Understanding energy efficiency in Swedish residential building renovation: A practice theory approach

Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Research & Social Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/erss

Original research article

Understanding energy efficiency in Swedish residential building renovation: A practice theory approach Jenny Palm ∗ , Katharina Reindl Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies—Technology and Social Change, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 20 May 2015 Received in revised form 10 November 2015 Accepted 17 November 2015 Available online 28 November 2015 Keywords: Renovation Energy efficiency Multi-family dwellings Practice theory

a b s t r a c t Examining renovation processes having reduced energy consumption as an explicit goal, this article considers how energy efficiency is made part of renovation processes, focusing on the planning and design phase. Interviews and participant observations of meetings have been conducted. Applying a framework developed in practice theory, we demonstrate the importance of understanding routines, technology, meanings, and knowledge in order to understand why renovation processes repeat themselves and why a renovation practice are hard to change. The analysis shows that the professionals were only engaged in decisions in relation to their own specialized areas, which benefited established solutions. The existing technical infrastructure, such as the HVAC shafts and the district heating system, largely determined what issues were up for discussion. It was clear that practical know-how were valued much higher than theoretical knowledge. The meaning of an energy efficient renovations for the professionals was to reduce the energy consumed as much as possible in every renovated building. With this in mind, we were surprised by how little energy efficiency was on the agenda. We can conclude that there was nothing in the studied processes that could trigger changes and dislodge the inertia of the practice. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Energy efficiency is a central political objective of the EU and its Member States. EU Member States have agreed to reduce their primary energy consumption by 20% by 2020 relative to 1990 levels. Sweden also has the objective of reducing its total energy consumption per heated area in homes and other premises by 20% by 2020 and by 50% by 2050 relative to 1995 levels [1]. In Sweden, the domestic and service sectors account for approximately 40% of total energy use [2]. According to the Swedish Energy Efficiency Committee, much remains to be done to address energy use and there is substantial potential for energy savings, particularly in the housing sector [1]. When considering energy efficiency in the housing sector, it is useful to examine existing buildings as they will continue to represent most of the housing stock in coming decades in most western countries [3]. Achieving already-set goals calls for action addressing the existing housing stock that leads to reduced energy consumption [4]. Sweden has 2.5 million apartments in multi-unit dwellings

∗ Corresponding author. Fax: +46 13 284461. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. Palm), [email protected] (K. Reindl). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.11.006 2214-6296/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

and 2 million single-family homes. In 2011, 6085 new apartments were completed and ready to be occupied [5]. The small number of new-built apartment buildings in Sweden makes it necessary to address energy efficiency when renovating the existing stock. Sweden’s national strategy for energy-efficient building renovation, which is a response to the EU’s Energy Efficiency Directive, states that 75% of existing buildings will need comprehensive renovation by 2050, i.e. 1,875,000 apartments will need to be renovated, according to the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning (Boverket) and the Swedish Energy Agency (SEA) [6]. This means that 52,000 apartments will have to be renovated in Sweden every year. It is difficult to find statistics concerning the energyefficiency measures implemented in the existing building stock. However, when it comes to multi-unit dwellings, 44% have implemented some such measures [6]. Adjusting and optimizing control systems and improving electrical efficiency have so far been the dominant measures. The increasing need for mass renovation of these buildings creates an exceptional window of opportunity to improve energy efficiency, address national energy and climate goals, and create and sustain modern, comfortable accommodations. Following Meijer et al. [3], the term renovation is here used to cover retrofitting, restoration, rehabilitation, and renovation and is used to indicate actions that go beyond maintenance.

248

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

The renovation process of one housing company in a mediumsized municipality in Sweden is analysed here. The housing company has decided to reduce energy consumption in its entire housing stock, the goal being to reduce the amount of purchased energy by 25% by 2025 (relative to 2011 levels). The housing company is a public housing company owned by the municipality; it has a dominant market position in rental apartments, controlling about 60% of the local market for apartments. Sweden has a large share of publicly built and managed housing. Public housing companies are mainly owned by local municipalities or public utilities, and one in five people rent units of such housing [5]. Public housing is intended to provide non-profit housing access for everyone, and there is no upper income limit for those who rent such accommodations. This article examines renovation processes having improved energy efficiency as an explicit goal. We analyse how energy efficiency is made part of the planning and design phase of the renovation process, applying a framework developed in practice theory that focuses on routines, technology, meanings, and knowledge [7–9]. The practice theory framework contributes to explain why some energy-efficiency measures are, or are not, brought into the planning and design phase in renovation processes for multiunit dwellings. The focus of this article is on the renovation planning and design phase, which starts with an investigation and ends with a tender document. The procurement follows EU regulations and the calls for bidders were published on the Opic website (www.opic.com). We closely followed three renovation processes from initiation until completion. This paper concentrates on the planning and design phase, as it is in this phase that the measures to be implemented in these renovations were determined. The contracting form in these projects was design-bid-build, which is the most common way of procuring infrastructure in Sweden [10]. In this contracting form the client, here the housing company, delivers the design for the project and the contractors offer bids to build, the lowest bidder usually winning the contract. The housing company is responsible for documentation and the contractor only builds according to the design [10].

The planning and design phase is implemented by the property developer, in this case the housing company, together with its consultants. The consultants hired in this phase are chosen from a list of consultants that have been contracted through public procurement for three years. Every three years, a new procurement is conducted. According to law, at least 50% of the tenants need to consent to any actions that raise apartment standards and lead to increased rent [11]. The housing company collects written consent from the tenants during the planning and design phase. See Fig. 1 for an overview of the renovation process. The planning and design phase of renovation projects in multiunit dwellings has been paid little attention in earlier studies, even though the decisions made early in this phase determine the final results [12]. In the planning and design phase, the energyefficiency measures to include in the procurement document and the materials to use are determined. The negotiation of these matters, however, is often “black boxed”. How professionals reason about energy efficiency and how routines, technology, meanings, and knowledge influence the measures that “survive” and find their way into the procurement document ought to be of general interest, so the present analytical framework contributes to a general understanding applicable beyond the Swedish case. The research also helps improve our understanding of professional cultures concerning energy efficiency and of “best” engineering practices [13]. 2. Practice theory and energy-efficiency renovations as practice Energy-efficiency policies have been criticized for being simplistically based on a belief in rational actors choosing the best available technology. For example, Moezzi and Janda [14] claim that social potential is as important as technical potential in an energy-efficiency decision situation. Economic factors are of course important when analysing energy efficiency and the choice of measures during a renovation process. However, it is important not to overemphasize the economic incentives or to neglect other important factors, such as cultures, knowledge and routines, that are

Need for renovation Housing company

Analysing and prioritizing Meetings with tenants Housing company and external consultants

Planning and design

(i)

(i)

Tender document publication

Preliminary investigation Project/working meetings

Investment decision

Reconstruction

Maintenance (tenants’ use)

Fig. 1. Overview of the renovation process.

Decision on direcon

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

important when negotiating and choosing technological solutions and appliances during a renovation. Guy and Shove [15] have, for example, emphasized the importance of understanding cultural and social engagements when energy-efficiency decisions are made in building projects. It is important to understand the choices made during a renovation process in their context. In science and technology studies (STS), the interdependence of technology and society as well as individuals’ ability to shape the technologies surrounding them have long been studied [16,17]. The idea is to recognize the importance of both context (i.e. available technologies and provision systems) and action (i.e. the energyrelated choices made during a renovation process) [18]. Energy efficiency is affected by socioeconomic factors as well as by the relations of social actors with material and semiotic aspects embedded in the built environment [19–21]. Buildings’ energy systems are situated in sociomaterial practices involving knowledge, institutions, technology, and methods. Our interest is in the planning and design phase, a phase in which professionals meet to discuss and decide what energy-efficiency measures to include in the procurement document. Janda and Parag [22] emphasize the need to study “the middle agents”, such as the building professionals, as vital actors in greening the housing sector and in building and refurbishment. They note that most research comprises top–down studies of government regulations and procedures or bottom–up studies of individual and grassroots organizations. The “middle”, according to Janda and Parag [22], is more unfamiliar territory, even though building professionals are “particularly important middle agents for initiating, delivering and promoting infrastructural changes” (p. 42). Our special focus is therefore on the planning and design phase and on how decisions are made – often via “black-boxed” negotiations – to include or exclude particular energy-efficiency measures. The final outcome, how energy efficient a building will be, greatly depends on the social relationships and discussions, negotiations, and agreements between the involved professionals during the planning and design phase. Experiences, routines, and habits existing and negotiated in a particular group will determine the energy-efficiency measures to be planned and later implemented. The agreements negotiated can both facilitate and constrain the renovation process. Focusing on social negotiations and agreements helps explain why energy-efficiency technologies may be rejected or adopted [23]. We take inspiration from practice theory, as based on the work of Schatzki [24] and Reckwitz [25] and on the framework later developed by Shove and Pantzar [7]. From these scholars’ perspectives, practices are sayings and doings held together by various elements (see also Gram-Hanssen [9]). Practice theory is still in flux and is interpreted in various ways. A general understanding of practice theory, however, is that practices are routinized behaviour “in which bodies are moved, objects are handled, subjects are treated, things are described and the world is understood” [25], p. 250]. The idea is to study activities in their social context and to view everyday activities from the perspective of cultural and social networks [26]. Karvonen [27] claims that the social practice approach is especially useful in order to understand the complexity of retrofitting, a context in which it is difficult to apply a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Establishing a single model is difficult because of, for example, the diversity of housing stock, the gap between modelled and actual performance, and the introduction of new and improved building products [27]. Many elements must be considered and practice theory can help by combining actors and structures in the analysis. Some studies have used practice theory to analyse retrofitting (see Vlasova and Gram-Hanssen [28] for an overview). These studies have focused on homeowners and their retrofitting or

249

rounes

knowledge

Pracce: Energy efficient renovaon

technology

meanings

Fig. 2. The elements of a practice.

retrofitting-related practices [28]. We will test the framework in the studied context involving professionals and the renovation of multi-unit dwellings. In doing so, we will treat the planning and design phase as practice. Our analysis will use the framework developed by Gram-Hanssen to analyse how energy-efficiency renovations are constituted in the planning and design phase of the studied projects. In Gram-Hanssen’s framework, practices are interpreted in terms of technologies, routines, knowledge, and meaning. Technologies are products or things important in structuring practices. Routines are embodied habits and knowhow, i.e. knowing what to do and how to react in a situation. Knowledge includes technical knowledge as well as rules for how to do things. Meanings are understood as collectively shared interpretations. Meaning accumulates through professionals’ actions and plays a key role in cohering a practice [8]. A practice consider both structures and agents. In a practice context structures and agents are not two independent sets of phenomena, but is seen as a duality. Social actors in their everyday activities fall back on and reproduces societal structures. [29] Practices are not a set of individual actions but modes of social relations, of mutual actions, see Fig. 2. [30] This means that renovations exist as a conjunction of elements figuring as an entity that exist and endure because of recurrent enactments, each reproducing the interdependencies of which the practice is compromised. The professionals involved in a renovation project is in this sense a carrier of a practice. Moments of doing, which in our case will be the project meetings, when the elements of a practice come together are moments when such elements are potentially reconfigured. Stability is the provisional outcome of successively faithful reproductions of practices. [30] 3. Material and methods We closely followed three processes of energy-efficiency housing renovation in a municipal housing company whose stated aim was to reduce energy consumption as much as possible in the renovated buildings. We were guided by the criterion that the chosen cases should illustrate the intention of achieving maximum energy efficiency in the renovation process. As the study is based on qualitative methods, and the number and range of cases were limited, the cases were not expected to be representative of all renovation projects in multi-family building throughout Sweden. Certain

250

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

Table 1 Characterization of the buildings renovated.

Built Number of apartments Floors Energy consumption of the buildings Problems in the buildings

Project 1

Project 2

Project 3

1961 12 4 153 kWh m−2 y−1 Poor external fac¸ade, poor roof construction, poor performance of windows, several cases of water damage in bathrooms, and problems with balconies

early 1950s 33 3 141 kWh m−2 y−1 Poor piping, inadequate ventilation, outdated wiring, inadequate fire insulation, and limited accessibility

1961 (partly renovated in 1985) 32 4 154 kWh m−2 y−1 Indoor environmental problems, low and varying indoor temperature, stuffy air, and odours

analytical generalizations can nevertheless be generated from the study [31]. The researchers participated in the planning meetings and had access to the project’s Web meeting place, where documents and information were shared between project actors. In addition, site visits were used to better understand the building itself. Participatory observations of the planning and design meetings, site visits, and a number of sequential, semi-structured interviews were carried out. The data comprise observations, field notes, interviews, casual conversations, photo documentation, and documents. The authors also had continuous contact by e-mail and telephone with housing company staff and were granted full access to relevant internal documents by the company. Data were collected from November 2012 until October 2014. Participant observations were used, in which one or both authors participated in the planning meetings of the three studied renovation projects. In total, 25 meetings were observed. In all three projects, the general time planning called for the design phase to take around three months, after which the procurement process would start. The meetings for each studied project occurred at least once every second week and all lasted one and a half to two hours. The meetings were all held in the housing company’s main office building. In two projects, the renovation planning meetings were held mostly in the morning and started with a shared breakfast and an informal get-together; this informal gathering was more or less lacking in the third project. The observations were guided by the aim of identifying social interaction, actions agreed on or under consideration, the process underlying energy-efficiency actions (i.e. how and when actions were agreed on), and contextual factors influencing the actions [32]. Before the meetings, we often met the project leader more informally, i.e. without any agenda or predefined questions, to discuss what had happened between meetings and what they had done since we had last met. These informal discussions usually revealed the same information as was later presented at the formal meeting, but they gave us the opportunity to hear about the problems encountered and questions that arose in relation to, for example, drawings, energy calculations, and dialogues with tenants. All meetings and conversations with the housing company and consultants were documented in case notes taken during the various interactions and written up as soon as possible afterwards. Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with all professionals involved in the planning and design phase, including external consultants and co-workers at the housing company, three of whom were interviewed twice. All actors participating in the projects but not employed by the housing company are referred to as consultants. Architects, fire consultants, construction consultants, HVAC consultants, building engineers, energy audit consultants, noise consultants, and an electricity controller were the external professionals, i.e. consultants, involved in the projects. However, not all of them were equally involved in all three projects. In addition, the housing company has an internal HVAC

and electricity functionary playing the same role as and collaborating closely with the external consultants. However, the housing company has no internal architect, building engineer, noise consultant, or fire consultant. Furthermore, there is also no distinct internal energy audit function. There were initially three different project leaders, but one of them transferred to a new position during the process, so in the end, one of the project leaders led two of the studied projects. An interview guide determined the overall structure of topics to be covered by the interviews. These topics covered the respondents’ background, role in the project, how they perceived the ongoing processes, influence of various project actors, oversights, possible energy goals and measures, and specific questions arising in each observed process [33]. The interviews were conducted halfway through the planning and design phase. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. The interview data were analysed based on computer-based coding of the interview transcripts using ATLAS.ti. The validity of this study is supported by data triangulation, i.e. the use of multiple data sources and respondents, and by long-term involvement in the studied planning processes [34]. Maxwell [34] argues that researcher influence on the research environment could threaten research validity. When conducting participant observation and interacting closely with respondents, as was done here, the studied processes are inevitably influenced. To counteract this, during the observed processes, we took notes describing situations in which we felt that our participation had an influence. Our expertise is not in technology, so we could not influence the suggested measures or solutions. The influence we did have was more related to the processes as such. Our presence was mainly noticed when we interrupted meetings to request clarification of what was happening or when we did not understand the discussion. There are no indications that we influenced central aspects of what we were interested in, such as the meeting agendas, suggested measures, timeframes, and prioritizations. Below we will discuss the three studied renovation processes from the perspective of the chosen framework, starting with routines, technology, and meanings and ending in knowledge. We start by presenting the general context of the observed renovation processes. 4. The case: understanding energy in ongoing renovation processes The housing company has a maintenance plan based on which the property improvement manager decides what buildings to prioritize in the coming three years. This prioritization is conducted based on the buildings’ age and general need for renovation, and on whether they are seen as outdated and worn-out. In this stage, energy efficiency is not an issue under consideration. The studied projects did not start with a specific focus on energy, but rather because certain buildings were in need of refurbishment. Table 1 summarizes certain facts about the buildings in the three projects.

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

The housing company’s planning and design phase can be divided into several stages. In the preliminary investigation before the first project meeting, inspections are conducted to gather data concerning the outdoor environment and the building’s context, technical status, and maintenance status and documentation is collected, including drawings, photographs, and records of property data. The next stage consists of working meetings in which documents and drawings produced for the procurement process are negotiated. The final stage is the tender document finalization. 4.1. Routines structure the content As defined above, routines are the embodied habits and knowhow of practitioners. The meetings were routinized in that they were all similar in structure and all ended with decisions about what to do next. The practical work was done between the meetings and the results of that work were presented at the next meeting. Predefined bullet lists for the meetings largely framed their content and the issues included in or excluded from the agendas. The planning and design phase of the renovation process was also like an action plan in which goals were broken down into sub-goals and details were clarified or simply deleted from the agenda. That prioritizing process was of interest during the participant observations, to understand why the procurement document was designed as it was. The project meetings were organized according to predetermined agendas and were chaired by the project leader employed by the housing company. The meetings followed agendas treating these issues in the following order: (1) administration, (2) authority issues (e.g. building permits), (3) documentation (e.g. construction plans), (4) quality and environmental issues (e.g. the waste management and work environment at the building site), and (5) project time plans. After that, each discipline involved in the project had a time slot for reporting progress and discussing issues, generally in the following order: (1) architecture, (2) construction, (3) HVAC, (4) electricity, and (5) other construction/installation issues, such as sound, fire, energy, and accessibility. Most of the meeting time for the studied renovation projects related to architectural, HVAC, and electricity issues. The meetings usually started with the project leader presenting an overview of the project process to that point in time, what was already decided on, and what issues merited discussion (the first of points 1–5 above). After that, it was the architect’s turn. Architectural issues concerned the drafting of drawings, door positioning, washbasin dimensions, and the relationships between washbasin dimensions and the HVAC shafts in the building. HVAC discussions largely focused on the positioning of shafts. Shaft positioning always took a surprising amount of discussion time in all the meetings. In the first start-up meetings, the shaft issue took more than half of the time. The existing shaft positions determined what could be done when renovating the building, for example, as new design elements could not entail moving the shafts. Ventilation and the heating system were also on every meeting agenda. For ventilation, the discussions concerned whether or not to install supply air ventilation. For the heating system, the discussions concerned whether the heating system would be left untouched, replaced, or relined. All studied buildings were connected to the district heating system run by the municipal energy company. The housing company is also owned by the municipality and the municipal policy is that the municipality and its company should choose district heating when possible. For that reason, disconnecting from district heating was never discussed. Discussions of electricity were quite practical, concerning, for example, where to locate outlets or whether cables should be exposed. When HVAC and electricity were discussed, most of the time was spent telling anecdotes, and many references were made

251

to earlier projects, especially if other buildings had recently been renovated in the same area. By the time those issues had been dealt with, time had started to run out, so other issues (e.g., tenants’ views, insulation, and solar panels) repeatedly had to be treated very briefly, usually leading to the conclusion to return to these issues at the next meeting. This procedure was repeated at every meeting, however, so little time was ultimately spent on these issues. Every meeting had the same agenda, making the meetings similar in character. The same issues were discussed, although in increasing detail at each succeeding meeting, so that decisions could finally be made as to moving walls, the exact position of basins and outlets, etc. What we expected to be “big” issues, such as insulation, the Uvalues of windows, and IMC (individual metering and charging) were quickly dealt with. The priority was obviously to coordinate installation so that it would run smoothly when actual work on the building started later on. During the interviews, we asked the participating professionals about the meeting content and whether they perceived it as “normal” for planning and design meetings. We got the impression that the agenda remained essentially the same from meeting to meeting, any differences concerning the specific measures to be implemented. One consultant said the following in responding as to whether the current renovation process differed from others or had essentially the same structure and content: It is difficult to put it in those terms, because things are so specific from project to project. What differs is what you need to do, the measures and kind of contracting involved [e.g. all-in or divided]. The other matters are quite similar. It is the same steps that you go through and look at in every project. (Building engineer) The meeting routines were not controversial at all for the participants, who all agreed that the meetings usually followed the same pattern. We were surprised, however, at how the participating professionals were used during the meetings. The meetings were not designed for brainstorming or developing new solutions within the group. The meetings instead followed a procedure that emphasized measures that everyone seemed familiar with and that did not entail further explanations or discussions. Everyone knew that HVAC shaft positions were a central concern and that all installations needed to be coordinated around them. The goal was to make that happen, not to discuss or perhaps come up with new ideas for reducing energy consumption. When, for example, electricity was discussed, it was the electrician and project leader who mostly participated; others engaged in the discussion only if they wanted to know, for example, whether an electrical outlet would interfere with their installation or needed to be marked on the drawings. The planning and design phase was not designed to create a group committed to reducing energy consumption by 25% by 2025. The meetings were essentially meetings between the purchaser and the consultants, all of whom had different individual tasks, and a common goal was lacking. The participants involved made decisions in their own specialized areas, to the benefit of established solutions, and nothing that happened in the meetings encouraged intentions to accomplish anything beyond the ordinary.

4.2. Technologies structuring the design As discussed above, technologies are products or physical things influencing a practice. We have already discussed the importance of HVAC shaft positioning in structuring discussions during the meetings. Much time was spent discussing how to place different installations relative to both the shafts and each other.

252

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

When a building is renovated, various regulatory standards need to be met regarding, for example, fire requirements, accessibility, and noise levels. These standards were discussed in terms of how – not whether – the building would meet them after the renovation. The Swedish SundaHus is a system of standards for assessing construction materials and products from the environmental and health perspectives. In the planning and design phase, it was simply stated that established standards, such as those of SundaHus, must be applied by the building company. These regulations and standards also explain why the processes were very similar: There are many routines and standards that you must uphold. This is why they [i.e. the processes] are so similar. (Architect 3) This process is the same as usual, as in all projects. We have the building codes to rely on. That is, we need to meet the requirements for kWh m−2 —that is what we always do and follow. Then, the requirements of the contractor can be tougher, but that is not so common, but it can happen. (HVAC consultant 1) As mentioned above, the process was not really intended for brainstorming or developing new solutions; instead, it was intended to serve as a basis for a public procurement document. This resulted in the prioritization of certain types of technology discussions that could ultimately produce a figure or definition that could go into the procurement document, discussions regarding, for example, energy requirements, classified appliances, number of outlets, and insulation thickness. The architect was asked why s/he was so fixated on details and standards, and did not discuss more general design issues: Yeah, it is like. . . the technology has more or less taken over. . . there is always a risk in these kinds of projects that technology gets more attention than it should. This is because the technology is supposed to support the housing functions. But it is not supposed to be the main theme. . . This is partly because the technical consultants usually have a lot of influence on the process. Our homes are very installation-dense today and an enormous number of cables and pipes must be installed before you are finished (Architect 1) The predetermined agenda was one reason why technology and certain details were emphasized. The agenda did not leave any dedicated time to raise other issues. The lack of more general architectural perspectives is also interesting given that, when asked which consultant had the most influence on renovation processes, most interviewees said it was the architect. Despite that, two of the architects said that they were constrained by all the technology that needed to be in place. One of the architects believed that the HVAC and electrical consultants had more influence than did the architects: Yes, we also have some influence, but in certain phases of the process they [i.e. the HVAC and electrical consultants] can have too much influence. This because they have so many issues and so many things to sort out. So, just looking at the time aspect, they take a lot of time during the planning meetings (Architect 1) So, I now have the impression of the project that [name of the housing company] has asked our architects and the other consultants and um. . . we are practically just there to draw plans and to optimize the layout maybe. . . but everything else the others are doing. . . we are only the “drawing slaves” (Architect 2) During the meetings, the researchers also noticed that the architects’ work was reduced to producing drawings, not addressing other design issues. Because so much meeting time was spent dis-

cussing where the HVAC shafts were situated or where to locate electricity or IT outlets, the installation technology issues simply displaced other issues. The shafts were often referred to in relation to many other issues/discussion points and often managed to find their way into all other discussions, assuming a central role in them. It seems that the shafts were prioritized in discussions because they were so difficult to move, so everything else needed to be planned in relation to them.

4.3. Meanings of energy-efficiency renovations Meanings accumulate through engaged practitioners and can be understood as collectively shared interpretations. We were therefore particularly interested in how the professionals perceived and attached meaning to energy-efficiency renovations. Everyone agreed that energy efficiency has been paid great attention in general in renovation projects in recent years, the idea being to reduce the energy consumed in every building as much as possible. That said, energy efficiency was surprisingly little discussed in the observed meetings. Before we began participatory observations, the 25–25 goal (i.e. that the company should reduce its energy consumption by 25% by 2025) was the centre of discussion in several meetings with the housing company’s management. The projects were accordingly chosen for observation because they were potential “energy projects”, i.e. paying unusually great attention to energy. When the housing company’s representatives were asked about the absence of the 25–25 goal in meetings, they said that their consultants already knew about the goal, were working towards it, and kept them informed of goal-related matters. In interviews, however, when we asked the involved consultants about the housing company’s 25–25 energy goal, most were unaware of it: No, I have not heard about it. . . I have no idea what it is (Fire consultant) Interviewer: Have you heard about the housing company’s 25–25 goal? Construction consultant: No, I don’t think so. Interviewer: [explains the goal] But they haven’t told you about this at the meetings? Construction consultant: I don’t know. It. . . it is possible Interviewer: . . . But don’t you work towards this goal in the building project? Hasn’t the project leader told you that you need to look into 25% or something like that? Construction consultant: No, it is more that you try to do as much as possible given the preconditions. The common view was that, as in any renovation project, they should implement as many energy-efficiency measures as possible within reasonable economical limits. The consultants also emphasized that they, as always, participated in the process with their specific purposes in mind and that they wanted to fulfil their tasks at the lowest cost. One architect summarized it as follows: “If the purchaser has no ambition to do anything other than what the building codes specify. . . then we won’t force them to do so” (Architect 1). The consultants’ view was that they should fulfil the purchaser’s requests for the project and do what they are paid to do, neither more nor less. By not involving all the consultants in the energy reduction goal, the housing company did nothing to change the overall meaning of what should be suggested and what input was expected from each participant. Another puzzling thing we noticed during the meetings was the apparent lack of any intention to save electricity. When we asked about this, our professional informants agreed with our observation, but their common view was that this was not an issue worth spending time on. One of the electricity consultants said:

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

I have given the electricity manager at [name of the housing company] a list of measures that would save electricity and have short pay-off times, but they have not been implemented. . . There are a lot of measures to implement, but the problem is that electricity [consumption] is too small in relation to the total. So you don’t save 25% in total if you reduce the electricity consumption by 50%. To save 25% you need to include HVAC. But then you have other investments as well. (Electricity consultant 1) The HVAC consultant also said: They don’t care so much about electricity – there is so little. . . In the big picture, it costs nothing. . . Even if you save 50%, it is like a drop in the ocean. (HVAC consultant 2) The general understanding was that the measures that made the greatest difference in terms of energy efficiency were related to ventilation, window replacement, laundry rooms, heating systems, insulation, and reduced air leakage. Therefore, even in these projects, which specifically prioritized energy reduction, many electricity-saving measures had a difficult time gaining access to the design and planning process.

4.4. Knowledge of energy efficiency in renovations In this section, we will focus on the professionals’ knowledge of how to implement energy-efficiency renovations. Knowledge is taken to include rules for how to do things as well as technical knowledge. The external consultants of course have specific professional knowledge as well as favourite suggested measures that they always recommend. Both the meeting minutes and interviews indicated that the housing company has a list of typical standard energy-efficiency measures that are usually installed. These energy-efficiency measures are often installed without any further investigation to determine what would actually be the most useful in specific buildings—as though all the actors just automatically apply rules of thumb: The goal of the project is that the energy savings will be “as good as possible”. [The housing company] has no specific demands or requirements for how much energy efficiency should be improved. (Meeting minutes, 2013-01-18) One of the project leaders said in this context: Yes, I am a traditionalist and old builder. It’s often the insulation and U-values and stuff like that you look at. And then we have an HVAC consultant who looks at systems like heat and HVAC systems, and then there is an electricity consultant. (Project leader 2) The reason given as to why certain measures are used is that people “know they are working”, as most of the involved consultants have used these measures for many years. Energy calculations are often mentioned, but there is a lack of numbers and set goals as to how much energy is used in the building to be renovated or how much less energy should be used after the renovation. When figures were mentioned, it was difficult to find out who had produced them and where one could access them. After a meeting, we asked one of the project leaders about the energy calculations s/he had mentioned and whether there was some kind of energy reduction goal for the building: Project leader: I have not been involved in producing any specific figures. Have you heard anything about it? [Asking another internal consultant who happened to be present]

253

Other internal consultant: No, no, me neither. It is the general aim. Project leader: But rather, it is a little more. . . we have some guidelines that really direct us in this, but that prevent us from going wherever we want to. We cannot add as much insulation as we want to. . . Unfortunately, I have to say no to it [i.e. a question about an energy goal for the building], but it was a good question. I ought to see if we should concretize that actually. (Project leader 1) After one of the planning and design meetings, the HVAC consultant mentioned in conversation that someone at his company had made energy calculations for the studied project as it was part of the contract. He said further that he did not know who used these figures at the housing company or how they were used. He just assumed that the people working for the housing company must somehow take the calculations into consideration. We then asked the project leader, after another planning and design meeting, about these calculations, and it turned out that s/he was unaware that the HVAC company had made energy calculations for the renovation project. When meeting the project leader a few days later, the project leader confirmed that s/he had received these calculations, but that s/he had taken no notice of them before we asked about them. However, the role of these calculations was still very unclear: They are so new – these energy issues and questions so far – that I do not think we really have found a common strategy. . . We will probably need more guidance on how to deal with them in the future. (Project leader 1) None of the projects possessed any information or statistics about how much energy particular buildings consumed before being renovated. In addition, the housing company has problems obtaining consumption figures, as the energy meters are installed in such a way that they produce figures for areas only, not for specific buildings. Therefore, the current system does not allow the company to obtain statistics broken down by individual building. It would, however, have been possible to make specific measurements a few months before the renovation process, but this was not done. Even though figures are powerful tools that are put into the procurement documents, as discussed above, energy calculations were not made and quantified energy-reduction goals were not set for the renovated buildings. Such knowledge does not seem to be regarded as especially important in the planning and design stage. However, it is regarded as valuable that project actors can demonstrate that they have implemented particular measures in earlier projects and that they believe that they functioned well. When we asked about evaluations of these earlier projects, we were told that they had never been conducted. Instead, the housing company relied more on the general impressions of the participating professionals.

5. Conclusions In our analysis, we have applied a framework developed within practice theory, emphasizing routines, technologies, meaning, and knowledge, to interpret how professionals have treated energy issues in renovation processes for multi-unit dwellings. We have analysed the project meetings as moments of doings, where the elements of practices come together. The professionals are carriers of a renovation practice, a practice that endure because of repeated enactments. In focus for the analysis was four elements in the renovation practice, where the purpose was to understand what kind of knowledge, routines, technologies and meanings that are enacted in renovation practices.

254

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255

The analysis has demonstrated the importance of understanding the routines governing planning meetings in order to understand why some energy-efficiency measures are or are not brought into the project. We saw that the planning and design phase is highly structured in accordance with predetermined meeting agendas that determine what issues are included and excluded. The established routines for the meetings were familiar to all participants and the position of HVAC shafts and various technical installations routinely dominated the agenda. The professionals were only engaged in decisions in relation to their own specialized areas and put forward established solutions. The meeting routines cater to professionals working on their own rather than creating a group of professionals with a common goal. There was nothing during the meetings encouraged intentions to accomplish anything beyond the ordinary. The existing technical infrastructure, such as the HVAC shafts and the district heating system, largely determined what issues were up for discussion. Regulations and standards were not especially time-consuming matters in the meetings or interviews, but were obviously decisive for what measures were implemented in the project. That regulatory standards had to be met was a simple message that needed no further discussion. Surprisingly, energy calculations attracted little interest and had little impact on the process. It was clear that tacit knowledge and empirical experience, i.e. of a measure or solution tried in a previous project, were valued much more than figures and statistics concerning the buildings to be renovated. Most meeting time was spent discussing technical details that seemed to be of general applicability rather than specific to the building as an energy system. Other issues that might be understood as non-technical energy measures, such as how to make better use of natural daylight, were never on the agenda. When discussing what energy-efficiency renovations meant to them, the involved professionals all claimed that energy in general was greatly emphasized in all projects, not only in the one studied. The general intention was always to reduce the energy consumed as much as possible in every renovated building. With this in mind, we were surprised by how little energy efficiency was discussed as such. The housing company apparently assumed that all actors knew about the 25% energy reduction goal and that all of them intended to work to achieve it. This was not the case, however, as many actors referred instead to a general societal desire to reduce energy consumption in buildings. They were simply unaware that any special energy-related objective was informing the studied renovation projects. The consultants’ general view was that they would do the same as they had always done, as the housing company had not asked for more. And that was what they did: they suggested the same well-known measures that they always did. Another interesting observation was the general belief that implementing electricity-saving measures during a renovation was not really worthwhile, as so many other measures had much greater impact. It was taken for granted that electricity saving was not a worthwhile part of an energy-efficient renovation. In terms of knowledge, it was interesting to note the importance of practical knowhow and of experience trying out a product or solution in earlier renovation projects. No formal evidence or evaluations were needed: it was enough for someone to confirm having previously tried a given measure. Traditional robust knowledge was highly valued. “I’m an old builder”, said one project leader, and we understood that he meant this as assurance that he knew how to perform a high-quality renovation, and that he supported established solutions rather than new technology. Although one can question whether the energy-efficiency renovation of multi-unit dwellings constitutes a practice in its own right, the practice theory framework advances consideration of why energy efficiency is or is not emphasized in particular ren-

ovation projects. Practice theory helps sort out various layers of explanation as to why no radical energy-efficiency measures were implemented in the studied project, even though energy efficiency was an explicit goal. Using this framework it is possible to understand why the planning and design phase more or less repeated itself and why the doings seemed quite unaffected by the decided energy reduction goal. There was nothing in the studied processes that could dislodge the inertia of the practice. Through the framework we could draw attention to how the renovation process excludes certain knowledge sources (e.g. energy audits and evaluations), has established routines that preclude, for example, an energy system analysis of the building, is steered by a mindset that rules out certain approaches, such as electricity-saving measures, and greatly prioritizes existing technical infrastructure to the extent that other possibilities are ignored. Acknowledgements This work was supported by FORMAS and IQS Samhällsbyggnad under grant number 2012-246. The authors would also like to acknowledge the valuable comments from the anonymous reviewers. References [1] Statens offentliga utredningar, Vägen till ett energieffektivare Sverige: slutbetänkande. Statens offentliga utredningar, 0375-250X; 2008:110. 2008, Stockholm: Fritzes. [2] Swedish Energy Agency, Energiläget i siffror 2015. 2015 Swedish Energy Agency: Eskilstuna. [3] F. Meijer, L. Itard, M. Sunikka-Blank, Comparing European residential building stocks: performance, renovation and policy opportunities, Build. Res. Inform. 37 (5–6) (2009) 533–551. [4] J. Palm, Energy efficiency in tenant–owners’ residences: the process of going from objective to implementation, Hous. Stud. 28 (1) (2013) 57–73. [5] SCB (Statistics Sweden), Statistisk årsbok för Sverige 2013, Statistiska centralbyrån, Stockholm, 2013. [6] Swedish National Board of Housing Building and Planning and Swedish Energy Agency, Förslag till nationell strategi för energieffektiviserande renovering av byggnader: gemensamt uppdrag Energimyndigheten och Boverket, Energimyndigheten, Eskilstuna, 2013. [7] E. Shove, M. Pantzar, Consumers, producers and practices: understanding the invention and reinvention of Nordic walking, J. Consum. Cult. 5 (1) (2005) 43–64. [8] K. Gram-Hanssen, Understanding change and continuity in residential energy consumption, J. Consum. Cult. 11 (1) (2011) 61–78. [9] K. Gram-Hanssen, Residential heat comfort practices: understanding users, Build. Res. Inform. 38 (2) (2010) 175–186. [10] J. Nystrom, J.-E. Nilsson, H. Lind, Beyond terminology—which contracting features promote innovation, The 2014 CIB W55/65/89/92/96/102/117 & TG72/81/83 International Conference on Construction in a Changing World (2014). [11] L. Thuvander, et al., Unveiling the process of sustainable renovation, Sustainability 4 (6) (2012) 1188–1213. [12] T. Konstantinou, U. Knaack, An approach to integrate energy efficiency upgrade into refurbishment design process, applied in two case-study buildings in Northern European climate, Energy Build. 59 (2013) 301–309. [13] B.K. Sovacool, What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1 (2014) 1–29. [14] M. Moezzi, K.B. Janda, From if only to social potential in schemes to reduce building energy use, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1 (2014) 30–40. [15] S. Guy, E. Shove, A sociology of energy, buildings, and the environment: constructing knowledge, designing practice, in: Routledge Research Global Environmental Change Series, Routledge, London, 2000. [16] T.J. Pinch, W.E. Bijker, The social construction of facts and artifacts: or how the sociology of. The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology, 1987, 17. [17] M. Callon, Society in the making: the study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology, 1987: p. 83–103. [18] J. Palm, The building process of single-family houses and the embeddedness (or disembeddedness) of energy, Energy Policy 62 (2013) 762–767. [19] S. Woolgar, The turn to technology in social studies of science, Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 16 (1) (1991) 20–50. [20] S.L. Star, Power, technology and the phenomenology of conventions: on being allergic to onions, Sociol. Rev. 38 (S1) (1990) 26–56. [21] T.F. Gieryn, What buildings do, Theory Soc. 31 (1) (2002) 35–74.

J. Palm, K. Reindl / Energy Research & Social Science 11 (2016) 247–255 [22] K.B. Janda, Y. Parag, A middle-out approach for improving energy performance in buildings, Build. Res. Inform. 41 (1) (2013) 39–50. [23] P. Thollander, J. Palm, Improving Energy Efficiency in Industrial Energy Systems: an Interdisciplinary Perspective on Barriers, Energy Audits, Energy Management, Policies, and Programs, Springer, London, 2013. [24] T.R. Schatzki, Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social, Cambridge Univ Press, 1996. [25] A. Reckwitz, Toward a theory of social practices a development in culturalist theorizing, Eur. J. Soc. Theory 5 (2) (2002) 243–263. [26] J. Palm, S.J. Darby, The meanings of practices for energy consumption—a comparison of homes and workplaces, Sci. Technol. Stud. 27 (2) (2014) 72–92. [27] A. Karvonen, Towards systemic domestic retrofit: a social practices approach, Build. Res. Inform. 41 (5) (2013) 563–574. [28] L. Vlasova, K. Gram-Hanssen, Incorporating inhabitants everyday practices into domestic retrofits, Build. Res. Inform. 42 (4) (2014) 512–524.

255

[29] A. Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1984. [30] E. Shove, M. Pantzar, M. Watson, The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How it Changes, Sage Publications, 2012. [31] R.K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, 99-0497898-0; 5, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2003. [32] A.M. Pettigrew, The character and significance of strategy process research, Strateg. Manag. J. 13 (S2) (1992) 5–16. [33] S. Kvale, S. Brinkmann, InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing, Sage Publications, Los Angeles, 2009. [34] J.A. Maxwell, Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Applied Social Research Methods Series, 99-0497898-0; 41, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2005.