Search results

Based on a case study of conversion of real estate complexes built in Turin at the time of the 2006 Winter Olympic Games into public and subsidized housing, the chapter compares policy goals aimed at producing social mix through the mixing of housing tenure, with actual outcomes and thus identifies possible advantages, challenges, and pitfalls of this kind of intervention.

The analysis is based on a survey and semi-structured interviews with residents, in-depth interviews with key actors, and observation of daily interactions in public and shared places.

Regeneration policies and tenure mix seem to be most effective at preventing neighborhood stigmatization and attract private investments in facility development (area-based effects), but not to be “automatically” a source of mixed social relations and positive role models able to limit socially disapproved behaviors (people-based effects).

The practical lesson which can be drawn from this chapter is that the achievement of people-based effects requires long-standing actions which go beyond the construction and allocation of new apartments.

The chapter engages critically with the idea that built environment has deterministic effects on social environment, and social mix resulted from regeneration and housing policies can work as a catch-all solution for activating and rehabilitating human and social resources in the target area. Specifically, we show how these processes require particular organizational and policy conditions that cannot be taken for granted.

The purpose of this paper is to define mixed tenure estates as comprising any mix of social housing tenants with: private renting tenants (who therefore have private landlords); shared owners (i.e. those who buy a part share in their home, the remaining share being typically retained by a social landlord); owner occupiers (bought outright, or those paying a mortgage on the whole value of the property).

A literature review and interviews with Registered Social Landlord (RSL) personnel are used to inform the discussion contained in this paper. The term “Asset Management” is used to describe the management of estates, including maintenance, repair and other physical investment. Does mixed tenure really have different asset management needs from mono tenure estates? The research methodology is based on a case study of a social housing provider, supported by semi‐structured interviews.

The main conclusion of this paper is that, along with a number of other issues, inter‐working at the case study RSL needs to be improved if mixed tenure estates are to succeed.

Little work has been undertaken in this specific area, and the research should be of interest to a wide audience including social housing developers, urban researchers and central and local government.

This chapter aims at providing insight into how social mixing plays out in the Transvaal neighborhood in Amsterdam — a neighborhood which has gone through various rounds of urban renewal — in the context of nationwide polarization between native-Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch.

This chapter is based on research with a neighborhood focus — daily interactions, urban renewal, and use of public space — which took place during 2007–2010. Methods used include participant observation, semistructured interviews, and focus groups.

The physical renewal implies renovating and pulling down social housing, and building new social or owner-occupier housing. This study provides insight into how residents of different ethnic and income backgrounds live together in the neighborhood, also taking into account the impact of social polarization at the national level.

By knowing how people with different ethnic and class backgrounds live together in Transvaal neighborhood, it contributes to the formulation of evidence-based policies for the improvement of social cohesion, livability, safety of the neighborhood, and social capital of local residents.

This study looks at social mix in the context of national-level social polarization between native-Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch. This creates a new viewpoint seen against how the general literature on renewal and social mixing tends to do two things: firstly it usually explicitly or implicitly is also a tenure mix strategy, and secondly the policy focus of the social mix is usually around class issues, that is, the mixing of poor social housing tenants with richer owners.

Increasing concern about rising crime rates, high levels of unemployment and the anti-social behaviour of youth gangs that are concentrated within particular regions and neighbourhoods of cities has prompted renewed interest in governments to frame policies to create socially mixed cities. Recent riots experienced on social housing estates, including in France (St Denis, Poissy, Clichy-sous-bois), Australia (Macquarie Fields, Redfern in New South Wales) and Britain (Bestwood, Nottingham) have reinvigorated public and community debate into just what makes a functional neighbourhood. The nub of the debate about dysfunctional neighbourhoods is whether part of the problem is to be found in the lack of social mix of residents, that is, the homogeneity of the neighbourhoods in aspects such as housing tenure, ethnicity and socioeconomic characteristics of residents.

In many countries in the Global North, interventions in deprived neighbourhoods have attempted to tackle poverty by spatially deconcentrating it. This has commonly been done through housing restructuring programmes in areas of social housing. Supported by the ‘neighbourhood effects’ thesis, such interventions promote the diversification of housing tenures and housing typologies, based on the idea that a wider mix will result in increased opportunities of interaction across housing tenures and in local social networks becoming more heterogeneous. Using data from interviews, surveys and participant observation in meetings and events organised by local residents in North Peckham, an area in South London which in the 1990s and beginning of 2000s was the site of a large-scale housing restructuring programme, this chapter explores the expectations and experiences of neighbouring of long-term and newer arrival social housing tenants. This chapter shows that their different experiences of the neighbourhood and of physical and social change, as well as their diverging socio-economic characteristics – long-term residents tended to be older and retired while newer residents tended to have more complex needs – highly influenced perceptions of neighbourly relations and the significance attached to them. Despite finding high levels of neighbourly interaction and assistance, it also shows that attitudes and expectations towards neighbours were marked by a sense of nostalgia among long-term social tenants, stigma due to the area’s past and towards newer social tenants and by feelings of alienation due to the perceived residualisation of the social housing tenure and increased housing unaffordability.

This study attempts to reveal the contemporary tools of spatial design – policy, planning, urban design and architecture – for social mix (SMX) and social mixing (SMXG) by focusing on the recent undertakings in Denmark, the case in point being Copenhagen.

The study applies a combined research methodology consisting of qualitative strategies. By making use of regulatory document reviews and interviews with key respondents, the study puts together the tools for SMX which are, otherwise, disorganised. Dwelling on reviews of municipal local plans, site visits and semi-structured interviews with municipal agents in charge, it provides a comparative urban morphology analysis of three recently developed neighbourhoods on the basis of SMX and SMXG.

This study presents the untitled “toolbox” of Danish authorities to regulate the SMX policies and spatial efforts within a variety of planning/design scales to facilitate SMXG among the inhabitants of the neighbourhoods. The examination of successive cases manifests that SMX strategies have been integrated with those of SMXG, with a gradual upwards inclination, since mixing different tenures, types, sizes and prices have not been successful in guaranteeing social interaction. In doing so, the “in-between” zones have become the primary realm of control with an observable differentiation in the studied cases.

Studies are scant concerning the spatial design efforts regarding social mix and mixing. The present work contributes to filling this gap by examining a cutting-edge practice in a mature milieu and describing it in a thorough and comparative manner.

The introduction of higher density housing development within suburban areas has been favoured by state governments in Australia as a means of improving the efficiency of land use, reducing the costs associated with the delivery of government services and promoting home ownership. However it has been hypothesised that such development may have a negative impact on neighbourhood social structure, for example reducing diversity as measured by economic status and family makeup or in local housing market performance as measured by price. This paper aims to test this hypothesis.

The methodology employs a quantitative approach with principal components analysis used to capture the main social structure of the Adelaide Statistical Division. Social constructs, the product of principal components analysis, are used to measure outcomes of higher density development as measured by community or household change.

The results in this paper show that densification has had significant impact on certain neighbourhoods in the Adelaide Statistical Division notably in relation to their built form but not necessarily in neighbourhood structure or housing market performance.

The findings are significant in highlighting that increasing medium densities and improving tenure mix may not necessarily improve the opportunities for socio‐economic mix or for cultural diversity with implications for policy makers seeking to follow strategies based on the promotion of mixed communities.

This paper seeks to add new research on the outcomes of higher density development in Australia in three ways. First, social constructs, the product of principal components analysis, are used to measure outcomes of higher density development as measured by community or household change. Second, the paper investigates the development at the local level where impacts are likely to be most important. Third, the analysis identifies a before and after scenario for those suburbs where higher density development has been most significant.