Utilising mixed methods research to inform low-carbon social housing performance policy

There is an over reliance on cost-benefit analysis in the policy development and evaluation of sustainable housing outcomes. This paper presents both qualitative and quantitative analyses from a multi-year mixed methods evaluation of four new low-carbon social houses in regional Victoria, Australia. Through a cost-benefit lens the housing was not financially viable. Householder interviews highlighted positive social outcomes such as improved health. A narrow focus by housing performance policy makers on cost-benefit analysis results in important understandings about housing and householders being overlooked or undervalued; inclusion of multiple evaluation methods can help to reflect a more realistic sustainable housing future.