Hannah Foreman
Glossary & Abbreviations
1.0 / Introduction
2.0 / Where? Establishing the knowledge gap.
3.0 / What? Finding the missing information.
4.0 / How? Filling the knowledge gap.
4.1 Introduction & Methodology
4.2 Key ndings
4.3 Discussion 1
4.4 Discussion 2
5.0 /
When I began my studies at the Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT), my knowledge of moisture in buildings was limited to the basic idea that building fabrics should keep water out. Leaning for the rst time about interstitial condensation, I was shocked as to why I’d never encountered this issue before, and why such critical topics weren’t talked about in other architectural schools. My rst encounter learning about breathability, I could not separate it from airtightness, believing it to mean air movement rather than water vapour. ese revalations sparked a growing interest in understanding moisture behaviour in building fabrics over the past year.
Learning to use dynamic hygrothermal modeling so ware like WUFI has allowed me to test moisture within di erent construction types and retro t measures. ough invaluable, it is a complex and costly tool to both learn and interpret, making it inaccessible to most. is realization prompted my research: how could I make the understanding of interstitial condensation and moisture behavior in buildings more accessible to a wider audience? My initial focus was on establishing practical rules of thumb for various building types and exploring e ective ways to share this information.
As my research progressed, reviewing existing moisture-related documents and speaking with both experts and laypeople, I uncovered a need for a more holistic understanding of moisture in buildings. e complex aspects like interstitial condensation and breathability, were inextricably linked with simpler, yet o en overlooked aspects of human behaviour and building services, like ventilation. is broader perspective doesn’t diminish the need to educate people about moisture within di erent constructions; rather, it highlights the importance of providing this information alongside other guidance, including care of construction (relating to the commonly seen performance gap between as designed and as constructed), occupant behaviour, maintenance, and continually assessing building use into the future. ere needs to be a holistic understanding of how everything works within.
No design can fully predict how occupants will interact with a building or how its use may evolve over time. erefore, a building’s design should accommodate the unexpected, making breathable constructions a crucial aspect of future-proo ng. Such buildings can better manage moisture intuitively, reducing reliance on mechanical systems and minimizing risks associated with user behavior. Nevertheless, occupant behaviour is crucial to navigating our future in the climate crisis. Educating people how to properly care for and use their buildings is essential for reducing moisture-related issues, enhancing durability, and improving occupant health.
In essence, our responsibility as designers extends beyond thoughtful design and proper construction. We must also empower building occupants to understand and manage their environments e ectively. By creating constructions that are simpler to comprehend and by sharing knowledge openly, we can bridge the current knowledge gap. is research paper advocates for a collective and inclusive approach to understanding moisture in buildings, urging that everyone—not just professionals—be equipped with the knowledge necessary to maintain healthier and more resilient living spaces.
Approved Documents
e ‘Approved Documents’ are a set of technical instructions demonstrating how to comply with building regulations. Each document is given a letter, for example, Part A, B, C etc.
British Standards (BS)
e British Standards are o cial agreed-upon guidelines created and sustained by the British Standards Institution (BSI), the UK’s National Standards Body. ey are not regulations; instead, they o er voluntary guidance. ousands of British Standards cover various goods and services, with many concerning buildings.
Building Regulations
e rst point of call for designing or altering buildings is the building regulations set of Approved Documents. Both new and modi ed buildings are legally required to follow building regulations, which were set up to protect people’s health & safety.
Building fabric / Building envelope
What separates the internal spaces of a building with the external surroundings. is means the wall, roof, and oor of the building, as well as external windows, and the joints connecting it all together.
Condensation
Condensation occurs when warm air with high humidity encounters colder surfaces, and the relative humidity reaches 100%, causing the excess moisture to condense as water droplets on the colder surface.
Damp
e presence of unwanted moisture on a surface or material, unable to dry out. ere are three types of damp: condensation, penetrating and rising, with condensation damp being the most common (Sharman, 2016).
Interstitial Condensation
When moisture vapour gets trapped within the building construction and condenses (i.e. within the walls, oor, or roof), commonly causing issues.
Publicly Available Speci cations (PAS)
Publicly Available Speci cations, or PAS, are fast-track standardisation documents primarily created to meet urgent market needs and provide a route into more formal standardisation such as a BS or ISO.
Relative Humidity (RH)
Expressed as a percentage. Measures how close the air is to saturation, by quantifying the moisture content in the air relative to the maximum amount it can hold at a given temperature. e maximum amount increases with temperature (Met O ce, no date).
Vapour resistance
e ability of a material to resist the passage of vapour
ABBREVIATIONS
ACAN = Architects Climate Action Network
BS = British Standard
CINARK = Centre for Industrialised Architecture, part of the Royal Danish Academy.
HEMAC = Health E ects of Modern Airtight Construction. Multidisciplinary Network.
ISO = International Organisation for Standardisation. Internationally recognised standards.
LETI = Low Energy Transformation Initiative
PAS = Publicly Available Speci cation
RH = Relative Humidity
SEDA = Scottish Ecological Design Association
STBA = Sustainable Traditional Buildings Alliance
Moisture in the built environment is not inherently bad, but it has become increasingly poorly managed (Leaman and May, 2019). ere has been increasing pressure on energy-e cient buildings in recent years due to increased health awareness, climate change, and the cost-of-living crisis (Healthy Homes and Buildings APPG, 2018). is has resulted in more insulation and better airtightness within our buildings. Alongside increasing water use from appliances and lifestyle changes, this has increased the potential for trapped moisture and added pressure to ventilation systems that frequently fail (May, McGilligan and Ucci, 2019). e consequences of improper moisture levels within buildings can be severe and wide-ranging, including mould and rot, which can result in adverse health risks to occupants and the degradation of the building structure (World Health Organization, 2009). is is particularly prevalent with the retro t of older buildings –problems are exacerbated as retro t takes place without careful consideration of moisture (Recart and Dossick, 2022).
Figure 1. e driving forces and pressures the UK faces going into the future. (May, McGilligan and Ucci, 2019)
In the future, as housing prices rise and climate change causes a mass migration of refugees from climatea ected areas, the UK will most likely see an increase in overcrowding, further increasing moisture levels whilst reducing air movement and overburdening ventilation systems (May, McGilligan and Ucci, 2019). Climate change will also a ect the UK’s climate with increased risk from ooding, wind-driven rain, and more humid winters (May and Sanders, 2017). Poor design and building quality will exacerbate the impact of these behaviour changes.
erefore, understanding the dynamics of moisture within the built environment is crucial for the future of the UK’s housing stock as well as the health of its people. ere has been little funding for understanding the risks of moisture in buildings for decades (May, McGilligan and Ucci, 2019). Poor design, construction, use and maintenance of buildings have o en caused and exacerbated moisture-related issues. is demonstrates a lack of understanding from all those interacting with buildings, from idea inception to future use (Leaman and May, 2019). erefore, all building professionals, owners, and occupants are responsible for mitigating future moisture risks. is can be accomplished by understanding the interlinking moisture aspects and connecting risk mitigation strategies. All these interwoven aspects of shared responsibility, moisture behaviour and risk mitigations demonstrate an essential need for a broader, more holistic understanding of moisture in the built environment.
is research paper aims to identify and explain the gap in knowledge, understanding and resources regarding moisture risk and management. Its structure can be seen in Figure 2. Firstly, the knowledge gap will be proven, linking a universal lack of understanding due to the lack of accessible information. Secondly, the current moisture regulations and guidance will be analysed to demonstrate what information is missing. irdly, six architectural resources will be analysed within a broader context to suggest ways to successfully ll the knowledge gap. Overall, this paper aims to be a step towards giving everyone the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of moisture in the building environment to minimise and mitigate risks for the future.
Introduction
Establishing the knowledge gap
Building regs
Finding the missing knowledge.
BS5250
Filling the knowledge gap
Six resources
Discussion 1
Discussion 2
Discussion 3
ree individuals
Conclusions
is section will establish the knowledge gap on moisture in the built environment. Firstly, the sources of moisture and the related risks and consequences will be explained. It will show that these issues are due to a lack of knowledge and understanding by all people, from building occupants and owners to building professionals. Notably, a holistic understanding of moisture within the built environment is lacking. Identifying and addressing the root causes of moisture-related issues is crucial for preventing and mitigating these issues in building environments.
ere are various sources of moisture in buildings, which can generally be divided into two categories: external sources from the surrounding environment and internal sources from occupant activity (refer to Figure 5). Buildings should aim for an indoor relative humidity of 40-60% (Sterling, Arundel and Sterling, 1985), meaning some moisture should be present. A relative humidity consistently falling outside this range can have adverse health risks (refer to Figure 4). Excessive moisture is a common problem in the UK due to frequent rainfall, high humidity levels, and limited dry periods, creating an environment that aids moisture retention in buildings. When moisture is unable to escape over time, this leads to damp. Consistent damp can cause severe problems such as mould and rot, which can eventually lead to the degradation of buildings and pose severe health risks to occupants (World Health Organization, 2009).
Figure 4. Potential health risks of varying Relative Humidity (Sterling, Arundel and Sterling, 1985).
A 2014 study by the Energy Savings Trust found that almost 1/3 of all households have mould, demonstrating how prevalent issues with moisture. ese problems are caused and exacerbated by the way buildings are designed, constructed, used, and maintained (May and Sanders, 2017). is lack of knowledge and understanding of moisture among building professionals, owners and occupants can be demonstrated through the lens of traditional buildings (seen in Figure 6). Moisture management is especially important for traditional buildings, which is explained in Figure 7. Figure 9 provides a breakdown of the problems, causes, and potential solutions for moisture-related issues in traditional buildings, demonstrating the lack of knowledge among all those who
Figure 5. Sources of
interact with buildings and the need for holistic education on moisture risk and mitigation.
Design
Figure 6. Moisture problems can arise during four key building stages due to a lack of knowledge by building professionals or owners/occupiers. is paper will explore this knowledge gap through a traditional building lens.
Relevance
Prevalence in building stock
Most still need insulating
Statistics
• Over 20% homes built pre-1919, generally solid-wall constructions built with brick or stone, both breathable materials (Custard et al., 2020)
• Only 9% of solid wall constructions are currently insulated (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, 2023)
• Only 9% of solid wall constructions are currently insulated (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, 2023)
• Traditional solid wall construction is o en the most di cult and in many cases the least cost e ective part of a building to insulate.
• It costs the NHS about £1.4bn every year to treat people who are a ected by poor housing – this hasn’t changed much since 2015 even with the English Housing Stock improving according to reports. Spending increases to over £15bn every year when considering wider societal costs (Garrett et al., 2021).
• Cost-of-living crisis exacerbating all energy costs, people cannot a ord to heat their homes, at worst resulting in death. Between December 2021 and March 2022, 45 people died every day due to cold homes in England and Wales (National Energy Action, 2023).
• ese pre-1919 homes are most at risk from category 1 risks (most common of these are associated with falls and excess cold) (Custard et al., 2020)
• Breathable constructions are actually good at dealing with moisture, but when they are insulated incorrectly this can exacerbate moisture risks (Pickles, 2016)
• “Many contemporary assemblies contain materials that are more likely to support mould growth than the simple, o en massive assemblies used in eras when the energy performance of a building was considered less important.” (World Health Organisation, 2009, p56)
Figure 7. Why focus on traditional buildings?
(some of the many...) Condensation (suface or interstitial)
Figure 8. Risks and causes of moisture, depicted in a typical home. A residential typology is utilised because most people have homes and engage in related activities. Even those without a home understand how one might function.
Drawing adapted from (HEMAC and John Gilbert Architects, 2021)
Building professionals (lack of moisture knowledge in designing and constructing buildings)
combined
Building owners & occupiers (lack of moisture knowledge in the use and maintenance of buildings)
When working with breathable materials, there is o en confusion surrounding the term ‘breathability’ (ASPB, 2023).
Hill House, Scotland. Constructed 1902-4 with a combination of breathable stone and a non-breathable cement render, which caused an array of moisture problems that eventually led to severe structural issues ( e Hill House, no date).
Combining breathable & non-breathable materials can trap moisture and cause degradation to the building fabric (Ward, no date).
Improper treatment of damp can exacerbate risks (RICS, Historic England, and PCA, 2022).
“Moisture problems occur mainly at the junctions between elements and the interfaces between materials” (May and Sanders, 2017, p6).
Traditional buildings originally have high levels of uncontrolled ventilation, from lack of insulation and air vents such as replace ues. When insulating, providing alternative means of ventilation is necessary, which can be forgotten about (SOURCE?)
Both internal and external insulation strategies can cause interstitial condensation. Internal strategies are more at risk, as the building’s structure remains unheated, causing a potential dewpoint on the insulation’s cold side. When insulating externally, the vapour resistance of each layer needs to be considered to ensure the building fabric ‘breathes’ correctly, allowing moisture to evaporate (Pickles 2016).
A particular lack of understanding regarding humidity control and venilation.
Without recognising or understanding moisture in their homes, homeowners may introduce or exacerbate any damp problems (Energy Saving Trust, 2023).
Poor construction or installation can cause problems such as thermal bridging and increased risk of damage to the building envelope (Borer, 2022).
e Quarry Cottages at the Centre for Alternative Technologies were retro tted with foam insulation internally, resulting in severe damp and mould problems (see Figure __).
People keep their windows closed in winter so as not to let any heat escape, but they o en don’t have adequate alternative ventilation, leading to an excess of moisture.
Due to a lack of knowledge themselves, there is too much reliance on building professionals, who may also not know what they’re doing.
Figure 9. Unveiling the moisture knowledge gap through the lens of traditional buildings Demonstrating how the gap can be lled by addressing the socio-physical problems and solutions.
“few, if any, schools are equipping students with the tools and technical knowledge they will need to address the climate emergency” (ACAN, no date)
Building professionals lack of knowledge about moisture movement as well as new materials or products.
Without proper knowledge or understanding, these homes might be insulated inappropriately (Borer, 2022), with the most signi cant risk being interstitial condensation (Pickles, 2016).
“most moisture enters buildings in incoming air, including that in- ltrating though the envelope, or from the occupants’ activities.” (World Health Organisation, 2009, p94)
Moisture risk is both a technical and human issue (May and Sanders, 2017)
“faulty construction is the cause of 90 per cent of moisture problems” (Block and Bokalders, 2010, p174).
Greater energy e ciency and comfort now required from buildings. Moisture risk in airtight buildings is di erent to the risk in leaky buildings and the e ects are more uncertain (May and Sanders, 2017).
“the challenge is to convince owners of the remaining harder to insulate properties that their homes need to be insulated and very o en can be insulated.” (Energy Saving Trust, 2014).
Reasons for residents not tackling problems in their homes were more related to knowledge rather than nance (Energy Saving Trust, 2014).
Homeowners are o en in charge of reburbishment, and may do it themselves to cut costs, such as adding lo insulation (Cornish, 2022)
Dynamic hygrothermal tools such as WUFI (World Health Organisation, 2009)
“Close consideration must be given to the hygrothermal performance of building assemblies, including mould growth, for the prevention of mould and moisture problems.” (World Health Organisation, 2009, p.38).
“Solutions must take into account ‘as built’ and ‘in service’ conditions” (May and Sanders, 2017, p6)
It is essential to understand the context of a building for understanding moisture risks and mitigation (May and Sanders, 2017)
“Build using forgiving construction systems, so that any eventual moisture dissipate or be taken care of without the occurance of mould damage” (Block and Bokalders, 2010, p174).
primary factor of controlling mould growth is moisture control (World Health Organisation, 2009)
“moisture risks should become a priority in building safety” (May, McGilligan and Ucci, no date, p21)
“Moisture control in buildings includes measures for choosing building materials and measures for controlling indoor humidity by ventilation.” (World Health Organisation, 2009, p55).
Giving homeowners the knowledge to comprehend moisture behaviour within their homes will help mitigate these risks and provide them with some agency, including watching for building professionals who may not be doing an adequate job.
“An e ective process of moisture risk assessment and design must take into account occupant behaviour and the human interactions between those involved in the design and construction process.” (May and Sanders, 2017, p6)
Although signi cant progress has been made in understanding moisture, there are still many gaps in this knowledge (May and Sanders, 2017). To better comprehend moisture in buildings, it is important to examine various aspects. Moisture management in buildings is multifaceted, with both simple and complex elements, as depicted in Figure 10. e simple aspects of building maintenance and occupant control are easy to understand, while the more complicated aspects revolve around the building’s structure, including its design, construction, and maintenance practices. However, focusing on these aspects individually fails to account for the complex interactions between the building’s occupants, fabric, and services, within a building’s context (May and Sanders, 2017). Considering the aspects listed in Figure 10 in isolation leads to a fragmented approach that overlooks key elements that aid moisture mitigation. For example, Passivhaus buildings can create air conditions with insu cient moisture content (Moreno-Rangel et al., 2020). e need for moisture was forgotten, demonstrating this fragmented approach. erefore, a holistic understanding of moisture is needed to e ectively mitigate risk in the UK’s built environment. Building industry professionals must work with owners & occupants to prevent damage and increase the durability of the UK’s building stock.
Water In ltration - e concept of water in ltration through roofs, walls, and foundations is mostly straightforward. It can be easy to grasp that leaks and cracks in a building’s envelope can lead to water damage.
Humidity control - Maintaining suitable indoor humidity levels and preventing condensation on surfaces, especially windows, is an aspect that’s easy to grasp and carry out.
Interstitial Condensation - is occurs when water vapour penetrates the building’s fabric and condenses within, due to coming into contact with a cool surface. It can be challenging to detect and mitigate, with potentially severe consequences.
Building Physics - e science around heat and moisture transfer within a building’s components ( oors, walls, roofs) requires expertise in building physics and o en involves complex calculations and modelling.
Ventilation - e importance of proper ventilation to remove excess moisture and ensure good indoor air quality is widely recognised.
Materials & Assemblies - e behaviour of various building materials and assemblies regarding moisture absorption, di usion, and permeability is intricate. Di erent materials have very di erent responses to moisture, which means there needs to be careful consideration on placing di erent materials together in an assembly.
Climate Variability - Local climate conditions greatly impact moisture management. Di erent regions particularly microclimates can require unique approaches to handle moisture e ectively. is is particularly the case in areas of high humidity and rain. Local climate is becoming increasingly di cult to predict due to climate change leading to unpredictable weather patterns and disasters.
It is evident that education regarding moisture risk and mitigation is crucial. Speci cally, architectural education in the UK is lacking in technical knowledge. is was revealed in the Skills Survey Report by RIBA Appointments in 2019, where over 80% of respondents, including students and employers, believed that students and graduates lacked the necessary knowledge to construct what they design (refer to Figure 11). However, it is important to educate everyone who interacts with buildings, not just built environment students. Furthermore, higher education and courses can be expensive and time-consuming, making it di cult to reach a wider audience. To address this, a self-guided educational resource could be created. is resource could help building professionals, owners, and occupiers quickly and easily access information to better understand moisture issues.
In conclusion, a comprehensive resource that encapsulates a holistic approach to moisture understanding will be highly useful in preventing moisture-related problems in buildings. In the following section, there will be an analysis of existing resources, namely building regulations and key guidance, to identify what information these resources are missing.
is section will focus on the building regulations and primary documents, such as BS5250, that are relevant to moisture risk & management. Building regulations are mandatory and free to access, consisting of a set of Approved Documents that govern building design and construction in the UK. Part C and BS5250 are directly relevant to moisture, and Part F and Part L refer to moisture management indirectly, through ventilation and energy e ciency, respectively. Other guidance relating to moisture will be referenced where appropriate.
Title publisher published/ last updated cost & access route relation to moisture legal requirement?
Approved Document C
Approved
Site preparation and resistance to contaminants and moisture. UK
Document F Ventilation 2021 Indirect
Building Regulations 2021 with 2013 amendments Free. Found across the internet, including gov.uk & planning portal Direct Yes
Approved Document L Conservation of fuel and power 2021 with 2023 amendments Indirect BS5250
Management of moisture in buildings. Code of practice.
British Standards 2021 Paywall. rough subscription or buying online/ o ine
Figure 12. Key existing moisture resources identi ed.
3.2.1
Direct
Ambiguous, generally no. Part C sometimes refers to it but only the old version.
Part C focuses on site preparation and resistance to contaminants and moisture. e moisture guidance has a technical focus and is laid out for the key elements – walls, oors and roofs. Examples given focus on standard constructions, regularly referring to British Standards. Potentially relevant information is not easily accessible, requiring a more complex pursuit of BS and other documents for guidance. For example, surface and interstitial condensation are mentioned as essential aspects, yet with scarcely any detail, instead referring to documents such as the BS5250. Part C rarely mentions junctions and thermal bridging even though these play a large part in causing condensation issues. Instead, most of the focus remains on ground moisture and precipitation. In summary, Part C o ers technical information without giving the bigger picture. Although the information that it contains is valid, it is incomplete and does not re ect current moisture guidance. It was last amended in 2013. It targets design and construction professionals as it is likely only they will refer to BS5250 (ASPB, 2023). However, to be more widely relevant and provide a more holistic understanding of moisture in buildings, this document urgently needs updating.
Part L focuses on the conservation of fuel and power, impacting moisture indirectly. e document refers to the interlinking heat and moisture such that any thermal adjustment or other energy e ciency measure, must also consider moisture (ASBP, 2023). Where there might be a problematic moisture risk, it refers to Part C, recommending changing energy e ciency measures when there is a high condensation risk. is demonstrates that Part C exceeds importance over Part L. But this is easily overlooked, such as in individually owned homes.
Unlike Part C, this document has been regularly updated, including 2023 amendments. ere have been several changes to improve airtightness and energy e ciency as the government tries for net zero (BMI Group UK, 2021). Considering Part C takes precedence over Part L, there is a need for Part C to be updated.
Part F is an extensive document on ventilation updated in 2021. With increased insulation and airtightness measures and a resulting increase in moisture build up, there is added pressure on ventilation measures that have been previously been overlooked (Hilton, 2022). Nonetheless, there is almost no mention of moisture
Figure 13. Building Regulations Part C and the BS5250 are the key resources directly relevant to moisture in buildings.
or condensation within the document. And there is no mention of interaction with Part C, even though it mentions key interactions with other Approved Documents, including Part L. is shows a lack of recognition of the interlinking elements of moisture risk and management. Ventilation is essential to moisture regulation yet it is not apparent that Part L relates to moisture at all.
Professionals currently consider the British Standard 5250 as the primary document concerning moisture risk and management in buildings as it now addresses general moisture, instead of focusing on condensation (ASPB, 2023). is shi towards a holistic view of moisture risk, is the main conclusion of this document and supports this paper’s hypothesis on the need for a broader understanding of moisture.
Where Building Regulations falter, Standard 5250 bridges the gap. It acknowledges the “lack of integration between guidance that treats di erent moisture problems, such as condensation, rain penetration and rising damp” (Marley, no date, p2). e BS repeatedly states that moisture risk must be considered holistically due to the complexities of the moisture risk of di erent elements, their internal and external environments, and how they age over time ( e British Standards Institution, 2021). It sets out a ‘whole-building approach’, which addresses “assessment, design, construction and serviceability” (Marley, no date, p2). ere is a clear recognition of the responsibility of not just professionals but also building owners and occupiers.
However, although the BS5250 lls the gap in terms of information needed, this information is not accessible. Firstly, the document is lengthy and text heavy; it could use more accessible graphics. Secondly, cost; access costs £178 as a member of the BSI, OR £356 without. e BS5250 is “intended for use by designers, builders and users of any class of building” ( e British Standards Institution, 2021, p4), but realistically it will only be used by specialists.
e following guidance documents are less relevant to moisture, or otherwise less known. e CIBSE guides only discuss moisture within documents such as Guide A – Environmental Design. ese documents are particularly complex and there is a paywall for access. e PAS 2035 is a document for A whole house retro t, developed in response to the failures of domestic retro t, setting out recommendations to avoid in the future (National Energy Foundation, 2023). Similar to the BS5250, it o ers a ‘whole building’ approach. However, unlike the BS5250, this document is free to access and easily available to homeowners.
e government research report conducted on the resistance to moisture in buildings, focused on interstitial moisture (Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, 2019). “Written for a non-specialist readership” (Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, 2019); it is however inaccessible to non-
specialists. It is hard to nd and the information is dense and complex. e information in this research report should be simpli ed further to make it more accessible (both to nd and also to understand) information.
Whether or not there is recognition for a holistic understanding of moisture in buildings to mitigate future problems, there is a clear need for to have accessible information regarding moisture risk and mitigation. e information is there in the specialist documents, but it is not easily accessible.
is investigation into current moisture regulations and guidance shows the information on moisture risk & mitigation is available, but much of this is NOT accessible.
e guidance that does recognise the need for a holistic understanding of moisture, notably the BS5250, misses a crucial point. A holistic understanding of moisture not only means recognising the interlinking yet di erent aspects of building moisture, but also infers that all people need an understanding, not just professionals, as building owners and occupants play a crucial role in moisture risk and management. e BS5250 recognises that some responsibility for moisture mitigation falls to building owners and occupiers, yet their information is inaccessible to most of this user group.
To summarise, although the necessary information exists; it is not easily accessible. Information on moisture risk, particularly relating to di erent materials and constructions, can be di cult to access and comprehend, and minimal e ort has been made to reach a wider audience that includes building owners and occupiers. Most of the documents analysed above are primarily aimed at building professionals. ere is a need for holistic and accessible resources that can bridge the moisture knowledge gap and act as a stepping stone to more specialist documents.
In the next section of this research paper, six resources will be analysed to assess their ability to communicate information successfully. is analysis will help formulate steps towards creating a truly accessible and successful resource that can bridge the moisture knowledge gap.
e current primary moisture documents are insu cient. ey either lack updated information regarding the importance of having a comprehensive understanding of moisture, or they contain such information but are mostly inaccessible, except to specialists. erefore, this section of the research paper aims to determine how to create a resource to bridge this knowledge gap. To accomplish this, a qualitative research method was employed to examine six resources. In order to increase accuracy, triangulation was employed by asking three individuals with varying levels of expertise to examine the resources. ese participants were also interviewed to provide contextualization. e full methodology, as well as a summary for each of the six resources and three interviews, can be found in Appendices A through C. e analysis of these ndings is divided into three discussions:
Discussion 1 focuses on the speci c aspects of a resource that determine success, referring primarily to the ndings, as seen in Appendices A and B.
Discussion 2 considers the broader contextual factors that in uence the success of a resource, taking into account the surrounding circumstances of the six resources and three individuals while still referring to the results.
Discussion 3 takes the ndings from the previous two discussions into the context of the moisture knowledge gap, proposing measures to bridge the gap successfully.
Online Form (preceeding the interview)
Tabling results & initial analysis. (seen in Appendices)
Discussion 1
Discussion 2
Discussion 3
DATA COLLECTION
KEY ANALYSIS
Figure 14. Summary of methodology. See Appendix C for more detail.
Title A guide to Retro tting your home e Carbon Architect Newsletter (CA07Carbon Lingo) Construction Materials Pyramid LETI Climate Emergency Design Guide Responsible Retro t Guidance Wheel Climate Emergency Conservation Area Toolkit
Type/ Format?
Aims
Teach homeowners about the steps of retro tting & guide them to professionals. Continuous education of architects, teaching them about carbon & sustainability Help building professionals gain an understanding of materials? To demonstrate how new buildings can meet net-zero targets. To educate on the complexities of the retro t of traditional buildings. To help update Conservation Area Guidance to allow more complete retro tting.
Info level Basic (introductory)
(architect-level)
(architect-level)
(architect-level)
(niche) Specialist (niche)
Audience Homeowners Architects Architects, designers, consultants, and any built environment student. Any professional or company with relation to the built environment. Not stated, but anyone with interest in traditional building retro t. Planners, policymakers & building professionals
Date of creation/ latest update. Updated in 2023. Creation date unknown.
February 2023. Newsletter’s out every week & still ongoing. First launched 2019. Updated since (unknown date). 2020. Updated in 2020. Creation date unknown. February 2023.
Creator Trustmark e Carbon Architect
Creator info?
CINARK (Centre for Industrialised Architecture)
LETI (Low Energy Transformation Initiative)
STBA (Sustainable Traditional Buildings Alliance) ACAN (Architects Climate Action Network)
UK governmentendorsed ‘Quality Scheme’. US individual, quali ed architect. Research centre for sustainability. Part of the Royal Danish Academy. Voluntary network of over 1,000 built environment professionals. An independent programme of the Sustainable Development Foundation. Voluntary network of professionals, addressing the climate & ecological breakdowns.
Feedback option? No.
Indirectly, asks for feedback & future topics separately via email & social media. Yes, email provided in ‘about the pyramid’ section. Yes, link provided on page where guide can be downloaded. No, only email given for further information. Not speci cally.
Figure 15. Introduction to the six resources.
Figure 16. Radar graphs from the average results of the initial assessment form.
Relationship to architecture
Layperson/Homeowner
Interested in homes and houses but not particularly knowledgeable. No architectural education.
Type of resident Owner
Interest level in the built environment
Type of learner
Preference of format
Lives in a Victorian terrace. Interest in homes and houses.
Post-graduate student in architecture. Education has been less technical, more conceptual.
Relationship to moisture
Not particularly any ‘type’ of learner. Likes to write things down when learning.
Physical format, e.g. booklet. Finds a lot online but prints o to digest, can mark up etc.
Has a Victorian terrace house with damp issues. Understands about occupant moisture control but no idea regarding building fabric.
Knowledge gap?
To help understand moisture in buildings: moisture sources, how it a ects materials, how to protect one’s home, potential problems and an unbiased opinion on di erent methods to treat said problems.
Architect with many years of experience. At time of quali cation worked as a builder for 7 years, learned a lot about traditional building skills and the technical aspects of building & construction. Many years working with housing cooperatives & public buildings. Now has a more advisory role, particularly with old buildings & planning.
Renter Owner
Career-driven. Has knowledge, interest and love of architecture.
Mostly a visual learner, audio too.
Books are easy, but interactive elements can help cement the information because its fun.
Understands moisture mostly as a resident, learned from own experience & others (everyone in her life, as lots of people deal with moisture problems).
A very basic understanding of moisture within the building fabric.
Practical recommendations, simple & actionable, as well as speci c information e.g. example details “what materials to use, how they should be put together” Current information is too broad.
Whole career dedication. Particular interest in old buildings & building conservation.
Physical format.
Deep level of understanding. Works a lot with old buildings & building conservation so comes across moisture issues regularly.
Occupants need to understand their buildings. is is partly an ownership of buildings to be intuitive (eg Passivhuas too complex/ technical).
Architects lack construction knowledge.
4.3 Discussion 1 - Aspects within a resource that determine it’s success.
Overall, each resource has its strengths and weaknesses, and the success of each is subjective to the user. e data-driven form results showed moderate success for all resources (see Figure ___). Appendix A-C summarises results by resource and person interviewed, while Appendix D displays the full results.
Figure 18. Tabulated results from the Initial Assessment Form. A tra c light grading system makes this table more intuitive to read. Details on the grading system can be read in Appendix C.
4.3.1
In the Initial Assessment Form (see Figure 18), Resource 1 had the highest number of top-scoring answers, with the highest combination of answers possible for Person A and an almost top score for Person B. In asking how intuitive the tool was and if it was easy to interpret, the answers for both people were ‘extremely’, the best possible answer. Person A even rated it the most accessible resource in their interview. is shows the resource was very accessible and thus hypothetically successful. However, in both their interviews, they were more pessimistic about the guide, with Person A calling it “too introductory”. Person C agreed with this, also going as far as to say it was impractical and unrealistic. is suggests that although the guide was highly accessible, the content was much too basic and at risk of becoming irrelevant, even for Person A, the homeowner for whom the guide is targeted. is shows that in terms of judging a resource’s success, the quality of content overrides the accessibility of a resource. Resource 6’s results support this theory. ough its ‘intuitive to use’ score was lower with a 3/5 average, and it was rated the most confusing graphically by Person B, the resource scored above average, even rated both extremely useful and extremely successful by Person B. is was due to its content. In summary, this shows that the quality of content can be more important than accessibility and graphics.
4.3.2 Graphics can’t be neglected.
However, this does not mean that graphics or accessibility can be neglected. Person A labelled Resource 6 as their favourite resource of the selection. is wasn’t only due to the quality of its content but because it had “lots of maps, diagrams and descriptions”. In an alternative scenario, Resource 5 could be unsuccessful because of its graphics and accessibility, relating to its format as an interactive tool. Person A o en rated the tool 1/5, nding it overwhelming and “di cult to access and understand”. Without any architectural background, the tool became completely inaccessible; Person A could not nd even the ‘getting started’ page. is implies that the tool may be more specialised and require prior knowledge for success, supported by Person B’s positive review, particularly regarding its graphical presentation. However, Person C, the most experienced architecturally, found the system overcomplicated and wouldn’t use it despite having the necessary knowledge to navigate and
interpret the information. It is worth noting they did give the tool a consistently above-average score in the initial form, suggesting, as with Person B, that the graphics enticed them.
erefore, the lack of content and the inaccessible format of Resource 5 made it unsuccessful for some users. Nevertheless, its graphics helped earn it a higher score. is highlights graphics’ signi cant role during the initial stages of accessing information in a resource. ese results also reiterate that content quality and quantity take precedence, but only a er some time, once users have gured out how to use the tool. Figure 19 suggests the varied importance of content and graphics over time. It’s important to consider that the resource loses relevance if the information takes too long to access or is uninformative.
Resources 2 and 5 also emphasise the importance of considering a resource’s intended audience. Both resources required prior knowledge and received the lowest overall rating from the form (see Figure 18), demonstrating some unsuccess. is is supported by the discrepancies among the participants during their interviews since they have di ering architectural knowledge levels. For Resource 2, Person C consistently rated the newsletter 4/5 and favoured this resource above the rest. On the other hand, Person A and B required more explanations, with Person B rating it as one of the most confusing due to its language, suggesting a glossary of keywords within each newsletter.
Given that Person C is the only quali ed architect and hence the sole participant within the target audience of Resource 2, it is understandable they have a more favourable response. is also demonstrates the newsletter’s success when considering its target audience. is trend is also observed in Resource 5. erefore, it can be concluded that these resources cater to smaller, more speci c audiences; Resource 2 is targeted solely at architects, while Resource 5 has a niche in traditional building retro t. Resources 3, 4 and 6 have larger target audiences covering all building professionals, so users with less architectural knowledge can access the information better.
e results conclude that to create a successful resource, aspects such as content, graphics, accessibility or intuitiveness, and time required must be considered, all of which depend on the target audience. Please refer to Figure 20, which illustrates how these factors are interconnected and their relative importance across time.
is discussion explores further factors and themes to consider when creating a resource, concerning the broader context around the six resources and three interviewees. When evaluating a resource, it’s important to take into account factors that exist beyond the resource itself, particularly in considering how the resource can be found erefore, conclusions from Discussion 1 (see Figure 20), can be developed into Figure 21.
Figure 21. Diagram determining the varying importance of di erent factors that determine a resource’s success, when considering time.
Figure 21 highlights some important factors to consider. Firstly, when it comes to the accessibility of a resource, it can be divided into two parts: how easy it is to locate and access the resource, and how easy it is to access the information contained in the resource. In addition, the intuitiveness and graphics of a resource relate to the resource’s format. It is worth noting that the feedback combined with the ability to update the resource can impact all these factors. is is summarised in Figure 22.
Figure 22. Target audience in uences the accessibility and format of a resource.
Ensuring a resource is easily accessible and discoverable can be critical to its success. is can be viewed as the rst step in making a resource accessible (refer to Figure 22). It is essential to consider both the reach of the resource as well as the intended audience it caters to. For example, Resource 2 is a newsletter sent to subscribers only, limiting its reach. However, the creator promotes it on LinkedIn, expanding its audience beyond the mailing list. is highlights the importance of having an online presence to enhance the reach of a resource.
Established groups or individuals can help expand the reach of a resource. For example, Resource 4 was created by LETI, a network of building professionals established in 2017 that started by giving recommendations to the GLA (LETI, no date). Today, the group is widely recognized, and Resource 4 is extensively implemented across the UK (LETI, no date). is association with a reputable group likely contributed to its signi cant growth since its inception. Furthermore, it may have helped them gain the time and resources to create a more polished document, which can link to the resource’s success. Resource 6 was created by ACAN, a group similar to LETI but formed more recently in 2019 (ACAN, no date). In the results, it scored lower than Resource 4, with Person B calling the graphics “all over the shop”. is can potentially be attributed to the lack of resources and time by ACAN, though it remains unclear exactly how much research and development has gone into each resource. In conclusion, having a strong online presence or established groups or people is critical for spreading a resource’s reach to a larger audience.
A resource’s format primarily relates to the second step of accessibility (see Figure 22) once the prospective user can gain access. However, its initial format, whether it can be accessed online or o ine, overlaps with how easy the resource is to access (the rst step of accessibility). e six resources chosen were free and accessible online, which was convenient for the interviewees as they had laptops and internet connections. is allowed for quick and e ortless viewing. Introducing a paywall, especially online where content cannot be previewed, creates an obstacle to accessibility. A resource that aims to be truly accessible should at least be free for those who can’t a ord it, whether it is online or o ine.
Two out of three participants, Person A and C, had a clear preference for physical formats. Person A speci cally mentioned that they prefer to print online information for better absorption and reference. As these participants are older, this may indicate a generational divide, with younger generations preferring online formats. is preference is re ected in the results from Resource 5, an interactive tool, which Person A and C disliked while Person B enjoyed its interactivity. However, although Person B expressed a liking for interactive elements to aid information retention, they also stated “books are easy”, demonstrating that all interviewees liked that books provide in-depth content with easy navigation and repeatable access. In addition, books have also been in use for thousands of years, making them a traditional format for information that is inherently more intuitive to use.
All of this suggests that physical books remain the most accessible and comprehensive format, leading to a continued preference for them regardless of age. is factor should be taken into consideration while creating a resource. In particular, the more content the resource wants to provide, the more a physical book can become the best medium for the information. For instance, the author of Resource 2 is writing a book that aims to encapsulate and consolidate everything that they discuss through their newsletter and social media. However, it is essential to consider the potential wider reach of online content, as well as what the target audience might prefer.
Feedback is also crucial to ensure a resource’s success, both during the process of creating the resource and a er creation. As the results have shown, not consulting with people within the resource’s target audience and beyond, will only provide an irrelevant resource. is can be seen in Resource 1, which had introductory content that scored highly in the form but was not useful. is shows the importance of talking to people for feedback beyond quanti able data. Out of all the resources, only Resources 3 and 4 provided a clear feedback option, and they both scored consistently above average from interviewees. is might suggest a link between accepting feedback and good performance.
In conversation with Resource 2’s creator, they explained that social media allowed them to receive constant feedback. is allowed them to quickly understand what worked and didn’t and tailor the future newsletters to suit their audience’s needs. Furthermore, the newsletter’s weekly publication allows it to speak on current events, something a published resource or complex interactive tool cannot do. is also relates to the fact that information on a topic can change over time, which should be considered to keep a resource relevant, depending on the topic and information the resource addresses and contains. e previous analysis of Building Regulations Part C shows an example of this potential irrelevance. It is worth noting this can be a challenge for more complex and o cial resources. Updating interactive tools is particularly time-consuming, which may explain why Resource 5 was less successful than other resources. is demonstrates how a resource’s ability to update is linked to its content and format.
To ensure the success of a resource, the key considerations that must be addressed are reach, audience, format and ability for feedback and updates. Reach, audience and format all relate to how accessible a resource is, which is essential for determining its success. Another factor to determine a resource’s success is its ability for feedback and updates. is is needed to ensure the resource stays relevant, during creation and post-creation. How these factors vary in importance across a resource’s timeline is suggested in Figure 23. Both Discussion 1 and 2 have highlighted the interconnectedness of important factors needed to consider how to create a successful resource.
4.5 Discussion 3 - Applying success factors to the moisture knowledge gap.
is discussion will bring the previous discussions into the context of the moisture knowledge gap, providing suggestions for moving forward towards a resource that might begin to ll this gap. e interviews hold particular signi cance as they shed light on the participants’ perception of moisture-related issues and the knowledge gap therein.
In considering the success of a resource, its target audience is incredibly important, seen in Figure __. It is particularly important at the inception, the idea stage, for the creation of a resource. By speaking to people from the target audience, the required content can also start to be determined. Figure 24 shows how all three participants meet at least two out of three of the target audience criteria.
architect)
24. Summarising who the three interviewees are in relation to the target audience.
All participants reported moisture issues in their homes, highlighting the complexity and prevalence of moisture-related problems in buildings. During the interviews, Persons A and B mentioned that they only had a simple understanding of moisture that came from being residents and both wanted practical tips. In particular, Person B lacked technical knowledge from their architectural education and wanted speci c information regarding moisture in material assemblies. erefore, a resource that bridges the knowledge gap should include practical tips that regular occupants can do, as well as a breakdown of the more complex aspects. In the context of homeowners, they may want to understand the basic rules of thumb in construction and moisture considerations for various maintenance and retro t strategies.
Person C, who has a deep understanding of moisture issues, expressed that occupants must have a comprehensive understanding of moisture in buildings to act more intuitively. ey emphasized human behaviour over technical solutions. erefore, the content should not just explain complex aspects of moisture but also include simple behaviour changes like wearing more layers and reducing heating in homes. erefore, it is important to address both simple and complex aspects of moisture understanding, along with practical tips. ese are all necessary because the information is meant to cater to a wide range of people with varying expertise levels.
A er considering the audience and content, the reach and format of the desired resource should be considered. is speaks to the two steps of accessibility explained in Discussion 2. Accessibility is particularly important since the resource wants to appeal to a wide range of people with di erent levels of expertise. Firstly, the resource should be easily discoverable. Both an online presence as well as a collaboration with well-known groups should be utilised to ensure maximum reach. Free access is particularly crucial, another reason why collaborating with established groups is good as it may help fund the process of a resource’s creation. e resource should be accessible both online and o ine.
Moisture in the built environment is a complex topic that requires a comprehensive understanding. A book would be a suitable format to present the information due to its intuitive nature and ability to contain extensive content. However, this doesn’t rule out the opportunity for di erent formats. ere could be several resources of di erent formats with varying levels of information. e ‘book’ could be the main resource, and the other resources could refer back to it for more information. is would enable a wide reach as well as a comprehensive amount of content.
Based on analysing the six resources and interviews with three participants, it is important that the graphics and layout make the content easily interpretable. For instance, in the case of a book format, it should have a clear structure and layout, perhaps structured by layers of complexity to aid navigation for users with di erent levels of expertise. A contents page with multiple headings and subheadings, footnotes, glossary, and index will also help with navigation. Additionally, using diagrams and pictures to break up the text will make the information easier to read and cater to more visual learners.
Creating easily accessible information can also be done through simple and relatable diagrams. During a conversation with the creator of Resource 2, they emphasized the importance of creating compelling visuals that convey only one idea. In addition, they suggested using analogies to help people understand complex ideas. e combination of analogies, diagrams, and practical tips can aid in understanding and controlling moisture.
4.5.3 Conclusions
A summary of the suggestions can be seen below, in Figure 25.
Audience/Content
Practical tips for every level of expertise
Speci c information regarding moisture in material assemblies
Breakdown of complex aspects
Human behaviour not just technical solutions
Reach & Format
Easily discoverable from an online presence and collaboration with established existing groups
Graphics & Layout
Clear structure & layout, perhaps divided into layers of complexity.
Consider groups for funding too To aid navigation & ease of interpretation: contents page, many headings & subheadings, footnotes, glossary, index
Accessible both online and o ine
Could have a variety of resources with di ering formats, with the main resource as the most comprehensive
Diagrams and images to break up the text
Simple & relatable diagrams
Di erent maintenance & retro t strategies A book is the best format for comprehensive information e use of analogies
Unbiased methods on how to solve moisture issues in your home
Figure 25. Summary of Discussion 3 suggestions.
is paper establishes a gap in knowledge on moisture in the built environment and suggests ways to address it. Moisture in the built environment is a complex and multifaceted topic. Building professionals, owners and occupiers can all cause moisture problems due to a lack of knowledge and understanding, and they all have a responsibility to help mitigate these issues. is demonstrates the need for a holistic understanding of moisture. Due to the inaccessibility of education, a free, self-guided resource is needed. Key resources regarding moisture management, like the BS5250, are either out of date or inaccessible and only targeted to building professionals. A resource that encompasses sections for building professionals, owners and occupiers, and provides a holistic view of moisture management, is desperately needed.
is paper has analysed six resources in order to suggest ways a resource could successfully ll this moisture knowledge gap. By considering these resources in context and from the perspectives of three individuals with di ering levels of building expertise, factors to determine success were identi ed. ese factors were subsequently applied to the moisture knowledge gap, and recommendations were given for the consideration of a resource that might begin to bridge the gap. In conclusion, a holistic understanding of moisture can be addressed by including both complex and simple aspects of moisture understanding, along with practical tips. e success of a resource requires consideration of audience, reach, format, accessibility and graphics, to name a few. is paper hopefully provides a small step towards bridging the knowledge gap on moisture for building durability and occupant health in the UK.
is paper suggests recommendations but doesn’t provide a solution. Extensive research is needed, especially data collection from the target audience. Gathering diverse opinions through longer data collection methods, such as workshops, is crucial. Collaborating with others should also be considered, as the resource creation will likely take a lot of time and money. Furthermore, the many factors to determine success as suggested in this paper are all intertwined and subjective, demonstrating how hard it is to assess a resource’s success. is puts extra importance on multiple streams of feedback from the target audience to ensure to resource can largely be seen as successful. erefore, to bridge the knowledge gap, extensive research is needed among building professionals, owners and occupiers to establish how the resource might meet their needs. It should be considered that a singular resource might not meet the needs of everyone or have the desired reach.
ACAN (no date a) Architects Climate Action Network, ACAN. Available at: https://www.architectscan.org/ action (Accessed: 20 September 2023).
ACAN (no date b) e Conservation Area Toolkit - home retro t, ACAN. Available at: https://www. architectscan.org/conservation-area-toolkit-retro t-homes (Accessed: 10 November 2023).
Agency, S.W.I.G. (no date) Publicly Available Speci cations (PAS) Explained | News | Solid Wall Insulation Guarantee Agency. Available at: https://www.swiga.co.uk/news/post/publicly-available-speci cations-pasexplained/ (Accessed: 4 November 2023).
American Society for Testing and Materials (1977) ‘ASTM E 241-77, Recommended practices for increasing durability of building constructions against water-induced damage’.
andrew.himes (2021) ‘AIA-CLF Embodied Carbon Toolkit for Architects’, Carbon Leadership Forum, 3 November. Available at: https://carbonleadershipforum.org/clf-architect-toolkit/ (Accessed: 22 September 2023).
Arundel, A.V. et al. (1986) ‘Indirect Health E ects of Relative Humidity in Indoor Environments’, Environmental Health Perspectives, 65, pp. 351–361.
ASBP (2023) ‘Webinar: Natural Fibre Insulation Summit 2023’, 12 October. Available at: https://asbp.org.uk/ webinar-recording/n -summit-2023 (Accessed: 16 October 2023).
Balogun, B. et al. (2023) ‘Health inequalities: Cold or damp homes’. Available at: https://commonslibrary. parliament.uk/research-brie ngs/cbp-9696/ (Accessed: 6 October 2023).
Balogun, B., Rankl, F. and Wilson, W. (2023) Health inequalities: Cold or damp homes. Research Brie ng. House of Commons Library. Available at: https://researchbrie ngs. les.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9696/ CBP-9696.pdf (Accessed: 9 October 2023).
Biersteker, S. (2023) ‘CA07 - Carbon lingo’, e Carbon Architect, 21 February. Available at: https:// stevenbiersteker.substack.com/p/ca07-carbon-lingo (Accessed: 10 November 2023).
Block, M. and Bokalders, V. (2010) e Whole Building Handbook. 0 edn. Routledge. Available at: https:// doi.org/10.4324/9781849774833.
BMI Group UK (2021) ‘BS 5250:2021 Management of moisture in buildings. A guide to the updated British Standard and the changes to pitched and at roo ng, by BMI.’ Available at: https://assets.ctfassets.net/ cd81nrotvav2/ujVUWjeQFoihtJkYoWsxY/878731b5e0c188d85afad93ba1dac78b/BMI-BS5250-Pitchedand_ atroo ngguidanceAugust2021.pdf (Accessed: 4 November 2023).
Borer, P. (2022) ‘Stone Cold Buildings.pdf’. Stone Cold Buildings, Centre for Alternative Technology. Bruton, J., Steven, B. and Yost, P. (no date) ‘Episode 23 - Moisture in Construction’. (Unbuild It Podcast). Available at: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2RnNwR5cc0TJiY1ERTJW3B?si=3caac5ed36ce4f38 (Accessed: 21 September 2023).
CINARK (2022) e Construction Material Pyramid. Available at: https://www.materialepyramiden.dk (Accessed: 8 November 2023).
Concrete Climate Ideas Girl Scouts Talk Building Materials and Embodied Carbon Updated (2021). Available at: https://www.youtube.com/@CarbonLeadershipForum (Accessed: 22 September 2023).
Cornish, P. (2022) DIY lo Insulation to save £355 per year on energy bills, Express.co.uk. Available at: https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/property/1700042/how-to- t-lo -insulation-DIY-save-energy-exclusive (Accessed: 19 November 2023).
Costa, O. de S. (2021) ‘A Brief Introduction to Assessing Moisture Risk’, Greengauge, 25 February. Available at: https://ggbec.co.uk/a-brief-introduction-to-assessing-moisture-risk/ (Accessed: 11 October 2023).
Custard, M. et al. (2020) e Housing Stock of e United Kingdom. BRE Trust.
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (2023a) ‘Household Energy E ciency Statistics, detailed report 2022’. Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service. gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ le/1146686/HEE_Stats_Detailed_Release_-_ Mar_23.pdf (Accessed: 6 October 2023).
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (2023b) ‘Household Energy E ciency Statistics, headline release September 2023’. Department for Energy Security and Net Zero.
Du , S. (2019) ‘Q&A: British Standards and PAS pricing’, PHPI Online, 12 July. Available at: https:// phpionline.co.uk/feature-articles/qa-british-standards-and-pas-pricing/ (Accessed: 4 November 2023).
Energy Saving Trust (2014a) Cold, draughty, mouldy, damp: What the UK public think about their homes, Energy Saving Trust. Available at: https://energysavingtrust.org.uk/about-us/news/colddraughty-mouldydamp-what-uk-public-thinkabout-their-homes (Accessed: 6 October 2023).
Energy Saving Trust (2014b) UK-Pulse-August-2014.pdf. Available at: https://energysavingtrust.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2018/10/UK-Pulse-August-2014.pdf (Accessed: 6 October 2023).
Energy Saving Trust (2023) Roof and lo insulation guide, Energy Saving Trust. Available at: https:// energysavingtrust.org.uk/advice/roof-and-lo -insulation/ (Accessed: 19 November 2023).
Fuktcentrum (2015) Vision | Fuktcentrum. Available at: https://www.fuktcentrum.lth.se/english/vision/ (Accessed: 22 September 2023).
Garrett, H. et al. (2021) e cost of poor housing in England. BRE Trust.
Healthy Homes and Buildings APPG (2018) ‘Building our Future: Laying the Foundations for Healthy Homes and Buildings’. HM Government. Available at: https://healthyhomesbuildings.org.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2018/10/HHB-APPG-White-Paper-V1.pdf (Accessed: 6 October 2023).
HEMAC and John Gilbert Architects (2021) ‘Indoor Air Quality in Airtight Homes: A Designer’s Guide’. SEDA. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5978a800bf629a80c569eef0/t/6159a3651ab56866 9d832932/1633264501397/HEMAC_Professional_User_Guide_ON_SCREEN.pdf (Accessed: 20 November 2023).
Hilton, D. (2022) Building Regulations Part F: How the New Ventilation Changes Could A ect You, Homebuilding & Renovating. Available at: https://www.homebuilding.co.uk/advice/building-regulationspart-f (Accessed: 6 November 2023).
HM Government (2013) ‘Approved Document C - Site preparation and resistance to contaminants and moisture’. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8192a0e5274a2e8ab54b5f/BR_PDF_ AD_C_2013.pdf (Accessed: 2 November 2023).
HM Government (2022) Approved Document F - Volume 1: Dwellings. Available at: https://assets. publishing.service.gov.uk/media/61deba42d3bf7f054fcc243d/ADF1.pdf (Accessed: 6 November 2023).
Kurnitski, J. et al. (2007) ‘Potential e ects of permeable and hygroscopic lightweight structures on thermal comfort and perceived IAQ in a cold climate’, Indoor Air, 17(1), pp. 37–49. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1600-0668.2006.00447.x.
LDN Architects (2021) ‘ e Hill House - Research & Development Project’. National Trust for Scotland. Available at: https://www.getty.edu/foundation/pdfs/kim/the_hill_house_scotland_conservation_research_ plan.pdf (Accessed: 20 November 2023).
Leaman, A. and May, N. (2019) ‘UK Moisture in Buildings Survey’. UK Centre for Moisture in Buildings. LETI (2020) ‘LETI Climate Emergency Design Guide’. Available at: https://www.leti.uk/_ les/ ugd/252d09_3b0f2acf2bb24c019f5ed9173fc5d9f4.pdf.
LETI (no date a) Climate Emergency Design Guide, leti. Available at: https://www.leti.uk/cedg (Accessed: 8 November 2023).
LETI (no date b) LETI - About, LETI. Available at: https://www.leti.uk/about (Accessed: 21 November 2023). Marley (no date a) BS 5250: Condensation and pitched roof design. Available at: https://www.marley.co.uk/ britishstandards/bs5250 (Accessed: 13 October 2023).
Marley (no date b) ‘BS5250-2021 - New Guidance on Managing Moisture Risk in Buildings.pdf’.
May, N. (2005) ‘Breathability - e Key to building performance’. Available at: https://strawbalebuildinguk. com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/breathability.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2023).
May, N., McGilligan, C. and Ucci, M. (2019) Health and Moisture in Buildings. UK Centre for Moisture in Buildings. Available at: https://ukcmb.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/health-and-moisture-in-buildingsreport-1.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2023).
May, N. and Sanders, C. (2017) ‘Moisture in buildings: an integrated approach to risk assessment and guidance’. British Standards Institution.
Met O ce (no date) Humidity. Available at: https://www.meto ce.gov.uk/weather/learn-about/weather/ types-of-weather/humidity (Accessed: 17 November 2023).
Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (2019) Resistance to moisture in buildings. HM Government. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/resistance-to-moisture-in-buildings (Accessed: 26 September 2023).
Moreno-Rangel, A. et al. (2020) ‘Indoor Air Quality in Passivhaus Dwellings: A Literature Review’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(13), p. 4749. Available at: https://doi. org/10.3390/ijerph17134749.
National Energy Action (2023) ‘Fuel poverty charity reveals 45 people per day die from cold homes’, National Energy Action (NEA), 20 January. Available at: https://www.nea.org.uk/news/fuel-poverty-charity-reveals45-people-per-day-die-from-cold-homes/ (Accessed: 29 September 2023).
National Energy Foundation (2023) ‘An introduction to PAS 2035’, National Energy Foundation, 15 February. Available at: https://nef.org.uk/an-introduction-to-pas-2035/ (Accessed: 4 November 2023).
Natural Building Systems (2022) Breathability in buildings, Natural Building Systems. Available at: https:// naturalbuildingsystems.com/insights-news/breathability-in-buildings (Accessed: 22 September 2023).
Net Zero Carbon Guide (no date) Retro t or New Build? - Summary, Net Zero Carbon Guide. Available at: https://www.netzerocarbonguide.co.uk/guide/early-decisions/retro t-or-new-build/summary (Accessed: 21 September 2023).
Pickles, D. (ed.) (2016) ‘Energy E ciency and Historic Buildings: Insulating Solid Walls’. Historic England.
Procter, C. and ACAN (2023) ‘Climate Emergency Conservation Area Toolkit - England’. ACAN. Available at: https://www.architectscan.org/_ les/ugd/b22203_4a37369a00c746778e487b5fd3449eeb.pdf (Accessed: 10 November 2023).
Recart, C. and Dossick, C.S. (2022) ‘Hygrothermal behavior of post-retro t housing: A review of the impacts of the energy e ciency upgrade strategies’, Energy and Buildings, 262, p. 112001. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112001.
RICS, Historic England, and PCA (2022) ‘Investigation of moisture and its e ects on traditional buildings’. Available at: https://historicengland.org.uk/content/docs/advice/joint-position-statement-investigationmoisture-traditional-buildings/ (Accessed: 9 October 2023).
Rose, W.B. (no date) Water in Buildings: An Architect’s Guide to Moisture and Mold.
Sharman, J. (2016) e NBS guide to damp: causes, e ects and measurement, NBS. Available at: https://www. thenbs.com/knowledge/the-nbs-guide-to-damp-causes-e ects-and-measurement (Accessed: 10 October 2023).
SlideModel (2023) How to Present Complex Concepts: A Guide for E ective Communication, SlideModel. Available at: https://slidemodel.com/how-to-present-complex-concepts/ (Accessed: 20 September 2023). STBA (no date) Responsible Retro t Guidance Tool. Available at: https://responsible-retro t.org/greenwheel/ (Accessed: 8 November 2023).
Sterling, E.M., Arundel, A. and Sterling, T.D. (1985) ‘Criteria for Human Exposure to Humidity in Occupied Buildings’, ASHRAE Transactions, 91, Part 1(CH85-13 No 1). Available at: http://sterlingiaq.com/ photos/1044922973.pdf (Accessed: 20 November 2023).
Sto Ltd. (no date) Are We Heading For a Condensation Crisis?, Sto Ltd. – United Kingdom. Available at: https://www.sto.co.uk/en/about-sto/news/news-detailview_44549.html (Accessed: 5 October 2023).
e British Standards Institution (2021a) BS 5250:2021 | 31 Oct 2021 | BSI Knowledge, BSI Knowledge. Available at: https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/management-of-moisture-in-buildings-code-ofpractice-1?version=standard (Accessed: 2 November 2023).
e British Standards Institution (2021b) ‘BS 5250:2021 Management of moisture in buildings. Code of Practice’. BSI Standards Limited.
e Hill House (no date) ‘ e Hill House’. e Hill House.
Trade Store Online (2021) What is Vapour Permeability, and Why is it Important in Breathable Roof Membrane?, Trade & Building Supplies Online. Available at: https://www.tradestoreonline.co.uk/what-isvapour-permeability-and-why-is-it-important-in-breathable-roof-membrane/ (Accessed: 22 September
2023).
Trechsel, H.R. and Bomberg, M.T. (2009) Moisture Control in Buildings: e Key Factor in Mold Prevention—2nd Edition.
Trustmark (no date a) ‘A guide to Retro tting your home’. Available at: https://cms.trustmark.org.uk/media/ kdynhrq2/mar0004-retro t-journey-brochure-a5-20pp-a-spreads.pdf (Accessed: 10 November 2023).
Trustmark (no date b) Retro t your Home • TrustMark. Available at: https://www.trustmark.org.uk/ homeowner/information-guidance/retro t-your-home (Accessed: 9 November 2023).
UK Centre for Moisture in Buildings (2019) ‘Health and Moisture in Buildings report’, UK Centre for Moisture in Buildings, 27 October. Available at: https://ukcmb.org/2019/10/27/health-and-moisture-inbuildings-report/ (Accessed: 11 October 2023).
Ward, P. (no date) Managing damp problems in old buildings, Heritage House. Available at: http://www. heritage-house.org/damp-and-condensation/managing-damp-in-old-buildings.html?clearcache (Accessed: 19 November 2023).
World Health Organization (2009) WHO guidelines for indoor air quality: dampness and mould. Copenhagen: World Health Organization, Regional O ce for Europe.