Potential and limitations of innovative housing solutions in planning for degrowth: the case of Vienna

Abstract

Limiting socio-spatial inequalities can be considered a decisive goal for a degrowth agenda. At different territorial scales, planning and housing policies have been crucial to achieve this goal, in terms of both reaching high environmental standards and framing the social reproduction of inequality. This article focuses on the implications, in terms of socio-spatial inequalities, of innovative housing solutions oriented to a degrowth agenda. It aims to answer to the following research questions: what are the socio-spatial implications of the most common innovative housing solutions that can best fulfil the degrowth principles/vision? How is it possible to ensure socio-spatial justice in housing projects inspired by a degrowth narrative? By analysing two cases of housing innovation in Vienna (qualitative analysis), we argue that many innovative housing projects, characterised by a degrowth narrative when it comes to the development of ecological and social practises, today show high level of elitism reproducing socio-spatial inequalities. However, we also argue that the role of local authorities can play a central role in up-scaling these housing innovations by ensuring higher level of inclusiveness.

An empirical test of measures of housing degrowth: Learning from the limited experience of England and Wales, 1981–2011

“…However, authors exploring degrowth and housing have tended to focus on alternatives to existing mainstream housing, involving innovative design, technology, ownership, governance and finance (Nelson and Schneider, 2018). There are numerous case studies of innovative models such as co-housing, co-ownership, self-build, community land trusts, eco-communities, self-sufficiency, community gardening, squatting, rent or mortgage strikes and occupations of foreclosed buildings, and how they could contribute to degrowth (Cucca and Friesenecker, 2022; D’Alisa et al, 2015; Fournier, 2008; Nelson and Schneider, 2018; Weiss and Cattaneo, 2017). One review found that co-housing, a form that as yet provides for fewer than 1000 households in the UK (cohousing.org.uk), had received more research attention than projects affecting the hundreds of millions of existing homes, or larger-scale new development (Cosme et al, 2017).…”

Autonomous re-naturalization of cities in a context of degrowth

“…Urban degrowth permits the spatial application of the principles of the degrowth movement in planning urban space, but the need for a dialogue between degrowth and urban planning has been largely neglected in existing degrowth narratives (Xue, 2021). Some studies have been published in the last few years addressing this recent field of research (Xue, 2015(Xue, , 2021Florentin, 2018;Lehtinen, 2018;Nelson & Schneider, 2018;Trainer 2019;Cristiano et al, 2020;Cucca & Friesenecker, 2021), and a review (Krähmer 2022). Wächter (2013) and Xue (2021) highlight the potential for urban planning to provide spatial instruments in a degrowth transformation, hence facilitating a down-scaling of the economy with environmental benefits and potentially, urban de-occupation.…”

A Critical Success Factor Framework for Implementing Sustainable Innovative and Affordable Housing: A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis

“…Innovation broadly engages the environmental, social, and economic parameters of sustainability, culminating in the analysis of commercial and technological activities in the market economy [29]. Accordingly, Cucca and Friesenecker [30] suggest that building healthy, comfortable, and ecologically sustainable residential areas is very important. In terms of construction, sustainable (housing) development requires a shift toward highquality buildings.…”

“…In terms of construction, sustainable (housing) development requires a shift toward highquality buildings. This requires the application of sustainable building and design techniques for energy conservation and generation and building standards, a reduction in the use of non-renewable materials, and the facilitation of the recycling of resources [30]. The wherefores are because construction has impacts through carbon emissions, climate change, waste generation, change of land use, and loss of biodiversity [31].…”

“…In terms of ensuring accessibility to housing, sustainability also promotes the right supply of affordable housing to guarantee social justice and cohesion [32] and addresses adequate planning of social infrastructure. This is questioned by Cucca and Friesenecker [30] who opine that, currently, housing regeneration or construction applying sustainability criteria plays an uncertain role in the promotion of more ecological and just cities.…”