Standardisation, Diversification and New Ways of Living

Reinmuth, G; Jackson, B

Standardisation, Diversification and New Ways of Living

Reinmuth, G

Jackson, B

Permalink

Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Forthcoming, 2019
Issue Date:: 2019-10-02

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (130.79 kB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Reinmuth, G https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7234-0168
dc.contributor.author	Jackson, B
dc.date	2019-09-30
dc.date.accessioned	2020-05-29T23:10:27Z
dc.date.available	2020-05-29T23:10:27Z
dc.date.issued	2019-10-02
dc.identifier.citation	Forthcoming, 2019
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/141001
dc.description.abstract	This paper asks what the role and responsibility of the architect are in the future of housing in Australia. Three decades of neo-liberal and fragmented policies have resulted in a housing crisis in terms of affordability and suitability. By looking back to the Bauhaus we trace a history of the architects’ vision of a future of housing and its often hostile political and public reception. Measures proposed by Gropius and Meyer around ‘new ways of living’, namely the potential of prefabrication, standardisation and industrial reform in particular were received with great criticism. In the Australian context, a century on, the role of the architect in the discourse on the future of housing is astoundingly undervalued and contested. With an ecology of factors contributing to the current capitalist housing free-market – driven by developers, the financial sector, spatial regulation and the market itself (passively accepting a one-fit housing product tailored to the ‘nuclear family’), the architects’ skill in spatial innovation to solve the aforementioned crisis is seemingly bound. This paper is based on a research project recently undertaken for the New South Wales Government’s Housing Agency, Landcom. Specifically, the research considered how Sydney’s housing crisis in affordability (which is most visible) is coupled to a crisis in diversity (which is interrelated but less visible in the public discourse). With the housing industry in Sydney delivering a single product; a standard apartment differentiated only by the presence of one, two, or three bedrooms - the market finds itself unable to accommodate the expanding set of ‘family types’ now prevalent in contemporary society. Our research addresses this demographic ‘diversity gap’, identifying those stranded between formal social housing (which they cannot qualify for) and the market itself (which they cannot afford), and simultaneously unpacks how spatial knowledge, while central, is but one contributor in addressing current market constraints from an architectural perspective.
dc.language	en
dc.relation.ispartof	Forthcoming
dc.relation.ispartof	Impact! From Bauhaus to Ikea
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title	Standardisation, Diversification and New Ways of Living
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.location.activity	UTS, Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CCDP - Contemporary Design Practice
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building/School of Architecture
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false
dc.date.updated	2020-05-29T23:10:25Z
pubs.finish-date	2019-10-02
pubs.start-date	2019-09-30

Abstract:

This paper asks what the role and responsibility of the architect are in the future of housing in Australia. Three decades of neo-liberal and fragmented policies have resulted in a housing crisis in terms of affordability and suitability. By looking back to the Bauhaus we trace a history of the architects’ vision of a future of housing and its often hostile political and public reception. Measures proposed by Gropius and Meyer around ‘new ways of living’, namely the potential of prefabrication, standardisation and industrial reform in particular were received with great criticism. In the Australian context, a century on, the role of the architect in the discourse on the future of housing is astoundingly undervalued and contested. With an ecology of factors contributing to the current capitalist housing free-market – driven by developers, the financial sector, spatial regulation and the market itself (passively accepting a one-fit housing product tailored to the ‘nuclear family’), the architects’ skill in spatial innovation to solve the aforementioned crisis is seemingly bound. This paper is based on a research project recently undertaken for the New South Wales Government’s Housing Agency, Landcom. Specifically, the research considered how Sydney’s housing crisis in affordability (which is most visible) is coupled to a crisis in diversity (which is interrelated but less visible in the public discourse). With the housing industry in Sydney delivering a single product; a standard apartment differentiated only by the presence of one, two, or three bedrooms - the market finds itself unable to accommodate the expanding set of ‘family types’ now prevalent in contemporary society. Our research addresses this demographic ‘diversity gap’, identifying those stranded between formal social housing (which they cannot qualify for) and the market itself (which they cannot afford), and simultaneously unpacks how spatial knowledge, while central, is but one contributor in addressing current market constraints from an architectural perspective.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/141001