Domesticating In Home Displays in Selected British and Norwegian Households

  • Tanja Winther University of Oslo
  • Sandra Bell Department of Anthropology


The paper uses qualitative data from Norway and the United Kingdom to understand the new technology of In Home Display monitors as a material object loaded with meaning and norms that may affect social practices and relations. The displays are designed to encourage householders to reduce electricity consumption. In contrast to technologies associated with ‘smart meters’, the monitors under study cannot be used for controlling or automatising various types of electricity consumption, but these devises nonetheless often form part of ‘smart grid solutions’. A large part of the research in this area has attempted to quantify the impact of displays, and qualitative research focusing on the users has also mainly sought to explain why - or why not – the introduction of displays has resulted in reduced household consumption. This paper follows a more open approach to the introduction and impact of displays by paying attention to the existing routines and social practices into which the display enters and potentially becomes integrated and domesticated. We examine to what extent ideas and norms inscribed in the display continue to have a bearing on the household moral economy and internal dynamics as the objects are negotiated and taken in use in British and Norwegian homes. Drawing on earlier studies that have sought to combine practice and domestication theory for understanding displays, the study’s novelty lies in its focus on the materiality of displays and social implications thereof, and its analysis of the social status of this object in two different contexts.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Tanja Winther, University of Oslo

Centre for Development and the Environment (SUM)

Associate Professor


Abrahamse, W., L. Steg, C. Vlek & T. Rothengatter (2005) A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology 25(3):273–291.

Akrich, M. (1994) The de-scription of technical objects. In W.E. Bijker and J. Law (eds), Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change. USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 205–224.

Aune, M. (2007) Energy comes home. Energy Policy, 35(11):5457–5465.

Author 2008

Author 2013

Author 2014

Author 2015A

Author 2015B

Berker, T., M. Hartmann, Y. Punie & K.J. Ward (2006) Introduction. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie and K.J. Ward (eds), Domestication of media and technology. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 1–17.

Boait P.J., D. Fan & A. Stafford (2011) Performance and control of domestic ground-source heat pumps in retrofit insulations. Energy and Buildings 43(8):1968–1970.

Bourdieu, P. (1977) Outline of a theory of practice. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Buchanan, K., R. Russo & B. Anderson (2015) The question of energy reduction: The problem(s) with feedback. Energy Policy 77:89–96.

Burgess, J. & M. Nye (2008) Rematerialising energy use through transparent monitoring systems. Energy Policy 36:4454–4459.

Caird, S., R. Roy & S. Potter (2012) Domestic heat pumps in the UK: User behaviour, satisfaction and performance. Energy Efficiency 5:283–301.

Darby, S. (2012) Metering: EU policy and implications for fuel poor households. Energy Policy 49:98–106.

DECC and OfGEM (2011) Smart Metering Implementation Programme Response to Prospectus Consultation Overview Document . Available at Accessed 25.3.2016.

DECC (2013) Electrical Appliances at Home: Tuning into energy saving. Available at Accessed 25.3.2016.

DECC (2015) Government policy: household energy (Appendix 7). Available at Accessed 25.3.2016.

Digest of UK Energy Statistics (2014). Available at Accessed 25.3.2016.

Douglas, M. (1996) Natural symbols. New York, USA and Canada: Routledge. First published in 1970 by Barrie and Rockliff.

Faruqui, A., S. Sergici & A. Sharif (2010) The impact of informational feedback on energy consumption—A survey of the experimental evidence. Energy 35:1598–1608.

Garud, R. & P. Karnøe (2005) Distributed agency and interactive emergence. In S.W Floyd, J. Roos, C.D. Jacobs & F.W. Kellermans (eds), Innovating strategy processes. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 88–96.

Haddon, L. (2011) Domestication analysis, objects of study, and the centrality of technologies in everyday life. Canadian Journal of Communication 36:311–323.

Hargreaves, T., M. Nye & J. Burgess (2010) Making energy visible: A qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy 38:6111–6119.

Hargreaves. T., M. Nye & J. Burgess (2013) Keeping energy visible? Exploring how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors in the longer term. Energy Policy 52:126–134.

Hoggett R., J. Ward & C.Mitchell (2011) ‘Heat in homes: Customer choice in fuel technologies.’ Study for Scotia Gas Networks. Energy Policy Group, University of Exeter.

Hyysalo, S. (2010) Health technology development and use. From practice bound imagination to evolving impacts. New York & London: Routledge.

Lie, M. & K. Sørensen (eds) (1996) Making technology our own? Domesticating technology into everyday life. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.

Miller, D. (1994) Modernity. An ethnographic approach. Dualism and mass consumption in Trinidad. Oxford and New York: Berg Publishers.

Miller, D. (1998) Why some things matter. In D. Miller (ed.), Material cultures. Why some things matter. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 3–23.

Nyborg, S. (2015) Pilot users and their families: Inventing flexible practices in the smart grid. Science & Technology Studies 28(3):54–80.

Pantzar, M. (1997) Domestication of everyday life technology: Dynamic views on the social histories of artifacts. Design Issues 13(3):52–65.

Ropke I. & Toke H. Christensen (2013) Transitions in the wrong direction? Digital technologies and daily life. In E. Shove & N. Spurling (eds), Sustainable Practices: Social theory and climate change. Routledge: Abingdon and New York, 49–68.

Shove, E. (2003) Comfort, cleanliness and convenience: The social organization of normality. Oxford and New York, NY: Berg.

Silverstone, R. (1994) Television and everyday life. London: Routledge. Available at Accessed 2.2.2015.

Silverstone, R. (2006) Domesticating domestication. Reflections on the life of a concept. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie & K.J. Ward (eds), Domestication of media and technology. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 229–248.

Silverstone, R., Hirsch, E. & Morely D. (1992) Information and communication technologies and the moral economy of the household. In Silverstone R. and Hirsch E., eds. Consuming Technologies, Routledge: London and New York.

Sørensen, K. (1994) ‘Technology in use: Two essays in the domestication of artefacts.’ STS Working Papers 2/94. Senter for teknologi og samfunn, Trondheim, Norway. Available at Accessed 2.2.2016.

Strengers, Y. (2013) Energy feedback, in Y. Strengers, Smart energy technologies in everyday life. Smart utopia? UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 73–93.

Vine, D., L. Buys & P. Morris (2013) The effectiveness of energy feedback for conservation and peak demand: A literature review. Open Journal of Energy Efficiency, 2, article ID:28957.

Von Hippel, E. (1988) Lead users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science 32(7):791–805.

Ward, K. (2006) The bald guy just ate an orange. Domestication, work and home. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie & K.J. Ward (eds), Domestication of media and technology. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 145–164.

Wilhite, H. et al. (2001) A cross-cultural analysis of household energy-use behaviour in Japan and Norway, in D. Miller (ed.), Consumption: Critical Concepts in the Social Sciences, Vol 4. London and New York: Routledge, 159–177.

Wilhite, H. (2008) New thinking on the agentive relationship between end-use technologies and energy-using practices. Energy Efficiency 1:121–130.

Research Papers