Summary of the joint DG GROW/DG CONNECT Silver Economy workshop on Age-Friendly Homes- 7/7/2015 in Brussels

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs Brussels, 9 July 2015 CNECT H2/ Summary of the joint DG GROW/DG CONNECT Silver Economy workshop on Age-Friendly Homes- 7/7/2015 in Brussels 1. INTRODUCTION This is the summary of a workshop co-organised by DG GROW and DG CONNECT of the European Commission with the objective to discuss and mobilise support from public authorities and stakeholders on a set of complementary actions that can be pursued at EU, national and regional level, by public authorities and stakeholders (industry, R&I, investment community) and which can lead to an increase in the number of age-friendly homes in Europe. This will in turn also help to address the challenge of demographic change and become a major opportunity for creation of new jobs and growth in the construction and ICT sectors. 2. SETTING THE SCENE The speakers highlighted the purpose of the workshop to identify actions that can stimulate the creation and investments in more age friendly houses and living environments that meet the growing demand of the ageing population and create new jobs and growth through scalable European markets. Peter Wintlev-Jensen presented the European Commission Silver Economy strategy and focused on the identified opportunity for ICT and construction around age-friendly home conversion. Antonio Paparella explained the policy work related to construction by DG GROW and the particular focus on age-friendly buildings as a new opportunity. The speakers highlighted the specificity of the ICT and construction sectors and the need to bring them together to benefit from new innovation required for age friendly homes through adaptation of existing building stock or construction of new housing. The workshop was intended to avoid thinking in "silos", i.e. to take a holistic approach beyond spatial design and accessibility issues, and ICT / technology needs for independent living, and identify actions that can stimulate investments in age-friendly homes and living environments, and create scalable markets across Europe. A particular objective was given to explore the rational for- and benefits of action at European level, building on the emerging national/regional initiatives. The speakers challenged the participants to focus the discussions on combining the needs of individuals as they age with the possible incentives provided by the public

2 sector, given the care efficiency gains realised in shifting care from institutional settings to the home and the desire of most people to remain living at home for as long as possible as they age. Moreover, the audience was invited to reflect on the needs in the homeenvironment for connectivity with proximity services and the local community, and how this holistic approach can contribute to economic growth opportunities and to the better quality of life of the ageing population. 3. PRESENTATIONS OF NATIONAL INITIATIVES: A number of examples of national and regional initiatives were presented as input to the discussion. In France and Poland a Silver Economy strategy underpins many of the initiatives in the field of age-friendly homes and living environments. In France a MoU signed between public and private sector to support economic growth in the Silver Economy is at the heart of a series of concerted actions including financing schemes to support the conversion of living environments into age-friendly environments. In Poland work has started on the definition of guidelines to define essential characteristics of an age-friendly home. The KfW Bank (Germany) runs a "Barrier-reduced conversion of homes" scheme focused on providing home owners with additional incentives for home conversion. This includes a preferential interest rate loans programme with repayment up to 30 years for both spatial and technology components that can support independent living and remove barriers. Essential requirements for home adaptation are based on a modified version of the German DIN standard concerning barrier-reduced house construction. The market alone did not provide the solution and that is the reason why KfW (national promotional bank) became active in this field. The KfW Loan Programme coexists with a Federal Grant Programme for age-friendly home conversion (financed by the Federal government but administered by KfW). Up to date housing units supported (17% of the current barrier reduced building stock). 1.9 bn EUR dispensed. Loans are favoured by the younger population whereas Grants are more popular with the older population. In the Netherlands initiatives in this field are mainly driven by stakeholders. The Netherlands is the country with the highest percentage of social housing. Public private partnerships are the key drivers to develop the urban agenda and include age-friendly living environments in this agenda. There is also an ambitious ehealth agenda that includes telemedicine and domotics at home. The "Digital Cities Agenda" is another area where age-friendly homes and living environments will be addressed. The fact that different initiatives at national and regional level were already emerging in the definition of age-friendly homes raised the question of "fragmentation". To what extent could a common framework of reference at EU level help prevent the negative effects of fragmentation, improving the quality of the information that is made available to home owners on age-friendly home solutions, without introducing new or mandatory standards and preserving the flexibility that is underpinned by the diverse national / regional realities? 2

3 4. PANEL DISCUSSION: A panel discussion followed with different stakeholder perspectives and ideas for moving forward with age friendly housing: Stuart Anderson (Digital Health Institute) focused on Care and how the home / living environment can support the future of long-term care provision. The physical infrastructure of a house will adapt to new needs just as our needs are changing. Design and technology changes will also support a greater degree of informal care. Bottom up community provision of care (e.g. coop models) can be enabled and enhanced by age-friendly homes and living environments with a technology platform and spatial infrastructure that is adequate. Public private partnerships will continue to be at the heart of advances in this field. Keith Baker (Philips) mentioned Industry 4.0 in Germany as an example of how economic and social models will shift as a result of technological evolution. A house offers a particularly rich field for technology evolution that can support the ageing population and improve conditions for healthy living. However, within the EU, astounding inequalities in health and care are driven by location and quality of accommodation. Whilst the life-expectancy of Europeans increases across the EU, this does not necessary reflect an increase in Healthy Life Years (HLYs). The differences across the EU on HLYs show that location and quality of accommodation are particularly important. Julien Dijol (Housing Europe) confirmed that in recent years there was an increasing demand of social housing across Europe driven by low and middle income families and by migration movements as well. The ageing population is very diverse diversity in terms of ICT literacy but health as well. He concluded that in Europe we need not only more homes but also better homes to accommodate the ageing population. That requires investment but public budgets for social housing have been consistently eroded as a result of the 2008 economic crisis. The role of the EU can be very important and an EU framework to support exchange experiences on age-friendly homes should help draw attention to this need and also provide support with solutions. An integrated approach with energy efficiency should be beneficial for age-friendly renovation. We need to work together with health and care providers, as well as with city and community planners. The EU framework / platform can provide guidelines on how to codesign solutions with users and how to combine energy efficiency and age-friendly renovation. Achieving cost-efficiency is crucial for success and therefore the framework should also avoid overly ambitious levels of implementation of standardisation initiatives, which may not necessarily deliver a good return on investment and which can have a negative impact on costs of rents. Mark Mobach (Health Space Design) highlighted the opportunities in the field of architecture, technology and funding organisations to cooperate in the creation of age-friendly homes and living environments. All these actors should be involved and integrated to deliver value to the ageing population that often has very specific needs. Often, solutions can be found with low-cost interventions in the living environment that make a significant impact for the improvement of safety and quality of life of the ageing population. A challenge for designers and users is to come up with innovative spatial interventions (e.g. sticker doors for people with dementia, cloud walk paths etc.). Evidence-based design should be more widely applied. We need to create a system that allows us to learn and to grow together based on evidence-based spatial design for the elderly and a common EU framework could help. 3

4 Antoine Aslanides (EDF) provided insights from the energy-efficiency perspective. The deployment of smart meters for energy efficiency and security of supply are currently happening and the increase in so-called "smart homes" provides new opportunities to build synergies amongst technology solutions / platforms that can be used for multiple purposes (from domotics and security, to entertainment, communications and even support solutions for independent living). These new technologies will provide data related to living environment (lighting and temperature control), energy consumption, health etc. There is already a very significant integration of ICT in energy efficiency solutions and this is an opportunity to be considered within the framework of an EU initiative on agefriendly living environments. Ulrich Paetzold (The European Construction Industry Federation) highlighted that renovation of homes for energy efficiency together with age-friendly / spatial changes is more expensive than renovation for energy efficiency only. But it is undoubtedly cheaper than doing both interventions separately. Ultimately there is a need to take into account the needs of the consumers, and their awareness of the benefits of energy efficiency and age-friendly conversions. We also need to take into account the levels of diversity that are needed in any framework to make sure that it caters for individual differences. Karina Marcus (AAL) supported the bottom up approach and the need to emphasise the co-design principles across any solutions for spatial or technology supported independent living. We shouldn t stigmatise home owners with "agefriendly" terminology. Instead, at EU level we should increasingly talk about reducing barriers and improving independent living. It is important to highlight that some of the investments in solutions that we have been describing are really about creating homes that can evolve with the inhabitants making them suitable for family living as well as accommodating the needs of the ageing population. Riccardo Viaggi (European Builders Confederation) suggested that standardisation bodies should also be involved in this discussion. Although the point is not to create new standards or revise existing ones, it is important to form an idea of what are the existing initiatives both for technology and construction / accessibility that currently exist and what are the trends in this field. 5. DISCUSSION ROUNDTABLES Three roundtables (Financial incentives, Construction and Technology) discussed options and possible European level actions to be proposed for the next 12 months to take forward the Age Friendly Homes agenda: Stuart Anderson presented the results of the "Financial incentives RT" with a list of suggested actions that included compilation of best practices, financial incentives and ROI / social impact (e.g. from KfW or UK Ireland Social Impact Bonds) and also the suggestion to replicate the Energy Efficiency Financial Institution Group (DG ENER) which compiled a report of financial instruments and incentives for energy efficiency conversion. The participants to the RT considered why other promotional banks are not involved in similar KfW schemes. There is a need to change the perception of people that investment in age friendly housing is a positive aspect rather than to stigmatise the concept, i.e. investments in communication actions should be made. A label scheme is an important element to help capture the increased value of property subject to conversions. It will create a clearer reference point for investments (by home owners and public authorities) and also for the industry. 4

5 Alexander Peine presented the results of the "Construction RT". The list of actions included: a proposal for guidelines on essential requirements for various aspects of age-friendly homes and buildings; best practices in incentives (similar to what was discussed in the financial investment RT); better integration of national strategies on larger scale and more efficient renovation projects. Involve citizens in urban and architectural design going from houses to community integration. The individual needs must be at the heart. Co-design is expensive. Funding support for Co-Design is important in that he can guarantee better outcomes. Keith Baker presented the results of the "Technology RT" with a list of suggested actions that included "Smart Living" rather than age-friendly living narrative. Platform development is important (reference design with levels for adaption), focus should be on serving people with conditions not-musicalized but with comorbidities. 6. CONCLUSIONS (BY ALEXANDER PEINE, PETER WINTLEV-JENSEN AND ANTONIO PAPARELLA) The participants confirmed the need to find effective ways of stimulating the release of the large investments required for making the current and future building stock suitable for a rapidly ageing population. It was also confirmed that there is a clear value in cooperation and a coherent European approach to the promotion of barrier-free homes for independent living that is flexible enough to take into account national / regional diversity, that prevents market fragmentation and stimulates the public and private investments needed to meet the needs of the ageing population. The Silver Economy potential for jobs and growth creation from such investments is large and should be pursued. These could take the form of a possible flexible EU label based on "guidelines" that take into account spatial adaptations and state-of-the art technology solutions to create smart living environments which support independent living and quality of life with clear and recognised benefits and an associated evidence base. The European Commission (DG CNECT and DG GROW) will continue working on the input collected during the meeting in order to provide the participants with a more detailed description of next steps in early September In the meantime the presentations and support materials provided by the participants will be made available through the Silver Economy Strategy pages of the European Commission. 5

6 ANNEX LIST OF PARTICIPANTS NAME Dominik Bach Alexander Peine Menno Hinkema Florent Jourde Antoine Aslanides Stuart Anderson Mark Mobach Agnieszka Ciesla Marzeha Rudnicka Leena Mäki Rodd Bond Keith Baker Ulrich Paetzold Julien DIJOL Riccardo Viaggi Karina Marcus ORGANIZATION KfW Bank ECTP Belgium TNO Netherlands EDF Group EDF Group Digital Health Institute, Scotland Health Space Design, The Netherlands Polish Institute of Silver Economy Polish Institute of Silver Economy Korpinen, Finland Dundalk Institute of Technology (Netwell Center) Philips The European Construction Industry Federation Housing Europe European Builders Confederation (EBC) AAL JP Antonio Paparella DG GROW C1.001 Bruno De Oliveira Ilias Iakovidis Peter Wintlev-Jensen DG CNECT H2 DG CNECT H2 DG CNECT H2 6