Motivational Barriers to Shared Housing: The Importance of Meanings of “Home” in the Diffusion of Housing Innovations

IF 2.5 3区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Housing Theory & Society Pub Date : 2021-07-05 DOI:10.1080/14036096.2021.1932580
Bart Put, Inge Pasteels
{"title":"Motivational Barriers to Shared Housing: The Importance of Meanings of “Home” in the Diffusion of Housing Innovations","authors":"Bart Put, Inge Pasteels","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2021.1932580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, Flanders has witnessed a notable upsurge in the public attention for cohousing and other types of shared living arrangements (e.g. Jonckheere et al. 2010; Van den Houte et al. 2015; Verstraete and De Decker 2017; Brusselmans et al. 2019). The attention is sparked by discussions on substantial challenges currently faced by the Flemish housing market. First, there is a growing concern about the long term environmental and societal costs of urban sprawl in Flanders (Vermeiren et al. 2019). A long history of path dependent policy decisions has resulted in a landscape characterized by the dispersal of large single family houses in low density areas and ribbon development, putting an increasing amount of pressure on nature and mobility (De Decker 2011; Bervoets and Heynen 2013). Second, like in many countries in the Western world, the demographic set-up of Flanders is undergoing important changes. The ageing of society and the shrinking size of households exacerbate the problem of an undercrowded housing stock on the one hand, that of a growing need for mutual support and easy access to care on the other hand (Bervoets and Heynen 2013; Bervoets, Vanneste, and Ryckewaert 2014). Furthermore, the Flemish housing model seems ill-suited to accommodate the increasing de-standardization of family life (Luyten et al. 2015). Third, researchers have pointed to persistent problems pertaining to the quality and the affordability of housing, especially on the lower end of the private rental market (Depraetere et al. 2015; Heylen 2015; Verstraete and De Decker 2017). In all three respects, shared housing or shared living arrangements have been thematized by researchers and policy makers as one of the avenues for confronting such challenges. Flemish law has been considered too inflexible to be able to support a more important role for collective housing, however. This was one of the reasons why a decree was issued by the Flemish Government in 2017, installing a test environment for experimental housing forms, the results of which will be evaluated in 2023 (Vermeire 2017). As part of its “Vision 2050” the Flemish Government also committed to stimulating a gradual shift towards “smart housing and living” and strengthening public support for alternative, including collective, ways of living (Wonen Vlaanderen 2017).","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"257 - 274"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14036096.2021.1932580","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Housing Theory & Society","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2021.1932580","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In recent years, Flanders has witnessed a notable upsurge in the public attention for cohousing and other types of shared living arrangements (e.g. Jonckheere et al. 2010; Van den Houte et al. 2015; Verstraete and De Decker 2017; Brusselmans et al. 2019). The attention is sparked by discussions on substantial challenges currently faced by the Flemish housing market. First, there is a growing concern about the long term environmental and societal costs of urban sprawl in Flanders (Vermeiren et al. 2019). A long history of path dependent policy decisions has resulted in a landscape characterized by the dispersal of large single family houses in low density areas and ribbon development, putting an increasing amount of pressure on nature and mobility (De Decker 2011; Bervoets and Heynen 2013). Second, like in many countries in the Western world, the demographic set-up of Flanders is undergoing important changes. The ageing of society and the shrinking size of households exacerbate the problem of an undercrowded housing stock on the one hand, that of a growing need for mutual support and easy access to care on the other hand (Bervoets and Heynen 2013; Bervoets, Vanneste, and Ryckewaert 2014). Furthermore, the Flemish housing model seems ill-suited to accommodate the increasing de-standardization of family life (Luyten et al. 2015). Third, researchers have pointed to persistent problems pertaining to the quality and the affordability of housing, especially on the lower end of the private rental market (Depraetere et al. 2015; Heylen 2015; Verstraete and De Decker 2017). In all three respects, shared housing or shared living arrangements have been thematized by researchers and policy makers as one of the avenues for confronting such challenges. Flemish law has been considered too inflexible to be able to support a more important role for collective housing, however. This was one of the reasons why a decree was issued by the Flemish Government in 2017, installing a test environment for experimental housing forms, the results of which will be evaluated in 2023 (Vermeire 2017). As part of its “Vision 2050” the Flemish Government also committed to stimulating a gradual shift towards “smart housing and living” and strengthening public support for alternative, including collective, ways of living (Wonen Vlaanderen 2017).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
共享住房的动机障碍:“家”的含义在住房创新传播中的重要性
近年来,佛兰德斯见证了公众对同居和其他类型的共享生活安排的关注显著增加(例如,Jonckheere等人,2010;Van den Houte等人,2015;Verstraete和De Decker 2017;Brusselmans等人,2019)。关于佛兰德住房市场目前面临的重大挑战的讨论引发了人们的关注。首先,人们越来越担心佛兰德斯城市扩张的长期环境和社会成本(Vermeiren等人,2019)。长期依赖路径的政策决策导致了一种景观,其特点是大型独栋房屋分散在低密度地区和带状开发,给自然和流动性带来了越来越大的压力(De Decker,2011年;Bervoets和Heynen,2013年)。其次,与西方世界的许多国家一样,佛兰德斯的人口结构正在发生重大变化。社会老龄化和家庭规模的缩小一方面加剧了住房存量不足的问题,另一方面也加剧了对相互支持和方便获得护理的需求(Bervoets和Heynen,2013年;Bervoets、Vanneste和Ryckewaert,2014年)。此外,佛兰德住房模式似乎不适合适应日益不标准化的家庭生活(Luyten等人,2015)。第三,研究人员指出了与住房质量和可负担性有关的持续问题,特别是在私人租赁市场的低端(Depraetere等人,2015;Heylen 2015;Verstraete和De Decker 2017)。在这三个方面,研究人员和政策制定者都将共享住房或共享生活安排作为应对此类挑战的途径之一。然而,佛兰德法律被认为过于僵化,无法支持集体住房发挥更重要的作用。这也是弗拉芒政府于2017年颁布法令的原因之一,该法令为实验性住房形式安装了一个测试环境,其结果将于2023年进行评估(Vermeire 2017)。作为其“2050愿景”的一部分,佛兰德政府还致力于刺激向“智能住房和生活”的逐步转变,并加强公众对替代生活方式的支持,包括集体生活方式(Wonen Vlanderen,2017)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
28
期刊最新文献
Co-Living, Gentlemen’s Clubs, and Residential Hotels: A Long View of Shared Housing Infrastructures for Single Young Professionals Toward a feminist housing commons? Conceptualising care - (as) - work in collaborative housing Acquaintances or Familiar Strangers? How Similarity and Spatial Proximity Shape Neighbour Relations within Residential Buildings Balancing Accumulation and Affordability: How Dutch Housing Politics Moved from Private-Rental Liberalization to Regulation Green Neighbourhood Identity: How Residents Use Urban Nature Against Territorial Stigmatization in Finnish Housing Estates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1