Nuancing the international debate on social mix: evidence from Copenhagen

Abstract

Whilst the political rhetoric of social mix has been similar across countries, asymmetries in their housing and planning systems and institutions owing to dissimilar underlying values, norms, and cultures has defined national and municipal practices of implementation. The purpose of this article, based on a literature review and semi-structured interviews with government, local officials, and academics, is twofold. First, to investigate why and how city planners in the municipality of Copenhagen have used strategies of social mix in the fields of housing and land-use planning, and how these policies have evolved to deal with recurrent shortages of affordable housing. Second, to highlight the contingent nature of social mix and argue the need for more context and more sensitive analysis of social mix policies and practices. Whilst many have claimed that social mixing is a euphemism for gentrification, this article argues that the concept can contribute to a more progressive housing and urban planning agenda.

Keywords:

• Social mix
• mixed communities
• housing affordability
• housing policy
• planning
• neighbourhoods

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the interviewees for contributions. This research would not have been possible without their time and insight. I would also like to thank three anonymous referees and the editor. The ideas in this article benefitted from their often challenging and generous comments. Valuable comments on the various drafts of this article were also provided by my colleagues at Sbi (Danish Building Research Institute, Aalborg University), ICS (Institute of Social Sciences, Lisbon University), and Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research (Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 Giddens claims that: “from a historical and empirical point of view, one can only very rarely speak of fixed classes and class boundaries; for the most part, what we find are variable ‘stages’ of class formation, influenced both by a society’s mode of production as well as the degree of intergenerational mobility, which is potentially subject to change” (Joans & Knobl 2009: 288).

2 Throughout Denmark, the private rented sector accounts for 27% of the total stock, with housing benefit covering around 32% of households in this housing market (Cole & Etherington, 2005, p. 79), and 20% of all stock is owned by housing associations, the main providers of affordable housing for low and middle-income families.

3 In certain neighbourhoods, vacant dwellings are now prioritized: (i) for students and young employees under 35 years old and working more than 25 h a week; (ii) employed people over 55 years old who wish to move to a home that is more suitable than their present abode, and (iii) newly divorced individuals who have separated, broken relationships within the past year who need to find accommodation quickly, as long as they already live in Copenhagen. As the system is blind regarding ethnicity, nationality and so forth, members of ethnic minorities who are employed or studying and so forth can move in. Hence the ban is based on integration into the labour market or education system, not on cultural, religious, or racial criteria.

Additional information

Funding

I gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Portuguese Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia for research grant SFRH/BPD/75863/2011, POPH/FSE. Within the framework of a Marie Sklodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship, this project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 747257.

Notes on contributors

Sónia Alves

Sónia Alves is a Marie Sklodowska-Curie Research Fellow at the Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research, Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge, and a Visiting Researcher at the Danish Building Research Institute (Aalborg University, Copenhagen) and at the Institute of Social Sciences (University of Lisbon). She is a geographer with a master's degree in urban planning and a PhD in Sociology. Her recent research papers include an evaluation of the impact of area-based initiatives in deprived neighborhoods (Journal of Urban Affairs, 2017), of the impact of housing policy on aspects of governance, and housing affordability in Portugal (Portugal, Urban Research & Practice, 2018), or a Comparative Study of Housing Policies and Outcomes in Portugal and Denmark (Housing, Theory and Society, 2017). Within the framework of her Marie Sklodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship, and the project PLANning for AFFordable Housing (PLANAFFHO) she is now examining how land-use planning contributes to the provision of affordable housing for low-income people and how it has promoted a mix of housing tenures within new developments in three capital cities - Copenhagen, Lisbon, and London.