The recent energy crisis in Switzerland during the winter of 2022-23 has ignited a critical conversation about energy sufficiency and justice, as highlighted in a new study published in ‘Buildings & Cities’. Conducted by Alice Guilbert from the Environmental Governance and Territorial Development Hub at the University of Geneva, this research delves into the intersection of energy consumption practices and social equity, revealing significant insights that could reshape the construction sector’s approach to sustainability.
As energy costs soar and environmental concerns escalate, the focus has predominantly been on efficiency. However, Guilbert’s study emphasizes the urgent need to integrate the concept of sufficiency into energy policies. Through a mixed-methods approach, which included qualitative interviews with 28 households and building management companies in Geneva, alongside a quantitative online survey, the research uncovered a stark reality: while many households are making efforts to reduce energy consumption, these initiatives often overlook the principles of energy justice.
Guilbert states, “Different measures and recommendations did lead to efforts to reduce energy consumption, but they typically lacked an energy justice perspective.” This gap is particularly concerning as it reveals discrepancies between various socio-economic groups. High-income households often have more resources and agency to participate in energy-saving measures, while low-income residents frequently feel marginalized and powerless. The study indicates that many of these individuals experience anxiety and a sense of exclusion from collective sufficiency efforts, which can hinder the overall effectiveness of energy policies.
For the construction sector, these findings signal a pivotal shift. As developers and builders increasingly prioritize sustainability, they must also consider the socio-economic landscape of the communities they serve. The implementation of energy sufficiency measures that account for diverse housing conditions, tenure types, and socio-economic realities can lead to more equitable outcomes. This approach not only enhances social responsibility but also opens up new avenues for innovation in building design and energy systems.
Moreover, the call for more inclusive decision-making processes is crucial. Guilbert argues for the need to represent vulnerable populations in energy policy discussions, stating, “If sufficiency policies and strategies are to be effective, they must account for differing housing, tenure, socio-economic conditions, capabilities and tackle recognition-based injustices.” This inclusive approach can foster a more cohesive community response to energy challenges, ultimately benefiting both residents and the construction industry.
As the sector looks to the future, the integration of energy sufficiency and justice into building practices could drive new standards and regulations, influencing everything from material selection to energy systems. Companies that embrace these principles may find themselves at the forefront of a transformative movement in sustainable construction.
The implications of Guilbert’s research are profound, urging stakeholders in the construction industry to rethink their strategies and prioritize equity in energy consumption. With the pressing need for sustainable solutions, the insights from this study are not just timely; they are essential for shaping a more just and resilient future. For more information, visit the Environmental Governance and Territorial Development Hub at the University of Geneva.