5 Programme Participation Social Drivers
5.1 Introduction
This section provides an overview of past and current approaches to incentivising change overseas (section 5.2) and in New Zealand (section 5.3). Based on these experiences, this section draws out and discusses the drivers that influence householders' decisions to participate in programmes that encourage change to cleaner heating and/or energy efficiency (sections 5.4 to 5.9).
5.2 Overseas approaches and experiences
United Kingdom
The United Kingdom (UK) first grappled with the issue of air pollution and the need for clean-heating appliances a long time ago. A pivotal event was London's infamous 1952 Great Smog, a mid-winter episode caused by an inversion layer, resulting in the deaths of over 4000 people. As a result of this event, in 1956 the Clean Air Act was passed, making it an offence to emit smoke from chimneys and laying down a set of rules about the types of fuel and appliances permitted, including the banning of coal burning from large areas of London. Also, assistance was made available through a system of grants to enable replacement or alteration of unsuitable fire grates. This set in place what is now a commonly established incentive regime of 'sticks and carrots'. Later the clean air objectives were aided significantly by the widespread availability of North Sea gas, which was piped to major urban conurbations in the UK, and provided clean-burning and cost-effective energy for domestic purposes.
During the past two decades the UK has taken significant steps towards improving energy efficiency in its domestic market. This has been largely driven by its need to meet four energy goals, as outlined in the UK Government's Energy White Paper: [See: www.dti.gov.uk/energy/whitepaper/]
- to cut carbon dioxide emissions
- to maintain the reliability of energy supplies
- to promote competitive markets
- to ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated.
Energy efficiency is seen as the best way to achieve all four of these goals. [Ibid.]
Although the outcomes being sought in the UK differ from those in New Zealand (here there is also a need to reduce the use of air-polluting home-heating appliances), the UK's experience still provides invaluable insights into incentivising change in the domestic energy efficiency market. Many of the insights and lessons learnt will also be applicable to incentivising change in the home heating market.
The UK's efforts to encourage householders to become more energy efficient have involved many sectors, including local, regional and central government, [For example, the UK government has set up a Sustainable Energy Policy Network to implement the programmes outlined in the Energy White Paper. This is a network of policy units across government departments, the devolved administrations, regulators and key delivery organisations.] the private energy sector, non-profit organisations, and the community. Non-profit organisations have led the way when it comes to encouraging change. Two examples are the Centre for Sustainable Energy, which was established in 1979, and whose mission is to "advance sustainable energy policy and practice, engaging people and communities in meeting real needs for both environmentally sound and affordable energy services;" [See: www.cse.org.uk/] and National Energy Action, a national charity focused on eliminating fuel poverty. [See: www.nea.org.uk/] Although the UK government has developed and supported various initiatives since the early 1990s, significant involvement by the government has only come about in the past five years. A series of strategies, reviews, papers and action plans during this period has signalled a new level of support and direction from the government. [Department of Trade and Industry, 2001; Performance and Innovation Unit, 2002; Department of Trade and Industry, 2003; DEFRA, 2004a.]
The direction supported by the UK government and other sectors is one that relies on a variety of complementary measures and initiatives to achieve change, including financial grants and incentives, regulation, awareness-raising and education, and market transformation. Note also that the UK has fuel subsidies for particular groups of energy consumers.
Although energy efficiency is required in all households, some measures and initiatives are specifically targeted at certain 'groups of households' who are unlikely to be able to make changes unassisted. Following are some specific examples of UK initiatives.
Warm Front
Established in 2000 [This follows on from the Home Energy Efficiency Scheme which was established in 1991.] by the UK government, Warm Front aims to tackle fuel poverty [Although there are several more complex definitions of 'fuel poverty', simply put 'fuel poverty' occurs when a household cannot afford to keep warm (www.defra.gov.uk/environment/energy/fuelpov/ index.htm).] by providing energy efficiency advice and financial grants to vulnerable ['Vulnerable households' include those on a low income (in receipt of certain government benefits), the elderly, the sick or disabled, and families with young children (DEFRA, 2004b).] private sector households to install energy efficiency measures. Grants of up to £1,500 are available to families and the disabled in receipt of certain government benefits, and up to £2,500 to householders who are over 60 years old and in receipt of certain government benefits. A recent evaluation of the Warm Front programme by the National Audit Office (2003) acknowledged the successes of the programme to date, but also noted several problems and issues for consideration. These included the lack of precision in identifying the fuel poor when existing documentation is relied on and assumptions are made about 'vulnerable households' also being the fuel poor, the lack of options under the scheme for 'hard to heat' homes, ['Hard to heat' homes include homes that are not on the gas network, homes that have solid walls that cannot be filled with insulation, and homes that require more than the maximum grant or assistance that falls outside the scheme rules.] and the special challenges faced when dealing with the private rental sector.
Energy Efficiency Commitment [Department of Trade and Industry, 2003; DEFRA, 2004c.]
Implemented in 2002 [This follows on from the Energy Efficiency Standards of Performance, which have operated since 1994.] by the UK government and overseen by the gas and electricity regulator Ofgem, the Energy Efficiency Commitment requires energy suppliers to encourage and assist customers to take up energy efficiency opportunities. A particular focus on pensioners and low-income consumers is required.
Local Government Energy Efficiency Activity
Under the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995, all local authorities with housing responsibilities are required to identify practical and cost-effective measures to significantly improve the energy efficiency of all residential accommodation in their area, implement these measures, and report on progress made. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is reviewing this activity to see if local authorities could meet these requirements in a more effective, coherent and strategic manner.
Energy Matters [www.cse.org.uk/cgi-bin/projectprint.cgi?1003; www.cse.org.uk/cgi-bin/projectprint.cgi?1029/]
Energy Matters is an educational programme run by the Centre for Sustainable Energy (CSE). Its aim is to raise awareness of the importance of energy conservation and reduce energy use in the home by educating children at school. CSE works with local authorities to find and train a local person to act as their 'energy educator'. Schools are then recruited and teachers introduced to the programme with a workshop. Teachers are given resources and the schools run the programme. The programme includes pupils carrying out energy surveys and analysing data to take home recommendations for energy efficiency improvements. An evaluation of Energy Matters was conducted over a three-month period and involved interviews with pupils, parents/carers and school staff. The evaluation showed that not only had 75% of the parents/carers taken action to reduce their energy consumption, but that the schools themselves had also increased their use of energy efficiency measures.
Market Transformation Programme
Established in 1997, the UK's Market Transformation Programme aims to "encourage products, systems and services which do less harm to the environment, using less energy, water and other resources over their lifetime". [www.defra.gov.uk/environment/consumerprod/mtp/]
It should be noted that these examples represent only a very small selection of initiatives and programmes used in the UK. For example, the Centre for Sustainable Energy notes that at any one time it has 50 to 60 programmes or projects under way.
North America
The North American (US) experience is more diverse and complex than the UK's, due to the size of the domestic market and the nature of the government system. Although the US does not appear to be addressing energy efficiency in the domestic market to the same extent or in the same manner as the UK, there is some involvement by all sectors, including federal and state government, the private energy sector, non-profit organisations and the community.
The federal government's commitment is evident in its National Energy Policy (Department of Energy, 2001), which "promotes the development and deployment of energy systems and practices that will provide current and future generations with clean, efficient, affordable, and reliable energy". In particular, it stresses the importance of product pricing, energy prices, the construction of energy-efficient buildings, energy efficiency products, and information on energy use. This emphasis on the energy efficiency market, or 'market transformation', is another aspect of the US experience that distinguishes it from the UK experience.
Many market initiatives are linked to Home Energy Rating Schemes (HERS) developed within each state. [Forty-seven were in operation in 2003.] These initiatives create a symbiotic relationship between HERS and energy mortgages. HERS provides leverage to get money for energy efficiency and efficient heating systems, while at the same time creating market awareness of the benefits of energy efficiency and best heating systems. A national group, RESNET, is the umbrella organisation which seeks to co-ordinate all aspects of HERS, energy mortgages, standards, and training and accreditation for providers of residential energy services. The overall objective of the organisation is to educate, inform and incentivise the market. [See: www.natresnet.org/]
The work of the Consortium for Energy Efficiency, a non-profit organisation, is another example of efforts focused on market transformation. The Consortium states that its objectives are to develop national initiatives to promote the manufacture and purchase of energy-efficient products and services, and induce lasting structural and behavioural changes in the market place, resulting in the increased adoption of energy efficiency technologies. [www.cee1.org/cee/mt-primer.php3/]
Despite this emphasis on market transformation, the US does recognise the need for other measures and initiatives to address change in the domestic energy efficiency market. The best example is the Weatherization Assistance Program, which was established in 1976. [www.eere.energy.gov/weatherization/] This programme "enables low-income families to permanently reduce their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient". In doing so, it also reduces the nation's energy dependency, improves the environment, and stimulates economic development in low-income communities. The programme offers free installation of appropriate energy efficiency measures to qualifying homes, including measures for the building, heating and cooling systems, electrical systems, and electricity consuming appliances. Funding (an average upgrade costs $2,672) and technical guidance is provided by the federal government, while states run the programmes (including setting eligibility and selecting service providers). Approximately 100,000 households are assisted per year, each of which saves approximately $200 to $250 on their annual energy bills.
The Weatherization Program has recently been extended with the implementation of the Weatherization Plus Program, [www.eere.energy.gov/weatherization/plus_opportunities.html/] which addresses the funding limitations of the Weatherization Assistance Program by combining the resources of different providers to enable 'whole-house weatherization'.
Australia
The Australian experience appears to be more limited than that of the UK and the US. Any discussion or initiatives that are taking place tend to originate from the southern states (New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania), where home heating and air quality are more of an issue. These discussions and initiatives include changes to building codes, small-scale incentive programmes, and Home Energy Rating Schemes. [See, for instance, details on the 5 Star requirement for new homes constructed in Victoria: www.sea.vic.gov.au/buildings/5starhousing/index.asp/] The focus at the federal level is through the National Framework for Energy Efficiency, with priority areas being the development of minimum energy efficiency standards for new houses, and the mandatory disclosure of house energy performance. [See: www.nfee.gov.au/implementation_committees/buildings/areas_focus.asp/]
Key observations from the overseas experience
Overseas experience in incentivising change offers invaluable guidance for the development of ways to encourage change in home heating and energy efficiency in New Zealand. Key observations that can be made from overseas experience include the need for:
- a clear direction and strong commitment from central government
- a long term commitment – change will not happen overnight
- adequate funding
- involvement from all sectors - including central, regional and local government, the private energy sector, non-profit organisations, and the community
- a variety of complementary measures and initiatives - including financial grants and incentives, awareness raising and education, regulation and market transformation.
In addition:
- although all households need to be targeted, some households will need additional targeted assistance (often financial) to make changes - including low-income households, householders in private rental accommodation, and the elderly
- monitoring and evaluation of programmes are essential to ensure objectives are being met.
5.3 New Zealand experience
Christchurch clean air initiatives
Over the past two decades four different types of incentive programme have been implemented to encourage Christchurch householders to move away from solid-fuel heating.
- Clean Air loans - these were introduced in the early 1980s and comprised interest-free loans for a period of two years to enable open fires to be replaced by an electric heating appliance. Most of the electric appliances used were night-store heaters. The programme ran for a number of years, and was used by about 2500 householders. The programme was administered by Southpower, the then local electricity supplier.
- Helping Hand for Heating - this programme was introduced by the Christchurch City Council in 1998 to complement the regulatory approach being pursued by Environment Canterbury (ECan) at that time. It provided a $500 grant towards the installed costs of a solid-fuel, [On condition that it meet the ECan-approved emission rate for solid-fuel burners, which was 1.5 g/kg wood.] LPG, diesel burner or heat pump, with a lesser amount for other forms of on-demand electric heating. The scheme also provided an incentive for under-floor and ceiling insulation, although the insulation was optional and not a condition for accessing the heating appliance grant. The scheme provided grants to over 6000 households until it finished in 2001. Most households uplifted just the heating grant alone, with relatively low numbers also taking advantage of the insulation incentive.
- Warmer Homes programme - this programme was also run by the Christchurch City Council. It ran over the period 2001/02 and was developed largely in response to concern that the Helping Hand programme did not provide sufficient incentive for low-income households. In total 525 households were assisted to install insulation and a budget form of heating, with the average amount of the grant being around $1000.
- Clean Heat - ECan launched the $38 million, 10-year Clean Heat programme in 2003. It currently provides three different incentive streams (low-income, landlords and general), ranging from a 100% subsidy for insulation and a fixed heating system for the low-income stream, to lower levels of subsidy for the other streams. The average subsidy for the low-income stream over the first year was about $2700. To date ECan has met almost all of the costs through local rates.
One feature that stands out with this progression of schemes is that over time the amount of incentive has increased substantially. Some have regarded this as the incentive schemes becoming increasingly inefficient, but there is a 'natural' progression at work here, with earlier schemes capturing the discretionary 'low-hanging fruit' for relatively low costs. However, with ECan seeking full participation from all households with non-complying solid-fuel burners to meet proposed air quality rules, there has been an inevitable realisation that higher forms of incentive are needed to bring about desirable change.
The issue of desirable change is important here. ECan has not only sought to clean up the air, but has chosen to do this in ways that:
- improve the efficiency of energy use in the home (by making insulation upgrades a compulsory part of the programme)
- provide a permanent, efficient form of heating [Approved appliances include heat pumps, pellet burners, flued gas heaters.] in the home
- address social issues of cold homes and affordability.
This adds a considerable extra cost to the programme (compared with a regulatory/low incentive approach) and raises issues of where the funding should logically be sourced. There are other issues that ECan is currently addressing, including the relatively low uptake from the lower incentive streams of the programme.
Despite these concerns, the Clean Heat programme is probably the nearest thing to a desired Warm Homes programme operating in New Zealand at present.
Energy efficiency initiatives: EECA residential grants
The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) has provided various support measures for residential energy efficiency since 1995. The initial programme was the Energy Saver Fund (ESF), which allocated grants on a competitive basis to those who could demonstrate the ability to provide cost-effective energy efficiency services and products. Funding was allocated yearly, although multi-year contracts were possible. A range of organisations accessed the ESF, including central and local authorities, energy supply companies, private energy efficiency businesses, non-government organisations and charitable trusts, and institutional landlords.
Over the years a number of changes were made to the ESF, including funding rules and eligibility criteria. For a period (1999–2001) the amount of grant money available decreased, and the scheme operated on a year-to-year basis. In 2001 the ESF was replaced and EECA now provide residential support through the EnergyWise Home Grants programme. The programme targets those who are least likely to be able to retrofit their homes - low-income home owners and landlords with rental properties at average or below rents. Currently the programme supports a range of projects throughout the country operated by commercial energy efficiency businesses or local non-profit community organisations. In 2004 the EECA's total expenditure on buildings initiatives was $1.4 million, most of which was used in Home Grants to provide assistance with insulation retrofits into 3400 homes.
Energy efficiency initiatives: a community network approach
The first community energy efficiency initiative was undertaken in Christchurch in 1993, driven by a combination of rising electricity costs, high numbers of under-heated and hard-to-heat houses, and clean air issues. This led to the establishment of Community Energy Action in 1994, and since then an estimated 20 community-based retrofit enterprises have come into existence, literally from Kaitaia to Bluff, with many in poorer towns. A number of these projects were created by or with iwi and runanga. In the mid-1990s the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) established subsidies for basic energy efficiency retrofits, which helped support these enterprises, as did support and subsidies from other government agencies such as Work and Income (Ministry of Social Policy) and the Community Employment Group for wage subsidies, and Te Puni Kokiri.
Objectives in common (although the emphasis has varied) have been to realise within a community the health, employment, job creation and economic benefits of energy efficiency (ie, social equity). The target group has been lower-income households, particularly those at risk from chronic illness caused by cold, damp houses. Environmental issues have been a lesser driver in most cases.
Community organisations end up undertaking much the same type of work as commercial insulation companies (eg, retrofitting insulation into ceilings and under floors). This can create both competitive and complementary elements. While the commercial companies are often better placed to undertake large contracts that are geographically dispersed and have some established funding providers, community organisations have often been at the forefront of initiating warm home/energy efficiency activities in a community, and have strong networks with other community groups and with a wide range of government agencies. The community group approach is especially successful at identifying need and being able to marshal resources to assist (eg, the Community Energy Action's Warm Babies project in Christchurch, which is sponsored by Meridian Energy and networks with a range of community groups, including Plunket and First Start).
Funding support, especially during the start-up years, has been particularly vital. So has developing a large enough geographical base to allow the organisation to build to a critical mass. One of the issues around the current institutional arrangements for funding is that EECA funding is conditional on there being a local funding share. Some community groups have closed down when they failed to secure the local ongoing funding required to meet the EECA's conditions.
To date an estimated 25,000 houses - mostly occupied by those on low incomes – have been fully or partially retrofitted through community-based organisations.
Energy efficiency initiatives: Housing New Zealand Corporation retrofit programme
Housing New Zealand Corporation (HNZC) rents properties to low-income New Zealanders. In 2001 HNZC began a 10–12-year project to improve the living environment of all HNZC homes built before 1977. The programme involves checking all properties built before 1977 to see if the following energy efficiency features can be improved, or installed if they are not already in place:
- ceiling insulation
- hot-water cylinder wrap
- insulating hot-water pipes in the cylinder cupboard
- under-floor insulation
- adjusting the hot-water cylinder thermostat.
The programme also involves improving the heating and ventilation of the houses to promote a healthy living environment. This includes fixing draughty windows, and addressing condensation and dampness under houses, and can include open fire replacements if needed to comply with local clean air regulations. In Christchurch, for example, in its one- and two-bedroom houses, HNZC has aimed to replace open fires with an electric heating appliance, while in its three-plus bedroom houses it has aimed to replace them with an enclosed wood burner. Some heat pumps have also been installed. In 1997 in Christchurch, 2688 houses contained open fires. As at July 2001, 1155 of these still had open fires (762 of which were in one- and two-bedroom houses, 393 in three-plus bedroom houses), 1035 had enclosed wood burners, 495 used electric heating, and three used gas (Environment Canterbury, 2001, pp.54-55).
In many areas, community-based organisations (CBOs) are contracted to provide energy efficiency retrofits. The benefits of the programme include:
- potentially lower power and medical bills
- a warmer, healthier home in which to live
- provision of local employment opportunities through CBOs, which often target unemployed persons and provide skill-building courses as part of the retrofit delivery programme.
In the 2002/03 financial year, 2619 properties were retrofitted with energy-efficient features. Other properties also benefited from insulation installation through the Healthy Housing, Rural Housing and Community Renewal programmes.
Key observations from the New Zealand experience
- Canterbury clean air has had a very long gestation, a lot of learning by doing, some false moves, issues of inter-agency conflict, etc, but there are many elements of the current programme that are working well. Canterbury has provided an invaluable template for future programmes to build on.
- The experience with incentivising warm homes has been very limited, and is focused almost entirely on grants or subsidies for specific measures. New Zealand's experience has some significant gaps (eg, market-based drivers such as Home Energy Ratings Scheme, loans/financing mechanisms), and the information/learning/motivational environment for change in general has been underdone in New Zealand.
- Programmes need incentives and rules. Incentives without rules reinforce procrastination and inertia, send mixed messages about the importance of the changes being promoted, and probably lead to higher levels of incentive having to be offered. Rules without incentives will force heating choices indiscriminately across all market segments, which will likely result in an uneven and inequitable distribution of private benefits and costs, lead to low capital cost heating choices (such as unflued gas heaters) that may have other detrimental side-effects, and may result in a significant degree of community resistance and non-compliance.
- Programmes to date (both clean air and energy efficiency and incentives/rules) have provided significant stimulus to commercial players, but more could probably be done to harness the motivation that could flow from a properly engaged commercial sector.
- Many initiatives are output rather than outcome focused; that is, focused on numbers of burners changed, floors insulated, etc, but not on whether warm and sustainable environments have been created.
- Community energy efficiency initiatives are generally strapped for cash and output focused, but the community approach has proven that it can reach people and identify need in ways that larger bureaucracies can find difficult to do – reaching the target audience is often harder than one might think. A number of barriers may be overcome through utilising a community network approach.
- Funding arrangements throughout the country are inconsistent and fragmented. They range from virtually full funding by local ratepayers of both energy efficiency and clean heating appliances for Environment Canterbury's full assistance stream under Clean Heat, [Some funding for energy efficiency has been made available by EECA from 2004/05.] through to partial funding from the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (ECCA) for local energy efficiency programmes. [EECA state a desire for 3:1 (local:EECA) funding, although typically the EECA contribution is higher than 25%.] The requirement for a high local share of funding for the EECA social retrofit programmes has led to disparate funding arrangements, with some local communities engaged and others not.
- The Community Services Card (CSC) is used for eligibility into most assistance programmes, but many people who need warm home miss out on incentives because they don't qualify under the CSC criteria.
5.4 Summary of programme participation drivers
This section draws together social drivers that relate specifically to householder participation in publicly funded programmes such as the Environment Canterbury clean air initiatives, Nelson City Council clean air initiatives, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority schemes, and various overseas programmes. Drivers listed in the previous two sections (sections 3 and 4) will not be repeated here, even though some of them still apply.
Table 5.1: Drivers specific to programme participation
View drivers specific to programme participation (large table).
5.5 Influences within the individual's immediate, day-to-day circumstances
Encouraging drivers
(1) Being able to meet eligibility criteria
Being able to meet eligibility criteria is clearly an important driver determining programme participation. It is therefore important that programme designers be careful to set eligibility criteria that enable their target group of householders to participate.
(2) Assistance sufficient to make change possible
Some households will be unable to afford the financial costs associated with a change to cleaner heating, improved energy efficiency and warmer homes. [KI Interviews: Pamela Storey, HEET; Ken Lawn, ECan.] If participation by these households is desired, then programmes need to ensure that there is assistance available, and that the assistance is sufficient to make change possible. The level of assistance required is likely to vary, with some households requiring a 100% grant to enable change.
This driver has been recognised by programme designers in New Zealand and overseas, where there are programmes that provide 100% grants to households ('low-income') that cannot afford change. Some examples include, Environment Canterbury's (ECan) clean air initiatives, Nelson City Council's clean air initiatives, the UK's Warm Front programme (DEFRA, 2004a), and the US's Weatherization Assistance Programme. [See www.energy.gov/]
(3) Financial incentive sufficient to 'tip' the decision
Some households can afford the financial costs associated with a change to cleaner heating, improved energy efficiency and warmer homes, but for various reasons decide not to make this change. Providing a financial incentive may be a way to 'tip' the decision in favour of investing in change. Economic policy theorists may argue that regulation is more efficient and fairer on the rest of the community, and therefore from an economic theory perspective should be preferred. However, other forms of behavioural rationalism support the notion that 'tipping points' are a useful and pragmatic policy concept.
Some programmes overseas and in New Zealand have adopted this approach. Examples include ECan's clean air initiatives, Nelson City Council's clean air initiatives, the Centre for Sustainable Energy's Somerset Warm and Well programme, [See www.cse.org.uk/cgi-bin/projectprint.cgi?1025/] and the Centre for Sustainable Energy's Warmer Lets programme. [See www.cse.org.uk/cgi-bin/projectprint.cgi?1002/]
The difficulty with this approach lies in determining the level of financial incentive needed to 'tip' the decision. The number of households attracted to participate in the ECan and Nelson City Council clean air programmes through a financial incentive has not been as high as programme designers would have liked. The level of incentive offered has been suggested as one reason for this, but we would like to see more detailed consumer marketing analysis demonstrating whether other forms of assistance could be more effective in achieving programme objectives.
Inhibiting drivers
(4) Inflexible eligibility criteria as the only gateway to participation
Inflexible eligibility criteria will inhibit participation in programmes that help people change to cleaner heating, improved energy efficiency and warmer homes. Such criteria are usually the result of efforts by programme designers and managers to develop practical, simple, cost-effective ways to screen participants. For example, one of the most simple and cost-effective ways to identify a 'low-income' household (ie, a household that cannot afford to make change) is to set eligibility criteria based on possession of a Community Services Card, or receipt of an income-related benefit. Unfortunately, there will be households who do not meet this criterion but who are still in need of assistance. The most effective (but potentially expensive) way to address this issue is to assess individual circumstances (on a case-by-case basis), and/or use referrals from agencies that work in the community.
5.6 Knowledge, understanding and skills to make decisions to change
Encouraging drivers
(1) Awareness of the programme
The first step to participating in a programme is being aware of its existence. Raising awareness is therefore a critical component of a programme's operation.
(2) A programme that is simple to understand
A programme that is simple to understand is more likely to attract and retain householder participation. For example, it should be simple for householders to understand what the programme offers, the programme objectives, the programme benefits, and eligibility criteria. How this information is presented, including the language used, will therefore be important.
(3) The role of in-home assessments to customise solutions
In-home assessments that customise solutions are an important factor influencing the success of programme objectives such as achieving warmer homes. The installation of certain pre-determined measures will not ensure warmer homes because households have different needs, determined by the type of house, the pre-existing heating and energy efficiency situation, and householder behaviours.
In-home assessments can also play a role in encouraging participation in programmes, because they provide an opportunity to clearly explain the options and benefits of participation for individual households. Boardman and Darby (2000) distinguish between 'advice' and 'information', by pointing out that 'advice' is specific to individuals and their circumstances, while 'information' is not specific to the person who receives it but is intended for general use. The authors argue that the best way to provide 'advice' is through home visits, because this enables a dialogue between the householder and the adviser, which is crucial to building knowledge and the ability to act to improve energy efficiency.
There are many examples of past and current programmes that have used or are using in-home assessments, including Environment Canterbury's clean air programme and various Community Energy Action programmes.
(4) Rising expectations of the quality of energy services, comfort and warmth
Rising expectations of the quality of energy services, comfort and warmth may encourage householders to participate in programmes.
Inhibiting drivers
(5) Eligibility requirements that are complicated and onerous
Eligibility requirements that are complicated and onerous are likely to inhibit participation in programmes that assist households to change to cleaner heating, improved energy efficiency and warmer homes (see sections 5.5(4) and 5.6(2)).
(6) Insufficient levels of social marketing to reach enough households
There is some concern that there are insufficient levels of social marketing to reach enough households, and that as a result the 2013 National Environmental Standard targets will not be met. [KI Interview: Stephen Ward and Robert Tromop, EECA.]
5.7 Influences from the public policy environment
Encouraging drivers
(1) Government leadership
Government leadership is likely to encourage household participation in programmes by increasing the availability of appropriate programmes, and by signalling that change is necessary and beneficial. The UK government has shown significant leadership in recent years by initiating debate, developing strategies and action plans, funding initiatives, implementing plans and initiatives, and facilitating involvement across all sectors.
(2) Co-ordination of policy and programme effort across government
Co-ordination of policy and programme effort across government is likely to increase the chances that programmes and initiatives that encourage household participation are developed. Some of the benefits of co-ordination include the ability to ensure that policies and programmes are consistent and resources are pooled.
The UK government recognised the need for co-ordination when it established the Sustainable Energy Policy Network, a network of units across government departments, devolved administrations, regulators and key delivery organisations which work together to achieve a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, and adequately and affordably heated homes through energy efficiency. [See: www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sepn/index.shtml/]
(3) Sustaining public programme efforts and promotions over the long term
A long term commitment is needed to raise awareness, change attitudes, achieve conversion/installation targets, and meet programme objectives.
(4) The role of incentives to accelerate change
Incentives can play a role in accelerating change to cleaner heating, improved energy efficiency and warmer homes by encouraging households who can afford to change to make changes before they might otherwise have planned to.
(5) The cross-compliance requirement to insulate homes
From a programme perspective, Environment Canterbury (ECan) reported that the cross-compliance requirements (ie, having to install insulation to a certain standard to become eligible for the cleaner heating subsidy) appeared to be a disincentive for households to participate in its Partial Assistance scheme. Is such cross-compliance necessary? It reduces uptake and also reduces the effective subsidy (by imposing an insulation cost). However, one insulation installer expressed the view that this cross-compliance feature was successful in encouraging some households to invest in insulation.
These apparently conflicting viewpoints may be explained by reference to differing segments of the market: the disincentive applied to households just above the Community Service Card threshold but with little discretionary expenditure and difficulties addressing the capital cost hurdle, while the incentive applied to households with sufficient discretionary expenditure for the capital cost not to be a hurdle, but that were nevertheless interested in receiving the clean heat subsidy as an inducement to change. A second explanation is that the viewpoints do not conflict at all. On the one hand fewer people get involved in the ECan programme than otherwise would, while on the other hand more people install insulation than otherwise would.
(6) Ineffectual deadlines
Deadlines can affect participation by householders in programmes. While having a fixed point in time by which action must be taken can serve as a motivating factor, having deadlines that are too distant can create a perception of a lack of urgency and therefore delay action to make change. [KI Interview: David Jackson, Nelson City Council.]
(7) Insufficient financial resources for promotion
Insufficient financial resources for the promotion of a programme can inhibit participation, because it results in a lack of awareness of the programme, its objectives, and its benefits.
(8) Failure to build working relationships
A failure to build working relationships can inhibit participation by reducing the ability of programmes to target households and promote the programme.
(9) Staff turnover
Programme staff turnover can make it difficult to establish effective, ongoing working partnerships with health agencies and community groups. [KI Interviews: Ann Curry, Community and Public Health; David Jackson, Nelson City Council.]
(10) Commercial tendering procedures
Commercial tendering procedures tend to lead to a 'winner takes all' outcome, squeezing out other players, which in turn reduces the number of players in the marketplace who are actively seeking customer participation.
(11) Inability of programme implementers to target households
An inability of programme implementers to target households inhibits programme participation (see section 5.5(4)).
5.8 Influences from the community and the immediate social environment
Encouraging drivers
(1) Using organisations/people with established relationships to households to promote the programme
Participation is more likely when organisations/people with established relationships promote programmes, because they will have a greater understanding of what type of promotion will be effective, and will also be more likely to be trusted by those with whom they have established relationships.
(2) Using organisations/people with established relationships to households to deliver the programme
See sections 5.8(1) and 5.8(4).
(3) Information sources that are trusted
Programme participation is more likely if information sources are trusted.
(4) Local champions
Participation may be more likely when programmes use respected opinion leaders who can lead by example and convince others to follow suit.
(5) Skilled project managers for local projects
Successful project participation requires enlisting the involvement of a range of organisations in the community, good communication, maintaining high levels of motivation, etc. In other words, excellent people skills are an essential ingredient to manage local projects.
5.9 The orientation of home heating and related commercial services
Encouraging drivers
(1) Using registered installers who are audited
An emphasis on quality installations builds confidence in the programme and will help increase participation rates.
(2) The role of approved suppliers/installers in educating other professionals
Approved suppliers/installers can attract enquiries from other professionals (eg, architects, design consultants, contractors).
Inhibiting drivers
(3) Finance, mortgage (and energy sector) not engaged
The lack of involvement by the finance sector reduces assistance options for householders who want to make change but who would struggle to cover the associated costs. For example, the use of 'revolving mortgages' to finance change to cleaner heating and improved energy efficiency may increase participation.
5.10 Key points
There is a lot we can learn about programme participation drivers from past and current 'incentive' programmes in New Zealand and overseas. Key points include:
- the nature of targeting and eligibility criteria
- assistance and incentives
- information and advice
- funding and resources
- government and other sector involvement.
These all affect programme participation, and should therefore be carefully considered during programme design and implementation.
