Critically Interrogating Eco‐Homes

Pickerill, Jenny

doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12453

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Equally, the bureaucracy and complex processes around grant applications hinder the willingness of landowners to embark on woodland creation, which need to be addressed to scale up tree planting (Staddon et al., 2021). The limits to what can be achieved with nature‐based carbon offsetting in urban greenspace also emphasize the need to substantially reduce emissions when building a green city, such as switching to renewable energy systems, popularizing low‐carbon transport infrastructures (Newcastle City Council, 2020), deploying eco‐homes (Pickerill, 2017), eco‐driving and eco‐charging (Ortega‐Cabezas et al., 2021). Importantly, the limited ability of urban soil management to accommodate carbon emphasizes the need for urban centres to work with rural partners, where soil carbon management achieves much higher gains in stocks (Wang et al., 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The limited potential of soil and vegetation in urban greenspace for nature‐based offsetting of institutional carbon emissions

Wang,

Manning,

Werner

2024

Soil Use and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The soil and vegetation of urban greenspace can potentially contribute to ambitious climate action plans declared by city institutions and councils. To assess how urban greenspace could make a contribution to institutional carbon management, we measured soil carbon at 42 sampling locations across three land‐covers and vegetation carbon of 490 trees (67 species), over the city campus of Newcastle University. Soil carbon varied with pH and land‐cover classes (lawned with some free‐standing trees, woodland park, sports fields), and tree cover significantly enhanced soil carbon storage. Soil carbon storage from 0 to 30 cm depth averaged 18.85 kg·m−2, more than double the tree carbon storage (average 7.66 kg·m−2) estimated using biomass empirical equations. According to our scenarios, even if all currently available urban greenspace were converted to woodland, this would offset only 1% of current annual greenhouse gas emissions of Newcastle University or, if implemented more widely, of Newcastle city overall. While urban woodland brings benefits beyond carbon storage, the limit to what can be achieved within cities emphasizes the need for urban–rural partnerships. In exchange for helping cities with carbon abatement, their surrounding rural regions could benefit from carbon offsetting payments to improve their infrastructure provision. Overall, a carbon‐friendly and nature‐based land management strategy should be developed with full consideration of collaborative partnerships between urban and surrounding rural areas, particularly placing a high value on soil and tree carbon.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The limited potential of soil and vegetation in urban greenspace for nature‐based offsetting of institutional carbon emissions

Wang,

Manning,

Werner

2024

Soil Use and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examples include employing straw bales in Northeastern China, bamboo in Ecuador, and earth roofs in Africa (11). Jenny Pickerill argued that the economic and social potential of eco-friendly houses is weakened due to their poor design (12). The author believes that the design of eco-houses requires accounting for climate factors, cultural traditions, available materials, lifestyle needs and local skills.…”

Section: Straw As a Building Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Archives of Civil Engineering

Kozień-Woźniak

Fąfara

Łukaszewski

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Occurrences associated with the phenomena of climate change are increasingly visible. Effects of progressive environmental pollution are monitored with growing concern. Still, in the construction sector, the choice of sustainable materials and the knowledge concerning them is insignificant. Studies have shown that single-family residential buildings form the largest share of new buildings in Central European countries. It should be assumed that it is the improvement of this particular section of the construction sector to be the goal of further development of societies. This paper presents a case study of the construction of a house using straw -a material that, on the one hand, is a product associated with local tradition, while significantly reducing carbon footprint of its production and use, on the other. The construction of a prototypical house with the application of composite technology, i.e. timber framing with straw bale infill, was compared with a conventional method (ceramic masonry units) which is currently the most popular choice for building single-family houses in Poland. The study is based on the building's life cycle assessment (LCA) over its consecutive phases as a tested and reliable method of the verification of a material's impact on the environment.

show abstract

“…Similarly, Mason [55] takes issue with the heavy emphasis eco-communities put on environmental sustainability at the expense of social justice. Barring these criticisms, scholars call for more research on the impact of ecovillage buildings and infrastructure on sustainable practices [35,56,57]. This article will aim to contribute to this research gap by focusing on the endeavors of two ecovillages to build new houses and infrastructure and scale up their practices.…”

Section: Ecovillages As 'Communities Of Practice'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Building an Island of Sustainability in a Sea of Unsustainability? A Study of Two Ecovillages

Temesgen

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecovillages aim to foster community around sustainable practices and encourage low-impact lifestyles. This article explores the strategies employed by two ecovillages to scale up their practices through physical expansion and the consequence for the maintenance of said practices. The ecovillages under study are Hurdal in Norway and Findhorn in Scotland. The study employed a multi-method approach: document study, participant observation, and interviews with ecovillage residents. The ecovillages applied different strategies to gain access to economic resources for expansion. Hurdal ecovillage sold its land to a private developer while Findhorn chose a different path: raising funds within the community, accessing public funds, and adopting low-cost building designs. The study finds that collaborating with investors and developers results in expensive housing that excludes low-income individuals and attracts well-off house buyers with mainstream values. Both ecovillages dropped introductory courses that aimed to equip new members with the necessary skills for shared practices and establish a common ground. These two consequences led to a weakening of competences for shared practices as private property took precedence. Prioritizing affordable infrastructure and accessing local (community and public) financial resources opens up paths for expansion that can maintain the necessary skills and meaning for community living.

show abstract

Critically Interrogating Eco‐Homes

Cited by 15 publications

References 70 publications

The limited potential of soil and vegetation in urban greenspace for nature‐based offsetting of institutional carbon emissions

The limited potential of soil and vegetation in urban greenspace for nature‐based offsetting of institutional carbon emissions

Archives of Civil Engineering

Building an Island of Sustainability in a Sea of Unsustainability? A Study of Two Ecovillages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About