Cohousing as a model for social health: a scoping review

References

• Althubaiti, A., 2016. Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 9, 211–217. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S104807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arksey, H. and O’Malley, L., 2005. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8 (1), 19–32. doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital. In: J. Richardson, ed. Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood, 241–258.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3 (2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Chiodelli, F. and Baglione, V., 2014. Living together privately: for a cautious reading of cohousing. Urban research and practice, 7 (1), 20–34. doi:10.1080/17535069.2013.827905.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, J.S. and Paulsson, J., 2011. Evaluation of common activity and life in swedish cohousing units. International journal of human ecology, 12 (2), 133–146. doi:10.6115/ljhe.2011.12.2.133
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, J.S., 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, 94 (s1), S95–S120. doi:10.1086/228943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colquhoun, H.L., et al., 2014. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 67 (12), 1291–1294. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denny, B., et al., 2014. Strengthening Australian families: socioeconomic status, social connectedness, and family functioning. Australian social work, 67 (3), 438–450. doi:10.1080/0312407X.2014.911927.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devlin, P., Douglas, R., and Reynolds, T., 2015. Collaborative design of older women’ s CoHousing. Working with older people: community care policy & practice, 19 (4), 188–194. doi:10.1108/WWOP-08-2015-0018.
   Google Scholar
• Droste, C., 2015. German co-housing: an opportunity for municipalities to foster socially inclusive urban development? Urban research & practice, 8 (1), 79–92. doi:10.1080/17535069.2015.1011428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, A. and Tranter, B. 2011. Housing, loneliness and health: AHURI Final Report No.164. Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Fromm, D., 2012. Seeding community: collaborative housing as a strategy for social and neighbourhood repair. Built environment, 38 (3), 364–394. doi:10.2148/benv.38.3.364.
   Google Scholar
• Garciano, J.L., 2011. Affordable cohousing: challenges and opportunities for supportive relational networks in mixed-income housing. Journal of affordable housing & community development law, 20 (2), 169–192.
   Google Scholar
• Glass, A.P., 2009. 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 (4), 283–303. doi:10.1080/02763890903326970.
   Google Scholar
• Glass, A.P., 2012. Elder co-housing in the united states: three case studies. Built environment (1978-), 38 (3), 345–363.
   Google Scholar
• Glass, A.P., 2013. Lessons learned from a new elder cohousing community. Journal of housing for the elderly, 27 (4), 348–368. doi:10.1080/02763893.2013.813426.
   Google Scholar
• Glass, A.P., 2016. Resident-managed elder intentional neighborhoods: do they promote social resources for older adults? Journal of gerontological social work, 59 (7/8), 554–571. doi:10.1080/01634372.2016.1246501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glass, A.P. and Vander Plaats, R.S., 2013. A conceptual model for aging better together intentionally. Journal of aging studies, 27 (4), 428–442. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2013.10.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt-Lunstad, J., et al., 2015. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review. Perspectives on psychological science, 10 (2), 227–237. doi:10.1177/17456916145683528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T.B., and Bradley Layton, J., 2010. Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review. PLoS medicine, 7 (7), e1000316–e. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulse, K., et al. 2011. At home and in place? The role of housing in social inclusion, AHURI final report no. 177. Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H., 2011. Saving space, sharing time: integrated infrastructures of daily life in cohousing. Environment & planning A, 43 (3), 560–577. doi:10.1068/a43296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H., 2015. Towards a deeper understanding of the social architecture of co-housing: evidence from the UK, USA and Australia. Urban research & practice, 8 (1), 93–105. doi:10.1080/17535069.2015.1011429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H. and Bonnett, A., 2013. Progressive Nostalgia in novel living arrangements: a counterpoint to neo-traditional new urbanism? Urban studies, 50 (11), 2349–2370. doi:10.1177/0042098013478235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jolanki, O. and Vilkko, A., 2015. The meaning of a “sense of community” in a Finnish senior co-housing community. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 29 (1/2), 111–125. doi:10.1080/02763893.2015.989767.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang, M., Lyon, M., and Kramp, J., 2012. Older adults’ motivations and expectations toward senior cohousing in a rural community. Housing & society, 39 (2), 187–202.
   Google Scholar
• Kehl, K. and Then, V., 2013. Community and civil society returns of multi-generation cohousing in Germany. Journal of civil society, 9 (1), 41–57. doi:10.1080/17448689.2013.771084.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, J.-F. 2012. Social cities Grattan Institute, Accessed 18 July 2018. http://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/137_report_social_cities_web.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Khangura, S., et al., 2012. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Systematic Reviews, 1 (1), 10. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Korpela, S., 2012. Casa malta: a case study of a contemporary co-housing project in Helsinki. Built environment, 38 (3), 336–344. doi:10.2148/benv.38.3.336.
   Google Scholar
• Lies, M.M., Kang, M., and Sample, R.K., 2017. Place attachment and design features in a rural senior cohousing community. Housing and Society, 44 (1–2), 41–63. doi:10.1080/08882746.2017.1394130.
   Google Scholar
• Lietaert, M., 2010. Cohousing’s relevance to degrowth theories. Journal of cleaner production, 18 (6), 576–580. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.11.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubik, A. and Kosatsky, T., 2019. Public health should promote co-operative housing and cohousing. Canadian journal of public health, 110 (2), 121–126. doi:10.17269/s41997-018-0163-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markle, E.A., et al., 2015. Social support in the cohousing model of community: a mixed-methods analysis. Community development, 46 (5), 616–631. doi:10.1080/15575330.2015.1086400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onyx, J. and Bullen, P., 2000. Measuring social capital in five communities. Journal of applied behavioural science, 36 (1), 23–42.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, M., 2015. Senior co-housing communities in Denmark. Journal of housing for the elderly, 29 (1/2), 126–145. doi:10.1080/02763893.2015.989770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, M., et al., 2015. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International journal of evidence-based healthcare, 13 (3), 141–146. doi:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puplampu, V., 2019. Forming and living in a seniors’ cohousing: the impact on older adults’ healthy aging in place. Journal of housing for the elderly. doi:10.1080/02763893.2019.1656134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, R.D., 1995. Bowling alone: america’s declining social capital. Journal of democracy, 6 (1), 65–78. doi:10.1353/jod.1995.000219.
   Google Scholar
• Riedy, C., et al., 2019. It’s a great idea for other people: cohousing as a housing option for older Australians. Urban policy & research, 37 (2), 227–242. doi:10.1080/08111146.2018.1531750
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiu, M.L., 2014. Differences between cohousing and gated communities. a literature review. Sociological Inquiry, 84 (2), 316–335. doi:10.1111/soin.12031.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiu, M.L., 2015. The effects of cohousing on the social housing system: the case of the threshold centre. Journal of housing & the built environment, 30 (4), 631–644. doi:10.1007/s10901-015-9436-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiu, M.L., 2016a. Participatory processes in designing cohousing communities: the case of the community project. Housing & society, 43 (3), 168–181. doi:10.1080/08882746.2017.1363934.
   Google Scholar
• Ruiu, M.L., 2016b. The social capital of cohousing communities. Sociology, 50 (2), 400–415. doi:10.1177/0038038515573473.
   Google Scholar
• Sanguinetti, A., 2012. The design of intentional communities: A recycled perspective on sustainable neighbourhoods. Behavior & Social Issues, 21, 5–25. doi:10.5210/bsi.v21i0.3873.
   Google Scholar
• Sanguinetti, A., 2014. Transformational practices in cohousing: enhancing residents’ connection to community and nature. Journal of environmental psychology, 40, 86–96. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.05.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargisson, L. 2010. Cohousing: A Utopian property alternative? Accessed 5 November 2019. http://www.psa.ac.uk/2010/UploadedPaperPDFs/1225_1085.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sargisson, L., 2012. Second-wave cohousing: a modern Utopia? Utopian studies, 1, 28.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan, E., 2016. Individualizing utopia: individualist pursuits in a collective cohousing community. Journal of contemporary ethnography, 45 (5), 602–627. doi:10.1177/0891241615587527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szreter, S. and Woolcock, M., 2004. Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health. International journal of epidemiology, 33 (4), 650–667. doi:10.1093/ije/dyh013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tatz, S. 2019. “Should we minister to the lonely?” Australian Medical Association, Accessed 29 October. https://ama.com.au/ausmed/should-we-minister-lonely.
   Google Scholar
• Tricco, A.C., et al., 2015. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC medicine, 13 (1), 224. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tricco, A.C., et al., 2016. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 16 (1), 15. doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L., 2016. The re-emergence of self-managed co-housing in Europe: A critical review of co-housing research. Urban studies, 53 (10), 2023–2040. doi:10.1177/0042098015586696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vestbro, D.U. and Horelli, L., 2012. Design for gender equality: the history of co-housing ideas and realities. Built environment, 38 (3), 315–335. doi:10.2148/benv.38.3.315.
   Google Scholar
• VicHealth, 2019. Loneliness: A new public health challenge emerges VicHealth, Accessed 1 November. https://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/letter/articles/vh-letter-47-loneliness.
   Google Scholar
• Wechuli, Y., 2017. Neighborly assistance: high expectations of multi-generation cohousing projects. Working with older people: community care policy & practice, 21 (3), 133–139. doi:10.1108/WWOP-02-2017-0006.
   Google Scholar
• Weeks, L.E., et al., 2019. Barriers faced in the establishment of cohousing communities for older adults in Eastern Canada. Journal of housing for the elderly. doi:10.1080/02763893.2019.1627267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, J., 2005. Designing neighbourhoods for social interaction: the case of cohousing. Journal of urban design, 10 (2), 195–227.
   Google Scholar