Normal View Dyslexic View
Thematic Article
Community-driven innovation: the social impact of Africa’s first net-zero sustainable innovative affordable house
Abstract
Delivering sustainable and affordable housing for low-income communities remains a major challenge amid housing shortages, energy insecurity, and net-zero transition pressures. In South Africa, adoption of net-zero housing is limited by regulatory, financial, and social barriers, highlighting the need for stronger policy integration and technological innovation. This study develops a community-driven, scalable net-zero housing model integrating Community-Based Participatory Research with innovative construction techniques. Africa’s first net-zero affordable housing prototype, the Sustainable Innovative Affordable House (SIAH-NZ), was implemented to demonstrate real-world feasibility. Performance assessments show a 97 per cent reduction in operational carbon emissions, an 82 per cent reduction in life-cycle costs, and a three-day construction period using prefabricated monolithic panels. Post-occupancy surveys indicate strong community acceptance, with 90 per cent of participants willing to adopt net-zero housing if financial support is available. The study highlights policy pathways for scaling net-zero housing through regulatory reform, financial incentives, decentralised renewables, and localised decision-making, offering a replicable blueprint for equitable, climate-resilient housing. This article is published in the Thematic Collection ‘Participatory Engagement and Game Playing for Achieving Sustainable Net-Zero Transition’, edited by Jing Zhao, Eirini Gallou, and Ievgeniia Kopytsia.
Keywords
climate-resilientcommunity-based participatory researchnet-zeropolicy integrationsustainable affordable housingtechnological innovationIntroduction
As the urgency for climate action grows, the pursuit of net-zero energy has become a global priority. However, much of the discourse around decarbonisation and net-zero transitions remains heavily focused on technological solutions, often neglecting the role of local communities in shaping sustainable futures (Mullally et al. 2022; Moghayedi & Awuzie 2025). This techno-centric approach risks overlooking community-driven innovation, local engagement, and co-creation, which are particularly vital in the Global South, where socio-economic and environmental challenges intersect (Moghayedi et al. 2022). This challenge is particularly urgent in Africa, where rapid urbanisation, persistent energy crises, and severe housing shortages create complex socio-economic and environmental pressures (Moghayedi et al. 2023). As millions migrate to cities in search of economic opportunities, the demand for affordable, climate-resilient housing continues to outpace supply, exacerbating inequalities and straining already fragile infrastructure.
With over 600 million people lacking reliable electricity and nearly 80 per cent of sub-Saharan Africa still dependent on biomass for cooking and heating (IEA 2022), energy insecurity remains a major barrier to development. Despite vast renewable energy potential, many African nations continue to rely on fossil fuels, struggling with power shortages, rolling blackouts, and grid instability (IEA 2022). In South Africa, the crisis is worsened by Eskom’s frequent load shedding, driven by aging infrastructure and coal dependency, leading to economic disruptions and rising energy costs for low-income households (Moghayedi et al. 2024). Simultaneously, the continent faces a severe housing deficit, with over 238 million people living in slum conditions (UN-Habitat 2023). South Africa alone has a housing backlog exceeding 2.4 million units, with low-income communities disproportionately affected by high energy costs and inefficient housing (Mahachi et al. 2022). Traditional low-cost housing in Africa is poorly insulated, leading to high energy consumption for heating and cooling, further straining already overburdened electricity grids (Bhanye et al. 2024). Addressing these intertwined challenges requires integrated solutions that combine affordability, sustainability, and energy efficiency.
Addressing these challenges requires a holistic, integrated approach that combines community engagement, innovative construction methods, and sustainable design principles to ensure that housing is not only affordable but also energy-efficient and climate-resilient. Importantly, this study also demonstrates that net-zero housing can be cost-effective, rapidly constructed, and socially accepted when community-driven approaches are integrated into housing design and delivery. These findings offer a practical and scalable alternative to conventional low-cost housing models, particularly in the Global South.
This study explores the role of community-driven approaches in advancing SIAH-NZ (Sustainable Innovative Affordable House) in Africa, with a focus on South Africa’s transition to decarbonised and sustainable affordable housing. It aims to examine how local participation influences the successful implementation of SIAH-NZ and assess the impact of participatory design and co-creation methodologies on community perceptions and adoption of net-zero housing technologies. The novelty of this research lies in its departure from techno-centric net-zero strategies, instead highlighting community-led innovation as a key enabler of sustainable housing solutions. Through a real-world SIAH-NZ prototype, the study demonstrates how localised decision-making and inclusive engagement drive affordable, scalable, and socially accepted net-zero housing models, offering valuable insights for policymakers, developers, and researchers in the Global South.
Literature review
Net-zero housing: evolution, challenges, and opportunities
The Net-Zero Energy Housing (NZEH) concept originated in the United States, gaining traction with the US Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which mandated net-zero building design in public infrastructure (Makvandia & Safiuddin 2021). NZEH refers to houses that generate as much energy as they consume, typically using on-site renewable sources such as solar PV, energy-efficient construction materials, and passive design strategies.
Despite its technological feasibility, the adoption of NZEH in developing countries faces several key challenges. One of the major barriers is the high initial cost of implementing sustainable materials and renewable energy systems. While NZEHs offer long-term energy savings, the upfront investment required remains prohibitive, particularly for low-income housing developments (Makvandia & Safiuddin 2021). Additionally, policy and regulatory gaps hinder progress, as many developing nations lack clear frameworks or financial incentives to promote the construction and adoption of NZEH. Without government subsidies, tax incentives, or financing mechanisms, the transition to energy-efficient housing remains slow. Moreover, limited awareness and social acceptance present further obstacles, as communities often resist unfamiliar construction methods and tend to favour traditional brick-and-mortar structures over modern prefabricated, energy-efficient alternatives (Moghayedi et al. 2021). These challenges highlight the need for targeted policy interventions, financial support mechanisms, and community engagement strategies to facilitate the scalability and acceptance of NZEH in developing regions.
Community-driven sustainability in net zero
Traditional net-zero strategies have largely been shaped by top-down policy interventions, driven by government policies, industry advancements, and large-scale infrastructure investments (Meadowcroft & Rosenbloom 2023). However, research increasingly highlights that community participation is essential for successful and equitable transitions (WEF 2025). For a truly just and localised transition, communities must be empowered as active participants, rather than passive recipients of imposed solutions (Sovacool et al. 2019). This shift toward community-driven sustainability ensures that local actors play a central role in shaping environmental transitions, fostering solutions that are socially inclusive, culturally relevant, and more effective in achieving long-term decarbonisation goals (WEF 2025).
Building on the importance of community participation in net-zero transitions, community-led sustainability initiatives harness local knowledge, social cohesion, and participatory governance to create context-specific solutions that address both environmental and socio-economic challenges (Sovacool et al. 2019). Unlike top-down, techno-centric interventions, which often overlook local realities, studies in the Global North show that community-driven decarbonisation and net-zero projects lead to higher adoption rates, stronger social acceptance, and more effective policy integration (Potts & Ford 2022).
Participatory design approaches in sustainable housing
Participatory design is a user-centred approach that engages local stakeholders in the planning, design, and construction of housing solutions. Unlike top-down decision-making, which often ignores community needs and cultural contexts, participatory design fosters collaboration, ownership, and long-term sustainability (Wacnik et al. 2025). Participatory design, grounded in Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR), emphasises co-creation, hands-on learning, and shared decision-making, ensuring sustainable solutions align with local knowledge, traditions, and economic realities (Reid et al. 2023; Shehadeh et al. 2025). Engaging communities from the early stages of design fosters greater ownership and acceptance, as residents actively contribute to shaping housing models that meet their cultural and practical needs. Additionally, hands-on learning is essential for skill development and job creation, as training community members in innovative construction techniques enhances knowledge retention, workforce capacity, and the long-term sustainability of net-zero housing initiatives (Moghayedi et al. 2024). Furthermore, shared decision-making empowers communities to take part in site selection, material choices, and design modifications, which not only leads to higher rates of adoption but also strengthens social cohesion and resilience (Sovacool et al. 2019). By integrating these principles, participatory design creates inclusive, community-driven housing solutions that are both sustainable and culturally appropriate.
Despite growing interest in sustainable development and net zero in housing projects, significant gaps remain in integrating community-driven innovation and participatory design approaches (Cotella et al. 2025). Existing research is limited in its focus on developing nations and Africa, particularly within low-income communities, where participatory net-zero housing solutions have not been widely explored (Bhanye et al. 2024). Additionally, there is a lack of frameworks that combine net-zero construction with co-creation methodologies, making implementation particularly challenging in low-income and subsidised housing projects. Another critical gap is the insufficient research on the social acceptance of modern sustainable housing technologies, such as MMCs [modern methods of construction (Mahachi et al. 2022)]. This study addresses these gaps by demonstrating a real-world, community-driven SIAH Net-Zero housing prototype in South Africa, bridging the divide between sustainable construction practices, net zero, and local acceptance. It also provides actionable insights for scaling participatory net-zero housing models in low-income communities and explores policy and regulatory pathways that promote bottom-up, localised decision-making in housing transitions.
Methodology
Grounded in a constructivist research philosophy, this study employs a CBPR approach to co-creation and implementing the SIAH-NZ. Constructivism emphasises that knowledge is socially constructed through interaction and shared experiences, making CBPR particularly suited for engaging communities as active participants rather than passive beneficiaries. This methodology prioritises community engagement, local empowerment, and the integration of social, environmental, and technical dimensions into the housing design process. By fostering collaborative decision-making and incorporating local knowledge and cultural preferences, CBPR ensures that the SIAH-NZ model is not only technologically viable but also socially accepted and contextually relevant, effectively addressing both housing and energy challenges in Africa.
CBPR ensures that communities are engaged in every stage of the research process, fostering community ownership and long-term sustainability of the SIAH-NZ concept (Reid et al. 2023). The key principles of this approach include co-learning, equity in decision-making, and action-oriented solutions. Co-learning was facilitated through hands-on training sessions, introducing local stakeholders to energy-efficient housing technologies and sustainable construction practices. Equity in decision-making ensured that residents, policymakers, and technical experts had equal input in material selection, construction techniques, and renewable energy integration, creating a balanced and inclusive development process. Finally, an action-oriented focus linked research with real-world implementation, allowing community members to actively participate in constructing, evaluating, and advocating for the SIAH-NZ house. These principles collectively ensured that the project was technically sound, socially accepted, and locally embedded, laying the foundation for scalable, community-driven net-zero housing solutions.
The research design followed a four-phase CBPR cycle, as illustrated in Figure 1. Each phase integrated three key research methods to optimise outcomes and ensure that the SIAH-NZ model was developed through a collaborative and participatory process rather than imposed on the community.
Figure 1.
CBPR cycle adapted for SIAH-NZ methodology. © Author.
Diagram illustrating the CBPR cycle adapted for the SIAH-NZ methodology, showing four interconnected phases: Phase 1 stakeholder engagement and needs assessment; Phase 2 co-design and material selection; Phase 3 construction and community-led implementation; and Phase 4 evaluation, refinement, and policy advocacy, all linked in a continuous cycle.
Findings
This section presents the key findings from the implementation of Africa’s first SIAH-NZ, structured across a four-phase CBPR cycle.
Stakeholder engagement and needs assessment
This phase focused on identifying key stakeholders in the housing and energy transition and assessing their needs, knowledge, and capacities to facilitate the successful implementation of SIAH-NZ.
Stakeholders mapping
A systematic stakeholder identification and mapping process (Figure 2) categorised stakeholders based on their level of influence and interest in affordable net-zero housing. The process begins with a literature review and policy analysis to identify key actors, followed by consultations with sector experts and local representatives to validate stakeholder inclusion. Finally, a stakeholder mapping exercise used an influence–interest matrix to classify stakeholders and prioritise engagement strategies, ensuring a comprehensive and inclusive approach to stakeholder participation.
Figure 2.
Mapping of key housing stakeholders in the SIAH-NZ project. © Author.
Diagram showing key housing stakeholders in the SIAH-NZ project, including governance bodies, developers, community members, and advocacy groups, represented as interconnected stakeholder categories.
The mapping process grouped stakeholders into four main categories based on their level of influence and interest in housing projects:
National and local government: Key decision-makers in housing policy, planning, and budget allocation, with high influence and strong interest in aligning affordability, sustainability, and net-zero housing with national and municipal strategies.
Developers and suppliers: Private housing developers, construction firms, and material suppliers held moderate influence but low interest, often deterred by perceived high costs and market uncertainty. Their involvement was crucial for technical feasibility and supply chain readiness.
Professionals and NGO (nongovernmental organisation) activists: Architects, engineers, and NGOs with high interest but limited influence played a vital role in technical validation, community mobilisation, and knowledge dissemination, advocating for sustainable, affordable net-zero housing.
Local community (residents of low-income housing): Initially low influence and interest, their engagement was essential for social acceptance, design input, and long-term sustainability.
Survey housing performance
As part of Phase 1, housing surveys were conducted to gain a comprehensive understanding of housing preferences, energy consumption patterns, and overall housing performance in the target community. These surveys provided quantitative and qualitative insights into the living conditions, affordability concerns, and energy inefficiencies faced by residents in low-income housing. Findings from the surveys revealed that most households relied on inefficient building designs, leading to high energy consumption for heating and cooling, further straining the already fragile energy infrastructure. Additionally, housing performance assessments highlighted poor insulation, ventilation issues, and a reliance on traditional energy sources, making residents vulnerable to fluctuating electricity costs and frequent load shedding. Importantly, the surveys captured resident preferences, indicating a willingness to adopt energy-efficient housing solutions if they were affordable, durable, and culturally appropriate. The findings from the housing surveys align with existing research on energy poverty and housing inefficiencies in low-income communities in the Global South (Moghayedi et al. 2022).
Focused group discussions
Building on stakeholder identification and housing surveys, targeted focus group discussions were conducted to gain deeper insights into housing challenges, policy constraints, and industry perspectives on net-zero housing implementation. These discussions were structured to engage four key housing stakeholder groups, ensuring a comprehensive and inclusive understanding of the barriers and opportunities within the housing and energy transition. Community focus groups explored housing affordability, living conditions, and perceptions of net-zero housing, revealing a high level of concern over rising energy costs and poor housing performance. Local government discussions assessed the regulatory landscape, policy gaps, and institutional capacity for integrating net-zero housing solutions into urban development plans. Meanwhile, professionals and developer engagement evaluated technical expertise, experience with energy-efficient construction, and industry openness to adopting innovations. The findings from these discussions played a crucial role in shaping the co-design process, ensuring that stakeholder priorities, practical challenges, and aspirational goals were fully incorporated into the SIAH-NZ model.
Phase 2: Co-designing the SIAH-NZ house
This phase centred on participatory design workshops, energy and carbon modelling, and training, enabling stakeholders to actively shape the design, material selection, and energy system integration of the SIAH-NZ house.
Participatory design workshops: developing the SIAH-NZ model
Prior to the main participatory design workshops, individual pre-design sessions were conducted for each stakeholder group to establish a foundational understanding of the net-zero housing concept and its implementation. These sessions introduced sustainable construction principles, outlined design objectives, and emphasised stakeholder engagement. They also ensured that all participants, regardless of background, were familiar with common terminology and methodologies, fostering a shared language and cohesive approach. By aligning technical experts, policymakers, developers, and community members, these pre-design sessions enabled meaningful contributions to the co-creation process, eliminating knowledge barriers.
Consequently, collective design workshops were conducted, bringing together all stakeholders and a team of net-zero housing experts. The net-zero housing model proposed by Oh et al. (2017) and the SIAH-Livable model developed by Moghayedi et al. (2023) were adopted as structured frameworks for this study. The design process unfolded in four key stages:
1.
Optimising housing design through passive and sustainable techniques: Participants focused on house orientation, natural ventilation, and daylight optimisation, ensuring maximum use of natural resources based on local climatic conditions and cultural housing preferences. Various MMCs approved by Agrément South Africa were assessed. The monolithic prefabricated structural insulated panels (SIPs) were selected as the most suitable MMC, balancing affordability, sustainability, and energy efficiency.
2.
Resource efficiency strategies for energy and water reduction: High-efficiency electrical fittings and appliances were incorporated to minimise household energy consumption. Water-saving technologies were introduced, ensuring optimal water efficiency through low-flow fixtures and greywater recycling systems.
3.
Calculating and designing the energy generation system: Once the housing design, materials, and consumption levels were optimised, the actual energy demand of the SIAH-NZ house was calculated. Based on this demand, an optimal solar PV system was designed to generate sufficient renewable energy over a year, ensuring sustainability and cost-effectiveness.
4.
Designing back-up energy systems for grid independence: A back-up energy system was incorporated to enhance resilience, ensuring uninterrupted power supply during periods of low solar energy generation.
The collaborative design approach provided valuable insights from diverse stakeholder groups, each bringing unique priorities and concerns to the SIAH-NZ project. Community members emphasised the importance of cultural preferences, durability, affordability, and housing performance, advocating for homes that align with local traditions and practical needs. Developers, on the other hand, focused on the economic feasibility of net-zero solutions, highlighting the need for cost-effective construction methods to encourage wider adoption. Meanwhile, national and local government officials raised concerns about subsidy structures and budget constraints, while also expressing strong interest in scaling up the SIAH-NZ model. Lastly, professionals and NGOs prioritised environmental and social sustainability, advocating for the optimised use of renewable and natural resources through passive design strategies, while also emphasising the need to minimise the energy and carbon footprint of the housing model. These insights collectively informed the refinement of the SIAH-NZ prototype, ensuring that it is technically, socially, and economically viable for large-scale implementation.
Performance evaluation: life-cycle assessment and life-cycle cost analysis
To quantify the sustainability and economic viability of the SIAH-NZ model, a comprehensive LCA (life-cycle assessment) and LCCA (life-cycle cost analysis) were conducted, comparing its performance to a conventional low-income house. The LCA assessed environmental impacts, including reductions in carbon emissions over the lifespan of the building, while the LCCA examined long-term financial benefits, emphasising operational cost savings through energy efficiency. These analyses provided data-driven insights into the economic and environmental benefits of net-zero housing, reinforcing its feasibility as a scalable, cost-effective solution for sustainable affordable housing. The findings align with existing research on net-zero housing and sustainable construction, which emphasises how sustainable design strategies, innovative construction methods, and materials effectively reduce life-cycle costs and carbon footprints (Sovacool et al. 2019).
Stakeholder training and validation
The LCA and LCCA findings were presented to stakeholders through a hands-on training session, bridging the gap between technical analysis and practical implementation. The training demonstrated that net-zero housing significantly reduces carbon emissions, provides long-term cost savings, and enhances the efficiency and benefits of prefabricated monolithic panels. It emphasised their energy performance, durability, and rapid deployment, enabling faster housing delivery while minimising environmental impact. These results strengthened stakeholder confidence in the feasibility of net-zero housing, reinforcing their commitment to scaling the SIAH-NZ model. By combining participatory design, performance validation, and knowledge transfer, this phase ensured that stakeholders were well equipped with the technical understanding and practical insights needed to support the broader adoption of net-zero housing solutions. This approach aligns with previous studies in the Global South, which emphasise the importance of stakeholder engagement and capacity-building in successfully implementing sustainable housing initiatives (Potts & Ford 2022).
Phase 3: Construction and community-led implementation
The construction phase of the SIAH-NZ project was community-driven, integrating hands-on training, skill development, and rapid assembly to ensure both technical efficiency and local ownership.
Community-led construction
Before construction, a short training period equipped local community members, particularly women, with the skills to assemble the SIAH-NZ house using prefabricated SIP panels. The manufacturer provided hands-on instruction, ensuring participants gained practical experience in panel assembly and installation. After training, community-led construction began, with 80 per cent of the workforce from the local community. The use of prefabricated monolithic panels enhanced speed, quality, and efficiency, enabling completion in just three days with 40 per cent lay labour. This demonstrated the feasibility of rapid and labour-efficient MMC deployment for affordable, sustainable housing solutions, as also highlighted by previous research (Moghayedi & Awuzie 2023). Experience the SIAH-NZ model firsthand through a Virtual Tour.
Real-time monitoring and performance assessment
Throughout the construction process, real-time monitoring was implemented to assess key performance indicators and ensure efficiency, quality, and cost-effectiveness. The evaluation focused on ease of assembly, tracking how quickly and effectively community members adapted to prefabricated construction methods, as well as labour productivity, ensuring that the training provided translated into efficient execution. Additionally, material efficiency and waste reduction were closely monitored to optimise resource use and minimise construction waste, reinforcing the sustainability goals of the project. Lastly, assessments of structural quality and cost-effectiveness of the prefabricated SIP were conducted, validating the durability, affordability, and feasibility of the SIAH-NZ model as a scalable solution for net-zero affordable housing. These findings align with previous studies on modern construction methods, which highlight the ability of MMC to improve efficiency, reduce material waste, and enhance housing affordability while maintaining high structural quality (Moghayedi & Awuzie 2023).
Capacity-building workshops on net-zero living
Following the construction and monitoring steps, a series of educational workshops were conducted to ensure the long-term sustainability of the SIAH-NZ model by equipping residents with the necessary skills to manage and maintain their net-zero homes effectively. The training covered operation and maintenance of the net-zero home, ensuring that residents could efficiently handle utilised innovative systems for optimal performance. Finally, the workshops promoted energy-efficient household practices, helping residents adopt sustainable habits to minimise energy and water consumption and reduce utility costs. By integrating these capacity-building initiatives, the project reinforced community ownership of the SIAH-NZ model, ensuring its long-term viability and replicability.
Phase 4: Evaluation, refinement, and policy advocacy
The final phase of the SIAH-NZ project focused on assessing its social, economic, and environmental impact, while identifying policy pathways for wider implementation. Through post-occupancy evaluation and stakeholder policy dialogues, this phase ensured that the SIAH-NZ model was not only technically validated but also aligned with national housing priorities for potential scalability and adoption.
Post-occupancy evaluation
To assess the real-world performance of the SIAH-NZ house, a short-stay experience was organised, allowing local community members to live in the net-zero home and provide direct feedback. Following this, post-occupancy surveys were conducted to evaluate key aspects of the functionality, affordability, and comfort levels of the house.
The assessment focused on functionality, affordability, and user experience to evaluate the performance of the SIAH-NZ house. Functionality was measured through thermal comfort, air quality, and overall housing performance, assessing how passive design and innovations regulated indoor temperatures. Affordability perceptions compared life-cycle cost savings to the initial investment, while user experience examined the efficiency and usability of solar PV and back-up energy systems. The findings revealed overwhelmingly positive feedback, with 94 per cent of short-stay participants reporting improved functionality and comfort levels compared to conventional homes, highlighting the effectiveness of passive techniques, innovative materials, and MMC. Additionally, 87 per cent observed lower indoor temperatures, reducing reliance on artificial cooling and heating, and 90 per cent expressed willingness to transition to net-zero housing, contingent on financial support or subsidies. These results reinforce the affordability, sustainability, and scalability of net-zero housing, demonstrating its potential for widespread adoption.
Comparative life-cycle assessment: carbon emissions and cost analysis
Comparative actual LCA and LCCA were conducted to evaluate the environmental and economic performance of the SIAH-NZ house against a conventional low-income home. The LCA quantified reductions in carbon emissions across the life cycle of the building, while the LCCA measured long-term cost savings, considering energy consumption, maintenance, and affordability. Findings revealed that the SIAH-NZ house significantly outperformed conventional housing, achieving a 97 per cent reduction in operational carbon emissions due to high thermal efficiency, passive cooling, and solar energy integration. Additionally, life-cycle costs were reduced by 82 per cent, as lower energy and maintenance expenses offset the initial investment. These results align with existing research on net-zero housing, demonstrating that energy-efficient, prefabricated designs offer both economic and environmental advantages, making them a viable solution for sustainable affordable housing (Moghayedi et al. 2025).
Stakeholder policy dialogues and pathways for scaling SIAH-NZ
To ensure the scalability and institutional adoption of the SIAH-NZ model, the project concluded with policy dialogues led by community representatives, NGOs, and social activists. These discussions focused on integrating net-zero housing principles into national and local housing policies, addressing financial and regulatory barriers, and exploring pathways for large-scale implementation.
Key policy recommendations emerged from these discussions, emphasising the need for government incentives to promote net-zero housing in low-income areas. This includes subsidies, tax breaks, and green financing options to reduce upfront costs and make sustainable housing financially accessible. Additionally, innovations and MMCs were highlighted as a cost-effective and efficient solution to address housing shortages. Policymakers acknowledged the necessity of streamlining regulatory approvals for modern building methods, allowing alternative construction techniques like monolithic SIP panels to be widely adopted. Another critical area of focus was workforce development, with stakeholders advocating for the expansion of training programmes to build local capacity in net-zero construction. Establishing vocational training and certification programmes would not only support long-term sustainability but also generate employment opportunities, ensuring that the shift to sustainable housing benefits local communities economically. These policy discussions established the SIAH-NZ model as a scalable solution, with local authorities expressing strong interest in integrating similar projects into national affordable housing programmes. To further expand this initiative across South Africa and beyond, stakeholder policy dialogues will be essential in driving institutional support, regulatory alignment, and long-term investment.
Conclusions and insights
The SIAH-NZ project highlights the transformative potential of community-driven net-zero housing in addressing South Africa’s housing and energy crises, aligning with global research on participatory design, prefabricated construction, and sustainable development. The SIAH-NZ findings have demonstrated the feasibility of community-driven, low-cost net-zero housing as a viable solution for South Africa’s housing shortages, energy poverty, and climate resilience. By integrating participatory design and innovative construction methods, the project highlights a scalable model that balances affordability, sustainability, and social impact.
The success of SIAH-NZ underscores the critical role of policy in scaling sustainable housing solutions. Integrating net-zero energy standards into South Africa’s National Housing Code, expanding financial mechanisms such as low-interest loans, tax credits, and subsidies for local material production, and streamlining regulatory approvals for MMCs are essential to making net-zero housing mainstream. Given Africa’s ongoing energy crisis, policies should also prioritise decentralised renewable energy integration, ensuring that solar PV installations and water recycling systems become standard in affordable housing. For developers, the project has proven that net-zero housing can be cost-effective, rapidly constructed, and widely accepted when incorporating community-driven approaches. Scaling these models requires affordable net-zero technologies, leveraging MMC to reduce costs and labour, and focusing on material selection that ensures affordability, durability, and energy efficiency. Training local communities in net-zero construction skills through social enterprise partnerships can further enhance economic empowerment and workforce capacity, making sustainable housing more accessible at scale.
The SIAH-NZ model also provides a strong foundation for future research in climate-resilient, affordable housing solutions. Further studies are needed to analyse long-term energy efficiency, affordability, and durability across different climate zones, while research on community-led housing innovation models can evaluate the effectiveness of participatory design methodologies and their impact on policy integration and adoption. Additionally, digital technologies such as AI, the Internet of Things, smart energy systems, and digital twins offer opportunities to enhance net-zero housing design, identify high-priority development areas, and streamline policy implementation. The SIAH-NZ project serves as a blueprint for the future, proving that sustainability and affordability are not mutually exclusive but essential components of a just, resilient, and climate-smart urban transition. By integrating policy support, private-sector collaboration, community engagement, and research-driven innovation, South Africa and other developing nations can pioneer scalable net-zero housing models, ensuring a sustainable and equitable future for all.
References
BhanyeJ., LehoboM.T., MocwagaeK. & ShayamundaR. (2024), ‘Strategies for sustainable innovative affordable housing (SIAH) for low-income families in Africa: a rapid review study’, Discover Sustainability, 5(1): 157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00353-9
CotellaV.A., AburamadanR., ErekatA., NeaguC.D., ShehadehA., MoghayediA. & MujtabaI.M. (2025), ‘A critical success factor (CSF) framework for implementing net-positive housing in the water, energy, food, environment (WEFE) Nexus: insights from Jordan and South Africa’, Journal of Building Engineering, 106: 112659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2025.112659
IEA (International Energy Agency) (2022), Africa Energy Outlook 2022. https://www.iea.org/reports/africa-energy-outlook-2022; https://doi.org/10.1787/2abd9ce2-en
MahachiJ.J., MoghayediA. & MichellK. (2022 July), ‘Investigating the effects of innovative technologies on the delivery of South African affordable housing’, in Construction Industry Development Board Postgraduate Research Conference (Cham, Springer International Publishing), 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22434-8_41
MakvandiaG. & SafiuddinM. (2021), ‘Obstacles to developing net-zero energy (NZE) homes in greater Toronto area’, Buildings, 11(3): 95. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030095
MeadowcroftJ. & RosenbloomD. (2023), ‘Governing the net-zero transition: strategy, policy, and politics’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(47): e2207727120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2207727120
MoghayediA. & AwuzieB. (2023), ‘Towards a net-zero carbon economy: a sustainability performance assessment of innovative prefabricated construction methods for affordable housing in Southern Africa’, Sustainable Cities and Society, 99: 104907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104907
MoghayediA. & AwuzieB.O. (2025), ‘A framework for facilitating low-income net-zero energy housing delivery in developing countries: insights from a practical case in South Africa.’, Building and Environment, 276: 112847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2025.112847
MoghayediA., AwuzieB., OmotayoT., Le JeuneK., MassynM., EkpoC.O., BrauneM. & ByronP. (2021), ‘A critical success factor framework for implementing sustainable innovative and affordable housing: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis’, Buildings, 11(8): 317. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11080317
MoghayediA., AwuzieB., OmotayoT., Le JeuneK. & MassynM. (2022), ‘Appraising the nexus between influencers and sustainability-oriented innovation adoption in affordable housing projects’, Sustainable Development, 30(5): 1117–1134. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2306
MoghayediA., PhiriC. & EllmannA.M. (2023), ‘Improving sustainability of affordable housing using innovative technologies: case study of SIAH-Livable’, Scientific African, 21: e01819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2023.e01819
MoghayediA., MichellK., HübnerD., Le JeuneK. & MassynM. (2024), ‘Examine the impact of green methods and technologies on the environmental sustainability of supportive education buildings, perspectives of circular economy and net-zero carbon operation’, Facilities, 42(3/4): 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/F-12-2022-0161
MoghayediA., AwuzieB.O. & MehmoodA. (2025), ‘Evaluating the sustainability performance of sustainable, innovative, and affordable housing’, International Planning Studies, 31(1): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2025.2550970
MullallyG. (2022), A roadmap for local deliberative engagements on transitions to net zero carbon and climate resilience. Report 415. epaResearch. https://www.epa.ie/publications/research/climate-change/Research_Report_415.pdf
OhJ., HongT., KimH., AnJ., JeongK. & KooC. (2017), ‘Advanced strategies for net-zero energy building: focused on the early phase and usage phase of a building’s life cycle’, Sustainability, 9(12): 2272. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122272
PottsT. & FordR. (2022), Leading from the front? Increasing community participation in a just transition to net zero in the North-East of Scotland. https://www.abdn.ac.uk/media/site/geosciences/documents/SUII_Just_Transitions_Final_Report.pdf; https://doi.org/10.57064/2164/19722
ReidC., LandyA. & HendersonJ. (2023), ‘‘Knocking at the door of humanity’: using co-creation and community-based participatory research to foster citizenship for individuals with lived experience of dementia’, Leisure/Loisir, 47(2): 257–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/14927713.2022.2104347
ShehadehA., OdeyA., AburamadanR., ArarM., AbuhazeemS., KhazalehK. & MoghayediA. (2025), ‘Integrating climate resilience and digital twin technologies in housing: a comparative analysis and sustainable design proposal for Jordan and South Africa’, Results in Engineering, 28: 108409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2025.108409
SovacoolB.K., MartiskainenM., HookA. & BakerL. (2019), ‘Decarbonization and its discontents: a critical energy justice perspective on four low-carbon transitions’, Climatic Change, 155(4): 581–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02521-7
UN-Habitat (2023), 2023 HLPF factsheet: SDG 11 – Sustainable cities and communities. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. 2023 Factsheets
WacnikP., DalyS.R. & VermaA. (2025), ‘Participatory design: a systematic review and insights for future practice’, Design Science, 11: e21. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2025.10009
WEF (World Economic Forum) (2025, January 16), Why a local approach to the just transition is so important — and so effective. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/local-approach-to-just-transition-is-important/
Cite
DOI: 10.5871/jba/014.a17
Published on: 10 June 2026
Volume: 14
Issue: Issue 2
Article view count: 4
Article download count: 0
Copyright statement
© The author(s) 2026. This is an open access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International LicenseCite this article
Moghayedi, A. (2026), ‘Community-driven innovation: the social impact of Africa’s first net-zero sustainable innovative affordable house’, Journal of the British Academy, 14(2): a17 https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/014.a17Crossref
Dimensions
Altmetric
Article metrics
View count: 4
Download count: 0
No Data Found
No Data Found
No Data Found
Received
October 2022
Accepted
May 2023
Published
July 2023
No Data Found
No Data Found