NSSI Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and
Transcription
NSSI Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and
NSSI Working Paper 47 September 2012 Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR) Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz IED – Institute for Environmental Decisions NSSI – Natural and Social Science Interface Dominik Saner, MSc ETH in Environmental Engineering, PhD candidate Ecological Systems Design, Institute of Environmental Engineering ETH Zurich, Schafmattstrasse 6, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland Tel.: +41 44 633 68 40; Fax: +41 44 633 10 61, dominik.saner@ifu.baug.ethz.ch PD Dr. Ralph Hansmann Department of Environmental Systems Science ETH Zurich, Sonneggstrasse 33, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland Tel.: +41 44 632 63 16, Fax: +41 44 632 10 29, hansmann@env.ethz.ch Dr. Evelina Trutnevyte Natural and Social Science Interface, Institute for Environmental Decisions ETH Zurich, Universitätsstrasse 22, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland Tel.: +41 44 632 49 03; Fax: +41 44 632 10 29, evelina.trutnevyte@alumni.ethz.ch Prof. Dr. Roland W. Scholz, former head of Natural and Social Science Interface Institute for Environmental Decisions ETH Zurich, Universitätsstrasse 22, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland, Tel.: +41 44 632 58 91; Fax: +41 44 632 10 29, roland.scholz@env.ethz.ch Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR) Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................... 2! Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 3! 1! 2! Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 4! 1.1! Face to Face Interviews and Questionnaire ....................................................................... 4! 1.2! Analyses .............................................................................................................................................. 5! Results ............................................................................................................................................................ 5! 2.1! Characteristics of recently renovated houses and their owners ................................ 5! 2.2! PCA and Cluster analysis based on willingness for energetic renovations .......... 6! 2.3! Correspondence between clusters and further homeowner characteristics ...... 8! 3! Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 9! 4! Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... 10! 5! References .................................................................................................................................................. 10! September 2012 1 Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz Abstract The residential sector in Switzerland is required to meet very ambitious energy efficiency targets within the next 25 years. Most recent energy scenarios for Switzerland assume that buildings will use significantly less fossil energy for heating and hot water purposes than today. This assumption relies heavily on the effectiveness of cantonal and federal incentive schemes for the implementation of energy efficiency measures. However, some homeowners may not respond to subsidies or do not see the importance of energetic renovation. In our study, we conducted face-to-face interview with 31 homeowners in Herisau, Appenzell Ausserrhoden. The goal was to determine factors and characteristics that encourage or hinder them from exercising their right of applying for incentives for energy efficiency measures. We found that homeowners who have recently performed energetic renovations somewhat differ from those who would be willing to take subsidies from the government for such renovations. A tendency towards stronger environmental attitudes was found among those who actually renovated their houses, whereas the willingness to take part in incentive schemes was related negatively with age, duration of ownership, time living in the building, and market liberal attitudes. We also found that some financial incentives (e.g. for solar collectors or district heat) are much better accepted by homeowners than state measures (e.g. for modern wood-heating systems). The results suggest that awareness of benefits of energy efficiency measures still needs to be raised, in particular among homeowners, who are older and/or live in their house for a long period of time. Keywords: renovation, energy efficiency measures, willingness to renovate 2 NSSI Working Paper 47 Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR) Introduction Introduction In 2011 the Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE) published the most recent energy scenarios for Switzerland with a time horizon up to the year 2050 (Prognos, 2011). The publication describes two scenarios, which were written in the light of the disastrous nuclear accident in Fukushima (Japan) of March 2011 and the consequent decision of the Federal Council to phase out nuclear power in Switzerland. One scenario is called “business as usual”, the other one “new energy policy”. Both scenarios assume that Switzerland will achieve significant annual reductions in the use of energy for heating purposes from 271 PJ to 183 PJ and 101 PJ, respectively, between the year 2009 and 2050. Similar reduction rates are also derived in other prospective studies, for instance a study for the city of Zurich (Wallbaum, Heeren, Jakob, Martius, & Gross, 2010). Herein the authors calculated the end energy demand for heating of all buildings within the city limits for the next 40 years and two scenarios called “reference” and “efficiency”. In the “reference” scenario the heat demand will decrease from 13 PJ in the year 2010 to 10 PJ in the year 2050 and in the “efficiency” scenario to 7 PJ in the year 2050. The results of the aforementioned studies are on the one hand extrapolations of trends for energetic consumption in the building stock, but on the other hand also demonstrate the belief in further progress and high implementation rates of energy efficiency measures. However, these changes in the building stock might not come as easy as these scenarios assume. Almost 89% of all dwellings and 73% of all apartments in Switzerland are privately owned (Ott, Jakob, Baur, Kaufmann, & Ott, 2005). The rest is owned by institutions. This means that for the majority of buildings the decisions for energetic renovation are made on an individual basis by a homeowner, who might not entirely be driven by economic reasoning. September 2012 In the aftermath of two transdisciplinary case studies in the canton Appenzell Ausserrhoden (AR), led by the Chair of Environmental Science – Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI) at ETH Zurich, Schlegel, Trutnevyte et al. (2012) calculated the residential heating energy demand for all dwellings in the canton. They found that in Herisau, the capital of the canton, almost 85% of all dwellings are heated with fossil energy (i.e. oil or natural gas) and that they use on average 525 MJ/(m ·year) of heating energy. In 2008 the parliament of Appenzell had implemented a cantonal energy concept with the goal to reduce the demand of fossil energy in the housing sector by 10% until 2015. The canton supports homeowners in total with CHF 400’000 per year (econcept, 2008) to achieve this goal. Additionally, on national level the so-called building program was launched in 2010. In the first year CHF 23 million were spent on 5’556 projects for energy efficiency measures of building envelops (BAFU, 2010). 2 In our study we analyze who is likely to make use of todays’ cantonal and federal measures and which types of measures are suitable to trigger renovation decisions. We applied a methodology similar to the approach of Banfi et al. (2011). But instead of modeling homeowner’s decision making process, we focused on analysis of the factors that correlate with the homeowners’ actual and supposed renovation decision. These factors may influence how well homeowner perceive the cantonal measures and how they value the costs and benefits of an energetic renovation. For example strong environmental awareness may motivate homeowners to take renovation, although these renovations would not be beneficial from a solely economical perspective. To investigate into these issues we conducted a questionnaire survey with homeowners living in Herisau, the capital of Appenzell Ausserrhoden. 3 Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz 1 Methods 1.1 Face to Face Interviews and Questionnaire Although Herisau is a city with over 15’000 inhabitants and the center of the region, it has preserved its rural heritage. In 2011, a total of 100 homeowners were selected from a database containing all addresses of Herisau. Before randomly selecting potential participants, the database was filtered for people owning single family dwellings with central heating systems using fossil energy carrier. Thus, the assumption was that the participants basically have the decision making power to refurbish and modernize their homes either due to energetic and comfort reasons, or for long-term conservation of value. In addition, houses built after 2000 were excluded from the random sampling to get a coherent sample of houses, for which renovation probably is needed in most cases. From 100 homeowners 31 agreed to participate in a face-to-face interview. The interviewer visited these homeowners at their homes, conducted the survey and completed the questionnaire based on the answers of the participants. The average duration of the interview was approximately one hour. the homeowners were inquired how willing they were to conduct an energetic renovation if they would be reimbursed with CHF 140 per window for their replacement. The total costs of the renovation measures were also revealed to the homeowners in these scenarios (i.e. approx. CHF 15’000–20’000 per house in the item on window replacement). Homeowners had to respond on a continuous scale between 0 (not at all) and 10 (very willing). The willingness to engage in totally ten different measures was assessed in this way (i.e. (ii) partly reimbursement of costs for insulation of walls, (iii) partly reimbursement of costs for insulation of roof, (iv) partly reimbursement of costs for insulation of floors, (v) partly reimbursement of costs for total renovation to MINERGIEstandard, (vi) total reimbursement of costs of hiring an energy consultant, (vii) specific amount of money for installing a ground source heat pump, (viii) specific amount of money for installing a new wood heating, (ix) specific amount of money for mounting solar collectors, (x) the opportunity to join a district heating network). The first part of the interviews served to gather information on the houses, such as exact year of construction, number of floors, and characteristics of roof, walls, windows and heating system. Questions about energy use and then questions on most recent renovations and foreseeable renovations in the future were asked. In addition, the homeowners had to rate the importance of different reasons for the conducted or planned renovations (i.e. aesthetics, comfort, conservation of value, reduction of energy use, or legal requirements) on scales from 0 (= not important at all) to 10 (= highly important). In the second part the interviewer asked for the homeowner’s willingness for energetic renovations based on ten different scenarios of subsidies. The scenarios were derived from real cantonal and national energy efficiency programs and the amounts of subsidies reflect the actual values in 2011 (Amt für Umwelt AR, 2012; BAFU, 2012). For example, (i) In the final part of the questionnaire homeowners provided information about themselves. In addition to sociodemographic information like gender, age and the economic situation like income (measured in discrete categories: 1 = up to 4’600 CHF/month, 2 = 4’600–6’700 CHF/month, 3 = 6’701–8’901 CHF/month, 4 = 8’901–12’500 CHF/month, 5 = more than 12’500 CHF/month) and savings (measured in discrete categories: 1 = up to 50’000 CHF, 2 = 50’001–100’000 CHF, 3 = 100’001–200’000 CHF, 4 = 200’001–300’000 CHF, 5 = more than 300’000 CHF). It was also inquired, how long they already live in the house and how long they have owned it. Finally their political attitudes were assessed using discrete rating scales from 1 (not at all) to 10 (absolutely agree) for ten items in which they could agree or disagree to certain political statements ranging from fiscal and environmental policy to law and order and foreign policy. 4 NSSI Working Paper 47 Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR) Methods 1.2 Analyses In the statistical analysis of the data we separated homeowners who renovated their buildings after 2008 due to energy efficiency considerations and those who did not. The new energy strategy of the canton is in place since 2009 therefore the year 2008 was used as a threshold value. This allowed analyzing the characteristics of homeowners who recently renovated their homes in comparison to the others and hence investigating which factors played a role in determining whether the homeowner took a chance in the cantonal and national energy efficiency program. Furthermore, a principle component analysis (PCA) of the willingness-to-renovate judgments was conducted. PCA is a method to extract a small number of fundamental components from a larger number of variables based on the correlations between the variables (Backhaus, Erichson, Plinke, & Weiber, 2006). Aim of the PCA was to investigate the dimensional structure of the willingnessto-renovate judgments and to determine groups of measures that have a higher acceptance than others. In a next step, a cluster analysis of homeowners was conducted based on the willingness-to-renovate judgments to arrive at typical groups of homeowners in this regard. And in a final step, correspondence between the homeowner type, cluster membership and the PCA dimensions was then investigated. 2 Results 2.1 Characteristics of recently renovated houses and their owners Out of the 31 homeowners, 10 have renovated parts of their houses after 2008, whereas 21 have not renovated their houses since then. The two resulting homeowner groups were compared to each other with regard to demographic characteristics and characteristics of their houses. There were no significant differences (significance level, p<0.05), but some noteworthy tendencies with a significance level of p!0.1 were found. It turned out that those who recently renovated their homes tended to have a lower household income (mean income category: M = 2.3 vs. M = 3.1; p = 0.10). Furthermore, those of the renovating group of homeowners have on average owned their houses for a shorter time period September 2012 than those who did not recently renovate (mean duration of ownership: M = 16.9 years vs. M = 23.4 years; p = 0.10). In addition the houses which were renovated after 2008 tended to be older than the other houses in the sample (mean construction year: M = 1888.1 vs. M = 1937.9; p = 0.11). There were no further salient differences. The average age of both homeowner groups was for example nearly identical (M = 58.2 years vs. M = 58.4 years; p = 0.95). With regard to the political orientation of the two groups the most salient difference was that homeowners who renovated their homes after 2008 tended to be more in favor of strong environmental protection than the others 5 Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz (M = 5.3 vs. M = 3.8; p = 0.11). Average ratings of the two homeowner groups with respect to statements in six further political fields were by and large similar. Consistent with their environmental orientation and the cantonal strategy, the motivation of all ten homeowners to renovate their homes was to reduce the energy use (i.e. showing ratings >5 on the scale from 0 to 10). The average rating for reduction of energy use was with M = 9.0 exceptionally high. Energy concerns were thus rated as more important reason for recent renovations than conservation of value (M = 7.6), comfort (M = 5.1), or aesthetic considerations (M = 3.9). Significant differences between the two homeowners groups were found in relation to their willingness to perform a renovation, if certain cantonal incentives were provided. Willingness to exchange windows (M = 3.9 vs. M = 1.1; p = 0.01), and to renovate the damming of the roof (M = 4.4 vs. M = 1.7; p = 0.03) was significantly higher among those who renovated their homes after 2008. In tendency willingness to join a local district heating network when available (M = 6.4 vs. M = 3.8, p = 0.10) was also higher among those who recently renovated their home. 2.2 PCA and Cluster analysis based on willingness for energetic renovations A PCA of the 10 ratings of willingness to implement energy efficiency measures revealed three principal components. The resulting rotated loading matrix is shown in Table 1. Accordingly, the first component loaded highly on measures that improve the isolation of the house (e.g. changing windows, damming roof, damming walls and floor, achievement of Minergie-standard). The second component loaded highly on cost free energy consultancy and the installation of wood heating systems. These are also the two measures with the lowest acceptances as a consultation was perceived as direct state interventionism and wood heating systems were perceived dirty (i.e. dust from wood). The third factor loaded on use of clean heating and hot water energy sources, namely ground source heat pump systems, solar thermal collectors and local district heating network. Clean in this regard means that the energy carrier is not stored in the house. Table 1. Rotated component loading matrix resulting from a PCA on homeowners ratings of willingness to implement different energy efficiency measures. Energy efficiency measures Component 1 Component 2 Component 3 Communality Exchanging windows 0.76 -0.17 0.14 0.63 Insulation of walls 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.84 Insulation of roof 0.66 0.19 0.17 0.50 Insulation of floors 0.79 0.18 0.05 0.66 Reaching MINERGIE-standard 0.80 0.17 0.32 0.77 Energy consultancy 0.20 0.78 0.11 0.67 Installing Ground source heat pump 0.05 0.33 0.65 0.53 Installing modern wood heating 0.01 0.88 0.17 0.80 Mounting solar collectors 0.33 -0.37 0.72 0.76 Join a district heating network 0.12 0.26 0.79 0.71 Eigenvalues " 3.27 1.82 1.76 Note: Number of extracted components determined by Kaiser-Guttman criterion. Only components with Eigenvalues ">1 were considered; Factor loadings after Varimax rotation. 6 NSSI Working Paper 47 Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR) A cluster analysis for grouping homeowners according to their willingness judgments was also conducted. Application of the Ward Method and the squared Euclidean Distance dissimilarity measure (Backhaus, et al., 2006) resulted in a three cluster solution with average willingness judgments (i.e. cluster centroid vectors) as shown in Table 2. Accordingly, there was one small cluster with only three homeowners, who were generally more willing to renovate their homes than the others with regard to all suggested measures except for the use of modern wood heating systems. A second cluster entailing the majority Results of homeowners (n = 21) was only willing to engage in use of solar thermal energy and to join a local district heating network, but tended to reject all other measures. The third cluster of n = 7 persons rejected all energetic improvement and innovation measures. The three clusters thus differed significantly with regard to PCA component 1 covering measures for improving the isolation of the house (p<0.001) and PCA component 3 covering use of innovative energy sources (p<0.001). They were however not different from each other with regard to the average scores of PCA component 2. Table2. Average ratings of willingness to implement different energy efficiency measures in the 3 homeowner clusters formed on the basis of the similarity of these judgments (Cluster Centroids). Energy efficiency measures Cluster 1 n=3 Cluster 2 n=21 Cluster 3 n=7 Overall sample Exchanging windows 6.2 1.7 1.1 2.0 Insulation of walls 7.0 1.2 1.1 1.7 Insulation of roof 6.0 2.5 1.2 2.6 Insulation of floors 9.0 2.1 1.4 2.6 Reaching MINERGIE-standard 9.2 1.1 0.1 1.7 Energy consultancy 4.8 3.1 0.1 2.6 Installing Ground source heat pump 3.9 2.6 0.9 2.3 Installing modern wood heating 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.8 Mounting solar collectors 9.3 5.2 0.1 4.5 Join a district heating network 8.1 5.3 0.9 4.6 Willing to improve insulation and to use innovative heating Inclined to innovative heating Unwilling to implement energy efficiency measures Cluster names (a-posteriori) Note: Cluster analysis with Ward Method and squared Euclidean Distance dissimilarity measure. Willingness scale from 0 to 10; average values >5.0 are printed boldly (reflecting considerable willingness). Based on the average willingness judgments and the PCA scores we named the clusters “homeowners highly willing to improve insulation and use clean heating energy sources” (cluster 1), “homeowners inclined to use clean September 2012 heating energy sources” (cluster 2), and “homeowners unwilling to implement energy efficiency measures” (cluster 3). 7 Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz 2.3 Correspondence between clusters and further homeowner characteristics One-Way Anova was used to investigate how the three clusters of homeowners differed from each other with respect to personal characteristics. Cluster membership and hence willingness to renovate was significantly related to age (p = 0.015). Homeowners of cluster 3 were oldest (M=66.6 years), and those of Cluster 2 (M = 57.0 years), were on average still older than those of cluster 1 (M = 49.0 years). Those who are in the “unwilling to implement energy efficiency measures” cluster 3 were on average also living for a longer period of time in their home (M1 = 8.7, M2 = 26.0, M3 = 30.1 years; p = 0.03) and have owned it for longer time (M1 = 8.7, M2 = 20.2, M3 = 29.9 years; p = 0.004). In tendency those of cluster 3 have also more savings available than those of the other two clusters (p = 0.09). With regard to political attitudes the only significant finding between the three clusters was found with regard to free market vs. regulation of the economy (p = 0.02). Here, those of cluster 3 opposed regulation of the economy (M = 6.8), whereas those of cluster 1 (M = 4.3) and cluster 2 (M = 4.8) are on average rather neutral in this regard. Two noteworthy tendencies towards differences were found in relation to social security policy (p = 0.065) and law and order policy (p = 0.099). Homeowners in cluster 3 oppose strong engagement of the state in social security (M3 = 6.8) whereas those of the 8 two other clusters give on average medium ratings in this regard (M1 = 4.3, M2 = 4.8). However, both cluster 2 and cluster 3 tended to favor rigorous law and order (M2 = 6.7, M3=5.8), whereas only the homeowners of cluster 1 gave somewhat lower ratings in this regard (M = 4.3). Differences between the three clusters in relation to environmental protection policy were not significant (p = 0.38). There was no significant relationship found between the three established clusters of homeowners and the two groups of homeowners (i.e. renovation vs. non renovation). However, there was a tendency that homeowners in the small cluster 1 (66.6%) recently more often renovated their homes than those of Cluster 2 and 3 (both 28.6%) (cf. Table 3). Table 3. Contingency table representing number of homeowners in the two renovation groups and the three clusters. Cluster Cluster Cluster 1 2 3 Total Renovation after 2008 2 6 2 10 No renovation after 2008 1 15 5 21 Total 3 21 7 31 NSSI Working Paper 47 Why Some Homeowners Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR) Conclusions 3 Conclusions In the analyses we studied two distinct groups and three established clusters of homeowners. The groups were built based on actually performed energetic renovations. Homeowners who renovated their homes after 2008 formed one group and homeowners who did not renovate since 2008 formed the other group. There were tendential differences between these groups. Homeowners who renovated their buildings after the implementation of the Appenzell energy concept had lower income and older houses, but owned their homes for a shorter period of time. The main reason for renovation was the reduction of energy use, and recent renovations correlated positively with endorsement of strong environmental protection policies. These findings suggest that the implementation of cantonal measures for more energy efficient buildings contributed to the renovation decisions in recent years. However, the three clusters that were formed on the basis of homeowners’ willingness-to-renovate did not correspond closely with actual renovations in recent years. Although eleven homeowners refurbished their building since 2008 only three homeowners had stated high willingness-to-renovate in connection with most cantonal measures. The clusters differed in the age. Younger homeowners were more willing to renovate than older homeowner. Clusters also differed in political attitudes. Homeowners unwilling to renovate had more economically liberal and socially conservative political opinions than homeowners from the other clusters. These differences did not appear between the two homeowner groups who recently renovated versus not renovated their houses. The fact that the groups and the clusters were not congruent can be explained by two reasons. (i) We inquired the willingness-to-renovate always in connection with a cantonal financial incentive. This could have influenced the answers. People who renovated their homes are aware of environmental problems and the necessity of reducing energy use; however, some of them might not be in favor of subsidies from the state for energetic renovation. (ii) PCA and cluster analysis suggest that some September 2012 cantonal measures are less preferred than others. The least preferred measure was an incentive for the replacement of an old heating in favor of a wood heating. This measure was rejected by all clusters. A comment from some interviewees on the subject of wood heating was that it is perceived inconvenient and dirty during operation. This explains why the participants of this study were generally unwilling to install modern wood heating and rated this measure lowest. The most preferred cantonal measures were subsidies for solar collectors and the opportunity to get access to a district heating network, because they are perceived as clean and easy to install. Preferences for insulation measures were higher than for wood heating but not high in absolute terms. This leads to the conclusion that generally measures are higher rated that support refurbishments that do not come with long and complicated construction work or are not considered dirty or complicated in the use phase (e.g. wood heating). Thus, if the use of wood as an energy source shall be increased as outlined in the cantonal energy strategy (econcept, 2008), centralized wood incineration plants should be supported that are connected with a district heating network. Furthermore, if considerable engagement in subsidized measures for both improving house insulation and use of clean heating energy sources is targeted, it may be an option to increase the financial incentives for the former relative to the latter to persuade more homeowner to insulate their buildings. Finally, it is important to raise awareness of energy efficiency issues with the aim to motivate homeowners to engage in reasonable modernizations. In particular older people and those who already live for a long period of time in their house should be targeted and provided with information on benefits of renovations. 9 Dominik Saner, Ralph Hansmann, Evelina Trutnevyte, and Roland W. Scholz 4 Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Corinne Moser for her valuable contributions during the design of the questionnaire used in this study, and Ilona Imoberdorf for her effort in visiting the homeowners and performing the interviews. We thank also Yann Blumer for his profound feedback on previous versions of this article. Especially, we would like to thank the authorities from the Amt für Umwelt Appenzell Ausserrhoden and their head, Hans Bruderer, for their financial support. 5 References Amt für Umwelt AR. (2012). Förderung – Appenzell Ausserhoden. Retrieved April 15, 2012, from http://www.ar.ch/departemente/departementbau-und-umwelt/amt-fuerumwelt/energie/foerderung/ Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W., & Weiber, R. (2006). Multivariate Analysemethoden (Vol. 11). Berlin (D): Springer-Verlag. BAFU. (2010). Das Gebäudeprogramm im Startjahr 2010. Ittigen (CH): Bundesamt für Umwelt BAFU. BAFU. (2012). Das Gebäudeprogramm – Was wird gefördert? Retrieved March 10, 2012, from http://www.dasgebaeudeprogramm.ch/index.p hp/de/foerderung/was-wird-gefoerdert Banfi, S., Ramseier, C., Alberini, A., Jakob, M., & KnellwolfPióro, D. (2011). Erneuerung von Einfamilienhäusern – Eine mikroökonomische Analyse für ausgewählte Schweizer Kantone. Ittigen (CH): Bundesamt für Energie BFE. 10 econcept. (2008). Energiekonzept 2008–2015. Appenzell (CH): Amt für Umwelt AR. Ott, W., Jakob, M., Baur, M., Kaufmann, Y., & Ott, A. (2005). Mobilisierung der energetischen Erneuerungspotenziale im Wohnbaubestand. Ittigen (CH): Bundesamt für Energie BFE. Prognos. (2011). Zwischenbericht I – Energieszenarien für die Schweiz bis 2050. Ittigen (CH): Bundesamt für Energie BFE. Schlegel, M., Trutnevyte, E., & Scholz, R. W. (2012). Patterns of residential heat demand in rural Switzerland. Building Research & Information, 40, 140-153. Wallbaum, H., Heeren, N., Jakob, M., Martius, G., & Gross, N. (2010). Gebäudeparkmodell – Büro-, Schul- und Wohngebäude – Vorstudie zur Erreichbarkeit der Ziele der 2000-Watt-Gesellschaft für den Gebäudepark der Stadt Zürich. Schlussbericht. Zurich (CH): Stadt Zürich. NSSI Working Paper 47 ETH-UNS Working Papers ■ UNS-Working Paper 1 (Out of Print) Scholz, R. W. (1994). Muss man den Formalismus beherrschen, um die Formalisten zu schlagen? Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R. W. (1998). Umweltforschung zwischen Formalwissenschaft und Verständnis: Muss man den Formalismus beherrschen, um die Formalisten zu schlagen? In A. Daschkeit & W. Schröder (Eds.), Umweltforschung quergedacht: Perspektiven integrativer Umweltforschung und -lehre (pp. 309–328). Berlin: Springer.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 2 (Out of Print) UNS (1994). Lehrstuhlbeschreibung Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften (UNS). Fallstudie, Forschung und Berufspraxis. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 3 Mieg, H. A. (1994). Die Expertenrolle. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 4 Heitzer, A. & Scholz, R. W. (1994). Monitoring and evaluating the efficacy of bioremediation – a conceptual framework. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 5 (Out of Print) Scholz, R. W., Weber, O., & Michalik, G. (1995). Ökologische Risiken im Firmenkreditgeschäft. Zürich: ETHZürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R. W., Weber, O., & Michalik, G. (1995). Ökologische Risiken im Firmenkreditgeschäft. In Overlack-Kosel, D., Scholz, R. W., Erichsen, S., Schmitz, K. W., and Urban, G. (Eds.), Kreditrisiken aus Umweltrisiken (pp. 1–49). Bonn: Economica.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 6 (Out of Print) Scholz, R. W., Heitzer, A., May, T., Nothbaum, N., Stünzi, J., & Tietje, O. (1995). Datenqualität und Risikoanalysen – Das Risikohandlungsmodell zur Altlastenbearbeitung. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R. W., Heitzer, A., May, T. W., Nothbaum, N. Stünzi, J., & Tietje, O. (1996). Datenqualität und Risikoanalysen: Das Risikohandlungsmodell zur Altlastenbearbeitung. In S. Schulte-Hostede, R. Freitag, A. Kettrup, and W. Fresenius (Eds.), Altlasten-Bewertung: Datenanalyse und Gefahrenbewertung (pp. 1–29). Landsberg: Ecomed.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 7 (Out of Print) Scholz, R. W., Mieg, A. H., & Weber, O. (1995). Mastering the complexity of environmental problem solving by case study approach. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R.W., Mieg, H.A., & Weber, O. (1997). Mastering the complexity of environmental problem solving with the case study approach. Psychologische Beiträge, 39, 169–186.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 8 (Out of Print) Tietje, O. & Scholz, R. W. (1995). Wahrscheinlichkeitskonzepte und Umweltsysteme. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Tietje, O. & Scholz, R. W. (1996). Wahrscheinlichkeitskonzepte und Umweltsysteme. In A. Gheorghe & H. Seiler (Eds.), Was ist Wahrscheinlichkeit? Die Bedeutung der Wahrscheinlichkeit beim Umgang mit technischen Risiken (pp. 31–49). Zürich: vdf.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 9 (Out of Print) Scholz, R. W. (1995). Grenzwert und Risiko: Probleme der Wahrnehmung und des Handelns. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R. W. (1996). Grenzwerte und Risiko: Probleme der Wahrnehmung und des Handelns. In A. Grohmann & G. Reinicke (Eds.), Transparenz und Akzeptanz von Grenzwerten am Beispiel des Trinkwassers (pp. 5–19). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 10 (Out of Print) Weber, O. (1995). Vom kognitiven Ungetüm bis zur Unverständlichkeit: Zwei Beispiele für Schwierigkeiten im Umgang mit Grenzwerten. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Weber, O. (1996). Vom kognitiven Ungetüm bis zur Unverständlichkeit: zwei Beispiele für Schwierigkeiten im Umgang mit Grenzwerten. In Umweltbundesamt (Ed.), Transparenz und Akzeptanz von Grenzwerten am Beispiel des Trinkwassers. Berichtsband zur Tagung vom 10. und 11. Oktober 1995 (mit Ergänzungen), (pp. 133–150). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 11 Oberle, B. M., Meyer, S. B., & Gessler, R. D. (1995). Übungsfälle 1994: Ökologie als Bestandteil von Unternehmens- strategien am Beispiel der Swissair. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 12 (Out of Print) Mieg, H. A. (1996). Managing the Interfaces between Science, Industry, and Society. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Mieg, H. A. (1996). Managing the interfaces between science, industry, and society. In: UNESCO (Ed.), World Congress of Engineering Educators and Industry Leaders (Vol. I, pp. 529-533). Paris: UNESCO.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 13 (Out of Print) Scholz, R. W. (1996). Effektivität, Effizienz und Verhältnismässigkeit als Kriterien der Altlastenbearbeitung. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R. W. (1996). Effektivität, Effizienz und Verhältnismässigkeit als Kriterien der Altlastenbearbeitung. In: Baudirektion des Kantons Zürich in Zusammenarbeit mit ETH-UNS (Eds.). Grundsätze, Modelle und Praxis der Altlastenbearbeitung im Kanton Zürich: Referate zur Altlastentagung 1996 (pp. 1–22) Zürich: AGW Hauptabteilung Abfallwirtschaft und Betriebe.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 14 (Out of Print) Tietje, O., Scholz, R. W., Heitzer, A., & Weber, O. (1996). Mathematical evaluation criteria. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Tietje, O., Scholz, R.W., Heitzer, A., and Weber, O. (1998). Mathematical evaluation criteria. In H.-P. Blume, H. Eger, E. Fleischhauer, A. Hebel, C. Reij, & G. Steiner (Eds.), Towards sustainable land use (pp. 53– 61). Reiskirchen: Catena.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 15 Steiner, R. (1997). Evaluationsbericht: Bewertung der obligatorischen Berufspraxis im Studiengang Umweltnaturwissenschaften durch Betriebe und Studierende. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 16 (Out of Print) Jungbluth, N. (1997). Life-cycle-assessment for stoves and ovens. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Jungbluth, N. (1997). Life-Cycle-Assessment for stoves and ovens. 5th SETAC-Europe LCAS Case Studies Symposium, (pp. 121–130), Brussels.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 17 Tietje, O., Scholz, R. W., Schaerli, M. A., Heitzer, A., & Hesske, S. (1997). Mathematische Bewertung von Risiken durch Schwermetalle im Boden: Zusammenfassung des gleichnamigen Posters auf der Tagung der Deutschen Bodenkundlichen Gesellschaft in Konstanz. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 18 Jungbluth, N. (1998). Ökologische Beurteilung des Bedürfnisfeldes Ernährung: Arbeitsgruppen, Methoden, Stand der Forschung, Folgerungen. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 19 (Out of Print) Weber, O., Scholz, R. W., Bühlmann, R., & Grasmück, D. (1999). Risk Perception of Heavy Metal Soil Contamination and Attitudes to Decontamination Strategies. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Weber, O., Scholz, R. W., Bühlmann, R., & Grasmück, D. (2001). Risk Perception of Heavy Metal Soil Contamination and Attitudes to Decontamination Strategies. Risk Analysis, Vol. 21, Issue 5, pp. 967–967.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 20 (Out of Print) Mieg, H. A. (1999). Expert Roles and Collective Reasoning in ETH-UNS Case Studies. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Mieg, H. A. (2000). University-based projects for local sustainable development – Expert Roles and Collective Reasoning in ETH-UNS Case Studies. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 67–82.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 21 Scholz, R. W. (1999). «Mutual Learning» und Probabilistischer Funktionalismus – Was Hochschule und Gesellschaft von einander und von Egon Brunswik lernen können. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 22 (Out of Print) Semadeni M. (1999). Moving from Risk to Action: A conceptual risk handling model. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Semadeni, M. (2000). Moving from risk to action: A conceptual risk handling model. In R. Häberli, R. W. Scholz, A. Bill, & M. Welti (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Transdisciplinarity 2000 Conference: Transdisiplinarity – Joint Problem-Solving among Science, Technology and Society. ETH Zurich. Workbook I: Dialogue Sessions and Idea Market (pp. 239-234). Zürich: Haffmanns Sachbuch Verlag.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 23 (Out of Print) Güldenzoph, W. & Scholz, R.W. (2000). Umgang mit Altlasten während dem Transformationsprozess im Areal Zentrum Zürich Nord (ZZN). Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Güldenzoph, W., Baracchi, C., Fagetti, R., & Scholz, R. W. (2000). Chancen und Dilemmata des Industriebrachenrecyclings: Fallbetrachtung Zentrum Zürich Nord. DISP 143, 36, 10-17.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 24 Semadeni M. (2000). Soil and Sustainable Land-Use. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften ■ UNS-Working Paper 25 Sell J., Weber, O., & Scholz, R. W. (2001). Liegenschaftsschatzungen und Bodenbelastungen. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften ■ UNS-Working Paper 26 (Out of Print) Hansmann, R., Hesske, S., Tietje, O., & Scholz, R. W. (2001). Internet-unterstützte Umweltbildung: Eine experimentelle Studie zur Anwendung des OnlineSimulationsspiels SimUlme im Schulunterricht. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Hansmann, R., Hesske, S., Tietje, O., & Scholz, R. W. (2002). Internet-unterstützte Umweltbildung: Eine experimentelle Studie zur Anwendung des Online-Simulationsspiels SimUlme im Schulunterricht. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, Nr. 1/2002.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 27 Scholz, R. W. & Weber, O. (2001). Judgments on Health Hazards to Soil Contamination by Exposed and Notexposed Residents. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnaturund Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 28 Scholz, R. W., Steiner, R., & Hansmann, R. (2001). Practical Training as Part of Higher Environmental Education. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 29 Hansmann, R., Scholz, R. W., Crott, H. W., & Mieg, H. A. (2001). Education in Environmental Planning: Effects of Group Discussions, Expert Information, and Case Study Participation on Judgment Accuracy. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 30 Laws, D., Scholz, R. W., Shiroyama, H., Susskind, L., Suzuki, T., & Weber, O. (2002). Expert Views on Sustainability and Technology Implementation. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 31 Flüeler, T. (2002). Robust Radioactive Waste Management: Decision Making in Complex Socio-technical Systems. Part1 = Options in Radioactive Waste Management Revisited: A Proposed Framework for Robust Decision Making; Part 2 = Robustness in Radioactive Waste Management. A Contribution to Decision Making in Complex Socio-technical Systems. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Part 1 published as: Flüeler, T. (2001a): Options in Radioactive Waste Management Revisited: A Framework for Robust Decision Making. Journal of Risk Analysis. Vol. 21. No. 4. Aug. 2001:787-799. Part 2 published as: Flüeler, T. (2001b): Robustness in Radioactive Waste Management. A Contribution to Decision-Making in Complex Socio-technical Systems. In: E. Zio, M. Demichela & N. Piccinini (eds.): Safety & Reliability. Towards a Safer World. Proceedings of the European Conference on Safety and Reliability. ESREL 2001. Torino (I), 16-20 Sep. Vol. 1. Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy:317-325.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 32 Hansmann, R., Mieg, H. A., Crott, H. W., & Scholz, R. W. (2002). Models in Environmental Planning: Selection of Impact Variables and Estimation of Impacts. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 33 Schnabel, U., Tietje, O., & Scholz, R. W. (2002). Using the Power of Information of Sparse Data for Soil Improvement Management. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 34 Weber, O., Reiland, R., & Weber, B. (2002). Sustainability Benchmarking of European Banks and Financial Service Organizations . Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 35 Kammerer, D., Sell, J., & Weber, O. (2002). Evaluation of AIJ Project Proposals – Potential Contribution to Sustainable Development. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 36 Scholz, R. W., Mieg, H. A., & Weber, O. (2003). Wirtschaftliche und organisationale Entscheidungen. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. (Published as: Scholz, R. W., Mieg, H. A., & Weber O. (2003). Wirtschaftliche und organisationale Entscheidungen, In: Auhagen & Bierhoff. Wirtschafts- und Organisationspsychologie.) ■ UNS-Working Paper 37 Scholz, R. W. & Binder, C. (2003). The Paradigm of Human-Environment Systems. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 38 Hansmann, R., Crott, H. W., Mieg, H. A., & Scholz, R. W. (2003). Is Group Performance Improved by Evaluating Task Difficulty and by Knowing about the Differential Effects of Conformity?. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 39 Binder, C., Hofer, C., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R. W. (2003). Transition process towards regional wood flows by integrating material flux analysis and agent analysis: The case of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, Switzerland. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 40 Loukopoulos, P. & Scholz, R. W. (2003). Future Urban Sustainable Mobility: Using ‘Area Development Negotiations’ for Scenario Assessment and for Assisting the Democratic Policy Process. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 41 Fenchel, M., Scholz, R. W., & Weber, O. (2003). Does Good Environmental Performance reduce Credit Risk? – Empirical Evidence from Europe`s Banking Sector. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 42 Grasmück, D. & Scholz, R. W. (2003). Risk perception of heavy metal soil contamination by high-exposed and low-exposed inhabitants. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 43 Wolfensberger, M., Lang, D., & Scholz, R. W. (2008). (Re) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity. Summary of the Workshop “Scarce Raw Materials” August 31–September 2, 2007 – Davos, Switzerland. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 44 Stauffacher, M., Walter, A., Lang, D., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R. W. (2005). Learning to Research Environmental Problems from a Functional Sociocultural Constructivism Perspective: The Transdisciplinary Case Study Approach. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 45 Walter, A., Helgenberger, S., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R. W. (2006). Measuring social effects of transdisciplinary research projects – Design and application of an evaluation method. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnaturund Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 46 Junker, B., Flüeler, T., Stauffacher, M., & Scholz, R. W. (2006). Description of the safety case for long-term disposal of radioactive waste – the iterative safety analysis approach as utilized in Switzerland. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ■ UNS-Working Paper 47 Saner, D., Hansmann, R., Trutnevyte, E., & Scholz, R. W. (2012). Why Some Homeowner Energetically Renovate and Others Do Not – The Case of Herisau (AR). Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften. ETH Zurich Institute for Environmental Decisions IED Natural and Social Science Interface NSSI CHN J76.1 8092 Zurich SWITZERLAND Phone +41 44 632 58 92 URL http://www.nssi.ethz.ch
Similar documents
Find the Kitchen Renovation Contractors in Vaughan
Find the list of kitchen renovation contractors with rating and reviews in Vaughan at gta-contractors.com. Their ranges of services are custom made kitchens, cabinets, remodeling, countertops, wine cellars & kitchen bar. Search today! Visit Us: http://gta-contractors.com/
More information