Context 155 - July 2018

14 C O N T E X T 1 5 5 : J U L Y 2 0 1 8 Put simply, people use and inhabit old buildings in different ways to new ones, and may tolerate different levels of ‘comfort’ with respect to heat- ing and light. This finding indicates the limitations of energy policies and incentives that aim to reduce con- sumption through technologies that improve efficiency. It also suggests that the ‘problem’ of energy-inefficiency in traditionally constructed buildings may be overstated by experimental efforts to assess buildings and technologies inde- pendently from how they are used in practice. This does not necessarily lend support to the ‘do-nothing’ approach, but it does underscore the importance of understanding existing prac- tices as the basis for sound intervention. A second finding is that homeowners, builders and architects come from different backgrounds, have different values, and often appreciate his- toric buildings in ways that may, or may not, coincide with how conservation professionals value these buildings. It is important for heritage professionals to understand their understandings of authenticity, character and environmental responsibility, as much as there is a need for expert-led advice and education. A third finding is that although pragmatic and financial considerations are often paramount, many occupants express a very genuine ethical desire to ‘do what is right’. However, there are many ‘single-issue messages’ and a lot of seemingly contradictory advice from agencies who respectively assume heritage and energy efficiency to be paramount concerns. Rather than assume energy as a ‘problem’ for historic buildings or vice versa (from the perspective of energy efficiency and environmental advocates), it might be more accurate to think of these as different regulatory and value systems that collide in complex and context specific ways (Pendlebury et al, 2014). Better outcomes for building and energy conservation might therefore result if these agencies and actors worked more closely, to deliver a more joined-up message, and to help people assess and strike contextual balances where genuine tensions arise. That might involve greater acknowledgement of shared interests among these parties. The heritage dogma that old buildings are sustainable seems a rather general and blunt message, even to the extent that it contains a grain of truth. It negates the fact that not all old buildings are sustainable, that an increasing number of historically significant buildings are not traditionally constructed, and unhelpfully dismisses some of the very real dilemmas and conflicts that are faced in this area. CONTEXT: More generally, what are the poten- tials or limitations of social science perspectives, and what kinds of contribution can these make to better understanding conservation issues? Heritage is about the relationship between the past, present and future, and is therefore inher- ently social. In other words, in asking and answering questions about how the past matters, we can do so only with respect to present social realities. Even while, in theory, social values have been given greater emphasis in recent approaches to heritage, social science perspectives remain relatively marginal in conservation practice. Relatively few conservation professionals have social science backgrounds, and these kinds of approach are not routinely incorporated in institutions such as Historic Environment Scotland or Historic England. This seems a missed opportunity, most obviously because assessments of the social significance of heritage are being made in the absence of the kinds of approach that can help to understand the social processes through which values are attributed. Solar photovoltaics on a traditionally constructed Cotswold house. In practice, if not in principle, the imperative to conserve energy often conflicts with the imperative to conserve historic buildings. References DeSilvey, C (2017) Curated Decay , University of Minnesota Press Fouseki, K and Cassar, M (2015) Editorial: ‘Energy efficiency in heritage buildings: future challenges and research needs’, The Historic Environment , 5 Jones, S and Yarrow, T (2013) ‘Crafting Authenticity: an ethnography of heritage conservation’, Journal of Material Culture , 18 Pendlebury, J, Hamzab, N and Shar, A (2014) ‘Conservation values, conservation-planning and climate change’, The Planning Review , 50 Yarrow, T (2016) ‘Negotiating heritage and energy: an ethnography of domestic renovation’, Historic Environment: policy and practice , 7 Yarrow, T (2017) ‘Where knowledge meets: heritage expertise at the intersection of people, perspective and place’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute , 23 Yarrow, T (2018) ‘How conservation matters: ethnographic explorations of historic building renovation’, Journal of Material Culture