## 4 Results and Discussion  
### Perceived Co-Benefits From Efficient Homes  
According to Figure 4 the required co-benefits of efficient homes are clearer in the selling market in relation to the leasing one. As a matter of fact, each of the financial savings (i.e., electricity and gas) and comfort attributes are statistically higher in the selling market. The same trend is present in the indirect indicator of willingness to pay: Respondents belonging to the selling segment do think efficient homes are more valuable in relation to respondents belonging to the leasing segment. When data is split into buyers and owners (that have sold a home) for the selling market; and tenants and owners (that have leased) a home, interesting conclusions emerge. While in the selling market there are only two statistically different perceptions (comfort and value), in the case of the leasing market the perceptions are largely different in all of the assessed aspects. In general owners (i.e., lessors) do clearly appreciate the co-benefits of energy efficiency in relation to tenants more. In general, owners (i.e., buyers, sellers or lessors) do place a larger relevance on such benefits in relation to tenants. This finding is in line with the evidence reported in the Santa Coloma de Gramanet retrofit program where, according to the city council [43], 32.5% of the retrofitted homes were vacant but their owners were interested in supporting the retrofit. Moreover, it is correlated with the fact that in Spain the leasing tenure is seen as a transitory path towards ownership. However, this finding challenges the current housing policies in the country which foster the tenancy as a long-term housing tenure.  
In order to learn whether energy-efficiency benefits are contingent to personal attributes of respondents the sample has been split into subgroups according to sociodemographic  
Figure 4: Perceived benefits according to market segments and offer/demand sides. Source: Self elaboration.  
graphic profiles. It is worth recalling that conclusions extracted in such a segmentation are not robust with the interference among segment variables, that is, the uneven distribution of respondents among different segmentation variables (e.g., there is a correlation between oldest respondents and less affluent households).  
According to Figure 5, in general older respondents do clearly perceive the inquired benefits, namely that related to interior comfort; conversely, while the indirect indicator of willingness to pay does also increase in the case of older respondents, its slope is lower in relation to the remainder of the benefits. Interestingly, it seems that men perceive higher benefits in relation to women in all of the assessed aspects except in comfort where there the difference fails to be statistically significant. There is also a positive correlation between the net disposable household income and the perceived inquired benefits, but in the indirect indicator of willingness to pay. Interestingly, the main differences are among the middle and low income-tier, suggesting that above the \"middle income-class\" the perception of energy-efficiency (EE) benefits remain stable. Such a trend is clearer in the financial implications associated to energy savings. It is worth recalling the relationship between household wealth and educational attainment and environmental awareness (not inquired in the survey). In Spain, past research, has pointed out a positive correlation among these three sociodemographic dimensions [6]. Thus, it is highly probable the more educated population correctly understand the co-benefits of efficient homes. e  
Finally, respondents that live in their own home express a larger agreement to most of the co-benefits, including the larger home value for efficient homes. This latter finding is consistent with the previously discussed results coming from market segmentation.