This study argues that environmental-sustainability and adjacent practices and identities are conducive to community cohesion in cohousing in the U.S. The theoretical framework draws from cohousing research based on social practice theory and on degrowth concepts. Data came from a Cohousing Research Network combined individual resident- and community-level survey data set (level-1 N = 272, level-2 N = 39). Two multi-level models of community connection among residents included individual-level factors measuring participation in cohousing practices, community-level measures of green identity, and an individual-level attitudinal indicator of potential discord stemming from perceptions of other residents’ insufficient or excessive commitment to sustainability. Keeping in mind data constraints, results from multilevel linear regression analysis were tentatively supportive. The findings suggest that residents indeed connected to their communities through participation in shared practices and through shared green identities. Further confirmatory and exploratory research is needed.
AshJ.SimpsonP. (2016). Geography and post-phenomenology. Progress in Human Geography, 40(1), 48–66.
2.
BakhtinM. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (McGeeV. W., trans.). University of Texas Press.
3.
BakkerL.DekkerK. (2012) Social trust in urban neighbourhoods: The effect of relative ethnic group position. Urban Studies, 49(10), 2031–2047. https://doi.org/10.2307/26150977
4.
BerggrenH. M. (2017). Cohousing as civic society: Cohousing involvement and political participation in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 98(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12305
5.
BerggrenH. M. (2020). Is cohousing good for democracy? Comparing political participation among residents of cohousing communities and traditional condominium developments. Housing and Society, 47(3), 189–214.
6.
BerryB. J. L. (1992). America’s utopian experiments: Communal havens from long-wave crises. Dartmouth College and University Press of New England.
7.
BerryW. (1987). Home economics: Fourteen essays. North Point.
8.
BoyerR. H.LelandS. (2018). Cohousing for whom? Survey evidence to support the diffusion of socially and spatially integrated housing in the United States. Housing Policy Debate, 28(5), 653–667.
9.
BressonS.DenefleS. (2015). Diversity of self-managed cohousing initiatives in France. Urban Research and Practice, 8(1), 5–16.
10.
BuurJ.LarsenH. (2010). The quality of conversation in participatory innovation. CoDesign, 6(3), 121–138.
11.
BygottD. (2006). Creating a village: Many people in the USA and Europe are designing their own communities. David Bygott and his wife Jeannette recently moved into a cohousing community. What’s that like?For A Change, 19(2), 16–17.
12.
ClarkP. I. (2021, October). Practices of shared living: Exploring environmental sustainability in UK cohousing, community living, and coliving [PhD thesis], University of Westminster.
CollinsR. (2014). Interaction ritual chains (Vol. 62). Princeton University Press.
15.
DalyM. (2017). Quantifying the environmental impact of ecovillages and co-housing communities: A systematic literature review. Local Environment, 22(11), 1358–1377.
16.
DominelliL. (1995). Women in the community: Feminist principles and organising in community work. Community Development Journal, 30, 133–143.
17.
DreherJ. (2009). Phenomenology of friendship: Construction and constitution of an existential social relationship. Human Studies, 32, 401–417.
18.
FensterM. (1999). Community by covenant, process, and design: Cohousing and the contemporary common interest community. Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law, 15(1), 3–54.
19.
ForrestK.RichC. (2005). Bring the family. Washingtonian, 40(6), 84–88.
20.
FrommD. (2000). American cohousing: The first five years. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(2), 94–109.
21.
GarcianoJ. L. (2011). Affordable cohousing: Challenges and opportunities for supportive relational networks in mixed-income housing. Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development Law, 20(2), 169–192.
22.
HargreavesT. (2011). Practice-ing behaviour change: Applying social practice theory to pro-environmental behaviour change. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(1), 79–99.
23.
HortonD. (2006). Demonstrating environmental citizenship? A study of everyday life among green activists. In DobsonA.BellD. (Eds.), Environmental citizenship (pp. 127–150). The MIT Press.
24.
JarvisH. (2011). Saving space, sharing time: Integrated infrastructures of daily life in cohousing. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 43(3), 560–577. https://doi.org/10.1068/a43296
25.
JarvisH. (2015). Towards a deeper understanding of the social architecture of co-housing: Evidence from the UK, USA and Australia. Urban Research & Practice, 8(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2015.1011429
26.
JarvisH. (2019). Sharing, togetherness and intentional degrowth. Progress in Human Geography, 43(2), 256–275.
27.
JensenJ. O.StenderM. (2024). Developer-driven co-housing in Denmark: Strengths and weaknesses compared to resident-driven co-housing. Urban Research & Practice. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2024.2381006
28.
KahnJ. P. (2010, March23). Intentional communities as resource-sharers: Cohousing booms as option in urban living. The Boston Globe.
29.
KennyM. (2014, July31). Communities of Resistance: The Success and Resilience of Intentional Communities in North America. A Major Paper submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
30.
LietaertM. (2010). Cohousing’s relevance to degrowth theories. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 576–580.
31.
MargolisD.EntinD. (2011). Report on survey of cohousing communities 2011. Cohousing Association of the United States.
32.
MartinJ. L.YeugnK.-T. (2006). Persistence of close personal ties over a 12-year period. Social Networks, 28(4), 331–362.
33.
McCamantK.DurrettC. (1994). Cohousing: A contemporary approach to housing ourselves. Ten Speed Press.
34.
McCamantK.DurrettC. (2011). Creating cohousing: Building sustainable communities. New Society.
35.
MeltzerG. (2000a). Cohousing: Verifying the importance of community in the application of environmentalism. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(2), 110–132.
36.
MeltzerG. (2000b). Cohousing: Toward social and environmental sustainability [PhD thesis]. The University of Queensland.
37.
MeltzerG. (2005). Sustainable community: Learning from the Cohousing Model. Trafford Press.
38.
MillerL. J. (1995). Family togetherness and the suburban ideal. Sociological Forum, 10(3), 393–418.
39.
MulderK.CostanzaR.EricksonJ. (2006). The contribution of built, human, social and natural capital to quality of life in intentional and unintentional communities. Ecological Economics, 59(1), 13–23.
40.
PickerillJ. (2016). Eco-homes: People, place and politics. Zed Books Ltd.
41.
PoleyL. D. (2007). Community and the habits of democratic citizenship: An investigation into civic engagement: Social capital and democratic capacity-building in U.S. Cohousing Neighborhoods [Dissertation]. College of Architecture and Urban Studies.
42.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis method. Sage.
43.
RuiuM. L. (2014). Differences between cohousing and gated communities. A literature review. Sociological Inquiry, 84(2), 316–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12031
44.
RuiuM. L. (2016). Participatory Processes in Designing Cohousing Communities: The Case of the Community Project. Housing and Society, 43(3), 168–181.
45.
SaegertS.BenítezL. (2005). Limited equity housing cooperatives: Defining a niche in the low-income housing market. Journal of Planning Literature, 19(4), 427–439.
46.
SanguinettiA. (2012). National Cohousing Survey, Phase III.
47.
SanguinettiA. (2014). Transformational practices in cohousing: Enhancing residents’ connection to community and nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 86–96. https://doi.org.10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.05.003
48.
SanguinettiA. (2015). Diversifying cohousing: The retrofit model. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 32(1), 68–90.
49.
SanguinettiA.HibbertK. (2018). More room for cohousing in the United States: Understanding diffusion potential by exploring who knows about, who likes, and who would consider living in cohousing. Housing and Society, 45(3), 139–156.
SeyfangG.ParkJ.SmithA. (2013). A thousand flowers blooming? An examination of community energy in the UK. Energy Policy, 61, 977–989.
52.
SherryJ.OrmsbyA. (2016). Sustainability in practice: A comparative case study analysis of the eco village at Ithaca, Earthaven, and Sirius. Communal Societies, 36(2), 125–151.
53.
ShoveE.PantzarM. (2007). Recruitment and reproduction: The careers and carriers of digital photography and floorball. Human Affairs, 17(2), 154–167. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10023-007-0014-9
54.
ShoveE.PantzarM.WatsonM. (2012). The dynamics of social practice: Everyday life and how it changes. Sage.
55.
SimonsonK. (2007) Practice, spatiality and embodied emotions: An outline of a geography of practiceHuman Affairs, 17, 168–181.
56.
SønderskovK. M.ThomsenJ. P. F. (2015) Contextualizing intergroup contact: Do political party cues enhance contact effects?Social Psychology Quarterly, 78(1), 49–76. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44075388
57.
StevensonF.Baborska-NaroznyM.ChattertonP. (2016). Resilience, redundancy and low-carbon living: Co-producing individual and community learning, Building Research & Information, 44(7), 789–803.
58.
VestbroD. U. (2000). From collective housing to cohousing—A summary of research. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(2), 164–178.
59.
VestbroD. U.HorelliL. (2012). Design for gender equality: The history of cohousing ideas and realities. Built Environment, 38(3), 315–335.
60.
WelchD.YatesL. (2018). The practices of collective action: Practice theory, sustainability transitions and social change. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 48(3), 288–305.
61.
WheelerS. C.BechlerC. J. (2020). Objects and self-identity. Current Opinion in Psychology, 39, 6–11.
62.
WilliamsJ. (2005a). Sun, surf and sustainable housing—Cohousing, the Californian experience. International Planning Studies, 10(2), 145–177.
63.
WilliamsJ. (2005b). Designing neighbourhoods for social interaction: The case of cohousing. Journal of Urban Design, 10(2), 195–227.
