Autonomy, democracy and solidarity. The defining principles of collaborative civil society housing and some mechanisms that may challenge them

Abstract

This theoretical paper introduces a conceptual framework for empirical study and comparison of collaborative civil society housing (CSH). We suggest that CSH communities satisfy four criteria to a lesser or higher extent: (1) autonomy, (2) participatory democracy, (3) internal solidarity and (4) external solidarity. Drawing primarily on empirical examples from the scholarly literature on cooperative housing, we claim that all CSH communities face challenges that may lead to the erosion of these civil society criteria. We argue that such challenges are general social mechanisms that manifest themselves in various types of situations, for instance, when apartments are transferred or refurbished.

Contemporary Co-housing in Europe

“…It is particularly relevant here to consider that if we are to understand cohousing as a form of collaborative civil-society-driven housing alternative, as argued by Sørvoll and Bengtsson (2019), it needs to more actively deal with the challenges of how to contribute to external (spatial) solidarity and the potential for realizing political, utopian, goals beyond the direct interests of the cohousing residents themselves. Although co-housing offers a type of housing that can mobilize internal, transpatial solidarity, fostering community between residentsmore or less strengthened by the internal spatial organizationit could also be part of attempts to provide space (both more symbolically and literally in the form of actual meeting places in the city) for political action, urban activism and solidarity with under-served groups in society, as also attempted in some of the cases of the Swedish co-housing studied.…”

“…Most co-housing projects would disavow these types of exclusionary practices, although the risk of self-segregation and the tendency for social and ethnic homogeneity in co-housing communities has been pointed out ; see also Chapter 2). Critical examinations of co-housing as a form of private residential community highlight the need for a more cautious interpretation, for example by problematizing an 'introverted' spatial organization and the risk that co-housing projects could function as segregated 'islands of community' Sørvoll and Bengtsson 2019).…”

The Impact of Contemporary Housing Functions on Its Social Sustainability

“…Up to now, the standardized model of the traditional two-generational family has prevailed. Changing household structures (beyond the biological family) call for new co-living forms, such as social co-housing or intergenerational housing, which provide spaces for collective usage [39]. Ideas comprise spaces such…”

Struggles for the decommodification of housing: the politics of housing cooperatives in Uruguay and Switzerland

“…Decommodification of housing means the withdrawal of housing supply from market-based modes of exchange and, thus, an emphasis on the use-value of housing and its importance in the field of social reproduction and community development (Holm 2011). The housing cooperatives we study can be defined as collaborative civil society housing (Sørvoll and Bengtsson 2020), i.e. the members are not only committed to their own community and individual interests but aim at contributing to the wider civil society.…”

“…Hence, while the working class became increasingly non-Swiss and excluded from political rights and organizational ties, housing cooperatives remained by and large profoundly Swiss. Insider solidarity increased at the expense of broader external political solidarity (see also Sørvoll and Bengtsson, 2020). This bias was reflected in the composition of the residents living in cooperative apartments.…”