UNIVERSITY OF VAASA 

 

FACULTY OF BUSINESS STUDIES 

 

DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Julia Meriläinen 

 

SAVING ENERGY TO PROTECT THE NATURE, BUT MONITORING TO 

REDUCE THE BILL 

 

Experiences from Adjutantti 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Master’s Thesis in 

Marketing Management 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VAASA 2014 



1 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS         page 

 

LIST OF FIGURES 5 

LIST OF TABLES 5 

ABSTRACT 7 

1. INTRODUCTION 9 

1.1. The purpose and objectives ................................................................................. 11 

1.2. Methodology and scope ...................................................................................... 12 

1.3. Definition of key concepts .................................................................................. 12 

1.4. Outline of the study ............................................................................................. 13 

2. SUSTAINABILITY IN HOUSEHOLD ENERGY CONSUMPTION 16 

2.1. Dimensions of sustainability ............................................................................... 17 

2.2. Sustainable consumption .................................................................................... 20 

2.2.1. Challenges of sustainable consumption ................................................... 23 

2.2.2. Grouping sustainable consumers .............................................................. 27 

2.3. Sustainable consumption in the context of household energy consumption ...... 28 

2.3.1. Challenges of sustainable energy consumption ....................................... 29 

2.3.2. Differentiating energy consumers ............................................................ 34 

2.4. Household energy consumption in Finland ........................................................ 36 

2.5. Summary ............................................................................................................. 41 

3. METHODOLOGY 44 

3.1. In-depth interview as a research method ............................................................ 45 

3.2. Introducing Adjutantti......................................................................................... 46 

3.3. Data collection .................................................................................................... 49 

3.4. Data analysis ....................................................................................................... 50 

3.5. Quality of the study ............................................................................................. 51 

4. SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION OF ADJUTANTTI RESIDENTS 54 

4.1. Personal meanings for sustainable energy consumption .................................... 56 

 

 



2 

 

 

 



3 

 

4.2. Sustainable energy consumption and reasons for it ............................................ 58 

4.2.1. Heating ..................................................................................................... 59 

4.2.2. Electricity ................................................................................................. 61 

4.2.3. Water ........................................................................................................ 65 

4.3. Other areas of sustainable consumption ............................................................. 67 

4.3.1. Food .......................................................................................................... 67 

4.3.2. Public transportation ................................................................................ 69 

4.3.3. Waste sorting ............................................................................................ 70 

4.4. New areas of sustainable consumption or just new routines? ............................ 71 

4.5. Reflecting on sustainable energy consumption .................................................. 74 

5. DISCUSSION 79 

REFERENCES 83 

 

APPENDIX 1. Interview guide             88



4 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



5 

 

LIST OF FIGURES  

 

Figure 1. Energy  sources in household energy consumption. 10 

Figure 2. Outline of the study. 15 

Figure 3. Dimensions of sustainability. 17 

Figure 4. Parties involved in sustainable consumption.  21 

Figure 5. Motivation and behavior. 24 

Figure 6. The amount of electricity used between heating and appliances. 38 

Figure 7. Electricty consumption between appliances. 40 

Figure 8. Summarizing the identified challenges and dimensions. 42 

  

LIST OF TABLES 

 

Table 1. Information of the informants.           50 

 



6 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



7 

 

______________________________________________________________________ 

UNIVERSITY OF VAASA 

Faculty of Business Studies 

Author: Julia Meriläinen     

Topic of the Thesis: Saving energy to protect the nature, but 

monitoring to reduce the bill. Experiences 

from Adjutantti 

Name of the Supervisor: Hanna Leipämaa-Leskinen  

Degree: Master of Science in Economics and Business 

Administration 

Department: Marketing     

Master’s Programme: Marketing Management   

Year of Entering the University:  2009 

Year of Completing the Thesis:   2014  Pages: 90 

 

ABSTRACT 

 

With the still increasing demand for energy, sustainability and consuming in a manner 

that supports a better quality of life but still leaves resources for the future generations 

have increased interest among private consumption. The purpose of the thesis is to 

understand the complexity of sustainable consumption in the context of household 

energy consumption. The study aims to understand the dimensions of sustainability 

relevant for this specific area of consumption. The recognized dimensions guide to 

identifying the challenges related not only to sustainable consumption in general, but 

more specifically those that make sustainable energy consuming challenging. The 

difficulties which consumers face when trying to consume energy in a sustainable way 

range from informational to social challenges.  

 

After building understanding around the challenges and the Finnish household energy 

consumption in the literacy review, the study aims to uncover what sustainable energy 

consumption means to consumers who already live in an energy efficient building in 

Adjutantti in Espoo. The study will also aim to see if the sustainable consumption of 

these residents has extended to other areas of consumption, such as food and 

transportation. This study was a qualitative research and data was collected from the 

residents by in-depth interviews to be able to answer the objectives of the study.  

 

Findings show that there were several differences between households in consuming 

and attempts to save energy, despite the enabling solutions being the same for all. The 

energy consumption is affected by both needs and wants, but this specific target group 

didn’t seem to face as many challenges as energy consumers in general. The ability to 

monitor and receive accurate information of consumption was a key motivator. Despite 

residents having many new routines after moving to Adjutantti, the study was unable to 

uncover completely new areas of sustainable consumption, as these conscious 

consumers were already considerate on several other areas of consumption as well.  

___________________________________________________________________ 

KEYWORDS: Sustainable consumption, household energy consumption, 

challenges, Adjutantti  



8 

 

 

 

 



9 

 

1. INTRODUCTION 

 

 

Environmentally and socially conscious consumption, in other words sustainable 

consumption together with green marketing has increased their interest among 

researchers, firms and policymakers. (Cherrier, Szuba & Özcaglar-Toulouse 2012: 397.)  

It has been argued that the origins of “responsibility” and “sustainability” within 

business date back hundreds of years, but the rise of the modern thinking of 

sustainability in consumption traces back to the 1960s and 1970s. When earlier the 

consumption and production patterns where associated with the health effects caused by 

industrial pollutants, the contemporary perception aims to see it in a bigger picture, 

almost as an environmental reform. Consumers are also introduced with 

environmentally friendlier lifestyles by ascribing them with responsibility and co-

responsibility with producers. (Connolly & Prothero 2008: 118.)  

 

Briefly, sustainable consumption is consuming in such a manner that present basic 

needs are fulfilled without jeopardizing the possibilities of the future generations (Dolan 

2002: 172). Public conversation has mainly focused on transportation’s effects on the 

environment, but recent studies have also examined organic food consumption and the 

clothing industry.  Saving energy in everyday living has also been noticed, but the core 

reasons and motivators for private energy saving remain unclarified. Are people 

decreasing their energy consumption because of environmentally responsible reasons, or 

for cutting down their own electricity bills? In addition to the own interests of the 

households lowering their energy bills, there is a considerable political interest in 

understanding and identifying the ways to influence this private energy consumption for 

environmental reasons. (Gram-Hanssen 2011: 62.)  

 

Despite the common assumption that people living in suburbs and rural area live a more 

sustainable lifestyle, several studies have proven those assumptions wrong and in fact 

compact urban living in whole strains the environment less.  (Kennedy, Krogman & 

Krahn 2013: 359; Kärrholm 2011: 98–100.) The Bo01 project in Malmö has received 

broad international attention, as it is one of the first (if not the first) modern urban areas 

to be heated, cooled, powered etc. 100% by locally produced renewable energy 

resources (wind, sun and water). Despite its northern location, this still growing district 

currently of over 1000 apartments provides a multitude of building techniques and 

housing technology solutions, measures of waste management and minimized 

transportation needs to form a sustainable living environment. Indirectly the system 



10 

 

increases the rate of renewable energy use in the city and the idea and systems 

developed are hoped to act as inspiration for other cities and communities as well to 

increase the usage of clean energy. (Malmö Stad 2013.) 

 

Sustainability and private energy consumption have begun to receive attention in 

Finland as well. According to Statistics Finland (2012), the energy consumption of 

households was 61 884 gigawatt hours (GWh) in 2011. Roughly 84% of all domestic 

energy consumption targeted heating of the building itself and the water used. 16% of 

total energy consumption was used in appliances. The image below summarizes from 

which sources the energy for households is acquired in Finland.  

 

 

Figure 1. Energy  sources in household energy consumption. (Statistics Finland 2012.)  

 

As can be seen from the image, there are several sources for energy in Finland. This 

image excludes industries and public use and does not specify which percent of the 

electricity consumed by private consumers is originally from a renewable energy 

source. However, it provides a clear picture of the most common energy sources for 

households.  



11 

 

A smaller scale project similar to Bo01, was completed in Finland in 2012. The 

Adjutantti apartment building in Espoo is offering new technological solutions to two 

significant energy consumption areas in everyday life; heating and electricity used for 

appliances.  Despite the intelligent solutions offered in the building to ease energy 

saving and adaptation of sustainable consuming habits, it is necessary to know whether 

it has helped residents living in Adjutantti engage to more sustainable energy 

consumption. It could be that it is still perceived challenging. The energy solutions of 

Adjutantti and the research will be presented in more detail later in the study.  

 

 

1.1. The purpose and objectives  

 

The purpose of the thesis is to understand the complexity of sustainable consuming in 

the context of household energy consumption. This is accomplished by a literacy review 

on the subject. The development of suitable terminology enables an opportunity to 

examine every day experiences of sustainable consumption as a normative strategy for 

environmental reform.  

 

The first objective of the study is to understand what challenges does sustainable 

energy consuming bring to everyday life and why is it seen so difficult? In seeking to 

provide an answer for this question the study aims to tackle the difficulty of ‘sustainable 

energy consumption’ as a term and present a variety of challenges recognized by 

previous studies that link to energy consumption. The literacy review is supported by 

information on both general level and more specific studies conducted on Finnish 

energy consumers.   

 

The second objective of the study is to uncover what sustainable energy consumption 

and the attempts to save energy mean to Adjutantti’s residents through in-depth 

interviews. Do they consider it important and why?  

 

Thirdly, this study aims to examine whether the sustainable consumption of Adjutantti’s 

residents has extended to other areas of consumption. Have they perhaps started 

recycling or increased their usage of public transportation? Are they more conscious of 

what food they buy?  

 

 



12 

 

1.2. Methodology and scope 

 

The purpose of the study is to build understanding around the complexity of sustainable 

consuming and the challenges that consumers face when engaging to more sustainable 

habits. The research method that enables to gain an in-depth understanding and allows 

making interpretations of human actions is phenomenological hermeneutics. 

Phenomenology studies experiences which can be seen to shape from meanings 

(Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 20).  The phenomenological hermeneutics is therefore a 

suitable method for a study that aims to understand and interpret.  Hermeneutics is 

specifically a qualitative research strategy and common for qualitative research methods 

is the practicality when aiming to understand human behavior and uncovering new 

dimensions of a phenomenon (Croucher 2004).   

 

The data will be collected by in-depth interviews from informants chosen in beforehand. 

A semi-structured interview will help to provide necessary answers, but could possibly 

provide also unexpected answers especially to the third objective.  

 

 

1.3. Definition of key concepts  

 

There are nearly as many terms and their definitions for consumers acting in an 

environment respective way as there are authors. These environmentally conscious 

consumers are often given a prefix; green-, conscious, responsible or sustainable. 

Responsibility, more specifically consumer responsibility has become a trend, according 

to which consuming decisions are made. Consumer responsibility still means different 

things to different consumers and is directly linked to one’s moral perceptions. 

Therefore it enables a personal definition for responsible consuming and gives it broad 

meanings. (Cherrier, Szuba & Özcaglar-Toulouse 2012: 397.) Responsible consumption 

however often measures the socially responsible traits of a consumer and attempts to 

explain the process of consumption, easily missing the dynamic nature of consumption 

(Dolan 2002: 171–172). The social dimension in this term is more about taking into 

consideration the conditions in which the products are produced, which is why 

responsible consumption is not the most suitable choice of words for this study.  

 

Sustainable consumption together is a problematic issue as it is an oxymoron, as 

‘consume’ is something to use it up or to destroy and ‘sustaining’ something is the 



13 

 

complete opposite (Peattie & Collins 2009: 107–108). However, a comprehensive 

definition is that “sustainable consumption is the use of goods and services that respond 

to basic needs and bring better quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural 

resources, toxic materials and emission of waste and pollutants over the life cycle, so as 

not to jeopardize the needs of future generations” (Dolan 2002: 172). This political and 

environmental voice of the definition makes it the most usable key concept for this 

study.  

 

To analyze energy consumption in the private sector, a unit must be defined. The unit 

has to be broad enough to capture the idea of income sharing and economies of scale 

derived from sharing resources. Household seems to cover the necessary conditions, as 

it does not require the members to be related, unlike the term family. Even if the income 

was not perfectly shared, resources usually are. (Smeeding & Weinberg 2001: 2–3.) 

Most of the literature used in this study have also chosen household as an analyze unit, 

as energy consumption is measured in usually per household. 

 

 

1.4. Outline of the study 

 

This study consists of an introduction chapter, theory chapter, methodology, results 

chapter and a discussion part. The introduction part states the purpose and objectives of 

this study, a brief scope and methodology and the structure of this study. In the chapter 

that follows, a review of existing theory is provided to understand sustainability in the 

context of energy consumption. The chapter will represent the identified challenges 

from both theory and previous research to form a comprehensive understanding of the 

challenges in energy consuming.  

 

The third chapter presents the Adjutantti building and its solutions. This methodology 

chapter also explains why the particular research method was chosen, and more 

thoroughly why an in-depth semi-structured interview is the most suitable for this study. 

It also specifies how the interviews are conducted and analyzed to be able to receive 

detailed answers of the informants’ current behavior and make them think about their 

individual role in the environmental context.  

 

The fourth chapter will showcase the findings from the interviews and interpret and 

reflect them to the theory presented earlier. The fourth chapter also answers the second 



14 

 

and third objectives of the study. The last chapter will summarize the study and give 

suggestions for future research.  

 

Figure 2 clarifies the structure of the thesis and aims to picture the theory chapter in a 

funnel like shape, indicating the manner in which the understanding is being built; from 

a more general overview towards a specific study of a particular group of consumers.  

The hermeneutical spiral (which indicates the nature in which the research questions are 

approached), is an endless spiral in which the information and data must be read several 

times. The researcher gets closer to the core problem while deepening their own 

knowledge. (Syrjälä, Syrjäläinen, Ahonen & Saari 1994: 125.) This hermeneutical 

approach is demonstrated with a few arrows between the theory chapter and the results.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



15 

 

1. OBJECTIVE 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2. Outline of the study. 

2. SUSTAINABILITY IN HOUSEHOLD ENERGY CONSUMPTION 

 

2.1. Dimensions of sustainability 

2.2. Sustainable consumption 

2.2.1. Challenges of sustainable consumption  

2.2.2. Grouping sustainable consumers 

2.3. Sustainable consumption in the context of 

household energy consumption 

2.3.1. Challenges of sustainable energy 

consumption 

2.3.2. Differentiating energy consumers  

 

3. METHODOLOGY 

4. RESULTS 

2. OBJECTIVE            3. OBJECTIVE 

What sustainable energy 

consumption and the 

attempts to save energy 

mean to Adjutantti’s 

residents? 

Has the sustainable 

consumption of 

Adjutantti’s residents 

extended to other areas of 

consumption? 

5. DISCUSSION 

1. INTRODUCTION 

2.4. Household energy consumption in 

Finland 



16 

 

2. SUSTAINABILITY IN HOUSEHOLD ENERGY CONSUMPTION  

 

 

This chapter builds understanding first around sustainability and sustainable 

consumption, after which it moves to sustainable consumption in the context of energy 

consumption. Common challenges for both sustainable consumption and energy 

consumption are presented, as well as providing basic information on current household 

energy consumption in Finland.  

 

Sustainability is broad subject, and may involve matters like volunteering, global 

poverty reduction, favoring of organic food and promoting healthy lifestyles (Salonen & 

Åhlberg 2013: 50–52). However, with the still increasing usage and demand of energy 

and limited resources of fossil fuels, the need of using alternative energy has and 

preserving what remains, has been recognized. In addition to regulating and 

concentrating solely on the supply side and industries, factors like recycling and 

composting, water conservation and use of renewable energy sources in households 

have gained interest.  

 

Sustainable energy and forms of renewable energy aim to meet the current needs, 

without diminishing this same chance of the future generations. Sustainable energy 

sources are biomass, solar power, wind power, wave power, geothermal power and 

energy efficient technologies. A noticed difficulty has been that energy end-consumers 

are not thinking the same way.  Energy, regardless of the source is often considered 

‘invisible’ and is rarely the object of conscious decisions for consumers. Studies have 

suggested that average consumers are often skeptical about the functionality of energy 

efficient products and many lack efficient knowledge about the matter. (Paliwal 2012: 

238.)  

 

To understand the complexity of sustainable consumption is it necessary to specify the 

dimensions of sustainability, to understand through which lenses consumers look at the 

matter and how they reason their actions. It is also necessary to see which dimensions 

are relevant for this study, so a clear interview frame can be built. As suggested earlier, 

one of the main problems is that it has remained unclear how a household’s 

understanding of environmental awareness and environmental practices relate to their 

overall household consumption. This problem is supported by Jensen (2008: 353) who 

also reminds how the conducted environmental practices in everyday life are often 



17 

 

overshadowed by consumption habits in other areas of life, and above all, are often 

related to different rationales than environmental awareness. 

 

 

2.1. Dimensions of sustainability 

 

To further explain sustainability and why this research does not approach it via all the 

dimensions, it is necessary to introduce the dimensions of sustainability generally used 

in literature and Figure 3 aims to clarify them. Firstly, an environmental dimension 

explains sustainability as preservation of natural resources, ranging from oil resources to 

fish stock. The social dimension sees sustainability as promoting equal opportunities for 

all and increasing the quality of life of the poor society and is linked to values and 

attitudes. The economic dimension sees economic growth as an important factor in 

securing human wellbeing. The temporal dimension as it name refers suggests to the 

time perspective in the sense that the needs of both current and future generations need 

to be considered. The fifth dimension to sustainability is the developmental dimension, 

which indicates that development is crucial for achieving sustainability in forms of 

technological solutions, changes in attitudes and policies. (Hans & Böhm 2011: 679, 

683).  

 

 

 

Figure 3. Dimensions of sustainability. 



18 

 

The question is which ones of these are actually relevant for this particular study and in 

the context of private consuming and household. To keep in mind, all of these 

dimensions hold more aspects within them. These are all necessary dimension in the 

bigger picture, but a strict selection based on literature, was to leave two dimensions out 

of the picture, as they are something a private consumer may not be able to influence 

without extra efforts.   

 

The environmental dimension may prove important, as many concerns related to energy 

consumption are environment related mutual goods, such as concerns on air pollutions 

and conservation of energy resources. Consumers need to do responsible purchase and 

consumption decisions and think about sustainability in everyday routines and 

household chores to be able to protect the natural environment (Moisander 2007: 406). 

This dimension in particular may be acknowledged when aiming to answer the second 

objective of the study, to uncover what energy saving means and why is it practiced, 

and to which extent the decisions are made based on environmental reasons, or if at all.  

 

Peattie and Collins (2009: 108) argue about the contradiction of talking about 

sustainability when the humankind is already demanding much more from the planet 

than it can sustain, yet billions of people live in poverty. However, in the scope of 

energy consumption, the weight of the social factor and poverty are not equally 

emphasized on, unlike in the apparel industry, in which the companies and production 

are under surveillance. In this study, the social dimension will be thought more in the 

light of whether the social environment effects sustainable consumption and whether the 

whole household consumes in the same manner.  

 

The economic dimension is necessary to take along and will probably be noted as well, 

as the study concentrates on consuming energy but also attempts to save. Aiming for 

sustainability has an economic dimension all the way from producing to disposal, and 

costs money for individuals and the governments.  

 

The temporal and developmental dimensions are from their descriptions very relevant, 

but are left out of study as the scope is mainly on private consumption, and these 

dimensions are something that could be thought of being slightly more important in 

producer side of the sustainability picture.  

 

Support for emphasizing on these three dimensions was also found in a study by 

Salonen and Åhlberg (2013: 48), who state that for a high-consumption society like 



19 

 

Finland, three of the dimensions form the core of possible change in behavior and 

attitudes towards sustainable consumption. These three are the social, financial and 

environmental dimensions, so almost identical.  

 

As already mentioned earlier, the terminology around the subject is also complex, and it 

may be difficult to define which products or type of behavior suit the criteria of 

“sustainable”. Some literature even talks about how un-sustainable something is, but 

that was not the approach suitable for this study. 

 

John Klein (2013) sees sustainability as something that is no longer for the consumer to 

decide up on. He does not aim to name a deeper reasoning for this idea of sustainability, 

as some kind of resource management has existed for many centuries. There are three 

pillars that form sustainability, energy, water and waste. In energy, the question of 

sustainability lays in its efficient use, enabling it to be a resource for additional capacity. 

Rather than trying to increase the supply side, utilities have understood the importance 

of strengthening the efficiency on the demand side. Even though this is the most reliable 

and cost-effective resource to increase capacity (compared to building new utilities for 

example), the costs are estimated to increase, because of the still continuing increase in 

demand.   

 

Unlike many other authors, Klein (2013) had discussed water as a separate pillar for 

sustainability. Especially in literature concerning household, water is often included to 

the term “energy”. Even though there is not an acute water deficit in Finland, parts of 

U.S are drying and development projects have been on hold.  

 

The concern of running out of landfill space and expensive recycling makes it necessary 

to think about waste. There has been strong campaigning to decrease the use of material, 

but the possibilities of sophisticate reuse and recycling have been addressed already 

long time ago. This was one Klein’s (2013) primary thoughts that it is unnecessary to 

think about sustainability as a term too thoroughly, as there has always been reuse and 

using material efficiently. The most important part is also to be able to reuse the already 

consumed material in an efficient way. This was very interesting, as most of the projects 

that have received attention concerning sustainability are in the developed countries, 

when the reuse of material on a private level may be bigger in the developing countries 

were resources are scarce.  

 



20 

 

The ’European Environmental Impact of Products’ Projects studied over 255 domestic 

products and their effects on the environment.  70-80% of total environmental impacts 

related to 1) housing (including domestic energy use); 2) food and drink consumption 

and 3) transport, which includes commuting and leisure and holiday travelling. (Peattie 

& Collins 2009: 110). These three groups seem natural contributors to the 

environmental impacts and are also the main areas of consumption to be concentrated 

on in this study as well. However, an interesting matter is that there are even specific 

products which do not have a significant impact either environmentally, socially or 

economically, but have been raised as symbols of today’s ‘throw-away’ society, plastic 

bag being one of these. Fairtrade coffee is an example of a socially and ethically correct 

considered product as it pays attention to the living wage of producers in poorer 

countries. (Peattie & Collins 2009: 110.) 

 

Despite the importance of addressing the sustainability on the supply side, as mentioned 

earlier, this study focuses solely on the private consumption. The literary review of this 

study focuses on the first group of domestic consumption, the energy used for housing. 

The empirical part of the study will also have its main focus on the housing 

consumption, but to support the third objective of the study, the interviews will include 

question about these two other groups (foods & drink and transport) as well.  

 

 

2.2. Sustainable consumption 

 

Sustainability and consumption together are often defined as the ability of how long and 

to what levels one can sustain from spending, rather than the level of environmental 

sustainability of their consumption. However the definition for sustainable consuming 

remains vague and as mentioned earlier, the term is an oxymoron. Connolly and 

Prothero (2003: 277) refer to several reports which state the clear need to provide more 

information for consumers to increase their awareness of energy labels and their 

significance in purchasing decisions.  (Connolly & Prothero 2003: 275–277.)  

 

 



21 

 

 

 

Figure 4. Parties involved in sustainable consumption (Adapted from Casimir & Dutilh 2003: 

317).  

 

Figure 4 by Casimir and Dutilh (2003: 317) aims to show the interactions of the various 

parties involved in sustainable consumption. The model separates consumers who 

actually aim to consume in a sustainable way and the citizens who have attitudes and 

opinions concerning society but cannot be said to be sustainable consumers. Note that 

both of these roles are usually present in each individual, but the roles never act 

simultaneously. This contradictory is discussed further in this chapter in more detail.  

 

The consumer rarely has a direct relationship to the government, which is why the 

model only indicates a relationship to the industry and citizen society. The industry aims 

to develop and produce products and services to meet the functional and emotional 

needs of the consumers. The products need to meet the expected standards to be sold, 

which is why the consumer is said to provide a “licence to sell”. The actual rules and 

“licence to produce” are provided to the industries by the government, which is elected 

by the citizens.  (Casimir & Dutilh 2003:  317–318.) The figure also shows the 

interaction between consumers and citizens, which can be defined the most delicate 

interaction in the scheme, and is also further presented in this chapter. This model could 

be connected to Figure 3, as these parties mentioned here could be roughly set under 

one of the dimensions.  



22 

 

Approaches to sustainable consumption can be identified by to what extents are they 

more ecologically orientated or aimed to deliver greater social equality (or both) to the 

existing patterns to consumption. Status quo orientation aims to continue the current 

trends of consumption, and to guarantee that they are not interrupted by social crises or 

environmental catastrophes. A good example of this approach is to motivate consumers 

to drive hybrid cars, however this change still encourages personal mobility and the 

automobile industry. (Peattie & Collins 2009: 109.) 

 

Reform orientated approach aims to encourage to the use of completely new and more 

sustainable ways to meet the need of both individual consumers and businesses. One 

example would be to encourage the use public transportation. Transformation 

orientated approach seeks to transformational change in the pursuit of sustainability by 

societies and economies via urban planning. (Peattie & Collins 2009:109.)  

 

The line between status quo and reform orientation may be vague, depending on how 

they are viewed. One could say that the hybrid cars support the reform orientation and 

the encouraging of public transportation would fit the status quo orientation, unless 

great changes in the pricing and usability are introduced. The Bo01 project in Malmö 

and the example of this study, apartment building Adjutantti have clearly approached 

sustainability in a transformational orientation, and perhaps act as good vanguards for a 

broader change.  

 

As mentioned earlier, housing and transportation where two of the biggest areas of 

consumption having environmental effects. They have also been the targets of active 

campaigning. In past years, the third biggest area of consumption, food, has also 

received attention. Megicks, Memery and Angell (2012: 265) suggest that this is partly 

because of increased consumer awareness of food supply chains due to crises like Food 

and Mouth Diseases. A recent example to increase fear of food safety and gaps in 

communication was the scandal of horse meat found in steaks and convenience food. A 

more thorough investigation showed that many middle men in the supply chains were 

not aware of the origin of the meat. In addition to this, consumers simply have increased 

there their expectations on food quality and the social responsibility and ethical 

dimensions of what they consume.  These together have formed a good platform for 

down streaming the food supply chain and for the growth of local food.  

 

Food is one the areas of consumption addressed in the empirical part of the study to 

answer the third objective. For the other areas of sustainable consumption the linkage 



23 

 

between living in Adjuntatti and behavior may prove apparent, but for the food 

consumption, there is no useful data for such as specific group of consumers to be able 

to make any sort of assumptions.   

 

Paliwal (2012:  238) argues that sustainable consuming in buying such products can be 

construed as altruistic (associated with status) as they often cost more and may be 

weaker from the functionality as the conventional counterparts, but these sustainable 

products do benefit the environment for everyone. This statement wasn’t fully supported 

by other authors, especially when thinking discussing topics like the housing and food. 

It will be interesting to see whether status or altruism is something informants in this 

study are concerned of.  

 

2.2.1. Challenges of sustainable consumption 

 

Most consumers relate and especially say to think of sustainability in a positive manner, 

yet passively (Salonen & Åhlberg 2013: 48.) This gap in attitude and actions may be a 

cause of several factors, and this study aims to point out the most common ones.   

 

In the existing consumer research, sustainable consuming has been studied in the 

context of motivational tendency of individual consumers. Motives are generally 

understood as the reasons for a particular behavior. Figure 5 presents the elements and 

dimensions of motivation and ability, which result in behavior and was done based on 

two different sources which support one another. There are two distinct motives, the 

primary motives which are the reasons for engaging or not engaging into sustainable 

consumption. The selective motives are more specifically the reasons to which are of 

sustainable consumption they want to engage in. (Moisander 2007: 404–405.) 

 

Behavior is also dependent on the ability to perform these chosen ways to consume in a 

sustainable way. It is dependent on personal resources (money, time, tools) and 

opportunity created by the environment (Moisander 2007: 404–405). Salonen and 

Åhlberg (2013: 48) have done a similar division factors affecting behavior, but refer to 

personal factors (values, attitudes and beliefs) and contextual factors. Both emphasize 

the importance of ability, as the lack of if may prevent people adopting sustainable 

activities, regardless of their positive attitudes.  



24 

 

Figure 5. Motivation and behavior.  (Adapted from Moisander 2007: 404; Salonen & Åhlberg 

2013:48). 

 

A study by Kennedy, Krogman and Krahn (2013: 359) emphasize on the importance of 

the external opportunity, as they believe the neighborhood and environmental attitude 

are the strongest predictors of sustainable consumption practices. Their findings also 

showed that engaging into sustainable activities in everyday life was more difficult in 

suburban areas, which gives support to projects like the Bo01 in Malmö and Adjutantti.  

 

This study has identified and collected four different problems most commonly 

mentioned in literature concerning sustainable consumption. Firstly, there is a great 

amount of different views and strategies on what sustainable consumption is. Most 

radically it is withholding of purchasing anything, and the others consuming as usual, 

but choosing the products that have been less destructive for the environment. Also, 

despite all the labels for products, there are no general agreed-upon criteria for how to 

determine and sustainably safe and sound product or service. (Moisander 2007: 405.) 

Even more related to this study, it seems obscure in practice to estimate how much 

energy has been used in producing the goods and services.  

 

Secondly, there are also a number of ways to engage into sustainable consumption. As 

already shown, there are several kinds of approaches to sustainable consumption and 



25 

 

consumers from everything in between. The next subchapter aims to show an example, 

how some have attempted the categorization of consumers. However, the conceptions of 

what sustainable consumption is may vary, whether it is the behavioral elements that 

should be involved, or what it the importance of each behavior. These elements vary 

greatly because of their lack of knowledge on what this behavior should be, they choose 

not do act so or they are not capable of doing so. (Moisander 2007: 406.) Routines are 

important aspects of energy and water consumption. However, trying to change 

people’s routines may prove difficult. All of the technologies in our homes have gone 

through phases when they were new and fascinating, and were able to showcase wealth 

and social status. (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1183.) 

 

The lack of knowledge was also recognized as one the problems, but it is not necessarily 

the person’s own lack of interest of gaining information. This is interesting, because it 

works two ways, meaning that to be able to reflect on your own consumption, the 

consumers must however be aware which parts of their consumption are unsustainable, 

and what they could do differently.  Moisander (2007: 406–407) points out that in order 

to form personal selective motives for sustainable behavior and identify the relevant 

effects of their consumption, it is necessary to aim to understand and analyze the 

information and arguments about sustainability. Understanding the complex 

environmental effects of ones actions requires specialist knowledge. In addition to this it 

may require practical skills, such as where to take old batteries and how to read the 

meter measurements at home. Past unsubstantiated environmental claims of 

sustainability promotion have also resulted in sceptic attitudes.  

 

Fourthly, as already pointed out in introduction, the founding idea in sustainability is the 

collective thought of leaving something for the future generations. Moisander (2007: 

407) argues that sustainable consumption is motivated by two different goals, the 

individual objectives and the collective long-term goals, which makes it hard to commit 

to. Clean environment and fresh air are collective goods, but for remaining clean and 

fresh, these need the co-operation of consumers and behavior that is committed towards 

these goals. However, because of the difficulties mentioned in previous paragraphs, 

people are willing to take a free-ride and let others behave in s sustainable way.  

 

The main challenges for sustainable consumption are;  

1) The unclear nature of sustainable consumption 

2) The numerous ways in how to engage into sustainable consumption 

3) The amount of information one must have to able to analyze their actions  



26 

 

4) Sustainable consumption is influenced by both personal and collective 

objectives. 

 

To further contribute to how complex the situation is, the strength of motivational 

perceptions was proven also in a study conducted by Paliwal (2012: 240–243). Paliwal 

tested whether the driving experience of people changed regarding which car they 

thought they were driving; a petrol car, a natural gas car (CNG) or a simulated CNG car. 

Informants rated the driving experience very differed depending on which car type they 

assumed they were driving. They were actually given false information and they only 

thought they were driving a CNG car, when in fact they were driving a petrol car, which 

was always ranked high. The study only proved that the sole impression of driving a 

CNG car has a clear impact on the driver’s rating. (Paliwal 2012: 240–242).  

 

As already suggested previously, one of the matters adding complexity to sustainable 

decision is social influence. Salazar, Oerlemans and Stroe-Biezen (2013: 172, 178–179) 

state that consumers do not act as independent units. Their behavior is shaped by social 

groups they are involved in and these specific groups have in fact a greater influence 

than factors like price and environmental concern measurements. Salazar et al. (2013: 

178) further continue that the more close the social group, the more weight it has on the 

decision process. These close social groups are identified as family and friends, and 

their opinion had a significant importance in decision to purchase, believe information 

and make sustainable decisions, especially in the long run.  

 

The peers’ choice for sustainable products seemed to have a strong effect but only in the 

short run, while their reasons for purchase was less significant. However, the study also 

points out that women appear to be more sensitive to information from both of these 

social groups, whilst men consider more the economic resources. It was also suggested 

that even if men and women have same habits in consumption, they may value them 

very differently.  

 

These social groups could therefore have a strong impact on the feelings and emotions 

of a consumer, which may have just as strong impact on behavior as the primary 

motives showed in Figure 5. Because of the abstract nature of measuring feelings, they 

are not mentioned in Figure 5. However Moons and De Perlsmacker (2012: 198) 

suggest that they have a stronger impact than attitude.  

 

 



27 

 

2.2.2. Grouping sustainable consumers 

 

The literature related to green consumers and sustainable consuming has been eager to 

categorize consumers by which strategies they are greening their lifestyle and 

consumptions. The categorization in more specific is often made by using either 

behavioral constructs (what kind of activities are done and how often) or attitudinal 

constructs (what are the intentions). (McDonald, Oates, Alevizou, Young & Chu-Ang 

2012: 447–448.)  

The identification of typologies shows that literature is slowly moving away from 

treating green or ethical consumers as a homogenous group with mutual intentions and 

purposes. On the other hand it does complexify the view of people aiming for 

sustainable consumption, but yet there is no need to determine which approach to 

segment the consumers is better than the other. (McDonald et al. 2012: 448). To provide 

a realistic and more useful picture of sustainable consumption, McDonald et al. (2012: 

449–450) suggest that these approaches could be layered together. To support this 

assumption, they found that most consumers actually balance between grey and green 

purchasing.  

 

Translators do not see sustainability in a holistic way and are not motivated by a 

political agenda. Rather they are trying to do what they perceive being the right thing to 

do and are open for change even though they are not actively seeking it. Translators are 

ready make sacrifices to a certain degree if there is a clear justification for engaging to a 

new routine or even a less convenient activity. After going through the process of 

changing a particular behavior or routine, they may even experience guilt or regret for 

not reacting earlier. Translators often focus on the most tangible aspects of 

sustainability, and may be active in composting, but not using the local recycling 

facilities. However, translators are likely to think about their lowering their water and 

energy use, which makes it relevant for this study. (McDonald et al. 2012: 453–454.)  

 

Exceptors are the consumers with the most sophisticated understanding of sustainability 

and may even have designed their lifestyle to implement a personal philosophy of 

consumption. They aim to achieve the smallest environmental impact by thinking what 

they eat and where they live. However, research shows that even exceptors have at least 

one aspect of their lives in which they behave like grey consumers. (McDonald et al. 

2012: 454). Without a doubt, there is a group of consumers who can be classified as 

exceptors, but what are the chances that this type of consumer lives in newly build 



28 

 

apartment in close to malls and hypermarkets? There is also little possibility to be self-

sufficient in areas of consumption, which is why this group may not exist in Adjutantti.  

 

Selectors can be said to be the largest group in numbers of consumers, when compared 

to the two mentioned above. Selectors tend to choose an aspect of sustainable 

consumption on which to focus, and can be said to be green in solely this aspect in their 

lives but grey in all other respects. The Selectors do not see sustainability as a holistic 

was as the translators, and are motivated by a single issue. They do not see their 

behavior as contradictory. (McDonald et al. 2012: 455). Several other researches 

support this being the most common type of consumers (Gram-Hanssen 2011; Alberini, 

Banfi & Ramseier 2013.)  

 

To point out, there is no  strict agreed on categorization of sustainable consumers, but 

this grouping above is a good example of consumers could be grouped in a simple 

manner divided by practices and manners. This categorization is also a good guide in 

planning out the empirical part, as it suggests that despite someone being cautious on 

what and how they consume, it is necessary to go through consumption habits in the 

other areas of consumption as well.  

  

 

2.3. Sustainable consumption in the context of household energy consumption 

 

Even though energy consumption is recognized as a critical part of sustainability, the 

focus has been industries and corporate responsibility, on the supply side. The energy 

consumption of household and its linkage to other practices of sustainability remain 

unclear. These practices comprise technology use, technology linkages of single 

appliances with broader infrastructures of energy (such as water) and so on. (Gram-

Hanssen 2011: 63.)  

 

What makes energy consumption interesting is its invisibility and abstract nature. 

Energy is mostly something that is consumed indirectly via another product or means 

that then fulfills the needs the needs that are aimed to be satisfied by consuming. Belk, 

Ger and Askegaard (2003: 329) simply explain needs as something fairly fixed, 

necessary and related to the body, whilst wants are something necessary for the mind, 

and are wishes and personal preferences. Based on this information and thinking about 

in what energy is needed in everyday lives, it is evitable that by consuming energy, 



29 

 

people are fulfilling both needs (keeping the house warm when cold) and wants (long 

shower and baking hobby).  

 

Over the last 20 years Scandinavians have been bombarded with campaigns to influence 

their behavior to a more environmentally friendly manner. These campaigns have aimed 

consumers to buy energy-saving bulbs, reduce stand-by consumption and turn of the 

lights when not being used. Environmental awareness is often seen as the consumption 

of green or labelled products, rather than withholding from the consumption or use of 

certain products. (Jensen 2008: 353, 358.) H 

 

Consuming and purchase decision are usually the end result or action to the first 

attention and then gained interest towards a product or service. But the interesting point 

in energy was that it couldn’t be restored and the amount of future consumption is 

difficult to estimate. So the consumers don’t do the usual steps that lead to purchase or 

consumption, and the electricity for instance is always paid afterwards.   

 

In energy related products and solutions it might be that many consumers do not even 

get to the first step, which would be gaining interest towards a product. But what if the 

consumers are given the technology and tools for sustainable energy consumption 

without them having made the purchase decision? This may also be the case with the 

apartments in Adjutantti, as it could be assumed that many current residents where not 

particularly looking for an energy efficient apartment. They may have required the 

energy solutions without purpose, if their main attention was in other matters related to 

buying a new apartment. These modern housing techniques may require habitants to 

engage into new consumption patterns right after moving in and they may have grown 

interest towards the technologies and developed a desire to want more similar choices.  

 

2.3.1. Challenges of sustainable energy consumption  

 

Previous research suggests that many people are not motivated into energy saving by 

environmental reasons or even the financial reasons. People are not solely rational 

energy consumers and both needs and wants are satisfied through energy usage (Gram-

Hanssen 2008: 1185). These challenges are to some extent similar than what they 

generally are in sustainable consumption, with the difference the energy consumption is 

something on going, often not a product specific choice. Below are identified some of 



30 

 

the most common challenges for sustainable energy consuming recognized from 

literature. 

 

One of the most profound obstacles for not consuming in a sustainable manner was the 

lack of knowledge from now on referred to as informational challenge as it holds many 

different elements in it.  A study conducted by the Ministry of Employment and the 

Economy, or MEE, (2013: 25) reveals that 32% of people living in apartment buildings 

in Finland were not even aware how their house was heated (usually electricity or 

district heating). As comparison, the percentage for townhouse dubiety was 8%, and as 

expected, all informants living in detached houses knew how there house was heated. 

This is clearly something that has to be addressed also later on in this study. Despite 

Adjutantti being an apartment building, it could be that because of their previous form 

of housing, their knowledge is better than the average presented by the MEE. 

 

Along with water and heating, consumers rarely seem to know how much their annual 

electricity consumption is. Even though many consumers follow their personal accounts 

and meters, they only compare the figures with their personal consumption one year 

earlier. They were not aware of their neighbors’ consumption, nor the general averages 

of similar households. It is also suggested that meters do not have a direct impact on 

energy consumption pattern. (Jensen 2008: 357–358.) This suggests that the consumers 

do not lack the knowledge on how to save energy, but are unsure what benefits the 

energy saving results and how big their effect on the environment is compared to others.  

 

Even though the lack of knowledge is broadly used as a reason, it is contradictory that 

consumers still feel that they have enough information of other factors, such as price 

and offering. A large survey conducted by Vaasa EMG shows, that Finnish consumers 

are aware of prices and clearly more than half believe they have enough information 

about environmentalism. (Pakkanen & Närvä 2011.) These results support the statement 

that consumers are not always rational, as the energy bills are a fair part of monthly 

incomes, but the hedonistic needs still need to be fulfilled.  

 

Consumers are also facing the trouble of understanding what sustainable consumption 

in the context of energy consumption is. As mentioned earlier, many believe that 

environmental awareness is buying labelled products, and they fail to consider that what 

if they just held themselves from using or purchasing something at all. It is also 

common for consumers to believe that sustainable energy consuming is expensive (low-

energy bulbs, housing techniques) and these financial factors are pose a financial 



31 

 

challenge as well. These are also relevant in household energy consumption, in which 

the withholding of consuming is important as there are no ways to reuse the consumed 

energy. (Gram-Hanssen, Bartiaux, Jensen & Cantaert 2007: 2885.)  

 

Economic was also a dimension related to sustainability in general, and also Gram-

Hanssen et al. (2007: 2885) support that the financial challenges are relevant in energy 

consumption as well. It is argued that people do find it difficult to hard to make 

decisions on energy solutions that require a greater involvement, solar panels being one. 

Some consider their economics only a few years ahead, whilst for others the house is a 

long term commitment and they make calculation for many years to come. This is 

where the solar panels for instance do not fit in, as is very difficult to estimate the 

possible profits and benefits. The biggest question, will they pay themselves back ever? 

This is linked to the lack of knowledge, but not only on an individual level, as 

information about solar panels for instance are difficult for even the producer to 

provide. To some extent this is related to the informational challenge, as it could be 

difficult to engage into expensive techniques and solutions if for instance the payback 

times are difficult to estimate. 

 

The type of dwelling and heating system were labelled significant environmental 

practices, but also short showers and energy-saving light bulbs were mentioned as 

obvious conservation practices. (Alberini, Bandi & Ramseier 2013: 76.) A rather 

surprising reason for people not renewing their heating systems or housing technology 

was not only financial, but apparently also trust. People are fairly skeptical about new 

solutions and their effect on the environment. Some even believe energy labels and 

regulations are just ways to get these products and solutions sold and is referred to as a 

political challenges from here on. These doubts were also supported by the lack of 

consistency between different sources of information.  The social networks’ promotion 

and opinion was once again an important factor. (Gram-Hanssen et al.  2007: 2882–

2885.) 

 

Another challenge is the gap between attitudes and actions. A contradiction in Denmark 

was that the households in favor of policies concerning renewable energy and with the 

largest number of low-energy light bulbs, were in fact the ones with the largest energy 

consumption. (Gram-Hanssen et al. 2007: 2885).  It is noticed that many actions are not 

done or at least not justified with the environmental concerns, but rather with lifestyle 

reasons like comfort, cleanliness and practicality.  If there wasn’t a gap between attitude 

and actions, meaning the hedonistic aspect would not be that significant, there would be 



32 

 

no need to have individual saunas and washing machines on every apartment in an 

apartment building.  

 

People also tend to mention short showers, turning off the lights and washing clothes 

with a lower temperature as environmentally conscious actions. However, many people 

do not take into consideration all the things and actions they don’t concretely have, 

which would have large effects on the household’s energy consumption. Not owning a 

car, a dishwasher and not travelling are in fact good examples of being a sustainable 

consumer, but the reason for withholding from these actions was reasoned with money 

or health. (Jensen 2008: 358).  

 

Gram-Hanssen et al. (2007: 2884–2886) also found other difficulties for consuming 

energy in a sustainable way. The social factors are also necessary, as already suggested 

earlier, social influence or even pressure may affect someone from consuming of not 

consuming in a way they would want to themselves. Some routines in energy 

consumption were also rules and behavioral patterns learnt from childhood, and these 

“unwritten” rules were not questioned later in life.  

 

A challenge perhaps not relevant for this study but interesting in the conversation was 

aesthetics, which received surprisingly much attention when trying to prioritize energy 

project among renovations and building. The study shows that beautiful open staircases, 

the elegance of badly insulated single glass windows and the appearance of the roof 

were more important than energy issues, even with the ones who considered themselves 

as environmentally aware. People also felt like some of the newest solutions may ‘harm’ 

the identity of an old apartment for instance, if they had planned to renovate in 

respecting the age but to their taste. (Gram-Hanssen et al. 2007: 2884–2886.) 

 

To conclude, actions in everyday life are valued very differently, some more 

significantly than others. Despite all the campaigns, there is still a general tendency of 

avoiding the most radical changes in habits and accustom into latest solutions, such as 

rainwater collection and solar panels. These are often seen too different and are 

associated with an alternative lifestyle. That is why persuasion on using environment-

friendly products or practices cannot solely rely on the environmental qualities, as 

clearly they are not often the motivators.  

 

An interesting target for research in a few years’ time will be whether the possibility for 

precise control and monitoring for electricity consumption has made any difference for 



33 

 

Finnish consumers. By the end of year 2013, the electricity companies had been able to 

install remote electricity meters to nearly all households in Finland. These meters send 

hourly information of the household’s electricity consumption once a day to the 

electricity company and this information can also be seen by the residents the next day. 

The biggest advantages for the end-consumers is that they can see the impacts of their 

actions (for example heating the sauna) more clearly and now they are charged for their 

actually consumption instead of estimations of consumption, as previously was. (Lassila 

& Pölkki 2014: 26.)  

 

This new regulation and its requirements should make it easier for consumers to 

understand and compare exact figures, since the abstract nature of following energy 

consumption has been a major concern. There is clear need for visualizing sustainable 

energy consumption, and research suggests it could be done these everyday practices. 

The connections between consumption behaviors and environmental consequences from 

both production systems and consumption need to be clarified. To be able to reach 

specific goals in decreasing the level of energy consumption, the communication with 

consumers needs to be increased, thus promote sustainable choices and create 

reasonable incentives.  

 

A study of Finnish consumers shows that the Finnish consumers value ways of saving 

energy. The use of renewable energy sources in the households has been recognizes as 

desirable, however many people feel this is the part where they have the smallest 

possibility to influence their behavior. (Salonen & Åhlberg 2013: 52.) This is partly 

true, as only those living in detached houses can influence the form of heating.  

 

A notable appreciated way of engaging into sustainability was recycling and 

composting, which are highly valued. However the big contextual constrain was the 

lack of space to sort the waste inside the apartments and added to a personal laziness, 

only small percent consider recycling as a part of everyday life. (Salonen & Åhlberg 

2013: 51.) A recent study also showed that despite high appreciation towards sorting 

and recycling, Finland is amongst the laziest countries in recycling in Western Europe 

(Lehtinen & Saavalainen 2014: 12). This supports the idea of there may often be a wide 

gap between attitudes and actions.  

 

Water consumption has been noticed to be important and one the easiest areas to 

possibly decrease consumption, however strong personal preferences and self-



34 

 

indulgence were obstacles to actually doing so. Long and hot showers have gained 

attention in international studies as well. (Salonen & Åhlberg 2013: 52.) 

 

2.3.2. Differentiating energy consumers  

 

As with grouping sustainable consuming and sustainable consumers, the grouping of 

energy consumers seems equally challenging. Gram-Hanssen (2008:1183–1186) does 

not support a strict categorization of private energy consumers either, but aims to point 

out areas and practices of energy consumption that differentiate households from one 

other and that make a difference in the amount of consumed. Gram-Hanssen suggests 

that household energy consumption could be categorized under following areas; 

comfort, hygiene, cooking and ICT (information and communications technology). 

 

The indoor temperature is the biggest factor affecting the overall heating costs of a 

private household. People relate indoor temperature, whether high or low, with very 

different things. Some try keeping the temperature lower for health reasons, while 

others prefer warmth over possible savings and do not believe a warmer indoor 

temperature is any harm. Individual practices linked to what makes sense to the 

consumer, even though the heating technology would be the same in a large group of 

households. (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1185.)  

 

The practice of lighting on the other hand was more tied to cultural norms of coziness 

and interior design. These practices are also related to childhood norms. Research also 

indicates that people reflect more on lighting than the other parts of their energy 

consumption. This is not very rational, as the lighting on average counts for less than 

15% of the total energy consumption in Danish household (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1185). 

In Finland this figure is almost the same for apartments and townhouses (11-13%), but 

only 7% when it comes to detached houses. (MEE 2013: 24–26, 32.) It will be 

interesting to see, whether the informants in this study also emphasize lighting.  

 

Hygiene, more specifically the washing and drying of clothes is still to this date 

considered something of which women are mainly in control of in households. Norms 

have been indicated to pass from previous generations, however the new technology has 

had a great influence in the routines and habits. The washing of clothes accounts for a 

fairly big part of time, when people aim to act responsibly (according to messages 



35 

 

received via campaigns) by lowering the washing temperature and washing only full 

loads. However, the questions of how often should clothes even be washed has been 

ignored. (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1186.) Common to Scandinavian countries seems to be 

the very established role of the washing machine in households. The dryer however is 

still an unusual appliance in Scandinavian households, and less than 20% of households 

in Finland have one (MEE 2013: 17).  

 

Cooking also separates households from one another by habits. The biggest factors for 

energy consumption are the freezer, microwave and oven. However not one without the 

other as foods to be prepared in a microwave or oven both need the freezer. They are all 

considered necessities and it is the frequency of preparing and heating of food that 

accounts. The microwave appears to have most negative thought concerning 

environmental effects. (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1186–1187.)  

 

The use of ICT (Information and communications technology) is interesting to examine, 

since there is no possibility for passed norms from childhood. The size, age and location 

of ICT devices in the house vary greatly. Commonly unknown to consumers is the fact 

that ICT devices consume over 90% of its energy while in standby mode. Aims to 

regulate the use of these devices are often related to the wish and assumptions of kids 

not only playing with their computers or chatting on the internet, rather than the thought 

of saving energy. (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1187.)  

 

As can be seen, the grouping of practices and chores related to energy consumption 

seems reasonable, as they are something that are in every household to some extent, but 

are also effected by individual needs, lifestyles and interests in general. The groups are 

also fairly separate, and the other does not have a direct effect to another.  

 

Maybe further research is able to group the energy consumers by certain characteristics, 

but for now it seems like many variables and generalization is needed to make them. 

Already the range of challenges suggested, how different energy saving is seen, and 

with the differences in everyday routines and habit in different appliances and heating, 

makes the equation difficult. The inaccurate grouping of sustainable consumers in 

general is not completely unusable; however there are bigger obstacles for sustainable 

energy consumption than many other areas of consumption. Also notable is that none of 

the attempted categorizations is to take into consideration the life cycle. Is it even 

possible to try to compare the gap between attitudes and actions of a family with two 

small children and parents working full-time to a retired couple who have the time to 



36 

 

take the effort to act sustainably, and already closer to an younger couple by other 

consumption patterns.  

 

 

2.4. Household energy consumption in Finland 

 

The climate politics of the European Union have an impact to the everyday lives of 

Finnish people, even if it is not always considered obvious. The European Union 

recently set new goals to be executed by year 2030, which included a goal of 27% of all 

energy consumed should be produced by renewable energy sources. Even though the 

figure is only an estimate and does not obligate Finland to reach the same figure, it is 

evident that these goals are considered in the regulations done in Finland. (Kähkönen & 

Elonen 2014: 2.)   

 

These goals set by the EU have already affected the regulation in Finland, for example 

the building and renovations of houses. New buildings have very strict energy 

efficiency requirements, and all new buildings are to be built “zero energy houses” by 

the year 2020. The regulations will also favor hybrid and electric cars, and will have an 

influence on automobile taxes. The appliances will have stricter efficiency 

requirements. (Saavalainen & Virtanen 2014: 6–7.).   

 

Despite the fact that the regulations do not directly force anyone to change their 

behavior, they are hoped to impact choices as; people reducing travelling by airplanes, 

increasing public transportation, decreasing indoor temperature and reducing the use of 

hot water. The citizens are also encouraged to reduce the waste derived from food 

choices, and to choose vegetables and fish over meat and to favor local produce. 

(Saavalainen & Virtanen 2014: 6–7.).  

 

In Finland there are specific guidelines in how to define the energy efficiency of a 

building. There are classes from A to G, A being the best. This energy group has to 

specified in the energy report of the house and it is commonly mentioned when 

marketing buildings as well. The efficiency is determined by the amount of energy the 

building needs for heating, appliances and cooling. (Sähköala 2007.) The energy 

efficiency of new buildings has clearly increased in the past four years in Helsinki from 

21% to 68%. The criteria for the A class was changed in 2013, after which the building 

must have its own energy production (solar panels) to reach he A class. After this rule 



37 

 

was taken in to consideration, only one building fulfilled this criterion. (Ylä-Tuuhonen 

2014: 8).  

 

Further a bit more about electricity, as that is something which is a financial concern 

and affects both heating and appliances. As already mentioned earlier, by the end of 

year 2013, the electricity companies had been able to install remote electricity meters to 

nearly all households in Finland. These meters send hourly information of the 

household’s electricity consumption once a day to the electricity company and this 

information can also be seen by the residents the next day. The biggest advantages for 

the end-consumers s is that they can see the impacts of their actions (for example 

heating the sauna)  more clearly and now they are charged for their actually 

consumption instead of estimations of consumption, as previously was. Consumers now 

have more tools for monitoring their electricity consumption, in the form of recent 

figures and euro amount in the bill. (Lassila & Pölkki 2014: 26.)  

 

This information has facilitates the usage of spot-pricing. Spot-pricing means the price 

varies depending on the time of the day (small hours being the cheapest). The division 

of electricity usage more evenly throughout the day would be beneficial for the entire 

electricity and distribution networks. (Lassila & Pölkki 2014: 26.) According to 

Helsingin Energia, this spot-pricing has already interested thousands of people, as they 

are able to set the washing machine to wash during the cheapest hours.  

 

However, this is still not the case when it comes to water consumption, and the meter 

has to be read from a separate room with no possibility of comparing it to previous, 

unless the user themselves writes the figures down. In Finland it is also common to pay 

a fixed amount for water (in condominium), and for it remains unclear whether their 

consumption is even close to the estimated amount. 

 

Even though the Nordic countries do not form a perfect homogenous group, there are 

many similarities in energy consumption due to climate and regulations. Several 

international trends in everyday routines have affected the Finnish electricity market as 

well. However, all the figures of possible decreases in certain areas of energy 

consumption does not necessary mean a new consumption trend, but a new technology 

to decrease the amount of energy being consumed. (Ministry of Employment and the 

Economy 2013: 5.)  

 



38 

 

A study published in 2013 on household energy consumption from 2011 by the Ministry 

of Employment and the Economy is a descriptive Finnish research that has concluded 

the trends but also taken into consideration the size of household, which other research 

lacked. The study describes change between the years 2006 and 2011. There hasn’t been 

a great change in the amount of consumed electricity for example, but the ratio how 

much electricity was used for what has changed fairly much.  

 

Figure 6 describes the end use of electricity in different types of housing. The end use 

seems the like most important and relevant to introduce in this study, as consumers 

should be able to somehow manage the consumption. It therefore lacks some 

information concerning the total energy usages as all heating is not done by electricity. 

 

 

Figure 6. The amount of electricity used between heating and appliances.  

 

As can be seen from the figure, 76% of the consumed electricity in apartments is used 

for appliances. In apartment buildings, the electricity used for appliances had not risen 

as much as the overall amount of apartments’ had increased. The 76% consists of 27% 

percentage used for kitchen related appliances (oven and refrigerator),  21% information 

technology and 13% lighting. Only 24% of the total electricity consumption is related to 



39 

 

heating as district heating is the most common source for heating in apartment 

buildings.  (MEE 2013: 24)  

 

To underline, Figure 6 shows only a rough division of on how the electricity is divided. 

These figures are not to be interpreted too precisely, as many appliances may actually 

increase the room temperature, resulting is decreased need to turn on the underfloor 

heating. Smaller spaces also heat up more quickly, and cooking on a stove may warm 

up the house significantly. As mentioned the refrigerator and freezer are the second 

biggest components taking up electricity in apartments and lighting is the third biggest 

one, despite a decrease from 20% to 14%. The fastest growing area of consumption has 

been an electrical underfloor  

heating. (MEE 2013: 23–25.)  

 

In townhouses, the percentage of electricity used for appliances was 45% and heating 

55%, very different to ones the apartment building.  Most of the consumed electricity 

goes to the heating in townhouses, as it is a more popular mean of heating than in 

apartment buildings. Naturally of this, the heating water takes up the second biggest 

slice in the electricity use (district heating 57% and oil 8%). A smaller percentage of the 

consumption in whole also goes to kitchen appliances and other electronic devices. 

Unlike in the other housing examples, the electricity used for lighting has remained the 

same. (MEE 2013: 25–26.) 

 

The numbers from the detached houses are slightly more challenging to understand and 

interpret, as heating is often from several different energy sources (electricity, wood and 

heating oil). (MEE 2013: 27.)  

 

Figure 7 shows in more detail the change in between which appliances the electricity is 

nowadays consumed. The division has the same elements that were suggested by Gram-

Hanssen (2008:1183–1186) previously, which set the differences between households in 

energy consumption. Figure 7 shows an average household of three persons in an 

apartment building, and in which appliances the electricity is nowadays consumed in. 

 

Even though there has been a large decrease in how much televisions take up from the 

total amount, the electronics are now a bigger electricity spender than a traditional 

appliances, such as the refrigerators. This is simply because of the large increase of 

information technology apparatus at households. Despite the apparatus being renewed 



40 

 

into more efficient, the amount of new apparatus has increased so much that it 

outnumbers the savings from the efficient ones. 

 

 

Figure 7. Electricty consumption between appliances. (MEE 2013: 36.) 

 

In the scope of Figure 7, it could be suggested that the areas that receive most attention 

would be cooking and dishes, electronics and lighting.  

 

As already mentioned earlier concerning heating, even the Nordic countries are not to 

be compared to one another too strictly, as there are some cultural differences. A simple 

example like the sauna culture in Finland, may result in big differences in household 

energy consumption when compared to other Nordic countries. Ylä-Tuuhonen (2014: 8) 

has also examined the differences in behavior and attitudes concerning the use of hybrid 

and especially electric cars in Nordic countries. The amount of electric cars in Finland is 

significantly smaller than in Norway and neighboring Estonia, which clearly out 

numbers the Finnish car market, even though the Estonian market is a lot smaller.  

 



41 

 

By September 2013 there were only 151 registered electric cars in Finland. According 

to research, the biggest challenge for the Finnish consumers is the price, which may be 

over 10,000€ higher than the price of the same car in petrol. Finland also lacks to give 

any incentives for the purchase unlike Norway, where electric cars do not have the usual 

automobile tax nor value added tax. The electric cars are also allowed to drive bus lanes 

and both parking and charge of the battery is free in public stations. This has resulted in 

18,000 registered electric cars and 12% of sold cars in November being electric cars. 

Also in Estonia consumers are encouraged towards electric cars with a 18,000€ 

purchase support, a charger station home and a national charger network. Ylä-Tuuhonen 

(2014: 8) also states that car sellers do not actively promote electric cars and rarely have 

one for test drive.  

 

Currently, there are none of these incentives in Finland for private consumers (a few 

supports to companies), and most abandon the idea of an electric car due the financial 

reasons. However the ones who have been able to purchase one, have been very pleased 

with the costs and use. The savings reach thousands of euros per year with a daily drive 

of 50 to 150 kilometers. (Ylä-Tuuhonen 2014: 8.) Interesting is that in addition to 

appreciating the simple use and reduced cost, electric car owners pointed out the silence 

of the car.  

 

 

2.5. Summary 

 

To be able to continue to the empirical part of the study, it was necessary to answer the 

first objective of the study; what challenges does sustainable energy consuming bring to 

everyday life and why is it seen so difficult?  The aim was to deepen the knowledge of 

the subject from more general to specific, covering the subjects necessary to answer the 

objective and to identify the possible challenges.   

 

The dimensions of sustainability were recognized, and they are considered when 

moving to the methodology chapter and designing the interview. Several challenges 

relating to sustainable consumption were identified, and some of them were similar to 

the ones that were identified in the context of energy consumption.  

 

Figure 8 pinpoints the identified dimensions and challenges that are involved in both 

sustainable and sustainable energy consumption. As mentioned, there were some 



42 

 

similarities, but the ones concerning energy consumption are more specific; 

informational, financial, political, lifestyle and social challenges. The challenges for 

sustainable consumption in general are something that may be recognized when 

uncovering the other areas of consumption, food, transportation and waste sorting.  

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 8. Summarizing the identified challenges and dimensions. 

 

Despite representing possible ways in which consumers could be grouped, a sole 

categorization was not found in either. The grouping for sustainable consumers was 

interesting and something to keep in mind for later on, but the grouping of energy 

consumers was left on a suggestive level, and representing the everyday practices that 

could be used in grouping.  

 

The chapter also gave an insight to what and how Finnish households consume energy 

in everyday life and which factors impact the way they consume energy. It was good to 

find accurate data as there were some differences in energy consumption between the 



43 

 

Nordic countries. This literature from previous studies will be reflected to the findings 

of this study later.  After having answered to the first objective of the study, it is now 

possible to continue to the empirical part of study. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



44 

 

3. METHODOLOGY 

 

 

The previous chapter built theoretical understanding by studying what are the 

dimensions of sustainability and sustainable consumption, and more specifically what 

are the difficulties for sustainable energy consumption in everyday life. Sustainability 

had to be considered from several dimensions, of which the environmental aspect 

seemed to be the most appropriate in this case. However, the other dimensions can’t be 

neglected in the empirical part either. The Finnish private energy consumption was also 

presented to understand what a Finnish consumer values and which factors shape the 

behavior.  

 

The basis of a qualitative research is the description of the reality (Hirsjärvi, Remes & 

Sajavaara 2009: 161). The purpose of the thesis is to understand the complexity of 

sustainable energy consuming,  to see what energy means to residents in Adjuntatti and 

to uncover possible new areas of sustainable consumption. This is why this study is 

based on qualitative research, because these personal meanings and descriptive answers 

would have been difficult to obtain via quantitative questionnaires for instance.     

 

According to Hirsjärvi et al. (2009: 164) the typical characteristics of qualitative study 

is the comprehensiveness of the data collection and its collection in natural and real life 

situations. This is why several interviews were conducted to this study, and in the 

informants’ home, in the place which is also the object of examination.  Previous 

research has focused on uncovering how people reason their purchases, their opinions 

about sustainable consumption and the correlation of actions and talk. Many studies also 

focused on the responsible consumption of food and clothing. However, a few of them  

did study questions like what people believe about new solutions in building techniques, 

their willingness to spend money on collective goods and possibly save money in the 

long run. These were essential for this study in identifying the challenges, both actual 

and perhaps imagined. Using people for gathering information is also one characteristic 

of qualitative research and in this study the interviews and conversation will be the 

source of information. (Hirsjärvi et al. 2009: 164).  

 

Given that only little empirical research has been conducted in the area of sustainable 

energy consumption, more specifically in an energy efficient building, it was necessary 

to choose a research paradigm that allows for exploratory research. Therefore, this study 

was conducted as a qualitative research and the findings were derived from in-depth 



45 

 

interviews. The aim was not to prove any set hypotheses. The research method that 

enables to gain an in-depth understanding and allows making interpretations of human 

actions is phenomenological hermeneutics. Phenomenology studies experiences which 

can be seen to shape from meanings (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2008: 19–20). 

 

Another common characteristic for qualitative study is an inductive analysis in which 

conclusions are made from single to general. (Hirsjärvi, Remes & Sajavaara 2009: 164; 

Heikkinen, Rovio & Syrjälä 2008: 88). This however depends greatly on how 

comprehensive the sample is.  

 

 

3.1. In-depth interview as a research method 

 

Interview is one of the most used research methods, during which the researcher and the 

informant discuss about the things related in the research topic either in a structured or 

discussing manner. (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2001: 47.) As a difference to a normal 

conversation, an interview has a clear aim; to find out the opinion or motives for certain 

actions of the other party and informant (Eskola & Suoranta 1998: 85).  

 

Interviews can be categorized with different reasoning, but one of the most common 

ones is based on how structured and planned the interview is, more specifically how 

much can the interviewer react on the moment and how specific the questions are. A 

rough bifurcation is 1) questionnaires, which are fully structured interviews with set 

questions and answer options and 2) semi-structured interviews and un-structured 

interviews with different types of questions and no ready answers.  (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 

2001: 43–44). The question of how formal an interview should be depends on the 

information trying to be attained. For this particular study a semi-structured form was 

necessary to gain new information. The interview proceeded within certain readymade 

themes. These themes were decided upon the previous research and literacy review and 

the opening questions for each theme are often broad.  It was important, that the decided 

themes were discussed with all the informants, but the questions in the interview guide 

(Appendix 1.) were mostly ideas and supporting questions in case the discussion would 

not have proceeded naturally.  

 

In an in-depth interview the interviewer and informant are in interaction with one 

another and the interviewer aims to create a natural setting for discussion. The interview 



46 

 

and discussion proceed naturally within these certain themes. The informant must be 

given time and space to reflect on their feelings and memories. This is also why the 

opening questions are often broad, to ensure the informant says what is in their mind 

without leading them too much. However, it is the responsibility of the interviewer to 

keep the conversation on the correct path towards the set goal, and to react and respond 

to the given answers. (Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2001; Eskola & Suoranta 2008, 86–88.) For 

an interviewer to be able to react and ask spontaneous questions, a good knowledge of 

the subject is vital, which is also why a thorough literacy review of the subject was done 

before any questions for the interview were planned. An interviewer may have some 

additional questions or bullet points on a separate piece of paper to help remember all 

the themes or a few additional questions.   

 

Ethicality should always be considered when doing qualitative studies, in both data 

collection and analysis phase. In this particular study, ethical concerns were minuscule. 

All the informants for this study had participated out of their own will, and no one was 

obligated to sign up, however a few of them were reminded about the interview. 

According to Alvesson (2011: 112) this is a strong factor when considering the 

ethicality of a study.  

 

The interviewer and informants were also in a fairly equal position in which no personal 

information was shared in beforehand. The interviewer did not have to tell false 

information nor were the questions so personal that they could cause an uncomfortable 

situation. To ensure good and truthful answers, the informants were not informed 

clearly about the objectives of the study and the purpose in beforehand. In the analysis 

part the most difficulty was in keeping the anonymity of the informants, as there were 

not that many.  

 

 

3.2. Introducing Adjutantti  

 

Some main reasons for why household energy saving is still lacking interest in the 

sustainability discussion and why it is seen challenging were showcased in previous 

chapter. However, as mentioned earlier also the changing regulations force builders to 

apply new building techniques and technologies to new buildings. A small scale but an 

advanced example from Finland is the Adjutantti building in Espoo, Finland. Even with 



47 

 

the more strict energy standards, Adjutantti still remains in the A category for energy 

efficiency.  

 

Adjuntantti is an apartment block building situated in the city of Espoo in the capital 

region in Finland. Completed in spring 2012 this building is part of the Sustainable 

Urban Living concept, a collaboration of Skanska, Fortum and ABB. (Rakennuslehti 

2011.) The building itself produces energy with the solar panels on the roof. These 

panels were estimated to produce about 15 000 kWh of electricity per year, which is 

then used to heat and light up the common areas, such as hallways and elevator. After a 

two year monitoring, the solar panels have actually exceeded the amount needed for the 

common areas. The surplus is nowadays sold to Fortum, a Finnish energy company 

which then distributes it back to the grid. According to a member of the condominium, 

the amount of money resulted from selling this energy has however been only some tens 

of euros per year. It is also estimated, that the solar panels need to be changed into new 

ones in ten years’ time. 

 

The Adjutantti building and its 42 apartments ranging from 53,5 m
2
 to 121 m

2  
is on the 

forefront of eco-efficient homes in a global scale with its solutions. The five main 

energy efficient features of Adjutantti were the monitoring system of energy 

information, housing technique, electric car, solar panels and elevator (Skanska 2011). 

The three areas of everyday energy consumption being affected by these mentioned 

technologies are heating, electricity used for appliances and transportation.  

 

The monitoring system enables the residents to follow energy consumption in two ways. 

A monitor in the apartment gives detailed information on ad hoc and recent electricity, 

water and heating consumption but also the outside temperature and clock. It is also 

possible to follow online the apartment’s individual cumulative energy consumption as 

well as averages of energy consumption in the long run. The online portal also enables 

the habitants may also find how much the solar panels have been producing as well as 

the consumption of individual appliances. (Skanska 2011.)  

 

As earlier suggested by Jensen (2008: 357–358), people are having difficulties in saving 

energy because of its abstract nature and the lack of specific information and accurate 

estimations. This equipment should provide help with that problem, but it will be 

interesting to see whether this has facilitated the saving or not. It however does not give 

accurate estimations in euros, or display the ratio between hot and cold water (and the 

costs) and an estimation of total electricity consumption for the coming year.  



48 

 

There has also been a lot of discussion about how much several appliances consume 

energy in their stand-by position (Gram-Hanssen 2008: 1187). Adjutantti’s solution to 

this is the “Home–Away–Long Away” switch which controls the lighting and the 

electrical equipment connected to that system. When the switch is set to “Away” or 

“Long Away”, it turns off certain electronics attached to specific plugs and decreases air 

conditioning and heating. It is especially useful if the house is left empty for a longer 

period of time, however it is designed to be used on a daily basis as well (Skanska 

2011.) Some possible difficulties of this switch is that certain electronic devices have to 

be placed close to these particular plugs and need new settings every time they are 

switched off.  

 

A one Celsius decrease in room temperature results in a 5% decrease in energy 

consumption. Adjutantti is very well insulated with thicker walls and good windows and 

doors. This is to ensure that heat does not escape easily through the structures. This 

apartment building, like most others also has district heating. The ventilation system is 

equipped with heat recovery. The “Home–Away–Long Away” switch also targets the 

room temperature. The thermostats aim to decrease the room temperature when the 

switch is turned and also maintain a steady room temperature when in the house. As an 

idea it was seen beneficial, however proper feedback on how these thermostats have 

really performed remains unclear. In case of malfunction and the room temperature 

being too warm, the windows would have to be kept open, resulting in loss of energy.  
 

The solar panels on the roof are not a direct benefit for residents’ individual everyday 

energy consumption. They do not directly have an effect on their behavior, however the 

condominium’s bill remains minuscule. (Skanska 2011.) These solar panels were often 

mentioned when marketing the houses, even though it is something the residents do not 

have a control on. Solar power is generally recognized as a clean and self-sufficient way 

of producing energy, and is something many people are strongly for. In this case these 

solar panels represent a collective good. However, it may not be clear how this solar 

power is actually used, how much it saves money in euros and would the residents be 

willing to pay this technology out of their own pockets. 

 

An automated elevator also saves energy generated from the breaking and uses it for the 

same mutual targets as the solar panels. The intelligence of the elevator is linked to the 

key with which a resident can open the front door. When showing the key, the lights in 

the hallway turn on, and the elevator is called automatically and it also takes to the 

correct floor without extra effort.  (Skanska 2011.)  



49 

 

For a year after the building was completed, the residents had a chance to test and use 

an electric car, which got a share of its energy from the solar panels on the roof.  The 

car could be reserved for a specific time, and was found very useful among some of the 

residents. After the one year free try ended, the condominium relinquished the electric 

car, because only a few households were ready to contribute to the expenses and 

maintenance of the car.  

 

 

3.3. Data collection 

 

For this study the data was collected by the in-depth interviews, which were conducted 

to seven households in Adjutantti. All together 4 in-depth interviews were conducted 

face-to-face, with those households that had volunteered and contacted themselves the 

quickest. All these interviews were conducted in the informants’ own apartments. All 

the visits took over an hour, however the taped talking ranged from 43 minutes to one 

hour and 4 minutes.  In addition to the four face-to-face interviews, 3 more interviews 

were done on the phone two weeks later. This was purposely done so that there was 

time to see whether there was something that had not been taken into consideration in 

the previous interviews. These phone interviews where slightly shorter, ranging from 32 

minutes to 46 minutes. The interview guide (Appendix 1.) was the same for all 

informants.  

 

In all the interviews, the talk was recorded, so the interviewer could be able to respond 

and react in the conversation instead of taking notes.  All the interviews were also 

carefully transcribed soon after. However, there were some discussion that was not 

caught on tape, as a few residents were eager to demonstrate the monitors, and a few 

informants started casually talking about their housing technique before the tapers were 

set. Even though the purpose was not to make too strict observations, the interviews 

were transcribed so detailed, that possible feelings could be interpreted.  

 

All the interviews were done in a few week timeframe in winter 2014. Despite the small 

number of informants, some parts of the interview started saturating already during the 

third interview. Even though the themes and questions had been answered very 

thoroughly, some of the richest opinions and ideas for further development were 

received after the informants were told that they could now mention anything that had 



50 

 

been left uncovered. These are not necessarily relevant for this particular study, but 

beneficial for future research and partners involved in Adjutantti.  

 

Out of 41 apartments that have residents, 7 households are represented in the study. 

Despite not intentionally targeting different types of household (apartment size, 

informant’s age) the study was able to get a sample from all the different apartment 

sizes. The table summarizes the informants, but the number given in front of the 

informant does not represent the order in which they were interviewed in, or whether 

the interview was done face-to-face or by telephone. The F and M stands for whether 

the informant was male or female, and the number after it the number of members in the 

household in addition to them.  

 

 

Table 1. Information of the informants. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Age was not relevant to be mentioned here, but the representation of age and 

households match pretty well the actual distribution in Adjutantti. The reason for 

indicating the summer cottage and return on estimate bills will be specified later in this 

chapter.  

 

 

3.4. Data analysis 

 

This study used content analysis as a type of qualitative data analysis. According to 

Tuomi and Sarajärvi (2009: 91–92) content analysis can be seen to be a ground for most 

different analysis methods, when it is considered as a wide theoretical framework for 

the analyzing of written, heard or seen content. Essential for content analysis is the 

Household

Informant 

(+members in 

household)

53,5m²- 65m² 86,5m²-88,5m² 121m²
Summer cottage 

or similar

Returns on 

estimated bills 

1 F(+3) X

2 F(+1) X X X

3 F(+1) X X

4 M(+1) X

5 M(+1) X X

6 M(+1) X X X

7 M(+1) X X X



51 

 

researcher’s decision on what in the data is rel