Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:21:57.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interdependence, commitment, learning and love: the case of the United Kingdom's first older women's co-housing community

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2020

Melissa Fernández Arrigoitia  and
Karen West Open the ORCID record for Karen West [Opens in a new window]
Melissa Fernández Arrigoitia
Affiliation:
Bowland College, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Karen West*
Affiliation:
School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
*
*Corresponding author. Email: Karen.west@bristol.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Housing options for older people in the United Kingdom (UK) have been rather limited to remaining living ‘independently’ in one's own home and some variant of institutionally provided, pre-established and age-exclusive housing such as retirement communities, extra-care or sheltered housing. However, interest in alternative forms of housing and living which align more closely with the expectations of those currently entering later life is steadily growing. In this paper, we present some findings from original, mixed-methods research on the UK's only established example of senior co-housing, which also happens to be women only. Through thematic analysis, we explore two key questions about this important social experiment: (a) is this a model merely for the dedicated, activist and privileged few, as is often presumed; and (b) what might it tell us about post-traditional ageing. Is it merely a retirement lifestyle choice and identity project, grounded in logics of age denial, activity, choice, individualism and risk management? Our findings cannot be conclusive at this stage, but they do suggest a new model of later-life dwelling for the UK based on more collectivist values of inter-dependence, commitment, learning and, even, love.

Keywords

senior co-housingpost-traditional ageingalternative housingwomeninterdependencemutual aidlove
Type
Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 41 , Issue 7 , July 2021 , pp. 1673 - 1696
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, S and Hodges, M (2018) Adapting for Ageing. Good Practice and Innovations in Home Adaptations. London: Centre for Ageing Better.Google Scholar
Bamford, G (2005) Cohousing for older people: housing innovation in the Netherlands and Denmark. Australasian Journal on Ageing 24, 44–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, M, Liddle, J, Bartlam, B, Scarf, T and Sim, J (2011) Then and now: evolving community in the context of a retirement village. Age & Society 32, 1–27.Google Scholar
Best, R and Porteus, J (2016) Housing Our Ageing Population: Positive Ideas (HAPPI 3). All Party Parliamentary Group on Housing and Care for Older People. Available at https://www.housinglin.org.uk/_assets/Resources/Housing/Support_materials/Other_reports_and_guidance/HAPPI3_Report_2016.pdf.Google Scholar
Bianchi, F (2015) Verso un nuovo spazio abitativo? Un’ indagine sulle rappresentazioni sociali del cohousing. Studi di Sociologia 53, 237–254.Google Scholar
Biggs, S, Bernard, M, Kingston, P and Nettleton, H (2000) Lifestyles of belief: narrative and culture in a retirement community. Ageing & Society 20, 649–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanchard, J (2013) Aging in community: the communitarian alternative to aging in place, alone. Generations 37, 6–13.Google Scholar
Bolton, M (2012) Loneliness – The State We're In: A Report of Evidence Compiled for the Campaign to End Loneliness. Age UK Oxfordshire. Available at http://www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/wp-content/uploads/Loneliness-The-State-Were-In.pdf.Google Scholar
Borgloh, S and Westerheide, P (2012) The impact of mutual support based housing projects on the costs of care. Housing Studies 27, 620–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenton, M (1999) Choice, Autonomy and Mutual Support: Older Women's Collaborative Living Arrangements. York, UK: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Brenton, M (2001) Older people's co-housing communities. In Peace, S and Holland, C (eds), Inclusive Housing in an Ageing Society. Bristol, UK: Policy Press, pp. 169–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenton, M (2010) Potential Benefits of Cohousing for Older People: A Literature Review for the NESTA Foundation. NESTA. Available at http://taycommonscohousing.com/why-seniors-cohousing-1/.Google Scholar
Brenton, M (2013) Senior Cohousing Communities – An Alternative Approach for the UK? (JRF Programme Paper: A Better Life). London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Brenton, M (2017) Community Building for Old Age: Breaking New Ground. The UK's First Senior Co-housing Community, High Barnet (Housing Learning and Improvement Case Study No. 139). London: Housing Learning and Improvement Network.Google Scholar
Buffel, T, Handler, S and Phillipson, C (2019) Age-friendly Cities and Communities: A Global Perspective. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Cashin, S (2001) Privatized communities and the ‘secession of the successful’: democracy and fairness beyond the gate. Fordham Urban Law Journal 28, 1675–1692.Google Scholar
Cattan, M, White, M, Bond, J and Learmouth, A (2005) Preventing social isolation and loneliness among older people: a systematic review of health promotion interventions. Ageing and Society 25, 41–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chartered Institute of Housing and Housing LIN (2014) New Approaches to Delivering Better Housing to Older People. Available at http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Policy%20free%20download%20pdfs/New%20approaches%20to%20delivering%20better%20housing%20options%20for%20older%20people.pdf.Google Scholar
Chiodelli, F and Baglione, V (2014) Living together privately: for a cautious reading of cohousing. Urban Research and Practice 7, 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, JS (2004) Evaluation of community planning and life of senior cohousing projects in Northern European countries. European Planning Studies 12, 1189–1216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, MC (2000) Site planning, building design and a sense of community: an analysis of six cohousing schemes in Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 17, 146–163.Google Scholar
Department for Communities and Local Government (2009) Housing Our Ageing Population: Panel for Innovation (HAPPI): Final Report. Department for Communities and Local Government, Department of Health, and Homes and Communities Agency. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/378171/happi_final_report_-_031209.pdf.Google Scholar
Devlin, P, Douglas, R and Reynolds, T (2015) Collaborative design of Older Women's CoHousing. Working with Older People: Community Care Policy & Practice 19, 188–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickens, AP, Richards, SH, Greaves, CJ and Campbell, JL (2011) Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systemic review. MBC.Google Scholar
Droste, C (2015) German co-housing: an opportunity for municipalities to foster socially inclusive urban development? Urban Research & Practice 8, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droste, C and Komorek, M (2017) Inclusion as a guiding principle. In LaFond, M and Tsvetkova, L (eds), Cohousing Inclusive: Self-organised, Community-led Housing for All. Berlin: Jovis, pp. 24–29.Google Scholar
Durrett, C (2009) The Senior Cohousing Handbook: A Community Approach to Independent Living. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
Federici, S (2012) Feminism and the politics of the commons. In Bollier, D and Helfrich, S (eds), The Wealth of the Commons. Amherst, MA: The Commons Strategies Group. Available at http://wealthofthecommons.org/essay/feminism-and-politics-commons.Google Scholar
Fernández, M and Scanlon, K (2017) Of flux or finality? On the process and dynamics of a co-housing group in formation. In Benson, M and Hamiduddin, I (eds), Self Build Homes: Social Discourse, Experiences and Directions. London: UCL Press, pp. 115–138.Google Scholar
Fernández Arrigoitia, M and Scanlon, K (2015) Co-designing senior co-housing: the collaborative process of Featherstone Lodge. Urban Design 136, 31–32.Google Scholar
Findlay, R (2003) Interventions to reduce social isolation amongst older people: where it the evidence. Ageing & Society 23, 647–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, J (2002) The Application of Age-integrated Cohousing for Older People. Hobart, Australia: The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust for Australia.Google Scholar
Fraser, N (2016) Contradictions of capital and care. New Left Review, July–August. Available at https://newleftreview.org/II/100/nancy-fraser-contradictions-of-capital-and-care.Google Scholar
Giddens, A (1991) Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Gilleard, C and Higgs, P (2005) Cultures of Ageing. Self, Citizen and the Body. London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Gilleard, C and Higgs, P (2013) Ageing, Corporeality and Embodiment. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Glass, AP (2012) Elder co-housing in the United States: three case studies. Built Environment 38, 345–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glass, AP (2013) Lessons learned from a new elder cohousing community. Journal of Housing for the Elderly 27, 348–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glass, AP and Vander Plaats, R (2013) A conceptual model for aging better together intentionally. Journal of Aging Studies 27, 428–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grinde, B, Bang Nes, R, MacDonald, IF and Sloan Wilson, D (2018) Quality of life in intentional communities. Social Indicators Research 137, 625–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamiduddin, I and Gallent, N (2016) Self-build communities: the rationale and experiences of group-build (Baugruppen) housing development in Germany. Housing Studies 31, 365–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J (2018) We need to talk about ageing – and it's about far more than the NHS. The Guardian, February 4.Google Scholar
Hayden, D (1977) Seven American Utopias. The Architecture of Communitarian Socialism 1790–1975. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hayden, D (1981) The Grand Domestic Revolution. A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods and Cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Held, V (2006) The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Higgs, P and Gilleard, C (2015) Rethinking Old Age. Theorising the Fourth Age. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horelli, L (2013) The role of shared space for the building and maintenance of community from the gender perspective – a longitudinal case study in a neighbourhood of Helsinki. Social Sciences Directory 2, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, H (2011) Saving space, sharing time: integrated infrastructures of daily life in cohousing. Environment and Planning A 43, 560–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, H (2014) Transforming the sexist city: non-sexist communities of practice. Analize: Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies 3, 7–27.Google Scholar
Jarvis, H (2015) Toward a deeper understanding of the social architecture of cohousing evidence from the UK, USA and Australia. Urban Research and Practice 8, 93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, H, Scanlon, K and Fernández Arrigoitia, M (2016) Cohousing: Shared Futures. Economic Social Research Council (Presented in Parliament, June). Available at https://www.housinglin.org.uk/_assets/Resources/Housing/OtherOrganisation/Cohousing-shared-futures-FINAL-web.pdf.Google Scholar
Katz, S (2000) Busy bodies: activity, aging and the management of everyday life. Journal of Aging Studies 14, 135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, S (2013) Active and successful ageing. Lifestyle as a gerontological idea. Recherches Sociologiques et Anthropologiques 44, 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, S and Calasanti, T (2015) Critical perspectives on successful aging: does it appeal more than it illuminates? The Gerontologist 55, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katz, S and McHugh, K (2010) Age, meaning and place; cultural narrative and retirement communities. In Cole, T, Ray, R and Kastenbaum, R (eds), A Guide to Humanistic Studies in Aging. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, pp. 271–292.Google Scholar
Labus, A (2016) Senior cohousing in cross-cutting research. Architecture, Civil Engineering, Environment 9, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labit, A (2015) Self-managed co-housing in the context of an ageing population in Europe. Urban Research & Practice 8, 32–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labit, A and Dubost, N (2016) Housing and ageing in France and Germany: the intergenerational solution. Housing, Care and Support 19, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaFond, M and Tsvetkova, L (2017) Cohousing Inclusive: Self-organised, Community-led Housing for All . Berlin: Jovis.Google Scholar
Lantham, A (2003) Research Performance, and doing human geography: some reflections on the diary-photograph, diary-interview method. Environment and Planning A 35, 1993–2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marckmann, B, Gram-Hanssen, K and Christensen, T (2012) Sustainable living and co-housing: evidence from a case study of eco-villages. Built Environment 38, 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markle, EA, Rodgers, R, Sanchez, W and Ballou, M (2015) Social support in the cohousing model of community: a mixed-methods analysis. Community Development 46, 616–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, W (1993) Grounding time-use in microspace: empirical results. Social Indicators Research 30, 121–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milligan, C and Wiles, J (2010) Landscapes of care. Progress in Human Geography 34, 736–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milligan, C, Bingley, A and Gattrell, A (2005) Using diary techniques to explore the place of health and wellbeing amongst older people. Social Science and Medicine 61, 1882–1892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ota, S (2015) Housing an ageing population (England). House of Commons Library, Briefing Paper 07423.Google Scholar
Peace, S, Holland, C and Kellaher, L (2006) Environment and Identity in Later Life. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Ruiu, ML (2017) Participatory processes in designing cohousing communities: the case of the community project. Housing and Society 43, 168–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandstedt, E and Westin, S (2015) Beyond Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft. Cohousing life in contemporary Sweden. Housing, Theory and Society 32, 131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sangregorio, I (1995) Collaborative housing: the home of the future? Reflections on the Swedish experience. In Ottes, L, Poventud, E, van Schendelen, M and Segond von Blanchet, G (eds), Gender and the Built Environment. Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum, pp. 101–114.Google Scholar
Sangregorio, I (2010) Collaborative housing from a woman's perspective. In Vestbro, D (ed.), Living Together: Cohousing Experiences Around the World. Stockholm: RIT Division of Urban Studies with Kollektivhus NU, pp. 114–124.Google Scholar
Sargisson, L (2012) Second wave cohousing: a modern utopia? Utopian Studies 21, 28–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargisson, L (2014) Utopianism in the architecture of New Urbanism and cohousing. In Bradley, K and Hedren, J (eds), Green Utopianism: Perspectives, Politics and Micro- Practices. New York: Routledge, pp. 226–242.Google Scholar
Savills (2015) Spotlight: Housing an Ageing Population. Savills World Research, UK Residential. Available at https://www.housinglin.org.uk/_assets/Resources/Housing/OtherOrganisation/housing-an-ageing-population_reduced.pdf.Google Scholar
Shafique, A (ed.) (2018) Coliving and the Common Good. RSA Action and Research Centre. Available at https://www.housinglin.org.uk/_assets/Resources/Housing/OtherOrganisation/Report-rsa-co-living_final.pdf.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M and Giarusso, R (2010) Aging and family life: a decade review. Journal of Marriage and Family 72, 1039–1058.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toker, Z (2010) New housing for new households: comparing cohousing and new urbanist developments with women in mind. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 27, 325–339.Google Scholar
Torres-Antonini, M (2001) Our Common House: Using the Built Environment to Develop Supportive Communities (PhD thesis). University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Available at http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0000360/torres_m.PDF.Google Scholar
Tummers, L and MacGregor, S (2019) Beyond wishful thinking: a FPE perspective on commoning, care, and the promise of co-housing. International Journal of the Commons 13, 62–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vestbro, DU (1997) Collective housing in Scandinavia – how feminism revised a modernist experiment. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 14, 329–342.Google Scholar
Vestbro, DU (ed.) (2010) Living Together – Cohousing Ideas and Realities Around the World. Proceedings from the International Collaborative Housing Conference in Stockholm 5–9 May 2010. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Vestbro, D and Horelli, L (2012) Design for gender equality – the history of cohousing ideas and realities. Built Environment 38, 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, K, Shaw, R, Hagger, B and Holland, C (2017) Enjoying the third age! Discourse, identity and liminality in extra-care communities. Ageing & Society 37, 1874–1897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J (2005) Sun, surf and sustainable housing – cohousing, the Californian experience. International Planning Studies 10, 145–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, C and Vibert, S (2017) Unlocking the Housing Market: Helping First Time Buyers by Helping Later Life Buyers. Demos. Available at https://www.demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Unlocking-the-Market-Demos-Report.pdf.Google Scholar