In this article we provide a timely account of how sustainable technologies become entangled with cultural practices and thus co-evolve, influencing energy consumption. In doing so, we critique the approach current UK policy takes towards energy renewal and carbon reduction. We investigate the effectiveness of the social housing sector’s efforts to implement environmental policy initiatives that use a technology-driven approach. By looking at how social housing residents consume energy as part of domestic practices, we identify tensions between strategies to influence energy consumption by a housing association, and the ways residents incorporate sustainable technologies into everyday practices. Our findings reveal how sustainable technologies become enrolled in established practices: residents creatively develop novel routine strategies to accommodate new technologies to their daily routines. We contend that policy efforts to engender ‘behaviour change’ through a technology-driven approach have limitations. This approach ignores how practices become entangled, affecting energy consumption.
BarrSGilgAShawG (2011) Citizens, consumers and sustainability: (Re)framing environmental practice in an age of climate change. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimension21: 1224–33.
2.
BarryA (2001) Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society. London: Athlone Press.
3.
BERR (2008) Energy Consumption in the United Kingdom: Overall Data Tables. 2008 update, URN09/452. London: Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform.
4.
ChappellsHShoveE (2004) Infrastructures, crises and the orchestration of demand. In: SouthertonDChappellsHVan VlietB (eds) Sustainable Consumption: The Implications of Changing Infrastructures of Provision. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 130–43.
5.
DECC (2011) 2009 Final UK GHG Emissions Data. London: Department for Energy and Climate Change.
6.
DCLG (2006a) Code for Sustainable Homes: A Step-change in Sustainable Home Building Practice. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
7.
DCLG (2006b) Building a Greener Future: Towards Zero Carbon Development. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
8.
GuyS (2006) Designing urban knowledge: Competing perspectives on energy and buildings. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy24: 645–59.
9.
HandMShoveESouthertonD (2005) Explaining showering: A discussion of the material, conventional, and temporal dimensions of practice. Sociological Research Online10(2). Available at: http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/11294/
McMeekinASouthertonD (2012) Sustainability transitions and final consumption: Practices and sociotechnical systems. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management24: 345–61.
12.
MillerPRoseN (2008) Governing the Present. Cambridge: Polity Press.
13.
OzakiRShawIDodgsonM (2013) The co-production of ‘sustainability’: Negotiated practices and the Prius. Science, Technology and Human Values38(4). DOI: 10.1177/0162243912441029
14.
PickeringA (1995) The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
ReckwitzA (2002) Towards a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory5(2): 243–63.
16.
SchatzkiT (2001) Introduction: Practice theory. In: SchatzkiTKnorr CetinaKSavignyE (eds) The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London: Routledge, 1–14.
17.
ShoveE (2003) Converging conventions of comfort, cleanliness and convenience. Journal of Consumer Policy26: 395–418.
18.
ShoveE (2004) Efficiency and consumption: Technology and practice. Energy and Environment15(6): 1053–65.
19.
ShoveE (2006) Constructing home: A crossroad of choices. In: CieraadI (ed.) At Home: An Anthropology of Domestic Space. New York: Syracuse University Press, 130–43.
20.
ShoveE (2010) Social theory and climate change questions often, sometimes and not yet asked. Theory, Culture & Society27: 277–88.
21.
ShoveESouthertonD (2000) Defrosting the freezer: From novelty to convenience: A narrative of normalization. Journal of Material Culture5: 301–19.
22.
ShoveEWalkerG (2010) Governing transitions in the sustainability of everyday life. Research Policy39: 471–6.
23.
SlaterD (1997) Consumer Culture and Modernity. Cambridge: Policy Press.
24.
SouthertonD (2006) Analysing the temporal organization of daily life: Social constraints, practices and their allocation. Sociology40(3): 435–54.
25.
SouthertonDChappellsHVan VlietB (2004) Introduction: Consumption, infrastructures and environmental sustainability. In: SouthertonDChappellsHVan VlietB (eds) Sustainable Consumption: The Implications of Changing Infrastructures of Provision. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1–14.
26.
SpaargarenG (2011) Theories of practices: Agencies, technology, and culture: Exploring the relevance of practice theories for the governance of sustainable consumption practices in the new world-order. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions21(3): 813–22.
27.
ThomasD (2006) A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation27(2): 237–46.
28.
WardeA (1999) Convenience food: Space and timing. British Food Journal101(7): 518–27.
29.
WebbJ (2012) Climate change and society: The chimera of behaviour change technologies. Sociology46(1): 109–25.
30.
WilhiteH (2004) Equating efficiency with reduction: A self-deception in energy policy. Energy and Environment15(6): 991–1009.
31.
WilhiteH (2005) Why energy needs anthropology. Anthropology Today21(3): 1–2.
32.
WilhiteH (2008) New thinking on the agentive relationship between end-use technologies and energy-using practices. Energy Efficiency1: 121–30.
33.
WinchD (2006) The problematic status of the consumer in orthodox economic thought. In: TrentmannF (ed.) The Making of the Consumer: Knowledge, Power and Identity in the Modern World. Oxford: Berg, 31–52.
