Socio-Technical Dimensions for a Sustainable Housing Transition
6.8 Policy, Regulations, and Governance
traditional tools and include place, water, energy, health and happiness, materials, equity, and beauty.
While most in the housing industry largely adhere to minimum land use and building regulations, there is often a lot of push back against increased sustainability requirements. This rejection of additional require- ments is often under the guise of not wanting to inhibit innovation or drive up the cost of housing [74]. Critiques to proposed policy changes are important and should occur, but much of industry push back is based on dubious evidence and misinformation. This has resulted in slow prog- ress towards lifting minimum performance requirements (or, in the case of the UK’s Code for Sustainable Homes, removing it all together) and other policy changes. What is left is a largely self-regulated industry with few checks and balances. In countries like Australia, there has been a long history of self-regulation which has arguably contributed to significant building quality and performance issues such as the flammable cladding crisis and dwellings not even meeting minimum sustainability require- ments [3].
Sustainable housing has both benefited and been constrained by the development of planning regulations and building code requirements.
While both planning and building codes have evolved over time, early examples of sustainable housing often had to demonstrate how they met and exceeded minimum building requirements. This created additional challenges for early sustainable housing projects as many sustainable housing elements fell outside the typical ways of doing housing. Current performance standards have increased, and many jurisdictions use energy rating tools, but sustainable housing providers are still facing challenges as they keep innovating and pushing the boundary of sustainable hous- ing. This is primarily due to problems of demonstrating improved perfor- mance when the regulatory systems have not kept up with new developments in terms design, materials, construction, and technologies.
Unlike the current housing regime, sustainable housing advocates typi- cally want to see more changes in policies and regulations.
However, there is increasing research, policy, and industry recognition that the provision of more sustainable housing cannot be solely driven by a top-down governance approach and that a range of actors and other approaches (including policy and regulation) will be required as part of the transition. Part of this rationale is from the uncertainty around how to upscale sustainable housing, with the possibility that other actors,
designs, materials, technologies, and construction approaches may be needed to deliver this transition at scale. In response, there have been various experiments and urban living labs developed in recent years [31, 75–77]. Essentially, these are places and spaces where additional protec- tion is provided (often by government) to allow sustainable housing innovations to attempt to establish themselves [76, 78]. This is important for creating and establishing new rules around “doing” housing and urban development and exploring what works, or does not work, without typical pressures or restrictions. Urban living labs are not just about test- ing feasibility; these experiments show the wider industry what can be done and help to establish the supply chains and other changes required to deliver such an outcome. The role of demonstration through exemplar projects has been critical in recent years to help shape and reshape policy and regulations.
Transitions seek to change governing arrangements, markets, culture, meanings, language, infrastructure, technologies, practices, and net- works. The challenge is how do these changes occur? In the housing sec- tor, this is often done by developing policies and establishing new regulations [79], by creating “protected spaces” for innovations to occur [80], or through demonstration or pilot projects [30]. These actions and initiatives are established by governments with the aim to either enhance the top end of the market or bring the bottom of the market up.
Sustainable housing primarily sits within the top end of the market, while many in the existing housing industry are at the bottom end. A major challenge is finding a balance that pushes the existing regime to deliver better outcomes without constraining sustainable housing [1]. A second major challenge is related to governance; while most of the policies and regulations are introduced by governments, the private sector has a lot of influence, particularly in some jurisdictions.
Over recent years, the sustainable housing movement has evolved beyond just advocating for improved policy and regulations. Sustainable housing advocates are now challenging the existing governance and industry regimes on multiple fronts. This includes locating the need for sustainable housing within the climate emergency, energy resiliency chal- lenge, and addressing wider social outcomes like fuel poverty and health and well-being outcomes [81–84]. In this way, sustainable housing has
shifted within the policy, regulation, and governance discourse from a technical challenge to a more holistic focus on social and environmental outcomes. Part of this shift has been calling for greater compliance checks across the industry to ensure that quality and sustainability issues are not only met, but that there is increased well-being and a level of protection for housing consumers [3].
6.8.1 Banning Fossil Fuel-Based Heating
With the goal to cut greenhouse gas and methane emissions by transi- tioning to electric heating, jurisdictions around the world are banning certain kinds of fossil fuel-based heating systems in new home construc- tion. These bans are a response to the Paris Agreement’s 2050 targets and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals which include the move away from polluting fuels. Bans are taking place at the national level across the European Union,9 at the provincial level in Quebec,10 and at the local level in places like Dublin,11 New York City,12 and Vancouver.13 Denmark was an early leader in introducing such bans, with the installation of oil- fired boilers and natural gas heating banned in new buildings in 2013 and all buildings in 2016.14 In Quebec, oil-powered heating for new con- struction projects was banned at the end of 2021 and, in 2024, it will be illegal to replace existing furnaces with fossil fuel powered heating sys- tems. The province is trying to reduce emissions related to heating build- ing by 50% by 2030, and with 60% of household emissions coming from heating, transitioning to electric heating options makes sense. In Vancouver, starting in 2022, equipment for space and water heating in new low-rise residential buildings must be zero emissions, and by 2025, all new and replacement heating and hot water systems must be net zero.
Currently, burning fossil fuels in buildings represents 57% of Vancouver’s
9 https://bit.ly/3B25iDv
10 https://bit.ly/3Vxmp86
11 https://bit.ly/3H1tPfY
12 https://bit.ly/3XQ0vi8
13 https://bit.ly/3gMY4fU
14 https://bit.ly/3GW4aoN
carbon pollution, so drastic policy changes are needed to help the City reduce its emissions.