1. Participatory way of life in cohousing communities:
HSA Conference 2016
Housing at the extremes: austerity, prosperity and systems change
6th -8th April 2016 • University of York
Participatory way of life in cohousing communities:
the case of the Community Project
Maria Laura Ruiu

2. Aims
We will explore:
Capability of cohousing experiments to develop cohesive communities through participatory processes;
risk that cohousing communities might become “ordinary” condominiums.

3. Common space/facilities
What are Cohousing Communities?
Common space/facilities
Private home

4. Community Project, Laughton, East Sassex, 1998
71 inhabitants: 35 adults 36 children
17 houses in blocks + 4 detached houses;
Common House: Shawfield;
23 acres of land.

5. From Forming to Performing
“Forming phase” - 7 years due to a number of difficulties and constraints related to:
recruiting people interested in the project;
finding an available site.
“Storming phase” - difficulties related to:
length of the process;
need for increasing reciprocal trust among cohousers;
obtaining approvals from local institutions;
obtaining a mortgage;
being accepted by the wider community.

6. From Forming to Performing
“Norming phase” - cohousers did not have any experience in such communitarian experiments:
the group did not provide a large number of common activities and meetings;
lack of an internal rigid normative;
An internal document includes the general rules for managing the “company”.
“Performing phase”:
Big size of the project + limited number of collective meetings + lack of an internal rigid normative =

7. Some imbalances within the community
As stated by cohousers, some members of the community do not steadily take part in common activities.
Sometime they do not fulfill their duties, producing extra work for the others.
Some cohousers stated that they do not intimately know all members of the community.

8. Renovated blocks
Detached houses

9. Physical Layout
The detached houses were built after the community establishment .
New residents became part of an existing cohesive group that had already established its rules.
The limited number of meetings for sharing dinners and collective activities contribute towards affecting the establishment of intimate relationships with the new residents.

10. Benefits Benefits Several intimate relationships among inhabitants.
“Village atmosphere” in which children grow up and safely play outdoors.
The group tends to be highly externally-oriented.
Since the establishment of the group, local community’s hostility has progressively decreased and many people from Laughton participate in the community life.
Several intimate relationships among inhabitants.
Availability of collective spaces and facilities, but also, and mainly, informal exchanges resulting from the community life.
In some cases, “spontaneous” mutual support arises.
Benefits
Benefits

11. Internal dynamics different from an “ordinary” condominium
“Intentional community”: cohousers spontaneously chose a “sharing way of life”;
the group is expected to collaborate and negotiate its private stakes with those of the whole community;
the inhabitants are expected to both socialise and know each other as a “mandatory task”.

12. Conclusions
Intentionality is a constitutive future of cohousing communities (from forming to perfoming);
The lack of participation from the forming to the performing phase increases the risk of becoming an “ordinary” condominium;
The original aim of creating a community characterised by sharing practices seems to be only partially achieved by cohousers among each single group but not between groups;
Need to take into consideration these features when the cohousing scheme is applied to social housing.

13. “For the original pioneers however, it was 8 years between first coming up with idea over dinner one night and the actual date of move-in. It took 5 years to find a property, set up a legal and financial structure, agree our vision and operating structures. It was a wonderful but demanding process full of disappointments and excitement“
(Sarah Berger, 2001).
Grazie…
thanks