Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Energy Research and Social Science, cilt.136, 2026 (SSCI, Scopus)
Energy sufficiency has emerged as a necessary complement to efficiency improvements in residential buildings to achieve climate targets. However, when assessing the potential of demand-reducing measures, energy simulations usually do not consider differences in the receptiveness of households but assume high and uniform adoption that risks overestimating what can realistically be achieved in practice. This study examines how differences in lifestyle and acceptance constrain the realizable energy demand reduction from household-level sufficiency measures in the Swiss residential building stock. To assess the practically achievable energy saving potential of five sufficiency measures covering behavioral adaptation, technical assistance, and space use optimization, we combined building energy simulations with national household data and a nationwide survey on lifestyle preferences and behavior. Energy saving potentials were first calculated under a full-adoption assumption, representing the theoretical maximum, and then adjusted to reflect acceptability constraints derived from the survey capturing differences in willingness to adopt sufficiency measures across lifestyle types. The results show that while household-level sufficiency measures can theoretically reduce residential energy demand by up to 21% for behavioral adaptations, 32% for technical assistance, and 22% for space use optimization, realizable savings are substantially lower once acceptability is accounted for, with most measures delivering less than half of their full theoretical potential. This gap indicates that ignoring heterogeneity in lifestyle and behavioral preferences leads to a systematic overestimation of sufficiency potentials. Findings have direct implications for how sufficiency is represented in national energy models and for the prioritization of demand-side policies.