Parallel Lives: Towards a Greater Understanding of What Mixed Communities Can Offer

Abstract

The creation of mixed communities has become a key element of UK housing policy but empirical research in such areas is limited. Through interviews with and diaries kept by residents of three mature estates, planned as mixed tenure from the start, levels of neighbourhood usage and social interaction are analysed. The techniques used deliberately replicate earlier work in mixed-tenure regeneration areas. While giving some support to the conventional wisdom that owners and renters tend to live separate lives, the distinctions are not as strong as previously suggested and the estates studied differ from each other. Explanations are drawn from both physical planning and community development. The authors indicate the parameters needed for such developments to meet residents' aspirations and draw out the lessons for policy.

Mixed Evidence on Mixed Tenure Effects: Findings from a Systematic Review of UK Studies, 1995–2009

“…For instance, Cole & Shayer (1998) found that it was not possible to discern whether tenure mix had led to any particular form of social interaction. Camina & Wood (2009) could not reach definitive conclusions on the effects of tenure mix on place attachment.…”

“…10 peer-reviewed journal articles (Atkinson & Kintrea, 2000Camina & Wood, 2009;Casey et al, 2007;Graham et al, 2009;Kearns & Mason, 2007;Manzi & Bowers, 2004;Middleton et al, 2005;Thompson-Fawcett, 2004;van Ham & Manley, 2009); . 2 books (Jupp, 1999;Ramwell & Saltburn, 1998); .…”

“…Primary studies: report (Atkinson & Kintrea, 1998) and journal paper (Atkinson & Kintrea, 2000); report (Groves et al, 2003) and journal paper (Middleton et al, 2005); report (Allen et al, 2005) and two journal papers (Camina & Wood, 2009;Casey et al, 2007). .…”

“…social capital, urban regeneration) but presenting evidence on mixed tenure effects (N studies ¼ 7, N references ¼ 8). Among 15 studies focussing on the question of what is achieved through tenure diversification, 10 studies aimed to look at 'outcomes', 'effects', 'results', 'influence' or 'impact' of tenure diversification (Andrews & Reardon Smith, 2005;Atkinson & Kintrea, 1998, 2000Beekman et al, 2001;Jupp, 1999;Kintrea et al, 1996;Page & Boughton, 1997;Pawson et al, 2000;Rowlands et al, 2006;Tunstall & Coulter, 2006;Wood & Vamplew, 1999), and 5 studies aimed to focus on 'perceptions' or 'experiences' of mixed tenure, and the 'contribution' and 'facilitating role' of tenure diversification (Allen et al, 2005;Camina & Wood, 2009;Casey et al, 2007;Cole et al, 1997;Harding, 1997;Meen et al, 2005;Silverman et al, 2005).…”

Diversity and social cohesion: the case of Jane-Finch, a highly diverse lower-income Toronto neighbourhood

“…However, while assimilationist tendencies in theory and policy prevail, we have also witnessed the emergence of a wave of counter-theories grounded in the belief that diversity is positive and must be embraced as a trait that can bolster social cohesion (among other things). The contributions of such works are especially notable in the area of social mixing -in terms of both theory and policy practice (see Graham et al 2009;Camina and Wood 2009;Joseph and Chaskin 2010). Social mixing policies identify and encourage greater mixing across income groups and between ethnic communities as a tool for establishing and strengthening social cohesion ).…”