Figure 2 - uploaded by Helena Titheridge
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This paper concerns how sustainable and low carbon living can be enabled in new housing developments in the UK. It is here recognized that consumption of energy and resources is not just what goes into the building, but also long-term through occupancy and activities. Current approaches, which require housing developers to reduce the carbon emissio...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... is likely to be driven by the mainstream media, a specialist press, and regular exhibitions [6,10]. In many European countries, self-build represents more than 50% of all new houses built [6,10] (see Figure 2). ...
Context 2
... people impact into account when choosing eco and low carbon features Both potential customers (Interviewees 11, 12 14, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 20) and conventional and "green" house builders (Interviewees 31, 32, 33) felt that they would be unlikely to pay for high-cost sustainability features (e.g., photovoltaics) which they do not benefit from directly. Lifestyle solutions such as communal gardens, pedestrian friendly streets with car share schemes, woodstoves, passive solar design, and the opportunity to grow food were popular. ...
Citations
... However, with an ever-increasing awareness of environmental issues among the public, there is an increase in interest in sustainable homes and, given the shortage and affordance of traditional mass housing, there is growth in those seeking alternative eco-homes and communities in the UK and also across other European nations. This is evidenced by the Low Impact Living Affordable Community co-housing eco-build households in Leeds (UK) (Chatterton, 2013;Lilac, 2020), the Ashley Vale Yard cooperative self-build development in Bristol (UK) (Broer and Titheridge, 2010), the Hedgehog self-build housing co-operative in Brighton (UK) (Channel 4, 1999), the Almere assisted self-build schemes in the province of Flevoland (Netherlands) (Bossuyt, 2020), the Vauban district of co-operative sustainable housing in Freiburg (Germany) (Coates, 2013) and the Eco Habitat Groupé housing in Grenoble (France) (Bresson and Denefle, 2015). ...
Earthship buildings are marketed as being an epitome of sustainable alternative housing. Built by reusing or repurposing mostly reclaimed urban waste products, their design includes the utilisation of low-embodied-energy materials, passive solar heating and cooling, photovoltaic power systems, rainwater harvesting and solar hot water heating, along with black- and greywater-treatment systems. This study explores stakeholder opinions of whether Earthship buildings can contribute towards the future of alternative housing in the UK. Opinions were sought through a questionnaire completed by UK members of online social media groups whose shared focus is related to sustainability (n = 50). The results reveal that the public believe that the main benefits are their minimal environmental impact and also their reliance on renewable energy resources, while the main barriers are identifying suitable building plots and obtaining the necessary planning permissions. Notwithstanding that the participants included in this study already have sustainability interests, it is surmised that the public deem that the general principles of Earthships are an acceptable choice of alternative home/living. However, while the uptake of Earthship homes proves increasingly popular in some parts of the world, the utmost concern within the UK setting is the reality of finding somewhere suitable to build an Earthship and acquiring necessary authorisations to construct the building.
... The ESBC model of development is led by a specialised developer, Bright Green Futures, and aims to overcome the challenges usually faced in self-build and community-led schemes whilst offering the positive environmental and social benefits [22]. Prior to this paper, ESBC housing has only been discussed as a potential model of developer-led selfbuild community housing [23]. This model has since been formalised through the work of Bright Green Futures. ...
... To contextualise ESBC housing, the following subsections briefly discuss the literature on speculative housing and forms of grassroots and developer-led self-build, custom- The ESBC model of development is led by a specialised developer, Bright Green Futures, and aims to overcome the challenges usually faced in self-build and communityled schemes whilst offering the positive environmental and social benefits [22]. Prior to this paper, ESBC housing has only been discussed as a potential model of developer-led self-build community housing [23]. This model has since been formalised through the work of Bright Green Futures. ...
... An advantage of group self-build (or cohousing) over individual self-build developments is that it enables housing schemes of a similar scale to speculative housing projects [15]. For example, Lilac, Leeds, a 20-home ecological, affordable cohousing community [19], Springhill Co-housing, Stroud, a 35-home new build cohousing scheme [48], and Ashley Vale, Bristol, a 39-home self-build community [23,49]. In each of these developments, the residents were in some way involved in the planning, design, delivery, and management of their homes and communities. ...
This paper evaluates the potential of eco self-build community (ESBC) housing to act as a socially and environmentally sustainable housing solution that can address the demand for self-build and community housing whilst supporting the UK’s 2050 net-zero-carbon commitment. This model of housing is being piloted through schemes such as the Water Lilies project, an upcoming ESBC scheme providing self-finish houses and custom-build flats. The research aims to gain a broad understanding of the market for ESBC housing by analysing the data from people who registered interest in a plot or home and comparing this with data from a similar survey targeted at the market for conventional self-build and custom-build housing. The key findings are that: (1) the ESBC housing market is largely open to more than one build method, but with a greater preference for purchasing a completed home and self-finish than self-build, compared to the conventional market for self-build and custom-build that is primarily interested in self-build; (2) the ESBC housing market is looking for a variety of home sizes, though predominantly 2 and 3 bedrooms, that could be provided through houses and flats, compared to the conventional market for self-build and custom-build that is mostly seeking larger houses on single plots; (3) the most important housing aspects to the ESBC housing market are ‘green lifestyle’, ‘style and construction quality’, and ‘community spirit’, which differ to the conventional self-build and custom-build market, where they are ‘construction quality’, ‘internal appearance/layout’ and ‘location’; (4) living in a sustainable home is important to the market for conventional self-build and custom-build housing and on average, they would be willing to pay 27% more for a highly sustainable home than the average UK new build. The main drivers are that people want to reduce their environmental impact and reduce their home running costs. A key overall conclusion of the study is that a distinct market exists for ESBC schemes, where the priorities of prospective homeowners differ to those from the more general self-build market. For ESBC schemes, the provision of eco-housing and a sense of community are key priorities, whereas for the more general self-build market, location and the need to tailor the house design to the owner’s unique aesthetic and lifestyle preferences tend to be the most important factors. This paper discusses the implications of these findings and identifies opportunities for scaling up the delivery of ESBC housing.
... Similarly, self-build housing has been a key supply of housing in most developed economies (McKee, 2012). For instance, at least 50% of the homes are self-built in the case of Austria, Belgium, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Germany, France, Ireland, Switzerland, Finland and Canada (Broer & Titheridge, 2010). This form of self-build housing is individual, and it ensures social sustainability through residential satisfaction. ...
Interest in the global unaffordable housing crisis is evident in its burgeoning publications. However, systematic review of the literature is limited concerning data visualization and mapping of the knowledge structure and worldwide trend of publications on housing. This study seeks to fill this knowledge gap through a quantitative method – scientometric analysis. To this end, three networking tools – CiteSpace, VOSviewer and Gephi – were employed in analysing 11,981 bibliographic records retrieved from Scopus for two decades (1998 to 2017). The research findings are informative in identifying trends, linkages and gaps in the literature. Besides, they reveal collaboration pattern among countries, academic institutions and publication outlets of housing studies. These have practical implications for policymakers. The findings are indicative of pivotal areas of relatively low research outputs that can be the focus for further research. They are also important for efficient research and development policies for attaining the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals on housing.
... The importance of research on sustainability and low-carbon living in residential environments is due to the consumption of energy and resources not only that enter into buildings, but also in the long term through occupancy and activities. [6]. The relationship between architecture and sustainable concepts is to create a safe space for human life and support the physical and psychological development of human beings. ...
Occupancy in housing built by the developer experienced changes that are not consistent with the original design, no exception to the pure residential housing program housing subsidies. Generally, the changes made to the residential layout occur after occupancy. Grand Permata Residence II Housing, Deli Serdang Regency is the housing that was built by a developer with a limited area of land and a restricted space of land that will be reviewed with a sustainable architectural approach to get alternative changes to an excellent residential spatial layout. Sustainable Architecture Approach is applied to realize housing that guarantees the well-being of its inhabitants. The method used in this study is a qualitative descriptive method with direct observation in the field and analyzed according to the rules of sustainable living. The results of this study are that changes in residential spatial planning and selection of building materials used are following the concept of sustainable architecture towards sustainable development.
... A few papers within the first-order theme environmental awareness echo such an approach of a soft alternative, arguing that environmental motivations in housing lead to new social behaviours (Pruvost 2013;Bresson and Denèfle 2015;Daly 2017). Studies aim at demonstrating that an environmental approach of housing can no longer be reduced to energy consumption as mainstream development tend to claim but calls for holistic approaches that deal with complex challenges (Chatterton 2013;Delendi 2017;Bernard and Rojey 2017) such as the invention of low carbon lifestyle (Broer and Titheridge 2010;Bresson 2016). However, evidence on the potential of CH to fulfil degrowth economic purposes appears inconclusive so far (Lietaert 2010;Marckmann, Gram-Hanssen, and Christensen 2012). ...
... CH has traditionally taken the shape of hybrid arrangements between civil society and private market housing, such as co-operatives or self-build initiatives (Broer and Titheridge 2010;Sørvoll and Bengtsson 2016). Further, CH movements have always included home ownership too, ranging from freehold land societies in Victorian England (Home 2010), to post-WWII owner communities in Germany (Spellerberg and Woll 2014), and to presentday senior housing co-operatives in Sweden (Nilsson Motevasel 2006). ...
Europe is witnessing a new wave of collective self-organized forms of housing provision. We refer to the wide variety of these forms under the umbrella term “Collaborative Housing”. Alongside growing grassroots activity, the number and breadth of academic publications is rapidly growing. Nevertheless, the field remains thematically fragmented, with literature spread across disciplines. This article aims to establish a basis for greater conceptual clarity by exploring the domain of collaborative housing research over the period of 1990–2017. We carry out a thematic mapping and assessment covering 195 relevant peer-reviewed journal articles in English, German and French. These are inductively synthesized and categorized into five main thematic areas: socio-demographic, collaboration, motivation, effects and context. We conclude that the systematic and inductive approach of our review unravels new perspectives and makes the case for the conceptualization of collaborative housing as an independent research field, providing a basis for further theory development.
... As alternative housing practices, meanwhile, self-build is often framed in explicit resistance to (and even in antagonism with) the domineering mode of new home delivery in the United Kingdom [33]. Furthermore it is regularly portrayed via pre-existing exemplars of holistic self-built communities, often with 'eco'-driven rationales [12,14,34]. Notable UK projects of this type include LILAC in Leeds, where residents delivered a co-housing model funded by a community ownership scheme which puts certain restrictions on future onward sales [35], and Lancaster Co-Housing, where riverside land deemed unsuitable for the delivery model of volume house builders, was transformed into a collective housing project over a long timescale [12]. ...
The United Kingdom has been a slow adopter of energy efficiency measures in domestic buildings. Ambitions to ensure that new homes are built to ‘zero carbon’ standards have been expressed by policy makers but subsequent targets have been abandoned. In the UK housing sector, the high costs of land, the stagnating delivery of affordable new-built homes, and market dominance by a handful of high-volume housebuilders limit progress towards lower carbon newbuild homes. Against this backdrop, the paper seeks to examine the emergence of a supposedly ‘alternative’ sub-sector. Inspired by pioneering initiatives in countries like Germany and the Netherlands, a handful of self-build projects have emerged in the UK. Through the analysis of two in depth case studies, Bath street in Edinburgh and Graven Hill in Oxfordshire, we find that self-build projects can not only deliver more diverse and bespoke homes, but also more energy efficiency. Our analysis therefore unpicks their success stories vis-à-vis the inefficiencies of speculative house building where the adoption of national policies on zero carbon homes has been resisted. Framing the emergence of these self-build projects in the UK as social innovation, we identify the physical, conceptual and affective spaces for system change that are opened up by our case studies. We subsequently reflect on the key roles played by intermediaries, including local authorities, in the potential facilitation and mainstreaming of self-build approaches to delivering more energy efficient homes.
... Consideration of the broader nature and scale of developments is therefore important. Because the act of building in a group engenders a sense of community (Broer and Titheridge, 2010;Falk and Carley, 2012), it has been suggested that group self-build is more likely to create sustainable communities than developments procured by speculative housing developers (Boonstra and Boelens, 2011;Brown et al., 2013;Wallace et al., 2013). Benson and Hamiduddin (2017) highlight the social significance of self-build, which they characterise as a social process, even more so at group scale. ...
... Panellists suggested self-build homes are more likely to create sustainable communities because self-builders are typically interested in sustainable lifestyle choices, thus going beyond the impact of the home as a technical system and considering the holistic impact of the way (Mullins, 2018;Parvin et al., 2011). It has been suggested that the benefits of community interaction tend to go beyond the group self-build development and spread to the wider neighbourhood community (Broer and Titheridge, 2010;Brown et al., 2013). ...
In England, there is a longstanding and increasing undersupply of both affordable and open-market housing. Around three quarters of all new homes in the UK are currently built speculatively by the developer-led private housing sector. However, demand for self-build housing is growing. Concurrently, there is also a need to address the sustainability of homes, which represent 29% of final energy consumption in the UK. There is a clear imperative to develop business models within the construction sector in which both social and environmental sustainability are inherent. The aim of this paper is to explore professional and expert opinions on the suitability of group self-build housing as a development model for zero carbon homes. A Policy Delphi study was conducted both at a national level in England and at a regional level in South West England. In this iterative, non-contact research method, online questionnaires were used to gather data from the same panellists over three rounds. Panellists were drawn from seven groups: public sector, specialist groups/experts, housing associations, housing developers, designers, contractors, and financial institutions. The findings highlight that the panellists believe that group self-build is well suited as a development model for the delivery of zero carbon homes and sustainable communities. The advantages identified include: energy efficiency, affordability, quality, innovation, and sustainable communities.
... It is asserted that motivations to group self-build 'tend to be influenced by micro factors around personal and community values, rather than macro factors related to the broader economy and social trends' (Wallace et al. 2013a: 42), community is a primary motivation within group self-build projects (Benson 2014). Previous research found that group self-build offered the benefit of building a community through the process of building homes (Benson 2014;Broer and Titheridge 2010;Brown et al. 2013;Wallace et al. 2013a). Hamiduddin and Gallent (2016) attribute this to individuals with shared purpose engaging in building a place for that community to continue to develop. ...
... Indeed, it is also suggested that this pathway of development leads to strong social relationships (Hamiduddin and Daseking 2014). Group self-building has been found to offer the benefit of being a good place to bring up children (Broer and Titheridge 2010), and to provide an affordable housing solution for those 'who find themselves marginal to the housing market' (Benson 2014: 21). Benefits which facilitate further the affordability of group self-build housing include sharing the costs of land, construction and professional fees; pooling of knowledge and skills, and potential sweat equity trading; reduced individual risk through aggregation; and savings on construction overheads by operating as a single client (Parvin et al. 2011). ...
... A year seeing each other every week, you know, 20 hours a week or whatever and all trying to get to the same goal and all trying to deal with the same problems... I mean it does build Within the literature it has further been suggested that the benefit of community interaction extends beyond the group self-build development to the wider neighbourhood community(Broer and Titheridge 2010;Brown et al. 2013). This was delightfully exemplified in a letter published in The Times about one of the schemes covered by the project. ...
The housing crisis in the UK, as Barker (2004) identifies, has become shorthand for a chronic lack of suitable and affordable housing—in both the home ownership and rental sectors—and the undersupply and diminishment of social housing stock (Barker 2004; Jefferys et al. 2014). What has also become clear, is that the mainstream housebuilding sector—speculative housing development—has not risen to the task of ameliorating this crisis. Consequently, there is increasing marginalisation within the housing and land economy, with many people finding that their housing needs cannot be met by the sector. This chapter focuses on the experiences and perceptions of those who have been involved in group self-build projects, where households are involved in the design and/or production of homes, either by arranging for their construction or building homes themselves within a group of three or more households (see also Duncan and Rowe 1993). Against the background of the United Kingdom’s housing crisis, this focus is particularly timely, as such group self-build projects are widely promoted as offering a route into housing that runs counter to these conditions.
... In other words, Green behavior still need to be established, especially in urban communities [5]. Research on the importance of sustainability and low carbon living done in new housing mostly, because the consumption of energy and resources is not just what goes into the building, but also long-term through occupancy and activities [6]. Based on these developments, it is necessary to do the research for the success of Green movement implementation, especially in urban communities in Indonesia. ...
... Sources and Material cycle (5). Air Quality and Comfort (6). Management Built Environment. ...
This present time, Indonesia just began applying the concept of Green Architecture. The actions require community participation as residents and the users of the building. The built environment is designed around the idea of Green Architecture but inhabited and managed improperly; the goal of sustainable built environment is not achieved. The aspect of behaviour is the key factor in the implementation of Green Architecture's concept. This research is a descriptive exploratory which is to identify the problems to the implementation of Green Architecture's concept in planned housing. Then the study will explore the components causes of the problems used as a problem solver. The study conducted on the living behaviour in Citraland Bagya City's resident. The estate is designed and built with the concept of Green Architecture in Medan city. The research was carried out by the four aspects of housing are the physical, social and cultural, policy, and management issue. These three components will indirectly relate to the economic issues that are the efficiency and effectiveness of living behaviour. The results showed that the increasing of green behavior is still small and the occupant requires motivation and socialization of living green.
... The Action Plan (2011) identifies the securing of land as a major hurdle for self-build and suggests that the strategic policies of planning authorities need to change to support self-build and the release of public land needs to include targeted release to self-build projects. Broer and Titheridge (2010) identify securing land as difficult for community self-build projects, as it is hard for them to compete with developers in terms of financial resources, and/or the time available to assemble finances and enter bids for land. Parvin et al. (2011) and Griffiths (2011) agree that self-builders should be assisted by making available public land and allocating proportions of larger sites to self-build plots. ...
