IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v2y2010i7p2084-2116d8954.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eco-Self-Build Housing Communities: Are They Feasible and Can They Lead to Sustainable and Low Carbon Lifestyles?

Author

Listed:
  • Steffie Broer

    (Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6XA, UK
    Bright Green Futures Ltd., 232 Mina Rd., Bristol, BS2 9YP, UK)

  • Helena Titheridge

    (Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6XA, UK)

Abstract

This paper concerns how sustainable and low carbon living can be enabled in new housing developments in the UK. It is here recognized that consumption of energy and resources is not just what goes into the building, but also long-term through occupancy and activities. Current approaches, which require housing developers to reduce the carbon emissions of the homes they build through a mixture of energy efficiency and renewable energy systems, do not sufficiently contribute to the carbon emission reductions which are necessary for meeting UK Government targets and to avoid dangerous climate change. Purchasing a home ties people in to not just direct consumption of energy (heating, hot water, electricity), but also effects other areas of consumption such as the embedded energy in the building and activities associated with the location and the type of development. Conventional business models for new housing development, operating under current government regulations, policies and targets have failed to develop housing which encourages the adoption of sustainable lifestyles taking whole life consumption into account. An alternative business model of eco-self-build communities is proposed as a way to foster desired behavior change. The feasibility of eco-self-build communities and their scope for supporting low carbon sustainable lifestyles is assessed through stakeholder interviews, and through quantitative assessment of costs, carbon emission reduction potential, and other sustainability impacts of technical and lifestyle options and their combinations. The research shows that eco-self-build communities are both feasible and have the ability to deliver low carbon lifestyles. In comparison to conventional approaches to building new housing, they have further advantages in terms of delivering wider social, environmental as well as economic sustainability objectives. If implemented correctly they could succeed in making sustainable lifestyles attractive, and foster the development of pro- environmental social norms.

Suggested Citation

  • Steffie Broer & Helena Titheridge, 2010. "Eco-Self-Build Housing Communities: Are They Feasible and Can They Lead to Sustainable and Low Carbon Lifestyles?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(7), pages 1-33, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:2:y:2010:i:7:p:2084-2116:d:8954
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/7/2084/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/7/2084/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    2. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pablo Newberry & Paul Harper & Thea Morgan, 2021. "Understanding the Market for Eco Self-Build Community Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-32, October.
    2. Engelken, Maximilian & Römer, Benedikt & Drescher, Marcus & Welpe, Isabell M. & Picot, Arnold, 2016. "Comparing drivers, barriers, and opportunities of business models for renewable energies: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 795-809.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Macdonald, Kevin & Patrinos, Harry Anthony, 2021. "Education Quality, Green Technology, and the Economic Impact of Carbon Pricing," GLO Discussion Paper Series 955, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    2. Warwick J. McKibbin & Adele C. Morris & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2014. "The Economic Consequences of Delay in US Climate Policy," CCEP Working Papers 1408, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    3. Grimaud, André & Lafforgue, Gilles & Magné, Bertrand, 2011. "Climate change mitigation options and directed technical change: A decentralized equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 938-962.
    4. Philippe Aghion & Antoine Dechezleprêtre & David Hémous & Ralf Martin & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Carbon Taxes, Path Dependency, and Directed Technical Change: Evidence from the Auto Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(1), pages 1-51.
    5. Klaus Mittenzwei & David S. Bullock & Klaus Salhofer, 2012. "Towards a theory of policy timing," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(4), pages 583-596, October.
    6. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    7. Elizabeth Baldwin, Yongyang Cai, Karlygash Kuralbayeva, 2018. "To build or not to build? Capital stocks and climate policy," GRI Working Papers 290, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    8. Kemp-Benedict, Eric, 2014. "Shifting to a Green Economy: Lock-in, Path Dependence, and Policy Options," MPRA Paper 60175, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. De Cian, Enrica & Tavoni, Massimo, 2012. "Do technology externalities justify restrictions on emission permit trading?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 624-646.
    10. World Bank Group, 2018. "Strategic Use of Climate Finance to Maximize Climate Action," World Bank Publications - Reports 30475, The World Bank Group.
    11. Oskar Lecuyer & Adrien Vogt-Schilb, 2013. "Assessing and ordering investments in polluting fossil-fueled and zero-carbon capital," CIRED Working Papers hal-00850680, HAL.
    12. van den Bijgaart, Inge, 2017. "The unilateral implementation of a sustainable growth path with directed technical change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 305-327.
    13. Maj Munch Andersen, 2010. "When High-tech meets Low-tech: Eco-innovation Dynamics and Corporate Strategizing in the Construction Sector," EKONOMIAZ. Revista vasca de Economía, Gobierno Vasco / Eusko Jaurlaritza / Basque Government, vol. 75(04), pages 112-139.
    14. Oscar Afonso & Ana Catarina Afonso, 2015. "Endogenous Growth Effects of Environmental Policies," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 62(5), pages 607-629, December.
    15. van den Bijgaart, I.M., 2017. "Too slow a change? Deep habits, consumption shifts and transitory tax," Working Papers in Economics 701, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    16. Popp, David & Newell, Richard, 2012. "Where does energy R&D come from? Examining crowding out from energy R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 980-991.
    17. Corinne Langinier & Amrita Ray Chaudhuri, 2020. "Green Technology and Patents in the Presence of Green Consumers," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(1), pages 73-101.
    18. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/14g286e42n8bl9is6h16b18kes is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Guy Meunier, 2015. "Prices vs. quantities in presence of a second, unpriced, externality," Working Papers hal-01242040, HAL.
    20. Adrien Vogt-Schilb & Guy Meunier & Stéphane Hallegatte, 2013. "Should marginal abatement costs differ across sectors? The effect of low-carbon capital accumulation," Working Papers hal-00850682, HAL.
    21. Mattauch, Linus & Creutzig, Felix & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2015. "Avoiding carbon lock-in: Policy options for advancing structural change," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 49-63.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:2:y:2010:i:7:p:2084-2116:d:8954. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.