LAS CAUSAS JUDICIALES

Retrofit programmes for installing energy efficient technologies in social housing, play an important part in the UK carbon reduction strategy (DECC, 2009a). Over recent years a suite of policies and Government initiatives have been introduced in an attempt to address the challenge of reducing the energy consumption and carbon emissions attributed to existing housing in the UK. Current and proposed policies predominately focus on the retrofit of energy efficient or low carbon technologies either by providing funding for their installation (e.g. Decent Homes Standard, Warm Front Scheme, CESP) or by providing financial incentives to make their installation more attractive (e.g. Green Deal, Feed-In Tariff, Renewable Heat Incentive).

The technical approaches to energy efficiency and carbon reduction that have been explored in this chapter do pay some attention to home occupiers’ behaviour related to energy use, by making use of energy feedback as an opportunity to engage with the householder on energy performance and using information sources that can influence behaviour change. However, the potential influence of occupant behaviour related to energy use on associated retrofit as a result of these policies is not acknowledged. In addition, DEFRA’s ‘Framework for Sustainable Lifestyles’ (2011), which does focus on influencing behaviour to be more sustainable, has very little mention of acts of behaviour relating to energy use (using temperature controls; line drying laundry; using right amount of detergent) focusing in the main, on behaviours which involve the consumption of particular products, technologies. The main

Policy Context

63

attention given to behaviour related to energy use is in the ‘Nudge’ or ‘Choice Architecture’ approaches to encourage the consumption of attractive financial deals, which involve the purchase and installation of retrofit technology. In accordance with its attraction to ‘Libertarian Paternalism’, the current coalition Government, unlike the previous Labour Government, does not seem interested in ‘behaviour change’, but is more interest in ‘influencing behaviour’, and if possible, doing so without the public even noticing.

Fuel Poverty a related issue to retrofit and behaviour related to energy use, is still a major problem in the UK despite efforts to improve the situation through retrofit installations, with a significant proportion of households in Fuel Poverty, residing in social housing. Fuel Poverty, in 2009, was at higher levels than in 1998, mainly because of rises in fuel bills (National Statistics, 2011). Policy intends to reduce Fuel Poverty through energy efficiency and carbon reduction strategies for UK housing. However policies such as Green Deal are not suitable for a majority of fuel poor households and the substitute ECO, targeted for the fuel poor, has inequitable provisions which do not target the fuel poor first. Additionally, tensions exist between social objectives of Fuel Poverty and environmental objectives of CO2 emissions, principally due to the funding mechanisms to pay for the mobilisation of energy efficient and low carbon retrofit. It is levied in an inequitable way by raising fuel bills, for everyone, regardless of the amount of energy they use and associated CO2 emissions they produce, thus it does not reflect the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle.

Thus far, significant investment has already been made towards retrofitting existing homes. Through emerging policies such as the Green Deal a significant mobilisation is anticipated in the energy efficient retrofit of UK housing stock. The huge capital required for investment is mostly being delivered by the public by taking out loans from energy companies and levies on public bills. However, the policy literature, shows that the Government is not addressing occupant behaviour related to energy use in order to mitigate the potential threat to retrofit energy efficiency or carbon reduction goals, due to unanticipated behaviours of the nation’s domestic energy users.

As will be discussed further in Chapter 3, behaviour related to energy use can have a significant impact on the energy efficiency and carbon reduction potential of retrofits. For example, comfort ‘takeback’ can reduce potential energy savings by 20-30%, and that alone could potentially leave the UK Strategy for Low Carbon

Housing considerably short of the 80% carbon emissions reductions targets set out in the Climate Change Act (2008).

By evaluating the impacts of a social housing retrofit project on behaviour related to energy use, this PhD research aims to improve understanding of behaviour related to energy use in this setting. By highlighting some of these occupant behaviour aspects it is the intention that they are considered as part of the equation in delivering future retrofit programmes. Thus, this knowledge will hopefully contribute to the design and implementation of retrofit programmes in order to improve energy efficiency and carbon reduction potential and support the UK strategy for low carbon housing.

Qualitative research is particularly useful to policy makers and planners by providing descriptive information and understanding of the context in which policies will be implemented (Murphy et al, 1998). This PhD research into behaviour related to energy use in the context of housing retrofits can inform policy makers and retrofit programme implementers and thus assist in the development of retrofit programmes which incorporate this critical component.

Literature Review

65