1. Introduction
Resident Engagement in Social Housing Retrofit
Social housing retrofit is gaining momentum throughout Europe, in the bid to meet net-0 energy targets by 2050. A 2021 recast of the Energy Performance of Building Directive stipulates targeting retrofit to those “living in social housing” (European Commission, 2021, p.14). Movements including the Green New Deal’s Renovation Wave and Fit for 55 are supported by funding schemes including the UK’s Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund, and the EU’s Next Generation Fund. Whole-house deep energy retrofit (DER) has been popularised by top-down initiatives including Passivhaus’ EnerPHit certification, Energy Performance Certificates, and EnergieSprong. However, performance gaps after retrofit can be as high as five times the predicted energy consumption (Traynor, 2019), driven by the rebound effect, the prebound effect, occupant behaviour, improper installation, and simulation uncertainties.
The literature agrees that social housing residents are expert stakeholders in the way they live and are best placed to determine their housing needs (Awwal et al., 2022; Boess, 2022; Gianfrate et al., 2017; Lucchi & Delera, 2020; van Hoof & Boerenfijn, 2018; Walker et al., 2014). Residents prioritise non-energy benefits (NEBs) over energy-related benefits (Broers et al., 2022), particularly social housing residents whose needs differ from homeowners (Santangelo & Tondelli, 2017). Resident engagement is therefore a vital component of holistic sustainability in social housing retrofit—social, environmental, and economic—and can increase energy performance, health and wellbeing, quality of life, and user empowerment, thus closing the performance gap.
2. The Role of Case Studies in Retrofit Research
The focus of this thesis is to examine and develop good practices for socially inclusive, holistic retrofit to engage with stakeholder groups. Groat and Wang (2013) (amending Yin, 1981) define case study research as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon or setting within its real-life context, especially when the boundary between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (p.418). Contextualising resident engagement in social housing retrofit enables an examination of how the retrofit interacts with complex dynamics—i.e. contextual factors and phenomena (Groat & Wang, 2013)—throughout design and implementation. These dynamics may include engagement tactics, decision-making processes, and architectural infrastructure, among others. In this way, it is possible to ground the theoretical framework in realised, retrofitted homes.
Case studies were identified through convenience sampling via four channels: (1) identified through a systematic literature review, (2) accessed through university and secondment contacts, (3) selected from interviewees with high-level stakeholders, and (4) through the RE-DWELL project network. Convenience sampling was chosen to increase the probability of access to data, including stakeholders and architectural drawings. Seven potential social housing retrofit case studies were identified. All seven cases satisfied specific inclusion criteria: European location, energy performance improvements, involved residents from marginalised groups who were actively engaged, and maintained affordable rents. Four cases were selected for further investigation due to data availability and representation of decision-making processes (see image 1): the Els Mestres retrofit in Spain, which employed a top-down decision-making approach; the Sutton Estate in England, which combines top-down and hybrid decision-making; the Liv Inn retrofit in the Netherlands, which utilised a hybrid decision-making process; and the Clau Mestra retrofit in Spain, characterised by bottom-up decision-making. Investigating the impact of decision-making throughout the retrofit process allows for an examination of successes, simultaneously identifying problems to be overcome. This examination can help locate opportunities to inform the thesis’ “good practices” output and identify solutions to challenges.
The aim of the case study analysis is to investigate whether resident empowerment increases sustainable outcomes in retrofit. Qualitative research, including the results of a semi-systematic literature review, and the thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with high-level stakeholders, helped identify key components to investigate throughout each case study: (1) passive solutions and design; (2) technical solutions; (3) engagement—before retrofit begins, during retrofit design, during retrofit construction, and after retrofit completion.
The Sutton Estate case study was chosen for the focus group because it employs a combination of top-down and hybrid resident engagement approaches as well as both deep and partial retrofit processes. While remaining critical of different contexts, some findings from this case will be relevant to retrofit case studies employing different decision-making processes. Further, given that building owners commonly adopt a top-down (DER) approach, persuading high-level stakeholders to initially integrate elements of bottom-up decision-making via hybrid methods for resident engagement might yield greater success.
3. Conclusions
The research shows that greater engagement leads to increased social sustainability in social housing retrofit. Good practices for socially inclusive, holistic retrofit to engage with key actors emerged from a combination of each case. (1) Budget and subsidies—early engagement can save time and money later. Engagement should be budgeted and funding deadlines extended to include these efforts. (2) Technical energy solutions—passive strategies should remain a key component to retrofit, supported by technical intervention. Upskilling from within social housing residents, including energy agents, can help adoption of technologies while combating the skilled labour shortage. (3) Participatory processes—hybrid engagement should facilitate knowledge exchange. High-level stakeholders should learn which NEBs are important to the quality of life of residents, while residents should become empowered to engage with low-carbon energies. (4) Inhabitants after retrofit—the housing association should facilitate activities to aid the transition, integrate the wider neighbourhood, promote their social role, and amend misapplication of measures. A good practice guide will be tailored for high-level stakeholders, to support their engagement with social housing residents in retrofit decision-making processes.
Related case studies
![Icon houseful-els-mestres-sabadell](/media/33951bc9260f9f2d9133f0bdf314d90b.jpg)
HOUSEFUL: Els Mestres, Sabadell
Created on 12-02-2024
Related vocabulary
Co-creation
Energy Retrofit
Housing Retrofit
Indoor Thermal Comfort
Performance Gap in Retrofit
Post-occupancy Evaluation
Social Housing
Social Sustainability
Social Value
Area: Community participation
Created on 16-02-2022
Read more ->Area: Design, planning and building
Created on 23-05-2022
Read more ->Area: Design, planning and building
Created on 16-02-2022
Read more ->Area: Design, planning and building
Created on 20-09-2022
Read more ->Area: Design, planning and building
Created on 08-09-2023
Read more ->Area: Design, planning and building
Created on 22-10-2023
Read more ->Area: Policy and financing
Created on 17-06-2023
Read more ->Area: Community participation
Created on 03-06-2022
Read more ->Area: Community participation
Created on 16-11-2023
Read more ->