Transformational practices in cohousing: Enhancing residents' connection to community and nature

Sanguinetti, Angela

doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.05.003

Cited by 66 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies with one‐dimensional scales, which measure similar behaviors, were combined for the analyses. These scales were self‐reported behavioral measures, such as native vegetation protection in farmland (Gosling & Williams ) and proenvironmental gardening and farming (Sanguinetti ; Dresner et al. ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta‐analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior

Whitburn

Linklater

Abrahamse

2019

Conservation Biology

362

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding what drives environmentally protective or destructive behavior is important to the design and implementation of effective public policies to encourage people's engagement in proenvironmental behavior (PEB). Research shows that a connection to nature is associated with greater engagement in PEB. However, the variety of instruments and methods used in these studies poses a major barrier to integrating research findings. We conducted a meta-analysis of the relationship between connection to nature and PEB. We identified studies through a systematic review of the literature and used Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software to analyze the results from 37 samples (n = 13,237) and to test for moderators. A random-effects model demonstrated a positive and significant association between connection to nature and PEB (r = 0.42, 95% CI 0.36, 0.47, p < 0.001). People who are more connected to nature reported greater engagement in PEB. Standard tests indicated little effect of publication bias in the sample. There was significant heterogeneity among the samples. Univariate categorical analyses showed that the scales used to measure connection to nature and PEB were significant moderators and explained the majority of the between-study variance. The geographic location of a study, age of participants, and the percentage of females in a study were not significant moderators. We found that a deeper connection to nature may partially explain why some people behave more proenvironmentally than others and that the relationship is ubiquitous. Facilitating a stronger connection to nature may result in greater engagement in PEB and conservation, although more longitudinal studies with randomized experiments are required to demonstrate causation.Keywords: connectedness to nature, conservation behavior, ecological behavior, human-nature relationship Metaanálisis de la Conexión Humana con la Naturaleza y el Comportamiento a Favor del Ambiental Resumen: El entendimiento de los conductores del comportamiento de protección o destrucción ambien-* email julie.whitburn@vuw.ac.nz Article impact statement: Interventions designed to facilitate a stronger connection to nature may result in greater engagement in proenvironmental behavior.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta‐analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior

Whitburn

Linklater

Abrahamse

2019

Conservation Biology

362

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The work on intentional communities includes studies, for instance, that have examined the potential transformative nature of these initiatives for wider societal changes [29,[38][39][40], have critically interrogated how these initiatives might provide solutions for sustainable living [31,41], and have linked intentional communities to degrowth ideas [22,42]. Other studies have had a narrower focus, looking at the development and potential of renewable energies in these initiatives, innovative uses of time and space [43], or motivations to join them [44].…”

Section: Background: Intentional Communities and Low-carbon Municipalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating Low-Carbon Living? A Comparison of Intervention Measures in Different Community-Based Initiatives

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The challenge of facilitating a shift towards sustainable housing, food and mobility has been taken up by diverse community-based initiatives ranging from "top-down" approaches in low-carbon municipalities to "bottom-up" approaches in intentional communities. This paper compares intervention measures in four case study areas belonging to these two types, focusing on their potential of re-configuring daily housing, food, and mobility practices. Taking up critics on dominant intervention framings of diffusing low-carbon technical innovations and changing individual behavior, we draw on social practice theory for the empirical analysis of four case studies. Framing interventions in relation to re-configuring daily practices, the paper reveals differences and weaknesses of current low-carbon measures of community-based initiatives in Germany and Austria. Low-carbon municipalities mainly focus on introducing technologies and offering additional infrastructure and information to promote low-carbon practices. They avoid interfering into residents' daily lives and do not restrict carbon-intensive practices. In contrast, intentional communities base their interventions on the collective creation of shared visions, decisions, and rules and thus provide social and material structures, which foster everyday low-carbon practices and discourage carbon-intensive ones. The paper discusses the relevance of organizational and governance structures for implementing different types of low-carbon measures and points to opportunities for broadening current policy strategies.

show abstract

“…The feature of community design and the nature of sharing may potentially reduce social isolation, especially for the older people (UK Co-housing Network, 2017); and create a sense of belonging which lead to the identity of the community (Yousefi et al 2017). Apart from the social aspect, co-housing communities offer a platform for residents to interact with nature and the land (Sanguinetti, 2014). More sustainable technologies can be introduced to the community, such as biomass boilers, composting and solar panels.…”

Section: Why Co-housing?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Co-housing in Building Sustainable Communities: Case studies from the UK

Wang

Hadjri

2017

E-BPJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explored the role of co-housing model in the UK and discussed the benefits and limitations of co-housing model by exploring co-housing residents" motivation and daily living. Through case studies in the UK, semi-structured interviews were carried out to establish the environmental and social sustainability in co-housing and understand residents thinking and behaviour. This study found that co-housing can benefit various age groups, and promote residents" thinking and behaviour change towards sustainable living. The study also found that the financial limitation and new members recruitment are the top two difficulties in co-housing development. The findings of this research will establish a better understanding of UK co-housing and highlight the potentials and possibilities of co-housing communities.Keywords: sustainable communities; co-housing; environmental sustainability; social sustainability eISSN: 2398eISSN: -4287© 2017 IntroductionNowadays a growing number of people pay more attention to the quality of living environment and social life. As a result, a wide range of stakeholders such as architects, engineers, housing officers, community development officers and neighbourhood managers play a part in creating safe, green and friendly living environments to respond this common needs. In 2003, the concept of a "sustainable community" was proposed by the UK government. A sustainable community is defined as an economically, environmentally, socially positive, mutually beneficial and resilient community. This concept will encourage the government to build communities that will stand the test of time and in which people "want to live and work, now and in the future" by promoting various housing provision models, such as co-housing. Co-housing is a creative way to achieve the sustainable community concept and to contribute to affordable living. It is a new collaborative housing model in the UK, and it is designed to foster meaningful relationships, social interaction and sustainable living, therefore, leading to the building of a sustainable community. Co-housing has the potential to deliver a supportive housing environment that leads to a low carbon lifestyle and sustainable living. Also, co-housing can be an alternative way to approach housing that could address larger issues of social, economic and environmental sustainability, while providing a better environment for the residents and a wider community.This paper aims to explore the role of co-housing model in the UK and will discuss the benefits and limitations of co-housing model by exploring co-housing residents" motivation and daily living. Examining whether co-housing model can be used as an evaluation tool to guide thinking and behaviour change and foster sustainable community building. Through case studies in the UK, residents interview will be used in this study to establish the environmental and social sustainability in co-housing and understand residents thinking and behaviour. The findings of this research will establish a better...

show abstract

Transformational practices in cohousing: Enhancing residents' connection to community and nature

Cited by 66 publications

References 20 publications

Meta‐analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior

Meta‐analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior

Facilitating Low-Carbon Living? A Comparison of Intervention Measures in Different Community-Based Initiatives

The Role of Co-housing in Building Sustainable Communities: Case studies from the UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About