Abstract
ABSTRACTThe built environment is a key target of decarbonization policies. However, such policies often have a narrow objective and narrow focus, resulting in ‘policy-resistance’ and unintended consequences. The literature attributes these unintended consequences to a narrow financial focus, adverse incentives, and inadequate handling of knowledge, skills, communication and feedback gaps, but it provides little advice on how these complex interactions can be captured. This paper illustrates the development and application of an integrated approach to address these complex interactions with regard to housing performance, energy, communal spaces and wellbeing. In particular, it explores the dynamics created by these relationships with simulation modelling in participatory settings, and with a diverse group of stakeholders. The simulation results suggest that monitoring is key to improve the performance of the housing stock besides energy efficiency; and investments in communal spaces positively affect the adoption of energy-efficiency measures and the wellbeing of residents. The evaluation results for participatory workshops show this approach was found useful by the stakeholders for supporting more integrated decision-making about housing. In future research, this approach can be implemented for policy problems in specific contexts.
Highlights
Decarbonizing the built environment by decreasing its energy consumption has been a major goal of climate change policies in the UK
The simulation results suggest that monitoring is key to improve the performance of the housing stock besides energy efficiency; and investments in communal spaces positively affect the adoption of energyefficiency measures and the wellbeing of residents
This study explores the dynamics created by the relationships between housing, energy and wellbeing
Summary
Decarbonizing the built environment by decreasing its energy consumption has been a major goal of climate change policies in the UK. Energyefficiency policies can potentially lead to considerable benefits for population health, e.g. increased thermal comfort and fuel poverty alleviation. If not implemented correctly, energy-efficiency interventions may result in negative unintended consequences, such as reduced indoor air quality, increased fuel poverty or a failure of the primary aim of the policy (Davies & Oreszczyn, 2012). Such consequences manifest in economic, social and natural settings beyond the built environment.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
