Back to Case Library

Porto 15, a public experiment to foster collaborative housing

Created on 13-12-2023 | Updated on 26-01-2024

Porto 15 is the first Italian public rental co-housing project dedicated to people under 35. Produced by three public bodies of Bologna from the welfare sector, it was designed and subsequently managed in collaboration with the residents. Through the renovation of a vacant council-owned building in the centre of Bologna, the project attracted public attention to limiting land consumption and improving the management of public properties. In 2017, residents were able to move in, after an intense co-production period involving the residents and the public administration.

 

This project is the first example of public engagement to set the scene for an alternative form of housing, different to the archetype of public housing. Porto 15 sets a milestone in changing the paradigm of the public housing resident. Through this project, the public administration redefines the position of the administration as a service provider, and of the tenant as a service user. In this context, the new public housing beneficiary is expected to be an active participant, fostering both an internal community within the co-housing and an external community through social and environmental sustainability actions in the neighborhood. The collaborative design and management of the shared spaces of the building should thus build new community competences.

 

Following the example set by this project, Bologna adopted its first building regulations for collaborative housing. In this regard, Porto 15 is expected to play a pivotal role in inspiring other affordable co-housing endeavours not only in the city but throughout Italy.

Instrument
regulation, community engagement

Issued (year)
-

Application period (years)
-

Scope
country, regional, local

Target group
young, low income group, vulnerable group

Housing tenure
tenancy, public housing, co-housing

Discipline
sociology, public policy, urbanism

Object of study
Outcomes Instrument

Description

Context

In contemporary Italy, public housing provision follows two main typologies: edilizia residenziale pubblica (ERP) or "public residential housing", with rents determined by law based on residents’ incomes, and edilizia residenziale sociale - (ERS) or "social residential building" offering affordable rents for individuals who do not meet public housing criteria and cannot access housing in the private market (Storto, 2018; Divari, 2019). The ERS rent is capped, and tenants are selected through a public call. Under this typology, there is a specific fund for ERS housing which also serves social networking purposes. Porto 15 belongs to this stream of projects.

Project

Porto 15 is an ERS development financed through a national call for housing projects from 2015 that aimed to promote housing autonomy for people under 35 by expanding and diversifying the affordable housing provision. The municipality of Bologna was one of the winners of the call.  It initiated the housing project in collaboration with two other public bodies: the municipal welfare service provider and the regional public housing manager. The public institutions’ aim was to address housing demand and promote collaborative living as a desirable housing model among young people.

Collaborative housing in Italy is mainly based on private property, long-term investment and selective communities (Rogel, 2018). This category of housing can encompass cohousing, residents’ cooperatives, solidarity condominium and eco-villages, among other. Porto 15 represents a pioneering experiment in collaborative housing, expanding access to it through a public rental scheme. This scheme responds to the co-housing category, by keeping private space to a minimum and complementing it with shared living spaces. In this case, the ‘co’ not only signifies mutual help relationships among tenants but also reflects collective efforts in networking to promote a collaborative housing culture in the neighbourhood (Calastri, 2013). 

In the Porto 15 experiment, future residents received 40 hours of training aimed at fostering group cohesion. The selection process entailed studying candidates’ motivations and profiles to create a socially mixed diverse community, including individuals with specific fragilities such as migration background, disability, and integration difficulties. Residents’ origins are diverse, including Syria, Peru, Russia, Spain, Morocco and various regions of Italy. The intention was to extend beyond a self-contained community, selecting individuals based on their motivation to build social ties beyond their homes. Currently, the co-housing accommodates 25 adults and 12 children. Prospective residents were encouraged to establish an association, disseminate the positive implications of the collaborative housing model, and facilitate sense-making processes regarding the values and principles that underpin this type of housing.

The housing development occupies a portion of a historic building dating back to 1914 which underwent a renovation to be repurposed as a co-housing facility. It comprises eighteen units, consisting of 9 two-bedroom and 9 three-bedroom apartments, along with a shared apartment and a multipurpose room. The premises also include a courtyard and communal spaces in the basements. Rent is set at a standard rate of seven euros per square meter, approximately 300 euros per month, depending on the apartment size. This stands in stark contrast to the average of eighteen euros per square meter in the private housing market within the central districts of Bologna, a city facing significant housing pressure.  

Co-housing and tenant – landlord relations: changing postures?

In Italy, recipients of public housing have traditionally been viewed as beneficiaries of either monetary subsidies for rent and bills or public house for living. The prevailing approach by public management perceived these individuals as users with uniform needs, leading to the delivery of standardised services to satisfy them. (Andersen & Pors, 2016). However, a “governance metatrend” (Mortensen et al., 2020) is emerging, fostering a hybridization of roles for service providers and users, encouraging  co-production, capacity-building, and a mutual learning perspective. With Porto 15, the public administration seeks to transform itself into an enabler and a place-maker, striving to create a space for opportunities, not just in physical terms but also socially. This marks a shift in attitude towards public housing residents, who are now actively engaged in creating and collaborating, rather than passively receiving social benefits.  In Porto 15, public bodies are shaping a new social dynamic by adopting a strength-based approach to social welfare (Price et al., 2020).

In the final phase of the building renovation, as the group of dwellers was being formed, future residents participated in the co-design of the basements together with the architects. They collectively decided to incorporate a bicycle repair workshop, a shared laundry, communal storage and a music practice room in that space.

After the group came together, irregular contact with the public service provider resulted in an interaction based on questions/answers or problem/solution, resembling a landlord-tenant relationship rather than the intended horizontal collaboration.   Paradoxically, this gap created an open space for innovation, allowing the co-housing group to take a proactive role. The group established a self-managed network, which was acknowledged by public authorities.   

In its inaugural year, the Porto 15 community engaged with twenty-seven different associations, took part in twenty-one projects (leading one), and organized various public events. All of these initiatives received endorsement from both the municipal welfare service provider and the municipality, serving as showcases for the   collaborative housing model. Notably, the association joined the “European Collaborative Housing Day” in 2022, also hosting activities from local groups in the shared spaces.   

Co-housing in the local urban regulation: a transformative impact?

Porto 15 played a pivotal role in shaping the first normative definition of co-housing in Bologna, setting an example for the entire country.  While collaborative housing was vaguely mentioned in a 2014 regional law as an “integrated solution for local communities to meet their goals”, the Bologna building code introduced more precise principles for “collaborative and solidarity-based housing”. These principles explicitly aim to prevent speculation and promote environmental sustainability, fostering homogenisation among emerging projects falling under the co-housing label. Households involved in such projects are required to adhere to building and environmental sustainability principles. Additionally, they must actively participate in community actions, engage in the design and management of common spaces, share practices within the neighbourhood, and organize public events.

Co-housing offspring in Bologna: a generative effect?

The Housing Plan of Bologna incorporates a dedicated section for the development of new “collaborative and solidarity-based” public projects in the city, drawing inspiration from the pilot project of Porto 15. The emergence of second generation co-housing projects started with the Salus Space in 2019, a “collaborative village” funded by the European Union and characterized by a diverse governance model endorsed by the municipality.

This new wave of projects aims to forge connections between collaborative housing and various policies, shaping a fresh narrative around collaborative housing. These policies prioritize environmental sustainability, with an upcoming co-housing project focusing on creating the first community energy collective for nearly zero-energy self-consumption in a public building. The second area of intervention emphasizes community building with an intergenerational and intersectional dimension, along with the development of a collaborative condominium. The third planned intervention involves awareness initiatives within co-housing for young people and families,  promoting efforts against organized crime.

The overarching goal is to create a lasting inventory of affordable social housing, serving as a social catalyst for the territory.  The residents of Porto 15 plan to contribute to this vision by sharing their expertise with future residents of other collaborative projects. This will involve organizing conferences, extending invitations to shared activities, and participating in events organized by future co-housing groups.

Public housing production in Italy faces the challenge of establishing secure financial channels. To achieve this goal, municipalities must devise solutions utilizing a range of financial resources, spanning from European to municipal levels, to ensure the successful development of collaborative housing projects. Looking forward, key strategies will entail incentivizing private investors to invest in social housing development and fostering a reflection on the role of social cooperation in affordable housing provision.

Alignment with project research areas

Design, Planning, and Building

The project encompassed the renovation of a portion of a historical building, addressing the need to reuse and revitalize the extensive, unused public estate stock. The project aims to enhance the energetic efficiency of an early twentieth century building by implementing sustainability upgrades. The interventions constituted a complete retrofit, including thermal insulation and the replacement of systems (heating, ventilation, electricity, water). Future residents participated in the design of the basements, choosing to create a shared space instead of private garages as proposed by the architect.  

Community Participation

As a rental co-housing scheme, Porto 15 relies on the participation of residents to cultivate social networks within and around the housing community. Their involvement started with the co-design of the project, encouraging the future community to take ownership of the space and promote a sense of belonging. Furthermore, various communal spaces were deliberately left vacant, empowering residents to decide on their collective use, establish relationships, participate in management, initiate entertainment initiatives, collaborate on projects, and host people and events. To formalize their collective efforts, the group established an association that promotes collaborative initiatives for the neighbourhood and the city.

Policy and Financing

Porto 15 has opened up broader perspectives on existing norms, providing an opportunity for local authorities to establish new regulations that encourage future collaborative housing projects, with clear technical criteria and a strong emphasis on social utility. The initiative has sparked a reflection on financing alternatives and continuity, prompting the establishment of specific funding for affordable housing at the municipal level, including a specific fund for co-housing. In addition, European funding, particularly through initiatives like the national Recovery and Resilience Plan, is expected to play a pivotal role in supporting affordable social housing in Italy in the following years.

 

Design, planning and building

Community participation

Policy and financing

* This diagram is for illustrative purposes only based on the author’s interpretation of the above case study

Alignment with SDGs

1. NO POVERTY. Porto 15 is part of a broader set of policies addressing the provision of affordable and social housing by the municipality of Bologna. It is specifically tailored  for young people whose financial conditions place them below a certain threshold: individuals who are not in extreme poverty but lack sufficient means to enter the private housing market.  

3. GOOD HEALTH AND WELL BEING. The project advocates a holistic vision of well-being, fostering social and relational opportunities for both for adults and children. It addresses physical and mental well-being through open initiatives promoting health practices and provides technical support for bike repair to promote slow mobility in the city centre.

9. INDUSTRY, INNOVATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE. The renovation project aims to reconcile the preservation of an existing historical structure with the requirements arising from the unconventional residential use of a cohousing project. Involving public subjects, architects, and residents in the design phase ensures more inclusive and effective housing solutions.  

11. SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND COMMUNITIES. Porto 15 connects with a wide community in the metropolitan area of Bologna, fostering knowledge and networks within civil society. It serves as a social pillar within a network node for collaborative housing, sustainability, and the promotion of inclusivity, valuing differences and countering discrimination.

12. RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION. The Porto 15 community fosters the consumption of local products and has evolved into a distribution hub for local food through a co-operative purchasing group. It creates links between sustainability practices by hosting numerous events and conferences on the theme, and has its own open repair shop.

17. PARTNERSHIPS FOR THE GOALS. The partnership forged for this project brought together public agencies and the municipality with the shared goal of promoting the co-housing model as an innovative form of public involvement in the provision of housing and social services, aligning with SDGs. This pilot project shows the commitment of public entities to collaborate and diversify public housing provisions, and develop more inclusive scenarios. 

References

Andersen, N. Å., & Pors, J. G. (2016). Public Management in Transition: The Orchestration of Potentiality (1st edition). Policy Press.

Calastri, S. (2013). Nuove soluzioni per l’abitare condiviso e intergenerazionale. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282133362

Divari, A. (2019). De social housing#an italian brief history. Nomos 1/2019.

Mortensen, N. M., Brix, J., & Krogstrup, H. K. (2020). Reshaping the Hybrid Role of Public Servants: Identifying the Opportunity Space for Co-production and the Enabling Skills Required by Professional Co-producers. In H. Sullivan, H. Dickinson, & H. Henderson (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant (pp. 1–17). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_17-1

Price, A., Ahuja, L., Bramwell, C., Briscoe, S., Shaw, L., Nunns, M., O’Rourke, G., Baron, S., & Anderson, R. (2020). Research evidence on different strengths-based approaches within adult social work: A systematic review. NIHR. https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr-tr-130867

Rogel, L. (2018). Cohousing: L’arte di vivere insime : principi, esperienze e numeri dell’abitare collaborativo : la mappatura in Italia. Altra economia.

Storto, G. (2018). La casa abbandonata: Il racconto delle politiche abitative dal piano decennale ai programmi per le periferie. Officina edizioni.

Related vocabulary

Collaborative Housing

Area: Policy and financing

Collaborative housing   According to the definition given to this umbrella term by Czischke, Cariou and Lang (2021), collaborative housing (CH) encompasses various housing typologies in which collaboration between residents and stakeholders of housing production is central. These authors stressed the importance of the term for conceptualizing a wide range of housing provision forms that present different interactions between traditional housing actors such as public authorities, private developers and/or non for profit organizations, together with future residents. These collaborative endeavours include different degrees of collective self-organisation or participation of residents to this collaborative process of housing provision and subsequent housing management. The academic literature presents CH as re-emerging since the 2000s in Europe in response to contemporary societal challenges such as housing affordability, better environmental practices (Czischke et al., 2020; Fromm, 2012; Lang et al., 2020; Tummers, 2016) and in some cases, social inclusion, stimulated by public policies . The model is therefore considered to be a potential answer to the affordability crisis, since collaborative processes in conjunction with particular tenure statuses could allow for savings in construction and management costs as, well as energy (Brysch & Czischke, 2021). Additionally, these models of co-creation of housing solutions address environmental challenges through several resource saving practices of eco-engineering (Tummers, 2016). In conjunction to the development of such new practices of housing provision, collaborative housing has become a growing research area for of interest for different disciplines, from urban planning to housing studies, public health and environmental studies (Brysch & Czischke, 2021; Czischke et al., 2020; Fromm, 2012; Lang et al., 2020).   CH draws inspiration from a wide range of self-organised housing forms, such as “resident-led cooperatives, cohousing, eco-villages, Community Land Trusts (CLTs)””, acknowledging collaboration among residents and with external stakeholders as a common thread (Lang et al., 2020, p. 1). However, unlike cohousing(Czischke et al., 2020), this is not always a bottom-up community-based initiative. The term collaborative housing refers to a broader spectrum encompassing also ‘’coliving’’ or commercial shared rental housing (Ronald et al., 2023), that are market-driven and prioritize profit oriented capital production through short-term rentals catering to remote working elite or middle-class individuals (Bergan et al., 2021). Therefore, the conceptualization of collaborative housing invites researchers to question differences and similarities of these new and wide set of practices with more established forms. Cohousing is such a case in point, since it stands for a set of guiding values and principles such as : collective solidarity and autonomous decision-making (Labit, 2013), co- design of the future homes,sharing decisions, spaces and facilities. The physical design is conceived to enhance social interactions, therefore it usually involves multifunctional rooms, laundry facilities, bike repair shops, children's playrooms, and guest rooms, as well as green spaces like courtyards, gardens, or plots (Durrett & McCamant, 2011). In addition to finding out if collaborative housing still promotes these core principles of cohousing, it raises the question of the possibility to overcome some of the limitations of previous models. Some scholars have raised concerns about the accessibility of cohousing projects, both financially and culturally, based on the small participation of vulnerable groups with financial difficulties (Ruiu, 2015) and the rare presence of individuals with low cultural resources (Bresson, 2016).   Fighting the risk of becoming a social elitist community, CH can act as a support for sustainable urban development through more collective forms of tenure, ownership, and land use (Jarvis, 2011) and can play an important role in revitalising neighbourhoods (Fromm, 2012). It can facilitate more social interactions (Williams, 2005) organising activities and social gathering opportunities for the neighbourhood, and can influence the adoption of more sustainable practices and ways of life. From a social capital theory perspective, CH, just like cohousing, can therefore produce social impact in terms of strengthening bonding social capital within the internal community, and bridging social capital with neighboring communities (Ruiu, 2016). While CH has emerged as an alternative housing solution, its success remains confined to a niche from a quantitative standpoint (Droste, 2015) but its potential for scaling up is bigger than in the case of cohousing, because of the involvement of traditional actors of housing provision. Since state-driven initiatives are emerging in certain European countries, as documented by Bressons and Labit in France or in Italy[1], and using the self-management and reciprocity dynamics brought by collaborative housing to balance the lack of welfare, CH appears to be a relevant model for more inclusive housing provision. In this perspective, it could also facilitate inclusion of socio-economically vulnerable people (Ruiu, 2015), although introducing concerns about the actual possibility for these groups to perceive themselves as agents of their own housing situation (Czischke et al., 2020) and contribute to the upstream phases of collaboration for housing co-creation.    

Created on 11-06-2024

Author: L.Chaloin (ESR3)

Read more ->

Related publications

No entries

Blogposts

Icon exploring-urban-innovation-in-lisbon

Exploring Urban Innovation in Lisbon

Posted on 20-11-2024

My Experience with LABIC and Participatory Planning During my secondment in Lisbon, I had the incredible opportunity to work on the LABIC (Neighborhood Innovation Laboratory) project in the historic district of Barreiro Velho. The project aims to bring together local residents and city officials to collaboratively design solutions for better urban living. My experience involved  insightful academic exchanges with the local researcher Carolina Cardoso (ISCTE) and gave me a closer look at the challenges and successes of community-driven urban regeneration in Portugal. The LABIC project, based in Barreiro Velho, focuses on fostering community cohesion and tackling urban issues like housing quality and public space management. The idea was to empower local residents to take part in shaping their own neighborhoods. The use of vacant lots for temporary libraries or play areas, and the involvement of children in these activities, showed me how powerful these simple actions can be in transforming spaces and creating connections between residents. I was fortunate enough to closely observe a community building event—a street party. This vibrant gathering, organized by local residents and project researchers, was a celebration of community spirit. With a small music stage, a barbeque, and an upcycling workshop, the event not only brought people together but also helped raise awareness about the ongoing urban interventions. As I wandered through the neighborhood, taking photos and chatting with the researchers present, I realized how much these small, community-driven events contribute to fostering social cohesion. There was a palpable sense of ownership, identity and community pride in the area, something that’s often difficult to achieve in areas nearer the city centre. Shifting My Focus: Housing, Informality, and AUGIs One of the most striking aspects of my secondment was the exposure to Portugal’s approach to informal settlements, specifically the Áreas Urbanas de Génese Ilegal (AUGIs), or areas of illegal housing construction. These neighborhoods, often located on the outskirts of cities, developed informally over time, and their residents have been working to legalize their homes and improve their living conditions. This topic intrigued me because it resonated with my research in Cyprus, where informal construction also plays a significant role in suburban and rural housing. I had the chance to conduct interviews with several key stakeholders, including academic researchers and municipal officials, to better understand how new participatory planning methods were being explored in these areas. These conversations were eye-opening, as they focused not just on the challenges of housing legality, but also on the social issues of self-governance, citizenship, and social cohesion for lower-income residents. In particular, I spoke with Carolina Cardoso, José Carlos Motta, and local officials from the Lisbon municipality, including Cláudia Batista and Álvaro Fernandez. The insights I gained were invaluable in exploring how participatory processes, such as community mapping and photo-voice methods, were being used to engage residents in transforming their own neighborhoods.  Taking Lessons Back to Cyprus The experiences gained during an Erasmus+ BIP Blended Intensive Programme, which I participated in at ISCTE, allowed me to gather new ideas for my own research in Cyprus. The programme also gave me a platform to collaborate with students and colleagues from Lisbon and Cyprus. Together, we explored the concept of Urban Living Labs, spaces where citizens and researchers can co-create solutions for urban challenges. This experienced enriched my understanding of how different South European countries approach similar issues. In particular, the participatory practices used in Lisbon’s AUGI areas—where residents collaborate with the municipality to legalize and improve their homes—provided a great example of how co-production of knowledge between citizens and authorities can lead to more sustainable and inclusive urban planning. Reflecting on my time in Lisbon, I realize that, from the lively street party in Barreiro Velho to the thought-provoking interviews on informal housing, it has been an experience which added to my understanding of urban planning. By seeing participatory urban planning in action, I realised that projects that take citizen participation seriously can make a real difference in the lives of  people in Lisbon’s peripheral neighborhoods. The power of community-driven urban innovation and experimentation is in reframing the prerequisites of urban planning, to start from the existing conditions and strengths of locality to build social cohesion towards socially sustainable housing envrionments.

Author: A.Panagidis (ESR8)

Secondments

Read more ->

Relational graph

icon case study Case Study
icon case study Concept
icon case study Publication
icon case study Blogposts