Talking about targets: How construction discourses of theory and reality represent the energy performance gap in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Targets for energy performance in operation have been advocated as a solution to the welldocumented mismatch between the expected and actual energy use of buildings. Although construction industry actors will be crucial in realising these targets, their response to them is currently under-explored. Augmenting research on how middle actors shape energy consumption, this paper examines how everyday talk in the construction industry sustains this mismatch, drawing on a study of a hospital construction project with targets for energy in use. It applies Gilbert and Mulkay's approach to discourse analysis, particularly their interest in "accounting for error", to data drawn from interviews with actors across the construction project, observation of daily life on site, and an examination of written interactions. Findings show how actors make a discursive division between the "theory" and "reality" of energy use. Expressing scepticism about "theory", in particular, allows them to rationalise problems with future operational energy consumption and thereby mitigate their professional liability. This division therefore perpetuates, rather than overcomes, the separation between energy in design and operation, displacing a more collaborative discussion of performance expectations. This challenges the assumption that targets for energy in use can be effective without accompanying changes in industry incentives and ways of working. This paper 2 argues for more attention to the patterns of talk that are found in the construction industry, in order to uncover how this crucial set of actors will respond to new energy policy incentives.

Seeking the Pressure Points: Catalysing Low Carbon Changes from the Middle-Out in Offices and Schools

“…This corresponds with research into the need for an integrated package of building policies [71] and climate policymaking that also accounts for multiple objectives and actors to create change in sectors such as buildings [72]. It also speaks to the debate around frequently problematic single indicators for specific buildings [73,74]. Systemic policy intervention is needed to muster change at scale for Net Zero in the UK.…”

Collaborative and life cycle-based project delivery for environmentally sustainable building construction: views of Finnish project professionals and building operation and maintenance experts

“…Facility managers are in principle expected to continually improve energy efficiency in buildings, but are not actually required or incentivized to do so. In fact, some facility managers actively avoid trying to fix issues so as not be held responsible for possible worsening of the gap, referring to unavoidable differences between theory and practice (Willan et al, 2020). Fears of causing disturbances in building operations and unfamiliarity with data-driven tools prevent the use of data-based recommendations (Markus et al, 2022).…”

Climate Mitigation in the Swedish Single-Family Homes Industry and Potentials for LCA as Decision Support

“…For example, Moncaster [38] and Moncaster & Simmons [39] studied how environmentally critical decisions take place in building design processes for UK school projects. Reindl [40] and Willan et al [41] highlight that in the field of energy efficiency studies in the property sector, building professionals are often under-studied as compared to households and occupants as actors, as seen, for example, in studies by Gram-Hanssen [42]. Reindl [40] used a middle-out perspective, which a few other scholars in similar studies have also used.…”