Renters on lower incomes in Australia and in the UK experience heightened, intersecting climate, health, and social inequalities. Among these are disproportionate exposure to climate induced extreme weather events such as heatwaves, financial impacts of sudden increases in price of energy and overall cost of living, compounding impacts of ill health due to poor quality housing and socioeconomic determinants, and a lack of social and political power in decisions concerning their homes due to lacking policy protections for renters. In the face of these contributors to disproportionate vulnerability, the household level energy transition measures by governments have largely benefited parties where policy action has been easier to implement, namely homeowners and communities with higher socioeconomic status. Energy transition policy for renters continues to also lag behind due to the complex web of interests and players involved in retrofitting rental homes. When we hear the voices of renters concerning retrofit in their homes, it is often after the works have been completed, and there are unresolved accountability questions around the outcomes of the renovations.
The potential for positive social, climate, and health co-benefits from energy upgrade renovations is widely recognised by policymakers and in research. However, to achieve these co-benefits, retrofit measures need to be deliberately structured as outcome focused, and with climate justice concerns in mind. Energy transition action that fails to do so risks exacerbating the existing climate, health, and socioeconomic inequalities, and serving political narratives that oppose climate action and frame it in opposition to addressing socioeconomic inequality. Voices of lived experience from renters on lower incomes are central to successfully delivering the type of retrofit that leads to these concrete wellbeing, and socioeconomic justice benefits expected from just transitions. At the same time, as higher emitting countries, Australia and the UK must balance this with their emissions reduction responsibilities at the core of any energy transition action.
This project introduces a theoretical framework that attempts to understand household level energy transition action taking place in communities as something that is interrelated to climate change on a global scale, green energy transition agendas on a national scale, and to highly localised social and health inequalities in households and communities. Climate justice offers an analytical framework that situates the energy transition discourse in the context of global climate action priorities and lays the groundwork for discussing the priorities in addressing energy vulnerability as something else than an unlimited increase in energy consumption. In positing the idea of human vulnerability (based on Martha Fineman’s conception) and capability (following Amartya Sen) as counterparts to each other within this framework, this project seeks to centre the perceptions of renters in asking if retrofit in renter households strengthens capability around wellbeing and facilitates flourishing. This is operationalised through semi-structured interviews with renters in Australia and the UK built on capability-centred language. The comparative Australia-UK aspect brings further insight into renter experiences climate-induced retrofit in different climates and socio-political contexts.
