decisions about their participation. The purpose of the second section’s questions was to elicit information about the respondents’ personal information. The last section asked about barriers preventing building occupants from implementing energy-efficient technologies. In this section, the respondents used a 5-point Likert scale to evaluate the barriers preventing them from implementing energy-efficient technologies. These assessed barriers have been selected from the literature based on their impacts (see Table 1).

3.3. Research Sampling

The study’s target demographic consists of building managers, office workers, homeowners, and tenants (see

Table 2. Research sample.

Participants	Frequency (N)	Percentage (%)
Homeowners	16	23.19
Building mangers	9	13.04
Tenants	31	44.93
Office workers	13	18.84
Total	69	100
Participants gender	N	%
Male	42	60.87
Female	19	27.54
Prefer not to disclose	8	11.59
Total	69	100
Participants qualification	N	%
Certificates	12	17.39
National diploma	13	18.84
Bachelor’s degree	26	37.68
Honors Degree	10	14.49
Master’s degree	8	11.59
Total	69	100

). A total of 114 participants received survey questionnaires, and 69 of them responded, accounting for 61% of the total responses. Building occupants who live and work in the Brandwag neighborhood were randomly given the survey. The participants were selected using the simple random sampling procedure [30]. It was observed that most of the participants were tenants (45%), followed by homeowners (23%), office workers (19%), and building managers (13%). The sample is composed of 61% male respondents, 27% female respondents, and 12% of respondents who chose not to identify their gender. Upon examining the participants’ qualifications, it was discovered that 17% had earned a certificate, 19% a national diploma, 38% a bachelor’s degree, 14% an Honors degree, and 12% a master’s degree. Most participants clearly possess a university degree, indicating their comprehension of the survey. It is not surprising that most participants possess university degrees, as residents of Brandwag have access to institutions such as the University of the Free State (UFS) and the Central University of Technology (CUT).

3.4. Data Collection and Analysis

To collect quantitative data, closed-ended survey questions were used. In 2023, data were collected between October and November. This resulted in the study’s cross-sectional design [30]. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the obstacles encountered by the building’s occupants. On the Likert scale, 1 was regarded as insignificant, 2 as important, 3 as neutral, 4 as significant, and 5 as highly significant. The quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics through mean score (MS) and standard deviation (SD). Additionally, Cronbach’s alpha (α) was used to examine the reliability of the data collected using a 5-point Likert scale. In this study, factor analysis (FA) was also used to identify the most noteworthy features that building occupants encountered when implementing energy-efficient technology. These qualities were then categorized based on their degree of similarity. The IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.0 (v2023) was used to assess the quantitative data using descriptive analysis and factor analysis.

4. Results

4.1. Evaluation of the Barriers Preventing Building Occupants from Implementing Energy-Efficient Technologies in Residential Buildings

According to the responses to the valid 69 questionnaires that were returned,

Table 3. Barriers preventing occupants from implementing energy-efficient technologies.

Code	Barriers Encountered by Building Occupants	MS	SD	α	Ranking	Remark
BOO5	Limited availability of financial support	4.19	0.839	0.982	1st	Significant barrier
BOO1	Lack of awareness and education	4.10	1.089		2nd	Significant barrier
BOO6	An enormous start-up cost	4.06	0.903		3rd	Significant barrier
BOO4	Occupants’ behavior	4.03	1.015		4th	Significant barrier
BOO2	Older building designs	3.85	0.857		5th	Significant barrier
BOO3	Limited access to energy-efficient technologies in certain areas	3.84	0.845		6th	Significant barrier
BOO7	Shortage of qualified or skilled professionals	3.78	0.935		7th	Significant barrier

NB: MS = mean score; SD = standard deviation; Cronbach’s alpha = α.

outlines the barriers that prevent building occupants from implementing energy-efficient technologies. The respondents’ acceptable Cronbach’s alpha rating of 0.982 indicates the validity and acceptability of the survey results collected from building occupants. Notwithstanding a low survey response rate, a positive Cronbach’s alpha indicates that the collected responses are still reliable for analysis, as it demonstrates good internal consistency among the items [31]. The standard deviations obtained from the analysis of the seven barriers encountered by building occupants are also within an acceptable range, as the values for all seven obstacles were low. For example, BOO5 received the lowest score (0.839), while BOO1 had the highest (1.089). These scores are well below the highest possible value of 5, indicating acceptable results. Additionally, all seven barriers preventing the building occupants from adopting energy-efficient technologies are acceptable, as the average mean score rating is greater than 3.00. For instance, BOO5 has the highest-ranking obstacle (MS = 4.19), while BOO7 has a score of (MS = 3.78). These findings show that all barrires identified in the study’s literature section are highly regarded by respondents and could be hindering building occupants from utilizing energy-efficient technologies. According to the study’s findings, Table 3 presents essential information on building design and human behavior when using energy-efficient technologies.

4.2. Factor Analysis of the Barriers Preventing Building Occupants from Implementing Energy-Efficient Technologies

Table 4. Correlation matrix.

Variables	BOO1	BOO2	BOO3	BOO4	BOO5	BOO6	BOO7
BOO1	1.000	0.845	0.825	0.943	0.939	0.903	0.857
BOO2	0.845	1.000	0.948	0.876	0.841	0.873	0.960
BOO3	0.825	0.948	1.000	0.871	0.836	0.887	0.931
BOO4	0.943	0.876	0.871	1.000	0.936	0.958	0.886
BOO5	0.939	0.841	0.836	0.936	1.000	0.925	0.848
BOO6	0.903	0.873	0.887	0.958	0.925	1.000	0.878
BOO7	0.857	0.960	0.931	0.886	0.848	0.878	1.000

shows the results of the correlation matrix that was to examine the correlations between variable pairs. The seven variables include lack of awareness and education (BOO1), older building designs (BOO2), limited access to energy-efficient technologies in certain areas (BOO3), the occupant’s behavior (BOO4), limited availability of financial support (BOO5), an enormous start-up cost (BOO6), and a shortage of qualified or skilled professionals (BOO7). All seven of the components in Table 4 have values greater than 0.8, indicating that they are all positively correlated. These variables are significantly positively correlated with each other, according to the data. For example, a very substantial positive correlation (0.943) was found between BOO1 and BOO4. The connection between BOO2 and BOO7 was also strong (0.960). This implies that BOO7 is often the result of BOO2.

Furthermore, the findings of the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sample adequacy and Bartlett’s test of sphericity for the seven variables are shown in

Table 5. KMO and Bartlett’s Test.

Variable		Value
KMO of sampling adequacy.		0.909
Bartlett’s test of sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square	870.590
	df	21
	Sig.	<0.001

. The results in Table 5 show that the KMO value of 0.909, which is greater than 0.50, is an acceptable value. Additionally, Bartlett’s test provides a significant value (p-value) of less than 0.001, which is acceptable. Furthermore, Table 4 shows the correlation between the seven variables, demonstrating the strong connection between them.

Table 6. Total variance in a principal component analysis.

Component	Initial Eigenvalues			Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %
1	6.362	90.891	90.891	6.362	90.891	90.891
2	0.341	4.877	95.768
3	0.106	1.512	97.280
4	0.068	0.971	98.251
5	0.056	0.798	99.049
6	0.036	0.513	99.562
7	0.031	0.438	100.000

shows the total variance explained by each principal component in a principal component analysis (PCA). The results in Table 6 show that the eigenvalue of component 1 was 6.362, its variance was 90.891%, and its cumulative was 90.891%. Subsequent components exhibit eigenvalues significantly below the conventional Kaiser criterion threshold of 1.0, ranging from 0.341 to 0.031, each explaining less than 5% of the variance. This finding suggests that a single, dominant latent factor accounts for most of the variance in the data, rendering the remaining six components statistically insignificant and reinforcing the scale’s essential unidimensionality for both practical and theoretical applications. Therefore, all seven measured variables are strongly correlated, collectively representing the challenges associated with the implementation of energy-efficient technology.

Table 7. Component matrix.

Variables	Loading Component 1	Interpretation
BOO1	0.946	Significant influence
BOO2	0.950	Significant influence
BOO3	0.943	Significant influence
B004	0.970	Significant influence
BOO5	0.948	Significant influence
BOO6	0.963	Significant influence
BOO7	0.953	Significant influence

shows the component matrix of the seven variables derived from principal component analysis (PCA). Each variable has a component loading that shows how significantly it coincides with the principal components, and Table 7 shows that the PCA extended one component (loading component 1). Additionally, all the variables have a significant correlation (value above 0.94), indicating that they are all crucial to loading component 1. This result implies that a lack of awareness and education about energy-efficient technologies is the primary variable, which accounts for all the six variables as shown in Table 6.

5. Discussion

Buildings are among the world’s largest consumers of energy and a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. In the EU, buildings consume over 41% of energy, and the residential and commercial sectors are responsible for over 12% of greenhouse gas emissions [11]. Eskom emits greenhouse gases because it uses coal to produce 95% of South Africa’s electricity [15]. Energy-efficient technologies should be integrated into buildings to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions [13]. In South Africa, the adoption of the energy-efficient technologies into buildings is crucial for alleviating the considerable strain on the coal-dependent national grid, thereby mitigating persistent load shedding, and significantly lowering the nation’s carbon footprint. Despite the clear advantages of implementing energy-efficient technologies to address carbon emissions and load-shedding issues in South Africa, building occupants frequently encounter challenges in effectively incorporating these technologies into their buildings.

The adoption of energy-efficient technology may be limited by the behavioral, technological, and financial challenges that building occupants face [22]. As shown in Table 1, the researcher identified seven challenges that building occupants encounter while implementing energy-efficient technologies after reviewing the literature. The most significant barrier identified is the limited availability of financial support (BOO5), as indicated in Table 3. Participants noted that the primary challenge facing building occupants in South Africa is the difficulty of incorporating energy-efficient technologies into their facilities due to high initial costs. Despite the potential benefits of such technologies, South Africa’s pervasive financial constraints, sluggish economic growth, and competing financial priorities further exacerbate the lack of available funding [3]. Although the South African government promotes the adoption of energy-efficient technologies through subsidies, tax incentives, and concessional loans, many building owners are unable to benefit from these interventions due to stringent regulations governing access to these financial incentives. The limited availability of funding programs and incentives for building occupants or owners, combined with a lack of understanding of the financial processes that could facilitate energy upgrades, particularly in South Africa, are significant factors contributing to the scarcity of financial support.

Additionally, a lack of awareness and education (BOO1) has been identified as the second-most considerable barrier to the implementation of energy-efficient technologies in buildings. This awareness gap is further exacerbated by restricted access to information, insufficient formal education on energy-related topics, and financial constraints that prioritize short-term survival over long-term savings. Moreover, inadequate outreach efforts by the government have hindered the effective promotion of energy-efficient technologies in South Africa.

Additionally, the enormous start-up cost (BOO6) is the third-highest-ranked barrier to the implementation of energy-efficient technologies. This result aligns with Dadzie et al., who state that high upfront costs remain a significant financial barrier. Implementing energy-efficient technologies such as solar panels, advanced HVAC systems, and intelligent energy management applications also requires substantial financial commitments [23]. Furthermore, the high initial expenditures for energy-efficient technology discourage building owners and employees from adopting them. In addition to the lack of funding for the adoption of energy-efficient technology adoption, behavioral challenges present another obstacle. For example, in South Africa, the substantial initial investment required for integrated solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage systems is essential for mitigating severe load shedding; however, this cost presents a significant barrier for building occupants. The high expense of integrated solar PV and battery storage systems in South Africa can be attributed to several factors, including a reliance on imported components, a weakened local currency that raises import prices, and complex supply chains that contribute to increased overall system costs.

Occupant behavior (BOO4) is another barrier that had significant value as shown in Table 3. These statistical results correspond with those of Mogaji et al., [25]. Alongside their ignorance, building occupants’ behavior is influenced by their awareness of technology adaptation. In the context of South Africa, the issues of occupant behavior are rooted to the limited availability of financial support, enormous start-up cost, and lack of awareness and education towards the implementation of the energy-efficient technologies. For example, building occupants in South Africa encounter significant socioeconomic disparities, which often perceive such technologies as an unaffordable luxury or a potential source of future financial burden due to maintenance costs, fostering resistance. Furthermore, a legacy of inadequate service delivery and a lack of meaningful consultation erode trust, leading to perceived impositions that trigger negative behavior, including non-cooperation and technology rejection, as part of a broader socio-technical transition conflict among building occupants.

As shown in Table 3, one of the barriers to the adoption of energy-efficient technology is the shortage of qualified or skilled professionals (BOO7). Despite receiving the lowest ranking, the participants acknowledged that this barrier is significant. For example, in South Africa, the scarcity of accredited solar PV installers and energy efficiency auditors frequently results in faulty system installations that fail to mitigate load shedding effectively. This shortage of skilled professionals often erodes the trust of building occupants from implementing energy-efficient technologies into buildings. This deficiency creates a damaging cycle where the perceived substantial risk of system failure makes financial institutions reluctant to offer affordable green loans, thereby stifling market growth and perpetuating the very skills shortage that constrains the industry’s development.

The findings indicate that all the variables identified in the study’s literature review were perceived positively by respondents and could be linked to the barriers faced by building occupants in adopting energy-efficient technologies. Additionally, the reliability of these seven variables was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, and the results revealed an exceptional value of 0.98. Therefore, the results demonstrate that the seven variables have an extremely prominent level of internal consistency. This finding supports the notion that a high Cronbach’s alpha signifies that the items on the instrument are closely related and accurately measure the same construction, both of which are essential for the validity of the study’s findings [31]. The correlation matrix was then utilized to evaluate the linear correlations between variable pairs. Based on the data collected, a significant positive association exists among the seven variables (Table 4). Furthermore, Table 6 shows that all seven variables have a substantial PCA, which highlights the challenges associated with implementing energy-efficient technologies in buildings. Despite the urgent need to mitigate load shedding and reduce carbon emissions in buildings, occupants in South Africa face challenges in implementing energy-efficient technologies due to the lack of an integrated strategy to address economic, technical, and regulatory standards.

The challenges associated with implementing energy-efficient technologies in South African buildings must be acknowledged to mitigate load shedding and reduce significant emissions from coal-fired power generation, which could further exacerbate the nation’s greenhouse gas inventory. This study underscores the urgent need for policy interventions to address these barriers, as they directly undermine national climate commitments and perpetuate carbon lock-in within the building sector. Consequently, in addition to addressing carbon emissions, this study also advances SDG7 by promoting clean and affordable energy through the implementation of energy-efficient building technologies.

6. Conclusions

Energy-efficient technology remains a key component of building energy reduction initiatives. The participants’ viewpoints have guided their efforts toward a solution because of this phenomenon. The results have led to the growth of initiatives encouraging building occupants to adopt energy-efficient technologies. Without this information, addressing high energy consumption in buildings may prove challenging. As a result, this study was established to fill this knowledge gap. This study investigated the barriers preventing the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in residential buildings located in Brandwag, Free State Province, South Africa, using survey questionnaires. To effectively implement energy-efficient technology in residential buildings, a comprehensive strategy is required that concurrently addresses financial processes, technical capacity building, and standardized regulations. The implementation of energy-efficient technologies in buildings will directly contribute to achieving SDG7 in South Africa by enhancing access to affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy supply. This initiative will reduce electricity demand on the overloaded national grid and increase the share of renewable energy within the building sector. However, it is important to note that the study has limitations due to its reliance on survey-based research methodology. The low response rate of 61% (69 out of 114 participants) limits the generalization of the findings. The variables being studied were selected from an existing body of literature, leaving no opportunity to extract new variables from the respondents since the survey was closed-ended. Future research is expected to address this constraint by conducting comparable evaluations using mixed-methods research design.