The contingent of large housing estates built in the 1960s and 1970s accounts for almost a half of all high-rises in Finland. The primary ideology in their genesis was to combine industrially prefabricated urban housing development with the surrounding forest landscape-together with a policy of spatial social mixingto prevent social disorder and segregation. These policies seemed to work as intended until the early 1990s, but have since proved to be insufficient. With Western integration and new information and communication-based economic growth, new trends of population differentiation have emerged. As new wealth has moved out to the fringes of cities, the large housing estates have declined socioeconomically and have been enriched ethnically. This differentiation is structurally produced, works through the regional housing market and, as such, is beyond the scope of the preventive policies pursued. Recent attempts at controlling the regional markets and new forms of spatial social mixing have so far proved difficult.

Studies on post-WWII housing estates have largely focused on problematic neighbourhoods, and there is scarcity of literature on housing estates across their entire social scale. Moreover, there is insufficient evidence on the extent to which tenure structure differentiates estates from each other in terms of social disorder. Using a large cluster sample of Finnish estates representing a wide variety of estate neighbourhoods, we examined the implications of tenure structure in terms of social disadvantage and perceived social disorder. We also studied how social interaction and normative regulation mediate the impact of structural estate characteristics. We found that rental domination is associated with social disadvantage, which exposes residents to social disorder, in line with social disorganisation theory. Differences in normative regulation partly explain this association. In contrast, social interaction in the neighbourhood is not associated with the level of perceived social disorder. The theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

It has repeatedly been shown that the Nordic countries are strongest when they stand togetherPREFACE 25

No abstract

No abstract