Is cohousing good for democracy? Comparing political participation among residents of cohousing communities and traditional condominium developments

References

• Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The Civic Culture. PUP.
   Google Scholar
• Ayala, L. J. (2000). Trained for democracy: The differing effects of voluntary and involuntary organizations on political participation.”. Political Research Quarterly, 53(1), 99–115. DOI: 10.2307/449248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barton, S. E., & Silverman, C. J. (eds). (1994). Common Interest Communities: Private Government and the Public Interest. Institute of Governmental Studies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, F. R., & Walker, J. L. (1988). Survey research and membership in voluntary associations. American Journal of Political Science, 32(4), 908–928. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111194
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berggren, H. M. (2013). Cohousing as civic society: Cohousing involvement and political participation in Massachusetts.”. New England Journal of Political Science, 7(1), 1–24.https://www.nepsanet.org/7-1
   Google Scholar
• Berggren, H. M. (2017). Cohousing as civic society: Cohousing involvement and political participation in the United States.”. Social Science Quarterly, 98(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry, B. J. L. (1992). America’s Utopian Experiments: Communal Havens from Long-Wave Crises. Dartmouth College and University Press of New England.
   Google Scholar
• Birnbaum, J., and L. Fox. (2014). Sustainable Revolution: Permaculture in Ecovillages, Urban Farms, and Communities Worldwide. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Boyer, R. 2016. Achieving one-planet living through transitions in social practice: a case study of Dancing Rabbit Ecovillage. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 12(1). 1 doi:10.1080/15487733.2016.11908153
   Google Scholar
• Boyer, R. H. (2018). Intermediacy and the diffusion of grassroots innovations: The case of cohousing in the United States. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.26, 32-43 10.1016/j.eist.2017.08.001
   Google Scholar
• Boyer, R. H., & Leland, S. (2018). Cohousing for whom? Survey evidence to support the diffusion of socially and spatially integrated housing in the United States.”. Housing Policy Debate, 28(5) 653-667. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2018.1424724
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresson, S., & Denefle, S. (2015). Diversity of self-managed cohousing initiatives in France.”. Urban Research and Practice, 8(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2015.1011423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BusinessDictionary.com. Retrieved July 12, 2019, from BusinessDictionary.com website: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/condominium.html
   Google Scholar
• Chiodelli, F. (2015). What is really different between cohousing and gated communities? European Planning Studies, 23(12), 2566–2581. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1096915
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiodelli, F., & Baglione, V. (2014). Living together privately: For a cautious reading of cohousing.”. Urban Research and Practice, 7(1), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2013.827905
   Google Scholar
• CohoUS. 2020. Cohousing Association of the United States. (http://www.cohousing.org/)The Cohousing Association of the United States
   Google Scholar
• Cohousing Research Network. 2020 (http://www.cohousingresearchnetwork.org/) Cohousing Research Network
   Google Scholar
• Community Associations Institute. Falls Church, VA (accessed: July 14, 2019)Community Associations Institute
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. A. (1970). After the Revolution. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DataTree. (2020). First American DataTree LLC. First American Financial Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Fenster, M. (1999). Community by covenant, process, and design: Cohousing and the Contemporary common interest community.”. Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law. 15(1), 3-54
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan-Doyle, D. (2015). Potential data sources to replace or enhance the question on condominium status on the American Community Survey. American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Program.
   Google Scholar
• Foundation for Community Association Research. (2020). “2018–2019 National and State Statistical Review for Community Association Data.”. Community Associations Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Fromm, D. (2000). American cohousing: The first five years. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(2), 94–109.
   Web of Science ®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
• Hendrickson, D. J., & Wittman, H. K. (2010). Post-occupancy assessment: Building design, governance and household consumption.”. Building Research & Information, 38(5), 481–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2010.494377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horelli, L. (2013). The role of shared space for the building and maintenance of community from the gender perspective: A longitudinal case study in a neighbourhood of Helsinki.”. Social Sciences Directory, 2(5), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.7563/SSD_02_05_03
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H. (2011). Saving space, sharing time: Integrated infrastructures of daily life in cohousing.”. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 43(3), 560–577. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2015.1011429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H. (2019). Sharing, togetherness and intentional degrowth.”. Progress in Human Geography, 43(2), 256–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517746519
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenny, M. (2014). “Communities of Resistance: The Success and Resilience of Intentional Communities in North America.” A Major Paper submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Environmental Studies. York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. July 31st, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Lasner, M. G. (2012). High Life: Condo Living in the Suburban Century. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Markle, E. A., Rodgers, R., Sanchez, W., & Ballou, M. (2015). Social support in the cohousing model of community: A mixed-methods analysis.”. Community Development, 46(5), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2015.1086400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCamant, K., & Durrett, C. (1994). Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves. Ten Speed Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCamant, K., & Durrett, C. (2011). Creating Cohousing: Building Sustainable Communities. New Society Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• McKenzie, E. (1994). Privatopia: Homeowner Associations and the Rise of Residential Private Governments. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mittelbach, F. G., & Ebin, J. (1975). Condominium housing: Some social and economic implications.”. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 3(2), 170–180.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. H. (2011). Homeowners associations in historical perspective.”. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 546–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02384.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Poley, L. D. (2007). Community and the Habits of Democratic Citizenship: An Investigation into Civic Engagement, Social Capital and Democratic Capacity-Building in U.S. Cohousing Neighborhoods. Dissertation, College of Architecture and Urban Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, Z., Ludwig, Y., & Willis, D. (2019). Conflict resolution and satisfaction in today’s intentional communities”. Communities, The shadow side of cooperation, 184, 57–60.
   Google Scholar
• Ruiu, M. L. (2014). Differences between cohousing and gated communities. A literature review. Sociological Inquiry, 84(2), 316–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiu, M. L. (2016). Participatory processes in designing cohousing communities: The case of the community project. Housing and Society, 43(3), 168–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/08882746.2017.1363934
   Google Scholar
• Sanguinetti, A. (2012). “National Cohousing Survey, Phase III.” ( With the Cohousing Research Network. Cohousing Research Network. http://www.cohousingresearchnetwork.org/)
   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
• Sanguinetti, A. (2015). Diversifying cohousing: The retrofit model. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 32(1), 68–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanguinetti, A., & Hibbert, K. “Cohousing by any other name: A framing study exploring ideological barriers to adoption of collectivist housing options.”
   Google Scholar
• Sanguinetti, A., & Hibbert, K. (2018). More room for cohousing in the United States: Understanding diffusion potential by exploring who knows about, who likes, and who would consider living in cohousing. Housing and Society, 45(3), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/08882746.2018.1529507
   Google Scholar
• Sargisson, L. (2012). Second-wave cohousing: A modern utopia?”. Utopian Studies, 23(1), 28–56. https://doi.org/10.5325/utopianstudies.23.1.0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skiba, T. M. (2011). Common-interest communities: Opportunities for greater understanding—and success. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 556–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02387.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stabile, D. R. (2000). Community Associations: The Emergence and Acceptance of a Quiet Innovation in Housing. Greenwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stolle, D., & Rochon, T. R. (1996). “Social Capital, but How? Associations and the Creation of Social Capital.” Paper presented at the Conference for Europeanists in Chicago, IL, March 1996 and the Northeast Political Science Association Meeting in Boston, MA, November 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan-Catlin, H. (2014). Feeding the communal family: ‘Family time’ and the division of household labor in cohousing. Michigan Family Review, 18(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.3998/mfr.4919087.0018.104
   Google Scholar
• The American National Election Studies (www.electionstudies.org). These materials are based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant numbers SES 1444721, 2014–2017, the University of Michigan, and Stanford University.
   Google Scholar
• The Harvard Law Review Association. (1985). The rule of law in residential associations”. Harvard Law Review, 99(2), 472–490. https://doi.org/10.2307/1341131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, J. F. C., & Fichter, R. (1972). Freedom to Build. The MacMillan Company.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2020). “Characteristics of New Housing: Definitions—Survey of Construction.” United States Department of Commerce (census.gov/construction/chars/definitions/#c): Accessed January 12, 2020. United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce
   Google Scholar
• Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vestbro, D. U., & Horelli, L. (2012). Design for gender equality: The history of cohousing ideas and realities. Built Environment, 38(3): 315-335. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.38.3.315
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. (2005a). Designing neighbourhoods for social interaction: The case of cohousing. Journal of Urban Design, 10(2), 195–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800500086998
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. (2005b). Sun, surf and sustainable housing: Cohousing, the Californian experience. International Planning Studies, 10(2), 145–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563470500258824
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. (2008). Predicting an American future for cohousing. Futures, 40(3), 268–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2007.08.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar