Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: De Vos, Els
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Spoormans, Lidwine
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i1.4750
Resumo: Collective housing (CH) is undergoing a revival in Belgium. Since 2009, the Flemish Government Architect and his team have been advocating CH, stressing its importance as a task for architects given the demand for affordable housing and the need to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This support for CH has converged with the work of the non-profit citizen organization Samenhuizen (“Living together”) and the ad hoc initiatives taken by individual households and architects. In the Netherlands too, where there is a longer tradition of CH, the phenomenon is once more on the rise because of the housing crisis. As it is a developing topic, the terminology used for CH is also evolving. Drawing on publications on the subject in both Belgium and the Netherlands as well as on interviews with relevant stakeholders, this article sheds light on two widely published cases in both countries (pioneering and current, greenfield and conversion). These cases are compared in regard to thematic areas, based on an extensive literature study on collaborative housing by Lang et al. (2018). In addition to such aspects as the balance between “individuality” and the “collective,” we compare the role played by architects in both countries. Besides similarities, we show that the historical context, and especially the housing policy of each country, has a great influence and that the role of the architect is essential in the development of older and contemporary cohousing projects.
id RCAP_71a7655c4515cfa74dd75b7f69633cf6
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4750
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysiscentral living; cohousing; collective housing; housing cultureCollective housing (CH) is undergoing a revival in Belgium. Since 2009, the Flemish Government Architect and his team have been advocating CH, stressing its importance as a task for architects given the demand for affordable housing and the need to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This support for CH has converged with the work of the non-profit citizen organization Samenhuizen (“Living together”) and the ad hoc initiatives taken by individual households and architects. In the Netherlands too, where there is a longer tradition of CH, the phenomenon is once more on the rise because of the housing crisis. As it is a developing topic, the terminology used for CH is also evolving. Drawing on publications on the subject in both Belgium and the Netherlands as well as on interviews with relevant stakeholders, this article sheds light on two widely published cases in both countries (pioneering and current, greenfield and conversion). These cases are compared in regard to thematic areas, based on an extensive literature study on collaborative housing by Lang et al. (2018). In addition to such aspects as the balance between “individuality” and the “collective,” we compare the role played by architects in both countries. Besides similarities, we show that the historical context, and especially the housing policy of each country, has a great influence and that the role of the architect is essential in the development of older and contemporary cohousing projects.Cogitatio2022-03-31info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i1.4750oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4750Urban Planning; Vol 7, No 1 (2022): The Terms of Dwelling: Re-Theorizing Housing Through Architecture; 336-3482183-7635reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/4750https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i1.4750https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/4750/4750Copyright (c) 2022 Els De Vos, Lidwine Spoormanshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessDe Vos, ElsSpoormans, Lidwine2022-12-20T10:59:44Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4750Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:21:55.248223Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
title Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
spellingShingle Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
De Vos, Els
central living; cohousing; collective housing; housing culture
title_short Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
title_full Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
title_fullStr Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
title_sort Collective Housing in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Comparative Analysis
author De Vos, Els
author_facet De Vos, Els
Spoormans, Lidwine
author_role author
author2 Spoormans, Lidwine
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv De Vos, Els
Spoormans, Lidwine
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv central living; cohousing; collective housing; housing culture
topic central living; cohousing; collective housing; housing culture
description Collective housing (CH) is undergoing a revival in Belgium. Since 2009, the Flemish Government Architect and his team have been advocating CH, stressing its importance as a task for architects given the demand for affordable housing and the need to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This support for CH has converged with the work of the non-profit citizen organization Samenhuizen (“Living together”) and the ad hoc initiatives taken by individual households and architects. In the Netherlands too, where there is a longer tradition of CH, the phenomenon is once more on the rise because of the housing crisis. As it is a developing topic, the terminology used for CH is also evolving. Drawing on publications on the subject in both Belgium and the Netherlands as well as on interviews with relevant stakeholders, this article sheds light on two widely published cases in both countries (pioneering and current, greenfield and conversion). These cases are compared in regard to thematic areas, based on an extensive literature study on collaborative housing by Lang et al. (2018). In addition to such aspects as the balance between “individuality” and the “collective,” we compare the role played by architects in both countries. Besides similarities, we show that the historical context, and especially the housing policy of each country, has a great influence and that the role of the architect is essential in the development of older and contemporary cohousing projects.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-03-31
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i1.4750
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4750
url https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i1.4750
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4750
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/4750
https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i1.4750
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/4750/4750
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Els De Vos, Lidwine Spoormans
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Els De Vos, Lidwine Spoormans
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Urban Planning; Vol 7, No 1 (2022): The Terms of Dwelling: Re-Theorizing Housing Through Architecture; 336-348
2183-7635
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130665199861760