Elsevier

Journal of Cleaner Production

Volume 224, 1 July 2019, Pages 697-708
Journal of Cleaner Production

Review
End-user engagement: The missing link of sustainability transition for Australian residential buildings

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.277Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Attempts to transform Australia's urban environment into a sufficiently sustainable one have not generated desirable outcomes.

  • A systematic review of 103 journal articles is conducted on the topic of end-users and sustainability transition.

  • Residential end-users do not purchase green homes and without their ‘buy[HYPHEN]in,’ sustainability transition will fail.

  • Financial incentives for the purchase of low-carbon buildings must be introduced into the residential real-estate market.

  • The modeling for the rebate is discussed in terms of emissions trading schemes or carbon tax.

Abstract

This paper argues that attempts to transform Australia's urban environment into a sufficiently sustainable one has been misdirected. The ‘green rating tool,’ industry's adherence to relevant standards and governmental policies represent the primary means of effecting the sustainability transition.

However, only high-profile commercial building owners seem interested in being green-rated; the actual end-users of buildings are far less committed (e.g. employees ensconced in commercial buildings and residential home occupiers). Through a systematic review of 103 journal articles published on the topic of end-users and sustainability transition, original findings are presented. The findings reveal that most residential end-users do not purchase green homes and without their ‘buy-in,’ sustainability transition across Australia will continue to fail. This paper offers a critical analysis of the status-quo, identifying where the effort to generate a sustainable urban environment has been misdirected, what challenges prevail, and why residential end-users have been overlooked. In looking for a way forward that engages end-users, the paper proposes that financial incentives for the purchase of low-carbon buildings must be introduced into the residential real-estate market. And the modeling for this rebate is discussed in terms of emissions trading schemes or carbon tax.

Introduction

Sustainability is a major challenge confronting the 21st century, with climate change and rising energy prices underscoring the need to seriously reconsider prevailing built environment practices (Chileshe et al., 2018; Tam et al., 2018). However, sustainability research in the built environment, has predominantly focused on green rating tools (Martek et al., 2019); two reasons are apparent (Doan et al., 2017; Van der Heijden, 2016). First, criteria are needed which collectively constitute the ‘sustainability’ that is being sought–creating extensive discourse on what does, and does not constitute sustainability, and what factors should, and should not be included in rating tools (Shad et al., 2017). Second, how best to measure each criterion presents an emergent problem (Mattoni et al., 2018). Quantitative parameters (e.g. energy usage) lend themselves to scientific (independently replicable) results but the means of measuring qualitative parameters (e.g. equity or well-being) are more contentious (Li et al., 2018; Luther, 2017). These two reasons have generated a plethora of rating tool configurations, resulting in a third complication – which configuration should we trust and use?

Against this backdrop, a comprehensive review of extant literature reveals a conspicuous neglect of the singular most important stakeholder to the whole sustainability project, namely the end-user (Warren-Myers, 2017; Zhang and El-Gohary, 2016). Evidence suggests that residential home owners (as the largest demographic of end-users) vis-a-vis commercial occupants and their employees have largely been overlooked (Tapsuwan et al., 2018; Warren-Myers et al., 2018). In overlooking the concerns of residential end-users, significant opportunities for realizing Australia's commitment to zero carbon emissions have been lost (ASBEC, 2016; ClimateWorks, 2018; Rameezdeen et al., 2019; van der Heijden, 2014, 2015). Indeed, overall energy intensity in Australia has only slightly improved; around 5% in the residential sector (ASBEC, 2017). Although some research on end-users’ perspectives has been conducted, end-users’ views have been represented as passive to the process; neglecting to build or buy sustainable houses only because they are unavailable to them (Martek and Hosseini, 2018; Martek et al., 2019; Warren-Myers et al., 2018).

This study aims at addressing these things; this is an effort to understand the role of end-users in generating more sustainable residential buildings, as well as what is actually being done, and can be done, to effect transition within Australia to a more sustainable built environment. The premise is argued from a digest of the literature, since the evidence substantiating the claim made here arises from the observation that most literature on sustainability transition in Australia fails to consider the residential end-user; their role, interests or impact (Martek et al., 2019; Tapsuwan et al., 2018; Warren-Myers et al., 2018).

Section snippets

Research approach and methods

An inductive methodological approach is selected with the literature constituting the unit of analysis. The epistemological foundation for this research is based upon an interpretivist approach applied to that existing body of knowledge. Following Lin (1998), the interpretivist work combines data acquired from the literature into systems of belief whose manifestations reveal causal mechanisms specific to a case.

The Scopus database is selected because of its wide range of coverage, faster

Australia's sustainability scorecard

Buildings are major sources of damage, and consume one-third of all the Earth's resources (Doan et al., 2017), including one-sixth of all freshwater, one-quarter of all trees and 40% of all other materials humans make and use (Dixit et al., 2013). 10% of world energy is embodied within building materials, with a massive 50% being consumed by building operations and maintenance (Chileshe et al., 2018). Indeed, 80% of all green-house gases are attributable directly to urban residents and their

Australia's greening strategy

Australia has a strategy of legislating minimal mandatory codes and standards, combined with expectations of higher levels of compliance through voluntary uptake (Berry and Marker, 2015; Mcguirk et al., 2015; Smoleniec et al., 2017) (refer to Fig. 1). Energy efficiency targets were subsequently introduced into regulations in 2005 for residential dwellings and 2006 for commercial buildings, following UK precedents (Wilkinson, 2014). In 2008, the Green Building Fund was established as an

The limits of sustainability rating tools

Due to the limitation of mandatory requirements like building codes (c.f.Van der Heijden, 2016), rating tools remain prime-movers in the push to curb environmental greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency, and deliver broader sustainability objectives such as social justice (Martek et al., 2018; Van der Heijden, 2016). Rating tools are the most recognizable mechanism by which to appraise a building's ‘greenness’ (van der Heijden, 2015). Some tools calculate a quantified metric for

Enhancing sustainability transition: critical success factors

An effective rating tool requires more than just a list of sustainability criteria and a means of measuring them (Love et al., 2012) – and this is where government can assist (Love et al., 2012; Olubunmi et al., 2016). Distilling the recommendations of Berardi (2015), Sulivan et al. (2014), Gil and Durante (2011), Becker (2004), and Chan et al. (2017), at a minimum the key attributes of a robust rating tool would entail:

  • Holistic vision of the built environment;

  • National and local synergies with

End-users and sustainability transition

The current state of sustainability transition in Australia, points towards the pivotal role of end-users. First, Hoffman and Hen (2008) proffer that sustainability in the built environment is “predicated on encompassing strategies, techniques, and construction products that are less resource-intensive or pollution producing than regular construction.” Thus second, if meaningful ‘greening’ of the urban environment is to occur, it must be undertaken with a ‘whole-of-life-cycle’ approach (

Engaging end-users: the way forward

Akin to other ‘politically correct’ issues, sustainability is ubiquitous within extant literature and seldom rejected (Martek et al., 2018). Despite the monumental effort and widespread consensus as to the worth of this objective, the Australian building industry has made little progress (Saman, 2013; van der Heijden, 2018). Australia will not come close to achieving its Paris Climate Accord agreements (Harrington, 2017; Hughes, 2017; Martek et al., 2019) because of the mistaken assumption that

Reorganizing the building sector

Policy making for promoting sustainability transition within the Australian building industry has been based on the hypothesis that various incentives that stimulate demand for green buildings will work bottom up to shake the market (its suppliers, builders and developers) into generating innovations that deliver supply (van der Heijden, 2018). The examples of showcase green iconic buildings have trickled down to find greater embrace amongst a wide base of commercial buildings. The presumption

Conclusion

As a point of departure from previous studies conducted, this study gives priority to the residential market in Australia that has remained under-represented in the literature even though it represents a major part of Australia's building industry. The key contribution of this study is providing an updated picture of the landscape of research on end-users of the residential market, their role, interests, and impacts. Findings provide insight into potential avenues for enhancing end-users’

Acknowledgement

This work was funded by the Integral Design Futures (IDF) funding scheme's 2018 program: Towards end-user engagement in Australian Green Star revolution (School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University).

References (136)

  • Z. Gou et al.

    Evolving green building: triple bottom line or regenerative design?

    J. Clean. Prod.

    (2017)
  • S. Hall

    Development and initial trial of a tool to enable improved energy and human performance in existing commercial buildings

    Renew. Energy

    (2014)
  • G. Hatvani-Kovacs et al.

    Heat stress-resistant building design in the Australian context

    Energy Build.

    (2018)
  • Y. He et al.

    How green building rating systems affect designing green

    Build. Environ.

    (2018)
  • M.B. Hirning et al.

    Post-occupancy evaluations relating to discomfort glare: a study of green buildings in Brisbane

    Build. Environ.

    (2013)
  • M.R. Hosseini et al.

    Sustainability by Information and Communication Technology: a paradigm shift for construction projects in Iran

    J. Clean. Prod.

    (2017)
  • M.R. Hosseini et al.

    Critical evaluation of off-site construction research: a Scientometric analysis

    Autom. ConStruct.

    (2018)
  • H. Li et al.

    Stakeholder studies and the social networks of NetZero energy homes

    Sustainable Cities Society

    (2018)
  • G.E. Marjaba et al.

    Sustainability and resiliency metrics for buildings - critical review

    Build. Environ.

    (2016)
  • I. Martek et al.

    Barriers inhibiting the transition to sustainability within the Australian construction industry: an investigation of technical and social interactions

    J. Clean. Prod.

    (2019)
  • B. Mattoni et al.

    Critical review and methodological approach to evaluate the differences among international green building rating tools

    Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.

    (2018)
  • O.A. Olubunmi et al.

    Green building incentives: a review

    Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.

    (2016)
  • I.J. Onuoha et al.

    Modelling the effects of green building incentives and green building skills on supply factors affecting green commercial property investment

    Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.

    (2018)
  • W. Paul et al.

    A comparison of occupant comfort and satisfaction between a green building and a conventional building

    Build. Environ.

    (2008)
  • S. Ravindu et al.

    Indoor environment quality of green buildings: case study of a LEED platinum certified factory in a warm humbid tropical climate

    Build. Environ.

    (2015)
  • S. Ruggiero et al.

    Realizing the social acceptance of community renewable energy: a process-outcome analysis of stakeholder influence

    Energy Res. Soc. Sci.

    (2014)
  • W.Y. Saman

    Towards zero energy homes down under

    Renew. Energy

    (2013)
  • ABS

    Australian Population Data

    (2018)
  • V. Albino et al.

    Green buildings and organizational changes in Italian case studies

    Bus. Strateg. Environ.

    (2012)
  • E. Altmann

    Apartments, Co-ownership and sustainability: implementation barriers for retrofitting the built environment

    J. Environ. Policy Plan.

    (2014)
  • A.R. Ambrose

    Improving energy efficiency in private rented housing: why don't landlords act?

    Indoor Built Environ.

    (2015)
  • S. Ang et al.

    Is the social agenda driving sustainable property development in Melbourney, Australia?

    Sustain. Prop. Develop.

    (2008)
  • M. Arashpour et al.

    Optimal process integration architectures in off-site construction: theorizing the use of multi-skilled resources

    Architect. Eng. Des. Manag.

    (2018)
  • L. Armitage et al.

    Green offices in Australia: a user perception survey

    J. Corp. Real Estate

    (2011)
  • ASBEC

    A National Framework for Residential Ratings: Discussion Paper

    (2016)
  • ASBEC

    ASBEC Submission on Review of Australia's Climate Change Policies

    (2017)
  • Australian Government

    Australia's 2030 Climate Change Target

    (2018)
  • J. Becker

    Making sustainable development evaluations work

    Sustain. Dev.

    (2004)
  • S. Berry et al.

    Residential energy efficiency standards in Australia: where to next?

    Energy Efficiency

    (2015)
  • R. Best et al.

    Assessing occupant comfort in an iconic sustainable education building

    J. Const. Econ. Build.

    (2012)
  • Beyond Zero Emissions

    Australian Local Government Climate Review. Beyond Zero Emissions, ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI Oceania) and Ironbark Sustainability

    (2018)
  • Bond University

    Sustainable Development Building

    (2011)
  • E. Bondareva

    Green star - LEED's Australian Cousin

    J. Green Build.

    (2008)
  • BREEAM

    What is BREEAM?

  • S. Candy et al.

    Pathways 2040. Results from Visions and Pathways 2040: Scenarios and Pathways to Low Carbon Living

    (2017)
  • CASBEE
    (2018)
  • Centre for Liveability Real Estate

    The New Value Proposition for Australian Homes

    (2018)
  • A.P.C. Chan et al.

    Strategies for promoting green building technologies adoption in the construction industry—an international study

    Sustainability

    (2017)
  • City of Melbourne

    Zero Net Emissions Strategy

    (2018)
  • ClimateWorks

    Low Carbon, High Performance: How Buildings Can Make a Major Contribution to Australia's Emissions and Productivity Goals

    (2016)
  • Cited by (30)

    • Sustainability Information Provision (SIP) framework: A review of the promotion of sustainability in the residential sector

      2023, Building and Environment
      Citation Excerpt :

      Most research concurs in the importance of including the well-being and comfort aspects in the sustainability equation. However, in practice, comfort or well-being aspects are often overlooked in sustainability promotion [7,25]. In addressing the sustainability information asymmetry problem, future efforts need to prioritise supporting developers and builders in including the well-being and comfort aspects to allow them to use sustainability to differentiate themselves in the market.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text