Järva Dialog, part of Stockholm City's Sustainable Järva initiative to improve energy efficiency of homes, enabled residents to have a say in decisions being made about renovations.
Title
Brief description
After initial resistance by residents, a dialogue between different groups of residents was initiated, including those with a migrant background, the local municipality, and the tenant association. The Järva Dialog took place in the form of open meetings, which saw 10,000 residents participate and provide responses about the advantages and challenges of the area. Retrofit challenges addressed through dialogue and participatory processes can have several local and social benefits, such as improved democratic capacity, in addition to increased energy efficiency.
Keywords
Renovation, energy efficiency, dialogue, housing, environmental education
City/Country
Time period
2010-2014
Lever(s)
Culture, civic participation & social innovation
Methodologies
World Region
Scale(s) of the case analysed
Target audience and dimension
Domain(s) of application
Context addressed
Solution applied
Challenge addressed/ Problem-led approach
Barriers addressed
Main Practices
Impact
Co benefits
Engagement Journey
Impact to climate neutrality
To improve energy efficiency in 350 homes. Energy-efficient renovations.
Context & Public policy of reference
Innovative approach(es) addressed
Sustainable lifestyles: green spaces, cultural investment, reducing energy demands from 180 kWh/m2 and year down to 88. Refurbish 5200 apartments by 2022. More jobs and enterprises.
To inform residents and ensure their participation in renovation decision-making in the buildings they live in. Improving education and language teaching, good and energy efficient housing and a more varied urban environment.
Initiator
The City of Stockholm’s commitment to improve energy efficient estates. Järva was a pilot study.
Stakeholder networks and organisational model
Stakeholders:
Svenska Bostäder- Funds and leads the project
Residents- Give input on neighbourhood
Network, communication and governance:
a. Constructive dialogues with residents.
b. The housing company invited residents to open meetings, and around 10,000 residents participated. Input gathered advantages and challenges of the area.
c. Schools- education in schools and nurseries. Climate scale.
d. Study circles- sustainable lifestyles, 164 study circles
e. Residents are trained as environmental ambassadors. Environmental education programs offered to societies, clubs, schools.
Democratic Purpose
Participant Recruitment
nteraction between participants
Resources
Key enablers
Key inhibiting factors
Drawbacks/pros/cons of the solutions (after implementation)
Scalability
Key lessons
Indicators
External link
Bergström, G., & Save-Öfverholm, U. (2011). Swedish Sustainable Building. The Swedish Research Council Formas. Retrieved from https://www.formas.se/download/18.462d60ec167c69393b91e53c/1549956093043/Formas_SB11_brochure.pdf
Enarsson, L., (n.d.). Sustainable Järva! 2010-2014. Stockholm stad. Retrieved from https://carbonn.org/uploads/tx_carbonndata/SustainableJarva%2020140320%20Clue_01.pdf
Jacobson, M. (2012, March 1). Stockholm Järva. WWF. Retrieved from https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?204460/Stockholm-Jarva
SMARTEES. District regeneration. Retrieved from https://local-social-innovation.eu/district-regeneration/
Sustainable Järva - Re-building the Suburbs. Retrieved from https://international.stockholm.se/globalassets/listor/sustainable-jarva-a4-info.pdf
Yorumlar ()