스웨덴 코하우징의 물리적 환경 디자인 평가
Evaluation of Physical Environment Design in Swedish Cohousing Projects
0
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Cohousing project has been evolved as an alternative housing to reduce housework for working women, and to reduce loneliness for the elderly in order to adjust people’s needs of modern society. From the view point of age, there are two different types of cohousing in Sweden. One is the +40 cohousing in which residents are supposed to be aged at least 40 or over and to be a couple or single without any cohabitant children at home. The other is the mixed-age cohousing in which diverse households can reside without age limit. This paper aims to find out evaluation and satisfaction level at the physical environment design and its difference by cohousing types in Swedish cohousing projects. 12 cohousing projects nationwide including 4 of the +40 cohousing and 8 of the mixed-age cohousing were surveyed by questionnaire. 242 data were collected and analyzed by SPSS program. The findings are as follows. Satisfaction level is high in both types, showing no remarkable differences between the two cohousing types, though slightly higher satisfaction level is found in the +40 cohousing than in the mixed-age cohousing. This reason might origin from the fact that most of the +40 cohousing buildings are newer than the mixed-age cohousing. Nevertheless, there might be a hidden reason. The fact that most of the residents in the +40 cohousing are more actively participated in shared activities and more satisfied at their living situation might affect higher satisfaction level at the physical environment design as well.
Abstract
Cohousing project has been evolved as an alternative housing to reduce housework for working women, and to reduce loneliness for the elderly in order to adjust people’s needs of modern society. From the view point of age, there are two different types of cohousing in Sweden. One is the +40 cohousing in which residents are supposed to be aged at least 40 or over and to be a couple or single without any cohabitant children at home. The other is the mixed-age cohousing in which diverse households can reside without age limit. This paper aims to find out evaluation and satisfaction level at the physical environment design and its difference by cohousing types in Swedish cohousing projects. 12 cohousing projects nationwide including 4 of the +40 cohousing and 8 of the mixed-age cohousing were surveyed by questionnaire. 242 data were collected and analyzed by SPSS program. The findings are as follows. Satisfaction level is high in both types, showing no remarkable differences between the two cohousing types, though slightly higher satisfaction level is found in the +40 cohousing than in the mixed-age cohousing. This reason might origin from the fact that most of the +40 cohousing buildings are newer than the mixed-age cohousing. Nevertheless, there might be a hidden reason. The fact that most of the residents in the +40 cohousing are more actively participated in shared activities and more satisfied at their living situation might affect higher satisfaction level at the physical environment design as well.
참고문헌 (24)
- 조정현, "미국 코하우징의 특성 및 주민참여 현황", 한국주거학회논문집, 22(2), pp.11~20 (2011), 한국주거학회
- 최정신, "인구, 사회구조 변화에 따른 쉐어형 주택사례-코하우징", LH-한국주거학회 합동 세미나 발표논문집 (2011), 한국주거학회
- 최정신, "덴마크 자치관리모델(Self-work Model)노인용 코하우징의 디자인 특성", Family and Environment Research, 41(4), pp.1~19 (2003), 대한가정학회
- 한민정, "덴마크와 스웨덴 코하우징의 물리적 특성의 내용분석", 한국주거학회논문집, 16(5), pp.57~66 (2005), 한국주거학회
- 한민정, "코하우징에 적용된 커뮤니티 개념의 계획기법에 대한 연구", 한국주거학회논문집, 16(6), pp.93~100 (2005), 한국주거학회
- Ambrose, I., "Etablering af seniorbofællesskaber, Erfaringer fratre projekter i Odense, Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut" (1993), København
- Cho, J. S., "Active Participants of Common Activities in Swedish Cohousing and Their Satisfaction", ENHR (European Network for Housing Research) 2012 International Conference, pp.118~119 (2012), ENHR(European Network for Housing Research) & NOVA
- 최정신, "Evaluation of community planning and life of senior cohousing projects in Northern European countries", European Planning Studies, 12(8), pp.1189~1216, Carfax Publishing Ltd.
- 최정신, "Evaluation of Common Activity and Life in Swedish Cohousing Communities", IAPS Internatinal Network Symposium 2011, pp.137~138 (2011), IAPS, CSBE, Housing Network, 대한건축학회, 한국주거학회 연합
- 최정신, "Why Do People Move into Cohousing Communities in Sweden?: Differences between +40 cohousing and mixed-age cohousing", IAPS International Network Symposium 2011, pp.152~153 (2011), IAPS, EDRA, Housing Network, 대한건축학회, 한국주거학회
- 최정신, "Do Motivation to Move in and Life Satisfaction of Residents Aged over 40 Differ by Cohousing Types in Sweden?", ENHR(European Network for Housing Research) 2012 International Conference, pp.119~119 (2012), ENHR(European Network for Housing Research)
- Durrett, C., "A senior cohousing handbook: A community approach to independent living" (2009), New Society Publishers
- Galss, A. P., "Aging in a Community of Mutual Support: The Emergence of an Elder Intentional Cohousing Community in the United States", Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 23, pp.283~303 (2009)
- Jarvis, H., "Saving space, sharing time: integrated infrastructures of daily life in cohousing", Environment and Planning A, 43, pp.560~577 (2011)
- Jensen, S. P., , Summary and Conclusion of the Conference on Cohousing for Senior Citizens in Europe, pp.8~13 (1994)
- McCamant, K., "Cohousing: A contemporary approach to housing ourselves" (1994), Habitat Press
- Meltzer, G., "Sustainable community: Learning from the cohousing model" (2005), Trafford
- Tchoukaleyska, R., "Co-housing childhoods: parents’ mediation of urban risk through participation in intentional communities", Children’s Georgaphies, 9(2), pp.235~246 (2011)
- Toker, Z., "New housing for new households: comparing cohousing and new urbanist developments with women in mind", Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 27(4), pp.325~339 (2010)
- Vestbro, D. U., "History of cohousing-internationally and in Sweden", Proceedings of the 1st International Cohousing Conference (2010)
- Williams, J., "Sun, surf and sustainable housing: Cohousing, the California experience", International Planning Studies, 10, pp.145~177 (2005)
- Zhang, R., "A new living concept based on low-impact strategy–The sustainability of cohousing community", Advanced Materials Research, 224, pp.220~223 (2011)