This paper investigates the relationship between self-build housing and the wider planning and housing regime. Although there is growing policy and academic attention to self-build housing, there is a lack of understanding of the institutional and regulatory conditions shaping the prospects of such housing provision. This paper takes the case of The Netherlands and scrutinizes how institutional dynamics over time have made lower and middle residents dependent on densely organized consortia of municipalities, housing associations and developers. These norms of land development appear to be at odds with the logic of self-building. Through exploring evidence in a pilot study of a municipal self-building scheme in Almere, the authors suggest that making self-building the cornerstone of a resident-led land development strategy, also for low- and middle-incomes, implies a reconfiguration of the actors’ positions in housing provision. This entails a commissioning role for residents in the institutional domain of social and commercial developers.
DOCUMENT
Senior co-housing communities offer an in-between solution for older people who do not want to live in an institutional setting but prefer the company of their age peers. Residents of co-housing communities live in their own apartments but undertake activities together and support one another. This paper adds to the literature by scrutinizing the benefits and drawbacks of senior co-housing, with special focus on the forms and limits of social support and the implications for the experience of loneliness. Qualitative fieldwork was conducted in eight co-housing communities in the Netherlands, consisting of document analysis, interviews, focus groups, and observations. The research shows that co-housing communities offer social contacts, social control, and instrumental and emotional support. Residents set boundaries regarding the frequency and intensity of support. The provided support partly relieves residents’ adult children from caregiving duties but does not substitute formal and informal care. Due to their access to contacts and support, few residents experience social loneliness. Co-housing communities can potentially also alleviate emotional loneliness, but currently, this happens to a limited degree. The paper concludes with practical recommendations for enhancing the benefits and reducing the drawbacks of senior co-housing. Original article at MDPI; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193776
MULTIFILE
Since the financial and administrative liberalisation from the government in the late 1980s and the 1990s, the Dutch housing associations have been very dynamic, regarding the considerable extension of both commercial and social activities, the increased reliance and dependence on market circumstances, and the large number of amalgamations, creating bigger organisations. In recent years the Dutch social housing sector is under increased pressure as a consequence of the credit crunch, increased tax levies and the national implementation in the sector of EU regulations on ‘Services of General Economic Interest’. Factors like these are likely to have an effect on the organisational strategies of housing associations, the main providers of social housing in the Netherlands. The direction and the size of these effects, however, are not well known. A recent inquiry among housing associations sheds more light on this. In this paper, we make use of a classification including a socialcommercial dimension and a dimension between so-called ‘prospectors’ and ‘defenders’. This classification proves to be an adequate tool to describe the recent developments in the sector. It is concluded that, in general, housing associations are focussing more on traditional social housing tasks and ‘defending’ strategies, implying a shift back compared to the trend in recent decades.
DOCUMENT