Unequal spatial distribution of retrofits in Bucharest’s apartment buildings

Abstract

This paper argues that the current spatial patterns of energy retrofits in post-socialist apartment buildings are unequally distributed across municipalities in Bucharest, Romania. In addition to the dominant techno-economic and social framing of this type of retrofit action, an institutional and political perspective can provide useful insights into why this occurs. By drawing on secondary analysis of statistical data, grey literature and 20 semi-structured interviews in Bucharest, three important findings emerge. First, the institutional complexity of energy retrofit of apartment buildings in Romania is underestimated and the interaction between various institutions is poor, explained by lack of trust and collective action. Second, the spatial distribution of the retrofit of apartment buildings is unequally distributed across Bucharest's six municipalities. Third, current action for retrofit does not reach municipalities with the greatest need and potential. A more bottom-up and decentralized institutional landscape exists than is currently acknowledged in public policy and the research literature. Findings show an unequal and unfair spread of retrofit action within and between citiesraising wider implications for the potential shortcomings of European Union retrofit programmes in Central and Eastern Europe.

Retrofit Poverty: Socioeconomic Spatial Disparities in Retrofit Subsidies Uptake

“…Considering that the VEU programme is a market-based mechanism, this finding was surprising as it contradicts the economics of agglomeration and the European experience of a relative disadvantage in residential retrofit subsidy benefits in peripheral areas (Lihtmaa et al 2018;Turcu 2016). One explanation was the relatively high share of VEECs generated by water heater upgrades.…”

“…While much of the work hitherto has focused on disparities in the functionings of affording energy or achieving adequate indoor temperatures in Europe (Burholt & Windle 2006;Healy 2004) and in Australia (Baker et al 2019), interest in the spatial distribution of intervention benefits is emerging (Bouzarovski & Simcock 2017). European research suggests that regional polarisation may lead to disparities in retrofit projects and subsidies, with metropolitan regions benefiting more than peripheral areas (Bouzarovski & Tirado Herrero 2017;Lihtmaa, Hess, & Leetmaa 2018;Turcu 2016). In Australia, investigations into the spatial distribution of low-carbon technology uptake have focused on solar PV installations Chandrashekeran & Li 2019).…”

Mind the Poorest: Social Housing Provision in Post-crisis Romania

“…These are the groups housed in and in need of rented social housing and comprise the remaining sitting tenants, the unemployed, the homeless, and Roma. Public investment in the existing rented social housing stock has been minimal since 1990 and in the aftermath of the crisis, and mainly deployed in larger cities and urban areas (Turcu 2015;Turcu 2016). Thus, existing social tenants, and especially those living in medium and small towns, are at greater risk of living in poor housing conditions and poorly managed buildings.…”

“…Current housing policy decisions in Romania have an ad-hoc character and are part of day-today political initiatives; they also lack follow-up and the gathering of evidence for them (Turcu 2016). This is an approach documented elsewhere in the region: policy and decisions are only coordinated in a loose way as part of a 'trial-and-error' or 'scrambling' approach (Tsenkova 2009).…”

“…However, more recent research documents the emergence of a new sub-type of affordable housing, which we shall here call 'self-help' affordable housing (Turcu 2015;Turcu 2016;Turcu, forthcoming). Self-help affordable housing has been little documented in Romania and was first developed throughout the early 2000s.…”