Barriers to passive retrofitting of residential buildings as interconnected systems: network analysis and qualitative perspectives from stakeholders

Abstract

Purpose Despite growing advocacy for sustainable building retrofitting, the construction sector remains faced with different barriers in developing countries. This study uncovers nuanced barriers to passive retrofitting of residential buildings from the perspectives of stakeholders in Lagos, Nigeria, and identifies the pattern of the associations amongst the barriers. Design/methodology/approach This study used a mixed-methods approach, which combined quantitative data gathered through a survey with 118 property managers and 163 homeowners and qualitative data from interviews with six building regulation officials. The quantitative data were analysed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and network analysis. In addition, qualitative data were thematically analysed to identify key themes. Findings EFA results identified four barrier dimensions, including information and communication (39.0% of total variance), financial and policy (8.5%), technical and professional capacity (6.1%) and compliance and implementation (4.9%). Further insights were derived using network analysis, which showed strong bidirectional connections across all four dimensions (with beta (β) ranging from 0.72 to 0.90; all p < 0.01). Qualitative data further revealed that people adopt passive measures informally, without recognising them as energy-efficiency interventions. Other key barrier themes identified include financial barriers and cost opacity, capacity and certification deficits, and physical and socio-cultural barriers. Research limitations/implications The study showed strong associations amongst all four dimensions of retrofit barriers in a context with low formal construction approval rates. It also highlights the existence of incidental retrofit practices amongst homeowners: basic passive measures implemented are not recognised for the purpose of energy efficiency. This emphasises the importance of strategies to tackle associated barriers together. Practical implications The research findings suggest the need for clarity of terminology, development of local certification schemes, increased cost visibility and formalisation of current practices. These actions can be followed by other interventions, such as awareness campaigns, financial incentives and targeted enforcement. Social implications The living standards of the residents can be improved by formalising the informal process of passive retrofitting. Given that most available loans have high interest rates, there is a need to explore more practical ways of financing, such as microfinance loans. This approach may allow for some improvement, while other long-term funding strategies help in undertaking retrofits. Originality/value This study extends existing retrofit barrier research by applying network analysis in a weak regulatory context. It shows how dimensions of retrofit barriers are connected beyond traditional categorisation and identifies reported incidental retrofit practices amongst homeowners.