{"title":"The Diverse Economies of Housing","authors":"A. Soaita","doi":"10.13060/23362839.2019.6.1.454)","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper questions the uncritical transfer of neoliberal concepts, such as financialisation and \noverreliance on conceptual dichotomies like formal/informal, as the lenses through which to understand \npractices of housing provision and consumption in the post-communist space. To this end, it introduces the newlyestablished ‘diverse economies’ framework, which has been used elsewhere to reveal existing and possible \nalternatives to advanced capitalism. Applied to the Romanian case, the lens of diverse economic practices helps \nshed light on the ways in which the current housing system was historically constituted, with implications for \nhow housing consumption is now stratified across some related housing typologies. The paper invites debate on \nthe theoretical usefulness of the diverse economies framework to study housing phenomena, particularly its \nimplications for understanding patterns of inequality and poverty, its potential to devise useful analytical \ncategories, and its effect of directing attention to acts of resistance to neoliberal capitalism.","PeriodicalId":37598,"journal":{"name":"Critical Housing Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Housing Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13060/23362839.2019.6.1.454)","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
This paper questions the uncritical transfer of neoliberal concepts, such as financialisation and
overreliance on conceptual dichotomies like formal/informal, as the lenses through which to understand
practices of housing provision and consumption in the post-communist space. To this end, it introduces the newlyestablished ‘diverse economies’ framework, which has been used elsewhere to reveal existing and possible
alternatives to advanced capitalism. Applied to the Romanian case, the lens of diverse economic practices helps
shed light on the ways in which the current housing system was historically constituted, with implications for
how housing consumption is now stratified across some related housing typologies. The paper invites debate on
the theoretical usefulness of the diverse economies framework to study housing phenomena, particularly its
implications for understanding patterns of inequality and poverty, its potential to devise useful analytical
categories, and its effect of directing attention to acts of resistance to neoliberal capitalism.
期刊介绍:
Critical Housing Analysis is a peer-reviewed academic journal focusing on critical and innovative housing research. The journal was launched in January 2014 and publishes two online issues annually. Critical Housing Analysis is published by the Institute of Sociology of the Czech Academy of Sciences. Critical Housing Analysis aims to provide on-line discussion space for researchers who come up with innovative, critical and challenging ideas and approaches in housing-related research. The unique function of this journal is to facilitate rapid feedback on critical and innovative ideas and methods developed by housing researchers around the world. We are especially keen to publish papers that provide: 1.Innovations in methods, theories and practices used in housing-related research. We especially welcome papers applying original research strategies (such as, mixed and interdisciplinary methods) and international comparisons with a strong sense for contextual and institutional differences. Papers should provide new and fresh research perspectives allowing a deeper understanding of housing markets, policies and systems. Innovations need to be justified but they could be “work in progress”, i.e. their findings may not yet have been fully verified. 2.Critiques of assumptions, methods and theories used in housing-related research. Such critical evaluations must be well-founded (empirically or by consistently logical argument) and convincing. However, there is no particular need to provide a solution to the problems that have been identified. 3.Critiques of applied housing practices and policies in particular cultural and institutional contexts, especially for those countries that are less represented in mainstream housing policy discourse. The critical assessment of policies must be analytical, should propose new perspectives and lead to wider policy implications.