I07: Fulfilment of Basic Needs

I07: Fulfilment of Basic Needs

Indicators framework: LIT_001 · Calculation methodology: self_sufficiency_calculation · EDT convergence: edt_ssi_convergence

Definition

As named in the primary: Fulfillment of basic needs (water, energy, housing) (Table 2). Bustamin et al. describe it as energy independence understood as the ability of an energy system to operate autonomously from the power grid, the use of effective and affordable methods such as photovoltaic panels, solar heat collectors and biomass, and per-capita housing expenditure as a measure of independence. LIT_001 (p.7)

As rendered for this project: The ability of a community to ensure reliable and affordable provision of essential resources (water, energy and housing) for all residents, ideally through local or autonomous systems. (This wording is the project’s working definition, restated from CR_001, the synthesis of the primary. The primary’s own words are above.)

Relevance to Neobiome

[Why this indicator matters for eco-village design. What achieving it looks like in practice.]

Evidence

• Skrzypczyński (2021): in 60 European ecovillages, water, energy, and food provision are primary self-sufficiency targets; communities prefer partial independence complemented by regional cooperation. CR_001

• Reis et al. (2021): energy independence as a community benefit; multiagent optimisation for energy self-sufficiency. CR_001

• ESR = E_self-consumed / E_total-demanded (Huang et al., 2022, Applied Energy) — most precisely defined community-scale energy metric; SCR = E_self-consumed / E_total-produced-locally is the complementary ratio. CR_002

• Canonical single-building energy self-sufficiency definition (the primary behind the ESR/SCR pair above). Luthander et al. formally define self-sufficiency = C/(A+C) — “the degree to which the on-site generation is sufficient to fill the energy needs of the building” (self-consumed energy ÷ total load) — and its dual, self-consumption = C/(B+C) (÷ total production). These are exactly the ESR / SCR ratios CR_002 attributes to Huang et al. (2022); this widely-cited Applied Energy review is the earlier canonical single-building formulation — the definitional anchor for the energy component of basic-needs fulfilment (it supplies the formula, not fulfilment data). LIT_072

• WSR = Q_lr / Q_td (Rygaard et al., 2011, Water Research) — most standardised community water self-sufficiency formula; highly boundary-dependent. CR_002

• NZ water-demand baseline for the WSR denominator (Q_td): first national-scope BRANZ measurement (66 households) puts typical residential use at a median 159 L/person/day in winter, 231 in summer (median preferred — the mean of 213/292 is skewed by heavy users); the MBIE efficiency target is 75 L/p/d. Grounds the NZ water self-sufficiency calculation that previously leaned on overseas baselines. OT_036

• Sieben Linden ecovillage empirical benchmarks: 67.1% electricity SS, 100% heat SS, 61% water SS (Bocco et al., 2019) — strongest real-world reference point for I07 targets. CR_002

• Gullberg, Wang & Eriksson (2025): first peer-reviewed multi-domain study co-calculating energy, water, and nutrient SS with consistent system boundaries. CR_002

• Energy SSR = locally consumed renewables / total community demand — consistent definition confirmed across 50-paper independent literature review. CR_003

• Biomass district heating at community scale using local forestry waste directly achieves heat supply self-sufficiency; primary metric is ESR (heat) = local biomass heat / total community heat demand. Interview I [INT_001]

• Kaposvár case: community-operated biomass heating insulated the city from the 2022 gas price crisis; a 5 billion HUF plant investment was recovered in ~2 months vs. a projected 6–8 billion HUF gas bill for the same period. Interview I [INT_001]

• Local wood chip fuel prices did not spike during the 2021–22 energy crisis (unlike gas and pellets), demonstrating that local, non-traded fuel supply is a quantifiable resilience advantage for basic needs provision. Interview I [INT_001]

• Community electricity architecture: centralized storage (1–2 MW) + central production unit (1–3 MW) strongly preferred over household-scale batteries for 20–100 family communities — household-scale batteries cost 2–3× more per unit and create operational coordination burden. Interview II [INT_002]

• 1:4 load-to-storage ratio heuristic: for every 1 GW of load, at least 4 GWh of storage is needed; California already planning 6-hour systems. Interview II [INT_002]

• Dubai model: 8× PV oversizing + storage achieves 1 GW baseload overnight from daytime solar; worst-case scenario (Stockholm insolation) ~130–140 EUR/MWh — approaching market rates. Interview II [INT_002]

• Grid connection recommended as backup/flexibility even for self-sufficient communities — isolated networks are most vulnerable (Texas, Spain, Australia); grid connection is the “road infrastructure” that handles edge cases local systems cannot. Interview II [INT_002]

• Anaerobic biogas digesters are framed as a “technological approach to support modern, sustainable, and fair access to energy” aligned with SDG7 — confirming bioenergy’s role as the primary vehicle for rural basic energy provision in 45 years of global literature (36% of 259 cases). LIT_004

• HOMER benchmark: 336-house village demand is 1,267 MWh/year (10.3 kWh/household/day); hybrid renewable systems achieve 107% of demand — full energy basic-needs provision confirmed at this community scale. India-context figures; use as design benchmark, not absolute NZ target. LIT_003

• A village’s own agricultural waste streams (2,400 tons/year crop residue + 1 ton/day cattle dung) can generate sufficient electricity for the entire community — full energy self-sufficiency from on-site biological feedstock is structurally feasible at 336-house scale. LIT_003

• NZ community battery sizing: 15 households with 8kW solar per household (14% NZ CF) + 180kWh community battery meets the daily energy needs of 2.16 additional non-solar households; 8kW + 240kWh serves 4.51 — quantifies the community sharing capacity of a small NZ energy system. OT_001

• Seasonal grid independence: in December–February, solar households import zero energy from the grid — full demand offset via solar + battery discharge; confirms seasonal full self-sufficiency is achievable at household scale in NZ within this community configuration. OT_001

• Base-case sharing limit (4kW+120kWh): sharing with non-solar households only possible in January and December; battery provides 25–34% of a single non-solar household’s daily demand in those months. A 4kW solar installation generates insufficient excess for meaningful non-solar sharing regardless of battery size — solar capacity, not battery size, is the binding constraint for community energy sharing. OT_001

• Without storage: 36.4% of daily solar generation is spilled annually in a 15-household NZ community; with 120kWh battery: spill drops to 2.1% — community battery converts individual PV into a community energy provision mechanism, directly advancing the ESR metric for non-solar households. OT_001

• NZ community-scale energy-provisioning cost reference: Totarabank grid-tied PV+wind+battery achieves a design LCOE of 0.094/kWh (baseline) / 0.109/kWh (resilient) at the 14-inhabitant / 8-lot scale, at or well below NZ retail. The design specification is directly reusable for Neobiome: an 80% time-based autarky ratio with 0% critical-load shortage over a 25-year horizon defines a community energy self-sufficiency target. LIT_032

• Totarabank MG (Mohseni et al. 2021) — ‘economics of self-sufficiency’: the design meets an 80% self-sufficiency ratio, and forcing 100% self-sufficiency costs only ~14% more over the life-cycle (≈ $8k) because the site has surpassed grid parity; the unconstrained optimum is already ~62% self-sufficient. Specific to a 14-inhabitant, high-wind, grid-tied site — needs scaling before use in a 50+ household worked example. LIT_083

• NZ household energy-demand baseline for sizing energy self-sufficiency (HEEP, ~400-house national sample): 11,410 kWh/dwelling/yr (all fuels) / 3,930 kWh/occupant/yr, of which 63% is low-grade heat (space + water) — heat, not electricity, dominates the basic-needs energy target. ⚠ Data to be validated — 2005-vintage, 20+ years old (heat-pump/efficiency gains since). OT_037

• Community shared TES (22.5–40 kWh, 8-house Austin TX community) increases annual hours of zero grid transition from 5,319 (individual reference) to 6,950–6,979 (+31%) — quantified improvement in on-site energy provision for basic needs through pooled community infrastructure. Any shared storage size achieves similar improvement; the pooling architecture, not the storage size, drives the gain. Treat as structural benchmark, not absolute NZ target. LIT_006

• 190-litre residential hot water tank provides ~73% of 8.3 kWh/day average residential DHW demand — baseline sizing reference for community hot water self-sufficiency estimation. LIT_006

• Hybrid RWHS+GWRS delivers 42.5% household WSR (131 m³/year potable water savings for 4 persons at 203 L/capita/day and 1053 mm/year rainfall); reduces WTP demand from 309 to 178 m³/year and WWTP discharge from 297 to 237 m³/year — the most directly comparable empirical WSR benchmark for decentralized water provision in the wiki. LIT_008

• Greywater (~75–80% of domestic wastewater) reuse for bush/garden irrigation is the highest-acceptance, lowest-treatment-barrier water self-sufficiency measure available at community scale; informal greywater reuse for garden irrigation is already near-universal in water-scarce rural communities even without formal infrastructure (90% of rural Palestinian households). LIT_017

• Community-scale centralized greywater treatment infrastructure commands significantly higher public trust than household-level alternatives — aligns with the community energy architecture finding (centralised community battery superior to household batteries for similar reasons: higher trust, better performance, lower per-unit cost). LIT_017

• Aftrak solar module (7.5 kWh/day) powers agricultural tractor during the day and provides community electricity off-hours — extending hours of productivity, education, and business opportunity where rural electricity access is 6%. Single solar investment simultaneously addresses food production and basic energy access. Journalistic source. URL_001

• EWF nexus 84-paper synthesis frames energy, water, and food provision as an integrated basic needs target: “a secure and resilient EWF system can be achieved by ensuring everyone has consistent and sufficient access to clean energy, water and food” — validates treating I07 as a nexus problem, not three separate indicators. LIT_007

• Schmidt et al. (2022): in three off-grid rural Alaska communities (n=114 households), FEW security was high overall (79% agreement) but food was the least-secure sector; subsistence/locally-harvested resources scored more secure than purchased ones across all four security components (availability/access/quality/preference), and energy insecurity was affordability-driven (17% could not afford gas, 12% could not afford to heat their home) because energy — unlike food and water — cannot be harvested locally. LIT_050

• Dancing Rabbit Ecovillage (Missouri): residents have reduced ecological footprint to 10% or less of the average American through collective ownership, resource sharing, waste reduction, and local sourcing — the strongest documented evidence that communal models achieve basic needs fulfilment at dramatically reduced resource throughput. (Boyer 2016, primary source pending [RT_052].) LIT_012

• Dancing Rabbit (PRIMARY, Lockyer 2017): basic energy, water and mobility needs are met at ~10% of mainstream US consumption while 81% of members report happiness ≥7 on a 1–10 scale and 88% rate the community “good”/“extremely good” — direct evidence that needs-fulfilment and drastically reduced resource throughput co-exist. Quality-of-life responses were on par with mainstream Seattle residents. LIT_081

• Findhorn wind energy trajectory: 75kW community turbine installed 1989 → expanded to 4 turbines totalling 750kW (3×225kW + 1×75kW); net electricity exporter by 2006; wind provides 28% of residential energy needs — a 30-year community-owned incremental build-out from single turbine to export-positive grid contributor. LIT_012

• Homestar rating system (NZ Green Building Council): Homestar 6 and 7 deliver above-Building Code performance in insulation, heating, ventilation, and moisture control; all five Community Finance CHPs build 100% of new homes to Healthy Homes Standard minimum. OT_003

• Homestar annual energy savings (NZGBC estimates, NZD/year): standalone house Homestar 7 — Auckland 520, Wellington 950, Christchurch 1,169; units 575/744/844 — quantified energy cost reduction from higher NZ building standard, by climate zone. OT_003

• Hospital bed nights for severe/persistent mental health patients housed by CHPs: mean 122 nights/year before → mean 10 nights/year after CHP housing intervention (ImpactLab, linked CHP + DHB data 2014–2020) — housing is a direct and measurable healthcare cost intervention. OT_003

• NZ housing continuum (CHFA framework): emergency → social → assisted rental → assisted ownership → private rental → private ownership; Q1–Q2 income quintiles rely on emergency/social housing; Q2–Q3 on assisted options; Q3–Q5 on private — maps housing need by income to appropriate tenure type for community design. OT_005

• Target populations for CHFA-financed housing: people on the NZ Housing Register (serious need, very low incomes), Māori, Pacific peoples, migrants, elderly, and other groups marginalised by the NZ housing market. OT_005

• “Affordability is fifty thousand dollars” (Ngāti Kuri) — mainstream 30% income threshold does not capture Māori housing reality; cooperative financing models proposed to reduce upfront barriers; reframes affordability as an absolute cost ceiling, not an income ratio. ot_006_er118-maori-housing-roadmap

• Unconsented housing as basic needs provision: whānau build without consent when formal pathways are inaccessible; basic services sometimes cut off as coercive pressure — ER118 documents this as an existing informal self-sufficiency response to systemic housing exclusion. ot_006_er118-maori-housing-roadmap

• Ngāti Kuri multi-generational Pākāinga: Kapowairua, Te Paki Station, Ngātaki sites; Waimārama Ōhanga Rau (diverse economies) links housing development with employment creation — a community model treating basic needs provision as integrated with economic self-sufficiency. ot_006_er118-maori-housing-roadmap

• Gullberg et al. (2025): electricity 140%–260% from roof PV alone in all density cases at 59.5°N; freshwater 100%–220% from combined rainwater/stormwater/graywater recycling; heat is the most constrained domain (66% dense multifamily, 31–48% single-family combining all local sources) — first peer-reviewed study co-calculating energy, water, and nutrient self-sufficiency within a single consistent system boundary. LIT_022

• Nitrogen recovery 78% and phosphorus recovery 98% achievable from blackwater anaerobic digestion across all density cases — nutrient recovery is volume-dependent (per-capita), not density-dependent; extends basic needs benchmarking into the nutrient/sanitation domain. LIT_022

• Only 24% of NZ adults agree enough affordable housing is available locally; 79% support more homes being built; only 30% confident enough affordable homes will be built — national survey evidence of structural NZ housing supply failure (Ipsos Global Advisor, Jan 2025, n=1,001). OT_008

• Biggest NZ housing challenges (Jan 2025): high property prices 51%, cost of renting 49%, rising build costs 32%, high interest rates 27%, not enough housing being built 21% — priority-weighted public perception of barriers to housing basic needs fulfilment. OT_008

• NZ habitat-comfort baseline (conventional stock): 34% of people report homes sometimes/always damp and 36% report mould (2018 Census); 33% of homes sit below 18°C with a mean winter daytime indoor temperature of 19°C — the warmth/dryness floor a self-sufficient community build must clear. LIT_044

• Energy poverty affects more than one-quarter of NZ households (paying >10% of income on non-travel household energy) — affordable warmth is a partly unmet basic need under current housing stock. LIT_044

• ~28,000 children and ~54,000 adults are admitted to hospital each year for potentially avoidable hospitalisations linked to poor housing; the Healthy Homes Initiative prevented ~1533 hospitalisations in its first year — the public-health stakes of the basic-needs warmth/dryness target. LIT_044

• HHI avoidable-hospitalisation outcomes now primary-sourced (Pierse, White & Riggs 2019). The Healthy Homes Initiative — warm/dry-housing interventions for low-income whānau with young children — is estimated to have prevented 1,533 hospitalisations, 9,443 GP visits and 8,784 pharmaceutical dispensings across 15,330 referrals in the first year post-intervention (evaluation sample 1,608; 55.2% Māori, 36.6% Pacific; 47.5% Housing NZ / 37.9% private-rental tenure). The direct primary behind LIT_044’s HHI basic-needs claim — quantifies how much of the poor-housing hospital burden warm/dry housing provision actually removes. ⚠ Referred-child-only, one-year follow-up → a conservative floor. OT_152

• NZ community design (Wellington, 16 people): 15kW solar system confirmed sufficient for all electricity and water heating at ~41.3°S latitude (confirmed via Cohaus field visit); water catchment + greywater recycling → all water on-site; composting toilets (EcoLet/Rota-loo) → sewage to compost. Design-derived; not empirically measured. OT_018

• 93% of 60 European ecovillages pursue some self-sufficiency in ≥1 of food, water, or energy; by domain: food 80%, water 77%, energy 75%; only 50% pursue all three simultaneously — partial SS is universal but multi-domain coverage is the minority position. LIT_020

• Water is the most achievable complete SS domain: 69% of water-seeking ecovillages have already achieved 100% water SS; 79% plan to reach it; only 24% remain connected to the mains water network — water independence is the most widely accomplished full-SS milestone. LIT_020

• Demand-side reduction is as important as supply-side generation: with the same production level, lower demand (less resource-intensive diets, water recycling, energy conservation) automatically increases self-sufficiency ratios — SS is a ratio, not a production target, and consumption minimisation is co-equal with generation expansion. LIT_020

• Mount Roskill test site baseline (30.5 ha, 393 dwellings, 820 people, 12 dph): water 173,630 L/day (100% sourced outside Auckland region); electricity 67,831 kWh/yr + gas 31,912 kWh/yr (non-renewable, external). CAUTION (audit 2026-09-03): the electricity, gas, and GHG figures are internally impossible, derived in the source as 1.48% of a whole-local-board total (about 90 kWh per person per year, orders of magnitude below real household demand); use the water and waste baselines only, not the energy block. LIT_018

• Eco-cell water design target: 180,000 L/day 100% locally sourced via rooftop + impervious surface rainwater collection → basement storage tank; multi-purpose use including human consumption — achieves WSR = 1.0 for water at community scale from a 30.5 ha Auckland site. LIT_018

• Eco-cell energy design target (inherits the source’s impossible energy baseline, see caution above): maintain 67,831 kWh/yr but 100% locally sourced via biomass plant (~year 15–20), 4 wind turbines (~year 20), solar panels (~year 20–25) — 50-year phased transition to full energy self-sufficiency in an Auckland suburb. LIT_018

• NZ residential electricity consumption baseline (MBIE official, March 2024): national average 7,088 kWh/household/year; Tasman regional 7,295 kWh/yr (4th highest of 16 NZ regions, +207 vs national); Nelson city 6,932 kWh/yr (−156 vs national). For rural Nelson/Tasman community design, Tasman 7,295 kWh/yr is the appropriate regional reference. Partially addresses RT_077 via synthesis; RT_077 stays Open pending primary BRANZ HEEP / MBIE retrieval (RT_094, RT_095, RT_097). CR_009

• MBIE QSDEP standard household benchmark: 8,000 kWh/year (~22 kWh/day) for a 4-person low-user-tariff household with controlled hot water — used by MBIE for regulatory and price-comparison modelling; conservative-on-the-high-side relative to the observed mean. Recommended NI design baseline for the Tasman/Lower Moutere pilot is 8,000 kWh/year per household — defensible as conservative all-electric heat-pump for a 2.8-person household. CR_009

• All-electric vs mixed-fuel distinction (critical for self-sufficient community design): all-electric resistance heating 8,000–11,000 kWh/yr, all-electric with heat pump + HPHWC 6,500–9,000 kWh/yr, mixed-fuel (LPG/wood + electricity) 5,500–7,000 kWh electricity/yr. Since a self-sufficient community generates its own electricity (not LPG), the all-electric scenario is the relevant one. CR_009

• End-use breakdown (BRANZ HEEP, 400 NZ houses): space heating ~34%, water heating ~29%, appliances/lighting ~37%. In all-electric homes, water + space heating ≈ 50–65% of total electricity use — the dominant targets for both demand reduction (passive envelope, HPHWC) and supply sizing. CR_009

• Household consumption distribution is wide: top 20% of NZ households consume 36% of total residential energy (>14,400 kWh/yr all fuels); bottom 20% consume 9% (<6,900 kWh/yr). The ~7,000 kWh/yr mean is the centre of a 4,000–12,000 kWh distribution — community-scale sizing must accommodate diversity, not assume the mean per household. CR_009

• Lower Moutere is a top-tier NZ solar region — annual GHI 1,450–1,550 kWh/m²/yr, specific yield 1,350–1,380 kWh/kWp/yr (NIWA + PVGIS + Brent 2020 converge). Energy basic-needs provision via on-site solar generation is structurally feasible at this site. CR_010

• Tasman pilot community-scale design (CR_010 framework): ~500–700 kWp ground-mount + 1,500–2,500 kWh battery covers ~80% of annual demand for 50 households at the CR_009 conservative baseline; theoretical site capacity 6,000–8,000 kWp at 10 ha leaves significant agrivoltaic headroom. Grid/generator backup needed for winter shortfall. CR_010

• Winter resilience caveat for energy basic needs: anticyclonic fog in the Waimea/Moutere area can suppress generation for 3–5 consecutive days (NIWA via CR_010). Battery sizing handles short-term variation; full winter coverage requires alternative supply (biomass, grid, generator). CR_010

Remote-community basic-needs provision (CR_012)

• Remote and off-grid NZ communities (Chatham, Aotea/Great Barrier, Rakiura, papakāinga/marae) historically lack reliable grid electricity and heat; renewable microgrids close this basic-needs gap — Motairehe modelling cut electricity supply shortfalls to under 1% of annual hours CR_012 (§1, §2, §7).
• Heat basic needs addressed by biomass (dispatchable, locally sourced woodfuel/pellet heating) and solar thermal (EECA: most NZ households can save >NZD $1,000/year with a solar system) CR_012 (§2, §4).
• MBIE/EECA CREF ($28M; Round 2 = 150 sites, 10–30 kW solar+BESS) explicitly targets low-income and energy-insecure communities, recognising remote-community energy access as a basic-needs priority CR_012 (§1, §9).
  • ⚠ Provenance (2026-07-17): the **28M / 150-site / 10–30 kW Round 2** figures above are synthesis-only ([[cr_012_remote-community-renewables-nz|CR_012]]). The closest primary now held — the **MBIE Budget 2023 CERF funding bid** [[ot_120_mbie-cref-energy-resilience-2023|OT_120]] — does **not** contain them (it carries a different envelope: 30m programme boost + 20m innovation = 50.152m operating; no per-site/kW config; verified by full-PDF grep). CR_012 stays the only source for those Round 2 figures; RT_156 stays open for the EECA Round 2 primary.

Reliable off-grid electricity for an isolated NZ community (Aotea-Great Barrier Island)

• Reliable off-grid electricity for an isolated NZ community: optimised stand-alone microgrids meet the residential/commercial energy needs of three Aotea-Great Barrier Island communities (residential/commercial ~66% of MG 1 consumption) with high reliability (residential/commercial ELF constrained to 0; EV ELF 0.005), confirming electricity as a basic need can be fully met off-grid at community scale in the NZ context. LIT_031

Multi-need provision from on-site renewables (Rakiura/Stewart Island)

• Multi-need provision from on-site renewables: the Stewart Island MECM simultaneously serves electricity (incl. electrified space heating), hot water (modelled at 44 L/person/day), and hydrogen transport fuel for a ~405-person remote community. LIT_033
• Demand split across needs: electric load ~48%, hydrogen (transport) load ~21%, and heat load ~19% of total consumption, all met at 100% reliability. LIT_033

Demand-side adaptation as a basic-needs lever (Afzalan & Jazizadeh 2021)

• User load adaptation (thermostat setpoint + deferrable load rescheduling in the 5-7 p.m. window) raised community electricity self-sufficiency from 65.1% to 75.5% at 100% PV penetration (and 53.2% to 62.2% at 75%), showing behavioural flexibility is a meaningful, low-capital contributor to meeting basic energy needs. US summer dataset. LIT_034

Town-scale basic-needs provision from 100% renewables (Ohakune, Mohseni et al. 2021)

• A notional Ohakune community micro-grid meets the town’s electricity plus hydrogen-transport demand (peak system load 7.31 MW) entirely from on-site renewables (PV, wind, micro-hydro, biopower, fuel cell + battery/super-capacitor/hydrogen storage). Market-based demand response shaves ~38% off peak power and lifts the annual load factor from 0.25 to 0.35 — behavioural/DR flexibility as a low-capital lever for meeting basic energy needs at community scale. LIT_067

NZ energy-affordability gap for remote communities (MBIE Budget 2023 CERF bid)

• Government-sourced articulation of the affordability gap the NI basic-needs indicator captures: ‘some remote NZ communities have the highest energy prices in NZ’ and lack reliable/affordable energy access, with some ‘not connected to NZ electricity grid’. The co-funding programme is explicitly designed to close this gap for low-income and energy-insecure communities. OT_120

EDT connections

[Which EDT domains most directly advance this indicator, and how.]

Measurement

• ESR (Energy Self-sufficiency Ratio): E_self-consumed / E_total-demanded — canonical formula CR_002
• WSR (Water Self-sufficiency Ratio): Q_locally-replenished / Q_total-demanded — canonical formula CR_002
• Sieben Linden benchmarks: 67.1% electricity, 100% heat, 61% water SS CR_002
• Per capita housing expenditure as an indicator of financial independence CR_001
• Use of locally appropriate technologies (photovoltaic panels, solar heat collectors, biomass) CR_001

Open questions

[Gaps in evidence, unresolved tensions, links to questions/ pages.]

Connections

Links to

Sources (38): CR_001 · CR_002 · CR_003 · CR_009 · CR_010 · CR_012 · LIT_001 · LIT_003 · LIT_004 · LIT_006 · LIT_007 · LIT_008 · +26 more

Concepts (2): EDT–SSI Convergence · Self-Sufficiency Calculation Framework

Referenced by

Sources (8): LIT_003 · LIT_004 · LIT_006 · LIT_007 · LIT_008 · OT_005 · OT_006 · OT_025

Concepts (1): Low-Carbon & Bio-Based Construction