Home Advantage_Opportunities to support UK households transition to net zero

Opportunities

to support UK households transition to net zero

What’s in store

Foreword ...................................................

Executive summary ........................................

Introduction ............................................... The idea and methodology

Themes and discussion ................................... including communications recommendations

Results and findings ...................................... including topic recommendations

Foreword

The starting premise for Home Advantage was that decisions made by households have a huge part to play in tackling climate change and most households want to act—but they need more support. Some of that support will be behavioural, which has been the staple of our work at Hubbub over the past ten years. However, we know that many of the barriers faced by households are deep-rooted and will require structural change. Home Advantage sought to understand what will help households overcome both the behavioural and structural challenges they face.

32% of emissions reductions up to 2035 relies on decisions by individuals and households, while 63% relies on the involvement of the public in some form.

This means the whole country needs to be engaged in this immense challenge—every government department, every layer of devolved and local government, every business, every charity, civil society group and faith community, and every household. Leadership and coordination from the Government are vital.”

House of Lords Environment Committee (2022)1

We worked closely with 175 homeowners over three months on a longitudinal research and engagement project. Using moderated online communities, supported by interviews, polls, surveys, and a focus group, we gathered in-depth first-hand data and insight on a range of topics including home energy and heating, food and diet and the everyday stuff we buy and throw away.

First-hand testimonies from Home Advantage offer a rich sense of what UK households really think of sustainable living, what stands in their way and what would help them to do more. It was fascinating and illuminating to observe how the issues sit alongside each other in a household’s everyday life and how interconnected they are.

So, what did we learn? The good news is that our starting hypothesis proved to be correct: overwhelmingly the households we worked with believe that household action to address climate change is necessary and they want to play their part. This was validated by our polling, with 75% saying they are open to making changes to how they live to help do their bit for climate change and help balance emissions, with the right help and support from business and government. Households want to know where to start, what will make the biggest difference, how much it will cost, what the wider benefits will be and how others will also play their part.

However, there are considerable headwinds: misinformation is rife, trust in politicians, institutions and the private sector is low, and household budgets are squeezed. Home Advantage shows us that if people don’t feel involved, if they feel choice is being restricted or if they sense measures are being imposed upon them then we risk a green backlash.

This is the moment to seize the opportunity. We’ve identified a range of recommendations for government and business to support households in this transition. We believe this challenge requires a radical rethink of how these issues are presented to the public to stimulate a step change in demand for sustainable choices. A key conclusion is Hubbub’s call for unprecedented public engagement campaigns to match the scale of the government’s admirable ambition, telling powerful human stories of change underpinned by easily accessible structural support, to drive change. The path forward should be framed with a careful balance of aspiration and realism: to build trust and confidence, to offer greater clarity as well as incentives and reassurance to satisfy concerns about cost. Less talk of treading on people’s lives; we need to convey a positive and inclusive vision of the future.

Finally, words must be chosen carefully. Too often the participants in Home Advantage told us how they were bamboozled by technical jargon, including the term ‘net zero’ itself. We use the

term in this report because of the nature of the audience likely to read it, but we recommend using it sparingly or not at all when communicating to the public –it’s little understood outside of industry circles and is becoming an increasingly loaded term.

Huge thanks go to our supporting businesses: Barratt Redrow PLC, B&Q, Starbucks UK, TSB, Unilever UK and Virgin Media O2, who provided funding and shared subject matter expertise, advice and insights from their sector. For the record, we have not asked partners to endorse any of the recommendations in this report. We hope this report will highlight the barriers and offer practical solutions to help public, private and third sector organisations design better campaigns and policies, grounded in the realities faced by UK households. We’re hopeful that 2025 can be a pivotal year of environmental progress in the UK, and that this report can play a positive role in that change.

Gavin Ellis, Director and Co-Founder, Hubbub

If you’d like to discuss any of the findings in this report, or work with us on the solutions, contact Hubbub at:

Executive summary

Giving households the Home Advantage

Home Advantage was a three-month online research and engagement project working with 175 UK homeowners, followed by separate polling of 501 UK homeowners2.

The starting point was:

• Households are a key part of the puzzle: 32% of the required emissions reductions needed between now and 2035 to meet our net zero goal are down to the choices made by individuals and households3.

• Most people are concerned about climate change and are keen to play a part: We know from government data that over 80% are concerned about climate change4, while previous Hubbub polling showed that 68% think individuals have a role to play in tackling climate change5.

• Many people are confused about where to start: People don’t know which actions have the most impact or often, where to get started.

Hubbub engaged a range of partners to help us shape and deliver the Home Advantage project, each offering knowledge and expertise from their specific sector, to help understand how we can best support UK households to create the net zero homes of the future.

Together we sought to find out:

• What are households most (and least) willing and able to do on key net zero topic areas?

• With this knowledge, what are the greatest opportunities for business and government to help households contribute towards net zero?

175 UK homeowners, aged over 25, with a household income of >£50,000 and ‘middling’ environmental attitudes6 took part. These criteria were chosen to represent those who may be able to make changes within their homes but were broadly not eligible for existing government support.

As primarily a qualitative research study, households engaged in discussions via private WhatsApp and Facebook groups, validated by online polls and surveys and supplemented with interviews at the start and end of the research phase. The project took place from August to October 2024, and covered home energy and heating, food waste and sustainable diets, and clothing, homeware and electronics.

1 House of Lords Environment Committee, calculated with the Climate Change Committee ‘In Our Hands’ (2022)

2 From UK polling of 501 homeowners aged 25 or over in the UK, with a household income of £50,000 or more, that somewhat agree or neither agree nor disagree that they consider themselves as someone who cares about the environment, conducted by Censuswide on behalf of Hubbub, in January 2025.

3 House of Lords Environment Committee, calculated with the Climate Change Committee ‘In Our Hands’ (2022)

4 ‘Public attitude tracker’, DESNZ (summer 2024)

5 Environmental behaviours and attitudes’, Hubbub (April 2024)

6 Identify as ‘middling’ environmental attitude = those who responded ‘agree’ or ‘neither agree nor disagree’ with the statement ‘I consider myself as someone who cares about the environment’, so excluding those who responded ‘strongly agree’, ‘disagree’, or ‘strongly disagree’.

Figure 1: How better communications and behaviour change alone could help households contribute to net zero

of the required emissions reduction by 2035 relies on decisions by households 32% on the public in some way!1 ...and 63%

Taking part in Home Advantage made households MORE willing to do their bit.*

“You know, if everybody in the country did this same project, then I imagine there would be a huge difference overnight.”

Male, 45-54

*Of 167 polled with the question: ‘Following your involvement in Home Advantage, how has your level of willingness changed in relation to the following targets to help the UK reach net zero?’

The Climate Change Committee7 set targets for 2030 for households to:

Cut energy use by 15%

Reduce meat and dairy intake by 20%

See Appendix 1, 2 and 3 for a breakdown of areas where households became more willing to take action as a result of taking part in Home Advantage.

Themes

We have identified five overarching themes from the research.

1

Shared responsibility to act

Households believe everyone has a role to play, including themselves. There was a clear sense that government needs to reduce systemic barriers that prevent change, especially in relation to home energy and heating. They want to see businesses improve the choices available and there is demand for information and inspiration from businesses, throughout their customer journey, where it feels genuine and authentic.

75% of UK homeowners2 say they are open to making changes to how they live to help do

their bit for climate change and help balance emissions, with the right help and support from business and government.

Cost and affordability

Perceptions of cost and affordability are major barriers and motivators for households taking sustainable actions, including the ‘squeezed middle’. Households need funding support, evidence of value for money and return on investments to help them act.

“I strongly believe there should be some kind of support for everyone irrespective of their financial status if they want to make significant change in their household to be part of green energy and net zero.”

Male, 35-44

“The vast majority of people in the current financial climate are simply just trying to get by. In my life, as bad as it sounds, I’d choose environmental unfriendly options if it meant having more money for me and my family.”

Male, 25-34

3

Trust and influence

Trust in politicians, institutions and the private sector is generally low; it’s hard to win and easy to lose. The right messenger is key and depends upon the topic and audience. There’s a role for government, business, trusted experts and everyday role models in communicating information to support, reassure and engage households.

4

Narrative, choice and framing

It’s critical to create and support positive narratives around net zero and sustainable living, to avoid any counter narratives that will stall progress. This positive narrative must avoid piousness; it needs to instantly resonate with the public and should consider choice, messengers and offer strong co-benefits.

“I think generally trust is a huge issue—I’ve become cynical over the past few years. People say what they want you to hear to get money from you.”

Anonymous via a survey

“Unfortunately, we have to put up with evangelical-style converts everyday— whether it’s meatfree or electric vehicles. Their snobbery and ignorance often go beyond personal preference.”

Male, 65-74

Support needed to help households be willing and able

Households identified a need for key structural support to make more sustainable choices. This is related to cost, or perceived cost, plus product and service availability and improved design so products are made to last. Households frequently talked about opaque, confusing and inaccessible systems as a barrier, especially in relation to home energy and heating. However, whilst financial incentives are needed to persuade households to invest larger sums, there is huge potential for communications and behaviour change alone to inspire households to act where there are no (or minimal) costs.

“I think people need to be directed to (a) website, as my experience is that the topic of sustainability is not a subject people go actively searching for. e.g. stick it on bus stops. Then once people know the website exists and visit, use the financial incentive/benefits proposition to drive people into reading more.”

Female, 35-44

“(I want) true installation, running and maintenance costs (after grant) of heat pump vs replacing gas boiler that’s tailored to me personally—my size house, pipes, radiators, average usage of heating and hot water.”

Male, 55-64

Use these three communication principles to get people on board with the transition to net zero:

(For anyone communicating with households, from government to business to NGOs)

Tell a positive story

• Show how sustainability can improve quality of life. From saving money, to keeping your home cosy and eating healthier food—many people are motivated by these co-benefits more than the environmental benefits. So, lead on the alternative benefit and show where there’s a double win e.g. buying refurbished electronics saves money and may enable people to access higher-end devices they couldn’t otherwise afford.

• Showcase first-hand experience. People trust others like them and often don’t want to be the first to act; leverage social norming to showcase positive

“How can we make changes towards net zero future if we don’t know what’s in the pipeline! We need more publicity, and more awareness of these plans and how it will help individual households and the future generations too.”

Female, 45-54

stories and mitigate negative misconceptions.

• Emphasise choice, not sacrifice. Especially for emotive topics linked to people’s identity. For diet and purchasing habits in particular, offer choice and inspiration. For energy, showcase new heating technology rather than focussing on the need to remove current boilers.

• Frame or be framed. Create a positive narrative around the change needed and how it will happen. It’s essential to frame action positively. Otherwise, others will frame it instead, most likely not in the way you’d have liked.

“I’d like to see stories of how normal people get on with solar, heat pumps, electric vehicles etc.”

Male, 25-34

Show the bigger picture

• Show what’s needed, why and how it’s possible to overcome challenges like transitioning away from gas and oil. Explain the changes needed in simple language and make it clear which actions make the most difference e.g. on diet, energy and finance. Help households understand the wider social and economic benefits, such as energy security and future prosperity.

• create a social contract. Households are willing to act but need to see action from business and government. Be clear that there’s a joint responsibility to act and all parties are doing their bit—and show how it all adds up.

Make it simple

• Step-by-step. Break it down into manageable, actionable chunks; focus on incremental change and show what support is available.

• consider the messenger. Trust is easily lost and hard to regain, so align your campaign with who your audience trusts - whether that be family, community or a public figure. The messenger can vary per topic, audience and channel, but people most trust those they already know

“I do feel more responsible after the project... It’s going to have a huge snowball effect, so every little counts. And I feel better for it.”

Male, 35-44

“It’s been really interesting hearing everyone’s comments and viewpoints so maybe it would be good to have a forum where people can share ideas/ tips so we can learn from each other”

Female, 65-74

like friends, family or a trusted tradesperson.

• consider your words carefully. Avoid technical jargon (e.g. retrofit, net zero) and terminology which might have negative associations for some people (e.g. vegan). Use clear and relatable language which people are more likely to respond positively to. For example, participants preferred refurbished electronics if they were framed as “like new”.

Key findings and recommendations

While Home Advantage was primarily a research project, households became more confident and took action when armed with new knowledge and behavioural nudges.

In general, households were already doing, or willing and open to adopting some or all the following behaviours: reducing food waste, buying fewer clothes, shopping second-hand, buying refurbished electronics, changing boiler settings, taking other small energy saving actions and slightly reducing consumption of meat and dairy.

Households were less willing to completely cut or significantly reduce consumption of meat and dairy and less able to make major investments in energy upgrades, mainly due to lack of financial support and information. However, likelihood to act on some topics increased as a result of taking part in this study (see Appendix 4-8).

Recommendations

The insights from Home Advantage have helped create 12 recommendations for business and/or government. You can find the specific details of these recommendations and how they have been shaped by insights from the participants in the Results and Recommendations section (following the colour coding below). Recommendations for clean heat and home energy upgrades:

Introduction: The idea and methodology

Home Advantage: The idea

Home Advantage sought to identify what actions households are willing and able to take to create the net zero homes and ways of living of the future, and where they need more support to go further.

The starting point:

• Households are a key part of the puzzle: Given 32% of the required emissions reductions needed between now and 2035 to meet our net zero goal, are down to the choices made by individuals and households1, it’s crucial to get them on board.

• Most people are concerned about climate change and are keen to play a part: We knew from government data that over 80% are concerned about climate change4, while Hubbub polling showed that 68% think individuals have a role to play in tackling climate change (Hubbub 20245).

• But many are confused about where to start: While lots are taking action, many don’t know which actions make the most impact, or what their role could be in doing their bit for net zero – or even know what the term means. Most are driven by other priorities such as the cost-of-living crisis, so need to know the benefit to them and what others are doing to make their effort worth it.

We wanted to delve into this further, to identify a blueprint of recommendations for business and government, to help households go further and faster on net zero. We were interested in:

• What are households most (and least) willing and able to do on key net zero topic areas?

• With this knowledge, what are the greatest opportunities for business and government, to help households work towards net zero?

Appendix 9 shows the research questions for each topic we covered.

What we did

Home Advantage brought together 175 households, from across the UK via a three-month online research and engagement project.

Supported by a range of businesses—B&Q, Barratt Redrow PLC, Starbucks UK, TSB, Unilever UK and Virgin Media O2—we provided households with trusted advice and inspiration to help them be able to make changes at home, know it’s making a difference, and get their say on what kind of support would help them go further.

Businesses supported with funding and expertise on the project topics relevant to their business:

• Energy – B&Q, Barratt Redrow, TSB

• Food – Starbucks UK, Unilever UK

• Things we buy and use – B&Q (electronics), Unilever (clothing care), Virgin Media O2 (electronics)

Who we recruited

188 households in the UK (175 households completed the project)

Freehold homeowners, who therefore have agency to make changes to their homes

A household income of at least £50,000, being those who do not qualify for current government support and yet may have some ability to make changes

Our methods

Households mostly engaged via WhatsApp groups and a private Facebook group discussing key topics and sharing their views. Each theme began with a tips pack of ideas, advice and actions to try. Each WhatsApp group had a Hubbub moderator who used open questions and prompts throughout to build engagement, achieving high participation levels across the households. Polls and surveys were also used to validate sentiment and add variety to the activities. Each theme ended with a discussion and vote on policies that would most help people go further.

We worked with an independent measurement and evaluation consultant to provide expertise on the research methodology.

Aged over 25 (to best represent homeowners)

Identify as ‘middling’ environmental attitude—neither strongly agree nor strongly disagree with the statement ‘I consider myself as someone who cares about the environment’

See Appendix 10 for a breakdown of the participant demographics.

Table 2: Research methods – how households engaged

Method Who took part

WhatsApp community announcements

WhatsApp community groups

All participants.

Participants divided into 5 smaller WhatsApp groups, with a range of demographics in each.

Purpose

To broadcast important messages and reminders about the project.

To enable discussion on topics and for participants to share peer-topeer ideas, support and feedback, identifying habits, attitudes, barriers, motivators and what would help them do more.

Data collected

Qualitative: Participants could ‘like’ and respond to posts but not post themselves.

Qualitative: Discussions, photos, links and tips arising from conversation starters.

Quantitative: polls— see below.

Facebook group

All participants.

Household interviews – pre and post

15 participants covering a range of demographics.

To share topic tip packs, challenges and activities. As with WhatsApp groups to enable participants to share peer-to-peer ideas, support and feedback, identifying habits, attitudes, barriers, motivators and what would help them do more.

To gain qualitative insight into a subset of households’ baseline views, action and knowledge and to track any changes over the project.

Qualitative: Responses to conversation starters, photos and links/tips.

Quantitative: polls— see below.

Qualitative: Recordings and transcripts of each interview.

Surveys - pre and post

All participants completed the pre-survey. 175 completed the post survey.

Polls and mini surveys

Sample size varied per poll or survey.

To establish overall baseline levels of knowledge, attitudes and behaviours and to measure any changes over the project.

Public polling

Focus group

500 adults in the UK recruited to align with the Home Advantage audience profile.

5 households who had recently (or planned to) move home, many living in new builds.

To capture snapshots of opinion and views on specific policy examples.

To validate findings from Home Advantage.

To understand homeowners’ attitudes towards energy efficiency measures in new builds and what touchpoints, messages and messengers they would most value and respond to.

Quantitative: Primarily quantitative measures of action, knowledge and attitude.

Qualitative: Some open questions.

Quantitative: Votes on poll data and survey data to get % agreeing/ taking action etc.

Quantitative: Levels of agreement around attitudes, behaviours and barriers to taking action on net zero.

Qualitative: Recording and transcript.

Our reporting approach

Home Advantage is primarily a qualitative study8—this means it aims to understand in depth the range and nuances of attitudes and behaviours across the different types of households represented in our sample. For this reason, we do not use numbers or percentages in the report unless we’re reporting the result of a poll or survey which was run alongside the live discussions. Instead, we refer to ‘people’ when a finding is relevant to the majority of the group, to ‘many’ when it’s a large subset of the group, and to ‘some’ where the finding relates to a smaller subset.

The findings and recommendations in this report also build on wider, desktop

research as well as previous Hubbub projects on how households can be supported to take environmental action, to seek a holistic understanding of where households are willing and able to act, to contribute to net zero.

The report uses terms like ‘net zero’ or on occasion ‘plant-based’ because of the nature of the industry and sustainability audience likely to read it, but are often little understood by the public, viewed as jargon, technical or divisive, so we recommend using them sparingly or not at all when communicating to the public.

8 We have chosen to report the headline findings in this report in the present tense, given they refer to a range of qualitative and quantative sources from participants, as well as desktop research and other industry publications, while the narrative body is in the past tense, as is standard with qualitative research.

The Home Advantage journey

The project ran for 11 weeks, from 12th August to 28th October 2024 and covered:

Introduction week

Food: Reducing food waste and eating less meat and dairy and more veggies

The stuff we buy and throw away: Our clothing, homeware and electronics

Energy: Getting winter ready and home energy upgrades

Wrap up week including green finance

The project took place at a time when household finances were often stretched from the ongoing cost-of-living crisis and a new UK government had just come into office. The project completed just before a new US president was elected and climate change caused widespread flooding in Spain.

Themes and discussion

The potential

Through participation in Home Advantage, households increased their willingness to act and their understanding of their role in reaching net zero. Applying the overarching principles and recommendations from this report could make huge strides towards the third of emissions reduction required by 2035 that relies on the decisions of households1. See figure 1 for how better communications and behaviour change alone could help households take action.

Opportunity

We identified five overarching themes from the research:

Shared responsibility to act cost and affordability Trust and influence

Narrative, choice and framing

Support needed to help make households willing and able

“Sustainability and issues like these aren’t something I would have googled or looked into, so having it in front of me and shared with me has really opened my eyes.”

Female, 25-34

“For households I think we should just carry on doing what’s right because it is right and on the whole these are things that benefit you in other ways not just the environment either financially or health wise..”

Female, 65-74

Shared responsibility to act

Key takeaway:

Households believe everyone has a role to play, including themselves. There was a clear sense that government needs to create more structural change, especially in relation to home energy and heating. They want to see businesses improve the choices available and there is demand for information and inspiration from businesses, throughout their customer journey, where it feels genuine and authentic.

“I was never made aware when I was in school/home how our impact would (affect) the future and I still wouldn’t be aware if I hadn’t joined the Home Advantage group. I’ve been telling family and friends about it too. Small changes make a big difference, therefore educating kids at a young age would be a massive advantage for them when they become a homeowner/start buying clothes/food.”

Male, 25-34

• Households reported a sense of duty towards the environment and future generations. Most were committed to taking action, while acknowledging they weren’t perfect in their practices. Despite frustration around lack of infrastructure and cost concerns, overall, most expressed optimism in the ability for individual action to collectively make a difference.

• Most participants didn’t realise which actions they can take at home are most impactful for net zero—or the extent of the role they need to play. Many households already take some form of environmental action at home, despite not labelling it as ‘environmental’ or actively seeking ways to do it. However, we learnt that households lacked knowledge on which actions had the most impact on climate change, for example, many wrongly believed that plastic reduction and recycling are high impact carbon actions. The final survey found that household knowledge on impactful actions did become more detailed as the project progressed, however this needs to be an ongoing process that continues to engage households beyond any singular project.

“I think our children and grandchildren will look back and be shocked at the lack of action we took given the evidence we had.”

Male, 25-34

“I would have thought that the smaller (but everyday) efforts such as recycling, avoiding food wastage & turning off appliances, would have more of an impact collectively.”

Female, 45-54

• Kicking the can down the road is common. Suggested solutions were often focused on the actions of others, suggesting that many people don’t see it as their personal responsibility to change. For example, when we asked for solutions related to repair and sustainable diets, many participants suggested more education for young people so the next generation has relevant skills and responsibility to act.

“(I) feel like things that are within your control are doable and people should be taking those steps. The government is not going to hold your hand and take you to Tesco, so people do need to take responsibility.”

Male, 25-34

“The only way to drive behaviour change is to influence while young.”

Male, 25-34

“I think I’m definitely more aware of the impact of things now. Weirdly, I think people who are younger have more knowledge about the environment than older people now. I think we’re now seeing the impacts, whereas I think the older generation weren’t.”

Female, 25-34

In general, households were already doing, or willing and open to adopting some or all the following behaviours: reducing food waste, buying fewer clothes, shopping second-hand, buying refurbished electronics, changing boiler settings, taking other small energy saving actions and slightly reducing consumption of meat and dairy.

Households were least willing to completely cut or significantly reduce consumption of meat and dairy or make major investments in energy upgrades mainly due to lack of financial support and information. However, likelihood to act on some topics increased as a result of taking part in this study (see Appendix 4-8).

“Government should be doing a lot more to set the example. No point talking about the steps for net zero and then taking short flights within the UK. I feel that business and government can be very hypocritical and do not do enough to engage the public.”

Male, 55-64

Although actions at the individual level are important, it is not fair, and not likely to be the most effective to position the response to the environmental crisis as being solely about changes individuals should make. Big companies and corporations need to do their bit too!”

Male, 45-54

• Whilst the overwhelming majority agreed on the need for action on net zero9, opinions on sustainable living and discourse on topics such as net zero varied, with some being advocates and others more sceptical. Participants believed that there needs to be a shared responsibility from business and government and adequate support for households to help them act.

“[The project gave] me a bit of a kick up the bum to say let’s do it. Reading quite a lot of the stuff about particularly the carbon footprint of meat, beef particularly was a bit scary.”

Female, 45-54

Households saw a role for:

• Government:

○ The government’s biggest role is tackling challenges that require structural changes, funding and legislation. This is especially the case for home energy improvements: to provide grants, clarity on policy and technology for low carbon heating. Policies that rewarded or encouraged positive actions were more popular than policies which fined, punished or limited options.

○ Participants saw less of a role for government where individuals want to retain choice, or personal habit decisions, for example on emotive topics like meat consumption or local community issues. Business and third sector organisations have the potential for impact here by increasing support for transformative policies on these issues.

“I do think there should be a little bit more government help there when it comes to energy; there’s obviously loads of extremely ambitious targets by 2030 to lower everyone’s carbon footprint.”

Male, 25-34

• Business and industry

○ Households mostly wanted business to help enable them to act, through improving the choice environment10 of the products and services on offer, such as loose fruit and vegetables in supermarkets to offering a greater variety of veggie meal options instore and in restaurants.

○ Participants were generally open to information and inspiration from businesses at relevant moments, where it feels credible. This included supermarkets providing veggie meal inspiration, home improvement retailers providing information on DIY home energy improvements, mortgage brokers providing information on green mortgages, or clothing retailers offering tips on clothing care.

○ Households were wary of businesses being biased or having ‘an agenda’, such as benefitting themselves financially, and often wanted to know what action businesses were taking themselves to share the responsibility to act.

“I chose the 50/50 option as it is up to the individual to choose not supermarkets or Government to dictate. Too much nanny state.”

Male, 65-74

(On sustainable diet policies)

9 This is despite not recruiting households to the project who strongly agreed, disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement: ‘I consider myself as someone who cares about the environment.’

10 A choice environment is the physical and symbolic setting in which people make decisions. It’s also known as choice architecture, which is the practice of designing the environment to influence people’s decisions.

• communities and local government

○ Many households were unaware of what was on offer in their local area, but there was a strong interest in knowing more. Some saw a key role for their community and local council to provide support and access, particularly to local repair and sharing services, but trust in councils varied. This supports the recent independent review of net zero highlighting how community level participation can encourage action11. However, when it comes to who bears the responsibility, communities and local government were mentioned far less than national government or business.

Participants’ views on sustainability became more pragmatic over the course of the project, with a larger emphasis placed on collective action and a balance of environmental, economic, and personal needs.

“A sustainable home is about living comfortably while being smart with resources. It means saving on energy bills with things like solar panels, cutting down waste, and using ecofriendly materials. It’s about creating a space that’s better for my family and the planet, without sacrificing comfort.”

Female, 25-34

“I’ve lived my life being careful of our environment and doing my bit. I refuse to sacrifice any more than I have done already.”

Male, 65-74

“In my opinion, I do feel like [local authorities] are the people that are genuinely invested in making the community and the country a better place.”

Male, 25-34

To understand if participants’ sentiment and knowledge towards sustainability had changed from the start to the end of the project, we asked participants ‘What does a sustainable home mean to you?’

Responses evolved from hopeful aspirations to a more pragmatic, practical and detailed view of what sustainability meant to them, emphasising the financial and systemic barriers to achieving sustainability and the need for national solutions instead of placing the responsibility solely on individuals.

Cost and affordability

Key takeaway:

Perceptions of cost and affordability are major barriers and motivators for households taking sustainable actions, including the ‘squeezed middle’.

“It’s great that the government has a plan. Finally, there might be some concrete improvements. However, I don’t think anybody thinks that the plan is big enough, funded well enough, or is adaptable enough to suit the majority of people.”

Male, 55-64

Households need funding support, evidence of value for money and return on investments to help them act.

• Some people are concerned about the cost of getting to net zero, who will pay and who may suffer as a result. Although most people are supportive of the ambitions to get to net zero, some questioned where the money to achieve this will come from and whether it will lead to an increase in taxes. Some expressed scepticism over who may ultimately benefit in the long run.

• Some people think sustainable behaviours are less affordable. Some people shared that they prioritised household finances over the environment, and there was an underlying assumption that the sustainable choice was often more expensive: whether that be meat alternatives compared to meat, plant milk compared to dairy, or heat pumps compared to gas boilers.

• There were key actions that households were willing to take, like shopping second-hand and buying refurbished electronic devices for their children, with the motivation primarily being to ‘get a good deal’ and that they were cheaper than buying new. For some, actions like mending and repair were only seen as viable if the original item was deemed valuable enough to warrant it.

“I am aware of this. I do like the idea of this but it’s going to cost a fortune. Not sure if they have the money to pay unless they will raise taxes to pay for it.”

Male, 35-44

“If it is a discussion about environmental issues, the money side of it sways us into engaging more, but I’ve taken on board that environmentally friendly doesn’t always mean more expensive and it’s about a mindset or lens we see it through.”

Female, 35-44

• Value and convenience are generally bigger motivators than environmental impact. The topic of value for money was brought up regularly throughout the project, and participants often wanted reassurance that a choice or action is worth the investment of time and money.

“You’re either on the very low part of the earning people, and you get help. If you’re rich you don’t need help. If you’re in the middle, you don’t get anything. And we’re in the middle ... so you[‘re] stuck basically.”

Female, 45-54

• People want more funding opportunities for the ‘squeezed middle’. Accessibility and affordability for all income levels was a recurring concern when discussing policies. Many perceived it as ‘unfair’ that there wasn’t enough financial support for middle income groups, believing grants should be made available based on what their home needs and how willing they are to make the changes, and not solely their income. Many shared that support should address both the most immediate cost-ofliving concerns and deliver long-term benefits. Popular financial support included grants, interest-free loans, and tax exemptions.

• Payback on an investment is important for larger purchases. For example, to consider investing in home energy upgrades, with large up-front costs for bigger purchases like solar panels, heat pumps or more energy efficient appliances, households want to know when they will recoup their investment, especially if it’s ‘worth it’ for the time they’ll remain in their home.

“I strongly believe there should be some kind of support for everyone irrespective of their financial status if they want to make significant change in their household to be part of green energy and net zero.”

Male, 35-44

Funding barriers are the main challenge for people making home energy improvements12

‘Not being able to afford the cost of the work’

‘It takes too long to break even’

‘Navigating the funding available to support the cost of the work’

12Question: Following your involvement in Home Advantage, what, if anything still stops your household from making improvements to your home’s energy efficiency, such as insulating your walls, loft, windows and floors? (Select all that apply). It got 537 responses—top four responses listed.

Trust and influence 3

Key takeaway:

Trust in politicians, institutions and businesses is generally low; it’s hard to win and easy to lose. The right messenger is key and depends upon the topic and audience. There’s a role for government, business, trusted experts and everyday role models in communicating information to support, reassure and engage households.

• Overall trust was low, with many highlighting concerns about hidden motives, potential biases or conflicts of interest. Everyone having ‘an agenda’ was a recurring sentiment, and many expressed concerns that information providers, from government to businesses, are often perceived as having one.

“I feel most energy companies have their own agendas as they have shareholders’ interests to think about, and politicians only say what they think you want to hear.”

Anonymous via a survey

“I think generally trust is a huge issue - I’ve become cynical over the past few years. People say what they (think they) want you to hear to get money from you.”

Anonymous via a survey

• Trust is influenced by personal experiences and perceived integrity, often built over time. Who households trust varies depending upon the topic, audience and situation.

“Trust is built on history so the scandals with MPs and poor experience of tradesmen (have) clouded my judgement.”

Anonymous via a survey

• Households have a large circle of influence, which can be leveraged to increase impact through positive case studies. First-hand experience and social norming are important, although this can hinder as well as inspire action, highlighting the need for positive case studies. Many participants said they shared tips, advice and information they had learnt from the project, and that it led to interesting discussions and followup actions from friends, family and colleagues.

“I started to tell people my dresses were from a charity shop… £6.50 for a very expensive label! Now I have converted more people, and we have started swapping dresses.”

Female, 55-64

Why positive stories are needed?

For heat pumps, influence from others led to negative framing as a result of a few ‘loud voices’ with rigid views. This was despite lots of positive examples also being in the group, showing how negative stories can be as powerful as positive ones.

Therefore, it’s important to proactively frame the behaviour positively, or it may be negatively framed by others.

“I have discussed with my friends about eating less meat as I didn’t realise that was a thing until our discussions and neither did a lot of them. I have also recommended a few people to turn down their boiler flow rates to save money. Yesterday I shared the question about trying not to buy more than three new items of clothing a year with my friends and they all agreed that there is no way I would be able to stick to that.”

Female, 55-64

“(I trust) any agency who provides unbiased information and has real evidence to support their recommendations.”

Anonymous via a survey

“I have discussed heat pumps with several people and not found anyone who is seriously considering making the switch.”

Female, 65-74

Households said they learnt as much from each other as from Hubbub

When asked to choose the top three responses to “Who did you learn the most from, if at all, during your experience in the Home Advantage project?” (175 participants) The most popular answers were:

‘Tried and tested tips shared by other participants in the project’ 24% 23%

‘Information shared by Hubbub in the themed info packs’

Table 3: Who households trust

Who More trusted

Personal contacts Friends, family, neighbours with first-hand experience.

Other citizens

Influencers and celebrities

Households were curious to hear other people’s experience, including reading social media comments.

Households shared that they often looked to social media for less important information, e.g. recipes and home improvement ideas. Who they trusted was down to their own personal judgement and gut feeling.

Less trusted

N/A—mostly well trusted even if they differed in opinions.

If seen as not being ‘like them’ e.g. if vegan, or if they can afford to spend a lot on renewable technologies.

Business

Government

Advice was trusted if perceived as timely and relevant e.g. an energy company or bank on energy upgrades, and a supermarket talking about food, small businesses with expertise are well trusted, e.g. plumbers.

Influencers and celebrities were often mistrusted if believed to be paid to promote products or services or speak on a topic where they lacked genuine expertise.

Any organisation perceived as having an agenda to profit or promote a certain view.

Lack of trust in unknown quantities e.g. perception of ‘cowboy’ suppliers or tradespeople.

Experts or NGOs

Trust in official published information such as government websites, reports or grants.

Huge levels of trust in Money Saving Expert, Martin Lewis, Zoe app for diet and health and Which? for consumer advice – it was cited as being impartial, evidenced and consumed facing.

If perceived to be dictating how people should live, or restricting choice.

Many are wary of scammers acting as government sources.

If seen as having an ‘agenda’ e.g. we shared a stat from Vegan Society which was perceived by some households as not being credible.

For one participant this discredited the whole project, despite the project focussing on small incremental steps towards reducing meat consumption.

• Many displayed a scepticism for ‘green’ claims and either did their own due diligence or relied on their own judgement or ‘gut feeling’ when deciding whom to trust or making decisions, especially when expertise or transparency were unclear. However, some underestimated the role of social influence and inertia on their own habits and decision making.

“[Martin Lewis] goes in and fights for every man, not just a rich person or a poor person. He goes in and he just fights for us. So, I think we need more people like him.”

Female, 55-64

“This whole thing up to now has been pushing one narrative and one only! Where is the balanced view and choice?”

Male, 65-74

“I like scientists, TED Talks, and things published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.”

Female, 65-74

“I’m all for progress and helping the planet. However - these plans mean that there will be a bonanza for the scammers, grant chasers, cowboy businesses and get rich quick merchants, with the ordinary consumer paying the price.”

Male, 65-74

“I’ve not got much of a precedent, and nobody wants to be the first person to take the gamble.”

Female, 35-44 (on heat pumps)

“I definitely don’t trust social media; everything is too easy to fake.”

Anonymous via a survey

Narrative, choice, and framing 4

Key takeaway:

Frame or be framed - it’s critical to proactively create positive narratives around net zero and sustainable living, otherwise an unwanted narrative is likely to dominate. This positive narrative must avoid piousness: it needs to instantly resonate with the public and should consider choice, the messenger and offer strong co-benefits.

Framing

• Framing the conversation is critical and there is a role for communications from business, government and communities, to help create a positive narrative. Findings from Home Advantage supports research by others, who highlight that support for climate action is stronger where freedom of choice is retained, plus where it offers co-benefits and showcases shared responsibility.

• choice is very important, especially for identity-linked decisions, such as eating meat and dairy and clothing choices. Even if restricting choice is not being suggested, it is very easy for messages on these topics to be perceived that way and become extremely divisive, which erodes trust.

• Messaging should focus on incremental steps and focus on the positives, not what’s missing. We need positive role models from everyday life who do not come across as biased or personally motivated. For example, messaging about reducing

consumption of meat and dairy foods should focus on the addition of interesting, new veggie ingredients and be seen as a bonus to primary messages, such as ‘great tasting’ and ‘easy to make’. Regarding the shift away from gas and oil, the perception of ‘having to rip out old boilers’ was another emotive topic where people wanted to retain choice.

“We are quite open minded, and my family were aware I was part of the trial. My family took most of the discussion quite well in most cases and stimulated a discussion, especially when there was something we could apply directly to us e.g. “shall we try and get less beef in this week”, “do you think we should consider a heat pump one day”. I think when it’s meaningful it’s easier to talk about. What’s hard to discuss is hypotheticals where we don’t understand the financial impact/ benefit.”

Female, 35-44

“The radical vegan evangelists need to be kept in a tin. Nothing puts people’s back up more than being preached to about not eating meat. Needs to be a step-by-step approach… I like simple messages like “eat more beans.”

Male, 65-74

• People wanted to retain choice for ‘special’ or treat meals such as Sunday lunch, fry up breakfast or a celebratory meal. Reducing consumption of red meat and dairy by 20%, once explained, was seen as achievable, but any suggestion of significantly reducing or completly cutting meat and dairy was often met with a strong emotional response.

• Focus on the tangible co-benefits that go beyond households’ day to day life. Despite cynicism about how the government might achieve net zero, some people were positive about the plans to create Great British Energy, being sold on the benefits of creating jobs, and homegrown energy, suggesting households value societal and economic co-benefits.

“I would be happy with a meat free option occasionally but probably not on a regular basis. I am not keen on having the decision made for me, if I am paying for a meal out, I want to have the choice.”

Female, 65-74

Opportunity

Use the framing of ‘getting heat pump ready’; refer to ‘boiler upgrades’ or ‘home energy improvements’ rather than ‘retrofit’ which has negative connotations.

“Good to hear that they will develop the Great British Energy, that could foster job growth and help decentralize energy production, while also ensuring that the energy transition is more accessible to people across the country.”

Female, 45-54

What’s in it for me?

• As other extensive research has highlighted, households need to know how taking action will benefit them because most people are not motivated by sustainability alone.

• At the outset of Home Advantage, participants rated their top priorities and ranked household finances and household health and wellbeing over living more sustainably.

• Other co-benefits included feeling more in control of their lives (e.g. batch cooking), improved comfort (e.g. having a warmer home), or improved wellbeing and self-esteem (e.g. buying a new second-hand outfit at a bargain price).

“I’ve talked to people at work about the project, but the people of my generation between 60 - 70 feel we are old dogs, and you can’t teach us new tricks. Funnily, speaking to the younger members of staff, they are more likely to be veggies or to reduce their meat intake, but they are useless at recycling and doing the small bits.”

Female, 55-64

Support needed to help households to be willing and able 5

Key takeaway:

Households identified a need for key structural support to make more sustainable choices. This is related to cost, or perceived cost, plus product and service availability and improved design so products are made to last.

Households frequently talked about opaque, confusing and inaccessible systems as a barrier, especially in relation to home energy and heating. However, whilst financial incentives are needed to persuade households to invest larger sums, there is huge potential for communications and behaviour change alone to help spark household awareness and inspire them to act where there are no (or minimal) costs.

As a result of taking part in Home Advantage, with new knowledge and behavioral nudges, households were able to take action.

Table 4: How taking part in Home Advantage changed household’s confidence and likelihood to act

Behaviour adoption after the project

Reduce food waste e.g. through freezing ingredients/ leftovers and planning meals

Reducing consumption of meat and dairy e.g. through tactical substitutions and recipe ideas

Buying fewer new clothes and looking after the clothing they already own

75% (130) feel more confident about reducing food waste. None are less confident, 15% (27) said it hasn’t changed and 10% (180) were already confident.

Over half of participants (95) became more confident in making veggie dishes at home, such as making simple ingredient swaps.

78% (137) said they are likely to use a shopping list and 82% (144) said they are likely to plan meals ahead of time to reduce their food waste.

Buying fewer new homeware and electrical items

Around two thirds (113) of participants feel more confident about laundry care.

Over half of participants (92) became more confident in selling their clothes online.

56% (99) participants reported they now feel more confident understanding where they can buy a refurbished phone.

73% (128) said they are likely to bulk out their dishes with extra beans/ veggies/pulses to reduce the amount of meat they use.

72% (145) planned to consciously buy fewer clothes to reduce their impact on the environment.

66% (114) said they are likely to wash their clothes on a 30-degree cycle.

49% (87) of participants said they are extremely or very likely to donate their old phone to go to someone in need e.g. through Community Calling13

Reducing energy consumption

Switching to renewable energy sources

77% (135) of participants said their knowledge on the simple ways to reduce energy consumption at home had increased.

67% (117) of participants said their knowledge about the renewable energy sources that are right for their home increased, including 63% (108) feeling more knowledgable about solar panels, and 61% (107) about heat pumps.

70% (122) said they are likely to keep their thermostat between 18 and 21 degrees in rooms they are sitting in.

61% (108) said they are likely to draught proof around windows and/or doors.

57% (101) said they are likely when looking for a new home, to prioritise one with a renewable energy installation.

Participants are unlikely to get a heat pump - 62% (108) said they are extremely unlikely or not at all likely to get a heat pump in their current home in the future.

Support needed to go further

Structural: increased availability of loose fruit and veg.

Communications: tips and advice on food storage and freezing.

Structural support: increased availability and choice of veggie options.

Communications: education on recipes and tips to support veggie cooking at home, and to showcase wider benefits.

Structural: regulation to support the increased durability and sustainability of clothing.

Communications: tips on laundry and clothing care.

Structural: regulation to enable more repair, reuse and refurbishment.

Communications: signposting the benefits of opting for second-hand, refurbished, or rental.

Structural: making EPCs more practical.

Communications: improved information to support lesser-known energy efficiency actions such as setting boiler flow rates.

Structural: simplify financial incentives and tackle the skills gap and supply chain.

Communications: increased publicity and accessible trusted information to build public demand and consumer confidence.

See Appendix 4-8 and 11-16 for a breakdown of areas where households became more confident and likely to take action as a result of taking part in Home Advantage.

“I feel like I’ve got more of a toolkit now in all areas of my life to think about how is this decision I’m about to make [going to] not just impact me financially, but also environmentally?”

Female, 35-44

13 Community Calling is a partnership between Hubbub and Virgin Media O2 to rehome unused smartphones to get more people digitally connected and tackle e-waste.

Structural support needed to enable households to act

• Structural barriers prevented participants from making environmental changes, despite their increased willingness to act as a result of taking part—This was predominantly focused on financial barriers, as the cost and affordability section outlines.

• Wider systems change is needed to review product and service availability—Many households highlighted the structures in place that make it difficult for them to make sustainable choices, and had a view that newer electricals, homeware and clothes didn’t last as long as they used to. These structural barriers included the design and economics of products that led to continuous new purchases, from ‘planned obsolescence’ to the extremely low cost of some clothing or poor quality of some electrical items.

• Support should be proactively delivered by trusted sources at key decision-making moments to shape the choice environment to make the sustainable option easier or the default—Some people shared that they do not actively go searching for how to make sustainable choices. Households therefore need more prompts, choice, and compelling nudges throughout their everyday lives, to drive curiosity and motivate action.

“I wish it was easily accessible on the internet however like with most things it’s hard to know that it is a trusted source. I would love to know what products for the home are genuinely cost effective in the long run such as heat pumps and solar panel.”

Male, 25-34

“If clothes were made to last longer, I wouldn’t have to keep replacing things that wear out too quickly—like my favourite shirts that fade or lose their shape after a few washes.”

Female, 25-34

• Households want tailored home energy upgrade advice—Many noted finding energy advice confusing or generic, so the idea of personalised, tailored advice appealed to them, for example from independent advisors or impartial online calculators, to really understand how their home could benefit. Some wanted specific information for their local area, including case studies from local people on home energy improvements, noting they’d be more likely to consider solar if they heard of a positive local example.

Examples of timely touch points to nudge households to make sustainable choices:

Practical energy efficiency information at every stage of the house buying process from estate agent websites to mortgage offers and via home improvement retailers, to help people consider the value of energy efficiency and potential for improvements.

Tradespeople to offer renewable alternatives when a boiler needs replacing, along with funding options.

Increased availability of affordable loose fruit and vegetables in supermarkets to tackle food waste.

A greater proportion and range of enticing plant-based options at restaurants, on-thego lunches and in the supermarket, displayed more prominently.

Signs in-store to help customers with awareness and knowledge around durability and laundry care.

Energy and money-saving labelling on laundry care products.

Increased availability of refurbished phones and electricals.

“[Information out there is] easy enough to understand but the difficulty is putting it into practice. It needs to be personal to me not generic. I would like a survey of my home and suggestions and their cost to be provided.”

Male, 65+

Communications support to help households be willing to change

• Work is needed to get households on board with net zero, including what it is and why it’s needed. Despite households claiming they understood phrases like ‘environmentally friendly’, ‘sustainability’ and ‘carbon footprint’ relatively well, they were less confident on defining ‘net zero’, ‘climate action’ and ‘green finance’. 41% (64) of 158 participants who voted claimed to understand the term net zero, but this did not mean they could accurately define it (see Appendix 17). The discussion revealed that knowledge of net zero is generally low, including net zero targets, and what’s needed from government and households to achieve them. Confusion about jargon and experiences of contradictory messaging led to some instances of scepticism of government and organisations sharing any form of information on climate.

• There are lots of opportunities to increase knowledge, especially on energy and finance but also on food waste and repair. The project found that there was particularly low knowledge of heat pumps, boiler flow settings, the sharing economy and what happened to clothing at its end of life, among other areas like the environmental impact of finances14 and meat and dairy. However, there was a big shift in knowledge as a result of taking part in the project, including an increased awareness of policies, systemic barriers and feasibility.

More support is needed to help households understand why they need to act, what’s in it for them, and exactly how they can do it.

“When I see the word ‘green’ in a product, I know immediately it’s just marketing.”

Male, 75+

• There is appetite for an independent ‘one stop shop’ website to support sustainable actions. When we asked households if this would be useful and what information they’d like to see, they emphasised the need for upto-date, impartial, and independent advice. They wanted clear, jargonfree guidance that was specific rather than generic. The site should offer both quick, cost-saving tips and in-depth advice on home energy improvements, including the pros and cons of different options, running costs, and clear environmental ratings for businesses and products. To trust it, they would want to know how it’s funded and who’s behind it.

Opportunities to increase knowledge and awareness

Throughout the Home Advantage project, we found that different methods sparked engagement and change for different households, and there’s a huge opportunity to increase awareness and motivate action through communications. This includes:

First-hand stories using households’ circle of influence: Some resonated with real-world examples and craved hearing the advice of others in the group. Most participants shared information within their circle of influence and helped inspire others to act. Hearing advice from other households was voted to be just as popular as information shared from Hubbub.

Surprising stats: Others were shocked by startling facts, such as the fact there’s enough clothing in the world to last for six generations15. There is a huge opportunity to show households the comparative impact of different actions to help shift behaviour.

Visualisations or counts:

For others, seeing their own personal impact in a tangible way brought the issue and impact of their actions to life. During the project, this worked when we asked participants to count how many electronics they had in their home or revisit which items they hadn’t worn in their wardrobe.

Easy and practical tips: Participants enjoyed and valued practical ideas, regardless of baseline knowledge, especially when shared by peers. The most popular advice and questions included information around eco-settings on washing machines, reducing boiler flow rate, and ideas for common leftovers.

14 There is more work needed to help households understand the environmental impact of finance and where financial models might help incentivise home energy upgrades, as well as defining what ‘green finance’ means.

15 Generation ReWear Documentary, Vanish × BFC, 2021

Communication and behaviour change recommendations for government and industry

Participants shared the need for a clear and strategic plan of what net zero looks like in practice, including:

• The everyday and structural changes that households, businesses and government need to make.

• A clear understanding of the changes in the short term alongside changes in the next 5-10 years to help them make long-term decisions.

• How these changes will occur, including who is responsible, and how they will be financed. Some participants shared that they would be open to increased taxes if there’s a clear and understandable reason for it.

Our research has found that information or financial incentives alone doesn’t necessarily lead to households taking action. However, taking part in Home Advantage – increasing knowledge, seeing others act and understanding the benefits - did increase willingness for many and inspire them to make changes. A stronger emphasis must be placed on the role of communications and behaviour change to increase demand and drive net zero forward. We recommend:

1

Government to focus on building public confidence and demand

Launch unprecedented public communications and behaviour change campaigns that are proportionate to the scale of the ambition, underpinned by easily accessible structural support, to drive change, in order to inspire and enable households to create the homes and ways of living of the future. This should be designed for each audience’s starting point, considering choice, trust, framing and key messengers (incorporating Hubbub’s communication principles).

2

Government to develop an impartial public facing source of independent credible sustainability advice

Participants called for a website from a trusted, independent source with digestible information that laid out the clear choices that they can take to make a difference, both for the environment and personalised for their household. The website would become the go-to place for household advice, guidance and support around net zero, to provide engaging, trusted, factual support to help them reduce their carbon emissions and benefit from co-benefits such as saving money, learning new skills and living a healthier lifestyle (incorporating Hubbub’s communication principles).

Businesses to support customers by raising awareness and inspiring action

Businesses to build on the structural support they provide by using their influence and reach to inspire action among their customer bases.

We recommend utilising Hubbub’s communication principles to build trust and provide relevant, credible advice and engaging content in-store, online and in their key touchpoints with customers. For example (and building on existing initiatives):

• Energy suppliers and home improvement retailers on easy ways to save e.g. changing boiler flow settings and upgrading home energy efficiency via DIY.

• Supermarkets offering guidance on easy swaps and tips to cut food waste e.g. help them make informed decisions at the point of sale to help with batch cooking and using up leftover ingredients.

• Electronics retailers to share evidence of the impact of e-waste, nudge customers towards refurbished, plus guidance on what to do with old electricals including reassurance on warranties and data wiping, and on quality, and guidance on end-of-life care to increase the chance of items having a second life.

• Clothing retailers offering clear guidance on laundry care and making clothes last longer.

“A one stop shop is a great idea as there is a lot of misinformation on the net. Day-to-day I wouldn’t use it much - once you’ve done what you can to your property that’s it until you move - then I’d be looking at it more closely.”

Male, 65-74

For business

Results and findings

Home energy, our food and the things we

buy and throw away

This section delves into the results and findings from the three main topics the project covered:

• Home energy and heating—including energy consumption, home energy upgrades and renewables.

• Our food—including food waste and sustainable diets.

• The things we buy and throw away— including clothing, homeware and electronics.

Home energy and heating Opportunity

Reducing energy consumption

• People are well-versed in energysaving actions and want to learn more, but only if it’s worth their time. People already know how to save money on their bills and are open to additional advice from peers and trusted organisations. However, some people shared they wouldn’t act on tips that they perceived as not worth their time. A popular and memorable energy saving tip we shared was reducing boiler flow temperatures, which some gave a go.

When sharing energy saving advice, highlight value for time and money, alongside wider practical benefits. For example:

More compelling:

Turning down your combi boiler flow temperature once could save the average home £65 a year.

Less compelling:

Turning off your TV on standby every night could save the average home £11 a year.

(See Appendix 12)

(12) said they already felt confident. of participants said that they feel more

“We are already making changes. We have a Hive that we can schedule our heating and hot water, so that saves us a lot of money. Gone are the days when heating is left on whilst you are out.”

Female, 55-64

“I don’t consider myself to be wasteful nor uncaring about our planet but, to be honest, saving £20 per year is not a priority for me. Having to adapt to so many new routines seems a little like an obsession.”

Male, 65-74

“We had our boiler replaced in 2019. I wouldn’t have even known what a heat pump was at that point. We had an electrician come do it. He basically just said, oh, I’ll put a combi in, and he never said, oh, do you know, you can have all these other options as well. It’s only lately that I’m finding out these things.”

Female, 25-34

• Most homes have an energy gatekeeper. Concerns around keeping the home warm for young children and older family members led to higher heating temperatures, whilst family members - often a man - were seen as being responsible for the thermostat and the boiler. This led to a lack of confidence from other members of the household to change their heating or boiler settings, with fear of breaking them outweighing the benefit of any potential savings.

• People want EPc ratings to be more practical and linked to costeffectiveness. People were aware of their EPC (Energy Performance Certificate) rating but generally only referred to it when buying or selling a home, and focus group participants shared that they prioritised location, size and layout of a property, over its energy efficiency. Our research found that people want the following information from their EPC rating:

○ Advice on low-cost measures that could also improve the rating, including the fastest and cheapest improvements.

○ Information on how well their home is keeping heat in, including an objective assessment of the heat retention of a property.

○ Information on how energy efficiency measures could increase their home’s value.

“I turned my [combi] boiler flow temp down to 40 today. It was set at 74 so I think I’ll notice a big differencehopefully not negatively so!”

Female, 45-54

“Most can make small changes if the cost is low, but new windows/solar panels/cavity insulation is not helpful/achievable advice for a lot of people.”

Male, 35-44

“I think we need way more publicity about the plan and clear steps about how we can make progress. There is a lot of fear, apathy, and negativity to overcome.”

Male, 55-64

30% (31) of 103 participants said they would like their EPC rating to include ‘advice on low-cost measures that could also improve the rating’.

23% (24) said they would like an EPC to share information on how well a house is keeping heat in.

(See Appendix 18)

Home energy improvements and renewables

• People are supportive of the government’s plans to move away from gas and oil, but there’s a lack of understanding and confidence on how we’ll get there—People were positive about the targets for clean energy by 2030 and understood why it needs to happen. However, many shared distrust and cynicism towards the plans, highlighting that they don’t believe it’s an achievable target and don’t trust the government to deliver on these promises.

• There was also a lack of awareness from participants on necessary and upcoming infrastructure changes including heat networks, and people expressed a need for more publicity to increase awareness of these ambitions to get people on board and overcome scepticism.

“I think probably 7 or 8 years ago [EPC ratings] was something nobody even talked about or measured. And then all of a sudden it became part of the selling process, and I think that made everybody start thinking about it.”

Female, 65-74

• Financial barriers are the main barrier to home energy improvements—Cost barriers were consistently mentioned: the affordability of installations, prioritising spending on other things, lack of clarity on grant support available and a perception that financial support isn’t aimed at middle income households. Renewables were perceived as particularly costly. However, some participants said heat pumps, solar panels and EV charging points would be something they’d look for in a new home, especially a new build, to avoid upfront installation costs.

• Return on investment is key—For significant investments like solar panels and heat pumps, people expressed that they want clear advice and information on exactly how much it will cost, if the home energy measures will add value to their home (both financial value and wider immediate benefits), when they will break even or save money in the long term.

• Some people believe the age of their home is a barrier—The households were split between those who thought their home was relatively new and therefore efficient and didn’t need changes (or wouldn’t be eligible for grants), or those who had older homes perceived as not being suitable for energy improvements.

Opportunity

Guidance on grants should include clear information on estimated payback period and who is eligible, including the age of homes.

“I remember the cost being in the realm of £20k to £30k ... that’s potentially 1/6 of the value of my house. I am not going to spend £30k to increase the energy rating. I don’t even know if I’d still be alive by the time I recoup that money. For the average person, it’s just nowhere near feasible in terms of that cost.”

Male, 25-34

“I would have to be confident that the information being shared wasn’t biased. Sadly, I’m becoming more and more cynical. I’d like information around initiatives such as heat pumps with clear understanding of the cost benefits and how long it would take to break even.”

Female, 65-74

“We were thinking of replacing our gas boiler with an air source heat pump but got discouraged after reading many not-so-good stories about it plus we don’t really have a space and a budget for it.”

Male, 35-44

Heat pumps: from hot air to getting ‘heat pump ready’

Through this research we wanted to identify key barriers on specific renewable energy sources, focusing on heat pumps as a technology many homes could consider (compared to being part of a heat network, for example, which households have less agency over if it’s not available in their area, despite being a big part of the future of clean heating).

People need support and advice, alongside positive framing and stories to get on board with heat pumps to prevent misinformation. We learnt that information on heat pumps doesn’t increase willingness, and more emphasis should be placed on tackling structural and societal barriers for households. These barriers included the space needed for a hot water tank, the noise and appearance of them, the high upfront costs, and being negatively influenced by stories alongside largely false information regarding the performance and efficiency of heat pumps.

Our survey found that:

• Despite 61% (107) of 175 participants saying their knowledge on heat pumps had increased, 62% (108) of 175 participants said they are extremely unlikely or not at all likely to get a heat pump for their current home in the future.

(See Appendix 8 and 13)

• This shows that urgent support is needed to get households on board with heat pumps.

“I’m hoping that the evolution in heat pumps will make them smaller and less noisy – until then I will look after my boiler and continue to service it regularly.”

Male, 65-74

However, people are willing to take incremental steps to move away from gas and oil.

Participants were generally more positive about the framing of getting their homes “heat pump ready” and smaller actions that lined up with their home improvement journey.

Some participants were happy to share that they had already made many of the changes needed to get their home ready for heat pumps or a heat network, including installing underfloor heating, induction hobs and larger radiators.

Those that hadn’t made the changes said they’d seriously consider it in the future, especially knowing it would seem desirable to future owners and minimise the impact of rising energy costs. However, knowledge of heat pumps and heat networks is low.

• Households are willing to get solar panels but need financial support— After hearing positive stories from their friends and family and seeing neighbours with them, there is demand for solar panels. People like the practical benefits, including being able to see how much energy they had created in real-time, and use appliances for free whilst they were producing energy, but were prevented due to the cost. Those with solar panels said that to make full use of the energy produced, they needed a battery, but these were expensive and required a large amount of space.

Opportunity

Highlight opportunities for households to make their home more energy efficient and move away from gas and oil during relevant touch points on their home improvement or purchasing journey e.g.

Home improvement retailers to provide opportunities and guidance for how customers can make changes themselves when renovating or doing home DIY.

Turnkey organisations such as energy companies or housebuilders to offer clean heat alternatives and raise homeowner awareness of options at key customer touchpoints.

Mortgage advisors and brokers alongside banks to provide information on green mortgages, and other opportunities to finance home energy improvements.

“We moved into our newly built house last year and are considering installing solar panels to improve energy efficiency and reduce longterm costs. I’m still researching this, as we believe it could be a smart investment. We’re also thinking about heat pumps, but since this might not be our permanent home, we’re weighing whether these upgrades are worth it.”

Female, 25-34

• Trust of tradespeople is gained through demonstrated reliability and experience over time—Households rated their plumber, heating engineer or electrician as the most trustworthy to give them advice on taking actions to be more sustainable. Tradespeople were seen as highly trusted if they had demonstrated honesty and reliability, directly or if they had been vouched for. However, some participants had concerns they would be ripped off by businesses and tradespeople after negative experiences with them in the past.

Opportunity

Offer households guidance and clarification on how to identify trusted suppliers and what to look out for when hiring an installer.

“We were ripped off by builders and had to pay money on top to another builder to put things right. I would like to insulate under the original floorboards as they are very draughty but cannot find a trustworthy contractor.”

Female, 55-64

• People want trustworthy, accessible and tailored energy advice alongside positive storytelling that focuses on the co-benefits—People valued reallife stories and experiences to help them build trust in energy solutions and make decisions on what to install in their home. People seek advice from internet searches, energy providers, Martin Lewis and friends and family and the most frequent questions were ‘what is the best long-term investment for me?’ and ‘what will make the biggest difference with the smallest amount of money?’

• Many want more direction, while retaining flexibility—Many expressed a desire to understand what a shift away from gas and oil will mean to them in practice and they see a role for government help with this. When it came to sharing feedback on energy policies, participants praised France’s Energy assistance grant programme16 for recognising that “one size does not fit all”; they liked that the policy offered flexibility and financial support to suit each home.

“I am at the point of thinking, “Tell me what to do, and if it’s within my power I’ll do it” but I find that government tend to throw out an idea without a clear plan of what I personally need/ am expected to do.”

Female, 55-64

16The programme ‘MaPrimeRénov’ aims to fund home energy upgrades for 700,000 to 800,000 French homes per year covering heat and hot water systems, plus insulation. The subsidy is calculated on income level, with the lowest income groups eligible for the highest levels of support; in 2023 it covered 40% to 90% of the cost of the measures depending upon income levels. Additional packages support the upgrades of the worst performing homes, those needing complex works, in multi-apartment buildings or to achieve the highest energy performance levels.

Awareness of green financing options and community energy buying schemes increased the most compared to other policies.

It increased from 48% (89) and 49% (90) respectively, to 85% (150) from the start and end survey of 175 participants.

Table 5: Views on energy policies

See appendix 19 and 20 for a breakdown of household support for various policies before and after taking part in Home Advantage.

Policy suggestion Overall sentiment from participants

Temporarily cutting VAT to zero on all energy efficiency products for Home DIyers purchasing materials and doing the work themselves

Positive

A ‘one-stop-shop’ website or place for households to get information on how to live sustainably at home

A time-limited government funded scheme ahead of winter 2025 to enable people to insulate their lofts who have not yet done so

Free or discounted EPc certificates and bespoke home energy advice for your property

Positive

Positive

Positive

Reducing Stamp Duty for home buyers who buy more energy efficient properties or install additional energy efficiency measures in the two years after they buy their property Positive

Grants for communities to install and run their own renewable energy projects

Green financing options to finance home energy improvements

Neutral

Neutral

(from final survey of 175 participants and discussion)

85% (122) of participants support this (but this was not discussed much by participants).

Discussion of a ‘one-stop-shop’ was well received by participants throughout the project.

Awareness and full support for ‘a ‘one-stop-shop’ website or place for households to get information on how to live sustainably at home increasing from 15% (27) to 55% (97) before and after the project.

74% (106) participants support this.

70% (123) fully support it.

Largely positive but tempered by practical concerns and fairness issues, indicating mixed enthusiasm and contingent on how the scheme would be structured and applied.

55% (97) of 175 participants fully support it.

53% (93) of 175 participants fully support it. More popular policies

• More work is needed to boost knowledge and awareness of green mortgages and how they can help finance home energy improvements— People’s understanding of what green mortgages are differed greatly but despite low awareness, people were supportive and believed them to be a good way to spread the cost of renewables and home energy improvements.

Opportunity

Build household willingness and confidence in homebuying journey such as through mortgage brokers and on property search websites.

“For me the key would be allowing me to add all the energy savings costs straight to my mortgage. I would happily spend 10k for solar if I knew the cost could be spread over the next 15 years.”

Male, 45-54

“The phrase “green mortgage” to me means that lenders would offer loans with low interest rates could be offered to homebuyers who purchase energy-efficient homes or who plan to make energy-efficient improvements.”

Female, 45-54

Home energy and heating policy recommendations

Throughout the project, households shared that they faced multiple barriers on their home energy improvement journey. There was an overall willingness to move away from gas and oil, but households expressed a need for improvements alongside financial support, including help to understand what choices give the best value for money, positive reviews from people they trust, and simplified guidance on where to go to make changes.

We ask for the government and industry to take an overarching, strategic approach to supporting households in the energy transition, to provide a coherence that matches the scale of the ambitions. A cross-industry approach needs to be taken to support households bringing together a broad range of sectors including energy companies, home energy improvement retailers, tradespeople, financial services, homebuilders, estate agents, solicitors and conveyancers, trading standards and unions.

Home Advantage suggests the need for three key focus areas to support households in the shift to warm homes and clean energy:

• Build household willingness and confidence in home energy improvements and new heating technology.

• Improve the current end-to-end experience for homeowners seeking to make home energy improvements.

• Tackle trust issues and skills gaps in the supply chain.

Build household confidence in home energy improvements and new heating technology

• Simply offering financial incentives won’t be enough to significantly shift uptake of home energy improvements and technology such as heat pumps; emphasis must also be placed on building trust and stimulating demand.

• Positive and aspirational storytelling is needed, to coordinate and build on existing case studies and stories from people across the UK who have successfully made and are delighted with, changes to their home.

• Any public engagement should look at timely moments in the home energy upgrade journey to influence and support households with a consistent, engaging, positive message.

Improve the end-to-end experience for home energy improvements

• Conduct an urgent review aiming to simplify the end-to-end experience for homeowners seeking to make home energy improvements; map timely touchpoints and barriers; and identify the most effective opportunities to intervene to encourage households to make energy improvements so that they receive a clear, consistent and positive message. This should consider household knowledge and confidence, funding and supplier options and consumer protections throughout, as well as involving more businesses.

For example:

• Energy Performance certificates (EPcs) need to be more practical, understandable and focused on cost to instil greater confidence in them as a useful metric of how warm and efficient a home is. We acknowledge the recent government EPC consultation and recognise this may lead to EPC reforms. Home Advantage shows EPCs would be useful if they provided clear quick wins, accurate payback times, gave

a breakdown of EPC A-E ratings against different parts of the home to help households prioritise upgrades, and crucially detailed how well the home keeps the heat in and clean heat options.

• Support incremental steps in the right direction. Government should help to build confidence by considering how households can be better supported to get ‘heat pump or heat network ready’—doing preparatory work that will reduce energy consumption immediately, even if a heat pump or heat network is not possible yet.

• Simplify financial incentives for upgrades. Build trust, transparency and reduce friction for households through clearer eligibility criteria, jargon-free communication and simplification of funding support. A quick win for government would be to target grants at the millions of homes that are uninsulated, to install insulation and make 2024 the last winter they are losing heat17.

Tackle the skills gaps and trust issues in the supply chain

• Government and industry need to ensure a sustainable skilled workforce can provide a quality service. Having enough skilled tradespeople is critical for building household confidence so that they can consistently get the trusted advice they are looking for. Currently, tradespeople are disincentivised to retrain in new technologies due to the lack of demand, their age demographics and existing workload.

Recommendations:

• Make all accreditation schemes as user friendly as possible to ensure households can understand what to look for in a tradesperson. Furthermore, government must ensure robust consumer protection is in place—with funding for trading standards to take action to discourage mis-selling.

• Focus on the number of apprenticeship placements in professions that have current and projected shortfalls. Ensure that Skills England monitoring of this does not focus solely on large businesses.

• Support SMEs (who make up over 80% of the maintenance workforce) to take on apprentices. Government should experiment with flexible apprenticeships to allow different SMEs to share apprentices based on the firm’s demand for work, plus increase targeted grants to support SMEs in wages and the costs of apprenticeships18.

17 Insulation and energy efficiency of housing in England and Wales: 2022 - ONS

18 For example, the boosted apprenticeship incentive of £3,000 in place during the pandemic led to a 21% increase in apprentice starts (Federation of Small Business, 2023)

Food waste and sustainable diets

Food waste

Reducing food waste is one of the most common environmental actions households take; Hubbub polling19 found that 64% of households say they reduce food waste at home. In Home Advantage, the topics of food waste was an easy entry point for households, with many being proud to swap tips and engage enthusiastically in activities, leading to most households boosting their knowledge and confidence on what they already do to prevent food waste at home.

Following their involvement in Home Advantage, 75% (130) of 175 participants felt more confident about reducing and preventing food waste at home.

What we learnt

• People don’t like wasting food—At the start of the project, over half of participants (97 of 188 surveyed) said they regularly threw away food (see Appendix 21), yet many saw it as an unacceptable behaviour and something they wanted to improve on. The most commonly wasted foods were bread, salad (spinach, cucumbers, tomatoes), soft fruits (berries), carrots, bananas, yoghurt and milk.

• Lack of knowledge on storage and large portions leads to food waste— Common reasons for throwing away food included cooking too much food, having to buy large portions of packaged fruit and veg, lack of knowledge of how to use up certain ingredients or the best way to store or freeze certain foods. Food waste tended to occur more at weekends and during school holidays, when plans often changed, and parents complained that picky eaters led to more leftovers.

• Taste and perceived ‘freshness’ of food is important—Some people had concerns around freezing food and eating leftovers, highlighting concerns around quality and taste.

• Increase in knowledge leads to action—Households we interviewed said they ate more leftovers, began freezing items like bread, started planning meals ahead of time, and did bigger food shops as an active way to reduce their food waste.

“Frozen isn’t the family favourite, so (it) usually end(s) up in the bin after the effort of freezing and defrosting.”

Female, 25-34

91% (169) of participants were fully supportive of ‘reducing the amount of unnecessary single-use plastic packaging in shops’.

And 86% (151) of participants fully supportive of ‘increasing the availability of options to buy loose fruit and veg’.

• People enjoy learning more about food waste and see it as a quick win to help the environment—Despite many saying they were already knowledgeable about food waste, many also said they learnt new skills from Hubbub and other participants in the project and threw away less food as a result.

Opportunity

Given households are willing to act, and behaviour shifted with simple knowledge sharing, there is huge opportunity for even more behaviour change from engaging communications alone.

“I think the suppliers could do some really simple things to make it easy for people just to buy smaller sizes as they need it. A lot more loose veg, less washed potatoes in plastic packets and more potatoes that you can pick just two of.”

Female, 25-34

Table 6: Views on food waste policies

See appendix 19 and 20 for a breakdown of household support for various policies before and after taking part in Home Advantage.

Policy suggestion

Reducing the amount of unnecessary single-use plastic packaging in shops (to allow for buying smaller portion sizes)

Increasing the availability of options to buy loose fruit and veg

clearer labelling on how to freeze, defrost, cook and store foods

Overall sentiment from participants

Positive

Positive

Positive

Removing best before dates on food

Neutral

“London has a huge number of single person households. Yet all of the pricing is focused on buying in bulk or buy one get one free. To buy items individually or in pairs for example means the unit cost is massive and the single person ends up constantly paying over the odds.”

Male, 55-64

Popularity (from final survey of 175 participants and discussion)

91% (159) supported it. Consistently popular policy in discussion.

86% (151) supported it.

People are willing to buy loose fruit and veg to reduce their food waste and are supportive of policies to enable them to do so.

79% (133) supported it.

More popular policies

51% (89) supported it, 25% (43) didn’t.

Despite many people saying they ignored Best Before Dates, many people said it’s a useful tool to determine how fresh produce is.

“I think if you get rid of BBE people will find other ways to become selective regardless. I find BBE is a good measure of present freshness.”

Male, 25-34

Food waste policy recommendations

Households are already on board with taking action to reduce food waste, and expressed a need for support from government and industry to help break down systemic barriers that lead to excess waste, and that more flexibility in portion size when buying fresh produce would help them the most.

7 Enable households to buy more loose fruit and veg

• Government to introduce policies to remove plastic packaging to enable households to buy more loose produce — support WRAP’s recommendation for the government to implement a phased approach to remove packaging from uncut fresh produce starting with banning primary packaging on 21 products20.

• Business retailers to increase availability of loose fruit and vegetables, highlighting the opportunities for customers to buy smaller portions for less.

20 Removing packaging from uncut fresh produce, WRAP (2024)

For government For business

Sustainable diets

To meet the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions targets, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) recommends a 20% reduction in meat and dairy intake by 20307. In this project, we sought to find out the role that choice, cost, messengers and social norms play in changing dietary norms.

The topic inspired debate amongst participants, with contrasting views leading to tension at times. However, there was an underlying curiosity about the actions and views of others, which led to participants trying new dishes and increasing their knowledge and confidence on how they can make small changes to adapt their diet to help the environment.

What we learnt

• People’s diets are motivated by health, cost and taste—Health was the biggest priority when it came to diet, especially for older people. For many, discussions of health focused on eating more vegetables, gut health and avoiding ultra-processed foods, which led to contrasting views on meat substitutes, with many older people being less willing to try them. Many people reported having already cut down on meat due to increased costs. Some expressed concerns around having to sacrifice taste when cooking simple veggie dishes at home.

• People were very positive about a greater choice of vegetarian options being offered, including how more options at schools would be beneficial for kids to try new things and eat a healthier diet.

• People are willing to reduce consumption of meat and dairy if it’s framed in incremental steps—Once aware of the health and environmental benefits of eating less meat and dairy, most people were willing to reduce their consumption by 20%. Some people reacted negatively or questioned the accuracy of information if they felt like their personal choice was being restricted or controlled; some participants believed that information or statistics on the impact of eating less meat and dairy was used to push a certain ‘meat-free’ agenda.

• People are willing to eat tasty vegetarian dishes, but many households want inspiration to increase their knowledge, and need more choice—Many participants, particularly older men, expressed not having the culinary knowledge to cook vegetarian meals at home, and enjoyed receiving recipes from others.

“I noticed.. tofu has less calories but then more protein than paneer and I’m not losing anything nutrition wise.”

Female, 25-34

“I’m only just learning now (I won’t say my age ��) about healthier options/alternatives which is why I struggle to make meals for my family. I need a basic go-to recipe - for example we like Bolognese, we use beef—how can I recreate that same taste with an alternative.”

Male, 45-54

“In the past I’ve been quite stubborn about serving meat with most meals, but I’m softening a little on this stance now. I should point out that this is more to do with the high cost of meat than its nutritional value!”

Male, 45-54

“For me, eating more and varied plantbased food is a must for health, the environment and my finances. Looking after my gut is a priority (veg and yoghurt etc). I intend to continue my goal of eliminating red meat and eating a lot of and variety of plant-based food plus fish with occasional chicken. Zoe [nutrition plan] has convinced me that ultra processed food is a no no.”

Male, 75+

“I’ve been reducing the amount of meat and increasing legumes and pulses and things. We have reduced the amount of meat that we’ve been eating, but we’ve done it in a sort of a gentle way as opposed to a vegetarian today way.”

Female, 55-64

“I’m still not fully swayed by the arguments for meat substitute products, so meat will continue to play an important part in my family’s diet. That said, I’ve attempted to reduce the size of our meat portions to good effect within the past two weeks and it was still manageable, so I may attempt to reduce this further in future.”

Male, 45-54

Opportunity

Additional support on what cutting down on meat and dairy looks like in practice, including recipes focused on flavour and ‘tactical substitutions’, would help mitigate concerns and increase willingness. BBC Good Food, Pinch of Nom and Joe Wicks were trusted sources of recipes for many, with younger groups using TikTok and YouTube.

“More veggie options— I believe in choice and certainly not taxing meat. Offer good veggie options and people will try.”

Male, 65-74

• Despite a curiosity about plant milks, some people were unsure about making the switch—Many participants shared they had tried plant milks, and a few tried them during the project based on other participants suggestions. However, not liking the taste, higher prices and concerns about dairy farmers put some people off making the switch long-term: 55% (95 of 175 participants) said they were not likely to switch dairy to plant milk in cooking, versus 38% (65) said they were likely to.

• The messenger, and the message, matters—People were curious about the dietary choices of other participants, even if it didn’t align with their views.

• Family, celebration and identity influence our choices—Meals containing meat are linked to significant moments of celebration and tradition, and meat eaters are more willing to go without meat for less ‘important’ meals, like lunches on the go or a post-pub snack (see appendix 22). For some, meat and dairy were a part of their identity and they would not be willing to give it up altogether. Often dietary choices were dictated or limited by reluctant or fussy family members.

“I’ve tried oat, almond, coconut and soy, I really did not enjoy the taste of the last 3 at all. Whilst I enjoyed oat milk, it is too expensive to justify as a long-term option.”

Female, 45-54

Opportunity

Build on curiosity when framing eating more vegetables and incrementally reducing meat and dairy, to drive social norming.

“I understand the need to cut meat out as much as we can. Being a novice cook, I don’t have any creative ways in which I can cook that is healthy, quick and easy. So yes, I would happily ‘try’ alternatives, just need to be shown or told how to do it!”

Male, 45-54

Table 7: Views on sustainable diets policies

See appendix 19 and 20 for a breakdown of household support for various policies before and after taking part in Home Advantage.

Policy suggestion

Labelling foods with their environmental impact –highlighting how much carbon it took to grow, package and transport the item, similar to nutritional labels.

Overall sentiment from participants

Neutral

Plant based milks (oat/soy/ coconut) costing the same as dairy milk

Neutral

Adding a tax to products that contain meat to cover the associated environmental costs Negative

“Farmers make hardly any profit on milk whereas the substitutes need to make profit to pay for advertising and line their pockets.”

Male, 35-44

Popularity (from final survey of 175 participants and discussion)

52% (91) supported it.

Especially data to help inform their decisions. However, some questioned the accuracy of carbon data and who would benefit from it.

46% (81) supported it, 17% (30) didn’t.

Many highlighted the cost of plant milks as a barrier to switching and a few participants had strong concerns about the impact of the increased consumption of plant milks on dairy farmers.

Only 21% (36) supported it and 53% (94) did not support it.

However, in discussions people were more positive about this policy when framed as “a veg subsidy” rather than a tax on meat

“Get the government to subsidise the cost of veg through our collective taxes not put meat prices up.”

Male, 65-74

Sustainable diet policy recommendations

Households shared that they are willing to cut meat and dairy by 20%, when presented with choices that were framed in a positive and practical manner and given the ability to do so21. These choices were linked to their weekly shop, where they eat out, and how ‘plant-based’ food is communicated and framed, including everyday discussions with their friends and family.

Home Advantage suggests the need for two key focus areas to support households to reduce their meat and dairy consumption and help households normalise sustainable diets:

“Clearer labelling re: carbon impact of fresh products gets my vote. We should take the decision to eat meat or become a vegan or even vegetarian based on the information and data provided to us. No-one should impose anything on us.”

Male, 35-44

Recommendations for government and industry (supermarkets, retailers, manufacturers, catering and hospitality)

8

Reframe meat reduction more positively—Focus on incremental steps to reduce meat consumption to increase ‘plant-based’ options, e.g. ‘switch, add, try’. Avoid communications that imply sacrifice, instead focus on flavour, substituting or switching, adding more veg, and trying something new. Use community leaders, organisations and spaces to amplify the health benefits and normalise vegetarian options.

9

Give people more options to enable them to reduce their meat and dairy consumption—Offer ingredients and ready-made dishes with 50/50 blend of meat and vegetables to cut down on meat consumption. For example, increasing the proportion of plantrich dishes on menus (e.g. in work, school or university canteens), with a focus on lunches and food on-the-go when people are more open to change. Where possible, ensure that the option with less meat is cheaper.

The things we buy and throw away

Creating a circular economy is crucial to reduce emissions from the everyday things we consume22, and there’s a demand from the UK public to support reuse, rental and repair. Hubbub polling from spring 2024 identified that 57% of people said they are willing to reduce how much they buy and consume (e.g. fashion, homeware, electronics) to tackle climate change.

In this project, we sought to understand what households are most willing and able to do to reduce the amount of new clothing, homewares and electronics they buy, what influences those decisions, and how best businesses and government can support them to move towards a circular economy.

We found that shopping as a whole was quite an emotive topic, and many households agreed they owned more than they needed. During the project we found that many households had already switched from buying some things new, to buying second hand, and were keen to share their second-hand and refurbished bargains and the wider benefits that came from sharing and repairing, motivating others to do the same.

Clothing

What we learnt

• Some clothes never see the light of day—Influence from social media adverts, wanting to improve selfesteem or mood, or wanting a new outfit for holidays influenced clothing purchases and often led to retail regrets, particularly for women, whilst weight fluctuations and intentions to sell on second-hand sites led to people keeping clothes they don’t wear.

“Constant ads make it hard to resist wanting new clothes all the time.”

Female, 25-34

• Buying second-hand has become socially accepted and people are doing it more than ever—There has been an increase in people buying and selling on apps like Vinted and Depop due to increased availability and choice; reduced feelings of ‘buyer’s remorse’; the opportunity to buy better quality clothes; and the option to re-sell clothes that aren’t right. The group was split on whether this meant they bought more clothes, but certainly for a proportion it gave them ‘license’ to buy more and fulfilled the emotional drivers of purchasing clothing.

22 Ellen Macarthur Foundation note that 55% of global emissions can be tackled by addressing energy efficiency and switching to renewable energy. To reach net-zero, we also need to change the way we make and use products, materials, and food - through creating a circular economy (Ellen Macarthur Foundation, 2021)

• There’s a lack of awareness and knowledge around the environmental impact of fashion and what happens at clothing’s end of life—People were shocked when hearing about the amount of clothes that are sent to landfill or incineration.

• People connect durability with price—The term durability was used frequently by participants as something they looked for when buying clothes, but as an empty signifier rather than a term they could define or add metrics to. Many people made a connection between garment price and durability, perceiving cheap clothes to be unlikely to last past a few washes. However, previous Hubbub research has shown that price is not a good indicator for durability23

• People don’t think repairing is worth it—Despite Hubbub polling showing that 47% of people have repaired clothing24, some people didn’t see the value in repairing clothes, due to the high cost of repair compared to the low cost and perceived value of an item.

“I buy more [second-hand] items, and I do this because I spend a lot less so I can afford to. Also, I can afford to be a bit more adventurous with what I buy due to each item costing much less. If I get fed up with it, I can usually afford to put in a charity bag without losing much money.”

Female, 55-64

• People want and need to learn more about how to care for clothing and look to friends and family for advice—Despite many people saying they didn’t pay attention to clothing care labels, some (including knowledgeable participants) were keen to share and learn new tips about laundry care. When sharing who they looked to for laundry care advice, many participants referred to maternal figures in their life and videos on social media. Some participants shared a need for more laundry care tips online. Common actions included washing at 30 degrees, ditching the tumble drier, and removing stains by hand.

“You can buy clothes so cheaply now. There’s no way I’d be bothered getting anything mended - I’d just buy another one.”

Female, 55-64

23 ‘Worn out: Is price an accurate indicator of clothing durability’ (Hubbub, 2023)

24 Hubbub polling - 3,000 people, nationally representative of the UK, April 2024

Table 8: Views on clothing policies

See appendix 19 and 20 for a breakdown of household support for various policies before and after taking part in Home Advantage.

Policy suggestion

clearer labelling on clothes on how to wash, repair and care for them

Overall sentiment from participants

Positive

Popularity (from final survey of 175 participants and discussion)

76% (133) supported it.

More popular policies

Accessible and affordable rental models for clothing

Neutral

Adding a small tax for any fast fashion clothing purchases Divisive

42% (74) supported it, 39% (69) knew of this policy and didn’t have an opinion either way

35% (61) supported it, 33% (58) didn’t support this policy, and 23% (40) knew of this policy and didn’t have an opinion either way

Policy recommendation

Households shared that when looking to change their behaviours around clothing, they were faced with systemic barriers including how clothing was advertised, the materials and methods of clothing production, and the durability of clothing items. Participants saw a clear role for policy changes to help create necessary systems change beyond their own actions.

Introduce legislation to help create a circular fashion economy

• Supporting the industry call to introduce an intelligent Extended Producer Responsibility scheme for fashion and textiles to incentivise, penalise and use the fees generated to develop a more circular economy in the sector.

• create an industry-wide standard to test and measure durability that all fashion brands and retailers can follow. This will help customers understand durability and support them to make informed choices when buying clothes.

Electronics

What we learnt

• People were shocked at how many electrical items they had at home— People had between 45-150 items, with many forgotten electrical products coming from hobbies, including DIY, cooking, gaming, music, and beauty.

• Households keep working and nonworking phones and laptops they no longer need—Reasons included not knowing how or where to recycle them, needing old photos and documents from their old devices, or keeping them lying around in case their current devices stop working.

• People are willing to buy refurbished phones—33% (135) of people had purchased a refurbished phone, with younger participants (aged 25-34) being more likely to have bought one compared to those over 65. Motivation to buy a refurbished phone was primarily the lower cost and for some the ability to purchase higher-end models.

• Barriers to buying refurbished focused on reliability and trust—Some feared items may have a reduced lifespan, or shorter warranty, while some perceived refurbished as ‘second best’, inherently disliking the idea that it might have been used by someone else.

• Some parents are choosing refurbished phones for their kids—Despite the demand from children for the latest phone due to peer pressure, the cheaper cost meant parents were willing to give refurbished phones a try. However, many highlighted concerns around the safety of second-hand electronics and data security.

People were more positive about buying refurbished electronics if they were framed as being “like new”.

68% (105) of 154 participants voted for this phrasing, over ‘refurbished’ (25%) or ‘pre-loved’ (8%) due to the sense of reliability it instilled.

“My last 3 ‘recent releases’ phones were all refurbished. Due to heavily reduced price (over its new equivalent) I bought them all outright.”

Male, 55-64

“Refurbished to me sounds like something that was previously broken and fixed. I chose ‘like new’ because it sounds like it’s in a new condition.”

Female, 55-64

Table 9: Views on electronic policies

See appendix 19 and 20 for a breakdown of household support for various policies before and after taking part in Home Advantage.

Policy suggestion

Right to Repair – improved consumer rights to be able to repair items

Extended Producer Responsibility - holding manufacturers and producers responsible for funding and possibly arranging end of life treatment of products

Overall sentiment from participants

Popularity (from final survey of 175 participants and discussion)

Positive 71% (124) supported it.

More popular policies

Positive 63% (111) supported it.

Policy recommendation

Participants expressed a need for trust in the electronic items they buy, knowing that they will last a long time, and that there’s an opportunity to repair them if the need arises. Participants saw a clear role for policy to hold businesses accountable for the items they produce and what happens to them at end of life.

Introduce legislation to tackle e-waste by enabling more repair and reuse

• Reforming Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) to include electronics waste and introducing a real ‘right to repair’ for electronics.

• Introduce legislation to standardise data security protocols for donated and refurbished devices.

Homeware

What we learnt

• Most households have a low proportion of second-hand homeware—Based on a survey of 114 participants, the average home was made up of just 20% second-hand homeware items.

• concerns around trust and accessibility can impact online second-hand purchases—Some people were put off buying online from sites like eBay, Gumtree or Freegle due to concerns about data and security when picking up items, concerns that items won’t match the description and the cost of needing a vehicle to collect items.

• People are less likely to buy items second-hand that are considered more ‘intimate’—Concerns about hygiene, cleanliness, reliability and the thought of people having used the item before put people off buying second-hand, with people saying they wouldn’t buy pre-loved mattresses, bedding, white goods and cutlery.

“I don’t buy some stuff second hand due to the ick factor. The fact someone else has used it before. For homeware stuff it’s a mental hang up for me.”

Male, 35-44

• There’s support for a sharing economy—Despite there being low awareness of sharing models at the start of the project, once informed people were very supportive, both about the concept and the idea of visiting one themselves. Lesser-used DIY equipment were the most popular items people would rent, motivated by lack of storage space and costeffectiveness per use. Barriers to rental included the extra admin and time spent travelling to rent it and drop it off, and a preference to borrow items from people they know.

“I hadn’t heard of this, but that’s a brilliant idea. I would definitely use it for items like tall ladders which we don’t own.”

Male, 45-54

“Does look a worthwhile idea, but not something I would go for. Would be wary of the collection and returns process.”

Male, 55-64

Table 10: Views on homeware policies

See appendix 19 and 20 for a breakdown of household support for various policies before and after taking part in Home Advantage.

Policy suggestion

clear product labelling on how to repair items and help them last longer

Support Repair cafes – community hubs where local volunteers can repair your everyday items for free

community sharing hubs – for example Library of Things where you can rent everyday items such as DIy tools, for a small fee instead of buying them

Overall sentiment from participants

Popularity (from final survey of 175 participants and discussion)

Positive 76% (133) supported it.

Positive 75% (131) supported it.

More popular policies

Positive 70% (122) supported it.

Policy recommendation

Households expressed support for replicable models that can give them more options of how they can share and repair homeware items, not only to help them save money and storage space but build community resilience.

Support the local sharing economy

Provide designated funding for communities to set up and maintain schemes to enable a local sharing and repairing economy, including repair cafes, Library of Things, and local community sharing hubs.

Conclusion and what’s next

This research project has demonstrated that UK households are willing to embrace sustainable living, but they require the right support to overcome financial, structural, and awareness or communication barriers. While most participants were open to making changes, confusion about the most impactful actions, affordability concerns, and low trust in key institutions remain significant challenges. However, the findings highlight the potential for a shift in behaviour when households are given clear, accessible information, inspiring narratives, and a sense of shared responsibility. It highlights the need for businesses, government, and other organisations to work together in providing the tools, incentives, and messaging that make sustainable choices both easy and desirable.

To drive meaningful change, we need a bold rethinking of how sustainability is communicated, ensuring that campaigns are framed around co-benefits such as cost savings, convenience, and improved quality of life. Businesses have a key role

in shaping choice environments, while government action must provide structural support and clarity on policies. Crucially, engagement efforts must be ambitious, relatable, and trust-driven, ensuring that households feel empowered rather than imposed upon. By addressing these barriers with targeted interventions, we can unlock the potential of households to contribute to a net zero future, making sustainable living the norm rather than the exception.

We hope some of the findings, insight and recommendations from this report can help business, government and NGOs better support households to contribute towards net zero.

If you’d like to discuss any of the findings in this report, or work with us on the solutions, contact Hubbub at: homeadvantage@hubbub.org.uk

“By building energy efficient new homes and nature-rich places, we are determined to play our part in making sustainable living a reality for our customers. As we transition to building new homes that are heated by electricity, this report strongly makes the case for industry and government to communicate the benefits of a sustainable lifestyle more clearly and to encourage choices that are good for the consumer’s pocket as well as the planet.”

Sarah Pratt, Acting Group Sustainability Director, Barratt Redrow

“We welcome the findings of the research that shows a willingness by consumers to do more to make their homes more sustainable and identifies the most effective ways for Government and business to help households to make more sustainable choices for their homes.

There’s a clear need for certainty and consistency in giving homeowners a roadmap of home efficiency measures, along with simplicity in communication to build trust and drive action, and financial incentives to overcome cost barriers, such as those for home energy improvements.

What is also clear is the need for a holistic and integrated approach. For example, simplifying EPC certificates to make them more practical and understandable would help households choose appropriate home energy improvements, which in turn would drive greater demand for skilled and trusted tradespeople, who are already in short supply in the UK.”

Joanna Gluzman, Director of Sustainability & Quality, B&Q

“We were delighted to support Home Advantage as part of our wider partnership with Hubbub, to gain a more detailed sense of how the UK public perceives sustainability and what policy makers and businesses like ours can do to help them. It’s incredibly useful to have this in depth understanding to inform our future campaigns, grounded in the realities experienced by households.”

Aoife Harrison, Senior Manager, Sustainability & Social Impact, Starbucks UK

“TSB got involved in Home Advantage project because we want to do everything, we can to help our customers live in a cosy low carbon home. This research gave us the opportunity to hear first-hand from households about the challenges they face in making their homes more sustainable, and we will use this insight to help us design and develop products and services that help our customers make their homes more energy efficient.”

Kirstie Ross, Sustainability Lead, TSB

“Responding to climate change has been a key part of Unilever’s sustainability agenda over the past two decades, where we have reduced greenhouse gas emissions in our operations by 74% since 2015. However, with around 98% of our value chain emissions occurring up or downstream of our operations, we know we cannot achieve our targets alone and need to work closely with regulators, policymakers, retailers and consumers. So, we were pleased to support Hubbub’s Home Advantage project to better understand what support and action is needed from business and government to help UK households on their journey towards net zero.

We’ll be looking at the report findings to consider how we can further support simple actions at home, such as encouraging low temperature washes on the very shortest, energy-saving wash cycles, where our latest innovation, Persil Wonder Wash, has been designed specifically to get clothes clean in just fifteen minutes.”

Helen Fenwick, Corporate Affairs and Sustainability lead, Unilever UK & Ireland

“This important research demonstrates how consumers need more help in knowing what to do with the huge amount of unwanted tech that’s lying around their homes, as well as the reassurance their data and personal information will be secure if they decide to donate or recycle their device. That’s why we’re committed to doing even more to support consumers to make sustainable choices through our industry-leading programmes. Whether that’s offering a comprehensive range of ‘Like New’ refurbished devices, our O2 Recycle service which wipes and refurbishes or recycles unwanted tech, or our Community Calling programme with Hubbub, which rehomes donated smartphones with people in need, we’ll continue to play a role in helping consumers take steps to tackle e-waste and to help drive the circular economy.”

Rob McCann, Head of Environment, Climate and Nature, Virgin Media O2

Thank you

Thank you to the businesses who supported Home Advantage project with funding and shared subject matter expertise, advice and insights from their sector, enabling the project to happen: Barratt Redrow PLC, B&Q, TSB, Starbucks UK, Unilever UK and Virgin Media O2.

Thank you to the following organisations for inputting support and guidance on specific topic areas: Energy Saving Trust, NESTA and WRAP. And to Jenny Kedros (Kedros Consulting Ltd) for advising on the measurement and evaluation of the project.

Thank you to the 175 households who committed to share their views and engage in the project.