| dc.description.abstract | "This thesis answers the research question: how does social cohesion relate to the built environment on the neighbourhood level, when comparing disadvantaged neighbourhoods with more advantaged neighbourhoods in Stockholm? The built environment in a neighbourhood is important in the construction of social cohesion on the neighbourhood level. In neighbourhoods where there are certain social tensions, it is of interest to mind the built environment of that neighbourhood. The built environment of a neighbourhood is after all the décor of everyday life; the daily experiences that make up most of the lives of residents are fixed around their own place of residence. This thesis is based on a comparative research on social cohesion and the relation with the build environment in an advantaged and disadvantaged neighbourhood in Stockholm. Due to occurring socio-spatial segregation, certain areas of this urban environment is can lead to social cohesion on smaller levels such as on the local, neighbourhood level instead as on the societal level. By conducting a qualitative research like this in a comparative manner, new insights are gained in the relation between the urban built environment and social cohesion by focusing on the notions and lived experiences of the residents.
The advantaged research setting is Midsommarkransen, a neighbourhood in the south of Stockholm. The disadvantaged research setting is a neighbourhood in the Northwest of Stockholm called Husby. To operationalize this research on social cohesion, data on the three dimensions social capital, social mobility and social inclusion are extensively collected and furthermore related to the characteristics of the built environment. The comparative research done within these two significantly different neighbourhoods show how no conclusions can be drawn on the question if one neighbourhood experiences more or less social cohesion than the other. The dimension of social cohesion have proven to exist in different forms in the comparing neighbourhoods resulting in two distinct manifestations of social cohesion. Furthermore, each neighbourhood has its very own set of characteristics in its built environment which can be differently related to the prevailing social cohesion. This research shows how, in disadvantaged neighbourhood, the social cohesion is most likely related to the quality of neighbouring in order to deal with the decaying and neglected environment. In advantaged neighbourhoods however, it is often the quality of the actual neighbourhood itself that holds people together and therefore causes social cohesion. However, these findings are not mutually exclusive. It is important to acknowledge that some qualities of the actual neighbourhood also plays a role in the creation of a cohesive neighbourhood in Husby, just like the quality of neighbouring also plays a role in the forming of cohesion in Midsommarkransen.
The findings show how social cohesion in Midsommarkransen tends to take shape in small groups like building community or social organisations. In comparison, in Husby social cohesion is more evident on the entire neighbourhood level. Factors within the built environment that influence social cohesion are for example the housing systems. In Midsommarkransen, co-owning buildings is the most prevailing way to live. Therefore, small social networks are formed due to a shared responsibility for the maintenance of the buildings. However, a general pride of residents on the quality of the neighbourhood is also responsible for a sense of cohesion on the neighbourhood level in Midsommarkransen. In Husby however, there are general issues and problems that can be related to the built environment which affects everyone. Therefore, these issues and problems seem to connect most of the inhabitants with each other causing civic engagement to deal with it. Thus, this quality of neighbouring is the most evident manner in which cohesion is shaped in Husby." | |
