Interview with the EPBD.wise Focus Country Contact Points

Across Europe, the recast Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) is entering a decisive phase. With the transposition deadline set for May 2026, Member States face the urgent task of embedding new requirements, from National Building Renovation Plans (NBRPs) to Zero-Emission Buildings and stronger Energy Performance Certificates, into national legislation and delivery systems.

If implemented ambitiously, the EPBD has the potential to accelerate decarbonisation, reduce energy poverty, improve comfort and health, and strengthen Europe’s energy security and competitiveness. Ambitious implementation will rely on much more than technical solutions, but on good governance, coordination and shared understanding.

The EPBD.wise project sits at the centre of this process, helping six countries (Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Ukraine) bridge the gap between EU legislation and practical national implementation. Through a series of national Policy Forums, the project has created a structured space for dialogue, evidence-sharing and policy stress-testing. The conversations that emerged from these Forums reveal how EPBD.wise is helping countries build the systems needed for the buildings transition.

What the Policy Forums set out to achieve

The EPBD.wise Policy Forums were designed as more than information-sharing events. Their aim was to create structured spaces for dialogue, learning and coordination, allowing national stakeholders to engage directly with EPBD.wise recommendations, exchange experiences and build shared ownership of the implementation process.

In Hungary, Péter Tóth, Chief Engineer at ÉMI, described the Forum as a continuation of professional dialogue between policymakers, stakeholders and the project consortium. The discussions focused on key EPBD elements, including EPCs and the National Building Renovation Plan, and brought together representatives from ministries, professional chambers and industry. For Tóth, the key outcome was clear:

“The most important conclusion: cooperation and exchange of knowledge and experience are essential. Such cooperation can lead to viable and usable legislation.”

In Bulgaria, Dragomir Tzanev, Director of EnEffect, emphasised that the Forum helped launch a more structured process of engagement:

“The major output of the event was the start of a structured, continuous process that involves actually stakeholders from all sides and all stages of the value chain in the construction industry.”

Across countries, the Policy Forums served as a bridge linking EU policy frameworks, national authorities and those responsible for delivery on the ground.

Social impact, inclusion and positive change

A strong social dimension runs through all EPBD.wise discussions. Partners consistently highlighted that building renovation is not only about reductions in emissions, but about improving quality of life, tackling energy poverty and ensuring that no one is left behind.

In Poland, Jan Ruszkowski, Managing Director of the Fala Renowacji, framed renovation as a foundation for broader societal goals:

“This is — using construction terms — a foundation of climate neutrality, improvement of air quality, energy transition, decrease in the level of energy poverty and improvement of the quality of life.”

Poland’s Policy Forum placed particular emphasis on the link between EPBD implementation and the Social Climate Plan, underlining that social and energy policies must reinforce one another. Ruszkowski stressed that success depends on seeing these instruments as interconnected:

“The interconnections between the EPBD implementation, Social Climate Plan preparation and successful financing of modernisation of buildings are very strong and none of these documents function in the void.”

In Greece, Alice Corovessi, Co-founder and Managing Director of INZEB, highlighted the urgency of addressing both inefficiency and inequality. She noted that Greece must renovate an ageing building stock while also tackling energy poverty and regional disparities. For her, the EPBD offers tools that can support this transition if used well:

“The Forum was designed to ‘translate’ European policy frameworks into national operational strategies. The purpose of the event was to critically examine how EPCs, BRPs and One-Stop Shops can become operational levers in this process, not simply formal compliance tools.”

This translation is essential because Greece’s building stock is both old and inefficient; more than 58% of homes were built before 1980. Without strong delivery mechanisms, citizens risk being overwhelmed by administrative complexity or left out of renovation support schemes altogether.

Ukraine’s context adds another layer of meaning to the societal impact of renovation. Volodymyr Shymkin, President at the Housing and Municipal Reform Support Center, underlined the urgency of energy-efficient renovation both now and in the future:

“A renovated, energy efficient building stock is a very important and urgent issue for Ukraine both in the current situation of full-scale invasion and in post war period.”

Despite extraordinary circumstances, Ukraine’s engagement with the EPBD is also about long-term inclusion in Europe: “No less important is the issue of EPBD implementation as a key task for UA on its path to EU accession.”

Enabling good implementation: opportunities for progress

While challenges remain, the interviews consistently frame them as opportunities to improve systems, strengthen cooperation and design better policies.

In Romania, Andrei Iorgulescu, Programme Director at ROENEF, pointed to the importance of communication, collaboration and dedicated funding as key enablers of success:

“There is a major need for dedicated funding for energy efficiency in buildings programmes. The communication and collaboration between the entities involved in the initiatives dedicated to the decarbonisation of the building sector should also be intensified so as to achieve the high standards brought by the new legislation.”

Romania’s forthcoming National Building Renovation Plan and digital Building Register were highlighted as tools that can significantly improve evidence-based policymaking and targeting of renovation efforts. Iorgulescu also stressed the value of projects like EPBD.wise in bringing stakeholders together:

“Such projects are important to ensuring that all stakeholders dedicated to improving energy efficiency in buildings are gathered under the same umbrella.”

In Bulgaria, Tzanev emphasised that the country already has strong technical capacity, and that improved coordination can unlock faster progress:

“We are quite advanced at the technical level. However, the hurdle we want to address is that changes are taking place slowly and without the necessary dialogue, which is what we want to improve on.”

Hungary’s experience similarly shows how structured dialogue helps identify concrete legislative steps. Tóth noted that consortium contributions helped raise key issues and clarify where change is needed, reinforcing that collaboration is not an abstract principle but a practical pathway to delivery.

Greece’s discussions highlighted delivery ecosystems as an opportunity for innovation. Corovessi observed that the policy architecture is largely in place, and that progress now depends on integration:

“Implementation hinges on creating cohesive delivery ecosystems blending data, governance, citizen engagement and financing tools.”

Across all countries, there is a shared sense that the EPBD can act as a catalyst not only for better buildings, but for stronger institutions, better data, clearer communication and more inclusive governance.

Conclusion: Laying the foundations of a successful renovation wave

Taken together, the voices from EPBD.wise Policy Forums paint a picture of momentum, commitment and constructive engagement. The EPBD implementation period will set a demanding agenda, but it will also open the door to transformative change for Europe’s buildings and the people who live and work in them.

Across all six interviews, partners describe EPBD.wise as an important source of structure, technical guidance and policy legitimacy. In Bulgaria, the project convened key ministries, agencies and associations in a way that rarely happens. In Hungary, consortium presentations helped policymakers identify the legislative changes required for EPBD alignment.

“The European Commission representative assessed the policy document prepared by EPBD.wise as very extensive and fully aligned with the objective of the Directive,” noted Ruszowski after the Policy Forum in Poland. For many partners, the project brings something beyond technical input: continuity, long-term thinking and a platform for evidence-based policymaking.

A determination for ambitious implementation is echoed by all six countries, but perhaps by none so firmly as in Ukraine. As Shymkin put it simply, “Ukraine is striving even in current circumstances.”

Across the EPBD.wise focus countries, partners see this moment not simply as a compliance exercise, but as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to modernise how buildings policies are designed and delivered.