All about size? – The potential of downsizing in reducing energy demand

Residential energy consumption is one of the main contributors to CO2 emissions in the UK. One strategy aimed at reducing emissions is to increase retrofitting rates of buildings. In this paper, an alternative approach is discussed and its potential impact on energy use assessed, that of downsizing (moving to smaller homes). Reviews of previous research show that a wide range of what can be termed psychological barriers exist to downsizing, such as the loss of ownership and independence, concern about what to do with possessions, not having enough space for visitors, and attachment to one’s home. Benefits of downsizing from a personal perspective are economic, with lower bills and/or rent, release of capital, lower maintenance costs, and also potential lifestyle improvements including living in easier-to-maintain and more age-appropriate housing. Wider societal benefits include the potential to significantly reduce energy consumption, and mitigating the housing crisis in cities where not enough properties are available. Empirical analysis on a nationally representative sample in England showed that building size alone accounts for 24% of the variability in energy consumption (compared to 11% of household size). If single-person households with more than two bedrooms downsized by one bedroom, energy-savings of 8% could be achieved, and if single-person households occupied only one bedroom, savings of 27%. Data also showed a significant amount of underoccupation, with almost two-thirds of households having more bedrooms than considered necessary compared to the bedroom-standard. However, analysis also revealed a structural barrier to downsizing, namely the lack of available alternative, smaller houses. The evidence would suggest that downsizing could realize significant energy savings, and address a range of other social benefits. However, against this stand significant personal interests, inadequate alternative housing and other infrastructure issues. Promoting downsizing as a means to achieve energy policy goals is therefore a potentially significant but socially challenging policy option.

[1]  S. Sorrell,et al.  Empirical estimates of the direct rebound effect: A review , 2009 .

[2]  Huei-chu Liao,et al.  Space-heating and water-heating energy demands of the aged in the US , 2002 .

[3]  Osamu Saeki,et al.  Effectiveness of an energy-consumption information system for residential buildings , 2006 .

[4]  A. Druckman,et al.  Household energy consumption in the UK: A highly geographically and socio-economically disaggregated model , 2008 .

[5]  Henk Visscher,et al.  The effect of occupancy and building characteristics on energy use for space and water heating in Dutch residential stock , 2009 .

[6]  W. Abrahamse,et al.  How do socio-demographic and psychological factors relate to households' direct and indirect energy use and savings? , 2009 .

[7]  C. Vlek,et al.  A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation , 2005 .

[8]  L. Curry,et al.  Medicaid estate planning: perceptions of morality and necessity. , 2001, The Gerontologist.

[9]  Andrea Trianni,et al.  A framework to characterize energy efficiency measures , 2014 .

[10]  Michael Thomas,et al.  Stamp Duty Land Tax , 2004 .

[11]  P. Blanchette.  Progress in Geriatrics: A Clinical Care Update. , 1997 .

[12]  Alan W. Evans,et al.  Unaffordable Housing: Fables and Myths , 2005 .

[13]  C. Vlek,et al.  Measurement and Determinants of Environmentally Significant Consumer Behavior , 2002 .

[14]  K. Steemers,et al.  Household energy consumption: a study of the role of occupants , 2009 .

[15]  J. Banks,et al.  Housing Price Volatility and Downsizing in Later Life , 2007 .

[16]  M. Binswanger.  Technological progress and sustainable development: what about the rebound effect? , 2001 .

[17]  Suresh V. Garimella,et al.  A benefit-cost assessment of new vehicle technologies and fuel economy in the U.S. market ☆ , 2015 .

[18]  Susanne Iwarsson,et al.  Home as a signification of independence and autonomy: Experiences among very old Swedish people , 2007, Scandinavian journal of occupational therapy.

[19]  Gwendolyn Brandon,et al.  REDUCING HOUSEHOLD ENERGY CONSUMPTION: A QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE FIELD STUDY , 1999 .

[20]  Nick Eyre,et al.  The Green Deal and the Energy Company Obligation , 2012 .

[21]  Evan Mills,et al.  Consumer non-energy benefits as a motivation for making energy-efficiency improvements , 1996 .

[22]  R. Sonderegger.  MOVERS AND STAYERS: THE RESIDENT'S CONTRIBUTION TO VARIATION ACROSS HOUSES IN ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR SPACE HEATING , 1978 .

[23]  Zaid Chalabi,et al.  Explaining domestic energy consumption – The comparative contribution of building factors, socio-demographics, behaviours and attitudes , 2015 .

[24]  M. Morgan,et al.  Quantifying the extent of space shortages: English dwellings , 2014 .

[25]  Scott Kelly,et al.  Do homes that are more energy efficient consume less energy?: A structural equation model of the English residential sector , 2011 .

[26]  Noah J. Goldstein,et al.  The Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms , 2007, Psychological science.

[27]  N. Choi.  Older Persons Who Move: Reasons and Health Consequences , 1996 .

[28]  D. Weil,et al.  The Housing Wealth of the Aged , 1992 .

[29]  Agis M. Papadopoulos,et al.  Statistical analysis of the Greek residential building stock , 2011 .