Our 2025 Annual Conference took place on Wednesday 29th January 2025 at the British Library Knowledge Centre in London. This article provides a summary of some of the many topics that were covered during the event.
Welcome to the conference
Lynne Sullivan OBE, Chair, Good Homes Alliance
Lynne Sullivan opened the conference with an introduction to the work of the Good Homes Alliance, and its role in enabling good quality housing, generating knowledge, developing networks and campaigning across 4 current themes:
- Net Zero, Energy Supply and Demand Reduction
- Planning, Placemaking and Nature-Positive Solutions
- Health, Quality and In-Use Performance
- Alternative Housing Models & Innovative Finance
In light of climate change and the burgeoning housebuilding agenda, this introduction raised a number of questions: who safeguards quality in 1.5m new homes and who has resident running costs in mind? Are new homes still routinely underperforming in terms of energy use for heating and ventilation systems for indoor air quality? And last but not least, homes built now will still be in occupation in 2085 – 2090 – are new homes and places really designed for a 60+year life?
Keynote address
Dame Baroness Brown, Chair, Adaptation Sub-Committee, Climate Change Committee
Dame Baroness Brown’s keynote address provided a precise account of our changing climate and the actions that we need to take: 2024 was the hottest year on record, at 1.6ºC over pre-industrial temperatures.
Even if we reach Net Zero by 2050, further climate change is inevitable. By 2050, the average annual temperature will be ~0.6ºC higher than it is at present; hotter, drier summers will be more typical; average winter rainfall will increase by as much as 16%; heavy rainfall will be more frequent; and sea levels will continue to rise. If we fail to reach NZ and emissions continue to rise after 2050 – the trajectory we see with current global policies – then an increase of 3-4ºC by the end of the century (2100) is a distinct possibility.
In terms of summer heat-related impacts, we are already seeing temperature peaks: 20% of homes already overheat and 90% of hospital wards are at risk of overheating. Maximum temperatures in the South East of England are rising by 1 ºC each decade, so we are likely to see temperatures of 45ºC in this part of the UK. 1.5 million homes are at risk of flooding today, and this is anticipated to rise to 2.5M by 2050. But in addition to increased flooding, there are many parts of the country (particularly in the South East and East Anglia) that don’t have enough water. Although there is political and volume housebuilder pushback to patchworks of standards, Local Authorities need to be able to define the relevant standards for their area as weather, water, and other conditions vary considerably across the country.
As carbon emissions from power generation have come down, emissions from buildings and surface transport are two of the biggest areas of challenge:
We therefore need to triple the rate at which we are reducing emissions in our buildings. We also need to adapt existing buildings and design, plan and build new homes that are climate resilient. This includes making sure cooling and ventilation work well in homes, and increasing low carbon transport, urban green space and the use of SuDS. This also means designing for 2ºC of warming by 2050 and 3-4ºC by the end of the century, as well as continuing to support the case for high standards; championing best practice; driving early action by going beyond the minimum stated by building regs; closing the performance gap and gathering evidence through POE; measuring and reducing embedded carbon; significantly upskilling the workforce; and integrating green solutions. Whilst many adaptation measures are cost effective (Watkiss, P. 2021), more data is needed to make the case for the level of adaptation that we need to achieve.
The government also needs to further strengthen the NPPF; ensure the right policies and incentives are in place (e.g., electricity pricing needs to be addressed); take a nature first approach; and integrate climate change into all policy.
Some of the CCC’s recommendations from 2019 are starting to happen, and we are seeing more thought being given to designing for a changing climate:
(Source: keynote slides; UK housing: fit for the future?)
Panel session: Climate adaptation in planning and placemaking
Chaired by Lynne Sullivan. Panellists:
- Dame Baroness Brown, Chair, Adaptation Sub-Committee, Climate Change Committee
- Amy Burbidge, Head of Master Development & Design at Homes England
- Stephen Platt, Director, Cambridge Architectural Research Ltd
- Lindsey Wilkinson, Consultant Landscape Architect and Fellow of the Landscape Institute
Amy Burbidge used a jelly analogy to describe the work of attempting to keep the structure and consistency of quality and control from planning through to the constructed project. Although there’s a need to balance multiple factors in planning and placemaking for climate adaptation, this can be achieved by defining the outcomes you want to achieve from the start; keeping control of delivery and quality; and focusing on details and recording decisions, particularly in cases where some aspects of design are prioritised over others. It is important to think about what is needed to make a place resilient, and how this will change over time (from short term uses, to medium term buildings and plot structures, through to long term street patterns). For example, what do streets need to be like? How is shelter and shade provided, and how is water managed sustainably through well-designed SuDS that respond to the environment, enhance biodiversity, and provide useful amenity space for people.
Despite the fact that the Cambridge is water-stressed and exposed to extreme heat and flooding, it has won 11 housing awards in the last decade. Stephen Platt provided an overview of new development in this city to draw key lessons that could be applied in other places. This learning comes from the work of the Cambridge Quality Review Panel, whose remit is to scrutinise major schemes. The panel’s findings have been summarised in the recent New Neighbourhoods in Cambridge report:
- Density and efficient use of land – sustainable development needs a critical mass of people for infrastructure, which has been achieved in Cambridge without the use of tall buildings by shrinking distances between homes and reducing private outdoor space, providing private terraces and shared communal green spaces instead. This provides the benefit of reduced travel distances, and more walking and cycling.
- Biodiversity and urban cooling – rather than being seen as ‘urban decorating’, landscape architecture has a huge role in highlighting the benefits of carbon reduction, increased biodiversity and wellbeing, and the use of SuDS for water management and plant irrigation.
- Roads and surfaces – it’s important to provide streets not movement corridors, as too much hard landscaping undermines the quality of places. Reducing hard landscaping is also a key aspect of creating low carbon places, and we need to foster a better understanding of what these, and how they go beyond a fabric first approach and the use of photovoltaics.
- Support for planning – evidence for the growth agenda came from Cambridge Futures, started by University, with multi-party involvement. This type of collaboration is important – quality isn’t all about price, and this is one thing that we can learn from Cambridge for places that don’t have the same land values. Equally, design quality panels can play an important role; it saves money to do G&B infrastructure from the start; priorities needed to be decided for each scheme; and multifunctionality and design-led approach is critical. Much of the new housing in Cambridge is, however, very expensive, and it was noted that development in the UK is not catering to huge swathes of the population.
Lindsey Wilkinson focused on the challenges and opportunities of biodiversity net gain (BNG) from a landscape design perspective, making the argument for a landscape led approach to be integrated into design and planning from the outset, with placemaking that balances creating spaces for people and nature. The aim of BNG is to leave biodiversity on site in a better state than before development and to encourage appropriate development on appropriate sites, by setting clear and measurable ecological contributions through the planning process. But there are certainly challenges to meeting this metric, and offsetting should be used as a last resort rather than a means of dealing with this requirement.
Best practice water efficiency and reuse in housing.
Chaired by Rory Olcayto, Writer and Critic, Pollard Thomas Edwards. Panellists:
- Katie Smith, Head of Water Efficiency and Demand Management, Defra
- Catherine Moncrieff, Policy and Engagement Manager, CIWEM
- Andrew Tucker, Water Demand Reduction Manager, Thames Water
- Lutz Johnen, Founder, Aquality
This session was introduced by Rory Olcayto, who is working with GHA on a series of guidance documents and acknowledged the important role of this organisation in working for the public good, suggesting that we need more civic mindedness.
Water matters to the GHA’s mission – it’s the first pledge in the updated manifesto and, simply put, we are all using too much water. The Chancellor’s announcement today about a new Silicon Valley for the UK is going to need both new homes and water cooling technology for AI (one 100 word AI generated email consumes the equivalent of a bottle of water).
Rory posed the following questions to each of the panellists: in relation to the water hierarchy (reduce, reuse and offset) what are the main challenges and opportunities for reducing and reusing water, and what role does offsetting have?
Katie Smith spoke about DEFRA’s work to reduce use by 20% per person by 2028, much of which will be achieved through products that are installed in the home. Mandatory water efficiency labels are being rolled out by the government, and a key aspect of Katie’s work is engaging with the many different groups of people need to be brought into this work. In terms of data and measuring water use, smart metering is key to understand behaviours. People are used to water butts, but how do we move this recycled water into the house? There are also lots of businesses using potable water for processes that do not need this type of water.
Cat Moncrieff from CIWEM is working on enabling water smart communities, and looking at barriers linked to mainstreaming water smart homes. This has included economic analysis on water scarcity and its impact on housing growth in the South East: 61,000 new homes have been delayed in this area because of a lack of water, and the impact of this delay is estimated to be £21 billion. Reducing water use by 30% would unlock 49,000 of these 61,000 homes.
Some main challenges include the feeling that water efficiency progress has plateaued; it is hard to get a culture shift in a rainy country, and national leadership and longer term thinking is needed. The consensus is that water reduction isn’t going to be sufficient, but rain and stormwater reuse isn’t mainstream in the UK, so this project has also looked at the ‘ick factor’ and what people consider to be acceptable. Another barrier is the cost for developers to install the necessary equipment and technology in new communities. Water offsetting and neutrality have been around for a long time, but not really demonstrated at scale; is there the opportunity to fund retrofits via offsetting? This type of thing takes a long time to establish, is quite complicated, and in terms of the time and resource required, local authorities might not be best placed to oversee this.
Andrew Tucker provided an outline of his role to get people to use less of his company’s product – water. Smart meter data has been game changing (currently at 25M meter reads per day) and 80% of their work is on demand reduction. It was noted that as a country, we are not water inefficient (only 20% of households use more than 500 litres per day). A focus on a appliances, figures and fittings is the easiest starting point. Reuse is more difficult, and doesn’t retrofit well. So one question is how to transfer lessons from new build to existing stock. Water neutrality is a core focus of their work, with the argument being that all homes can be water neutral, with the remainder of the money from the infrastructure charge used for offsetting. Andrew’s final point was that water efficiency is an integral part of energy efficiency; if you are not including water in your energy efficiency work, then you are not doing this right.
Lutz Johnen agreed with the need to reduce consumption, but noted that water efficiency will always have limited results as a certain amount of water will always be needed in the home. Water reuse is therefore where the opportunities can be found. The UK construction industry is currently miles behind countries like Germany, where 80,000 systems – such as the dual pipework needed for retrofit – are installed each year. If no changes are made, we won’t have the water to build new homes. Using rainwater would cover 20% of the gap in water needed (which would unlock 1.9 million new homes through the water saved by 2050) but he is also seeing a great deal of innovation and offset initiatives between planners, manufacturers and developers to enable water neutrality in certain areas.
Finance for net zero – Unlocking investment and incentivising the delivery of net zero homes
Chaired by Rafe Bertram, Built Environment Sustainability Lead, Enfield Council
Panellists:
- Sarah Milne, Head of Impact, Puma Property Finance
- Jess Hrivnak, RIBA’s Sustainability Advisor and Technical Steering Group Member of the UK Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard
- Philip Graham, AHRC Innovation Scholar in Design and Director of Studies & Bye-fellow, Homerton College, University of Cambridge
This session stated with a brief introduction to our work on finance innovation before opening out into a panel discussion: This work comes out of the GHA’s 10 steps manifesto to accelerate sustainable and Net Zero housing development, and builds on the first edition of the Green Shift report, which investigated existing financial incentives for higher environmental performance in the built environment. Rafe Bertram outlined the findings that a tipping point had been reached, and that financial incentives do exist, but these incentives are often quite small, and people don’t know about them. In a follow-up to this report, our aim is to help different stakeholder groups to find ways of affording more sustainable outcomes – be it developers embarking on sustainable new build, homeowners considering retrofit, or councils reviewing their council homes. Questions we want to answer: are the incentives enough to drive change? Which stakeholders are receiving the most incentives? Where, if anywhere, are incentives and regulation pushing in the right direction? However, the financial ecosystem is complex, with multiple perspectives and dimensions (e.g. location, economic priorities, and outcomes). All of this is being worked into an interface that allows stakeholders to identify incentives and compliance frameworks (and a measure of their impact) based on outcomes. This tool is currently in development, and we’d welcome you to get in touch if you are interested in contributing to or sponsoring this project.
Each panellist was asked to give an example of a specific financial incentive (existing or proposed) that they were excited about in terms of its potential impact, and which stakeholders it would benefit:
Sara Milne put forward Puma Finance’s impact lending framework, which launched at start of last year and provides a 1% discount (fee reduction) on lending based on social or sustainable criteria for projects that will deliver a minimum of 20% improvement to building regs for energy and water. Six loans were underwritten last year, the first of which – a care home – is due to be completed by the end of March. They were able to make design changes to taps, shower specifications, and other systems, and so they are using this financial lever to encourage better outcomes in the short term.
Jess Hrivnak outlined a pilot project with Atelier to support a shift to outcome-led delivery through funding rebates and loans linked and tracked to RIBA 2025 or 2030 Climate Challenge targets. This project will include post-occupancy evaluation, for which data will be available in just over a year. Jess also proposed the Energiesprong model as a means of upscaling retrofit through energy bill cost savings, noting that inspiration can be drawn from other sectors – even the motor industry, with its use of black box telematics.
Philip Graham made the case for a different approach to the great housing game, and suggested that we need to start thinking about reducing demand for space, as this use of space is a big driver of emissions. Philip is interested in the idea of equity release – perhaps in the form of equity lifetime mortgages – as way of nudging people to make better use of space. That might be by converting a garage, or splitting a larger home into two, whilst also retrofitting. The argument behind this is that we have plenty of homes, but there is too much underutilised space.
Growth is a term that was used a lot during this conference, primarily referring to new homes. There’s also growth in wellbeing, education standards, health etc., but the predominant narrative is of GDP growth. In terms of current priorities, we can have climate goals or current housing goals, so what if we were to take a different approach?
The role of building performance evaluation (BPE) in ensuring high quality outcomes in new homes and retrofit
Chaired by Tom Dollard, BPE lead/Vice-chair, Good Homes Alliance and Partner – Sustainability and Innovation, Pollard Thomas Edwards. Panellists:
- Professor David Glew, Director of the Leeds Sustainability Institute, Leeds Beckett University
- Elanor Warwick, Head of Strategy, Policy, Evidence and Research, Clarion Housing Group
- Sam Wallis, Director, Energy & Net Zero Strategy, Envision and Chair of the Task Group on Reporting, Disclosure & Verification for the UK Net Zero Carbon Buildings Standard
- Luke Smith, Managing Director, Build Test Solutions Ltd
- Laura Forster, Innovation Lead – Net Zero Heat, Innovate UK UKRI
Building Performance evaluation has been fundamental to the GHA since the organisation was set up 18 years ago, and this includes BS40101, which was produced by our members. Finance has to be linked to outcomes, not just theoretical calculations, and the panel explored BPE from a variety of perspectives:
Laura Forster outlined the role of Innovate UK’s NZ team, whose premise is that we have the technology we need to decarbonise buildings, but uptake is too slow, and the main barrier is lack of trust. Good quality retrofits are needed, and people need to be assured of this quality. So, data innovation that supports our understanding and rapid assessment of buildings is needed, and data needs to be robust and accessible. How data is shared is also important, and so Innovate UK is investing in the Live Data Trust, as well as other projects that are creating tools to understanding decarbonisation pathways across a portfolio, and big data (through the BESS scanning system) to build the conditions of buildings database. But data on its own isn’t enough – it also needs to be turned into insights and actions.
Sam Wallis spoke of the role of the NZCBS in creating a landscape shift to performance-based outcomes, which is critical for credibility and transparency. BPE is a foundational element of the NZCBS, and the mandatory requirements breakdown NZ into targets and numbers. In terms of designing for longevity and adaptability, 70% of the carbon in a home comes from building and in-use embodied carbon. So by understanding what works, what doesn’t and why systems fail, you can reduce the need for repairs over time, and therefore reduce whole life carbon.
Luke Smith opened with the adage that you can’t manage what you can’t measure, making the argument that if you are serious about NZ, then some means of testing is needed. It is not adequate to sign off buildings on visual inspection alone. Build Test Solutions aims to make measurements mainstream by increasing accessibility and affordability of testing through smart meter, temperature, mould, over- and underheating risk data. The biggest markets are where requirements are in place (Part L or PAS 2035) but the other main market is where people see an immediate cost saving, for example, when sizing heat pumps. Heritage building space – and measuring notable unknowns – is another aspect of this work.
Dave Glew approached the role of BPE from a research perspective, outlining the work that has been done at Leeds Beckett for other 30 years in developing, testing and improving tests (e.g. gold standard test for SMETERS) and validation work. A balance needs to be found between perfection sand practicality – identifying what is good enough for consumer protection. Dave highlighted the fact that BPE encompasses a huge range of things, e.g., post-occupancy evaluation can range from interviews with residents through to expensive whole-house measurements. This makes sense – there is no single test because what you do depends on what you want to find out. However, the difficulty with this is that it can create confusion, and you get some of the same criticisms that you find with EPC when bringing BPE into regulatory environments.
Elanor Warick from Clarion Housing Group provided some practical examples from their development arm’s retrofit programme, where they pick and mix measurements and evaluations, and disseminate this knowledge to relevant staff in their organisation. Some of these tests have been much more valuable than others (e.g., in one development, practical completion testing was very useful but modelling for heat loss tests wasn’t adequate). In terms of monitoring equipment and technology, decisions were made about hardwiring vs plug and play, with some sensors working well, and others less do (depending on location, access, interference by other technology etc. Occupancy levels and how people use their use their homes also affect the data, but all of this work helps to gather a picture over time. Elanor noted that this evaluation is a long process, and as many things are bespoke, it is hard to find comparators. However, they aim to use this data to think strategically over the longer term, in order to understand complexity and develop their in-house knowledge.