Untitled

Tunick, Mark

doi:10.1023/a:1013704924367

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While many tiny housers appear to articulate a strong interest in cohesive and collaborative community dynamics, their comments also suggest that privacy is not only a precondition for community (Tunick 2001), but that privacy and community cannot easily be separated (Boone 1983). Tiny housers demand "spatial boundaries" while being intensely aware of their own "dependence on community resources such as storage facilities, showers, and garden space" (Anson 2018).…”

Section: Maintaining Privacy In Communitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Small Houses, Big Community: Tiny Housers’ Desire for More Cohesive and Collaborative Communities

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past research on the tiny house movement has primarily focused on understanding the individual motivations behind adopting the tiny house lifestyle. While some studies have suggested that tiny housers do entertain an interest in community, no systematic research exists that examines the actual complexities of this phenomenon. To make first inroads into this body of literature, twenty-four community-oriented tiny housers were interviewed about their ideal community. Interview questions ranged from definitions of community to specific ideas of the nature of community characteristics. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded in NVivo 12.0. Four main themes and eleven subthemes emerged from the qualitative content analysis. Select themes were then subjected to a subsequent quantification analysis in order to refine and deepen the theoretical understanding. The findings of this exploratory study suggest that a majority of tiny housers desire to be part of more cohesive and collaborative communities. While stressing the importance of community, tiny housers also expressed concerns over privacy. To explain the findings, the paper offers a set of arguments situated in the broader socio-cultural texture of our time.

show abstract

Section: Maintaining Privacy In Communitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Small Houses, Big Community: Tiny Housers’ Desire for More Cohesive and Collaborative Communities

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recent approaches see privacy as holding wider social value as well as individual importance (Bennett and Raab 2018), alongside other values such as personal autonomy and communication (Westin 1967). Volkman (2003), by contrast, conceptualises privacy in relation to the right to life, proprietary rights, and autonomy, while Tunick (2001) links respect of privacy to self-determination. As a result, a breach of privacy can even be considered 'an offence against individuality, dignity, and freedom', and an attack on the person (Flaherty 1989).…”

Section: The Contested Concept Of Privacymentioning

confidence: 99%

For the greater good? Data and disasters in a post-COVID world

O’Connor

Johnston

2021

Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of information technology during the COVID-19 pandemic raises significant questions around the protection of personal data in a disaster. This paper considers how the clear benefits of using and sharing such data in disaster scenarios can be achieved while recognising an individual's right to privacy through examining the experiences of Taiwan and New Zealand. These states represent two successful COVID-19 response strategies which utilised different approaches to the use of technology. In Taiwan, the response made significant use of personal data and information technology. New Zealand, by contrast, has relied upon stringent lockdowns and extreme limits upon personal freedoms. The paper considers the different approaches to data and privacy that underpinned these responses and considers whether New Zealand can learn from the Taiwanese experience in future disaster planning. In doing so, the paper concludes by examining the wider question of when and if the community's expectation of a safe environment should trump the rights of individuals to retain personal data both in the context of pandemics and in other emergency or disaster scenarios. It also raises deeper questions, exposed by the COVID-19 response, about whether our current approach to privacy is sustainable in the digital age.

show abstract