Short Abstract:

The paper investigates the gaps in the views/concepts of housing through comparisons of the ten central capabilities, the right to adequate housing, and meanings of home.Data from a qualitative study in Kenya was used to develop a localised application of the discussion. As a conclusion, a more comprehensive understanding and conceptualisation of housing seems imperative: Housing, as House + Home.

Long Abstract:

Research context

The built environment affects everyday life, our physical and mental health and the ideas we create about our lives and societies. We can argue that our primary experience of the built environment resides in the intimacy of our houses, and the conditions in which we experience them can create diverse understandings of what we have -or what we lack- to live a flourishing and meaningful life. In that regard, this paper identifies a relationship between housing and prosperity. Prosperity, according to Jackson (Prosperity without growth, Earthscan, Oxford, 2009), is built on Sen’s notion of capabilities. Sen’s Capabilities Approach (CA) has been advanced by Nussbaum, who developed a list of ten central capabilities in an effort to define a threshold level for a minimally flourishing life. Interestingly, the ability to access adequate shelter is included as a component in her list. Then, in the pursuit of understanding the role of housing as an enabler of capabilities for the achievement of prosperity, the paper investigates the gaps in the views/concepts of housing through comparisons of the ten central capabilities, the right to adequate housing (RAH), and meanings of home. Based on this exploration and applying these ideas in qualitative research in two communities in Kenya, the paper elaborates on how housing should be conceptualized to ensure greater human flourishing: Housing, as House + Home.

I start by defining prosperity and discussing the relevance of examining housing as a means for its achievement. Next, I present the CA as a useful framework for understanding this relationship for its capacity to capture human and social dimensions that are often neglected. I will then suggest the necessity to deepen the conceptualisation of housing beyond its material values. I draw on the RAH criteria and Hayward’s nine dimensions of home as comparative standards to reflect on the gaps between their concepts and the relevance of the achievement of certain housing dimensions as a precondition for prosperity. In that sense, the paper explores housing both as the physical conditions of the house and as the social and psychological dynamics that construct the meanings of home. In the second half of the paper, data from a recent study in rural and urban Kenya is used for empirical analysis as a way to develop a localised application of this discussion. The study allows for a nuanced understanding of the experience of housing through the acknowledgement of the singularities and universalities of their local values. And by acknowledging their particular tangible and intangible values -I suggest- we’ll be able to conceive a more holistic understanding of housing that relates more comprehensively to Nussbaum’s list, and prosperity in general. Hopefully, this exercise can contribute to inform future housing research, policy or design and their localised applications.

Methodology and Analysis

Qualitative research was con¬ducted in the communities of Kangemi -a slum in western Nairobi-, and Kaptel Village -a rural community at the Elgeyo-Marakwet County in northwest Kenya. A purposeful, snow¬ball sampling strategy was used for the selection of the participants. The research was car¬ried out in a short period of three weeks, which impacted on the availability of participants. In that sense, the snowball sampling managed to gather ten female participants: women ranging from 23 to 45 years old, most of them mothers and wives. The collection of data was carried out through in-depth semi-structured interviews in their houses. Non-participant observation was also applied to inform the analysis, staying for a night with families in both communities helped understanding local dynamics and building trust. All interviews were recorded. However, due to time constraints, it was decided not to transcribe the full verbatim. Comparative tables were produced to systematise the responses and facilitate a thematic analysis.

The interviews sought to identify the material and non-material values that people deposit into housing in order to acknowl¬edge how certain housing conditions could promote or hinder opportunities for flourishing. Although the small scale of the research could be perceived as thin in number or not representative of the communities as a whole, it must be noted that in terms of validity, the objective of this research is not to make broad generalisations or draw absolute conclusions. Rather, it aims at developing a localised exercise that could contribute to inform similar future explorations on these topics to improve housing research, policy, and design in order to ensure greater human flourishing.

Conclusion

The research demonstrated that housing does play a vital role in the enjoyment of pros¬perity. But more importantly, evidence revealed that, in examining that role, it is not pos¬sible to acknowledge housing only by its material conditions. Although material dimensions were demonstrated fundamental, the inextricable value of non-material dimensions was also proved essential. In that sense, the extent to which housing enables the enjoyment of capabilities for flourishing increases or diminishes insofar housing acknowledges and incorporates both material and non-material functions. Thus, housing reaches its highest “fertility” potential as an enabler of prosperity when it is conceptualised as House + Home. The absence of any of them could potentially foster negative outcomes.

This acknowledgement is crucial in order to inform housing policies, which are generally focused on the achievement of material goals and indicators, without necessarily considering how their implementation enables or constrains people’s opportunities to live a pros¬perous life. In that sense, a capabilities approach can help reshape our notions of housing, enrich international law instruments and consequently guide local policies and programs in lights of prosperity. In that sense, housing values can vary from con¬text to context. Therefore, it is also important to ensure mechanisms to adjust and contextu¬alise the CA framework in order to capture accurately the complexities, nuances and needs of the region in question, and of specific vulnerable groups.

“I was as well convinced then, as I am now, that nothing effectual can be done for the elevation of the poor (…), until their dwelling-places are made decent and wholesome.” -Charles Dickens

But what is decent and wholesome? We must ask.

Read full at: rdcu.be/dtWsw