Domestic energy use, lifestyles and poe: Past lessons for current problems

Vale, B and Vale, R (2010) Domestic energy use, lifestyles and poe: Past lessons for current problems. Building Research & Information, 38(5), pp. 578-588. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Many research and demonstration projects in the 1970s showed it was not difficult to make houses with a much lower energy use than conventional ones. Some of these projects also included autonomous systems, such as collecting and using rainwater and growing food on site. These projects not only recognized clear limits, but also translated into consumption restraints for occupants which positively affected their behaviour. However, these ideas failed to become mainstream. This resulted in houses in many developed countries becoming more energy efficient, but, paradoxically, the demands for increased floor area and amenity suggested that what users actually want is more rather than fewer resources. Building regulations to save energy have been outweighed, in terms of resources consumed, by other consumer-led moves. Seminal ideas and projects from the 1970s for the design of low-energy, autonomous houses are re-evaluated showing where resource reductions through synergy of lifestyle activities can be made. Post-occupancy evaluation (POE) could have a significant role in the lowering of environmental impacts, but the framing of domestic POE must embrace a rating of the occupants' behaviour. A key challenge is to provide indicators not only on technical performance and usability, but also on user behaviours.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: autonomy; behaviour; ecological overshoot; energy efficiency; housing; jevons's paradox; lifestyles; post-occupancy evaluation; systems approach
Index terms: energy efficiency, environmental impact, developed country, rainwater, framing, building regulation, becoming, housing, lifestyle, paradox, energy use, post-occupancy evaluation, usability, consumption, synergy
Subjects: conceptual models, evaluation methods, user-centered design, energy systems, consumer economics, sustainability and energy, regulatory law, demography, partnership management, construction type, development economics, philosophical process, environmental engineering, social theory and frameworks, environmental impact
Topics: Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Research Practice, Design Practice, International Construction, Sustainability, Quality Management, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here