Consumer perspectives in low energy/ low carbon housing: a video and interactive website

The starting point is a concern that the debate about innovative low carbon/ low energy housing has been over-dominated by technologists, architects and various national pressure groups. Whilst we recognise the decisive influence of technology, we want to give tenants and other occupants a voice and we wish in addition to find ways of avoiding the technical jargon and specialised language of innovative housing design. We want to translate the issues into everyday language as far as possible. We also wish to disseminate some of the more technical research findings to a wider audience, one more concerned with policy and practice.

In this context we intend to go beyond conventional forms of research and dissemination based on what is said or written. We intend to use two particular means to communicate our results and to stimulate professional awareness of the main issues.

First, we propose to hire a community arts or film company to make a short video about how the occupants use the heating and other features of low carbon/ low energy housing and how in general they see this type of home and estate. We want to include a variety of schemes, one relying on renewable house-based energy such as photovoltaic cells; another using more modest technology to achieve high insulation and air proofing and a third involving district heating and biomass fuel. We also want to talk to local housing and related area managers about their experience, for example in dealing with technical failures, with metering and billing.

Secondly and this is the most innovative aspect of the research in the context of a university, we wish to create an interactive forum where interested parties can see the videos, deposit and look at other sources of information and also communicate amongst themselves as to the future of low energy housing, including rehabilitation and retrofitting. The proposal mirrors a shift in the use of the web from a one-way means of disseminating information to a two way means of promoting a conversation. The proposal adopts and applies exactly the same shift to research into innovatory housing and domestic technologies.

This proposed follow on study deals, in part, with the implementation of national carbon reduction targets. The benefits of carbon reduction, the assessment of which is outside the scope of this proposal, are long-term and concern society in general. In the short term, the major beneficiaries of this study comprise two groups; first, the occupants of innovatory low energy/ low carbon housing and secondly, the various agencies that develop and manage such schemes. In relation to the potential impact on urban development, the developers and managers are obviously the most important. However, this is a user-oriented study that includes, of necessity, the voice of users.

The occupants of low energy and low carbon housing gain from lower bills or increased comfort levels or a combination of the two (Jackson, O'Flaherty and Pinder, 2009: Pett and Guertler 2004). An aim of the present project is to identify the issues involved in communicating good practice in minimising energy bills at an acceptable comfort level. At the same time, the benefits for the developer and landlord are not obvious. The experience, noted by the present proposers in previous studies, is that low energy design and the provision of renewables have (as yet) had little impact on market valuations or rents. In any case, taken overall, high initial costs may overwhelm subsequent savings. Much depends on the payback period and the way in which the users use their home. Where the developer also becomes an energy supply company, a further range of risks arise in relation to local pricing policies, billing and arrears.

Social housing agencies face another risk. Theories of the home, as well as the historical evidence suggest that, amongst low income and low status groups, housing expectations are moulded by images of the 'normal' and the 'abnormal' (Goffman 1971), that departures from the normal risk undermining notions of 'ontological security', the individual's sense of order and continuity (Giddens 1991: Kearns et al 2000; Walshaw 2011) and that, therefore, innovatory housing can prove unpopular, even if low rise (Furbey and Goodchild 1986: Goodchild 2008, 91-92). Despite the typical wishes of social housing developers, the functional requirements of low carbon/ low energy design encourage unconventional solutions, in relation to both the interior (for example, sealed windows) and the exterior (orientation towards the sun, rather than the street). Private developers face similar dilemmas. However, the greater choice open to purchasers, combined with the influence of valuers and short-term financial constraints, means that private developers have been cautious about the adoption of innovatory design (Ball 1999).

In the context of such uncertainties and dilemmas, the impact of research is unlikely to rest on the application of specific findings. Instead, as has been noted in other exercises in environmental research (Phillipson and Liddon 2007), the impact is likely to derive from making practitioners more aware of the issues involved, the risks and the possibilities. The design of this follow on study is intended exactly to promote such awareness, through a combination of outputs that include interactive web-based learning methods.

The disciplinary background and experience of the proposers also serves to promote practical impacts. The proposers include a technologist/ engineer (O'Flaherty) and two social researchers/ housing and planning specialists (Goodchild and Walshaw). The mix will help promote the exchange of ideas, as is necessary in any attempt to apply knowledge. The proposers have very extensive experience of working with practitioners in consultancy and research and in making presentations to large and small groups of practitioners. Finally, this previous experience provides a substantial amount of data relating to the costs and performance in use of renewable technologies (O'Flaherty) and to the users' experience (Goodchild and Walshaw).