E-Co-Housing' has demonstrated that a social housing building in very poor structural conditions can be rehabilitated into quality and environmentally-friendly social housing and thus make a significant contribution to better and fairer housing provision for lower income households.
At the same time, E-Co-Housing had to face major challenges during its implementation with strong financial impact: among them change in the political leadership and commitment of the municipality, central governmental budget cuts on Hungarian municipalities due to the Covid 19 pandemic, serious changes in the local regulatory building framework, high increase of construction costs due to the global construction market. This meant that the project could not be realised as planned. One major change was that instead of a new building with an additional 25-30 social housing units, it was "only" possible to renovate an existing building with 14 social housing units and that the mentoring programme, an essential component of the project approach, had to be carried out within a month instead of six months before and after the residents moved in due to the delays in the project.
Despite these challenges and the necessary adjustments, helpful lessons can be drawn from the project.
Co-housing
It turned out that a high number of the social housing tenants had low interest in the co-housing approach. In addition, for most of them it was unclear what co-housing meant and why it should be relevant to them. For some people, the topic of "community" and "co-housing" also aroused fears, as it reminded them of communist times, when everything had to be done "together and in or for the group". As a result, the perception of the topic was not entirely positive.
The reason for participating in the project was therefore not because of the co-housing approach, but despite the co-housing approach. The desire and need for decent and affordable housing was much greater and more urgent and was the driving motivation to apply for the project. Co-housing therefore does not appear to be a particular motivator for social housing tenants, although there were of course tenants who were interested in the co-housing approach from the beginning.
As the project progressed, it became clear that due to the social, cultural and educational diversity of the tenants, there were also very different interests as to how much or how little co-housing should be undertaken. Not every person was suitable for co-housing, which makes it challenging to form a co-housing community. At the same time, the residents must first learn to deal with the diversity they encounter in the framework of co-housing and find a common language and behaviour. They are not all prepared for that and how to handle it.
Recommendations
The importance and opportunities of co-housing, particularly with regard to practical help in everyday life, must be communicated to the participants at an early stage; at the same time, the co-housing approach must be aligned with the needs and interests of the residents (which was pursued to some extent with the focus group). It is necessary to find out together what kind of co-housing is “desired” and should be "tried out". Only then, and if it is voluntary, can a functioning co-housing community be established.
Therefore, when selecting people entitled to social housing for co-housing projects, in addition to the criteria points system to ensure a social mix, consideration should also be given to enquiring about their interest in co-housing - in writing or via interviews. Interviews would be more suitable, but also more time-consuming. An interest or open mind should emerge in order to better build a cohesive and supportive house community.
As the social housing tenants may have to develop the skills to deal with the social, cultural and educational diversity in the day-to-day co-housing, to organise themselves independently as a group, to deal with conflicts, etc., the group needs professional mentoring and guidance from the beginning, as the e-co-housing project originally envisaged, which should extend beyond the move-in date. In general, a professional contact person is needed who can support the group at certain points, e.g. in conflict situations.
Mentoring program
Originally 6-12 months were planned for the mentoring activities. But due to the overall delay and changes of the project, which led to the late selection of tenants, the mentoring programme had to be implemented in just one month as the UIA project had to be completed. There was too little time to raise interest in all the topics of the mentoring program and to deepen and practice what was taught during the mentoring sessions or even prepare concrete co-housing elements. This resulted in shortening the mentoring programme and its topics could rather be touched upon, but not deepened and practised that much. To help the participants to remember the content of the programme, the learning materials were provided to all tenants in a ring binder to be able to look it up in future occasions.
With regards to the content of the mentoring programme the interests of the tenants were very diverse. This was due to the diversity of the tenants, which reflected the different interests and life situations of them. In principle, the interest in the practical sessions were of greater interest, for example how to build up a house community or how to have a more sustainable lifestyle in the household and how to support each other through barter activities. They showed less interest in topics which did not correspond so much to their current life goals and expectations as for example becoming an entrepreneur.
One tenant also mentioned that the intellectual level of the mentoring program was partly too high for the participants which less educational background. This overstretched some people.
Recommendations
When you develop a mentoring programme for a group of people with different cultural, social and educational background, you need to be aware of it and the training program has to reflect it. The programme must respond and align to the life situations and challenges of the participants and offer ideas and support. Nevertheless, there will always be parts of the programme that will appeal people’s interest more respectively less. It is therefore important to find out the needs and interests of the tenants as early as possible, e.g. during the selection process, and to incorporate them into the mentoring programme, e.g. demonstrating possibilities how co-housing can support their needs and interests.
A key point of the mentoring programme should be that the participants get to know and bond with each other. This is a very important basis for a co-housing community.
Also, sufficient time needs to be ensured to “transmit, digest and practice” the topics of the mentoring program. It should start couple of months before tenants move in and last couple of months after they have moved in to be able to practice accompanied. This might allow as well to raise interest in topics they might not have been of interest before.
Another key is that the training programme and the support of the group is provided by professional players, as was predominantly the case in the project. Municipal employees are usually not sufficiently trained or experienced for this and can only provide limited guidance and support.
Co-design
Some residents noted that they were allowed to have a say in the decor of the flat or the design of the garden, but that this was not always implemented, which led to dissatisfaction. Other people would have liked to have had more co-design opportunities, e.g. in the design of the flat floor plans.
Recommendations
At the beginning of a project, co-design possibilities should be outlined and how the tenants can become involved. At the same time, however, any restrictions on co-design possibilities must also be communicated (e.g. due to legal or financial constraints). The possibilities should be aligned with the interests of the tenants in co-designing. Also, it is important to seriously consider the tenants' input when co-designing and, if it cannot be carried out, to communicate this to the tenants in a well-founded manner.
If decisions have to be made at a time when the tenants have not yet been selected, working with focus groups is an alternative, as it was the case in E-CO-Housing.
When selecting project partners, e.g. the architect, it is important that they identify with the approach of the project and are open or even experienced with co-designing.