Campbell, Goodhart et PEB

Vers un certificat PEB obligatoire pour tous les logements en Belgique ?” Tel est la question posée dans un article de la RTBF sur base d’un avis du “Conseil central de l’économie” (CCE). Le texte du CCE est disponible à https://www.ccecrb.fgov.be/p/fr/1296/renovation-de-logements-un-besoin-urgent-de-sensibilisation-d-informations-claires-et-de-regles-uniformes/10

Ceux qui me connaissent savent que j’ai déjà une réaction quand je lis “conseil central”. Et quand je lis la proposition d’un certificat PEB obligatoire, je ne peux m’empêcher de penser “loi de Campbell”

Plus un indicateur social quantitatif est utilisé comme aide à la décision en matière de politique sociale, plus cet indicateur est susceptible d'être manipulé et d'agir comme facteur de distorsion, faussant ainsi les processus sociaux qu'il est censé surveiller.

et “loi de Goodhart”

Toute régularité statistique observée tend à perdre toute crédibilité dès qu'elle est mise sous tension à des fins de contrôle.

Ne vous y trompez pas, je suis favorable à l’information la plus grande et à des logements avec une bonne performance énergétique. J’ai fait un audit énergétique d’un bâtiment ancien (construit en 1871) que j’ai acheté et ensuite j’ai investi de manière conséquente pour l’adapter le plus possible (processus en cours). Le but est le confort pour les occupants et l’efficacité des moyens mis en œuvre, pas le chiffre du PEB qui est facile à manipuler.

Pour être plus complet, il faut également ajouter que l’avis indique “la qualité du certificat PEB doit être améliorée”. Mais même amélioré, le certificat sera toujours impacté par les lois de Campbell et Goodhart. Il est aussi indiqué qu’il est confronté à “une certaine subjectivité”.

Si un tel changement devait être mis en place, on peut s’attendre à voir des consultants en “optimisation du PEB” apparaître sur les réseaux sociaux. Également la chasse au certificateur le plus “subjectif” sera ouverte.

Beaucoup d'énergie administrative perdue pour ne rien gagner en efficacité énergétique!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multi-curve framework book: new edition in progress

Image
Subject: Interest Rate Modelling in the Multi-curve Framework: Foundations, Evolution, and Implementation It has been more than 10 years since I wrote the first edition of the multi-curve framework book. What happened in those 10 years? Why did it take me so long to start a new version? It took me roughly 10 years to write the first edition. The reason it took so long at that time, was that I did not know that I was writing it! I thought I was writing a couple of pages on an obscured and theoretical idea that there was not a `` one curve to rule them all '' but multiple curves. It turned out that it became the actual practice for very clear and important reasons. That was the excuse for the first edition, what is the excuse for the second edition? Since the first edition, many things happen, in particular: March 2015: BCBS - IOSCO: margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives and mandatory variation margin July 2017: The future of LIBOR -- actually it...
Read more

Treasury / Swap spreads are negative. And what?

In recent weeks there were several news articles related to the negative treasury/Swap spread. This is in particular the case of a Bloomberg article and a Zero Hedge blog . Some of the “information” in those notes are Swap rates are what companies, investors and traders pay to exchange fixed interest payments for floating ones. That rate falling below Treasury yields […]  is illogical in the eyes of most market observers, because it theoretically signals that traders view the credit of banks as superior to that of the U.S. government. It’s hard to overstate how illogical it is when swap spreads are inverted. That’s because it suggests that governments are less creditworthy than the very financial institutions they bailed out during the credit crisis just seven years ago. Let’s be clear, to me, those claims are purely wrong , nothing is “ illogical ” in negative swap spread. But why do I rant about that in the “multi-curve framework” blog? Because it is exactly the same that ...
Read more

A 6 sigma event every 2 months!

“ So much or so much sigma, that is a mathematical impossibility. ” I have seen this sentence many times on LinkedIn or similar places. The supposed meaning of this sentence is that the probability of an event corresponding to x — with x being 3 or 6 or similar — standard deviations has a probability so small that it can be consider for all practical matter as impossible. These comments are based on a misunderstanding of what “ sigma ” represents together with a confusion between “normal distribution” and “any distribution”. I write this post with a discrete distribution notation but it can be extended easily — with a little bit of extra notations — to continuous distribution. Suppose that my distribution has n points with values a i and probabilities p i = 1/n ( i = 1, … , n ). The mean is m = sum i=1 n a i p i = 1/n sum i=1 n a i To simplify further my notations, I suppose that the mean is 0. The standard deviation is the square root of variance, with variance V = 1...
Read more