Search

Collective housing (CH) is undergoing a revival in Belgium. Since 2009, the Flemish Government Architect and his team have been advocating CH, stressing its importance as a task for architects given the demand for affordable housing and the need to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This support for CH has converged with the work of the non-profit citizen organization Samenhuizen (“Living together”) and the ad hoc initiatives taken by individual households and architects. In the Netherlands too, where there is a longer tradition of CH, the phenomenon is once more on the rise because of the housing crisis. As it is a developing topic, the terminology used for CH is also evolving. Drawing on publications on the subject in both Belgium and the Netherlands as well as on interviews with relevant stakeholders, this article sheds light on two widely published cases in both countries (pioneering and current, greenfield and conversion). These cases are compared in regard to thematic areas, based on an extensive literature study on collaborative housing by Lang et al. (2018). In addition to such aspects as the balance between “individuality” and the “collective,” we compare the role played by architects in both countries. Besides similarities, we show that the historical context, and especially the housing policy of each country, has a great influence and that the role of the architect is essential in the development of older and contemporary cohousing projects., Heritage & Design

Collective housing (CH) is undergoing a revival in Belgium. Since 2009, the Flemish Government Architect and his team have been advocating CH, stressing its importance as a task for architects given the demand for affordable housing and the need to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This support for CH has converged with the work of the non-profit citizen organization Samenhuizen ("Living together") and the ad hoc initiatives taken by individual households and architects. In the Netherlands too, where there is a longer tradition of CH, the phenomenon is once more on the rise because of the housing crisis. As it is a developing topic, the terminology used for CH is also evolving. Drawing on publications on the subject in both Belgium and the Netherlands as well as on interviews with relevant stakeholders, this article sheds light on two widely published cases in both countries (pioneering and current, greenfield and conversion). These cases are compared in regard to thematic areas, based on an extensive literature study on collaborative housing by Lang et al. (2018). In addition to such aspects as the balance between "individuality" and the "collective" we compare the role played by architects in both countries. Besides similarities, we show that the historical context, and especially the housing policy of each country, has a great influence and that the role of the architect is essential in the development of older and contemporary cohousing projects.

De helft van onze wereldbevolking leeft in steden. Deze steden zijn hubs van creativiteit en innovatie waardoor ze talrijke kansen bieden aan de bewoners. De ruimte in de stad is echter niet even toegankelijk voor iedereen. Wereldwijd zijn er vrouwen en meisjes die zich angstig en onzeker voelen in steden, vaak door een gebrek aan aangepaste infrastructuur. Maar ook op andere domeinen is de stad niet altijd even vrouwvriendelijk. Ook in België niet.Wat kunnen we dan wel doen om onze steden inclusiever te maken voor vrouwen? In het webinar “Een (om)weg naar een vrouwvriendelijke stad” gaat het Hannah Arendt Instituut in gesprek met experten uit de academische wereld en het middenveld om samen te zoeken naar concrete voorstellen op weg naar een vrouwvriendelijk stad., Accessible en ligne :https://hannah-arendt.institute/verdiep-je/webinar-een-omweg-naar-een-vrouwvriendelijke-stad, info:eu-repo/semantics/published