Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 11 results ...
Boyd, P and Schweber, L (2018) Unintended consequences: institutional artefacts, closure mechanisms and the performance gap. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 10–22.
Darby, S J (2018) Smart technology in the home: time for more clarity. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 140–7.
Frances, Z and Stevenson, F (2018) Domestic photovoltaic systems: the governance of occupant use. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 23–41.
Gram-Hanssen, K and Georg, S (2018) Energy performance gaps: promises, people, practices. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 1–9.
Hansen, A R, Gram-Hanssen, K and Knudsen, H N (2018) How building design and technologies influence heat-related habits. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 83–98.
Hargreaves, T, Wilson, C and Hauxwell-Baldwin, R (2018) Learning to live in a smart home. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 127–39.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: domestication; energy demand; feedback; field trial; household energy; occupant behaviour; smart homes; technology systems; users;
- ISBN/ISSN: 0961-3218
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2017.1286882
- Abstract:
Smart homes promise to significantly enhance domestic comfort, convenience, security and leisure whilst simultaneously reducing energy use through optimized home energy management. Their ability to achieve these multiple aims rests fundamentally on how they are used by householders, yet very little is currently known about this topic. The few studies that have explored the use of smart homes have tended to focus on special-interest groups and be quite short-term. This paper reports on new in-depth qualitative data that explore the domestication of a range of smart home technologies in 10 households participating in a nine-month field trial. Four core themes emerge: (1) smart home technologies are both technically and socially disruptive; (2) smart homes require forms of adaptation and familiarization from householders that can limit their use; (3) learning to use smart home technologies is a demanding and time-consuming task for which there is currently very little support available; and (4) there is little evidence that smart home technologies will generate substantial energy savings and, indeed, there is a risk that they may generate forms of energy intensification. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for policy, design and further research.
Madsen, L V (2018) Materialities shape practices and notions of comfort in everyday life. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 71–82.
Palm, J, Ellegård, K and Hellgren, M (2018) A cluster analysis of energy-consuming activities in everyday life. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 99–113.
Sunikka-Blank, M, Galvin, R and Behar, C (2018) Harnessing social class, taste and gender for more effective policies. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 114–26.
van den Brom, P, Meijer, A and Visscher, H (2018) Performance gaps in energy consumption: household groups and building characteristics. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 54–70.
Wade, F, Murtagh, N and Hitchings, R (2018) Managing professional jurisdiction and domestic energy use. Building Research & Information, 46(01), 42–53.