Home improvements in later life: competing policy goals and the practices of older Dutch homeowners

Abstract

Dutch policy-making has been framed by simultaneous efforts aimed at reforming the social care system and initiating an ambitious sustainable retrofitting programme of housing. In these processes, the willingness and ability of older people, living in owner-occupied housing, to adapt and improve their home or move to a suitable dwelling are crucial. However, our understanding of how and why older people undertake home improvements, and how these practices intersect with policy agendas is still limited. In this paper we draw on a qualitative study with 33 older Dutch homeowner households, to understand how older people conceive home improvements and investments, and their motivations for pursuing them (or not). We find that home improvement as well as moves through and into homeownership are usually deeply connected with ideas of a good life. That may involve adapting to decreasing mobility and cognitive functions, closer relations with children and grandchildren, traveling and hobbies, comfort, and even luxury. However, these practices often lack the coherence implied by policymakers and include intricate considerations of physical, mental, social, and financial well-being.

Keywords:

• Aging
• climate adaptation
• homeownership
• renovations
• wellbeing

Introduction

Adapting to climate change in aging societies is a challenge for many high-income countries (Pillemer et al., 2011; Phillipson, 2015). However, the policy agendas targeting these two domains have largely remained detached from each other. In the Netherlands, securing the long-term viability of welfare safety nets by reforming long-term and social care has been the chief policy effort in tackling population aging. Aging-in-place in one’s own home and continued independence of older people until advanced ages has been at the heart of these reforms in the past two decades, similar to other European countries (Ilinca et al., 2015; Martens, 2018; Mot et al., 2012). The share of households aged over 75 who opted for residential care environments declined from 25% in the 1970s to 8% in 2017 (Daalhuizen et al., 2019), and is projected to keep declining. Consequently, an increasing share of older homeowners needs to take active responsibility for aging at home. Meanwhile, an ambitious renovation programme (the Building Agenda), seeking to make the residential sector energy neutral, has formed the core of climate change policy in the building sector. Through the Climate Agreement (Ministry of Economy and Climate, 2019), this agenda aims to drastically reduce CO₂ emissions by decoupling the residential built environment from the gas-based heating system. This implies that more than 1 million homes currently owned by people over 65 (WoON, 2018) need to be renovated to various degrees in the upcoming decades, to which homes of people that will turn 65 in the meantime will be added. Thus, these policy goals have come to frame everyday practices and housing decisions among older homeowners, whether older homeowners are aware of these goals or not. Making homes more suitable for independent aging (to match welfare goals) as well as increasing their energy performance (to match climate adaptation goals) both fall to the homeowner and assume that older homeowners will participate and spend personal funds to improve their dwellings. Despite these simultaneous claims on the ways older adults renovate and (dis) invest in their homes, it remains far from obvious if older adults are willing and/or able to shoulder these responsibilities.

Research tackling the nexus of homeownership, old age and climate adaptation has developed in complementary yet separate fields. Thus, there is a rich body of literature on homeownership and housing wealth in old age (Dewilde & Ronald, 2017; Doling & Elsinga, 2012; Doling & Ronald, 2010; Jones et al., 2012; Overton & O’Mahony, 2017; Toussaint, 2011; Toussaint & Elsinga, 2010), another on aging-in-place and home adaptations (Bigonnesse & Chaudhury, 2019; Hwang et al., 2011; Kendig et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2017; Park et al., 2017), and yet another on homeownership and energy efficient renovation practices (Ebrahimigharehbaghi et al., 2019; Judson & Maller, 2014; Kieft et al., 2020; Wilson et al., 2015). Housing wealth accumulated in mortgage-free owner-occupied homes has become key to sustaining financial wellbeing and health in old age (Müller, 2019). Hence, acquiring housing wealth, and releasing equity to pay for care or sustain consumption have come to be considered desirable practices for old age planning, despite evidence that older people rarely view their homes as liquid assets (O’Mahony & Overton, 2017). Meanwhile, zooming into the home environment and its adaptation to decreasing capabilities in old age, literature from the field of environmental gerontology has identified the importance of owning a home to subjective well-being (e.g., Hwang et al., 2011). Pursuing home modifications has been shown to increase satisfaction with the home (Lee et al., 2017) and improve an older person’s sense of control over their surroundings making the home more meaningful and useful. Finally, focusing on energy efficiency, researchers found that homeowners rarely pursue energy efficient renovations in a concerted manner (Wilson et al., 2015; Abreu, Oliveira & Lopes, 2018). Despite proven benefits from improved thermal comfort and lower energy bills especially among older adults (Ahrentzen et al., 2016) multifaceted considerations regarding desired lifestyles and household relations, budget constraints, and knowledge (Broers et al., 2019) usually determine which sustainable renovations are pursued, when, and in what way.

In this paper we bridge these bodies of research, recognising policy agendas that bring together concerns for the future welfare of aging populations and the sustainability of the built environment. We draw on an original data-set of 33 qualitative interviews with older people aged between 55 and 90 to answer the following questions: How do older home owners improve and invest in their homes with a view to aging in them? In what ways do they consider investments in energy efficiency and aging-in-place? How do these practices support or not policy goals? We argue that, while concern for physical, mental, social, and financial well-being in old age is high among this sample of Dutch older people, they rarely pursue home improvements and housing investments in a coherent manner in line with policy goals. Moreover, there are significant differences in the strategies that older households adopt in relation to aging-in-place, from passive adaptation to the aging process to active planning for financial security, implementation of home improvements, moving to suitable and more energy efficient homes. Finally, only a small minority of people have a preoccupation for home energy efficiency as part of old age planning, despite high awareness of climate change concerns. These points to a large discrepancy between what the envisioned commitments of homeowners should be in the Dutch sustainability agenda, and the actual willingness and ability of older homeowners to pursue energy efficient home improvements. The aim of the paper is not to evaluate the effectiveness of aging-in-place and energy transition policy in the Netherlands, but to challenge the premises of these reforms by confronting them with the actual practices of older homeowners.

The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. The following two sections will frame our study by further detailing the homeownership, old age, sustainable renovation nexus, and defining aging-in-place and the pursuit of well-being in this context. Then we will introduce the Dutch policy context, and the study design. In the findings section we will present three approaches to aging-in-place, home improvements and investments, and delve deeper into the holistic considerations of physical, mental, social and financial well-being that underscore the different approaches. The discussion will further reflect on the implications of the study for the field of housing and for public policy that increasingly must cross established boundaries between housing, care, and energy.

Aging-in-place, homeownership and home improvements

Aging-in-place has become the dominant approach of welfare policies targeting aging populations in many European societies, implying greater responsibility for planning for and care in old age passing into the hands of the older persons themselves. Despite its widespread adoption, however, there remains considerable ambiguity as to what exactly aging-in-place refers to. Martens (2018) rightly points out that the ‘place’ of aging-in-place can mean different things to different people and policy agendas. Two main distinctions can be made between aging-in-place at home—which implies that older persons continue living in the same house in which they lived the majority of their adult life, with modifications, adaptations, and a social care support network (Callahan, 1992)—and aging-in-place in a home—which points to a move to some form of assisted living that enables the older person to continue living independently while receiving care according to need (see Campbell, 2015). The first form of aging-in-place is, arguably, the kind that is implied by policies stressing the wish of older people to live in their own homes for as long as possible. However, aging-in-place at home implies a growing set of responsibilities for the older person, such as maintaining and adapting the home to changing needs and standards, nurturing and maintaining a caring social network, and actively seeking care services available in the neighbourhood (Vasunilashorn et al., 2012). It also comes with important drawbacks, particularly if the house is ill-suited to adapt to decreasing mobility, cognitive impairments, or chronic conditions, or if it is situated in a living environment with poor access to formal and informal care services (Daalhuizen et al., 2019).

Aging-in-place in a house one owns comes with additional burdens on the older person, among them managing the equity and debt that comes with owning property. The need for older homeowners to consider their house as a potentially liquid source of wealth and even income is a development of the last few decades, particularly since the global financial crisis of 2008, and adds a new dimension to the reality of aging-in-place (Doling & Ronald, 2010). Studies investigating the perspective of older people aging in their owned homes found that many resisted the idea of treating their houses as a source of income (Jones et al., 2012; Toussaint, 2011), with bequest motives and precautionary saving as motivations for the resistance. When forced by circumstances to release equity, feelings of shame and lack of control were associated with the process, undermining the positive effects implied by aging-in-place at home (Overton & O’Mahony, 2017). Downsizing, however, is increasingly seen as a prerequisite to old age planning as a homeowner, with moves to suitable homes meant to counter both financial and environmental difficulties of aging in a conventional dwelling. Moving to a smaller, cheaper, and flat dwelling is thus increasingly part of the aging-in-place narrative, including in the context of Dutch policies (de Groot et al., 2019).

For those who chose to continue living in their owner-occupied houses into old age, maintaining the house and keeping up with energy performance standards can become important. Studies have found that older adults tend to divest in their homes, and face challenges due to home disrepair and the lower quality of home life particularly among low-income groups (Begley & Lambie-Hanson, 2015). Meanwhile, age appropriate adaptations and improvements, such as sleeping and bathroom quarters on the same living floor, non-step flooring, walk-in showers, but also more specific interventions such as railing, or stair-lifts, have been shown to increase the control that older people feel over their home environment (Hwang et al., 2011). Renovations and improvements that tackle thermal comfort and energy efficiency of buildings can both improve the overall health and sense of physical well-being among older adults with declining health (see van Hoof et al., 2010) and contribute to financial wellbeing by reducing energy costs. Nevertheless, research into the energy efficient renovation practices of homeowners shows that both a gap in knowledge about appropriate interventions (Broers et al., 2019) and the enmeshing of energy efficient renovations in wider home-making considerations usually hinder the process (Galvin & Sunikka-Blank, 2014; Risholt & Berker, 2013).

Aging-in-place, homemaking and wellbeing

The idealisation of aging-in-place, and its adoption as a policy direction in many European countries, is associated with the belief that older people prefer to live in their well-known home environments, mostly due to emotional attachment (Golant, 2018). Studies point to older people being more reluctant to move (Abramsson & Andersson, 2012), and increasingly centring their lives on the home as they age, in a process of centralisation (Rubinstein & Parmellee, 1992). Hence, in the case of community dwelling older adults, the home, and proximate neighbourhood, become key places for achieving well-being in old age, as well as key targets of homemaking practices. Two dominant perspectives exist regarding the relationship between aging and homemaking. The environmental gerontology perspective focuses predominantly on the fit between the home environment and the aging body, or the person-environment fit. Thus, early research into the field has coined the term environmental docility to explain the tendency of older adults to adapt their behavior to existing environmental conditions in their homes while cognitive and physical abilities decline (Oswald et al., 2006). Environmental proactivity on the other hand sees older adults as able to influence their environment, through renovations and adaptations, in order to make it fit declining abilities and to enable the enjoyment of environmental richness (Lawton, 1989; Rowles, 2017). A focus on person-environment fit in relation to home improvements and adaptations draws attention to the agency of the person in pursuing physical and mental well-being through homemaking practices that enhance their sense of competence and independence (Oswald et al., 2006).

The second perspective, stemming from the field of geography, has focused on the home as a place of belonging and attachment (Rowles, 2006, 2017). While emphasising the process of turning a space into a place, a house into a home, this perspective has focused on everyday routines in familiar environments, home adaptations that enhance social connections (such as lower window sills), and a sense of place, permanence and memory (such as displays of photos and memorabilia). It is also in this tradition that studies emphasise the reasons for older people to move, in the form of dissatisfaction with home and neighbourhood (Hillcoat-Nallétamby & Ogg, 2014). The geographical perspective has expanded the scope of home outside the house, showing that homemaking covers daily routines within familiar neighbourhood settings (Rowles & Bernard, 2013). Belonging, emotional and social well-being are, therefore, directly tied to the ability of older people to continue living in the same neighbourhood as they age, even if they may have to move house. Proximity to family, and social ties developed over the life-course, as well as the ability to continue engaging in familiar rituals and activities are particularly important to the ability of people to age in place (Wiles & Andrews, 2020).

Thus, homemaking in old age is a process that involves the physical retrofitting of the home (or alternatively a move to a suitable home) to match physical and cognitive competence, the progressive adaptation of the home environment by acts such as arranging furniture and repurposing spaces, as well as the maintenance of routines, connections, and social relations in the home and the neighbourhood. All these aspects impact the general well-being of older homeowners, and their ability to age in place. Therefore, considerations over these aspects are expected to mould home improvement and investment practices in this period of life. However, it remains to be seen whether there is any alignment between these considerations, and aging and environmental policies that depend on homeowners pursuing home improvements and investments for their successful implementation.

The Dutch context

For this study two recently implemented policies are relevant: the reform of the organisation of long-term elderly care, and the Climate Agreement. Both have an impact on the daily lives of the elderly and compete for their scarce financial and personal resources. Nonetheless, in neither case have policy makers given any thought to the integral implications of these policies in general, or for older people, in particular.

First, the reform of long-term care in 2015 residualises institutionalised housing with care facilities and contains two important elements: (i) decentralisation of authority and financial responsibility to municipalities and health care insurance companies, and (ii) strong budget cuts. The general idea behind the decentralisation of authority in the care for the elderly is the assumption that local government and health care insurance companies can organise appropriate care and support for elderly better than central government. In this reform one national act was replaced with two acts: one mainly aimed at supporting people in living independently for which the municipality is financially responsible, and one aimed at care, for which health care insurance companies are responsible. The decentralisation therefore created an incentive for municipalities and health care insurance companies to allocate costs to support or care, and pass on costs to the other party. Furthermore, decentralisation was accompanied with a reduction of annual budgets in excess of one billion euro (De Jonge, 2019).

Second, the Dutch Climate Agreement is the result of extensive consultation of over 100 stakeholders, including several governmental bodies, representatives of different industries and others. The agreement was signed in 2019 and is a pivotal part of climate policy in the Netherlands, creating a roadmap towards meeting the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement. For the built environment one of the goals is to fully abolish the use of natural gas for heating, and switch to alternative sources such as electricity and geothermal energy. Therefore, many programmes, varying from providing information to subsidisation, have been started to try and entice homeowners to improve the energy efficiency of their homes. Despite that many people endorse climate policy in general, many have proven reluctant to take measures themselves. In particular, the retrofitting of houses to accommodate alternative (low temperature) heat sources has been lagging behind the targets so far (Dutch Environmental Assessment Agency, 2020).

As noted, both policies compete for people’s scarce resources, not only financial but also cognitive. Several consecutive governments have emphasised the self-sustainability of people. In his annual address of 2013 King Willem-Alexander stated that the Netherlands needs to move away from the classical welfare state, towards a ‘participation society’. However, there are strong signals from both academia and professional worlds that the level of self-sufficiency demanded by that participation society is overwhelming, particularly in old age.

Study design

Given the aim of this study, to understand the home improvement and investment practices and considerations of older homeowners, we adopted a constructivist approach centred on the narratives and experiences our respondents. We conducted a qualitative interview study recruiting participants based on a maximum variety purposive sampling framework. We conducted 33 interviews with couples and single older adults with ages between 55 and 90. As Table 1 shows, the sample was well represented by older homeowners from different residential backgrounds, inhabiting different housing types,¹ and with different levels of income, savings and types of mortgage, accounting for a balanced set of interviews. We recruited participants from the membership of a large senior’s organisation,² by advertising the study in the organisation’s newsletter that reaches 70,000 members. Over 140 potential participants responded, out of which we selected 33 respondents that fit our sample design and ensured maximum variety of circumstances. Interviews were conducted in the period when the Dutch climate agreement was being debated, and the exact parameters of the legislation were formulated. Thus, the debate was high on the public agenda, and our respondents were very aware of it.

Table 1. Sample characteristics.

Interviews		33
Age	55–64	3
	65–74	15
	75+	12
Household type	Couple	21
	Single	12
Income	Low	14
	Middle	12
	High	7
Savings	Low	3
	Middle	8
	High	21
Mortgage	None	13
	Interest only	15
	Annuity	5
Location	Urban	19
	Rural-Suburban	14

Interviews were conducted face to face in the older homeowner’s home and lasted on average one hour. All interviews were conducted in Dutch. Participants were asked for a recorded verbal consent at the beginning of each interview, based on a pre-determined consent text which was read out to them. Participants received no rewards for participation. The interviews covered the following topics: a brief housing history of the respondent, including reasons for moving to current home and positive/negative characteristics of the home from the point of view of the household’s current lifestyle, past improvements and renovations, short and long term plans, as well as a specific consideration of sustainability aspects. We investigated long term plans through the use of vignettes, in which we presented the respondents with stylised stories that were then used as conversation prompters to discuss their own situation. Interviews were transcribed verbatim in the original language, coded using Dedoose (www.dedoose.com) qualitative analysis software and interpreted using a thematic analysis framework (Ritchie et al., 2013) building on the original interview guide to derive a typology of approaches. Furthermore, we use illustrative housing histories to highlight the relationships between life-course events, well-being (including financial well-being) considerations and the kind of renovation and moving decision that older homeowners make.

For this article all quotes were translated into English by a native speaker of Dutch. All names and locations are anonymised.

Planning for and adapting to aging

The life-histories of the people we interviewed were varied, as were their circumstance in old age. The interviews revealed that our respondents thought about their options in old age in very creative ways, integrating many facets of well-being into their plans. Many found the cut and dry vignettes that we presented to them too restrictive and could think of many more options that would be available to people as they age. The majority of people we interviewed were still very active and believed in ‘keeping on moving’ and participating in family and neighbourhood activities (e.g., volunteering) as almost their duty. In this sense many of them espoused the virtues of active aging (Foster & Walker, 2015).

Furthermore, a sizeable minority of the respondents engaged in active planning for later life involving investments in and/or improvements of their home. Nevertheless, approaches were quite different, and we distinguished three dominant ones in our data: (1) older adults that move to (and sometime renovate) an age friendly house in anticipation of old age; (2) older adults that incrementally improve their home with a clear view to aging well in it; (3) older adults that continue living in their family homes, but for whom the home is not a large part of old age planning. Below we discuss each of these approaches focusing on home adaptations for aging-in-place, and energy efficient renovations. Where necessary to understand the different strategies, reference is made to the financial plans of older homeowners. We illustrate each approach with one example of a life-course narrative that best represents the complicated considerations of well-being in decisions about how and when to renovate homes or simply move.

Movers

Roughly one third of our respondents had made a conscious decision in their 50 s and early 60 s to move to a home in which they planned to live in later life. Movers tended to have higher incomes and education, more frequently espousing ideas about self-sufficiency and environmental responsibility. Several respondents had bought an apartment after a career of renting, aiming to secure their shelter and assets. Nevertheless, homeownership late in life, also offered possibilities to pursue luxuries not entertained until then. One example is a single women who bought her first apartment in her 50 s when the death of her mother suddenly awakened a consciousness of her own anticipated frailty. She describes the process of buying her apartment both as a pragmatic decision toward a more comfortable and secure old age, and as an opportunity to acquire state-of-the-art bathroom and kitchen appliances as well as designing a hobby room and purchasing expensive furniture and decorations.

Most movers, though, downsized to a smaller owner-occupied dwelling after having sold their family home. Many, sought homes that were either purposefully built for aging, including features such as non-step floors, larger doorways, walk-in showers, or an electric kitchen stoves, or otherwise sought homes that could (easily) be refurbished. A few also considered environmental aspects, and purchased higher energy label homes, or pursued extensive renovations in their newly purchased homes to make them energy efficient. However, in some cases, due to the quick pace of change in environmental policy and standards they found that their efforts were not keeping up with the pace of change. An example is Mrs. Noord, a single woman in her late 60 s who had purchased a high-energy label new built apartment in 2016, downsizing from a larger family home. At the time of the interview, two years later, the building where she had moved was already not conforming with the latest trends discussed in policy circles where heat pumps for hot-cold exchange were becoming the energy system of choice. Mrs. Noord’s concerns and considerations mirror many others of our respondents who had given thought to sustainability, but found that technological change far outpaced the rhythm with which new technologies were implemented in homes:

Well, I do want a heat pump. But that is twenty thousand euros, so I need to think it over a bit, if I can do that at my age—if that is the only way… but there are definitely more possibilities there. But that is purely my interest, you see. And if the homeowners association says in 5 years ‘we are installing heat pumps everywhere’ then they can count me in, and if they say that in one year I will also join. But yeah, of course everything is still new. The boiler and all are new, so what should we do? Shall we say away with this boiler? In with the new heat pump? [implying that would also not be sustainable]

Furthermore, moving not too far from their original neighbourhood and therefore being able to keep up the same daily routines (Willes & Andrews, 2020) was highly valued. Mrs. Noord again is a good example here, having moved no more than a few hundred metres from her old house so as to be able to continue with her volunteering activities for the neighbourhood association, for which she delivered newsletters. For most, finding an apartment close to their old family home was not problematic, but for some, especially if they lived in somewhat mono-functional suburban environments, the search for a suitable apartment could be a source of struggle.

To illustrate how concerns for shoring up assets, (re) making home in old age and following through on sustainability and energy efficiency concerns come into play in the context of life-course transitions, below we present the story of the Kroon family. It shows how events such as divorce and remarriage, but also the receipt of inheritance in old age, intersect with housing decisions to move and renovate.

Mr. and Mrs. Kroon were a reconstituted family in their early 60s at the time of the interview. They both had been married before and both have children. They bought and fully renovated the house they currently live in 10 years prior to the interview, just as the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 was starting. They both sold their previous houses and saw in the purchase of this house the chance to consolidate their newly formed family. The house is located on the outskirts of the mid-sized city where they had lived their adult life, and it is a stand-alone house on a beautiful plot with an open view over the countryside. It was built in the 1960s and had never been renovated before the Kroons bought it. So, upon purchase they stripped the inside, and remodeled it according to their ideas. They changed the roof, replaced all windows and doors, made the ground floor an open living-dining-kitchen space, and organised two adjacent working rooms for each of them, that could later be redone into an en suite bedroom on the ground floor. In 2018, at the time of the interview, however, they had just completed a new round of renovations, this time making their house entirely energy neutral. They installed solar panels and a heat-pump, insulated walls and roof again, and reconsidered the entire ventilation system of the house. Achieving a pleasant and comfortable home environment that would let them enjoy their home well into old age was the first stated motive for these extensive renovations. However, what was noticeable was the pride of being the first house in the area to sever their gas connection and become fully independent. The fact that the Kroons had the means to undergo the renovations, due primarily to an inheritance, was well recognised, as were the investment considerations that went into the decision making. About the time when they had decided to do the works, a rumour spread that a new development was planned that was going to block the open view of the house. Since the Kroons considered that open view to make the value of the house, it was only after the rumour was disproved that they went ahead with their plans.

Planning for aging had an implicit character in the example of the Kroons, with improvements directly related to aging-in-place intermingled with other considerations about making home, comfort, and making good investments. Energy efficiency was an add-on possible due to an unexpected windfall in the form of inheritance and seen both as a status symbol and a manifestation of a sense of environmental responsibility.

Improvers

A quarter of our respondents were people aging in the same homes where they had raised children, and expending considerable time, effort and money on improving and adapting these dwelling with a view to aging well in them. In our sample, these improvers were usually middle or higher income, but did not always have high levels of savings. It was also among this group that we found many people in possession of an interest only mortgage,³ so their financial planning for later life involved extensive negotiations with mortgage lenders, to secure reasonable mortgage repayment rates into the future. Regarding home renovations aimed at aging-in-place, some improvers conducted one major renovation on their house in their late 50 and early 60 s, including general age-proofing as well as some remodeling of bathrooms and kitchens. In most cases, however, improvements happened incrementally and continued until people were well into the 70 s, particularly when they depended on the availability of mortgage finance or renovation loans. Extensive home adaptations and improvements included building an extension or fully remodeling of the ground floor to allow bedroom and bathroom on the same level. Those few that did pursue investments in energy performance acknowledged that they were the exception, and that the fact that they had the means to do it played an important role in their decision making. A strong environmental awareness and belief in their responsibility to reduce energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions animated those that chose these renovations, as previous studies show (Broers et al., 2019).

To illustrate the ways in which life-course transitions, considerations about aging-in-place, individual and family well-being blend in decisions to stay in place and renovate, the example of Mrs. Maartens is particularly telling:

Mrs. Maartens is a widow in her early 70s, living in an urban benedenwoning⁴ and owning the entire building. Mrs. Maartens and her family moved into the upper apartment (bovenwoning) of the building some 40 years earlier. At the time they were renting. However, as the rent kept getting higher and at one point the owner put the entire building on sale, the Maartens and their neighbours downstairs discussed whether they should buy the property. The neighbours could not to get a mortgage at the time, but they did not mind paying rent, so the Maartens bought the entire building. Some years later, the neighbours decided to move out, and, not being comfortable becoming landlord to unknown people, the Maartens decided to offer the downstairs apartment to Mr. Maartens’ mother, who had recently been widowed. In this format, the extended family occupied the building for 20 years until Mrs. Maartens’ mother-in-law died in 2007. At this point the Maartens’ children were adults, so they decided that the older generation was going to move downstairs while one of their adult children would live independently upstairs. They fully stripped and renovated the downstairs house to fit their needs at that moment. Mrs. and Mr. Maartens put a lot of thought into age proofing the house, removing the steps and thresholds, installing a shower on the ground floor, straightening the staircase to allow a lift if necessary. About 3 years after these renovations Mr. Maartens became very ill, and he died after half a year of being bedridden. The renovations helped immensely in adapting their lifestyle for this unforeseen situation. The husband slept on the ground floor and did not need to go up and down stairs. He used the shower and toilet on the ground floor and could enjoy a bit of the view of the garden while lying in bed. Mrs. Maartens recounts:

We had looked at making the house age proof, and that became a necessity for my husband much sooner than we expected. He died six and a half years ago and was sick for one and a half years. We completed the renovations in 2007 and very quickly in 2010 we found out he was very sick. The last half a year he was bedridden and spent most of his time in this room. And then I was so incredibly happy that we were in the downstairs apartment… the circumstances [we created with the renovations] were ideal for him. And that we had not predicted, maybe when we were 80 or 90, but he needed it much sooner.

Questioned about the likelihood that she might invest in energy efficient retrofits, Mrs. Maartens had a very straightforward and pragmatic view. She saw the energy and money they had already invested in the house in her life as enough, at this point it was her time to just sit back and enjoy.

Mrs. Maartens’ story illustrates how renovations and improvements in the home happen at certain key moments when circumstances align to make them possible and desirable. Like many others of our respondents, the Maartens were much more aware and thoughtful of the need for age proofing than the need for energy proofing. And though a basic level of investments in energy efficiency had gone into the house, Mrs. Maartens’ view on ‘having done enough’ was mirrored in many of our respondents’ attitudes toward energy efficient renovations especially after a certain age.

Amenders and adapters

The remainder of our respondents was aging in the same homes in which they had lived as adults. For these older people planning for old age was incremental, and the home was not prominent in these plans. Among those with higher levels of income and savings, precautionary saving was a clear strategy (Toussaint & Elsinga, 2010) ensuring that even when they had not invested in adaptations for aging-in-place they could do so if necessary. A lifestyle that included long periods of traveling abroad throughout the year, or a second home abroad was common among middle and higher income respondents. When adaptations were pursued in the home they were usually small, such as replacing grass with tiles to reduce the need for mowing, moving the washing machine from the attic to the ground floor, reducing the use of upper floors of homes by redecorating a ground floor study into a bedroom, or installing a wall-shower in their ground floor toilet.

Among those with a lower income and level of savings, planning for financial wellbeing, including resolving issues with interest only mortgages, was the most important preoccupation related to their owner-occupied home. Adaptations aimed at supporting aging-in-place or energy performance were rare and haphazard. Especially for those older adults who were single and had experienced life-course shocks such as divorce, a tendency toward centralisation and environmental docility (Oswald et al., 2006) was evident, with older persons seeking ways to adapt their behaviour to declining abilities while at the same time reducing the scope of their everyday life to the home and immediate neighbourhood. Practices such as washing in a washbasin so as to not have to go up the stairs or moving their bed into the living room were pursued as people advanced in age, while their home environments could at times be far from the standards of design and functionality suitable for aging.

Amenders and adapters rarely pursued investments aimed at energy performance or thermal comfort, and some clearly did not view this as something they were willing or able to pursue. As the largest group among our respondents, their views are representative of the kind of hurdles that policies aimed particularly at climate adaptation face in their implementation. Some voiced an ideologically framed resistance and a belief that responsibilities for the energy transition of the built environment rested with the government suggesting that assumptions about the willingness of older adults to invest in energy efficiency may be misplaced. For others a lack of knowledge and awareness was evident. Even when ideas regarding energy efficiency and the transition toward an energy neutral residential built environment were at the forefront of people’s minds, not having the means to pursue the extensive renovations needed hindered plans. One example of this latter situation is Mr. Beekman, a former worker for the Dutch Railways currently in his late 60 s, living together with his wife in a small town:

I find it an important point, [energy efficiency]. I am considering whether to install solar panels. That is one. And further is the thing that we have an air heating system in the house. I am a bit technical myself, so I find this interesting. I have seen already, it is easy to insert an incandescent spiral in the system and make it electric. And then if I buy a separate boiler I have hot water for the shower. We are only two now so we don’t need such a big boiler. And these are the kind of plans that play out in my head. Then I think we can make this almost energy neutral.

I also find it important that the municipality where we live is committed to energy neutrality. Here close by there is a group of houses that are part of a pilot. Those houses are energy neutral. There is also a heat pump installed in one of them. And you can visit the houses one day per month during an open day. This is very interesting. Because I think that the Netherlands should head in that direction, toward energy neutrality and sustainability. But I also find it a bit exaggerated and too expensive … to say that heat pump costs between eight and fifteen thousand euros.

Mr. Beekman’s commitment to the idea of energy neutrality and sustainability is evident in this quote, as is his position on the financial feasibility of the renovations implied. Moreover, the life history of Mr. and Mrs. Beekman is in fact illustrative of the kind of considerations about aging-in-place and home renovations that were common among amenders and adapters. These involved a more incremental approach, centred on more immediate ideas of enjoyment and connection with family. The story also points to old age being much less of a clear transition in people’s life, as something that just happens, and requires after the fact adaptations.

Mr. Beekman retired but keeps working on the side, Mrs. Beekman is also working as a cashier still. Before 2008, they were entrepreneurs owning a small wooden toys factory that did not survive the crisis. They live in a small suburban family house that they bought when they were young, to raise their children in a green environment. They bought the house with an interest-only mortgage in the late 1980s and 30 years later their mortgage came to maturity in a very different economic climate. Mr. Beekman was very proud that when the term of the mortgage expired he was able to renegotiate the mortgage conditions securing their ability to continue living in their house for the next 20 years. When it comes to renovations and improvements, the Beekmans had made many alterations to their house, but none of them with the specific goal of enabling aging or improving the energy performance of the house. They had installed a fancy kitchen because cooking was Mr. Beekman’s hobby. They had renovated the bathroom from a shower to a bath so their grandchildren would come over and use it. In Mr. Beekman’s own words they did a lot of ‘luxury investments’ in their house, things that increased their ability to enjoy their house in the short run with their family, but may have in fact undermined their ability to age in place. They were only now starting to think that they were getting older, and perhaps some things should be done on the house. However, when pressed to think about it, Mr. Beekman mentioned primarily adaptations in behaviour rather than investments in the house. Despite shortcomings, Mr. Beekman was also not considering moving. Like other interviewees, the Beekmans valued their neighbourhood environment, their daily routines and the company of neighbours, and Mr. Beekman clearly saw moving to a more suitable house as a condition of last resort in very old age.

Home renovations in later life from a holistic perspective

Having analysed the different practices and approaches to aging and home investments among homeowners in our sample in relation to the two policy goals of aging-in-place and increasing energy performance of residential buildings, what became clear was that the pursuit of home improvements among older homeowners was poorly aligned with policy goals. Especially the pursuit of energy performance renovations was something that most homeowners we interviewed either did not feel able to do or were unwilling to pursue (almost regardless of incentives). It was also clear that many older adults did pursue home improvements and investments as part of the process of preparing for old age, and while aging. However, improvements and investments had a lot more to do with how our respondents perceived wellbeing throughout later life, whether physical, emotional, social or financial, and the complicated give-and-take process that pursuing ideals of a good life entailed.

The examples presented in the previous section give an account of the complex set of considerations that older homeowners make regarding home renovations, improvements and investments. Whether these refer to financial aspects, the ability to adapt to physical frailty, keeping family close, or enjoying the comfort of home and neighbourhood, it is usually a somewhat unique combination of factors that play out in each case. We argue that many of these factors have to do with older homeowners’ conceptions of the good life and well-being, given that many times they reflect preoccupations with personal comforts, family and social ties, and the ability to enjoy life in old age. However, there are also practical considerations with financial, physical, and emotional health that come into play to shape decisions and approaches. Especially among older adults that fit the mover or improver categories of our typology we observe high levels of environmental proactivity (Rowles, 2017). However, even in this sample of older adults, where self-selection might have introduced more proactive individuals than usually present in the population, the share of older adults that purposively plan for old age is only about half.

Furthermore, among those older homeowners that do demonstrate a proactive attitude toward aging by pursuing interventions meant to improve their home environments, only a small fraction see energy efficiency as a goal and worthwhile project. As pointed out by previous studies (Broers et al., 2019), these are people that have a high level of environmental awareness and knowledge, or people with a technical background and understanding of the usefulness of energy efficient renovations. In addition to the insights of studies that engage homeowners in general, a focus on older homeowners reveals that timing is an important factor to consider in the design of policy interventions. And it is difficult point to tackle in one-size-fits-all policy making. Our interviews revealed that there is a time in the life-course trajectory of older homeowners when they can no longer be convinced that doing any renovations or improvements on their home is worthwhile. This poses significant challenges to energy efficient renovation, particularly since technical solutions are improving at a rapid pace, and the current wave of the ‘great renovation’ in Dutch society asks of everyone to participate. For example, some of our respondents recounted with great satisfaction the improvements they had done on their home some 20 years ago when they were in their 50 s or early 60 s, but recognised that those improvements that were the state-of-the art at the time fall short of current standards. Others recognised the appeal of energy efficiency and saw great value in current efforts toward more sustainable housing but could not see themselves engaging in this type of large-scale, high-commitment renovation.

Conclusions

In this article, we explored the nexus of homeownership, aging and energy efficient home renovations and argued for a holistic view of how older adults engage in practices of home renovation, improvement and investment. Our findings demonstrate that interventions in the home are intricately tied to ideas of a good life and wellbeing, but also that homeowners differ markedly in their approaches. Active planning and intervention in the home aimed at aging-in-place was pursued by less than half of our respondents, while the inclusion of energy efficient renovations in these plans is a priority only for a small number of households. Financial resources, awareness, motivations and perceptions of urgency influence the ways in which older homeowners engage in home renovations and investments, making it a variegated field to engage in policy making. A diverse set of policy approaches is necessary to support those homeowners with a high degree of awareness and commitment to either downsize/move to more energy efficient and age proof housing, or to implement age and energy proofing interventions in cases when they want to remain in their existing home. A different set of policy approaches is needed to raise awareness among a large group of older homeowners for whom implementing home improvements both as part of aging-in-place or to match climate adaptation goals is not a priority. Clearly assumptions that older homeowners are all equally equipped to manage necessary transformations to their homes to ensure comfortable and fulfilling aging-in-place and meet climate adaptation goals are false.

Furthermore, policy makers face a genuine conundrum in activating older homeowners. Our findings show that most participants in this study refrain from investing and renovating proactively their homes when they are in their 50 s or 60 s. This is mainly due to insecurities about the need for specific renovations, and about whether investments are going to pay off in the long run. However, it was equally the case that after a certain age (usually after 75) older homeowners become much more averse to undergoing any kind of renovations and investments in their homes. Thus, while much has been made of the necessity for activate homeowners as early as possible to start planning for old age, what our findings suggest is that there is actually a quite narrow window (between late 50 s and early 70 s) when older homeowners are open and willing to engage in interventions on their home.

Given the costs of renovations and the substantial financial leveraging that older homeowners must withstand to be able to undergo them, particularly when we consider energy efficient renovations, issues of financial capability come strongly to the fore. Our findings suggest that while maintaining substantial savings is a strategy for some homeowners to withstand uncertainties related to the aging process, for those that experience both a decrease in income after retirement and low levels of savings, there are considerable difficulties in pursuing home adaptations when needed. Moreover, tapping into old age savings for energy efficient renovations was not a strategy that we encountered in our study, suggesting that when such investments are pursued they are either financed through mortgage borrowing or through other sources of finance, such as inheritance. None of these strategies are likely to be scalable to the level implied by current national policy goals. So, on the one hand, it is crucial that costs of energy and aging-in-place home investments be brought down within reach of a broader section of the population. On the other hand, it is important that policy makers realise that policies eminently relying on responsibilisation of citizens without proper public investment in the residential environment, including owner-occupied housing, have little chance of success. This is especially when they require a high degree of coordination, as in the case of nationwide energy retrofitting policies.

Acknowledgement

Our thanks go to our informants, for their time and the knowledge shared.

Disclosure statement

We report no conflict of interests in conducting this research.

Notes

1 Income levels were determined based on commonly used metrics in the Netherlands. Lower income denotes incomes below 36,000 euro taxable income, middle denotes incomes between 36,000 and 52,000 euros, and high denotes incomes over 52,000 euros. Rural-suburban category denotes small communities outside city cores.

2 ANBO (Algemene Nederlandse Bond voor Ouderen) is a large special interest group for elderly in the Netherlands and has more than 100,000 members.

3 Interest only mortgages became particularly popular in the Netherlands from the late 1980s until the financial crisis of 2008, and are nowadays approaching their maturity. Renewing these mortgages is not possible under the conditions imposed on Dutch banks following the financial crisis. A majority of older people who have contracted interest only mortgages have in time either paid back the majority of the capital, or have accumulated enough equity in their home so as to be able to strike an acceptable deal with the bank on a new mortgage. However, a recent study indicates that between 5–10 percent of Dutch older people with interest only mortgages (max 46,000 households) will likely run into difficulties regarding housing costs once their mortgages reach maturity.

4 A beneden/bovenwoning is a Dutch vernacular housing type where two dwellings are stacked on top of each other, usually with separate entrances, forming a 3–5 floor narrow building. The benedenwoning is the house occupying the bottom floors, the bovenwoning is the one occupied the top floors.