The Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing: Trends, Benefits, Barriers, and Enablers

The Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing: Trends, Benefits, Barriers, and Enablers | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Systematic Review The Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing: Trends, Benefits, Barriers, and Enablers Christian Nwarueze, Monty Sutrisna, Hennie Van Heerden This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7483852/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Global challenges such as population growth, climate change, and energy sustainability emphasise the urgent need for energy efficiency measures in housing. Social housing, which serves vulnerable populations with limited resources, highlights the importance of these interventions due to cost burdens, health risks, and social disparities. This study investigates the implementation of energy efficiency measures in social housing. by reviewing global trends, benefits, barriers, and enablers. The PRISMA protocol analysed 92 articles published between 2012 and 2025. The study identifies four major domains shaping adoption trends: technology, finance, policy, and social equity. The review outlines several benefits, including reduced energy consumption, enhanced indoor environmental quality, long-term cost savings, and climate mitigation. It also addresses barriers such as high upfront costs, policy fragmentation, and limited tenant engagement. Despite the growing application of energy-efficient technologies, financing and behavioural dynamics remain underexplored. This research calls for further investigation into innovative financial mechanisms, inclusive policy frameworks, and socially responsive approaches to support widespread implementation. Improving buildings and adding energy-efficient systems are crucial for enhancing social housing sustainability, affordability, and resilience. Social Housing Energy Efficiency Retrofitting Trends Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 1. Introduction Housing goes beyond providing mere shelter; it is vital for public health, social stability, and economic participation. It plays a crucial role in discussions about equitable development, urban resilience, and the well-being of communities(Baker, 2019 ). The United Nations defines adequate housing as encompassing protection from forced eviction, security of tenure, habitability, and affordability, particularly for vulnerable and marginalised groups(UN-Habitat, 2010 ; 2019 , p. 129; 2022, pp. 22–24). Building on this foundation, social housing represents a targeted mechanism to realise the principles of adequate housing for those unable to access the private housing market. Managed by public authorities or non-profit providers, it offers secure, affordable, and habitable homes for low-income households, marginalised groups, and individuals with specific housing needs(OECD, 2020 ; Reeves, 2013 ). By reducing exposure to housing insecurity and substandard living conditions, social housing mitigates health risks, enhances social stability, and supports economic participation. It also plays a pivotal role in promoting equity and resilience within communities, aligning housing provision with broader social and sustainable development objectives(Russell et al., 2023 ; UN-Habitat, 2019 ). Homelessness often arises from a combination of factors, including mental illness, discrimination, lack of affordable housing, and insufficient infrastructure. These issues highlight deeper systemic failures within housing markets. However, evidence indicates that coordinated policy initiatives and inclusive housing models can provide viable long-term solutions(OECD, 2024 ; Pleace et al., 2011 ; UN-Habitat, 2019 , p. 19). In New Zealand, these challenges remain prevalent. According to the 2023 Census, 2.3% of the population experiences severe housing deprivation. This includes individuals without shelter, those in temporary accommodations, and people living in overcrowded conditions(StatsNZ, 2024 ). In response to these challenges, the Aotearoa Homelessness Action Plan advocates for a multifaceted strategy that prioritises prevention, increases the supply of housing, and enhances coordination within the housing system(OECD, 2024 , p. 6). A pressing issue within New Zealand’s housing landscape is the poor condition of many homes, especially those within the social housing sector. Approximately 30% of homes lack adequate insulation, and nearly half of all rented dwellings exhibit issues such as dampness and mould, leading to poor indoor air quality and thermal discomfort(Baker, 2019 ). These shortcomings disproportionately affect low-income tenants, increasing their energy burdens and their risk of respiratory illness conditions for which New Zealand ranks among the worst in the OECD(IEA, 2017 ; Poortinga et al., 2018 ). Energy efficiency has therefore become central to efforts aimed at improving housing conditions. Inadequate insulation and outdated heating systems contribute to excessive energy use and thermal discomfort in low-income households (Ascione et al., 2024 ; Ruiz & Guevara, 2021 ; M. Sunikka-Blank et al., 2012 ). Energy efficiency interventions, defined as measures that reduce energy consumption while improving or maintaining indoor conditions, offer co-benefits: they reduce emissions, improve health, and lower energy costs for households(Asadpoor & Jahanshahi, 2024 ; Penna et al., 2015 ). To support these goals, governments have introduced a range of financial mechanisms. These include direct grants, on-bill financing, and public-private partnerships aimed at spreading retrofit costs over time(Aranda et al., 2017 ; Bianco & Sonvilla, 2021 ; Lang et al., 2021 ). In New Zealand, examples include the Warmer Kiwi Homes programme and the Māori and Public Housing Renewable Energy Fund, both managed by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) to target low-income and public housing sectors(Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment (MBIE), 2023a, 2023b; Olivia Campbell, 2024 ). Retrofitting is a particularly promising strategy to improve energy performance in existing buildings. Complete energy retrofits, as explained by Recart and Dossick ( 2022 ), involve mechanical system upgrades and smart heating controls; thermal retrofits improve the building envelope; and focused retrofits involve single interventions such as insulation or window replacement. Integrating renewable energy sources such as solar panels and heat pumps can reduce dependence on fossil fuels and improve affordability (McCabe et al., 2018 ). Retrofitting is often more cost-effective than new construction and avoids displacement(Jagarajan et al., 2017 ). However, such upgrades require enabling policy frameworks, financial incentives, performance standards, and administrative simplifications that are essential to scaling these interventions and ensuring alignment with national housing and energy goals(Alabid et al., 2022 ; Umana et al., 2024 ). It is also important to distinguish between social and affordable housing: the latter may include a broader mix of ownership and rental options, while social housing typically serves the most vulnerable and is managed by public or non-profit organisations (OECD, 2020 ; Reeves, 2013 ). This distinction is important, as the financial and technical barriers to energy retrofitting are often higher in social housing due to limited investment capacity and complex tenant-landlord dynamics. This study explores how energy efficiency measures are adopted in social housing, focusing on the New Zealand context. It aims to (i) identify global trends and benefits, (ii) examine the barriers and enablers of adoption, and in doing so, it seeks to inform evidence-based strategies for achieving resilient, low-carbon, and equitable housing systems. 2. Methodology A hybrid methodology that integrates systematic review and narrative analysis was employed in this study to examine the key themes surrounding the motivations and methods social housing providers use to implement renewable energy technologies. While systematic reviews are frequently utilised in health-related fields focused on quantitative outcomes, narrative analyses are typically reserved for literature reviews of case studies with diverse and incomparable boundaries. This review combines both methodological approaches by incorporating a replicable systematic review protocol and qualitative analysis techniques within the narrative review, such as coding and thematic analysis. This blended strategy was appropriate given the highly contextualised and heterogeneous nature of the data, which precluded direct comparisons but allowed for the identification of recurring themes throughout the literature. 2.1 Systematic literature review (SLR) A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a research method that uses a clear process to find, evaluate, and combine existing research on a specific topic. The main aim of an SLR is to give a complete overview of the literature, identify gaps in research, and draw conclusions based on careful and objective analysis. This method stands in contrast to traditional narrative reviews, which often allow for more flexibility and interpretation( Kraus et al ., 2020). A systematic literature review (SLR) studies and summarises existing research. It helps us understand what has already been done and points out where more research is needed. This method reduces biases that often appear in regular reviews (Moher et al., 2015) . Table I outlines the criteria and guidelines utilised for data searches according to the PRISMA protocol.Table i. Criteria and guidelines for data search. Stages Criteria and guidelines for data search Inclusion criteria Only academic journals published in English in line with housing, residential housing, energy efficiency measures in social housing, benefits, challenges and alignment with sustainable development goals were included in the study. This method reduces language barriers. The study stays aligned with its goals and objectives by focusing on energy efficiency in social housing. Studies published between 2012 and 2025 were included to align with establishing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2012, ensuring relevant data on SDG implementation. A few important studies from before 2012 were also intentionally included for their valuable insights. Exclusion criteria Non-English studies were excluded due to the authors' English proficiency. Studies focused solely on social housing without considering energy efficiency were also excluded to maintain the focus on adopting energy efficiency measures. Data search approach in Scopus database Keywords utilised for the search include: TITLE-ABS-KEY (“housing association” OR “public housing” OR “social housing” OR “council housing” OR “state housing”) AND (“energy efficiency” OR “renewable” OR “solar” OR “wind”). The search scope was confined to articles published between 2012 and 2025. The subject areas addressed in this study comprise Housing, Housing Finance, Energy, Engineering, and Environmental Science. These selected disciplines encompass all fields relevant to research on implementing energy efficiency measures in social housing. Only articles published in English were included, covering those in press and at their final stages. Data search strategy in the Google Scholar database Search keywords used: (“housing association” OR “public housing” OR “social housing” OR “council housing” OR “state housing”) AND (“energy efficiency” OR “renewable” OR “solar” OR “wind”). Results were limited within the timeframe ranging from 2012 to 2025. 2.1.1 Procedure for data collection The data retrieval process included four stages (see Fig. 1): (a) identifying relevant papers, (b) evaluating and excluding papers, (c) assessing the quality and eligibility of selected papers, and (d) summarising them. (a) Identifying Relevant Papers This systematic review followed the PRISMA protocol, drawing data from Scopus, ScienceDirect, JSTOR, Wiley Online, Taylor & Francis, Google Scholar, UN-Habitat, and the OECD Library. These databases were selected for their broad coverage of peer-reviewed literature and policy documents relevant to energy efficiency, social housing, sustainability, and housing technology adoption. The Boolean search string combined terms such as “social housing,” “energy efficiency,” “funding,” and “technology adoption.” Initial searches yielded 3,317 records from Scopus, 4,230 from ScienceDirect, 1,805 from Wiley, 618 from JSTOR, 396 from UN-Habitat, and 139 from the OECD Library. The search was refined to remove duplicates and irrelevant results. (b) Paper Evaluation and Exclusion The preliminary screening focused on the relevance of each paper to the study's objectives. We reviewed titles and abstracts to exclude any documents that did not align with the themes of energy efficiency in social or low-income housing. As a result of this process, we narrowed the pool down to 550 full-text articles. (c) Eligibility and Quality Evaluation The full-text papers were evaluated for quality and relevance, focusing on peer-reviewed articles, government reports, and credible publications. Only studies addressing energy efficiency adoption, barriers, enablers, or policy linkages were included. A total of 92 high-quality sources were selected for analysis. (d) Selected Paper’s Summary The final set of 92 papers was exported to Excel for thematic coding. These papers examined energy efficiency strategies in social housing, including economic and environmental impacts, policy instruments, and SDG alignment. Although grey literature and some case studies were excluded, the review maintained methodological integrity. Some terminological limitations (e.g., exclusion of “low-income housing” as a term) may have led to missed studies, but the selection strategy ensured a comprehensive and credible evidence base. 3. Results & discussions The detailed SLR findings on the study's objectives are discussed in the following section. Articles distribution by year The systematic literature review (SLR) analysed articles and government reports from 2012 to 2025, including key earlier publications. Figure 2 shows varying interest levels in adopting energy efficiency measures in social housing, with notable peaks in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023, and the highest in 2024. This increase is primarily due to funding initiatives supporting research in this area. The integration of energy efficiency measures aligns with several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), while also contributing to SDGs 13 (Climate Action) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). The increasing number of publications on adopting energy efficiency measures in social housing highlights a growing global awareness of this important issue. This trend can be attributed to several interconnected factors. Firstly, the pressing need to address climate change and its effects has motivated governments, organisations, and researchers to concentrate on effective practices in housing, especially in social housing, where affordability and accessibility are paramount. Energy efficiency measures reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the living conditions of vulnerable populations by lowering costs and enhancing indoor air quality(McCabe et al. , 2018; Sánchez et al ., 2018; Souliotis et al ., 2018). The expanding body of literature recognises that integrating energy efficiency into social housing is crucial for achieving these goals, fostering further research, policy development, and practical implementation. The rise in studies in this field shows a global shift toward prioritising energy efficiency in social housing as a key part of sustainable development, underscoring the challenges and opportunities ahead. 3.1 Country-wise distribution of articles Figure 3 illustrates the geographical distribution of studies focused on the adoption of energy efficiency measures in social housing. The United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States exhibit the highest concentrations of research, contributing 15, 12, and 11 studies, respectively, out of the 92 analysed. Following these countries, Spain, Italy, New Zealand, France, Sweden, and Kenya each added 8, 7, 6, 5, and 4 studies, respectively. This trend likely reflects the European Union's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, alongside strong financial incentives that encourage sustainable building practices. While New Zealand demonstrates commitment and effort, its research output is not as substantial as that of Australia, indicating a need for further exploration in this area. Australia and the United States have made notable advancements in raising awareness about climate change and implementing strategies aligned with the Paris Agreement established in 2015. In contrast, other nations—such as Mexico, Chile, Canada, Brazil, Qatar, Norway, Belgium, China, the Netherlands, Uganda, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Poland, Switzerland, Ireland, Austria, South Africa, Greece, and India—have also significantly contributed to this field. These efforts underscore their commitment to limiting global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius as mandated by the Paris Agreement, which includes an ambitious target of reducing emissions by 45% by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Despite New Zealand's considerable research output, the country faces significant challenges in enhancing housing energy efficiency. Various factors contribute to this situation, highlighting the necessity for continued research. A considerable portion of the housing stock remains inadequately insulated, resulting in low indoor temperatures and excessive energy consumption (Baker, 2019; Rangiwhetu et al., 2017 ). Additionally, buyers and landlords often do not prioritise energy efficiency measures, and some government initiatives have faced resistance( Lang et al., 2021) . The country has a longstanding history of inadequate housing regulations, resulting in many existing homes being poorly insulated (Howden-Chapman et al. , 2012). There is an urgent need for additional research in this critical area. 4. Identified global trends in energy efficiency adoption in social housing An interplay of technology, finance, policy and social factors, and emerging innovations shapes energy efficiency (EE) measures in social housing. Among the hundred and two reviewed articles, technological and economic (40% technology, 12.82% economic) trends co-occurred in 52.82% of cases, suggesting that technological upgrades such as retrofitting or the use of heat pumps are frequently discussed in relation to cost considerations like subsidies or investment barriers. Technological and policy overlaps (technology 40%, policy 28.72%) were equally common, indicating that policy frameworks are often linked to specific technologies. Social dimensions (18.46%) , such as tenant behaviour or trust, landlords' willingness to invest in energy-efficient upgrades, intersected more frequently with financial and technological aspects than with policy alone, reflecting concerns around cost acceptability, behavioural change, and end-user engagement. Although some articles addressed all four dimensions simultaneously, and some demonstrated a three-way relationship (Tech + economic + Policy), providing initial evidence of integrated approaches to energy efficiency adoption. This co-occurrence pattern supports the claim of an “intricate interplay” between domains and highlights the need for multi-dimensional strategies. An interplay of policy, technology, finance, social factors, and emerging innovations shapes energy efficiency (EE) measures in social housing. 4.1 Identified Benefits of Adopting Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing (2000- 2500 words) From an economic perspective, energy efficiency measures can lead to substantial cost savings for residents and housing providers, thereby reducing energy use and promoting financial sustainability(Poortinga et al., 2018). Additionally, the health benefits associated with improved energy efficiency, such as enhanced indoor air quality and thermal comfort, significantly contribute to the overall well-being of occupants, particularly in vulnerable populations that often live in social housing by reducing health risk, boosting cognitive performance and improving overall satisfaction(Brown et al., 2014; Medrano-Gómez & Izquierdo, 2017; Sánchez et al., 2018; Souliotis et al., 2018; Teli et al., 2016) 4.1.2 Economic Benefits The systematic literature review (SLR) findings in Figure 5 highlight the economic benefits of energy efficiency measures in social housing. Reduced energy costs represent immediate savings from lower consumption, while long-term cost savings reflect the cumulative financial benefits over time. Many studies emphasise these aspects due to their financial and environmental impacts. Key benefits include reduced energy costs noted in thirteen studies (42%), long-term cost savings in twelve studies (39%), job creation in three studies (10%), and increased property values also reported in three studies (10%). 4.1.3 Reduced Energy Costs and Long-term Cost Savings Social housing residents are predominantly concerned with minimising energy costs, making energy efficiency interventions a critical strategy for achieving long-term financial relief. A substantial body of evidence confirms that energy-efficient upgrades in social housing significantly reduce energy expenditures. Systematic reviews indicate that strategic investments in housing retrofits substantially lower utility costs over time, producing sustained economic benefits for tenants and providers(Kamal et al., 2019) . These cost savings are closely linked to the physical characteristics of buildings, where retrofitting and integrating renewable energy sources have been shown to reduce electricity consumption and deliver more equitable financial outcomes (Esmaeilimoakher et al., 2016). Several applied studies further demonstrate the tangible financial benefits of specific interventions. Installing advanced heating controls during retrofits optimises heating schedules, reduces unnecessary energy use, and lowers monthly bills(Fabrizio et al., 2017). Similarly, life cycle analyses show that solar water heating systems substantially reduce hot water energy demand, lessening the ongoing financial burden on occupants(Souliotis et al., 2018). Adopting heat pumps has also been associated with significant operational savings, particularly when residents are adequately informed and engaged in their use(Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025). Integrating renewable energy technologies into social housing enhances environmental outcomes and decreases reliance on costly fossil fuels, delivering long-term financial relief to residents(McCabe et al., 2018). Projections suggest that implementing widely available and cost-effective energy efficiency interventions could reduce household energy consumption by approximately 25% by 2035, representing substantial savings for economically vulnerable households(Larrea-Sáez et al., 2023; Rosenow et al., 2018). These findings consistently point to one conclusion: energy efficiency in social housing offers a clear pathway to sustained cost reductions. For tenants facing high energy burdens, these savings are not marginal but transformative, alleviating financial stress and improving affordability. By prioritising retrofits and technology, optimising energy performance, housing providers can generate long-term economic benefits that align with tenant needs and broader sustainability goals. 4.1.4 Increased property value and Job creation Improving energy performance in social housing delivers not only environmental and cost-saving benefits but also contributes to increased property value and job creation. In New Zealand, both the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) and the New Zealand Green Building Council (NZGBC) recognise the role of energy efficiency in enhancing asset value. Energy-efficient buildings are increasingly desirable due to their lower operational costs and alignment with sustainability standards (EECA, 2000; NZGBC, 2024). Numerous studies and policy reports affirm that energy upgrades can generate a “green premium,” whereby properties with higher energy performance command higher market valuations than less efficient counterparts(Carpino et al., 2018; Kamal et al., 2019; Souliotis et al., 2018; Ugarte et al., 2016). This added value stems from reduced long-term energy expenses and a growing market preference for sustainable, comfortable, and healthy living environments. Enhanced property valuation also strengthens stock(McCabe et al., 2018; Ugarte et al., 2016). Simultaneously, energy-efficiency interventions serve as significant drivers of employment. Large-scale retrofitting and system upgrades require skilled labour in construction, installation, and engineering trades. In addition to these direct jobs, energy efficiency programmes generate employment in related fields such as energy auditing, renewable energy consulting, and green technology development (Ferroukhi et al., 2020; Thema et al., 2019). The associated growth in manufacturing and supply chains for energy-efficient materials further expands job opportunities. Ugarte et al. (2016) highlight that energy retrofitting stimulates local economies by fostering green job creation and promoting inclusive growth. Together, these outcomes demonstrate that energy-efficient social housing offers long-term economic value through increased property value and job generation, strengthening communities. 5. Health and Environmental Benefits Energy efficiency adoption is crucial in promoting health and environmental benefits. It reduces carbon emissions, improves air quality, contributes to climate stability, and enhances thermal comfort. Social housing can substantially lower energy consumption by adopting energy-efficient measures, such as advanced insulation, energy-efficient appliances, and renewable energy sources (Brown et al., 2014; Fabrizio et al., 2017; Teli et al., 2016; Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025). 5.1 Reduced carbon footprint and contribution to climate goals Enhancing energy efficiency in social housing is essential in reducing carbon emissions and advancing national and international climate goals. These interventions, once seen primarily as cost-saving or technical solutions, are central to sustainable development and climate action due to their measurable environmental impact. Reducing energy demand in the residential sector directly lowers greenhouse gas emissions, supporting broader decarbonisation efforts(Esmaeilimoakher et al., 2016; Kamal et al., 2019). Social housing, often characterised by outdated infrastructure, presents significant opportunities for emissions reduction through retrofitting, renewable energy integration, and envelope performance upgrades(Alonso et al., 2017; McCabe et al., 2018). Technological improvements such as heat pumps, advanced heating controls, and solar water heating systems have demonstrated strong potential to lower carbon intensity, particularly when aligned with efficient design and informed user engagement(Fabrizio et al., 2017; Souliotis et al., 2018; Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025). Enhancing insulation and airtightness further reduces energy demand for heating and cooling, especially in thermally inefficient social housing stock(Fernández-Agüera et al., 2019; Larrea-Sáez et al., 2023) . At a policy level, energy-efficient social housing aligns with decarbonisation targets. Estimates suggest that energy-saving measures could reduce residential emissions by up to 25% by 2035(Rosenow et al., 2018), supporting directives such as the European Commission’s aim to cut building-sector emissions by 60% by 2030 and achieve a zero-emission building stock by 2050(Mastrucci et al., 2024). Circular economy approaches further suggest that emissions and energy savings of 30–40% are achievable across the sector. While these environmental benefits are substantial, effective implementation depends on addressing behavioural and social barriers. A lack of user awareness and engagement, termed the “socially neglected effect”, can undermine the effectiveness of low-carbon technologies, especially in low-income communities(Hernandez-Roman et al., 2017). These findings demonstrate that energy efficiency in social housing is a vital strategy for carbon mitigation, with direct implications for climate resilience and environmental justice. 5.1.1 Improved indoor air quality Indoor air quality (IAQ) is defined by the New Zealand National Environmental Standards for air quality as the condition of air within living spaces, including homes and schools, that influences the health and well-being of their occupants. Various factors contribute to IAQ, such as ventilation, moisture management, and the presence of indoor contaminants(Ministry for the Environment, 2021). Residents in these environments often encounter subpar IAQ due to insufficient maintenance, inadequate ventilation, and increased exposure to moisture, dampness, and airborne pollutants. These factors elevate the risk of respiratory illnesses, allergies, and general discomfort, particularly among vulnerable populations(Fisk et al., 2020; Kurmanbekova et al., 2025; Lozinsky et al., 2025; Medrano-Gómez & Izquierdo, 2017; Mei & Seo, 2024; Recart & Dossick, 2022). Energy-efficient retrofitting, particularly improvements in insulation and airtightness, significantly enhances IAQ when paired with proper ventilation strategies(Ascione et al., 2024). While such measures reduce energy consumption and thermal losses, they also affect indoor air dynamics(Baniassadi et al., 2022). Without adequate ventilation, airtight buildings risk trapping pollutants, thereby worsening IAQ. Studies have emphasised the importance of integrated design approaches that combine insulation with mechanical or passive ventilation to maintain air freshness and pollutant control(Baniassadi et al., 2022; Fabrizio et al., 2017; Jayalath et al., 2024). Thermal comfort and IAQ are interrelated; factors such as heat transfer, insulation resistance (R-value), and thermal transmittance (U-value) influence internal temperatures and moisture accumulation, directly affecting respiratory health and comfort levels(Aranda et al., 2017; Desvallées, 2022; Hashemi & Dungrani, 2025; Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025). Enhancing envelope performance thus contributes not only to energy efficiency but also to healthier indoor environments. However, the “socially neglected effect, " where residents fail to fully utilise or accept energy technologies, can limit IAQ interventions' effectiveness(Hernandez-Roman et al., 2017). Addressing this requires a user-focused approach, combining physical improvements with education and engagement. In conclusion, improving IAQ in social housing through energy-efficient retrofitting and ventilation is essential for occupant health. Such interventions support both environmental objectives and public health, especially for low-income households disproportionately exposed to indoor pollutants. 5.1.2 Enhanced thermal comfort Thermal comfort is defined by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers as "that condition of mind that expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment”(Barbosa et al., 2024) It is an essential factor in ensuring occupant well-being, and in social housing, upgrades in energy efficiency are instrumental in achieving and sustaining thermal comfort, particularly for vulnerable populations who face inadequate indoor environments(Jayalath et al., 2024; Medrano-Gómez & Izquierdo, 2017; Pereira-Ruchansky & Perez-Fargallo, 2020). One of the most consistently reported benefits of energy efficiency interventions in social housing is improved thermal comfort. Retrofitting measures such as insulation, draught-proofing, and building envelope enhancements have been shown to stabilise indoor temperatures, especially during colder seasons. In the UK, energy upgrades led to noticeably warmer homes in winter, improving comfort for low-income residents(Poortinga et al., 2018) . Similar outcomes were observed in Spain, where retrofitted social housing demonstrated better indoor thermal performance and more stable environmental conditions (Aranda et al., 2017). Even minor modifications can yield substantial benefits; in New Zealand, simple draught-blocking interventions significantly improved nighttime bedroom temperatures in social housing (Rangiwhetu et al., 2017). In warmer climates, passive cooling strategies such as natural ventilation, thermal mass, and shading are essential for reducing indoor heat stress during extreme heat events(Ozarisoy & Altan, 2021). These approaches are critical in maintaining comfort without increasing energy demand. Thermal comfort is further enhanced when energy retrofits are integrated with behavioural and social engagement. Renovation projects in the Netherlands that included resident participation delivered technical improvements and achieved higher user satisfaction with thermal conditions(Koops-Van Hoffen et al., 2023). Empirical studies in Austria, New Zealand, and the U.S. also confirm that upgraded insulation, airtightness, and building design consistently led to warmer and more comfortable homes(Fisk et al., 2020; Lozinsky et al., 2025; Seebauer et al., 2019). Overall, the literature demonstrates that energy retrofits in social housing enhance thermal comfort across diverse climates. These interventions reduce exposure to temperature extremes and foster healthier, more stable indoor environments, particularly when paired with resident-centred design strategies. 6. Barriers and Enablers Influencing the Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing Sorrell (2004) defines a barrier to energy efficiency as “a postulated mechanism that inhibits a decision or behaviour that appears to be both energy and economically efficient.” Building on this definition within the context of this research, a barrier is understood as a factor that adversely affects an organisation’s willingness to adopt energy efficiency opportunities. Implementing energy efficiency measures in social housing is essential for reducing fuel poverty, enhancing indoor environmental conditions, and supporting climate mitigation objectives. However, this implementation is often obstructed by structural and behavioural barriers. This section critically explores three primary categories of barriers: high upfront costs, lack of awareness, and regulatory obstacles, alongside key enabling mechanisms such as financial incentives, education and training, and supportive policy frameworks. 1. High Upfront Cost, Hidden cost and Split incentive as a Financial Barrier Implementing energy efficiency upgrades, particularly through retrofitting, renewable heating systems, and improved insulation, can be prohibitively expensive for social housing providers. These costs are typically incurred before any operational savings are realised, placing significant strain on capital budgets(Moore et al., 2015). Additionally, there are “hidden costs”, unforeseen expenses such as ongoing maintenance, tenant training, or necessary system adjustments, that further heighten the perceived risks and complexities associated with these investments(Azimi et al., 2023). Although these anticipated downstream costs are not included in the initial investment, they are psychologically and financially integrated into the decision-making process, discouraging decisive action. Beyond the magnitude of these costs, the split incentive dilemma is a significant deterrent in the social housing sector. In this scenario, landlords are responsible for funding energy upgrades, while tenants benefit from reduced utility costs. This misalignment of investment and reward diminishes the financial appeal of retrofitting for housing providers, especially those operating on limited margins or fixed budgets(Bird & Hernández, 2012; Moore et al., 2017). Consequently, the split incentive disrupts traditional cost-benefit analyses, rendering energy efficiency investments financially irrational from the landlord’s perspective, irrespective of the broader societal or environmental benefits. Enabler – Financial Incentives Financial incentives such as targeted subsidies, low-interest loans, on-bill repayment programmes, and shared-savings models can effectively address the burden of upfront costs (Abolhosseini & Heshmati, 2014; Magallón et al., 2019). These mechanisms reduce capital risks, improve cash flow for housing providers, and align investment incentives between landlords and tenants(Pawson et al., 2011; Solan et al., 2010). Transparent financial modelling and performance-based frameworks can further enhance the credibility and uptake of retrofit initiatives. 2. Lack of Awareness and Resident Engagement as a Social Barrier Another significant barrier is tenants' limited awareness and understanding regarding the operation, purpose, and benefits of energy-efficient technologies. Many social housing residents express scepticism toward new systems, particularly when prior experiences with poorly communicated installations have bred mistrust(McCabe et al., 2018). Complex control systems and insufficient user training often result in improper or underuse of technologies, thus reducing their intended impact. Behavioural resistance is also driven by routine attachment to legacy systems and uncertainty about the risks of adopting unfamiliar technology. This lack of awareness undermines system performance and alienates users from broader retrofit objectives. Additionally, tenants often feel excluded from retrofit planning and decision-making processes, which can lead to disengagement and even opposition to installation(Ascione et al., 2024; Azimi et al., 2023; Hernandez-Roman et al., 2017; Hoppe, 2012; Moore et al., 2017). Enabler-Education and Training Resident education and post-installation support are vital in overcoming these barriers. Comprehensive, tenant-focused communication strategies and hands-on training must complement energy efficiency measures. Behavioural interventions grounded in social norms, such as publicising neighbour adoption rates, have proven effective in increasing acceptance (Bielig et al., 2024). Moreover, engaging tenants in co-design processes ensures better alignment with their needs and fosters long-term ownership and use of technologies. 3. Regulatory and Institutional Hurdles as a Barrier Regulatory inconsistency and fragmented policy landscapes significantly constrain the scaling of energy efficiency in social housing. A core issue is the absence of stable and targeted national mandates to support renewable energy adoption in retrofitting programmes. This creates uncertainty for housing providers, particularly when existing regulations conflict, such as expenditure caps on social housing and limited energy performance requirements(McCabe et al., 2018). Furthermore, regulatory frameworks are often ill-suited to the structural and social realities of social housing. The failure to design policies that address the specific needs of low-income tenants and non-profit housing providers limits the effectiveness of current programmes(Moore et al., 2017). Frequent policy changes and a lack of continuity deter long-term investment planning(Swan et al., 2017). Another notable gap is the limited regulatory attention to the construction phase of buildings. Most energy codes focus on operational performance, overlooking the substantial savings that could be realised during early-stage construction activities(Palm & Bryngelson, 2023). Enabler- Supportive Policy Frameworks To effectively tackle regulatory inertia, it is essential to establish a clear and comprehensive national policy strategy. This strategy should seamlessly integrate retrofit objectives within housing and energy mandates. Ensuring stable funding, setting performance benchmarks, and implementing mandatory tenant engagement guidelines will create a robust framework for consistent and equitable adoption. Furthermore, policies must include efficiency standards for construction phases and encourage early-stage design interventions. Simplifying compliance processes and broadening access to certification systems like BREEAM and LEED for smaller providers can also significantly enhance participation. 7. Conceptual framework This conceptual framework illustrates the complex and interconnected dynamics shaping the adoption of energy efficiency (EE) in social housing by integrating barriers, benefits, feedback mechanisms, and stakeholder roles into a holistic model. At the centre are four critical domains: technological, economic, policy, and social, that form the foundation of adoption processes. The framework highlights that adoption is constrained by multiple barriers: financial constraints such as high upfront costs, technical capacity issues such as limited tenant knowledge and engagement, stakeholder dynamics such as split incentives between landlords and tenants, weak regulatory environments, lack of green finance, and socio-cultural norms, including mistrust in retrofit initiatives. Despite these challenges, the framework also underscores the potential benefits of EE adoption, including cost savings, improved indoor air quality, reduced carbon footprints, job creation, enhanced thermal comfort, increased property values, and alignment with climate goals. Importantly, feedback mechanisms shaped by policy environments, market systems, and cultural dynamics determine whether adoption outcomes reinforce or undermine progress. Stakeholders are mapped as key actors in this ecosystem: government agencies (e.g., MBIE, HUD) set policy and funding frameworks, housing providers (e.g., Kāinga Ora, CHPs) implement programmes and engage tenants, while tenants themselves influence outcomes through behavioural responses that determine effective use of EE measures. The framework demonstrates that successful adoption requires aligning technological innovation with supportive finance, robust policy, and active social engagement. Multidisciplinary collaboration is essential to overcoming barriers and realising long-term sustainability outcomes in social housing. This framework was adopted from a combination of other tested frameworks, such as a proposed conceptual stakeholder management ecosystem framework by (Tarode & Shrivastava, 2021 ), proposed an energy efficiency policy framework by (Dzobo et al., 2020 ), and the Low-Income Net Zero House Delivery Framework by (Moghayedi & Awuzie, 2025 ) 8. Conclusion and Further Research This systematic review demonstrates that implementing energy efficiency measures in social housing yields multifaceted economic, environmental, social, and health-related benefits. It establishes a compelling rationale for prioritising energy efficiency as a core element of sustainable housing policy, particularly for promoting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and alleviating energy poverty. Since social housing primarily serves low-income and vulnerable populations, it is uniquely positioned to adopt transformative energy strategies. These populations are disproportionately affected by poor indoor air quality, high utility costs, and associated health risks, making energy efficiency interventions especially impactful. The review identifies four global, interconnected trends shaping energy efficiency adoption in social housing: technological innovation, financial mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, and social acceptance. While technologies such as retrofitting, heat pumps, and solar water systems are increasingly accessible, their effectiveness depends on affordability, stable policy support, and tenant engagement. Financing mechanisms, including on-bill financing and public-private partnerships, require regulatory clarity and tenant trust to ensure uptake and longevity. Economically, energy-efficient retrofits lower household utility costs, increase property values, and generate long-term savings for tenants and housing providers. These outcomes improve household financial resilience, reduce public healthcare expenditures, and stimulate employment in green construction sectors. Environmentally, such interventions contribute directly to climate mitigation by reducing CO₂ emissions and aligning with international targets such as the Paris Agreement. Socially, energy efficiency enhances occupant well-being, mitigates health disparities, and fosters more inclusive, resilient communities. Despite these advantages, barriers persist. High upfront costs, regulatory fragmentation, and insufficient tenant involvement hinder implementation. Social resistance, technical unfamiliarity, and distrust in housing authorities further undermine technological adoption. As such, the study concludes that energy efficiency in social housing is not solely a technical matter; it is a complex socio-political and economic challenge requiring an integrated, multi-level approach. Policy Recommendations Table ii: Proposed policy recommendations Based on the findings, the following policy recommendations are proposed. Recommendation’s References 1. Establish Long-Term, Targeted Funding Mechanisms: Governments should create dedicated and sustained funding streams for social housing retrofits. This should include capital grants, low-interest loans, and on-bill financing tailored to housing associations and low-income tenants. Funding schemes must be designed to reduce administrative burdens and ensure timely disbursement to avoid project delays. (Bianco & Sonvilla, 2021), (Copiello, 2016), (Bird & Hernández, 2012), (Azimi et al., 2024), (Panteli et al., 2020), (Bertoldi et al., 2021) 2. Adopt Inclusive and Integrated Regulatory Frameworks: Energy efficiency regulations should be streamlined and harmonised locally and nationally, with clear performance standards for new constructions and retrofits. Mandating minimum energy efficiency standards for social housing and compliance support will ensure uniformity and prevent regional disparities. (Aranda et al., 2017), (Edalatnia & Das, 2024), (Minna Sunikka-Blank et al., 2012), (Wei et al., 2024), (Seebauer et al., 2019) 3. Bridge the Split Incentive Gap: Introduce policies that realign incentives between landlords and tenants, such as performance-based subsidies, shared-savings models, or tax credits. These initiatives should reward landlords for installing energy-efficient technologies while ensuring tenants benefit directly through reduced energy bills without facing rent hikes. (Bird & Hernández, 2012), (Copiello, 2016), (Azimi et al., 2024), (Ascione et al., 2024), (Rodriguez et al., 2024), (Schleich, 2019), 4. Mandate Resident Engagement and Education: Retrofit and energy efficiency programs must incorporate structured tenant engagement strategies. This includes co-design workshops, simple user guides for new technologies, and ongoing support services. Engaged residents are more likely to use energy systems effectively and maintain energy-saving behaviours. (Croon et al., 2024), (Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025), (Bielig et al., 2024) , (Brown et al., 2014), (Moore et al., 2015) 5. Support Technological Innovation with Behavioural Insights: Beyond hardware upgrades, energy efficiency initiatives should consider user behaviour. Technologies like smart thermostats should be user-friendly, and systems should be adaptable to diverse household routines. Pilot studies and demonstration projects should evaluate both technical and behavioural outcomes. (Brown et al., 2014), (Moore et al., 2015), (Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025), (Croon et al., 2024), (Jones et al., 2016) 6. Embed Energy Efficiency in Homelessness and Health Strategies: Housing and public health policies should explicitly recognise energy-efficient housing as a determinant of health. Energy efficiency upgrades must be included in strategies aimed at preventing homelessness and in housing-first models, especially for those with chronic health conditions exacerbated by poor indoor environments . (Baker, 2019), (Russell et al., 2023), (O’Donnell, 2021), (Moore et al., 2015), (Koops-Van Hoffen et al., 2023), (Croon et al., 2024) 7. Enhance Data and Monitoring Infrastructure: Governments and research institutions should invest in robust data collection and monitoring systems to track retrofit outcomes, tenant satisfaction, and energy savings. This will allow for evidence-based policy refinement and the scaling of successful models. (Alonso et al., 2017), (Jones et al., 2016), (Recart & Dossick, 2022), (Wei et al., 2024), (Ascione et al., 2024), 8. Leverage Public-Private Partnerships for Retrofit Delivery : Encourage collaboration between the government, housing providers, energy companies, and non-profits to deliver retrofit programs efficiently. Models that combine public oversight with private sector innovation and delivery capacity can enhance scale and improve outcomes. (Fell & Mattsson, 2021), (Bielig et al., 2024), (Baker, 2019), (Ugarte et al., 2016), (Tewari & Rajagopalan, 2025) The future of sustainable housing depends on how effectively nations can scale energy efficiency in social housing. Achieving this will alleviate the most vulnerable populations' energy burdens and contribute significantly to climate action, economic development, and social justice. The evidence is clear: social housing, often overlooked in mainstream energy and climate discussions, must now become a central focus of decarbonisation strategies. This review demonstrates that the solutions exist, the benefits are proven, and the need is urgent. What remains is the bold, coordinated, and inclusive action required to implement them. Future Research Directions Future research should prioritise interdisciplinary and equity-focused investigations to support the effective implementation of energy efficiency measures in social housing. First, there is a critical need for longitudinal studies assessing retrofit's sustained impacts on residents’ thermal comfort, health outcomes, and overall well-being. While short-term benefits are well documented, long-term evaluations could better inform policy and investment decisions, particularly regarding public health savings and household resilience. Second, the ongoing challenge of the landlord-tenant split incentive requires targeted inquiry. Empirical testing of financial instruments such as shared savings agreements, tax credits, and performance-based subsidies could provide valuable insights into aligning stakeholder interests. Additionally, we need a deeper understanding of how socio-behavioural factors influence the effectiveness of energy technologies. Research should explore how trust, digital literacy, and usability affect tenants’ adoption and sustained use of intelligent energy systems. Third, research should assess the comparative effectiveness of resident engagement strategies within retrofit programs. Although policies increasingly mandate tenant participation, there is limited empirical data on which methods, such as co-design workshops, feedback mechanisms, or user training, result in improved satisfaction and alignment of behaviours with energy-saving technologies. Moreover, the role of social housing within broader decarbonization and climate adaptation strategies remains underexplored. Analysing how national and local policy frameworks integrate social housing into climate agendas would help identify gaps and inform the development of more coherent and inclusive approaches. Concurrently, evaluating equity outcomes of retrofit programs is essential to ensure that benefits are distributed fairly and that interventions do not unintentionally exacerbate existing inequalities. Finally, future work should examine the governance, performance, and accountability of public-private partnerships delivering retrofit projects. Investigating best practices across different contexts could inform scalable and ethically sound models. At the same time, investment in smart monitoring and data systems should be researched to enable ongoing evaluation of energy performance, user experience, and policy effectiveness. In summary, advancing research in these areas will be crucial to ensuring that energy efficiency in social housing meets technical and environmental targets and delivers lasting economic, social, and health benefits for the most vulnerable populations. Declarations Author Contribution The author, Nwarueze Christian Chidiebere, was solely responsible for the conception and design of the study, as well as conducting the systematic literature search, screening, and analysis in accordance with the PRISMA protocol. The author also interpreted the findings and drafted the manuscript. It was revised by co-authors Monty Sutrisna and Hennie Van Heerden. The author assumes full accountability for all aspects of the work, ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the research presented. Acknowledgement Dear Reviewers, Please don't hesitate to contact me at [email protected] for any corrections or updates at any time. Thank you References Abolhosseini, S., & Heshmati, A. (2014). The main support mechanisms to finance renewable energy development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , 40 , 876-885. Alabid, J., Bennadji, A., & Seddiki, M. (2022). A review on the energy retrofit policies and improvements of the UK existing buildings, challenges and benefits. (“Sustainable Retrofitting of Existing Buildings: Techniques and Case ...”) Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , 159 , 112161. Alonso, C., Oteiza, I., Martín-Consuegra, F., & Frutos, B. (2017). Methodological proposal for monitoring energy refurbishment. Indoor environmental quality in two case studies of social housing in Madrid, Spain. Energy and Buildings , 155 , 492-502. Aranda, J., Zabalza, I., Conserva, A., & Millán, G. (2017). Analysis of energy efficiency measures and retrofitting solutions for social housing buildings in Spain as a way to mitigate energy poverty. Sustainability , 9 (10), 1869. Asadpoor, S. J., & Jahanshahi, E. (2024). A Smart Multi-Criteria Assessment of Housing Energy Efficiency Relevant to Occupants’ Socio–Demographic Characteristics: A Concept Paper. Ascione, F., de Rossi, F., Iovane, T., Manniti, G., & Mastellone, M. (2024). Energy demand and air quality in social housing buildings: A novel critical review. Energy and Buildings , 114542. Azimi, S., Hon, C. K., Tyvimaa, T., & Skitmore, M. (2023). Barriers to energy efficiency: Low-income households in Australia. Buildings , 13 (4), 954. Azimi, S., Hon, C. K. H., Tyvimaa, T., & Skitmore, M. (2024). Adoption of energy-efficiency measures by Australian low-income households. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-023-10104-3 Baker, A. (2019). Improving well-being through better housing policy in New Zealand . https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/b82d856b-en Baniassadi, A., Heusinger, J., Gonzalez, P. I., Weber, S., & Samuelson, H. W. (2022). Co-benefits of energy efficiency in residential buildings. Energy , 238 , 121768. Barbosa, E. F., Labaki, L. C., Castro, A. P., & Lopes, F. S. (2024). Energy Efficiency and Thermal Comfort Analysis in a Higher Education Building in Brazil. Sustainability , 16 (1), 462. Bertoldi, P., Economidou, M., Palermo, V., Boza‐Kiss, B., & Todeschi, V. (2021). How to finance energy renovation of residential buildings: Review of current and emerging financing instruments in the EU. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment , 10 (1), e384. Bianco, V., & Sonvilla, P. M. (2021). Supporting energy efficiency measures in the residential sector. The case of on-bill schemes. Energy Reports , 7 , 4298-4307. Bielig, M., Kacperski, C., & Kutzner, F. (2024). Increasing retrofit device adoption in social housing: Evidence from two field experiments in Belgium. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 95 , 102284. Bird, S., & Hernández, D. (2012). Policy options for the split incentive: Increasing energy efficiency for low-income renters. Energy Policy , 48 , 506-514. Brown, P., Swan, W., & Chahal, S. (2014). Retrofitting social housing: reflections by tenants on adopting and living with retrofit technology. Energy Efficiency , 7 , 641-653. Carpino, C., Bruno, R., & Arcuri, N. (2018). Social housing refurbishment in Mediterranean climate: Cost-optimal analysis towards the n-ZEB target. Energy and Buildings , 174 , 642-656. Copiello, S. (2016). Leveraging energy efficiency to finance public-private social housing projects. Energy Policy , 96 , 217-230. Croon, T., Hoekstra, J., & Dubois, U. (2024). Energy poverty alleviation by social housing providers: A qualitative investigation of targeted interventions in France, England, and the Netherlands. Energy Policy , 192 , 114247. Desvallées, L. (2022). Low-carbon retrofits in social housing: Energy efficiency, multidimensional energy poverty, and domestic comfort strategies in southern Europe. Energy Research & Social Science , 85 , 102413. Dzobo, O., Tazvinga, H., Chihobo, C. H., & Chikuni, E. (2020). The adoption of energy efficiency and a policy framework for Zimbabwe. Journal of Energy in Southern Africa , 31 (3), 1-13. Edalatnia, S., & Das, R. R. (2024). Building benchmarking and energy performance: Analysis of social and affordable housing in British Columbia, Canada. Energy and Buildings , 313 , 114259. EECA. (2000). Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act 2000 . https://climate-laws.org/documents/energy-efficiency-and-conservation-act-2000_a8c1?id=energy-efficiency-and-conservation-act-2000_bfd2 Esmaeilimoakher, P., Urmee, T., Pryor, T., & Baverstock, G. (2016). Identifying the determinants of residential electricity consumption for social housing in Perth, Western Australia. Energy and Buildings , 133 , 403-413. Fabrizio, E., Ferrara, M., & Monetti, V. (2017). Smart heating systems for cost-effective retrofitting. In Cost-effective energy efficient building retrofitting (pp. 279-304). Elsevier. Fell, T., & Mattsson, J. (2021). The role of public-private partnerships in housing as a potential contributor to sustainable cities and communities: A systematic review. Sustainability , 13 (14), 7783. Fernández-Agüera, J., Domínguez-Amarillo, S., Alonso, C., & Martín-Consuegra, F. (2019). Thermal comfort and indoor air quality in low-income housing in Spain: The influence of airtightness and occupant behaviour. Energy and Buildings , 199 , 102-114. Ferroukhi, R., Casals, X., & Parajuli, B. (2020). Measuring the socio-economics of transition: Focus on jobs. International Renewable Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates . Fisk, W. J., Singer, B. C., & Chan, W. R. (2020). Association of residential energy efficiency retrofits with indoor environmental quality, comfort, and health: A review of empirical data. Building and Environment , 180 , 107067. Hashemi, A., & Dungrani, M. (2025). Indoor Environmental Quality and Health Implications of Building Retrofit and Occupant Behaviour in Social Housing. Sustainability , 17 (1), 264. Hernandez-Roman, F., Sheinbaum-Pardo, C., & Calderon-Irazoque, A. (2017). “Socially neglected effect” in the implementation of energy technologies to mitigate climate change: Sustainable building program in social housing. Energy for Sustainable Development , 41 , 149-156. Hoppe, T. (2012). Adoption of innovative energy systems in social housing: Lessons from eight large-scale renovation projects in The Netherlands. Energy Policy , 51 , 791-801. Howden-Chapman, P., Viggers, H., Chapman, R., O’Sullivan, K., Barnard, L. T., & Lloyd, B. (2012). Tackling cold housing and fuel poverty in New Zealand: A review of policies, research, and health impacts. Energy Policy , 49 , 134-142. IEA. (2017). Energy Policies of IEA Countries: New Zealand 2017 Review, International Energy Agency . Retrieved 28/05/2025 from https://webstore.iea.org/energy-policies-of-iea-countries-new-zealand-2017-review Jagarajan, R., Asmoni, M. N. A. M., Mohammed, A. H., Jaafar, M. N., Mei, J. L. Y., & Baba, M. (2017). Green retrofitting–A review of current status, implementations and challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , 67 , 1360-1368. Jayalath, A., Vaz-Serra, P., Hui, F. K. P., & Aye, L. (2024). Thermally comfortable energy efficient affordable houses: A review. Building and Environment , 111495. Jones, R. V., Fuertes, A., Boomsma, C., & Pahl, S. (2016). Space heating preferences in UK social housing: A socio-technical household survey combined with building audits. Energy and Buildings , 127 , 382-398. Kamal, A., Al-Ghamdi, S. G., & Koc, M. (2019). Revaluing the costs and benefits of energy efficiency: A systematic review. Energy Research & Social Science , 54 , 68-84. Koops-Van Hoffen, H., Poelman, M., Droomers, M., Borlée, F., Vendrig-De Punder, Y., Jambroes, M., & Kamphuis, C. (2023). Understanding the mechanisms linking holistic housing renovations to health and well-being of adults in disadvantaged neighbourhoods: A realist review. Health & place , 80 , 102995. Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal , 16 , 1023-1042. Kurmanbekova, M., Du, J., & Sharples, S. (2025). A Review of Indoor Air Quality in Social Housing Across Low-and Middle-Income Countries. Applied Sciences , 15 (4), 1858. Lang, M., Lane, R., Zhao, K., Tham, S., Woolfe, K., & Raven, R. (2021). Systematic review: Landlords’ willingness to retrofit energy efficiency improvements. Journal of Cleaner Production , 303 , 127041. Larrea-Sáez, L., Cuevas, C., & Casas-Ledón, Y. (2023). Energy and environmental assessment of the chilean social housing: Effect of insulation materials and climates. Journal of Cleaner Production , 392 , 136234. Lozinsky, C. H., Casquero-Modrego, N., & Walker, I. S. (2025). The health and indoor environmental quality impacts of residential building envelope retrofits: A literature review. Building and Environment , 112568. Magallón, D., Neve, J., Pillet, A., Motmans, T., Miethke Morais, L., & Lemoine, P. (2019). Manual of financing mechanisms and business models for energy efficiency. In: Basel, Switzerland: Basel Agency for Sustainable Energy (BASE). Retrieved …. Mastrucci, A., Guo, F., Zhong, X., Maczek, F., & van Ruijven, B. (2024). Circular strategies for building sector decarbonization in China: A scenario analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology , 28 (5), 1089-1102. McCabe, A., Pojani, D., & van Groenou, A. B. (2018). The application of renewable energy to social housing: A systematic review. Energy Policy , 114 , 549-557. Medrano-Gómez, L. E., & Izquierdo, A. E. (2017). Social housing retrofit: Improving energy efficiency and thermal comfort for the housing stock recovery in Mexico. Energy Procedia , 121 , 41-48. Mei, X., & Seo, B. K. (2024). The relationships among housing, energy poverty, and health: A scoping review. Energy for Sustainable Development , 83 , 101568. Ministry for the Environment. (2021, 12 April 2021). Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Air Quality) Regulations 2004 . Retrieved 12 April 2021 from https://environment.govt.nz/acts-and-regulations/regulations/national-environmental-standards-for-air-quality/ Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment (MBIE). (2023a, 19th July 2023). Energy Efficiency in New Zealand . Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment. . https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/low-emissions-economy/energy-efficiency-in-new-zealand/ Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment (MBIE). (2023b, 20 Dec 2023). Māori and Public Housing Renewable Energy Fund . Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment (MBIE). Retrieved 27 May 2025 from https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/low-emissions-economy/energy-efficiency-in-new-zealand/maori-and-public-housing-renewable-energy-fund Moghayedi, A., & Awuzie, B. O. (2025). A Framework for Facilitating Low-Income Net-Zero Energy Housing Delivery in Developing Countries: Insights from a Practical Case in South Africa. Building and Environment , 276 , 112847. Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & Group, P.-P. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews , 4 , 1-9. Moore, N., Haines, V., & Lilley, D. (2015). Improving the installation of renewable heating technology in UK social housing properties through user centred design. Indoor and Built Environment , 24 (7), 970-985. Moore, T., Nicholls, L., Strengers, Y., Maller, C., & Horne, R. (2017). Benefits and challenges of energy efficient social housing. Energy Procedia , 121 , 300-307. NZGBC. (2024). Existing Homes Roadmap: Retrofitting our existing homes to improve health, productivity, and progress towards net zero . https://nzgbc.org.nz/hubfs/NZGBC%20-%20Roadmap%20for%20Improving%20Aotearoas%20Existing%20Homes%20Report%20FINAL.pdf?hsCtaTracking=819c8238-5342-401a-a162-cf237045042e%7C3a57d387-80a8-403e-9572-7da9a206e0be O’Donnell, J. (2021). Does social housing reduce homelessness? A multistate analysis of housing and homelessness pathways. Housing studies , 36 (10), 1702-1728. OECD. (2020, 2020). Social housing: A key part of past and future housing policy, Employment, Labour and Social Affairs Policy Briefs, OECD, Paris, . http://oe.cd/ahd OECD. (2024). OECD Affordable Housing Database - indicator HC 3.2. National strategies for combating homelessness, . https://oe.cd/ahd Olivia Campbell. (2024). Top Government Incentives for Energy-Efficient Home Upgrades Sustainableliving.org.nz. Retrieved 27 May 2025 from https://sustainableliving.org.nz/top-government-incentives-for-energy-efficient-home-upgrades Ozarisoy, B., & Altan, H. (2021). Developing an evidence-based energy-policy framework to assess robust energy-performance evaluation and certification schemes in the South-eastern Mediterranean countries. Energy for Sustainable Development , 64 , 65-102. Palm, J., & Bryngelson, E. (2023). Energy efficiency at building sites: barriers and drivers. Energy Efficiency , 16 (2), 7. Panteli, C., Klumbytė, E., Apanavičienė, R., & Fokaides, P. A. (2020). An overview of the existing schemes and research trends in financing the energy upgrade of buildings in Europe. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering , 27 (2), 53-62. Pawson, H., Lawson, J., & Milligan, V. (2011). Social housing strategies, financing mechanisms and outcomes: an international review and update of key post-2007 policy developments. City Futures Research Centre University of New South Wales, Sydney . Penna, P., Prada, A., Cappelletti, F., & Gasparella, A. (2015). Multi-objectives optimization of Energy Efficiency Measures in existing buildings. Energy and Buildings , 95 , 57-69. Pereira-Ruchansky, L., & Perez-Fargallo, A. (2020). Integrated analysis of energy saving and thermal comfort of retrofits in social housing under climate change influence in Uruguay. Sustainability , 12 (11), 4636. Pleace, N., Teller, N., & Quilgars, D. J. (2011). Social housing allocation and homelessness: EOH comparative studies on homelessness. Poortinga, W., Jiang, S., Grey, C., & Tweed, C. (2018). Impacts of energy-efficiency investments on internal conditions in low-income households. Building Research & Information , 46 (6), 653-667. Rangiwhetu, L., Pierse, N., & Howden-Chapman, P. (2017). Effects of minor household interventions to block draughts on social housing temperatures: a before and after study. Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online , 12 (2), 235-245. Recart, C., & Dossick, C. S. (2022). Hygrothermal behavior of post-retrofit housing: A review of the impacts of the energy efficiency upgrade strategies. Energy and Buildings , 262 , 112001. Reeves, P. (2013). Affordable and Social Housing: Policy and Practice (1st ed.). Routledge . https://doi.org/ https://doi-org.ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/10.4324/9781315882758 Rodriguez, N., Katooziani, A., & Jeelani, I. (2024). Barriers to energy-efficient design and construction practices: A comprehensive analysis. Journal of Building Engineering , 82 , 108349. Rosenow, J., Guertler, P., Sorrell, S., & Eyre, N. (2018). The remaining potential for energy savings in UK households. Energy Policy , 121 , 542-552. Ruiz, A., & Guevara, J. (2021). Energy Efficiency Strategies in the Social Housing Sector: Dynamic Considerations and Policies. Journal of Management in Engineering , 37 (4), 04021040. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000937 Russell, E., McKerchar, C., Thompson, L., & Berghan, J. (2023). Māori experiences of social housing in Ōtautahi Christchurch. Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online , 18 (4), 352-369. Sánchez, C. S.-G., González, F. J. N., & Aja, A. H. (2018). Energy poverty methodology based on minimal thermal habitability conditions for low income housing in Spain. Energy and Buildings , 169 , 127-140. Schleich, J. (2019). Energy efficient technology adoption in low-income households in the European Union–What is the evidence? Energy Policy , 125 , 196-206. Seebauer, S., Friesenecker, M., & Eisfeld, K. (2019). Integrating climate and social housing policy to alleviate energy poverty: An analysis of targets and instruments in Austria. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy , 14 (7-9), 304-326. Solan, D., Hurley, K., & Louis, M. (2010). Energy Efficiency Financing Mechanisms. Energy Policy Institute . Souliotis, M., Panaras, G., Fokaides, P. A., Papaefthimiou, S., & Kalogirou, S. A. (2018). Solar water heating for social housing: Energy analysis and Life Cycle Assessment. Energy and Buildings , 169 , 157-171. StatsNZ. (2024). 2023 Census severe housing deprivation (homelessness) estimates Sunikka-Blank, M., Chen, J., Britnell, J., & Dantsiou, D. (2012). Improving Energy Efficiency of Social Housing Areas: A Case Study of a Retrofit Achieving an "A" Energy Performance Rating in the UK. European Planning Studies , 20 (1), 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.638494 Sunikka-Blank, M., Chen, J., Britnell, J., & Dantsiou, D. (2012). Improving energy efficiency of social housing areas: A case study of a retrofit achieving an “A” energy performance rating in the UK. European Planning Studies , 20 (1), 131-145. Swan, W., Fitton, R., Smith, L., Abbott, C., & Smith, L. (2017). Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing 2010-2015. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation , 35 (5), 456-469. Tarode, S., & Shrivastava, S. (2021). A framework for stakeholder management ecosystem. American Journal of Business , 37 (2), 76-88. Teli, D., Dimitriou, T., James, P. A., Bahaj, A., Ellison, L., & Waggott, A. (2016). Fuel poverty-induced ‘prebound effect’in achieving the anticipated carbon savings from social housing retrofit. Building Services Engineering Research and Technology , 37 (2), 176-193. Tewari, S., & Rajagopalan, P. (2025). Integration of Heat Pumps in Social Housing—Role of User Behaviour and User Satisfaction. Buildings , 15 (6), 898. Thema, J., Suerkemper, F., Couder, J., Mzavanadze, N., Chatterjee, S., Teubler, J., Thomas, S., Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Hansen, M. B., & Bouzarovski, S. (2019). The multiple benefits of the 2030 EU energy efficiency potential. Energies , 12 (14), 2798. Ugarte, S., van der Ree, B., Voogt, M., Eichhammer, W., Ordoñez, J. A., Reuter, M., Schlomann, B., Lloret Gallego, P., & Villafafila Robles, R. (2016). Energy efficiency for low-income households. Umana, A. U., Garba, B. M. P., Ologun, A., Olu, J. S., & Umar, M. O. (2024). The role of government policies in promoting social housing: A comparative study between Nigeria and other developing nations. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews , 23 (03), 371-382. UN-Habitat. (2010). The Right to Adequate Housing . O. o. t. U. N. H. C. f. H. Rights. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/documents/2019-05/fact_sheet_21_adequate_housing_final_2010.pdf UN-Habitat. (2019). Expert Group Meeting on Affordable Housing and Social Protection Systems for All to Address Homelessness . U. N. H. S. P. (UN-Habitat). www.unhabitat.org UN-Habitat. (2022). Children, Cities and Housing: Rights and Priorities . UN-Habitat. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2022/08/children-cities-and-housing-rights-and-priorities.pdf Wei, J., Li, H. X., Sadick, A.-M., & Noguchi, M. (2024). A systematic review of key issues influencing the environmental performance of social housing. Energy and Buildings , 319 , 114566. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7483852","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Systematic Review","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":511520020,"identity":"b51a8aa6-1f9c-4c53-a524-0da12d7c5873","order_by":0,"name":"Christian Nwarueze","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Massey University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Christian","middleName":"","lastName":"Nwarueze","suffix":""},{"id":511520021,"identity":"d05019d8-d2ff-4819-9cbd-f5449c9c8233","order_by":1,"name":"Monty Sutrisna","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Massey University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Monty","middleName":"","lastName":"Sutrisna","suffix":""},{"id":511520022,"identity":"f35aee40-7034-403d-b718-a7f7f1debbf4","order_by":2,"name":"Hennie Van Heerden","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Massey University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hennie","middleName":"Van","lastName":"Heerden","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-08-29 01:23:12","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7483852/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7483852/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":90816116,"identity":"9a3b334e-3f7c-4f4c-b8f8-3a423345f145","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:13:04","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":114350,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe PRISMA Protocol for Conducting SLR was used in this research.\u003cstrong\u003e(a) Identifying Relevant Papers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/562664c0a7fa0afcf23d9c47.png"},{"id":90816369,"identity":"fdf6db34-dfe9-4132-9b89-49fc6c323ce1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:21:05","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":18024,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eJournal article distribution by Year\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/a578cf79d8e2f4fd6158b5d6.png"},{"id":90816127,"identity":"8039899a-68be-44f3-8a51-66868b7eac56","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:13:05","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":54984,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eList of countries included in the study\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/6a97b4d06f335fd6a4188ebf.png"},{"id":90816130,"identity":"ac70a1a2-c482-44a6-839b-3291f0c01f71","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:13:05","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":23149,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEnergy efficiency adoption trends in social housing\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/bb2ce842394d5f83f2dcbeca.png"},{"id":90816371,"identity":"39f709e0-ec09-45c5-a601-054be3cad0d4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:21:05","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":17979,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe economic benefits of energy efficiency adoption in social housing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/04b0a7eced145fb554e5ab91.png"},{"id":90816117,"identity":"19bd50c0-d6c6-491d-b238-09ec2d430464","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:13:04","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":19953,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe Health and Environmental Benefits of Adopting Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/0847304401f54b886044387f.png"},{"id":90816125,"identity":"a811515b-5d9d-4a7f-be47-96e4b308868d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:13:05","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":86101,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVisual representation of benefits derived from an energy-efficient social housing unit.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/e5b604ab52f53babd84efe8f.png"},{"id":90817535,"identity":"39bfbc40-fa9c-4edd-b855-1b4fc51666e7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-08 13:29:05","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":190543,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFig.9. The proposed conceptual framework for adopting energy efficiency measures in the social housing system\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/0ffdde1c43fce31c7fafe9eb.png"},{"id":96454838,"identity":"5f6ffb67-aafc-4e5c-8d4a-90598e2128c3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-21 10:03:11","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1935308,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7483852/v1/8c2df4f4-d92e-429b-84e7-d10994bcfaa3.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing: Trends, Benefits, Barriers, and Enablers","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eHousing goes beyond providing mere shelter; it is vital for public health, social stability, and economic participation. It plays a crucial role in discussions about equitable development, urban resilience, and the well-being of communities(Baker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The United Nations defines adequate housing as encompassing protection from forced eviction, security of tenure, habitability, and affordability, particularly for vulnerable and marginalised groups(UN-Habitat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR92\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, p. 129; 2022, pp. 22\u0026ndash;24).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBuilding on this foundation, social housing represents a targeted mechanism to realise the principles of adequate housing for those unable to access the private housing market. Managed by public authorities or non-profit providers, it offers secure, affordable, and habitable homes for low-income households, marginalised groups, and individuals with specific housing needs(OECD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Reeves, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). By reducing exposure to housing insecurity and substandard living conditions, social housing mitigates health risks, enhances social stability, and supports economic participation. It also plays a pivotal role in promoting equity and resilience within communities, aligning housing provision with broader social and sustainable development objectives(Russell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; UN-Habitat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHomelessness often arises from a combination of factors, including mental illness, discrimination, lack of affordable housing, and insufficient infrastructure. These issues highlight deeper systemic failures within housing markets. However, evidence indicates that coordinated policy initiatives and inclusive housing models can provide viable long-term solutions(OECD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Pleace et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; UN-Habitat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, p. 19). In New Zealand, these challenges remain prevalent. According to the 2023 Census, 2.3% of the population experiences severe housing deprivation. This includes individuals without shelter, those in temporary accommodations, and people living in overcrowded conditions(StatsNZ, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). In response to these challenges, the Aotearoa Homelessness Action Plan advocates for a multifaceted strategy that prioritises prevention, increases the supply of housing, and enhances coordination within the housing system(OECD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e, p. 6).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA pressing issue within New Zealand\u0026rsquo;s housing landscape is the poor condition of many homes, especially those within the social housing sector. Approximately 30% of homes lack adequate insulation, and nearly half of all rented dwellings exhibit issues such as dampness and mould, leading to poor indoor air quality and thermal discomfort(Baker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). These shortcomings disproportionately affect low-income tenants, increasing their energy burdens and their risk of respiratory illness conditions for which New Zealand ranks among the worst in the OECD(IEA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Poortinga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEnergy efficiency has therefore become central to efforts aimed at improving housing conditions. Inadequate insulation and outdated heating systems contribute to excessive energy use and thermal discomfort in low-income households (Ascione et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Ruiz \u0026amp; Guevara, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; M. Sunikka-Blank et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Energy efficiency interventions, defined as measures that reduce energy consumption while improving or maintaining indoor conditions, offer co-benefits: they reduce emissions, improve health, and lower energy costs for households(Asadpoor \u0026amp; Jahanshahi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Penna et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo support these goals, governments have introduced a range of financial mechanisms. These include direct grants, on-bill financing, and public-private partnerships aimed at spreading retrofit costs over time(Aranda et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Bianco \u0026amp; Sonvilla, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Lang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). In New Zealand, examples include the Warmer Kiwi Homes programme and the Māori and Public Housing Renewable Energy Fund, both managed by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) to target low-income and public housing sectors(Ministry of Business Innovation \u0026amp; Employment (MBIE), 2023a, 2023b; Olivia Campbell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRetrofitting is a particularly promising strategy to improve energy performance in existing buildings. Complete energy retrofits, as explained by Recart and Dossick (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), involve mechanical system upgrades and smart heating controls; thermal retrofits improve the building envelope; and focused retrofits involve single interventions such as insulation or window replacement. Integrating renewable energy sources such as solar panels and heat pumps can reduce dependence on fossil fuels and improve affordability (McCabe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Retrofitting is often more cost-effective than new construction and avoids displacement(Jagarajan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, such upgrades require enabling policy frameworks, financial incentives, performance standards, and administrative simplifications that are essential to scaling these interventions and ensuring alignment with national housing and energy goals(Alabid et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Umana et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). It is also important to distinguish between social and affordable housing: the latter may include a broader mix of ownership and rental options, while social housing typically serves the most vulnerable and is managed by public or non-profit organisations (OECD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Reeves, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). This distinction is important, as the financial and technical barriers to energy retrofitting are often higher in social housing due to limited investment capacity and complex tenant-landlord dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study explores how energy efficiency measures are adopted in social housing, focusing on the New Zealand context. It aims to (i) identify global trends and benefits, (ii) examine the barriers and enablers of adoption, and in doing so, it seeks to inform evidence-based strategies for achieving resilient, low-carbon, and equitable housing systems.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eA hybrid methodology that integrates systematic review and narrative analysis was employed in this study to examine the key themes surrounding the motivations and methods social housing providers use to implement renewable energy technologies. While systematic reviews are frequently utilised in health-related fields focused on quantitative outcomes, narrative analyses are typically reserved for literature reviews of case studies with diverse and incomparable boundaries. This review combines both methodological approaches by incorporating a replicable systematic review protocol and qualitative analysis techniques within the narrative review, such as coding and thematic analysis. This blended strategy was appropriate given the highly contextualised and heterogeneous nature of the data, which precluded direct comparisons but allowed for the identification of recurring themes throughout the literature.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1 Systematic literature review (SLR)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a research method that uses a clear process to find, evaluate, and combine existing research on a specific topic. The main aim of an SLR is to give a complete overview of the literature, identify gaps in research, and draw conclusions based on careful and objective analysis. This method stands in contrast to traditional narrative reviews, which often allow for more flexibility and interpretation(\u003cem\u003eKraus\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). A systematic literature review (SLR) studies and summarises existing research. It helps us understand what has already been done and points out where more research is needed. This method reduces biases that often appear in regular reviews\u003cem\u003e(Moher et al., 2015)\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable I outlines the criteria and guidelines utilised for data searches according to the PRISMA protocol.Table i.\u0026nbsp;Criteria and guidelines for data search.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"656\"\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStages\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCriteria and guidelines for data search\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInclusion criteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOnly academic journals published in English in line with housing, residential housing, energy efficiency measures in social housing, benefits, challenges and alignment with sustainable development goals were included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis method reduces language barriers. The study stays aligned with its goals and objectives by focusing on energy efficiency in social housing.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudies published between 2012 and 2025 were included to align with establishing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2012, ensuring relevant data on SDG implementation. A few important studies from before 2012 were also intentionally included for their valuable insights.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExclusion criteria\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNon-English studies were excluded due to the authors\u0026apos; English proficiency. Studies focused solely on social housing without considering energy efficiency were also excluded to maintain the focus on adopting energy efficiency measures.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData search approach in Scopus database\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKeywords utilised for the search include: TITLE-ABS-KEY (\u0026ldquo;housing association\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;public housing\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;social housing\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;council housing\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;state housing\u0026rdquo;) AND (\u0026ldquo;energy efficiency\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;renewable\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;solar\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;wind\u0026rdquo;). The search scope was confined to articles published between 2012 and 2025. The subject areas addressed in this study comprise Housing, Housing Finance, Energy, Engineering, and Environmental Science. These selected disciplines encompass all fields relevant to research on implementing energy efficiency measures in social housing. Only articles published in English were included, covering those in press and at their final stages.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData search strategy in the Google Scholar database\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSearch keywords used: (\u0026ldquo;housing association\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;public housing\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;social housing\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;council housing\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;state housing\u0026rdquo;) AND (\u0026ldquo;energy efficiency\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;renewable\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;solar\u0026rdquo; OR \u0026ldquo;wind\u0026rdquo;). Results were limited within the timeframe ranging from 2012 to 2025.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1.1 Procedure for data collection\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data retrieval process included four stages (see Fig. 1): (a) identifying relevant papers, (b) evaluating and excluding papers, (c) assessing the quality and eligibility of selected papers, and (d) summarising them.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(a) Identifying Relevant Papers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis systematic review followed the PRISMA protocol, drawing data from Scopus, ScienceDirect, JSTOR, Wiley Online, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, Google Scholar, UN-Habitat, and the OECD Library. These databases were selected for their broad coverage of peer-reviewed literature and policy documents relevant to energy efficiency, social housing, sustainability, and housing technology adoption. The Boolean search string combined terms such as \u0026ldquo;social housing,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;energy efficiency,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;funding,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;technology adoption.\u0026rdquo; Initial searches yielded 3,317 records from Scopus, 4,230 from ScienceDirect, 1,805 from Wiley, 618 from JSTOR, 396 from UN-Habitat, and 139 from the OECD Library. The search was refined to remove duplicates and irrelevant results.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(b) Paper Evaluation and Exclusion\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe preliminary screening focused on the relevance of each paper to the study\u0026apos;s objectives. We reviewed titles and abstracts to exclude any documents that did not align with the themes of energy efficiency in social or low-income housing. As a result of this process, we narrowed the pool down to 550 full-text articles.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(c) Eligibility and Quality Evaluation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe full-text papers were evaluated for quality and relevance, focusing on peer-reviewed articles, government reports, and credible publications. Only studies addressing energy efficiency adoption, barriers, enablers, or policy linkages were included. A total of 92 high-quality sources were selected for analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(d) Selected Paper\u0026rsquo;s Summary\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe final set of 92 papers was exported to Excel for thematic coding. These papers examined energy efficiency strategies in social housing, including economic and environmental impacts, policy instruments, and SDG alignment. Although grey literature and some case studies were excluded, the review maintained methodological integrity. Some terminological limitations (e.g., exclusion of \u0026ldquo;low-income housing\u0026rdquo; as a term) may have led to missed studies, but the selection strategy ensured a comprehensive and credible evidence base.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results \u0026 discussions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe detailed SLR findings on the study\u0026apos;s objectives are discussed in the following section.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArticles distribution by year\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe systematic literature review (SLR) analysed articles and government reports from 2012 to 2025, including key earlier publications. Figure 2 shows varying interest levels in adopting energy efficiency measures in social housing, with notable peaks in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023, and the highest in 2024. This increase is primarily due to funding initiatives supporting research in this area. The integration of energy efficiency measures aligns with several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), while also contributing to SDGs 13 (Climate Action) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe increasing number of publications on adopting energy efficiency measures in social housing highlights a growing global awareness of this important issue. This trend can be attributed to several interconnected factors. Firstly, the pressing need to address climate change and its effects has motivated governments, organisations, and researchers to concentrate on effective practices in housing, especially in social housing, where affordability and accessibility are paramount. Energy efficiency measures reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the living conditions of vulnerable populations by lowering costs and enhancing indoor air quality(McCabe \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2018; S\u0026aacute;nchez \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018; Souliotis \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018). The expanding body of literature recognises that integrating energy efficiency into social housing is crucial for achieving these goals, fostering further research, policy development, and practical implementation. The rise in studies in this field shows a global shift toward prioritising energy efficiency in social housing as a key part of sustainable development, underscoring the challenges and opportunities ahead.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.1 Country-wise distribution of articles\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 3 illustrates the geographical distribution of studies focused on the adoption of energy efficiency measures in social housing. The United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States exhibit the highest concentrations of research, contributing 15, 12, and 11 studies, respectively, out of the 92 analysed. Following these countries, Spain, Italy, New Zealand, France, Sweden, and Kenya each added 8, 7, 6, 5, and 4 studies, respectively. This trend likely reflects the European Union\u0026apos;s commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, alongside strong financial incentives that encourage sustainable building practices. While New Zealand demonstrates commitment and effort, its research output is not as substantial as that of Australia, indicating a need for further exploration in this area. Australia and the United States have made notable advancements in raising awareness about climate change and implementing strategies aligned with the Paris Agreement established in 2015. In contrast, other nations\u0026mdash;such as Mexico, Chile, Canada, Brazil, Qatar, Norway, Belgium, China, the Netherlands, Uganda, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Poland, Switzerland, Ireland, Austria, South Africa, Greece, and India\u0026mdash;have also significantly contributed to this field. These efforts underscore their commitment to limiting global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius as mandated by the Paris Agreement, which includes an ambitious target of reducing emissions by 45% by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Despite New Zealand\u0026apos;s considerable research output, the country faces significant challenges in enhancing housing energy efficiency. Various factors contribute to this situation, highlighting the necessity for continued research. A considerable portion of the housing stock remains inadequately insulated, resulting in low indoor temperatures and excessive energy consumption\u003cem\u003e(Baker, 2019; Rangiwhetu et al., 2017\u003c/em\u003e). Additionally, buyers and landlords often do not prioritise energy efficiency measures, and some government initiatives have faced resistance(\u003cem\u003eLang et al., 2021)\u003c/em\u003e. The country has a longstanding history of inadequate housing regulations, resulting in many existing homes being poorly insulated (Howden-Chapman \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2012). There is an urgent need for additional research in this critical area.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Identified global trends in energy efficiency adoption in social housing","content":"\u003cp\u003eAn interplay of technology, finance, policy and social factors, and emerging innovations shapes energy efficiency (EE) measures in social housing. Among the hundred and two reviewed articles, \u003cstrong\u003etechnological and economic (40% technology, 12.82% economic) trends co-occurred in 52.82%\u003c/strong\u003e of cases, suggesting that technological upgrades such as retrofitting or the use of heat pumps are frequently discussed in relation to cost considerations like subsidies or investment barriers. \u003cstrong\u003eTechnological and policy overlaps (technology 40%, policy 28.72%)\u003c/strong\u003e were equally common, indicating that policy frameworks are often linked to specific technologies. \u003cstrong\u003eSocial dimensions (18.46%)\u003c/strong\u003e, such as tenant behaviour or trust, landlords\u0026apos; willingness to invest in energy-efficient upgrades, intersected more frequently with financial and technological aspects than with policy alone, reflecting concerns around cost acceptability, behavioural change, and end-user engagement. Although some articles addressed all four dimensions simultaneously, and some demonstrated a three-way relationship (Tech + economic + Policy), providing initial evidence of integrated approaches to energy efficiency adoption. This co-occurrence pattern supports the claim of an \u0026ldquo;intricate interplay\u0026rdquo; between domains and highlights the need for multi-dimensional strategies. An interplay of policy, technology, finance, social factors, and emerging innovations shapes energy efficiency (EE) measures in social housing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1 Identified Benefits of Adopting Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing (2000- 2500 words)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom an economic perspective, energy efficiency measures can lead to substantial cost savings for residents and housing providers, thereby reducing energy use and promoting financial sustainability(Poortinga et al., 2018). Additionally, the health benefits associated with improved energy efficiency, such as enhanced indoor air quality and thermal comfort, significantly contribute to the overall well-being of occupants, particularly in vulnerable populations that often live in social housing by reducing health risk, boosting cognitive performance and improving overall satisfaction(Brown et al., 2014; Medrano-G\u0026oacute;mez \u0026amp; Izquierdo, 2017; S\u0026aacute;nchez et al., 2018; Souliotis et al., 2018; Teli et al., 2016)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1.2 Economic Benefits\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe systematic literature review (SLR) findings in Figure 5 highlight the economic benefits of energy efficiency measures in social housing. Reduced energy costs represent immediate savings from lower consumption, while long-term cost savings reflect the cumulative financial benefits over time. Many studies emphasise these aspects due to their financial and environmental impacts. Key benefits include reduced energy costs noted in thirteen studies (42%), long-term cost savings in twelve studies (39%), job creation in three studies (10%), and increased property values also reported in three studies (10%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1.3 Reduced Energy Costs and Long-term Cost Savings\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSocial housing residents are predominantly concerned with minimising energy costs, making energy efficiency interventions a critical strategy for achieving long-term financial relief. A substantial body of evidence confirms that energy-efficient upgrades in social housing significantly reduce energy expenditures. Systematic reviews indicate that strategic investments in housing retrofits substantially lower utility costs over time, producing sustained economic benefits for tenants and providers(Kamal et al., 2019) . These cost savings are closely linked to the physical characteristics of buildings, where retrofitting and integrating renewable energy sources have been shown to reduce electricity consumption and deliver more equitable financial outcomes (Esmaeilimoakher et al., 2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSeveral applied studies further demonstrate the tangible financial benefits of specific interventions. Installing advanced heating controls during retrofits optimises heating schedules, reduces unnecessary energy use, and lowers monthly bills(Fabrizio et al., 2017). Similarly, life cycle analyses show that solar water heating systems substantially reduce hot water energy demand, lessening the ongoing financial burden on occupants(Souliotis et al., 2018). Adopting heat pumps has also been associated with significant operational savings, particularly when residents are adequately informed and engaged in their use(Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIntegrating renewable energy technologies into social housing enhances environmental outcomes and decreases reliance on costly fossil fuels, delivering long-term financial relief to residents(McCabe et al., 2018). Projections suggest that implementing widely available and cost-effective energy efficiency interventions could reduce household energy consumption by approximately 25% by 2035, representing substantial savings for economically vulnerable households(Larrea-S\u0026aacute;ez et al., 2023; Rosenow et al., 2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese findings consistently point to one conclusion: energy efficiency in social housing offers a clear pathway to sustained cost reductions. For tenants facing high energy burdens, these savings are not marginal but transformative, alleviating financial stress and improving affordability. By prioritising retrofits and technology, optimising energy performance, housing providers can generate long-term economic benefits that align with tenant needs and broader sustainability goals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1.4 Increased property value and Job creation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eImproving energy performance in social housing delivers not only environmental and cost-saving benefits but also contributes to increased property value and job creation. In New Zealand, both the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) and the New Zealand Green Building Council (NZGBC) recognise the role of energy efficiency in enhancing asset value. Energy-efficient buildings are increasingly desirable due to their lower operational costs and alignment with sustainability standards (EECA, 2000; NZGBC, 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNumerous studies and policy reports affirm that energy upgrades can generate a \u0026ldquo;green premium,\u0026rdquo; whereby properties with higher energy performance command higher market valuations than less efficient counterparts(Carpino et al., 2018; Kamal et al., 2019; Souliotis et al., 2018; Ugarte et al., 2016). This added value stems from reduced long-term energy expenses and a growing market preference for sustainable, comfortable, and healthy living environments. Enhanced property valuation also strengthens stock(McCabe et al., 2018; Ugarte et al., 2016).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimultaneously, energy-efficiency interventions serve as significant drivers of employment. Large-scale retrofitting and system upgrades require skilled labour in construction, installation, and engineering trades. In addition to these direct jobs, energy efficiency programmes generate employment in related fields such as energy auditing, renewable energy consulting, and green technology development (Ferroukhi et al., 2020; Thema et al., 2019). The associated growth in manufacturing and supply chains for energy-efficient materials further expands job opportunities. Ugarte et al. (2016) highlight that energy retrofitting stimulates local economies by fostering green job creation and promoting inclusive growth. Together, these outcomes demonstrate that energy-efficient social housing offers long-term economic value through increased property value and job generation, strengthening communities.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Health and Environmental Benefits","content":"\u003cp\u003eEnergy efficiency adoption is crucial in promoting health and environmental benefits. It \u003cstrong\u003ereduces carbon emissions, improves air quality, contributes to climate stability, and enhances thermal comfort.\u003c/strong\u003e Social housing can substantially lower energy consumption by adopting energy-efficient measures, such as advanced insulation, energy-efficient appliances, and renewable energy sources (Brown et al., 2014; Fabrizio et al., 2017; Teli et al., 2016; Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.1 Reduced carbon footprint and contribution to climate goals\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEnhancing energy efficiency in social housing is essential in reducing carbon emissions and advancing national and international climate goals. These interventions, once seen primarily as cost-saving or technical solutions, are central to sustainable development and climate action due to their measurable environmental impact. Reducing energy demand in the residential sector directly lowers greenhouse gas emissions, supporting broader decarbonisation efforts(Esmaeilimoakher et al., 2016; Kamal et al., 2019). Social housing, often characterised by outdated infrastructure, presents significant opportunities for emissions reduction through retrofitting, renewable energy integration, and envelope performance upgrades(Alonso et al., 2017; McCabe et al., 2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTechnological improvements such as heat pumps, advanced heating controls, and solar water heating systems have demonstrated strong potential to lower carbon intensity, particularly when aligned with efficient design and informed user engagement(Fabrizio et al., 2017; Souliotis et al., 2018; Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025). Enhancing insulation and airtightness further reduces energy demand for heating and cooling, especially in thermally inefficient social housing stock(Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Ag\u0026uuml;era et al., 2019; Larrea-S\u0026aacute;ez et al., 2023) .\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt a policy level, energy-efficient social housing aligns with decarbonisation targets. Estimates suggest that energy-saving measures could reduce residential emissions by up to 25% by 2035(Rosenow et al., 2018), supporting directives such as the European Commission\u0026rsquo;s aim to cut building-sector emissions by 60% by 2030 and achieve a zero-emission building stock by 2050(Mastrucci et al., 2024). Circular economy approaches further suggest that emissions and energy savings of 30\u0026ndash;40% are achievable across the sector.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile these environmental benefits are substantial, effective implementation depends on addressing behavioural and social barriers. A lack of user awareness and engagement, termed the \u0026ldquo;socially neglected effect\u0026rdquo;, can undermine the effectiveness of low-carbon technologies, especially in low-income communities(Hernandez-Roman et al., 2017). These findings demonstrate that energy efficiency in social housing is a vital strategy for carbon mitigation, with direct implications for climate resilience and environmental justice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.1.1 Improved indoor air quality\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIndoor air quality (IAQ) is defined by the New Zealand National Environmental Standards for air quality as the condition of air within living spaces, including homes and schools, that influences the health and well-being of their occupants. Various factors contribute to IAQ, such as ventilation, moisture management, and the presence of indoor contaminants(Ministry for the Environment, 2021). Residents in these environments often encounter subpar IAQ due to insufficient maintenance, inadequate ventilation, and increased exposure to moisture, dampness, and airborne pollutants. These factors elevate the risk of respiratory illnesses, allergies, and general discomfort, particularly among vulnerable populations(Fisk et al., 2020; Kurmanbekova et al., 2025; Lozinsky et al., 2025; Medrano-G\u0026oacute;mez \u0026amp; Izquierdo, 2017; Mei \u0026amp; Seo, 2024; Recart \u0026amp; Dossick, 2022).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEnergy-efficient retrofitting, particularly improvements in insulation and airtightness, significantly enhances IAQ when paired with proper ventilation strategies(Ascione et al., 2024). While such measures reduce energy consumption and thermal losses, they also affect indoor air dynamics(Baniassadi et al., 2022). Without adequate ventilation, airtight buildings risk trapping pollutants, thereby worsening IAQ. Studies have emphasised the importance of integrated design approaches that combine insulation with mechanical or passive ventilation to maintain air freshness and pollutant control(Baniassadi et al., 2022; Fabrizio et al., 2017; Jayalath et al., 2024).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThermal comfort and IAQ are interrelated; factors such as heat transfer, insulation resistance (R-value), and thermal transmittance (U-value) influence internal temperatures and moisture accumulation, directly affecting respiratory health and comfort levels(Aranda et al., 2017; Desvall\u0026eacute;es, 2022; Hashemi \u0026amp; Dungrani, 2025; Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025). Enhancing envelope performance thus contributes not only to energy efficiency but also to healthier indoor environments. However, the \u0026ldquo;socially neglected effect, \u0026quot; where residents fail to fully utilise or accept energy technologies, can limit IAQ interventions\u0026apos; effectiveness(Hernandez-Roman et al., 2017). Addressing this requires a user-focused approach, combining physical improvements with education and engagement. In conclusion, improving IAQ in social housing through energy-efficient retrofitting and ventilation is essential for occupant health. Such interventions support both environmental objectives and public health, especially for low-income households disproportionately exposed to indoor pollutants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5.1.2 Enhanced thermal comfort\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThermal comfort is defined by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers as \u0026quot;that condition of mind that expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment\u0026rdquo;(Barbosa et al., 2024) It is an essential factor in ensuring occupant well-being, and in social housing, upgrades in energy efficiency are instrumental in achieving and sustaining thermal comfort, particularly for vulnerable populations who face inadequate indoor environments(Jayalath et al., 2024; Medrano-G\u0026oacute;mez \u0026amp; Izquierdo, 2017; Pereira-Ruchansky \u0026amp; Perez-Fargallo, 2020).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne of the most consistently reported benefits of energy efficiency interventions in social housing is improved thermal comfort. Retrofitting measures such as insulation, draught-proofing, and building envelope enhancements have been shown to stabilise indoor temperatures, especially during colder seasons. In the UK, energy upgrades led to noticeably warmer homes in winter, improving comfort for low-income residents(Poortinga et al., 2018) . Similar outcomes were observed in Spain, where retrofitted social housing demonstrated better indoor thermal performance and more stable environmental conditions (Aranda et al., 2017). Even minor modifications can yield substantial benefits; in New Zealand, simple draught-blocking interventions significantly improved nighttime bedroom temperatures in social housing (Rangiwhetu et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn warmer climates, passive cooling strategies such as natural ventilation, thermal mass, and shading are essential for reducing indoor heat stress during extreme heat events(Ozarisoy \u0026amp; Altan, 2021). These approaches are critical in maintaining comfort without increasing energy demand.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThermal comfort is further enhanced when energy retrofits are integrated with behavioural and social engagement. Renovation projects in the Netherlands that included resident participation delivered technical improvements and achieved higher user satisfaction with thermal conditions(Koops-Van Hoffen et al., 2023). Empirical studies in Austria, New Zealand, and the U.S. also confirm that upgraded insulation, airtightness, and building design consistently led to warmer and more comfortable homes(Fisk et al., 2020; Lozinsky et al., 2025; Seebauer et al., 2019). Overall, the literature demonstrates that energy retrofits in social housing enhance thermal comfort across diverse climates. These interventions reduce exposure to temperature extremes and foster healthier, more stable indoor environments, particularly when paired with resident-centred design strategies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Barriers and Enablers Influencing the Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing","content":"\u003cp\u003eSorrell (2004) defines a barrier to energy efficiency as \u0026ldquo;a postulated mechanism that inhibits a decision or behaviour that appears to be both energy and economically efficient.\u0026rdquo; Building on this definition within the context of this research, a barrier is understood as a factor that adversely affects an organisation\u0026rsquo;s willingness to adopt energy efficiency opportunities. Implementing energy efficiency measures in social housing is essential for reducing fuel poverty, enhancing indoor environmental conditions, and supporting climate mitigation objectives. However, this implementation is often obstructed by structural and behavioural barriers. This section critically explores three primary categories of barriers: high upfront costs, lack of awareness, and regulatory obstacles, alongside key enabling mechanisms such as financial incentives, education and training, and supportive policy frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1. High Upfront Cost, Hidden cost and Split incentive as a Financial Barrier\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eImplementing energy efficiency upgrades, particularly through retrofitting, renewable heating systems, and improved insulation, can be prohibitively expensive for social housing providers. These costs are typically incurred before any operational savings are realised, placing significant strain on capital budgets(Moore et al., 2015). Additionally, there are \u0026ldquo;hidden costs\u0026rdquo;, unforeseen expenses such as ongoing maintenance, tenant training, or necessary system adjustments, that further heighten the perceived risks and complexities associated with these investments(Azimi et al., 2023). Although these anticipated downstream costs are not included in the initial investment, they are psychologically and financially integrated into the decision-making process, discouraging decisive action. \u0026nbsp;Beyond the magnitude of these costs, the split incentive dilemma is a significant deterrent in the social housing sector. In this scenario, landlords are responsible for funding energy upgrades, while tenants benefit from reduced utility costs. This misalignment of investment and reward diminishes the financial appeal of retrofitting for housing providers, especially those operating on limited margins or fixed budgets(Bird \u0026amp; Hern\u0026aacute;ndez, 2012; Moore et al., 2017). Consequently, the split incentive disrupts traditional cost-benefit analyses, rendering energy efficiency investments financially irrational from the landlord\u0026rsquo;s perspective, irrespective of the broader societal or environmental benefits.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnabler \u0026ndash; Financial Incentives\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinancial incentives such as targeted subsidies, low-interest loans, on-bill repayment programmes, and shared-savings models can effectively address the burden of upfront costs (Abolhosseini \u0026amp; Heshmati, 2014; Magall\u0026oacute;n et al., 2019). These mechanisms reduce capital risks, improve cash flow for housing providers, and align investment incentives between landlords and tenants(Pawson et al., 2011; Solan et al., 2010). Transparent financial modelling and performance-based frameworks can further enhance the credibility and uptake of retrofit initiatives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2. Lack of Awareness and Resident Engagement as a Social Barrier\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnother significant barrier is tenants\u0026apos; limited awareness and understanding regarding the operation, purpose, and benefits of energy-efficient technologies. Many social housing residents express scepticism toward new systems, particularly when prior experiences with poorly communicated installations have bred mistrust(McCabe et al., 2018). Complex control systems and insufficient user training often result in improper or underuse of technologies, thus reducing their intended impact.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBehavioural resistance is also driven by routine attachment to legacy systems and uncertainty about the risks of adopting unfamiliar technology. This lack of awareness undermines system performance and alienates users from broader retrofit objectives. Additionally, tenants often feel excluded from retrofit planning and decision-making processes, which can lead to disengagement and even opposition to installation(Ascione et al., 2024; Azimi et al., 2023; Hernandez-Roman et al., 2017; Hoppe, 2012; Moore et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnabler-Education and Training\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResident education and post-installation support are vital in overcoming these barriers. Comprehensive, tenant-focused communication strategies and hands-on training must complement energy efficiency measures. Behavioural interventions grounded in social norms, such as publicising neighbour adoption rates, have proven effective in increasing acceptance (Bielig et al., 2024). Moreover, engaging tenants in co-design processes ensures better alignment with their needs and fosters long-term ownership and use of technologies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3. Regulatory and Institutional Hurdles as a Barrier\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegulatory inconsistency and fragmented policy landscapes significantly constrain the scaling of energy efficiency in social housing. A core issue is the absence of stable and targeted national mandates to support renewable energy adoption in retrofitting programmes. This creates uncertainty for housing providers, particularly when existing regulations conflict, such as expenditure caps on social housing and limited energy performance requirements(McCabe et al., 2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, regulatory frameworks are often ill-suited to the structural and social realities of social housing. The failure to design policies that address the specific needs of low-income tenants and non-profit housing providers limits the effectiveness of current programmes(Moore et al., 2017). Frequent policy changes and a lack of continuity deter long-term investment planning(Swan et al., 2017). Another notable gap is the limited regulatory attention to the construction phase of buildings. Most energy codes focus on operational performance, overlooking the substantial savings that could be realised during early-stage construction activities(Palm \u0026amp; Bryngelson, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnabler- Supportive Policy Frameworks\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo effectively tackle regulatory inertia, it is essential to establish a clear and comprehensive national policy strategy. This strategy should seamlessly integrate retrofit objectives within housing and energy mandates. Ensuring stable funding, setting performance benchmarks, and implementing mandatory tenant engagement guidelines will create a robust framework for consistent and equitable adoption. Furthermore, policies must include efficiency standards for construction phases and encourage early-stage design interventions. Simplifying compliance processes and broadening access to certification systems like BREEAM and LEED for smaller providers can also significantly enhance participation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conceptual framework","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis conceptual framework illustrates the complex and interconnected dynamics shaping the adoption of energy efficiency (EE) in social housing by integrating barriers, benefits, feedback mechanisms, and stakeholder roles into a holistic model. At the centre are four critical domains: technological, economic, policy, and social, that form the foundation of adoption processes. The framework highlights that adoption is constrained by multiple barriers: financial constraints such as high upfront costs, technical capacity issues such as limited tenant knowledge and engagement, stakeholder dynamics such as split incentives between landlords and tenants, weak regulatory environments, lack of green finance, and socio-cultural norms, including mistrust in retrofit initiatives. Despite these challenges, the framework also underscores the potential benefits of EE adoption, including cost savings, improved indoor air quality, reduced carbon footprints, job creation, enhanced thermal comfort, increased property values, and alignment with climate goals. Importantly, feedback mechanisms shaped by policy environments, market systems, and cultural dynamics determine whether adoption outcomes reinforce or undermine progress. Stakeholders are mapped as key actors in this ecosystem: government agencies (e.g., MBIE, HUD) set policy and funding frameworks, housing providers (e.g., Kāinga Ora, CHPs) implement programmes and engage tenants, while tenants themselves influence outcomes through behavioural responses that determine effective use of EE measures. The framework demonstrates that successful adoption requires aligning technological innovation with supportive finance, robust policy, and active social engagement. Multidisciplinary collaboration is essential to overcoming barriers and realising long-term sustainability outcomes in social housing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis framework was adopted from a combination of other tested frameworks, such as a proposed conceptual stakeholder management ecosystem framework by (Tarode \u0026amp; Shrivastava, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), proposed an energy efficiency policy framework by (Dzobo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), and the Low-Income Net Zero House Delivery Framework by (Moghayedi \u0026amp; Awuzie, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"8. Conclusion and Further Research","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis systematic review demonstrates that implementing energy efficiency measures in social housing yields multifaceted economic, environmental, social, and health-related benefits. It establishes a compelling rationale for prioritising energy efficiency as a core element of sustainable housing policy, particularly for promoting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and alleviating energy poverty. Since social housing primarily serves low-income and vulnerable populations, it is uniquely positioned to adopt transformative energy strategies. These populations are disproportionately affected by poor indoor air quality, high utility costs, and associated health risks, making energy efficiency interventions especially impactful.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe review identifies four global, interconnected trends shaping energy efficiency adoption in social housing: technological innovation, financial mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, and social acceptance. While technologies such as retrofitting, heat pumps, and solar water systems are increasingly accessible, their effectiveness depends on affordability, stable policy support, and tenant engagement. Financing mechanisms, including on-bill financing and public-private partnerships, require regulatory clarity and tenant trust to ensure uptake and longevity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEconomically, energy-efficient retrofits lower household utility costs, increase property values, and generate long-term savings for tenants and housing providers. These outcomes improve household financial resilience, reduce public healthcare expenditures, and stimulate employment in green construction sectors. Environmentally, such interventions contribute directly to climate mitigation by reducing CO₂ emissions and aligning with international targets such as the Paris Agreement. Socially, energy efficiency enhances occupant well-being, mitigates health disparities, and fosters more inclusive, resilient communities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite these advantages, barriers persist. High upfront costs, regulatory fragmentation, and insufficient tenant involvement hinder implementation. Social resistance, technical unfamiliarity, and distrust in housing authorities further undermine technological adoption. As such, the study concludes that energy efficiency in social housing is not solely a technical matter; it is a complex socio-political and economic challenge requiring an integrated, multi-level approach.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePolicy Recommendations\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable ii: Proposed policy recommendations\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the findings, the following policy recommendations are proposed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"620\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRecommendation\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReferences\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1. Establish Long-Term, Targeted Funding Mechanisms:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eGovernments should create dedicated and sustained funding streams for social housing retrofits. This should include capital grants, low-interest loans, and on-bill financing tailored to housing associations and low-income tenants. Funding schemes must be designed to reduce administrative burdens and ensure timely disbursement to avoid project delays.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Bianco \u0026amp; Sonvilla, 2021), (Copiello, 2016), (Bird \u0026amp; Hern\u0026aacute;ndez, 2012), (Azimi et al., 2024), (Panteli et al., 2020), (Bertoldi et al., 2021)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2. Adopt Inclusive and Integrated Regulatory Frameworks:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eEnergy efficiency regulations should be streamlined and harmonised locally and nationally, with clear performance standards for new constructions and retrofits. Mandating minimum energy efficiency standards for social housing and compliance support will ensure uniformity and prevent regional disparities.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Aranda et al., 2017), (Edalatnia \u0026amp; Das, 2024), (Minna Sunikka-Blank et al., 2012), (Wei et al., 2024), (Seebauer et al., 2019)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3. Bridge the Split Incentive Gap:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eIntroduce policies that realign incentives between landlords and tenants, such as performance-based subsidies, shared-savings models, or tax credits. These initiatives should reward landlords for installing energy-efficient technologies while ensuring tenants benefit directly through reduced energy bills without facing rent hikes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Bird \u0026amp; Hern\u0026aacute;ndez, 2012), (Copiello, 2016), (Azimi et al., 2024), (Ascione et al., 2024), (Rodriguez et al., 2024), (Schleich, 2019),\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4. Mandate Resident Engagement and Education:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eRetrofit and energy efficiency programs must incorporate structured tenant engagement strategies. This includes co-design workshops, simple user guides for new technologies, and ongoing support services. Engaged residents are more likely to use energy systems effectively and maintain energy-saving behaviours.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Croon et al., 2024), (Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025), (Bielig et al., 2024) , (Brown et al., 2014), (Moore et al., 2015)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5. Support Technological Innovation with Behavioural Insights:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eBeyond hardware upgrades, energy efficiency initiatives should consider user behaviour. Technologies like smart thermostats should be user-friendly, and systems should be adaptable to diverse household routines. Pilot studies and demonstration projects should evaluate both technical and behavioural outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Brown et al., 2014), (Moore et al., 2015), (Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025), (Croon et al., 2024), (Jones et al., 2016)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e6. Embed Energy Efficiency in Homelessness and Health Strategies:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eHousing and public health policies should explicitly recognise energy-efficient housing as a determinant of health. Energy efficiency upgrades must be included in strategies aimed at preventing homelessness and in housing-first models, especially for those with chronic health conditions exacerbated by poor indoor environments\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Baker, 2019), (Russell et al., 2023), (O\u0026rsquo;Donnell, 2021), \u0026nbsp;(Moore et al., 2015), (Koops-Van Hoffen et al., 2023), (Croon et al., 2024)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7. Enhance Data and Monitoring Infrastructure:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eGovernments and research institutions should invest in robust data collection and monitoring systems to track retrofit outcomes, tenant satisfaction, and energy savings. This will allow for evidence-based policy refinement and the scaling of successful models.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Alonso et al., 2017), (Jones et al., 2016), (Recart \u0026amp; Dossick, 2022), (Wei et al., 2024), (Ascione et al., 2024), \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e8. Leverage Public-Private Partnerships for Retrofit Delivery\u003c/strong\u003e: Encourage collaboration between the government, housing providers, energy companies, and non-profits to deliver retrofit programs efficiently. Models that combine public oversight with private sector innovation and delivery capacity can enhance scale and improve outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 310px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Fell \u0026amp; Mattsson, 2021), (Bielig et al., 2024), (Baker, 2019), (Ugarte et al., 2016), (Tewari \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, 2025)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe future of sustainable housing depends on how effectively nations can scale energy efficiency in social housing. Achieving this will alleviate the most vulnerable populations\u0026apos; energy burdens and contribute significantly to climate action, economic development, and social justice. The evidence is clear: social housing, often overlooked in mainstream energy and climate discussions, must now become a central focus of decarbonisation strategies. This review demonstrates that the solutions exist, the benefits are proven, and the need is urgent. What remains is the bold, coordinated, and inclusive action required to implement them.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFuture Research Directions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFuture research should prioritise interdisciplinary and equity-focused investigations to support the effective implementation of energy efficiency measures in social housing. First, there is a critical need for longitudinal studies assessing retrofit\u0026apos;s sustained impacts on residents\u0026rsquo; thermal comfort, health outcomes, and overall well-being. While short-term benefits are well documented, long-term evaluations could better inform policy and investment decisions, particularly regarding public health savings and household resilience.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSecond, the ongoing challenge of the landlord-tenant split incentive requires targeted inquiry. Empirical testing of financial instruments such as shared savings agreements, tax credits, and performance-based subsidies could provide valuable insights into aligning stakeholder interests. Additionally, we need a deeper understanding of how socio-behavioural factors influence the effectiveness of energy technologies. Research should explore how trust, digital literacy, and usability affect tenants\u0026rsquo; adoption and sustained use of intelligent energy systems.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThird, research should assess the comparative effectiveness of resident engagement strategies within retrofit programs. Although policies increasingly mandate tenant participation, there is limited empirical data on which methods, such as co-design workshops, feedback mechanisms, or user training, result in improved satisfaction and alignment of behaviours with energy-saving technologies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoreover, the role of social housing within broader decarbonization and climate adaptation strategies remains underexplored. Analysing how national and local policy frameworks integrate social housing into climate agendas would help identify gaps and inform the development of more coherent and inclusive approaches. Concurrently, evaluating equity outcomes of retrofit programs is essential to ensure that benefits are distributed fairly and that interventions do not unintentionally exacerbate existing inequalities. Finally, future work should examine the governance, performance, and accountability of public-private partnerships delivering retrofit projects. Investigating best practices across different contexts could inform scalable and ethically sound models. At the same time, investment in smart monitoring and data systems should be researched to enable ongoing evaluation of energy performance, user experience, and policy effectiveness.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn summary, advancing research in these areas will be crucial to ensuring that energy efficiency in social housing meets technical and environmental targets and delivers lasting economic, social, and health benefits for the most vulnerable populations.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe author, Nwarueze Christian Chidiebere, was solely responsible for the conception and design of the study, as well as conducting the systematic literature search, screening, and analysis in accordance with the PRISMA protocol. The author also interpreted the findings and drafted the manuscript. It was revised by co-authors Monty Sutrisna and Hennie Van Heerden. The author assumes full accountability for all aspects of the work, ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the research presented.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDear Reviewers, Please don't hesitate to contact me at [email protected] for any corrections or updates at any time. Thank you\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbolhosseini, S., \u0026amp; Heshmati, A. (2014). The main support mechanisms to finance renewable energy development. \u003cem\u003eRenewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 40\u003c/em\u003e, 876-885. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlabid, J., Bennadji, A., \u0026amp; Seddiki, M. (2022). A review on the energy retrofit policies and improvements of the UK existing buildings, challenges and benefits. (\u0026ldquo;Sustainable Retrofitting of Existing Buildings: Techniques and Case ...\u0026rdquo;) \u003cem\u003eRenewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 159\u003c/em\u003e, 112161. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlonso, C., Oteiza, I., Mart\u0026iacute;n-Consuegra, F., \u0026amp; Frutos, B. (2017). Methodological proposal for monitoring energy refurbishment. Indoor environmental quality in two case studies of social housing in Madrid, Spain. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 155\u003c/em\u003e, 492-502. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAranda, J., Zabalza, I., Conserva, A., \u0026amp; Mill\u0026aacute;n, G. (2017). Analysis of energy efficiency measures and retrofitting solutions for social housing buildings in Spain as a way to mitigate energy poverty. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 9\u003c/em\u003e(10), 1869. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAsadpoor, S. J., \u0026amp; Jahanshahi, E. (2024). A Smart Multi-Criteria Assessment of Housing Energy Efficiency Relevant to Occupants\u0026rsquo; Socio\u0026ndash;Demographic Characteristics: A Concept Paper. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAscione, F., de Rossi, F., Iovane, T., Manniti, G., \u0026amp; Mastellone, M. (2024). Energy demand and air quality in social housing buildings: A novel critical review. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e, 114542. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAzimi, S., Hon, C. K., Tyvimaa, T., \u0026amp; Skitmore, M. (2023). Barriers to energy efficiency: Low-income households in Australia. \u003cem\u003eBuildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(4), 954. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAzimi, S., Hon, C. K. H., Tyvimaa, T., \u0026amp; Skitmore, M. (2024). Adoption of energy-efficiency measures by Australian low-income households. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Housing and the Built Environment\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-023-10104-3 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaker, A. (2019). \u003cem\u003eImproving well-being through better housing policy in New Zealand\u003c/em\u003e. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/b82d856b-en\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaniassadi, A., Heusinger, J., Gonzalez, P. I., Weber, S., \u0026amp; Samuelson, H. W. (2022). Co-benefits of energy efficiency in residential buildings. \u003cem\u003eEnergy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 238\u003c/em\u003e, 121768. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarbosa, E. F., Labaki, L. C., Castro, A. P., \u0026amp; Lopes, F. S. (2024). Energy Efficiency and Thermal Comfort Analysis in a Higher Education Building in Brazil. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 462. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBertoldi, P., Economidou, M., Palermo, V., Boza‐Kiss, B., \u0026amp; Todeschi, V. (2021). How to finance energy renovation of residential buildings: Review of current and emerging financing instruments in the EU. \u003cem\u003eWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 10\u003c/em\u003e(1), e384. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBianco, V., \u0026amp; Sonvilla, P. M. (2021). Supporting energy efficiency measures in the residential sector. The case of on-bill schemes. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Reports\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 7\u003c/em\u003e, 4298-4307. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBielig, M., Kacperski, C., \u0026amp; Kutzner, F. (2024). Increasing retrofit device adoption in social housing: Evidence from two field experiments in Belgium. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Environmental Psychology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 95\u003c/em\u003e, 102284. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBird, S., \u0026amp; Hern\u0026aacute;ndez, D. (2012). Policy options for the split incentive: Increasing energy efficiency for low-income renters. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 48\u003c/em\u003e, 506-514. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown, P., Swan, W., \u0026amp; Chahal, S. (2014). Retrofitting social housing: reflections by tenants on adopting and living with retrofit technology. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Efficiency\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 7\u003c/em\u003e, 641-653. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCarpino, C., Bruno, R., \u0026amp; Arcuri, N. (2018). Social housing refurbishment in Mediterranean climate: Cost-optimal analysis towards the n-ZEB target. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 174\u003c/em\u003e, 642-656. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCopiello, S. (2016). Leveraging energy efficiency to finance public-private social housing projects. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 96\u003c/em\u003e, 217-230. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCroon, T., Hoekstra, J., \u0026amp; Dubois, U. (2024). Energy poverty alleviation by social housing providers: A qualitative investigation of targeted interventions in France, England, and the Netherlands. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 192\u003c/em\u003e, 114247. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDesvall\u0026eacute;es, L. (2022). Low-carbon retrofits in social housing: Energy efficiency, multidimensional energy poverty, and domestic comfort strategies in southern Europe. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Research \u0026amp; Social Science\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 85\u003c/em\u003e, 102413. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDzobo, O., Tazvinga, H., Chihobo, C. H., \u0026amp; Chikuni, E. (2020). The adoption of energy efficiency and a policy framework for Zimbabwe. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Energy in Southern Africa\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 31\u003c/em\u003e(3), 1-13. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEdalatnia, S., \u0026amp; Das, R. R. (2024). Building benchmarking and energy performance: Analysis of social and affordable housing in British Columbia, Canada. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 313\u003c/em\u003e, 114259. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEECA. (2000). \u003cem\u003eEnergy Efficiency and Conservation Act 2000\u003c/em\u003e. https://climate-laws.org/documents/energy-efficiency-and-conservation-act-2000_a8c1?id=energy-efficiency-and-conservation-act-2000_bfd2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEsmaeilimoakher, P., Urmee, T., Pryor, T., \u0026amp; Baverstock, G. (2016). Identifying the determinants of residential electricity consumption for social housing in Perth, Western Australia. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 133\u003c/em\u003e, 403-413. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFabrizio, E., Ferrara, M., \u0026amp; Monetti, V. (2017). Smart heating systems for cost-effective retrofitting. In \u003cem\u003eCost-effective energy efficient building retrofitting\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 279-304). Elsevier. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFell, T., \u0026amp; Mattsson, J. (2021). The role of public-private partnerships in housing as a potential contributor to sustainable cities and communities: A systematic review. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 13\u003c/em\u003e(14), 7783. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFern\u0026aacute;ndez-Ag\u0026uuml;era, J., Dom\u0026iacute;nguez-Amarillo, S., Alonso, C., \u0026amp; Mart\u0026iacute;n-Consuegra, F. (2019). Thermal comfort and indoor air quality in low-income housing in Spain: The influence of airtightness and occupant behaviour. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 199\u003c/em\u003e, 102-114. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFerroukhi, R., Casals, X., \u0026amp; Parajuli, B. (2020). Measuring the socio-economics of transition: Focus on jobs. \u003cem\u003eInternational Renewable Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates\u003c/em\u003e. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFisk, W. J., Singer, B. C., \u0026amp; Chan, W. R. (2020). Association of residential energy efficiency retrofits with indoor environmental quality, comfort, and health: A review of empirical data. \u003cem\u003eBuilding and Environment\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 180\u003c/em\u003e, 107067. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHashemi, A., \u0026amp; Dungrani, M. (2025). Indoor Environmental Quality and Health Implications of Building Retrofit and Occupant Behaviour in Social Housing. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 17\u003c/em\u003e(1), 264. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHernandez-Roman, F., Sheinbaum-Pardo, C., \u0026amp; Calderon-Irazoque, A. (2017). \u0026ldquo;Socially neglected effect\u0026rdquo; in the implementation of energy technologies to mitigate climate change: Sustainable building program in social housing. \u003cem\u003eEnergy for Sustainable Development\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 41\u003c/em\u003e, 149-156. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoppe, T. (2012). Adoption of innovative energy systems in social housing: Lessons from eight large-scale renovation projects in The Netherlands. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 51\u003c/em\u003e, 791-801. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHowden-Chapman, P., Viggers, H., Chapman, R., O\u0026rsquo;Sullivan, K., Barnard, L. T., \u0026amp; Lloyd, B. (2012). Tackling cold housing and fuel poverty in New Zealand: A review of policies, research, and health impacts. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 49\u003c/em\u003e, 134-142. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIEA. (2017). \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policies of IEA Countries: New Zealand 2017 Review, International Energy Agency\u003c/em\u003e. Retrieved 28/05/2025 from https://webstore.iea.org/energy-policies-of-iea-countries-new-zealand-2017-review\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJagarajan, R., Asmoni, M. N. A. M., Mohammed, A. H., Jaafar, M. N., Mei, J. L. Y., \u0026amp; Baba, M. (2017). Green retrofitting\u0026ndash;A review of current status, implementations and challenges. \u003cem\u003eRenewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 67\u003c/em\u003e, 1360-1368. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJayalath, A., Vaz-Serra, P., Hui, F. K. P., \u0026amp; Aye, L. (2024). Thermally comfortable energy efficient affordable houses: A review. \u003cem\u003eBuilding and Environment\u003c/em\u003e, 111495. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJones, R. V., Fuertes, A., Boomsma, C., \u0026amp; Pahl, S. (2016). Space heating preferences in UK social housing: A socio-technical household survey combined with building audits. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 127\u003c/em\u003e, 382-398. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKamal, A., Al-Ghamdi, S. G., \u0026amp; Koc, M. (2019). Revaluing the costs and benefits of energy efficiency: A systematic review. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Research \u0026amp; Social Science\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 54\u003c/em\u003e, 68-84. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoops-Van Hoffen, H., Poelman, M., Droomers, M., Borl\u0026eacute;e, F., Vendrig-De Punder, Y., Jambroes, M., \u0026amp; Kamphuis, C. (2023). Understanding the mechanisms linking holistic housing renovations to health and well-being of adults in disadvantaged neighbourhoods: A realist review. \u003cem\u003eHealth \u0026amp; place\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 80\u003c/em\u003e, 102995. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKraus, S., Breier, M., \u0026amp; Das\u0026iacute;-Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. \u003cem\u003eInternational Entrepreneurship and Management Journal\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 16\u003c/em\u003e, 1023-1042. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKurmanbekova, M., Du, J., \u0026amp; Sharples, S. (2025). A Review of Indoor Air Quality in Social Housing Across Low-and Middle-Income Countries. \u003cem\u003eApplied Sciences\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 15\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1858. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLang, M., Lane, R., Zhao, K., Tham, S., Woolfe, K., \u0026amp; Raven, R. (2021). Systematic review: Landlords\u0026rsquo; willingness to retrofit energy efficiency improvements. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 303\u003c/em\u003e, 127041. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLarrea-S\u0026aacute;ez, L., Cuevas, C., \u0026amp; Casas-Led\u0026oacute;n, Y. (2023). Energy and environmental assessment of the chilean social housing: Effect of insulation materials and climates. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 392\u003c/em\u003e, 136234. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLozinsky, C. H., Casquero-Modrego, N., \u0026amp; Walker, I. S. (2025). The health and indoor environmental quality impacts of residential building envelope retrofits: A literature review. \u003cem\u003eBuilding and Environment\u003c/em\u003e, 112568. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMagall\u0026oacute;n, D., Neve, J., Pillet, A., Motmans, T., Miethke Morais, L., \u0026amp; Lemoine, P. (2019). Manual of financing mechanisms and business models for energy efficiency. In: Basel, Switzerland: Basel Agency for Sustainable Energy (BASE). Retrieved \u0026hellip;.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMastrucci, A., Guo, F., Zhong, X., Maczek, F., \u0026amp; van Ruijven, B. (2024). Circular strategies for building sector decarbonization in China: A scenario analysis. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Industrial Ecology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 28\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1089-1102. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcCabe, A., Pojani, D., \u0026amp; van Groenou, A. B. (2018). The application of renewable energy to social housing: A systematic review. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 114\u003c/em\u003e, 549-557. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMedrano-G\u0026oacute;mez, L. E., \u0026amp; Izquierdo, A. E. (2017). Social housing retrofit: Improving energy efficiency and thermal comfort for the housing stock recovery in Mexico. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Procedia\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 121\u003c/em\u003e, 41-48. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMei, X., \u0026amp; Seo, B. K. (2024). The relationships among housing, energy poverty, and health: A scoping review. \u003cem\u003eEnergy for Sustainable Development\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 83\u003c/em\u003e, 101568. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry for the Environment. (2021, 12 April 2021). \u003cem\u003eResource Management (National Environmental Standards for Air Quality) Regulations 2004\u003c/em\u003e. Retrieved 12 April 2021 from https://environment.govt.nz/acts-and-regulations/regulations/national-environmental-standards-for-air-quality/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Business Innovation \u0026amp; Employment (MBIE). (2023a, 19th July 2023). \u003cem\u003eEnergy Efficiency in New Zealand\u003c/em\u003e. Ministry of Business, Innovation \u0026amp; Employment. . https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/low-emissions-economy/energy-efficiency-in-new-zealand/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Business Innovation \u0026amp; Employment (MBIE). (2023b, 20 Dec 2023). \u003cem\u003eMāori and Public Housing Renewable Energy Fund\u003c/em\u003e. Ministry of Business Innovation \u0026amp; Employment (MBIE). Retrieved 27 May 2025 from https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/low-emissions-economy/energy-efficiency-in-new-zealand/maori-and-public-housing-renewable-energy-fund\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoghayedi, A., \u0026amp; Awuzie, B. O. (2025). A Framework for Facilitating Low-Income Net-Zero Energy Housing Delivery in Developing Countries: Insights from a Practical Case in South Africa. \u003cem\u003eBuilding and Environment\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 276\u003c/em\u003e, 112847. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., \u0026amp; Group, P.-P. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. \u003cem\u003eSystematic reviews\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 4\u003c/em\u003e, 1-9. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoore, N., Haines, V., \u0026amp; Lilley, D. (2015). Improving the installation of renewable heating technology in UK social housing properties through user centred design. \u003cem\u003eIndoor and Built Environment\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 24\u003c/em\u003e(7), 970-985. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoore, T., Nicholls, L., Strengers, Y., Maller, C., \u0026amp; Horne, R. (2017). Benefits and challenges of energy efficient social housing. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Procedia\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 121\u003c/em\u003e, 300-307. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNZGBC. (2024). \u003cem\u003eExisting Homes Roadmap: Retrofitting our existing homes to improve health, productivity, and progress towards net zero\u003c/em\u003e. https://nzgbc.org.nz/hubfs/NZGBC%20-%20Roadmap%20for%20Improving%20Aotearoas%20Existing%20Homes%20Report%20FINAL.pdf?hsCtaTracking=819c8238-5342-401a-a162-cf237045042e%7C3a57d387-80a8-403e-9572-7da9a206e0be\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Donnell, J. (2021). Does social housing reduce homelessness? A multistate analysis of housing and homelessness pathways. \u003cem\u003eHousing studies\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 36\u003c/em\u003e(10), 1702-1728. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOECD. (2020, 2020). \u003cem\u003eSocial housing: A key part of past and future housing policy, Employment, Labour and Social Affairs Policy Briefs, OECD, Paris, \u003c/em\u003e. http://oe.cd/ahd\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOECD. (2024). \u003cem\u003eOECD Affordable Housing Database - indicator HC 3.2. National strategies for combating homelessness,\u003c/em\u003e . https://oe.cd/ahd\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlivia Campbell. (2024). \u003cem\u003eTop Government Incentives for Energy-Efficient Home Upgrades \u003c/em\u003eSustainableliving.org.nz. Retrieved 27 May 2025 from https://sustainableliving.org.nz/top-government-incentives-for-energy-efficient-home-upgrades\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOzarisoy, B., \u0026amp; Altan, H. (2021). Developing an evidence-based energy-policy framework to assess robust energy-performance evaluation and certification schemes in the South-eastern Mediterranean countries. \u003cem\u003eEnergy for Sustainable Development\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 64\u003c/em\u003e, 65-102. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePalm, J., \u0026amp; Bryngelson, E. (2023). Energy efficiency at building sites: barriers and drivers. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Efficiency\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 7. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePanteli, C., Klumbytė, E., Apanavičienė, R., \u0026amp; Fokaides, P. A. (2020). An overview of the existing schemes and research trends in financing the energy upgrade of buildings in Europe. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 27\u003c/em\u003e(2), 53-62. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePawson, H., Lawson, J., \u0026amp; Milligan, V. (2011). Social housing strategies, financing mechanisms and outcomes: an international review and update of key post-2007 policy developments. \u003cem\u003eCity Futures Research Centre University of New South Wales, Sydney\u003c/em\u003e. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePenna, P., Prada, A., Cappelletti, F., \u0026amp; Gasparella, A. (2015). Multi-objectives optimization of Energy Efficiency Measures in existing buildings. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 95\u003c/em\u003e, 57-69. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePereira-Ruchansky, L., \u0026amp; Perez-Fargallo, A. (2020). Integrated analysis of energy saving and thermal comfort of retrofits in social housing under climate change influence in Uruguay. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 12\u003c/em\u003e(11), 4636. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePleace, N., Teller, N., \u0026amp; Quilgars, D. J. (2011). Social housing allocation and homelessness: EOH comparative studies on homelessness. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePoortinga, W., Jiang, S., Grey, C., \u0026amp; Tweed, C. (2018). Impacts of energy-efficiency investments on internal conditions in low-income households. \u003cem\u003eBuilding Research \u0026amp; Information\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 46\u003c/em\u003e(6), 653-667. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRangiwhetu, L., Pierse, N., \u0026amp; Howden-Chapman, P. (2017). Effects of minor household interventions to block draughts on social housing temperatures: a before and after study. \u003cem\u003eKōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 12\u003c/em\u003e(2), 235-245. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRecart, C., \u0026amp; Dossick, C. S. (2022). Hygrothermal behavior of post-retrofit housing: A review of the impacts of the energy efficiency upgrade strategies. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 262\u003c/em\u003e, 112001. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReeves, P. (2013). \u003cem\u003eAffordable and Social Housing: Policy and Practice (1st ed.). Routledge\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/ https://doi-org.ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/10.4324/9781315882758 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRodriguez, N., Katooziani, A., \u0026amp; Jeelani, I. (2024). Barriers to energy-efficient design and construction practices: A comprehensive analysis. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Building Engineering\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 82\u003c/em\u003e, 108349. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRosenow, J., Guertler, P., Sorrell, S., \u0026amp; Eyre, N. (2018). The remaining potential for energy savings in UK households. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 121\u003c/em\u003e, 542-552. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRuiz, A., \u0026amp; Guevara, J. (2021). Energy Efficiency Strategies in the Social Housing Sector: Dynamic Considerations and Policies. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Management in Engineering\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 37\u003c/em\u003e(4), 04021040. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000937 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRussell, E., McKerchar, C., Thompson, L., \u0026amp; Berghan, J. (2023). Māori experiences of social housing in Ōtautahi Christchurch. \u003cem\u003eKōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 18\u003c/em\u003e(4), 352-369. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eS\u0026aacute;nchez, C. S.-G., Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, F. J. N., \u0026amp; Aja, A. H. (2018). Energy poverty methodology based on minimal thermal habitability conditions for low income housing in Spain. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 169\u003c/em\u003e, 127-140. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchleich, J. (2019). Energy efficient technology adoption in low-income households in the European Union\u0026ndash;What is the evidence? \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 125\u003c/em\u003e, 196-206. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeebauer, S., Friesenecker, M., \u0026amp; Eisfeld, K. (2019). Integrating climate and social housing policy to alleviate energy poverty: An analysis of targets and instruments in Austria. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 14\u003c/em\u003e(7-9), 304-326. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSolan, D., Hurley, K., \u0026amp; Louis, M. (2010). Energy Efficiency Financing Mechanisms. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Policy Institute\u003c/em\u003e. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSouliotis, M., Panaras, G., Fokaides, P. A., Papaefthimiou, S., \u0026amp; Kalogirou, S. A. (2018). Solar water heating for social housing: Energy analysis and Life Cycle Assessment. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 169\u003c/em\u003e, 157-171. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStatsNZ. (2024). \u003cem\u003e2023 Census severe housing deprivation (homelessness) estimates\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSunikka-Blank, M., Chen, J., Britnell, J., \u0026amp; Dantsiou, D. (2012). Improving Energy Efficiency of Social Housing Areas: A Case Study of a Retrofit Achieving an \u0026quot;A\u0026quot; Energy Performance Rating in the UK. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Planning Studies\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 20\u003c/em\u003e(1), 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.638494 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSunikka-Blank, M., Chen, J., Britnell, J., \u0026amp; Dantsiou, D. (2012). Improving energy efficiency of social housing areas: A case study of a retrofit achieving an \u0026ldquo;A\u0026rdquo; energy performance rating in the UK. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Planning Studies\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 20\u003c/em\u003e(1), 131-145. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSwan, W., Fitton, R., Smith, L., Abbott, C., \u0026amp; Smith, L. (2017). Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing 2010-2015. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 35\u003c/em\u003e(5), 456-469. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTarode, S., \u0026amp; Shrivastava, S. (2021). A framework for stakeholder management ecosystem. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Business\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 37\u003c/em\u003e(2), 76-88. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTeli, D., Dimitriou, T., James, P. A., Bahaj, A., Ellison, L., \u0026amp; Waggott, A. (2016). Fuel poverty-induced \u0026lsquo;prebound effect\u0026rsquo;in achieving the anticipated carbon savings from social housing retrofit. \u003cem\u003eBuilding Services Engineering Research and Technology\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 37\u003c/em\u003e(2), 176-193. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTewari, S., \u0026amp; Rajagopalan, P. (2025). Integration of Heat Pumps in Social Housing\u0026mdash;Role of User Behaviour and User Satisfaction. \u003cem\u003eBuildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 15\u003c/em\u003e(6), 898. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThema, J., Suerkemper, F., Couder, J., Mzavanadze, N., Chatterjee, S., Teubler, J., Thomas, S., \u0026Uuml;rge-Vorsatz, D., Hansen, M. B., \u0026amp; Bouzarovski, S. (2019). The multiple benefits of the 2030 EU energy efficiency potential. \u003cem\u003eEnergies\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 12\u003c/em\u003e(14), 2798. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUgarte, S., van der Ree, B., Voogt, M., Eichhammer, W., Ordo\u0026ntilde;ez, J. A., Reuter, M., Schlomann, B., Lloret Gallego, P., \u0026amp; Villafafila Robles, R. (2016). Energy efficiency for low-income households. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUmana, A. U., Garba, B. M. P., Ologun, A., Olu, J. S., \u0026amp; Umar, M. O. (2024). The role of government policies in promoting social housing: A comparative study between Nigeria and other developing nations. \u003cem\u003eWorld Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 23\u003c/em\u003e(03), 371-382. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUN-Habitat. (2010). \u003cem\u003eThe Right to Adequate Housing\u003c/em\u003e. O. o. t. U. N. H. C. f. H. Rights. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/documents/2019-05/fact_sheet_21_adequate_housing_final_2010.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUN-Habitat. (2019). \u003cem\u003eExpert Group Meeting on Affordable Housing and Social Protection Systems for All to Address Homelessness\u003c/em\u003e. U. N. H. S. P. (UN-Habitat). www.unhabitat.org\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUN-Habitat. (2022). \u003cem\u003eChildren, Cities and Housing: Rights and Priorities\u003c/em\u003e. UN-Habitat. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2022/08/children-cities-and-housing-rights-and-priorities.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWei, J., Li, H. X., Sadick, A.-M., \u0026amp; Noguchi, M. (2024). A systematic review of key issues influencing the environmental performance of social housing. \u003cem\u003eEnergy and Buildings\u003c/em\u003e,\u003cem\u003e 319\u003c/em\u003e, 114566. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Social Housing, Energy Efficiency, Retrofitting, Trends","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7483852/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7483852/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eGlobal challenges such as population growth, climate change, and energy sustainability emphasise the urgent need for energy efficiency measures in housing. Social housing, which serves vulnerable populations with limited resources, highlights the importance of these interventions due to cost burdens, health risks, and social disparities. This study investigates the implementation of energy efficiency measures in social housing. by reviewing global trends, benefits, barriers, and enablers. The PRISMA protocol analysed 92 articles published between 2012 and 2025. The study identifies four major domains shaping adoption trends: technology, finance, policy, and social equity. The review outlines several benefits, including reduced energy consumption, enhanced indoor environmental quality, long-term cost savings, and climate mitigation. It also addresses barriers such as high upfront costs, policy fragmentation, and limited tenant engagement. Despite the growing application of energy-efficient technologies, financing and behavioural dynamics remain underexplored. This research calls for further investigation into innovative financial mechanisms, inclusive policy frameworks, and socially responsive approaches to support widespread implementation. Improving buildings and adding energy-efficient systems are crucial for enhancing social housing sustainability, affordability, and resilience.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Social Housing: Trends, Benefits, Barriers, and Enablers","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-08 13:13:00","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7483852/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":2}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d72676bf-6343-427c-9393-7b9859608e51","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 8th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-11-20T20:38:23+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-08 13:13:00","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7483852","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7483852","identity":"rs-7483852","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}