Consumer voices: adoption of residential energy‐efficient practices

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to identify constraining variables that may impinge on adopting energy-efficient practices, materials, equipment and technology in households. The intent is to uncover relationships of attitudes, beliefs, knowledge and other resource constraints to: (1) existing housing adaptations and adjustments for energy efficiency; and (2) more efficient use of energy in homes. A second objective is to identify existing practices used to reduce energy use and the adaptations made to the existing structure, materials, equipment and technology for energy efficiency as well as their intentions to make future adaptations. Constraint variables include knowledge of existing energyefficient practices and technology; economic constraints (household income, cost as a problem, financial need and existing energy costs); obstacles to making changes (lack of information, assistance, time, cooperation, trained persons and the condition of home); and demographic variables (age, education level and urban/rural). Attitude and belief constraints include measures of felt responsibility for energy use-related actions that impact the natural resources and environment, and measures of concern. These constraints may impinge on or contribute to making energy-efficient changes in residential households. Questionnaires were mailed to a random stratified sample of 800 households in Nebraska (US state) in April and May of 2008, resulting in a 29% return rate. The analysis indicates that the research produced information about constraining factors that impact the existing energy-efficiency levels of households. The use of energy-efficient equipment and technology, and behaviour practices that reduce energy use are related to those barriers. However, residential energy use and behaviour change result from a range of psychological and contextual influences on behaviour. Behaviour is often inconsistent with attitudes because of the presence of various constraining factors that preclude consistency with behaviour. Educational programmes have a challenging task if they are to alter attitudes and norms to overcome situational constraints. It may be more fruitful to educate and to remove the constraints impinging on those who already have a positive attitude about the need to increase energy efficiency for whatever reason. This paper is organized as follows: The first section focuses on the background and rationale, and includes literature examples related to the need to reduce fossil fuel use for energy and household energy consumption and predictors. The next two sections include the purpose and objectives, followed by the methodology. The fourth section addresses the analysis and demographics of the respondents. The fifth section summarizes the results and discusses the conclusions. Finally, the limitations of the study and the implications are discussed.

Retrofitting social housing: reflections by tenants on adopting and living with retrofit technology

“…Studies from Sweden (Nair et al 2010), the USA (Niemeyer 2010) and Germany (Achtnicht 2011) replicate this perspective, although Achtnight highlights the potential importance for climate change as a driving factor. Given that climate change awareness as a factor for adoption is partially driven by income and education (Semenza et al 2008), it seems that Chahal's (2012) assertion that it does not drive adoption in UK social housing is potentially supported.…”

Factors that influence engagement in on-site environmentally responsible behaviours at music festivals

“…Supporters of CBSM theory have confirmed the importance of strategies such as prompts, feedback, social support and public commitment as key drivers that foster behavioural change. Some examples of studies that support this view are: 1) recycling and purchasing items with minimal packaging (Cole & Fieselman, 2013;Haldeman & Turner, 2009;Hughes, 2012); 2) turning off unnecessary heating or cooling (Kaiser & Schultz, 2009;Niemeyer, 2010;Petersen, Shunturov, Janda, Platt, & Weinberger, 2007); 3) using public transport instead of private vehicles (Grob, 1995;Stein, 2004); and 4) water conservation (Beal, Stewart, & Fielding, 2013).…”

Increasing Energy-Saving Actions in Low Income Households to Achieve Sustainability

“…Similarly, Niemeyer [18] found that householders least likely to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions hold lower pro-environmental attitudes and less concerns about, and knowledge of, environmental issues. Due to these financial constraints and motivations, low income householders are more likely to adopt curtailment behaviour, involving repetitive efforts to reduce energy use [19].…”