Produzione di abitabilità e condizioni di efficacia di interventi di Social Housing Post doc 2010 incoming (call 1) The “Trentino - PCOFUND-GA-2008-226070” programme

1. Collective action and habitability
in residential contexts
Francesco Minora
Bologna, 7/11/2015
francesco.minora@cbs.tn.it
Produzione di abitabilità e condizioni di efficacia di
interventi di Social Housing
Post doc 2010 incoming (call 1)
The “Trentino - PCOFUND-GA-2008-226070”
programme

2. The project
• 3 research lines :
– Deepening a theory on self-
production of habitability
(using IAD framework of analysis)
– Comparing practices and
policies of Social Housing (9
cases in England, Italy and France)
– Geo-referencing habitability
in Trento (quantitative analysis)
• Aims:
– To extend the theory of the
commons to urban contexts;
– To study social housing with
an international perspective
– To understand the
effectiveness of self-
organisation in producing
habitability;
– to apply this theory to the
Trentino local context.

3. Main objects
Processes of production of
habitability
• Habitability = a public good co-
produced at many different
scales; it’s the outcome of the
interaction between a territory
and the uses made of it by its
inhabitants, based on housing
choices, conditioned by
community characters,
biophysical conditions of the
context, rules and organisational
system
Collective institutions
• Institutional arrangements
defined by groups of people
aimed at overcoming some
common problems along a certain
period of time, defining the rules
for accessing the group, the
usage of resources managed by
the group and the management
system used by the group

4. Which actors for which housing policy?
• 1 theory
– Self produced housing solutions can be a housing
policy option if:
• 3 hypothesis:
– They produce social inclusion
– They maintain good housing condition over the
time
– They develop robust institutional settings able to
last over the time
• 3 institutional settings, 9 compared cases
(Italy, France e England)

5. 1. Housing ourselves
CHARACTERS
• Aim: to satisfy housing needs of a
specific group of people
• Property regime: co-ownership
• Time: long lasting and stable
communities
• Institutional role: playmaker
• Social interaction: commonification
• Inhabitant: entrepreneur
ELEMENTS AFFECTING HABITABILITY
• Accessibility : high homogeneity
(language, age, economic etc.)
• Congruence: high congruence since the
beginning
• Participation: one head = one vote
• Control: informal in monitoring and
sanctioning
• Conflict resolution mechanisms: proximity
prevent conflicts
• legitimisation from over-ordered
institutions: through property
• Internal coordination: through the group
• Level of infrastructure within the context :
not required

7. Strengths
•They can produce
affordable homes and
mantein over the time
this affordability
•High level of
congruence before
inhabiting = less conflitcs
•this model can be used
even for renting
Weaknesses
• It is for very
homogeneous and
targeted groups
• High risky process
• No guarantee for
environmental attention
Conditions
•Some incentives are
needed for low income
groups
•Over ordered funds in
order to give guarantee
the enterprise doesn’t fail
•Some incentives for
environmental
improvements

8. 2. Self-producing housing services
CHARACTERS
• Aim: to improve housing conditions
through the delivery of services
• Property regime: a community of
renters with a single owner
• Time: short –medium period
• Institutional role: pooling
• Social interaction: service deliverer
• Inhabitant: user
ELEMENTS AFFECTING HABITABILITY
• Accessibility: level of homogeneity
defined from external players
• Congruence: services are required by
the group
• Participation: inhabitants are voted
and elected
• Control: informal in monitoring and
formal for sanctioning
• Conflict resolution mechanisms:
through information exchange and
filtering
• Legitimisation from over-ordered
institutions: contract
• Internal coordination: between
contract signatories
• Level of infrastructure within the
context: within the neighbourhood

9. About Us
Roman Way Estate is situated in the Edgbaston
area of Birmingham in direct proximity of the
new QE Hospital Birmingham which is also home
to the RCDM and also Birmingham University.
The area is considered a desirable place to live.
We have 272 properties on the estate:
•2 High rise tower blocks (each with 42 flats)
•26 Low rise blocks each with 4 flats
•96 Houses
With a variety of tenure:
•158 are council properties
•46 are council leaseholders
•68 are freehold properties a number of which
are rented to students of the University

12. Strengths
•Collecting
information on the
context
•Delivering services
timely preventing big
damages
•Help in defining
much better the
public expenditure
Weaknesses
•They have specific aims
based on very narrow
focused activities;
•They hardly have
strategic aims;
Conditions
•They have to be credible
to the inhabitants they
work for;
•they don’t he to burden
public expenditure;

13. 3. Self-regenerating a neighbourhood
CHARACTERS
• Aim: to concentrate investments over
specific areas
• Property regime: a community of
homeowners (public and private)
• Time: long term projects
• Institutional role: sharing
• Social interaction: partnership
• Inhabitant: promoter
ELEMENTS AFFECTING HABITABILITY
• Accessibility: low homogeneity
• Congruence: through the definition
of opportunities for the development
• Participation: inhabitants are voted
and elected + local external key
players
• Control: informal and formal in
monitoring and formal for
sanctioning
• Conflict resolution mechanisms:
listening and problem solving
• Legitimisation from over-ordered
institutions: plans and projects
• Internal coordination: through the
network activated
• Level of infrastructure within the
context: high level and required

14. H’ Nord project in Bordeaux

15. Stregths
•They activate marginal
resources
•They reinvest profits
over the area
•if rooted, they grant
long time improvements
•The work for social mix
Weaknesses
•Inhabitants
professionalise their
knowledge
•A risk of total
delegation from public
authorities
•No financial standard
solutions to be
replicated
•They cannot realise
expensive infrastructure
Conditions
•Regeneration
opportunities are
needed (waste land,
derelict areas etc.)
•They have to work
within their specific
mission, otherwise they
go bankrupt
•An umbrella
organisation is needed
for high skills knowledge

16. Three conditions
– Self organising communties are an option of
housing policy if:
– They produce social inclusion:
• They produce sociable housing (reciprocity and sociability)
– They maintain good housing and physical
conditions of the area:
– Autonomous housing: inhabitants learn skills and instruments for how
to solving housing problems by themselves
– They develop robust and long lasting institutional
settings:
– Aimed housing: they can be used to single and targeted initiatives that
need entrepreneurial capacities