Comparison of results between demographic groups

Comparison of results between demographic groups found fewer statistically significant differences in experiencing key fuel poverty indicators than expected –particularly for geographic area compared by using the three climate zones for building insulation standards in new-build dwellings, where no differences were found. This was particularly unexpected, given that use of heating, average indoor temperature, and estimates of fuel poverty are geographically patterned across the country (Howden-Chapman et al., 2009; Howden-Chapman et al., 2012). However, our results found that young people living in private rental housing and state-owned social housing were at increased risk of fuel poverty. Local research has consistently provided an evidence-base to support a mandatory warrant of fitness and policy targeting of retrofitting improvements for private rental housing (Bennett et al., 2016). Our findings support those recommendations. The results also suggest that targeting remedial policy could especially benefit those self-identifying their ethnicity as Māori, Asian, and or Pasifika. Although no differences were found between the experience of key fuel poverty indicators and the number of dependent children, the overall study results support other evidence that policy targeting of housing improvements to households with dependent children is justified (Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty, 2012; O\'Sullivan et al., 2016; O\'Sullivan et al., 2013). Government intervention is imperative to improve household conditions for children and young people as they have limited capacity for action to address the key challenges of their calcium ionophore vulnerability (Middlemiss & Gillard, 2015). In addition to the physical building and energy efficiency, as well as socio-economic factors that influence the extent to which they experience fuel poverty, more than a quarter of young people felt they had little to no say over when heating is used in their home environment, for a variety of reasons. Other structural factors may also limit young people\'s ability to achieve thermal comfort, for example, it is culturally less common for heating to be used in bedrooms, with bedrooms on average cooler than living rooms. In addition, post-war New Zealand houses traditionally face the sun (North), but while ‘master’ bedrooms are in the front of the house, children\'s bedrooms are placed in the back of the house facing South. Young people indicated a strong preference for the results of the study to be presented to government and for government to address the issue of cold housing for young people in New Zealand. This research adds young people\'s voices to the call to action for Government-led housing and energy efficiency improvements to improve youth public health.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank all of the young people who took part in the online survey and e-interviews for this study. We would also like to thank teachers and principals at schools that invited their students to participate. Special thanks to Mr Mark Robinson at Waiopehu College for his support for the study. The first author was funded by a Lotteries Health Postdoctoral Fellowship (Grant no 352235) (funder reference PD13) while undertaking this study. Study costs were met by He Kainga Oranga / Housing and Health Research Programme, funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand.
Introduction Shana’s life experiences, while extreme, highlight the extent to which poverty and neighborhood violence impact the lives of individuals residing in poorer sections of Auckland, Aotearoa/New Zealand, a city undergoing an immensely rapid demographic transition. There is now a sizeable literature suggesting that neighborhood safety, which varies substantially in global cities like Auckland, has important impacts on health. For example, perceived neighborhood safety has been associated with lower self-rated health (Baum, Ziersch, Zhang, & Osborne, 2009; Chandola, 2001; Ziersch, Baum, MacDougall, & Putland, 2005), even after adjusting for individual and household level socioeconomic factors.