Huber, A; Heinrichs, H and Jaeger-Erben, M (2024) Promoting neighbourhood sharing: Infrastructures of convenience and community. Buildings & Cities, 5(1), pp. 349-367. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Against the background of high levels of energy and resource demand in the residential sector, this paper investigates one potential way of making housing more sufficient: sharing at the neighbourhood level. Evidence from French and German case studies of 'collaborative housing' and 'developer-driven neighbourhood sharing' is used to identify two types of popular sharing practices: community-oriented and convenience-oriented. The first group of sharing practices is underpinned by creating, maintaining and experiencing social ties with neighbours. The second group of practices is guided by getting day-to-day tasks done smoothly and efficiently. To support the establishment of such sharing practices, some social and organisational measures are suggested. Thus, convenience-oriented sharing practices may be promoted by infrastructures and associated services that optimise the availability of sharing facilities and minimise temporal stretches and consumption work involved in practice performances. Community-oriented sharing practices may benefit from infrastructural arrangements that enable chance encounters, privilege community spaces over private areas and create welcoming spatial atmospheres.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | France; Germany; housing; lifestyles; neighbourhood; services; sharing; sufficiency; sustainability |
| Index terms: | housing, consumption, Germany, evidence, social ties, France, privilege, lifestyle, case study |
| Subjects: | sociology, data collection methods, Geography, demography, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, consumer economics |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Ethics, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here