Hafström 2021 - Coliving in The Sustainable City

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/348755566
Coliving in the Sustainable City - A study of coliving as a sustainable urban

housing strategy in Stockholm
Thesis · January 2021

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34916.60809
CITATION READS
1 4,767
1 author:
Ulrika Hafström
Lund University
1 PUBLICATION 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Coliving in the Sustainable City - A study of coliving as a sustainable urban housing strategy in Stockholm View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ulrika Hafström on 25 January 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Lund University Department of Human Geography
SGEL36, Fall 2020 Supervisor: Nicklas Guldåker

Coliving in the Sustainable City

A study of coliving as a sustainable urban housing strategy in Stockholm
Human Geography: Bachelor Thesis in Urban and Regional Planning
© Ulrika Hafström 2021

Lund University Ulrika Hafström, 2021

Abstract
The challenge to limit global warming to 1.5°C requires substantial transitions in cities. Shifting
consumer behaviours, property use and development are necessary to meet urban housing
shortages and ensure a liveable future. Isolation and loneliness are increasing in cities and with
the rise of the sharing economy system, traditional ways of living are questioned. While shared
housing is nothing new to the world, new forms have evolved in response to unbalanced housing
conditions and, in recent years, cities have witnessed the rise of coliving. This study intendsto
contribute to a deeper understanding of the prospects of key stakeholders on coliving as a model
for sustainable housing. The research explores coliving within an urban planning context to
identify challenges and positive implications, complimentary to the housing market. This has
been done with a combined inductive and deductive approach of five qualitative interviews,
document analysis, and a case study of Stockholm. The results indicate that coliving affects
sustainability in urban environments by encouraging reduced consumption through sharing and
access to social capital, lowering carbon emissions from densification, and providing social
belonging. The findings suggest that the benefits of coliving could extend beyond urban
residential spaces, providing value to local communities.
Keywords:
Coliving, Environmental sustainability, Shared forms of housing, Sharing economy, Social capital
1

Table of Contents
Abstract 1
1 INTRODUCTION 5
1.1 Aim and Research Question 7
1.2 Definitions 7
1.3 Delimitation 8
1.4 Disposition 9
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10
2.1 The Sustainability Paradigm 10
2.2 The Climate Impact of Housing 12
2.3 The Sustainability of Shared Housing 14
2.4 Research on Coliving 17
2.5 Summary 19
3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 20
3.1 Chattertons Post-Carbon Cities 20
3.2 Social capital 22
3.3 The Planner's Triangle 23
3.4 Summary 25
4 METHODS AND MATERIALS 26
4.1 Research Design 26
4.1.1 Case-Study Method 27
4.1.2 Research Method 27
4.2 Interviews 28
4.2.1 Pre-interview phase 29
2

4.2.2 Semi-structured interviews 29
4.3 Document analysis 31
4.4 Data analysis 32
4.5 Reflections 35
5 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS 37
5.1 The Housing Situation In Stockholm 37
5.2 Drivers 40
5.2.1 Demand for Housing Diversification 40
5.2.2 Market Gaps 41
5.2.3 Isolation and demand for belonging 42
5.3 Potential Challenges 43
5.3.1 Size, Diversity, and Mixed-use 43
5.3.2 Stigmatization and Lacking Standardizations 47
5.4 Positive Implications of Findings 47
5.4.1 Social Capital: Exchanged Values Through Networks 48
5.4.2 Environmental Benefits of Sharing 49
5.4.3 Potential Positive Externalities of Co-living in Neighborhoods 51
5.4.4 Reducing Vacant Space and Need For Construction 52
5.5 Sustainability Analysis 53
6 FINAL DISCUSSION 55
6.1 Future Research 56
6.2 Closing Statement 57
7 REFERENCES 59
8 APPENDIX 68

3

Tables, figures & appendices
List of Figures
Figure 1. The United Nations 17 Sustainable Development Goals Integrated 12
Figure 2. Consumer-based greenhouse gas emissions 2009-2017. 13
Figure 3. Worldwide Google Searches for coliving. 18
Figure 4. The Planner's Triangle. 23
Figure 5. Research Design. 27
Figure 6. Inductive vs Deductive Research. 28
Table 7. The Seven Stages of Interview Investigation. 28
Figure 8. Summary of stakeholders. 30
Table 9. Summary of interviews. 31
Table 10. Summary of codebook. 34
Figure 11. Historical and expected population development 2000-2025. 38
Table 12. Commercial Coliving spaces in Stockholm. 39
Figure 13: Overall CO2e per household per year. 50

Appendices
Appendix 1: Description of interviews 68
Appendix 2: Interview guide 1 70
Appendix 7: Households in Stockholm 79
4

1 INTRODUCTION
“We must voluntarily choose sustainable practices since there is no immediate survival or market
imperative to do so.” ( Campbell, 2016:9).
The challenge to limit global warming to 1.5°C requires fast and substantial transitions in cities
(IPCC, 2018). Among other high-emission industries, the housing sector is responsible for large
greenhouse gas emissions and needs to undergo restructuring to meet critical climate targets
(Naturvårdsverket, 2019). At the same time, Sweden is facing one of the biggest housing crises
on the planet where the equivalent of a new Stockholm has to be built every five years (Moore,
2020). As we face increasing environmental threats and population needs, we more and more
need to resign to the visions of the current sustainable urban development paradigm which
guides modern urban planning (Hall, 2014).
Cities are disproportionately vulnerable to the risks of these environmental threats, giving rise to
the need for urban resilience. In Sweden, with some of the highest consumption-based carbon
emissions per capita, finding more efficient ways of living is a necessity (Naturvårdsverket,
2010). Simultaneously, the global urban population expects a rise to 6 billion people by 2045
(World Bank, 2020) while soaring real estate values are making life in urban areas inaccessible
for many. Consequently, an acute housing shortage subsists in major global cities (Hagbert, P,
Larsen, HG, Thörn, H & Wasshede, C, 2019). Stockholm city has experienced a housing crisis
for decades with new strategies for constructing thousands of homes within the next ten years.
Decision-makers and urban planners are trapped between different priorities; solving urgent
housing shortages and finding solutions to decarbonize the world economy by 2050 (IPCC,
2018).
5

In a search for solutions to these challenges, a growing number of housing forms that reject old
practices of housing, neighbourhoods, and planning cities, have risen. Shared housing, where
biologically unrelated individuals live together (Tummers, 2016), is nothing new to the world;
however, with more people living isolated in cities than before, the demand for connection has
manifested in new forms of shared living (Kim, Woo & Cho, 2020). Amongst other concepts in a
renewed housing typology, the Global North has seen a rapid spread of coliving across urban
landscapes since its inception (Pepper & Manji, 2019). While coliving is a relatively new term
for urban planners, this form of communal rental housing is becoming more widespread (Bergan,
Gorman-Murray & Power, 2019). Central to this concept is the values of the sharing economy, a
system in which ownership is exchanged for accessibility to a wider range of products and
services through renting or collective ownership (Raworth, 2017).
Community housing is often placed in the context of sustainable urban development and framed
as an alternative to traditional housing forms with the capacity to meet the complexities of the
housing shortage and climate crisis (Hagbert et. al., 2019). Exploring coliving as a growing
urban movement and conceptualizing it within a planning context was the starting point of this
study. The driving factors behind the rise of coliving, the specific challenges, and positive
implications of this new housing form has been analysed from five key stakeholder interviews.
The findings have been connected to existing sustainability conflicts in the city of Stockholm
through document analysis and case study of the housing situation in the capital. The intention is
to generate knowledge about how coliving affects sustainability in urban environments, to help
planners operationalize shared housing in future housing strategies.

6

1.1 Aim and Research Questions
The purpose of this thesis is to explore coliving within an urban sustainability planning context
to understand the challenges and positive implications as a complement to the housing market.
This study aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of key stakeholders prospects on
coliving as a model for sustainable living. These stakeholders include urban planners, coliving
residents, coliving developers, and operators. The main research question is:
In what way does coliving affect sustainability in urban environments?
Based on the main research question, the following sub-questions are as follows:
− What are the main qualities of coliving?
− What factors are driving the current development of coliving?
− What are challenges and positive implications with coliving?
− How can the concept of coliving be operationalized in urban sustainability strategies?
1.2 Definitions
In this section, the central concepts used in this bachelor's thesis are defined.
Sharing economy
An economic system built on ideas of sharing, renting and lending, different assets, products or
services to reduce individual ownership. The sharing economy enables access to products and
services by exchanging ownership for rental. Consequently, the capacity of a product, service or
space is used more efficiently (Raworth, 2017)
Cohousing
Cohousing is the most commonly adopted term when referring to a house where both spaces and
facilities are shared (Durrett & McCamant, 1988). In contrast to coliving, cohousing is often
built collectively and self-managed by its residents (Tummers, 2015).
7

Coliving
Like cohousing, coliving is an intentional and purpose-driven housing form. It diverges as it is
privately managed and delivered shared housing. The principal objectives of coliving are to
create flexibility, increase creativity among residents and community and foster meaningful
relationships. Coliving transcends beyond the physical sharing of spaces and suggests a stronger
focus on soft values, which is achieved by creating and upholding a sense of community
(Steding, 2019).
Post-Carbon
Post-carbon is a process that moves cities from fossil fuel dependency towards a society built on
long term sustainable practices. The label post-carbon regards transitioning from high
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to solving climate change and securing energy conservation
while including economic and social concerns such as economic justice, land ownership,
behaviour change and community self-management (Chatterton, 2013).
Social Capital
Social capital is the sum of the potential or actual resources available through relationships and
acquaintances that are more or less institutionalized. It is another form of capital collectively
owned and credited by individuals through membership of a group or network (Bourdieu, 1985).
1.3 Delimitation
This bachelor’s thesis is centred on the implications of coliving in urban areas and will
geographically focus on the Stockholm region. To gain a broader understanding of coliving, key
stakeholders have been interviewed. Although real estate is an important role in the development
of coliving, this perspective is not included in this study. Since the foremost intention is
conceptualizing coliving in an urban planning context to understand its implications and
potential contributions to housing strategies. The planning perspective and the experiences of
people involved in coliving as a resident or developer has hence been prioritized. It is important
to note that all aspects of coliving are not covered but rather a selection of relevant scientific
8

perspectives that contributes to an increased understanding of coliving in the planning context.

The limitations of this study are further elaborated on in section 4.5 Reflections.
1.4 Disposition
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Presents the housing crisis and need for ecological sustainable housing. Introduces coliving, aim,
research questions and reoccuring definitions.
Chapter 2 - Literature Review

Explores the challenges within the housing sector and discusses different shared housing
concepts, their relation to coliving and reviews previous research on the topic.
Chapter 3 - Theoretical framework

Describes theories that are applied to the empirical findings to conduct the analysis. Concludes
with a summary of the theoretical framework.
Chapter 4 - Methods & Materials

Presents and discusses the research design, methods and material that have been used for data
collection and analysis.
Chapter 5 - Findings & Analysis:

Explores the housing situation in Stockholm. Presents results from stakeholder interviews and
document analysis. Analyses the data through the theoretical framework and discusses the
sub-research questions in the final discussion.
Chapter 6 - Conclusion:
Answers the main research question through highlighting the key findings. Proposes future
research topics.
9

2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The following chapter provides a background of coliving in contemporary and historical

contexts. Local and national sustainability targets, the environmental impact of the housing
sector, and previous research on shared housing and coliving will be presented. Due to the
research gap on the subject matter, a selection of relevant literature is presented to analyze the
empirical findings to answer the research question.
2.1 The Sustainability Paradigm
Although ‘sustainability’ appears as a recent buzz-word, the search for sustainable urban
development has been a defining theme in planning for over three decades (Hall, 2014). While
most are familiar with the quote from the Brundtland Report published in 1987, “[Development]
which meets present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to achieve
their own needs and aspirations”, a shared understanding of what sustainability implies in
everyday decisions and planning context remains a difficulty (ibid). Sustainability is a resolution
based on three dimensions; economic, social and environmental (Lélé, 1991). In contrast to the
initial objectives of the Brundtland commission, these three pillars have often been tackled
separately causing institutions to continuously design programmes that focus on one, or in ideal
cases, two of the dimensions. The agenda has predominantly been shaped by resolving technical
and environmental issues, while social problems just recently have gained attention (Campbell,
2016).
The role of urban planning in developing living environments where all three dimensions unite is
undoubtedly imperative in the means of reaching national and international sustainability targets.
In Sweden, policies such as the Climate Act, adopted by the government in 2017 with the goal of
zero emissions of greenhouse gases by 2045 and subsequently negative emissions, requires
strategies that combine all dimensions. The policy describes necessary actions to reduce
10

greenhouse gas emission by 63% from the 1990 levels by 2030 (Regeringskansliet, 2017). In a
planning context, the objectives are often generalized as; developing building forms that
minimize emissions and conserve energy; make the city reachable by walking and bicycling;
discourage private-use driving by advancing public transport and facilitate activities around
public transport nodes (Hall, 2014). It is important to keep in mind that without a shared
definition of sustainability, interpretations of these objectives vary depending on the person and
their role. An activist, developer, planner or politician will have different ideas about what
sustainable development means. Consequently, underlying philosophy determines the proponents
perspective, priorities and choices about which policies to implement and actions to take (Paoli
and Addeo, 2019).
The ambiguity of sustainability is one reason it took 21 years before the world united over a
global and legally binding agreement on climate action. In December 2015. The Paris
Agreement, that requires all parties to present their best efforts to stop global warming under 2°C
degrees, was signed by 187 of 197 parties (UNFCCC, 2020a). The same year, the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development was adopted by the United Nations. The agenda outlines 17
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) designed to “[end] poverty, ensure prosperity for all
and protect the planet” (see figure 1). Goal 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities and its
subgoals, such as reducing “[the] adverse per capita environmental impact of cities” (target
11.6)or providing access to“[adequate], safe and affordable housing” ( target 11.1)is of
priority for planners to translate into practical actions. Goal 12: Responsible Consumption and
Production a nd Goal 13: Climate Action is also of relevance for the objectives of planning as
they align with visions of improved capacity for participatory and integrated planning for human
settlement that protects and safeguards vital natural heritages (UN, 2017).
11

Figure 1. The United Nations 17 Sustainable Development Goals Integrated. (SRC, 2020).
Quite predictably, corporations and governments cherry-pick certain SDGs over others based on
economic, political or national interests, defying the inherent purpose of integrating the three
sustainability dimensions (Forestier & Kim, 2020). As illustrated in figure 1, Johan Rockström
challenges the way SDGs are used by emphasizing the need to embed social and economic
actions as part of a functioning biosphere (SRC, 2017). To reach these goals within the coming
decade, integrating sustainability practices within all sectors is imperative, not least within the
housing sector.
2.1 The Climate Impact of Housing
There is evidence showing substantial impacts of the housing sector on climate-change inducing
emissions. In 2017, the Swedish construction and real estate sector was responsible for
approximately 19 percent of Sweden's total domestic greenhouse gas emissions (Boverket,
2020). Of the total emissions from the sector in 2017, construction is responsible for 50 percent
12

and property management and heating for 30 percent. According to Boverket (2020), the
emissions within each sector are continuing to increase.
Hagbert et. al (2019) however notes that low-energy buildings, improved construction processes,
circular material use and other eco-efficient technologies are increasingly adopted within the
industry to strive towards creating urban development projects that are within a safe and just
operating space for humanity and within the earth's biophysical thresholds, also referred to as the
nine planetary boundaries by Rockström (2013). The emissions caused by household
consumption, public sector consumption and societal investments account for about half of
Sweden's total emissions (Figure 2, Naturvårdsverket, 2019). Despite technical advancements,
national emissions (territorial and non-territorial) remained overall unchanged in the last decade,
as Figure 2 depicts. This underlines that the challenge is not only a technical one, but rather a
transitional one that requires momentous cultural, societal, and economic changes (Hagbert et. al,
2019).
Figure 2. Consumer-based greenhouse gas emissions 2009-2017 (red: total emissions,
yellow: non-territorial emissions, blue: territorial emissions). (Naturvårdsverket, 2019).
13

2.2 The Sustainability of Shared Housing
Purpose-driven shared housing forms can be placed in the context of global interdependence as a
collaborative approach to solving climate change (Hagbergt et. al, 2019). The demographics are
often described as environmentally and socially responsible residents who seek more affordable
housing, community, and low-carbon solutions. Hagbert et. al (2019) stresses the importance of
relating such claims to the “ecological modernization” that dominates today’s urban governance,
reinforcing the role of regulations and technology and that sustainability can be achieved without
challenging economic development (Hall, 2014). This worldview originates from ideas like
“green growth”, indicating that “sustainable consumption” and infinite economic progress are
plausible. Similarly, the discourse has been dominated by claims that sustainability challenges
can be addressed through innovation and adaptation which can also be applied to market
mechanisms, stimulating less environmentally destructive consumption and production patterns
(Hagbert et. al, 2019). The opposing idea of the “risk society” instead argues that the
reformative, social purposes that once shaped planning are lost as bureaucracy and technical
exercise controls. This perspective calls for a resurgence of ideology and proactive planning to
truly achieve sustainability (Hall, 2014).
In a study of European cohousing communities, Hagbert et al. (2019) found that ecological
sustainability savings primarily emerged from low-climate impact building design and
lowered-resource use from sharing. Resource efficiency increased as a result of sharing common
spaces like kitchens, living rooms and bathrooms. The communities also promoted more
environmentally-friendly lifestyles among their residents. Architect Dick-Urban Vestro (2014)
similarly implies the sustainability benefits of shared living and phrases it as “saving by sharing”
achieved by more efficient sharing habits than the average household. Specifically, the shared
housing form cohousing involves four sustainability claims: the opportunity to implement more
sustainable technologies within the model; more compact space; community housing appears to
encourage pro-environmental lifestyles; and the fact that smaller households gain environmental
advantages. Shared living enables collaboration and community-level action that may otherwise
be difficult to organize. Cohousing can therefore be connected to the discourse of a
14

contemporary “responsibilisation process” of green governmentality where self-management of

everyday life and choices are central (Hagbert et al, 2019).
A recent study of five different coliving and shared housing cases in Sweden made by
Akademiska Hus (2020) presented key factors defining sustainable shared households. Firstly,
sharing rate and utilization within the accommodation regarding interior environments, products,
and services, are influential factors reducing carbon footprint per capita (CO2e-footprint/capita).
Other determinants are the degree of generality, flexibility and elasticity of building design,
interior environments, products, and services within the home. Measurements of the
CO2e-footprint/capita of the five shared housing cases show that function planning of the space
is one of the determining factors for reducing CO2e-footprint/capita. As mentioned in previous
research, higher density results in lower climate impact. The study concludes that when these
design practices are applied to the development of the coliving spaces, CO2e-footprint/capita can
be cut by 50 percent (ibid).
2.3 The History of Shared Housing
While coliving is a newcomer, the related term cohousing has been around for decades (Vestbro,
2014). The renewed recognition for shared housing forms can be reflected in the first-ever
international conference on cohousing arranged in Stockholm in 2010 (Vestbro, 2014). There is
no accident that the interest in collective housing resided in Stockholm, as many cohousing
pioneers, activists and activist-researchers have been based in Scandinavia. One of them is the
architect Dick-Urban Vestbro, who published an extensive book in 1982 examining the history
of cohousing (Hagbert et. al, 2019). In his book, cohousing is presented as neighbourhood
development occurring in a bottom-up fashion where residents take charge of the housing
situation with the environment in mind (Vestbro, 2014). Cohousing is the most adopted term in
the English speaking community and has been described as the most appropriate concept when
referring to housing where both facilities and communal spaces are shared (Vestbro, 2010). The
foremost attributes of cohousing are participatory processes, resident management, and
neighbourhood design (Durrett and McCamant, 1988).
15

The umbrella term shared housing includes a number of variations that can be understood
differently depending on geographical and cultural contexts. During the cohousing conference,
the following concepts were classified and examined: collaborative housing, cohousing,
collective housing, intentional communities a ndecovillages ( Vestbro, 2010).Collaborative
housing is one of the broadest terms used to define housing with shared facilities and entails an
existing collaboration between the residents to organize living (Fromm, 1991). Similar to
collaborative housing, collective housing includes shared housing and facilities, but instead of
residents being responsible for services, an external company arranges the service facilities
(Franch and Ahrentzen, 1989). Cooperative housing describes cooperative ownership of housing
but since shared facilities of common spaces are not shared between the residents, it is implied
that the term should not be used in the “s hared housing” context (Vestbro, 2010). People in
intentional communities have ‘chosen to live together with a common purpose, working
cooperatively to create a lifestyle that reflects their shared core values’ (Kozeny, 1995).
According to the Fellowship for Intentional Community, i t is based on the principles;
non-violence, inclusivity, cooperation, and unregulated freedom to leave the community at any
point in time (Vestbro, 2010).
Lastly, ecovillages is another predecessor found in different parts of the world where a group of
5-500 people use local participatory processes to live in alignment with ecological, social,
economic and cultural values of sustainability with the aim to regenerate natural and social
environments (Clark, 2017). While coliving and cohousing usually are embedded within
mainstream urban society, ecovillages are predominantly rural and exist in the periphery.
Graham Meltzer defines ecovillages as“Human scaled, full-featured, harmlessly integrated with
nature, supportive of healthy human development and sustainable” (Vestbro, 2010:28-29).
In 1935, the first Swedish modern collective house was developed in Stockholm (Vestbro, 2014).
From an idea of rational living, a food lift existed to provide the residents with meals from their
apartments. The cohousing units mainly attracted middle-class intellectuals despite the small
apartment sizes accredited to the service included in the living. Rather than being built on
cooperation, through a division of labour, employed staff served the residents with everything
16

from room cleaning to laundry which is why Vestbro describes it as a “special solution for
privileged people” (ibid). In this form, the housing model was not obtainable by the broader
population but shortly after, the cohousing “self-work model” started to form which became
more adopted in the 60s and 70s (Steding, 2019).
2.4 Research on Coliving
While different forms of shared housing have existed for centuries, coliving diverges from earlier
collective housing forms through its focus of sustainability (Steding, 2019). The concept is yet to
be universally defined and is often misconceived as the broader definition of cohousing
(Osborne, 2018).
According to WeLive, one of the largest coliving providers, coliving has three main objectives;
(1) to create meaningful relationships, (2) to enable flexibility, and (3) to foster innovation and
creativity among the residents of the coliving community. These goals are achieved in various
ways but most commonly through spatial planning where a building, house, or apartment floor
consists of smaller private rooms connected to larger shared amenities and communal spaces.
These are usually composed of groups of 8 to 12 people. Coliving spaces are rental properties,
often fully furnished and inclusive of services that act as sharing economy solutions, like
cleaning and housekeeping, to mitigate conflicts that generally arise from shared living. It
reduces social conflicts and intends to make it easier to move in and out. On the other hand, it
can also result in shorter leases and some discomfort among residents as there are limitations to
personalizing their own space. In general, interdependency, security, and belonging are fostered
depending on the size and characteristics of the coliving (Steding, 2019).
17

Figure 3. Worldwide Google Searches for ‘Coliving’ (red) and ‘Co-living’ (blue) between
November 25 2015 - November 25 2020. (Google Trends, 2020).
The concept of coliving sparked with the rise of Silicon Valley as tech workers sought
innovative solutions to staggering rents and housing shortages (Steding, 2019). Coliving as an
idea started appearing in newspapers around 2011 and 2012, but it took another five years before
it gained traction (Figure 3). Until late 2019, there was no clear conceptual definition of the term,
which is why Steding (2019) designated his master's thesis to present a conceptual definition of
coliving. The author highlights some earlier descriptions of the term that gives an understanding
of it:
“Coliving is a form of rental housing that seeks to create community among its residents by providing
features such as extensive share spaces and community managers paid with typically small, furnished
private spaces” (Osborne, 2018, para. 1)
The crowd-sourced Urban Dictionary further describes coliving as “Shared housing designed to
support a purpose-driven life. A modern urban lifestyle that values openness, sharing, and
collaboration” (Urban Dictionary, 2013). Furthermore, The Danish architect and cofounder of
Freiraum Kollektive, Hannah Wood, describes coliving as an umbrella term for various housing
structures managed and set up by external agents like a developer or an entrepreneur (Steding,
2019). BritishAction and Research Centre ( ARC), provides a similar description and denotes
18

that coliving in contrast to flatshares and other shared living arrangements, actively seeks to
create a social contract between residents and local communities (Shafique, 2018).
These definitions highlight some fundamental elements of coliving. (1) Coliving endeavours to
create community; (2) Coliving spaces mainly exist within a “rental” structure of shared houses
and apartments; (3) Most communities are located in dense urban areas; (4) Residents generally
consist of young people, who seek flexible housing solutions in a transitional time of their lives
(Osborne, 2018). Bergan et. al (2019) emphasize that coliving is a commodified form of shared
housing that caters to knowledge economy labourers and acknowledges the link between
successful social life and professional life. Coliving organisations help foster meaningful
relationships through enduring networks, which is an example of how the economy is embedded
in the home as dimensions of productivity are rooted in the dimensions of home (ibid).
2.5 Summary
With the pressing climate issue, there are increasing demands to live less resource-intensive
through sharing and reduced private space (Hagbert et. al, 2019). Through an understanding of
the ruling theme of sustainability within the planning and the policy frameworks shaping the
urban sustainability agenda, coliving can be contextualized and analysed further. The potential
for lowering carbon footprints through increased sharing is highlighted in this literature review.
It can be understood that coliving as a term has emerged from previously shared housing forms
as a blend of the characteristics of intentional community and collective housing where housing
and services are provided and managed externally. While flexibility and convenience have been
fundamental to the concept from the start, values of sustainability are more recently identified as
a defining (Steding, 2019). Starting as a niche housing form, coliving is now occupying more
space as a residential supply and as a social asset.
19

3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This section describes the theories used to interpret and analyze the findings in Chapter 6. These
are Chattertons cohousing research finding, Bourdieu’s social capital theory and Campbell’s
theory about planning conflicts related to sustainability. The theories originate from an
interdisciplinary background of human geography, social sciences, and sociology and are
employed to answer the research questions through a descriptive and critical lens.
3.1 Chattertons Post-Carbon Cities
Chatterton (2013) explores one of the UK’s first ecological, affordable cohousing communities,
Lilac, and presents six main findings from his research. Firstly, intentional cohousing
communities require strategies to work across multiple institutional and governmental scales and
frameworks that consider planning, legal, financial and governance issues. The case illustrates
the need to build governance frameworks that foster the holistic development of shared housing
to deliver its objectives.
Secondly, he emphasizes democratic accountability, self-determination and control.

Community-level decision making is vital to change individual consumer behaviour and move
towards post-carbon cities. Community housing cultivates self-determination and advocates
regaining control of energy usage, land ownership of homes, food production and decision
making. Chatterton (2013) indicates that this challenges the way urban space is planned, used
and integrated. Different types of community living decrease space for individual dwellings,
reduce car ownership, maximise residential cooperation, increase space dedicated for sharing,
and improves integration of previous communities with new projects. Chatterton (2013) notes
that the limitations are existing planning and policy frameworks.
20

Thirdly, Chatterton (2013) contends that post-carbon initiatives must find ways to address
political conflicts that arise when working towards different urban futures, as these often
compete with other interests. Chatterton (2013) describes it as being “in”, “against” and
“beyond” existing urban planning models. Post-carbon communities experience tension by
existing within current cultural, financial, regulatory and planning frameworks while seeking
alternatives to building long term sustainability rather than being passive to changes.
Consequently, these initiatives may appear vague and be strenuous to place in an existing
planning context. Chatterton (2013) stresses that cohousing needs to find ways to translate big,
holistic visions into manageable and measurable initiatives that are simple, integrated into local
plans and replicable in mainstream society.
Fourth, post-carbon housing initiatives provide a new way of imagining urban transitions. Rather
than focusing on predetermined outcomes, it enables an approach focused on making the process
more inclusive, durable and participatory. Chatterton (2013) stresses the need to set and measure
milestones to monitor the urban transition. The lessons of radical post-carbon communities could
be used as a roadmap to challenge the "business-as-usual" way of developing housing through
committing to accessibility, affordability and economic equality. There is yet to exist a
generalized model that can multiply in lower-income urban areas and intermediate housing
markets, validating the need for continuous development of the model.
Fifth, prioritizing strategic action planning to make community living replicable is of

importance. It requires resources and assistance to assure democratic formations, alignment with
planning, building from demands of communities in different geographical locations, including
raising capital and funding to allocate land for community-led housing. Beside governmental
frameworks, joining forces with multinational corporations may help leverage impacts of shared
housing communities (ibid).
Sixth, t he spatial limits of urban and rural communities need to be reconsidered. So the
connection between global networks and peripheral locations can improve. Chatterton (2013)
argues that it is required to reach objectives such as justice, cooperation and solidarity, central to
21

initiatives such as cohousing communities housing. Planning must derive from an understanding
of which neighbourhood patterns and housing forms limit dangerous fossil fuel dependency to
truly contribute to the post-carbon city.
3.2 Social Capital
Social capital is an important concern in urban planning and community development. It can
empower the success of housing planning, promote community integration, enable a sense of
belonging, promote affluence, and cooperation in neighbourhoods (Ruiu, 2016). Bourdieu (1985)
was the first to adopt the term ‘social capital’ and defined it as:
“Social capital is the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a
durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition -
or in other words, to membership in a group - which provides each of its members with the backing of the
collectively owned capital, a “credential” which entitles them to credit, in the various senses of the
word.” (Bourdieu, 1985:248-249)
In Bourdieu’s (1985) The Forms of Capital, social capital is described positively as the
advantages gained through membership in a group or community. To develop solidarity, social
networks where individuals access social capital is fundamental. Socially instituted forms, such
as families, tribes, schools, or a party, foster relationships and are a way to create and maintain
social networks. Proximity in physical geographical space, and social or economic space, are
other aspects that strengthen the exchange of social capital. Bourdieu (1985) explains that the
volume of social capital depends on the number of people within a network and the capital worth
(cultural, economic and symbolic).
Social networks are the result of endless efforts that are established and maintained by
institutional acts. Bourdieu (1985) emphasizes the role social formations have played throughout
history to create and reproduce relationships to secure material or symbolic values. Networks
require efforts such as investments to emerge and sustain. Investment strategies that are practical
and directed at transforming shallow relationships, such as at the workplace or in a
22

neighbourhood, into deeper relationships with durable obligations such as gratitude, friendship,
or respect are imperative.
3.3 The Planner’s Triangle
The urban planner Scott Campbell first published the article “Green cities, Growing cities, Just
cities?” in 1996 to spotlight complex relationships within sustainability. His model is adopted to
illustrate how the three dimensions of planning: economic, social and environmental a spects
dispute. In this section, Campbell’s original article and edited version from 2016 are used to
describe the theory that is applied in section 6. Findings & Analysis.
Figure 4. The Planner’s Triangle. The three priorities of planning and their associated
conflicts.
Campbell (1996) initiates by pointing out the challenge planners face in deciding between
economic growth, social justice, and protecting the green city. While sustainable development
offers an attempt to present a holistic way to resolve these conflicts, Campbell (1996) asserts that
they are rarely solved effortlessly. Although the intentions with sustainable development are to
find balanced solutions, Campbell (1996) acknowledges the vulnerability of adopting the concept
as a holistic vision rooted in vague idealist ideas. The Planner’s Triangle d epicts three opposing
23

priorities in each corner; economic development, environmental protection, a ndsocial justice.

The aspirational goal of sustainable development, “green, profitable and fair", is at the heart of
the triangle where economy, equity and environment meet. These three interests would be in
equilibrium in an ideal world. In reality, Campbell (1996) contends that overarching
authoritarian and bureaucratic objects restrict planners from serving the broader public while
harmonizing preservation, growth and equality. Consequently, planners tend to represent one
specific goal. Such as increased green areas, raised property taxations or more affordable
housing, instead of generating solutions that balance the needs of all three interests.
The three priorities equal three different standpoints from which planners operate and examine
the city. The economic-growth planner s ees the city as a place for innovation, production,
consumption and distribution. Cities are in constant competition to attract and maintain existing,
and emerging markets, industries, tourists and residents. Space is perceived as a container for
market areas, highways and commuter zones of people and commodities. In contrast, the
environmental planner understands the city as a place in dispute with nature and pays attention
to the scarcity of resources and land. Space in this context is the ecological space, ecological
niches and river basins. Lastly, for the planner advocating for social equity, the city is recognised
as a place where inequalities play out through resource distribution and competition between
social groups.
The three interests lead to three central conflicts: “The Property Conflict”, “The Development
Conflict” and“The Resource conflict”. Competing interests in property between landlords and
residents, gentrifying professionals and long-lived citizens, or ownership and use of properties
creates the first conflict between economic growth and equity - one of the core conflicts analysed
in this study. The resource conflict arises from the tension between, on the one hand, the
economic utility of natural resources in industrial society and on the other, their ecological value
and scarcity in the natural environment. The development conflict a ppears amid environmental
and social interest and is seen by Campbell (2016) as the most challenging one to resolve. This
conflict exists between urban communities and resource-dependent communities regarding
24

where heavy industries, landfills, and other deleterious land uses are located, which often derives
from environmental racism.
In the revised version of the article, Campbell (2016) highlights the complexity of solving social
disputes. The occurrence of gentrification and segregation in a neighbourhood is connected to
global circuits. Housing- or neighbourhood redevelopment tend to attract a new group of
residents as the rents change. Gentrification can occur as new groups move in and long-term
residents are forced to move. Additionally, when groups of like-minded people, with similar
cultural, economic, ethnic or social backgrounds live together in the same location, the risks for
segregation transpire. The Planner’s Triangle can nonetheless be considered a simplified model
for solving sustainable development issues and critically examining urban planning conflicts.
Thus, Campbell (2016) emphasizes the importance of recognizing interdependence and that no
sustainability conflict is a “spatial fix”: the understanding that no solutions on a geographical
scale can solve overarching regional, national or global issues.
3.4 Summary
The findings from the interviews and document analysis are analyzed in Chapter 6. Findings &
Analysis through the theoretical framework composed by Chatterton, Bourdieu and Campbells
conceptions. Chatterton’s "lessons" from the cohousing community Lilac help examine the
driving factors, challenges, and positive implications brought up by the interviewees. It also
provides an analysis of the similarities and differences between coliving and cohousing.
Chatterton's theory can be seen as a framework to elaborate on what coliving can learn from past
experiences to be an accelerator towards post-carbon cities. The social capital notion is
connected to the interviews to explore the social benefits of community that coliving brings.
Finally, Campbell’s theory is applied to the findings to analyze social, environmental, and
economic sustainability mentioned in the interviews and documents.
The challenges and positive implications of coliving from the finds are equated to sustainability
conflicts within urban planning.
25

4 METHODS AND MATERIALS

The following chapter presents the research design and methods used to collect and analyse data
for this study. Five qualitative stakeholder interviews with an urban planner, coliving residents,
a coliving consultant and operator took place. A case study of the housing situation in Stockholm
and document analysis highlighting planning challenges was conducted to triangulate the
information.
4.1 Research Design
In this bachelor thesis, different research methods have been applied and triangulated to present a
more comprehensive overview of the subject. The adopted methods are selected to provide
different perspectives that can yield answers to the research questions. In this study, a literature
review was conducted to identify material for the document analysis and gather data to design
the interview guides. In tandem with the interviews, a document analysis of Stockholm city’s
master plan has been conducted based on the delimitations of the case study - which is to
investigate coliving as a compliment on the housing market in Stockholm. Overall, the nature of
the data collection and data is qualitative (interviews and document analysis), but some
quantitative data is used in compliment. These are primarily statistics from SCB (see appendix
7), research on coliving measuring CO2e-footprint/capita by Akademiska hus (2020) and Penny
Clark who investigates the environmental sustainability of coliving spaces (Coliving Insights,
2020). Qualitative methods, such as semi-structured interviews and document analysis are used
to answer the research questions with depth rather than breadth, which helps the reader form a
more profound understanding of coliving and its role in a planning context (Denscombe, 2018).
The following figure summarizes the research design.
26

Figure 5. Research design (Hafström, 2020).
4.1.1 Case Study Method
A case study on coliving in Stockholm was conducted. It is motivated by the housing shortage
which is larger in Stockholm than the majority of other Swedish municipalities (Boverket,
2018b). The case-study method enables depth through understanding a limited place, context or
object (Denscombe, 2018). As coliving is an urban housing concept, examining the emergence of
this housing form in the city is of interest. The intention has been to contextualize coliving in
information concerning the housing situation and planning strategies to answer the research
questions. The table summarized in Chapter 5. Findings & Analysis consists of data that was
collected through Google searches for coliving in Stockholm. A limitation of this method is that
there could be coliving spaces that did not appear in the searches.
The problem with utilizing the case study method is that the conclusions from the analysis can be
less generalizable as they can originate from geographical or cultural circumstances within the
case. If a conclusion may be that coliving in Stockholm contributes to gentrification, this
knowledge may not necessarily apply to every city with coliving housing. Which depicts both
the weaknesses and strength of this research design as it enables a specific understanding of one
phenomenon, yet limits the degree of generalization (Denscombe, 2018).
4.1.2 Research Method
The thesis stems from a mix between inductive and deductive approaches (see figure 4). An
inductive approach is when an open research question is used to guide an explorative approach
towards the data collected from the case. This method stems from the objective to observe the
27

phenomenon to develop theory, without preconceptions. As Farthing (2016) notes, there are
always some initial ideas that guide the researcher which is why the scope and inductive research
questions must be transparent about the guiding principles. In contrast, the deductive method
derives from an existing hypothesis about the phenomenon and the empirical data collection is
hence designed to verify or falsify the theory (Farthing, 2016). The research questions in this
study derive from more of an inductive nature, but some deductive approaches occur when
triangulating the findings in Chapter,6. Results & Analysis. Hence, the two methods are
combined. The questions are examined both from preconceived ideas and an explorative
approach (Farthing, 2016).
Figure 6. Inductive vs Deductive Research (Farthing, 2016. Layout by Ulrika Hafström 2020)
4.2 Interviews
Interviews are adopted to provide in-depth knowledge about a topic by understanding individual
interpretations and views on a specific issue or situation. In contrast to questionnaires, interviews
enable depth by understanding “why and how” questions that are captured in the subjective
experiences of an individual. To provide a broader understanding of this relatively unexplored
topic, various stakeholders were interviewed to cover different perspectives on coliving.
Interviews are used as a research instrument to widen the scope of knowledge about a studied
phenomenon through the interactive nature that enables new topics and questions to emerge
during the process (Kvale, 2007).
28

Table 7. The Seven Stages of Interview Investigation (Kvale, 2007).
Stage Step Explanation
1 Thematizing The purpose of the research and the general theme of investigation is
formulated.
2 Designing The research is designed with the objective to generate the intended
knowledge about the topic while taking moral implications of the study
into consideration.
3 Interviewing Interviews are carried out with a reflective and adaptive approach in
accordance with an interview guide.
4 Transcribing Interviews are transcribed to written text in preparation for the analysis.
5 Analysis The data is analyzed in accordance with relevant methods for the topic
and aim of the study.
6 Verification The interview findings validity, reliability and generalizability is evaluated.
7 Reporting The methods for data collection and modes of analysis are communicated
in a clear and concise manner that considers ethical issues and follows
scientific standards.
4.2.1 Pre-interview phase

Before conducting the interviews, a pre-interview was conducted. The interviewee is a former
student at The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) who had written a masters thesis about
coliving and now works within the real estate sector. The questions asked were intended for
learning more about the topic, identify relevant stakeholders to interview, and discuss potential
problems. The interview was semi-structured and covered a broad range of questions and topics
concerning the scope of research on coliving. Pre-interviews are helpful to generate new ideas,
perspectives and dimensions in preparation for the official interviews (Blomqvist and Hallin,
2015).
4.2.2 Semi-Structured Interviews

Five semi-structured interviews with different stakeholders took place. These included an urban
planner at Stockholm city, a co-founder of the coliving startup Allihoop, a coliving consultant
from the organization Conscious Coliving, and two residents from the coliving space K9 in
Stockholm(see appendix 1-6 for in-depth information about the interviews and interview
29

guides). All interviewees are anonymous and were carried out for 40 minutes (see table 8). The
semi-structured interviews included a list of topics prepared with associated questions, which
allows for a more flexible dialogue between interviewee and interviewer as the questions can be
tailored based on the answers. It enables the interviewee to elaborate more in-depth on their
perspective and the researcher to follow up with spontaneous questions during the conversation
(Denscombe, 2018). The questions were designed to be relatively open, which allows the
researcher to follow up with relevant questions based on the context (ibid). Some questions have
been asked consistently throughout all interviews, while some have been adapted. The questions
were formulated depending on stakeholder, interview context, and the evolution of the
conversation. The follow-up questions have emerged during the conversation to provide deeper
knowledge of certain aspects of the subject matter. As there are no established rules for
conducting qualitative interviews, this method yields an openness that has been beneficial in this
study which stems from a more inductive approach when exploring the particular matter (Kvale,
2007).
Figure 8. Summary of stakeholders. (Hafström, 2020)
All interviews were conducted via the online meeting applications Zoom, a cloud-based video
conferencing program that provides services such as secure recording of sessions during online
meetings (Zoom Video Communications Inc., 2016). The benefits of using virtual meeting
solutions are the time- and cost efficiency as the interviewee and researcher do not need to travel
to meet up in person for the interview. Another advantage is that the participants can be in their
30

respective setting of choice, which can foster a more relaxed conversation. In turn, this reduces
the risk of the “interview effect” that otherwise can influence the answers from the interviewee
(Denscombe, 2018:288). The disadvantage of digital communication method is that it may make
it more difficult for the interviewee to get across certain messages. Consequently, the
communication between the participants can be disturbed. A study of Zoom as a qualitative
research tool, however, shows that it is a suitable method for collecting interview data in
comparison to other Voice over Internet Protocol technologies (i.e Skype or Microsoft Teams)
(Archibald, Ambachtsheer, Casey & Lawless, 2019). The tool is often described positively in
terms of its security, convenience, interactivity and ability to foster personal interactions between
people (ibid).
Table 9. Summary of interviews.
Presented in Interviewee 1 Interviewee 2 Interviewee 3 Interviewee 4 Interviewee 5
the
interview
Actor Stockholm City Resident at K9 Conscious Allihoop Resident at K9

Coliving
Title Urban planner Coliving Coliving Co-founder Coliving

Resident consultant Resident
Interview 2020-11-22 2020-12-1 2020-12-2 2020-12-2 2020-12-8

date and 11.00-11.40 14.00-14.40 13.00-13.40 15.00-15.40 13.20-14.00
time 40 min. 40 min. 40 min. 40 min. 40 min.
4.3 Document Analysis
A document analysis of Stockholm city’s master plan from 2018 has been carried out as a
complement to the interviews and case study. The document was accessed through the
Stockholm municipality’s webpage and was selected for its ability to provide a general overview
of the city’s plans for housing development, urban design, and sustainability goals. The
document describes how buildings, land, and water use will be developed over the coming
decade. It can be connected to the Campbell theory as it outlines strategies to reach goals within
environmental, social and economic sustainability. This method aims to help strengthen the
validity of the interviews by comparing the answers about coliving to housing, planning and
31

sustainability issues central to Stockholm. Initially, the idea was to code keywords in the
document, but the term “coliving” did not exist in any identified planning documents from
Stockholm city. Instead, search words such as housing, densification, mixed-use, housing stock,
properties, social diversity, and similar terms are used to identify and interpret the municipality’s
prospect on coliving. The analysis has been executed by identifying relevant or meaningful terms
and paragraphs of the text and interpreting it qualitatively through content analysis and thematic
analysis (Bowen, 2009). The information was then analysed through the theoretical framework in
the same way as the interviews described in the following section.
4.4 Data Analysis
After completing the interviews, the audio-recordings were transcribed and coded before
analysis. Coding is an approach for qualitative analysis where one or more keywords are
attached to a text segment (Kvale, 2007). In this thesis, the interview transcripts were coded to
conduct a qualitative content analysis, which helps “quantifying” qualitative data (Denscombe,
2018). The interview transcripts were dissected and relevant categories based on the interview
guide, theoretical framework, and relevant keywords were identified from the interviews (see
some of the keywords in table 10). Based on commonly found themes from the interviews, a
graphic thematically categorizes the data (see table 10). The codes are elected to highlight
driving factors, challenges, and positive implications of the subject. This process has been
followed by thematically coding the transcripts according to the relevant categories (Kvalie,
2007). This method makes the analysis more systematic, transparent and rigorous as the
researcher can trace insights directly back to data segments (Denscombe, 2018). Through
analyzing the different units and comparing their frequency and relation to one another, the
analysis becomes more sophisticated and allows the researcher to reveal information that may at
first not have been noticed (ibid).
The themes are directly originating from the interview guide designed based on the aim and
research questions. Drivers, challenges, positive implications, and the three sustainability
dimensions were classified to identify vital sub-themes analyzed through the theoretical
framework. The sub-themes derive from keywords explicitly mentioned in the interviews. The
32

17 SDGs presented in the literature review have defined the three sustainability dimensions
identified by Campbell, providing the framework to thematically organize the interviews (see
table 10 for definitions). The following codes have been sorted and summarized in preparation
Chapter 6. Analysis & Findings.
33

Table 10. Summary of codebook.
Themes and sub-themes Definition Example
Drivers Factors potentially causing the “The labor market also demands it, as it has
growth of coliving identified by become more common for people to work in
- housing shortage informants. project form and therefore need to be in
- market gaps different places for a shorter time and be
- demand for able to move easily.” (Author’s translation,
community Interviewee 5, 2020-12-8)

Challenges Potential problems and “If it is a large area with many coliving, or any
difficulties with coliving small-size apartments, then relocation is
- lack of identified by informants. likely greater and there may be less stability.”
standardization (Author’s translation, Interviewee 1,
- discimination 2020-11-22)
- transient housing
Positive implications Potential positive effects from “I view it positively on the basis that there will
coliving on a micro, meso and be greater diversity in the housing market.
- diversified housing macro level identified by More people will be able to more easily find
stock informants. an accommodation that is suitable and
- neighbourhood affordable. So, as a complement, I only see
engagement benefits” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 1,
- social capital 2020-11-22)
Social Sustainability Statements about human "And with the trust that exists, you get great
welfare, justice, rights, power and opportunities because everyone knows
- social capital individual needs referenced by different things and do different things and
- diversity interviewee. Defined by the 17 yeah, we all have different networks and
- discrimination SGDs (UN, 2017). lives”
(Author’s translation, Interviewee 2,
2020-12-1)
Environmental Statements about emissions and “If people live in a smaller space, they will buy
Sustainability consumption production, and less stuff because they don't have a place to
energy- and water saving and put it. And they will be more considerate of
- sustainable lifestyle ecological values referenced by their purchases.“ (Interviewee 3, 2020-12-2).
- sharing interviewee. Defined by the 17
- less consumption SGDs (UN, 2017).
Economic Sustainability Statements about economic “Spaces where like, local businesses and
growth strategies referenced by people can set up pop-up shops, or they can
- local economic interviewee. Defined by the 17 teach there, so you're boosting the local
value SGDs (UN, 2017). economy.” (Interviewee 3, 2020-12-2).
- property conflicts
- business model
34

4.5 Reflections
Everyone perceives the world differently based on certain assumptions and ideas about the
world. Whether a phenomenon is studied by natural or social scientists, individual perceptions
about the world will to some extent be based on presumptions, rather than unfiltered
observations (Farthing, 2016). Allemdinger (2002) argues that all research includes a subjective
element to some extent since “All theory is to greater or lesser degrees normative, i.e., suffused
with values and embedded within a social and historical context” (Farthing, 2016:17). Values,
and how they help shape the research process, is, hence, vital to account for to understand
relationships between the researcher and the research (ibid). In this case, the curiosity for
coliving originates from a personal concern for environmental issues and the knowledge and
understanding gained throughout my studies within human geography, sociology and
environmental studies. These values have steered this inquiry, and several previous research
projects, to investigate sustainability within urban planning.
The primary data collected from the interviews help strengthen the validity and reliability of this
study. Through the first-hand contact with the interviewees, the relevance of the data can be
checked during the conversation and controlled after. Consequently, the risk of collecting
inaccurate information before the analysis reduces. Interviews are particularly useful for
small-scale research projects (such as this bachelor’s thesis) that are limited by time and
resources, as it provides valuable depth for the researcher in the exploration of the subject
(Denscombe, 2018). A limitation with the stakeholder interview method is nonetheless the
generalizability of the findings. The answers can not be compared equally to one another as the
different informants have different roles and relationships to the subject. On one hand, this
enables a broader understanding to answer the research question. But it can reduce reliability as
the responses are not comparable, i.e. coliving operators or planners with different roles. It could
increase the integrity of the study by interviewing multiple representatives of each "role" to
compile added data from each perspective. This reasoning was a motive to conduct a second
interview with a coliving resident from K9. Having two data sets to compare deepens the
analysis and delivers more reliability on the conclusions.
35

A stakeholder that could have been included in hindsight is the real estate perspective. Coliving
operators often work closely with real estate developers and owners, interviewing with a
representative could have added depth to how coliving affects urban environments. Nonetheless,
there are previous studies on coliving that focus on the role of real estate (i.e. Steding 2019,
Karpmyr & Landkvist 2019, Almgren & Melander 2020). The priority was instead to relate the
subject to urban planning, as no such study was found. Rather than bringing in real estate
prospects, the document analysis of Stockholm city’s master plan was selected as it was
considered to bring a more foundational understanding of how coliving can be an alternative
housing form to prevailing housing solutions on the market.
Despite this reflection of identified limitations of this study, there are both strengths and
weaknesses to the selected research design, methods and material. This study intends to
contribute to a research gap about the implications of coliving in a planning context: the
aspiration has been balancing between width through including multiple stakeholders, and depth
through the semi-structured interviews and document analysis. There will always be alternative
approaches to analyzing qualitative data. Using a different method to investigate the meaning of
identified themes could have been achieved by conducting a critical discourse analysis. This may
have provided more depth, yet the thematic analysis method chosen in this study was considered
more relevant for the aim and research questions. Due to the efficiency of identifying recurring
themes and patterns, and key factors, rather than the implicit meaning reaped by deconstructing
text in discourse analysis (Denscombe 2018).
36

5 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS
This section presents the six major themes, with sub-themes, identified from the coding of the
data as follows; Drivers, Challenges, Positive Implications, Social Sustainability, Environmental
Sustainability, and Economic Sustainability. The three first themes outline the structure of this
chapter followed by an analysis of the sustainability implications. The main empirical findings
are analyzed through the lens of the theoretical framework presented in Chapter 3.
5.1 The Housing Situation In Stockholm
Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, has the highest population in the country of 974,000 people
(Stockholms stad, 2020) with an expected 1.3 million inhabitants in 2040 (Stockholms stad,
2018). Internationally, Stockholm is ranked high for its innovative capacities, life quality, and
secure social systems attracting students, professionals, and other populations to launch their
lives in the city (ibid).The European Digital City Index (EDCi, 2016) ranks Stockholm 2nd best
out of 60 cities for startups based on the high number of success stories within entrepreneurship,
highly skilled workforce and strong government and public funding for innovation. Regarding
sustainability efforts, Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index (2016) ranks Stockholm 3rd among 100
global cities based on present and future social, environmental and economic plans (Stockholms
stad, 2016).
While there are positives to the attractiveness of Stockholm, such as the local and regional
economic development, negative consequences accompany this growth. In Stockholm city’s
master plan, two main issues are stressed: the need for housing and the need to expand existing
infrastructure (such as roads and public transit) to meet present and future demands (Stockholms
stad, 2018). The city has experienced a housing shortage for decades (Emanuelsson, 2015) and
rents for rental apartments have increased more than 70 percent over the last 10 years (Boverket,
2018a). There is a gap between the population development and the number of completed
37

dwellings and in 2018, the population growth doubled the number of houses entering the market
(see figure 10). According to the European Commission (2019), the average monthly rental rate
in Stockholm is among the highest in Europe, even though the circumstances are similar in other
major European cities. As housing is a fundamental aspect of a functioning city for individuals
and society, an uncertain housing market also provokes stress in many people’s lives (Boverket
2018b).
Figure 11. Historical and expected population development and the number of completed
dwellings (red: population development, yellow: completed dwellings, grey: prognosis)
(Boverket, 2018).
By 2030, 140,000 houses will have to be built in Stockholm, however, with the expected
population growth, the need for increased housing supply will most likely continue after this
(Stockholms stad, 2018). As seen in Figure 11, the current housing development shows little
promise to close the gap between the number of houses developed and the added demand from
populations migrating into the city (Boverket, 2018a). This challenge creates a unique
opportunity for Stockholm to leverage long-term sustainability that achieves critical social,
economic and environmental targets (Stockholms stads, 2018). In line with national
sustainability objectives, Stockholm has set the goal to become a fossil-free city by 2040 to limit
global warming under 2°C degrees before the year 2100 (European Commission, 2020).
38

In Stockholm city’s master plan, the necessity of densification and mixed-use is highlighted,
with a rising need for space to be used more effectively. Besides the economic and social
benefits of a mixed-use urban environment (Fainstein, 2016), this strategy is necessary to cope
with segregation issues in the city (Stockholms stad, 2018). The document highlights the need to
diversify the housing stock to contribute to more diverse and less segregated neighbourhoods
(ibid). In combination with the high volume of single-person households in Stockholm, this
points to a requirement for alternative housing forms (see appendix 6). More than 40 percent of
homes are occupied by just one person and among this group; the young and elderly population
constitute a majority (SCB, 2019a). There is a necessity to target young adults and the elderly
through housing plans. Simultaneously, the municipality of Stockholm must ensure livable and
affordable housing for all, while striving towards limiting the ecological impact from the
construction of homes.
Stockholm municipality makes no explicit mention of coliving in their master plan, yet planning
targets aligned with the principles of coliving exist. Such as the need to diversify the housing
stock, reduce climate impact and increase integration and diversity in neighbourhoods
(Stockholms stad, 2018). To this date, there are few coliving housing units in Stockholm, but the
number is growing (Fastighetsvärlden, 2020). The table below provides an overview of the main
coliving operators identified by the researcher.
Table 12. Commercial Coliving spaces in Stockholm. (Hafström, 2020)
Nr. Name Operator Location Opening Min. rent in swedish

date kronor
(services included)
1 K9 Tech Kommendörsgatan 9, 2016 6000

Farm Stockholm
2 Colive Lab Colive Nytorgsgatan 44, April 2019 8030

Stockholm
3 Parkstråket Colive Örnens väg 1, Handen November 5990

2020
4 U25 Colive Agavägen 40, Lidingö, November 7480
39

Sweden 2020

5 Dalenum Allihoop Agavägen, Lidingö September 8990

Place 2020
6 Kransen Allihoop Vårgatan 4, Hägersten September 8490

Icons 2020
7 Södra 20-30 Södra Långgatan 19, October 7900

Långgatan 19 Solna 2020
5.2 Drivers
5.2.1 Demand for Housing Diversification
“[...] I think the housing shortage is behind it. It is so difficult for young people to enter the housing
market and so this is a way to get a bit more affordable rents and a form of housing that probably a lot of
younger people appreciate.” ( Author’s translation, Interviewee 1, 2020)
All five interviews brought light to the housing crisis as a driving force to the development of
coliving. The need to solve the unbalanced situation is also emphasized by the city of Stockholm
in the master plan which outlines that “the ambition is to densify the urban environment through
building new houses as a complement in every part of Stockholm” (Stockholm city, 2018). The
need for large investments in more homes of different sizes, lease forms and housing types
expresses in the document as a necessity to solve the crisis (ibid). The planner from Stockholm
city reinforced the information in the planning documents and stated that “We consider the
question of segregation and mixed-use, we try to create a mixture of tenancies throughout the
city.” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 1, 2020).
The interviewees shared different perspectives on the topic, but a common inference was that
coliving is primarily serving as a complement to the housing market. The planner from
Stockholms city expressed that“There are probably very few in planning who think any of these
alternative forms of housing will be dominant.” (Author's translation, Interviewee 1, 2020). The
coliving operator confirms that they do not see coliving becoming mainstream, but rather “
it's
40

more like we try to solve a piece of the housing puzzle.” and adds, “let's say that all of the
residences that are being built, let's say that 10% of the space should be always coliving, then we
can make an impact.” (Interviewee 4, 2020).
5.2.2 Market Gaps
The founder at Allihoop explains that there are existing “gaps” in the housing market, which real
estate developers and coliving entrepreneurs are catching up with. This can be interpreted as an
indicator towards post-carbon urban transitions as Chatterton (2013) stresses. Moving away from
fossil fuel dependency involves making communities centred around environmental and social
values more replicable. The coliving operator states that no collaborations with local
municipalities have taken place but that there are interest and hope for shared projects in the
future. He explains that more than 2,000 people in Stockholm have registered interest in their
coliving apartments but, due to a lack of properties and uncertainty about the location of future
projects, there is still higher demand than supply. “I think that if we are in a project from the
beginning with a city, then we can do some amazing things'' Interviewee 4 (2020) mentions and
emphasizes that they could create more homes for people through being part of housing plans
from the start. Increasing numbers of research projects (i.e. Akademiska hus, 2020) and financial
investments going into coliving (Fastighetsvärlden, 2020) can nonetheless be considered as
growing demand for community housing. Despite being responsible for major greenhouse gas
emissions, finding a common ground with the industrial sector to scale up community housing
could be a way to accelerate the transition towards post-carbon cities (Chatterton, 2013).
The interviewees illustrate this market gap in different ways. The coliving consultant explains
that “[...] There are so many different types of coliving models out there that are serving slightly
different people or people who would like slightly different things.” (Interviewee 3, 2020). One
coliving resident emphasizes the high percentage of single households in Stockholm and states
that coliving “Is the ultimate solution to that problem, which is living with more people in a
community” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 2, 2020). There are many different coliving
spaces, which creates potential difficulties for planners to incorporate coliving into housing
strategies. Nevertheless, the variation of the housing form enables coliving to be tailored to the
41

demands of different demographics and geographical contexts. Consequently, coliving can be

shaped to directly address the high single-housing numbers rather than pulling consumers from
non-single households.
The coliving consultant points out that the growing sharing economy and trend towards renting is
a driving force:“If they’re going to rent, they want a really nice rent experience. So that’s part
of what coliving is offering.” (Interviewee 3, 2020). Besides community, the demand for a higher
quality rent experience entails the need for increased convenience and flexibility as the coliving
resident adds;
“People want flexibility! There is a need for flexibility in housing as people live more flexible lives. The
labor market is also demanding it, as it has become more common for people to work in project form and
therefore a need to be in different places for a shorter time and be able to move easily.” (Author’s
translation, Interviewee 5, 2020).
In response to the old “business-as-usual” way of developing housing, cohousing emerged,

offering accessibility, affordability and economic equality (Chatterton, 2013). Similarly,
elements of sharing in coliving provide people with more conveniences and flexibility without
having to pay expensive rental prices for living in urban areas (Interviewee 3, 2020). With an
increasingly mobile workforce, Interviewee 4 (2020) comments:
“I think it just comes as a natural need to live temporarily, but not a hotel, or a boring long-stay or like
some unsure Airbnb. (...) It's more like wanting to go to a place where you feel like, okay, here I can be
part of something, I can launch my life, get a good start.” (Interviewee 4, 2020).
5.2.3 Isolation and demand for belonging
Isolation, and the damaging nature of loneliness, is highlighted by the interviewees. This
problem can be related to the desire for community mentioned as a driving factor in all
interviews. People are also forming families later in life, causing focus to shift towards more
professional and social life instead. As interviewee 4 (2020) describe, “there's this thing that
people always say about millennials, valuing experiences over things.”, which can be related to
the word “belonging” brought up by both coliving residents - “people are seeking a feeling of
42

belonging and purpose” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 2, 2020). It indicates that millennials
and generation Z, who constitute the target groups in coliving housing (Steding, 2019), prefer
coliving for the social values that are less achievable through single-household apartments.
Likewise, this can be connected to Bourdieu’s (1985) theory as belonging and purpose are values
that qualify as social capital credited through a group or community.
The founder of Allihoop describes coliving as a way to“challenge the status quo” (Interviewee
4), as it questions the way housing is developed and operated. Before launching the startup, the
founder worked within architecture, giving rise to an awareness that housing often lacks focus on
the residential experience. Consequently, this became a personal driver to begin shaping a
housing form where people and life quality are in focus, as the interviewee describes it;
“And we started thinking about unlocking new homes, or as soon as possible, creating more community
driven homes for people so that we can actually solve a problem rather than creating a cool product that
is convenient.” (Interviewee 4, 2020).
Chatterton (2013) notes that community living has yet to find a way to align with planning.
Similarly stated above by the coliving operator, to ensure democratic structures of the
communities and that the sustainability benefits are distributed in society, strategies for
replicating the concept in different types of neighbourhoods is critical. Governance frameworks
increased funding and collaboration with municipalities are therefore necessary. Another way to
integrate coliving spaces into existing communities is through collaborations with multinational
corporations (Chatterton, 2013).
5.3 Potential Challenges
5.3.1 Size, Mixed-Use and Diversity
The coliving consultant from Conscious Coliving states that“The interesting thing is that there
are so many different types of coliving models out there that are serving slightly different people
or people who would like slightly different things.” (Interviewee 3, 2020) and that the number of
residents ranges from a few individuals to hundreds. The challenge with increased size and large
43

clusters of coliving spaces is maintaining the connection and community, avoiding the
experience of anonymity that can transpire in groups larger than 10, ensuring a diversity of
tenants. She explains that if a coliving space consists of 500 people and each room is a studio
with a kitchenette, but there is also a communal kitchen that is “massive [...] then it's not very
likely that people will be coming there to cook together” (Interviewee 3, 2020). The risk with
larger coliving spaces is the potential loss of social capital when a size threshold surpasses.
Although geographical proximity is an aspect that increases access to social capital, transforming
acquaintances into meaningful relationships requires active efforts that bring people together
(Bourdieu, 1985).
The inherent benefits from densification of already developed properties are not only
environmental (in terms of reduced resource use per capita) but also economical (Campbell,
2016). This causes conflict between social and economic interests when coliving developers
prioritize short-term economic growth and returns. The coliving consultant explains that some
projects in the UK have been paused due to their large scale plans with hundreds of people living
together;
“There's a real danger as well that developers come in who don't really care about the community side,
they see like, here's a potential for profit, we will say that it's going to be a place that promotes
community but they won't put in the resources and the work needed to actually try and facilitate that
community developing.” (Interviewee 3, 2020).
In line with this, Interviewee 5 (2020) mentions that a big problem is concerned with developers
focused on short-term economic growth and returns. “They want to solve the housing crisis and
get a quick return on investments and build on a large scale, but fail to deliver what people are
actually looking for, and it's community.” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 5, 2020). As
reinforced by the interviewees, the business proposal that the coliving housing model offers
entails higher rental margins through an increased number of tenants in a building;
“So part of the reason that coliving is such a good business proposition is because of the increased
density, you're packing a greater amount of people into a smaller amount of space.” (Interviewee 3,
2020)
44

This aspect attracts the real estate sector but can cause arising social problems and lack of
community. The planning conflicts Campbell (1996) depicts between social and economic
interest can be seen here. Social and economic values are in a dispute where values such as social
capital are prioritized rather than squeezing hundreds of people into a building for the sake of
economic surplus.
Another conflict coliving face in terms of social sustainability is ensuring diversity without
discrimination. The coliving consultant mentions that a process of induction where coliving
operators arrange interviews with potential tenants commonly occur. “Often, operators are
looking for people who are interested in having a social life within the building” (Interviewee 3,
2020). The coliving operator comments that there are some values they look for in potential
tenants,“We look at engagement and commitment. We also look at ambition”. Different coliving
actors are more or less nisched, and while Allihoop focuses on young professionals who are new
to the city, the coliving consultant explains that each operator may value the management of the
social dynamic differently (Interviewee 3, 2020). The risk of discrimination that can occur in the
selection process must nonetheless be accentuated. One of the K9 residents mentions that there
are discussions about how the induction processes can be made as fair as possible, as it may
otherwise contravene the Discrimination Act (Interviewee 5, 2020). This connects to Campbells
(2016) point on the risk of creating gentrification when housing- and neighbourhood
redevelopment takes place and attracts certain groups of residents to a new area. As coliving
evolves in the Stockholm region, the induction process of residents must be transparent and
inclusive to reduce the risk of creating segregation of homogenous communities of people with
similar cultural, socio-economic, cultural and ethnic backgrounds.
To ensure diversity of people in the building is one aspect, creating a dynamic neighbourhood
through a mixed-use urban environment with a diversity of housing forms is another one brought
up by the planner, “As a complement, I only see benefits with Coliving. If it becomes very
extensive, then maybe there could be worrying issues, but that applies to all types of housing”
(Author’s translation, Interviewee 1, 2020). The interviewee used the example of elderly homes;
when one age-group is isolated, that may create a neighbourhood with little or the same type of
45

activity. The coliving consultant confirms that it can be difficult to integrate coliving spaces into
a neighbourhood when people have the prejudices of young people who will cause noise, trouble
and be transient, whilst only living there temporarily. From incidents of this nature, coliving has
been banned in Ireland and planned coliving projects in the UK are halted (Interviewee 3, 2020).
On the contrary, limiting students and temporary residents would also make it an exclusive
housing form. Akademiska Hus (2020) similarly notes that the challenge and success of coliving
lie in the balance between gathering groups of like-minded people while ensuring inclusivity.
Connected to the Planner's Triangle (Campbell, 1996), a planning challenge is to understand how
resources can be distributed fairly between coliving spaces and other housing forms to help solve
the housing shortage while maintaining a mixture of tenure forms.
While coliving is illustrated as a viable solution to the housing crisis (Steding, 2019), interviewee
3 (2020) mentions hesitations rooted in the fear that after coliving spaces are built, the building
may be abandoned, filled with rooms that are difficult to use for other types of housing. The
urban planner reinforces that constructing clusters of small apartments creates an increased risk
of “greater relocation, greater wear and tear, (...) you get a much more homogeneous
population” ( Author’s translation, Interviewee 1, 2020). He raises the importance of creating
homes that are not only space-efficient but durable, “We need to build high quality homes as
well. [...] if you take it too far by reducing quality and size to create somewhere to live, then
that’s not a long-term solution.” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 1, 2020). The coliving
consultant asks, “What happens after the building has stopped being used for coliving?”, raising
implications on resource efficiency in the long run.
In this question of densification of land-use, economic and environmental interests often clash
(Campbell, 2016). Coliving can be comprehended in this context as another tool that enables
planners to use the existing housing stock more efficiently, while ensuring economic
sustainability through the increased number of tenants (Interviewee 3, 2020).
46

5.3.2 Stigmatization and Lack of Standardization
A difficulty arising when discussing coliving with the planner is the lack of a common definition
of coliving and inconsistent perceptions of “shared housing”. Similarly to the vagueness of
sustainability and what it entails in practical urban plans (Campbell, 2016), the lack of a common
understanding of coliving acts as a barrier for planners in their discipline. This issue has been
recognized by others in existing literature (i.e. Steding, 2019) and explains the lack of existing
research that involves the term coliving along with the absence of the coliving as a term in
Stockholm city’s master plan (Stockholms stad, 2018).
The second coliving resident mentions the importance of developing a zoning type for coliving
to integrate it into municipal detail-plans (Interviewee 5, 2020). As the planner from Stockholm
city explains, coliving is not planned for on the municipal level. Due to the lack of
standardization, it is difficult to plan a coliving space and understand how it will integrate into a
neighbourhood. While this could be understood from the standpoint that coliving is a form of
community living and that each “community” has its own unique set of rules, values and
systems, (Interviewee 3, 2020), from a planning perspective, the lack of cohesiveness could be a
reason it is difficult to communicate and advocate for coliving. Similar problems are experienced
by cohousing communities, which highlights Chattertons (2013) point out that community
housing models must be defined to be replicable in other areas.
5.4 Positive Implications of Findings
When asked about the positive effects of coliving, one of the interviewees laughs and says “Oh,
this will take a long time. There is no end to that question!”. Overall, the interviewees have a
positive attitude towards coliving and the potentials it brings, although as identified, there are
challenges that arise as the housing form evolves. The opportunities with coliving are analyzed
through Bourdieu's (1985) social capital theory.
47

5.4.1 Social capital: exchanged values through networks
Connected to Bourdieu’s (1985) theory about social capital, individuals that live in a community
have access to resources that are connected to a network as described in the interviews.
“The great possibilities are that when you live with someone, a trust in each other is created that
automatically comes from sharing life in this way. And with that trust, there’s great opportunities because
just as we know different things and we do different things, we have different networks and lives.”
(Author’s translation, Interviewee 2, 2020).
One coliving resident explains everyone gains access to each other’s social and professional
networks through shared living. She explains that this allows people to share knowledge, ideas
and competencies. The informant describes the struggles of moving to a new city, with
difficulties integrating into new cultural, social- or professional settings. The word “trust” is
emphasized as the result of a successful community at K9, and the resident adds “It’s a greater
closeness to everything that exists in society through that trust” (Author’s translation,
Interviewee 2, 2020). Through cultivating mutual trust in coliving, it is easier to access social-
and business networks (Interviewee 2, 2020), which are examples of social capital. Confirming
Bourdeiu’s (1986) idea that the volume of social capital depends on the size of the network,
similarly does the volume of economic, cultural or symbolic capital possessed through coliving.
The interviewee explains that activities and engagement transpire when unrelated people get
together and share their experiences, knowledge and ideas, as possibilities are greater when
people live together “Because there's more of you to give energy and passion to something.”
(Interviewee 3, 2020). She mentions that it is not surprising to see a coliving community set up a
local market or community gardening. The founder of Allihoop confirms that activities such as
dinners, group workouts and events are initiated both by the community and the operator. This
illustrates Bourdieu’s (1985) theory that networks are not necessarily naturally or socially
formed, but are the result of efforts and investment strategies intended to reproduce durable
social relationships.
“There is diversity. Not only in ethnicity, income and types of individuals, but also diversity in other types
of resources. There are different types of rooms in different price ranges, there are different people from
48

different parts of the world, people with different types of views on life and different ages. Diversity in a
multitude of areas and in interaction and cooperation.” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 5, 2020).
When coliving is available in a variety of forms in terms of room size, rent, and activities, it
facilitates a range of people to interact. Seen from Bourdieu's (1985) lens, opportunities for
people to gain, not only social support systems but also professional networks, can be connected
to the diversity of residents as expressed above by one of the coliving residents. The coliving
operator explains that there is a broad diversity of nationalities in their apartments. He mentions
that in one location of 25 residents, there are approximately 10 different nationalities
(Interviewee 4, 2020). The interviewed coliving residents also highlight that the relationships
formed through shared housing go beyond age, class, gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic status
(Interviewee 2, 2020).
Despite the economic and demographic growth in Stockholm, segregation is increasing.

Consequently, fewer people with different backgrounds are interacting (Stockholms stad, 2018).
Although Stockholm wants to be “A city for everyone” (ibid), no practical strategy to tackle
segregation presents. With increased diversity of people living together, planning tensions linked
to the distribution of resources, opportunities, and services that exist between groups,
communities, and neighbourhoods in Stockholm could be resolved more fairly (Campbell, 2016).
The question is if urban sustainability strategies could integrate coliving to mix different
demographics to halt growing separation. Campbell (2016) may agree, yet emphasizes the
importance of dividing resources more equally throughout the city.
5.4.2 Environmental benefits of sharing
“What it is, is sustainability.”, one of the residents at K9 declared when asked to define coliving.
He referred to it as an opportunity to live more sustainably (Interviewee 4, 2020). The other
resident expresses that “I think there are more “sustainability-conscious” people living in
collectives, who are passionate about environmental and humanitarian issues and so forth.”
(Author’s translation, Interviewee 2, 2020). The coliving operator explains that sustainability
values are communicated both in a top-down and bottom-up way, but that most suggestions are
initiated by the tenants. The interviewee states that “One thing that we notice is that 95% of our
49

tenants are very aware of sustainability and climate issues and so they take their own
initiatives.” (Interviewee 4, Allihoop, 2020).
Figure 13. Overall CO2e kgs per household per year. (Coliving Insights, 2020).
From previous literature and the interviews performed, it is clear that sharing is fundamental to
the concept of coliving. One of the K9 residents explains that it “fosters a minimalist lifestyle”
(Author’s translation, Interviewee 5, 2020) since different belongings are shared. It can be
conceded as another social capital that emerges from community living (Bourdieu, 1985).
Similarly, the other resident adds that “It requires less individual resources when people live
together, so it is a lot more energy-efficient.” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 2, 2020). This
aligns with the findings of Akademiska Hus (2020). The research concludes that shared
consumption reduces everyday resource use per person through shared transportation resources
such as car- and bike pools, or shared belongings. From measuring carbon footprint, waste,
energy usage and daily habits of two cohousing and two coliving spaces, Penny Clark also finds
that housing emits about half of the emissions of an average UK household (see figure 13)
(Coliving Insights, 2020).
50

The environmental benefits of coliving are primarily rooted in the densification of space that
occurs when people reduce their individual space in exchange for larger communal spaces. The
coliving consultant specifies that reduced numbers of washing machines, toilets and cooking
appliances that are needed cause instant emission reductions. They, and one of the K9 residents,
make a point that “they will buy less stuff because they don’t have a place to put it. And they will
be more considerate of their purchases, generally speaking” (Interviewee 3, 2020). The
interviewee also states that whether the communities have intended to be more “sustainable” or
not, a culture around the values of environmental sustainability frequently emerges. She explains
that if someone in the community prefers a vegan diet, then it is more common that the shared
meals will be vegan as it reduces social friction from having to make five separate meals. She
illustrates the point with an example:
“If I know my neighbour goes to a lot of effort to cycle. So
then when I look at my car, I think, oh, maybe I should make the effort as well.” (Interviewee 4,
2020).
5.4.3 Potential Positive Externalities of Coliving in Neighbourhoods
One of the residents at K9 explains that the positive effects of ‘community capital’ (the
combined social, cultural capital) of a coliving space have the potential to be transferred to local
neighbourhoods. There are many examples of coliving actors abroad that have adopted a
“neighbourhood engagement plan”. It is a strategy used to target positive ways that the coliving
can integrate into the local neighbourhood (Coliving Insights, 2020). The resident explains that
“The idea is to create a spillover effect so that the residential area around coliving housing has
access to the social and environmental sustainability created in coliving housing.” (Author’s
translation, Interviewee 5, 2020). While no neighbourhood plans were found on the Swedish
coliving spaces webpages, the resident states that there is a lot to learn from international
coliving actors and highlights that it should be planned for “so that the positive things that are
created in our community are shared with others.” (Author’s translation, Interviewee 5, 2020).
Increasing spillover effects allows for social community benefits to be extended (Chatterton,
2013). Going beyond the advantages reaped by the individual inhabitants could make coliving
more attractive on political and economic standpoints since benefits extend past the consumers
of coliving
51

5.4.4 Reducing Vacant Space and Need For Construction
In the wake of the pandemic, the Central Business Districto f Stockholm has experienced an
increased vacancy rate. The real estate consultancy Savills (2020) notes the highest percentage of
vacant spaces in five years at 4.8% corresponding to 80,000 square meters of vacant space in the
city. Similarly, the coliving operator notes that “[...] the opportunities are everywhere, especially
now after the pandemic. So much office space is becoming vacant and available.” (Interviewee
4, 2020). He affirms that there is potential in solving parts of the housing crisis while reducing
the need to construct housing by using existing and vacant properties. The fact that vacancy rates
are increasing, indicates a mismatch between demand and supply of housing in Stockholm. It
shows that there is a supply of other kinds of property (i.e. office spaces) and as explained by the
founder of Allihoop, coliving could potentially restructure floor plans of buildings that may not
have been intended for housing at first through mixing private and common spaces. Seeking new
ways to manage properties abandoned by the crisis becomes more critical to make local
economies stay afloat, and as the coliving operator explains:“If there are hotels going bankrupt
now, can we help them somehow right? And we're working with two hotel operators to perhaps
take like half of the building and shape it into our concept.” (Interviewee 4, 2020).
Spatial conflicts related to land-use are fundamental to planning (Campbell, 2016) in which
different interests collide. In Stockholm city’s master plan, it is explained that the ambition is to
densify the city with new houses to meet the needs of a growing urban population (Stockholms
stad, 2018). Nonetheless, the method where existing properties can be utilized more efficiently
through shared housing is not discussed. Conventional planning solutions for housing shortage
have often translated into new development such as Miljonprogrammet (Boverket, 2010). From
an environmental planning perspective, the city is always in competition with nature for scarce
land and resources, and the consumer society is threatening the ability of the planet to regenerate
(Campbell, 2016). Considering ambitious climate targets of carbon neutrality by 2045
(Regeringskansliet, 2017) and achieving Agenda 2030 ( UN, 2017), creative solutions are needed
to resolve both issues. Chatterton (2013) also stresses that post-carbon urban initiatives have to
be broad-ranging, holistic and prepared to handle the complex challenges they face as they work
across existing institutional and governmental frameworks. Reaching Stockholm city’s goal of
52

building 140,000 new houses by 2030, demands more efficient space use to ensure vital
environmental qualities such as green belts, parks, water basins, and, ensuring the preservation of
ecological habitats (Stockholms stad, 2018). Alternatively, coliving could be a way to reduce the
increasing demand for new constructions by renovating and restructuring existing spaces.
5.5 Sustainability Analysis
The findings reveal a relationship between coliving and an increased possibility to live more
environmentally, socially and economically sustainable lives. Although, specifying what
sustainability means in the context of its use, how it can be measured and the conflicts that arise
between the three dimensions, as provided in Campbells (1996) Planner’s Triangle, is of
importance.
The long-run property development conflict highlighted by Campbell (1996) where economic
growth and equity are in dispute is seen in the development of coliving. If pure economic
interests rule, there are risks for large-scale coliving facilities developing solely to maximize
profit margins and property tax revenues without considering the social consequences. If
community facilitation (which is the basis for social capital evolving) and mixed-tenure forms
are not invested in as a result of prioritizing economic interests, coliving risks enhancing existing
segregation in Stockholm as homogenous clusters of people form. Real estate developers may
use coliving as a trendy concept to attract affluent residents to a new neighbourhood. This would
add to planning issues in Stockholm, such as gentrification, as long-term residents are pushed out
of an area with increased rents. A trade-off between private economic interests and the social
benefits arises, which relates to the idea that perpetual economic growth will trickle-down to
society and be redistributed. It is realistic to argue that such mechanisms are not always able to
occur naturally, reinforcing Chattertons (2013) idea that community housing must be
strategically incorporated within planning frameworks to deliver positive environmental and
social externalities to neighbourhoods and larger societies.
53

Like cohousing, the presented findings of the environmental sustainability of coliving can be
related to the dominating ecological modernization discourse in urban planning (Hagbert et. al,
2019). Framing coliving as a solution to the climate crisis fits into the idea that sustainability is
achievable without large scale systemic- and economic changes (Hall, 2014). This perception is
elusive as it rejects the interconnectivity of environmental issues by simplifying a global issue
into a local “spatial fix”: which is described by Campbell (2016) as “no geographic scale can, in
itself, eliminate all conflict, for not all conflict is geographic” (p.8). There are negative
implications to not including a social justice perspective when discussing this, as greenhouse gas
emissions to a large extent stem from the unsustainable lifestyles of affluent minorities, such as
in countries like Sweden (Kaijser & Kronsell, 2013). From an intersectional perspective, if not
incorporated into society, coliving spaces could cultivate environmental elitism, which defeats
the purposes of accelerating a systemic shift towards post-carbon cities (Chatterton, 2013). In
coliving, the degree of socio-economic diversity that is desired, in theory, may not be feasible in
its application due to its trendy nature and therefore fragility to be affiliated with socio-economic
exclusivity.
54

6 FINAL DISCUSSION
This bachelor’s thesis aimed to explore coliving within an urban sustainability planning context
to identify challenges and positive implications as a complement to the housing market. Five
in-depth interviews with key-stakeholders, Stockholm city’s master plan, and previous literature
were analysed through the theoretical lens of Chatterton, Bourdieu, and Campbell to examine
coliving as a method of planning for sustainable housing. The driving factors, challenges, and
positive implications of coliving have been situated in the case of Stockholm to provide an
analysis and answer the aim and research questions. The findings demonstrate the sustainability
advantages and conflicts with coliving and identify negative implications that must be addressed
for the longevity of this housing form. The main benefits include reduced carbon footprint,
increased social-emotional connection, and a solution to a part of the housing crisis. By
answering the research questions, the findings demonstrate how this study illustrates coliving as
a method of achieving social, environmental, and economic urban sustainability goals.
In what way does coliving affect sustainability in urban environments?

− What are the main qualities of coliving?
− What factors are driving the current development of coliving?
− What are challenges and positive implications with coliving?
− How can the concept of coliving be operationalized in urban sustainability strategies?
From previous research and the conclusions drawn from the analysis, the main qualities of
coliving can summarize as sharing, flexibility, and mobility. It is found that sustainable habits
and behaviours more easily cultivate in a coliving through sharing of space and belongings. This
study suggests that minimalism and sustainability values can be incorporated as central qualities
of the concept. Planning documents from Stockholm city and key stakeholders show that
coliving has developed in response to the housing market disequilibrium. With a shift from
55

ownership to renting, a rental experience that meets the desire for community, social capital,
convenience, and belonging can also be considered driving factors. Additionally, the challenges
that arise with coliving concerns size and the number of residents living together. Finding
synergies between coliving operators and municipalities can be a way to ensure that the positive
aspects of coliving are enhanced. Encouraging community building without discrimination in the
induction process has been highlighted as another challenge. Likewise, the negative implications
of transience are obstacles planners and coliving operators must find aligned solutions to.
When coliving is offered in a variety of forms, the positive implications are many; social capital,
diversity, social, cultural and professional integration as mentioned by coliving residents. By
standardizing and integrating coliving into local planning strategies, the findings show potential
positive externalities that can spread to local neighbourhoods. Coliving offers an additional
method for transforming vacant properties into housing by restructuring existing floor plans by
mixing private and common spaces. Examples of coliving operators transforming abandoned
hotels or emptied offices are highlighted as potential local economic opportunities that
concurrently reduce the need for new resources in the building process. Alternatively, coliving
could reduce the ever-growing demand for new housing expansions and contribute to
environmental targets through reduced greenhouse gas emissions. In an urban planning context,
establishing a shared definition is crucial to overcome planning hesitations and develop
standardizations of coliving. As the analysis demonstrates, governance frameworks are required
to balance all three sustainability dimensions as there are examples where either one or two, of
the interests, are prioritized but not all three.
6.1 Future Research
This study investigated the driving factors, challenges and positive implications of coliving to
understand how it relates to the current sustainability paradigm in planning and affects urban
areas. The findings indicate the need to explore the housing form further in a planning context.
Coliving was studied in the context of Stockholm, which limits the findings, since certain
geographical circumstances may not apply to another location. Replicating this study in other
cities could produce a more ubiquitous understanding of other geographical drivers,
56

opportunities and challenges connected to coliving. Investigating cases where coliving was
banned can also yield valuable knowledge for urban planning. Likewise, defining best practices
to improve coliving models would help steer coliving operators towards more sustainable
practices. The finds raise awareness about potential positive externalities that can contribute to
neighbourhoods. Future research could measure these effects through methods such as survey
questionnaires distributed to coliving residents and neighbours. More specific measurements of
social sustainability and diversity of the residents in a coliving are of value to solidify the
information presented in this study.
6.2 Closing Statement
With these findings, we can conclude that coliving is a promising complement to the housing
market as it offers more socially connected, lower carbon intensive, and affordable ways of
living rooted in community and values of sharing. By establishing a shared definition of coliving
that appeals to the need of a broader population, we can construct a societal foundation of
community driven progress that accelerates the transition towards post-carbon cities. The lack of
knowledge about what coliving offers enables prejudices against potentially beneficial living
environments and life experiences. By closing the knowledge gap, coliving can more readily
become a standardized form of housing that benefits both communities and the planet.
Additionally, through stimulating the coliving movement, sustainable living practices can
permeate the mainstream, and demands for attainable modern housing solutions can be met.
Looking at where there is an excess supply of wasted vacant properties or inefficiently allocated
housing, planning authorities could offer subsidies to renovation companies to incentivize them
to produce coliving units.
Aligning planning strategies with the development of these types of coliving spaces would
dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the housing sector. It would also provide
planners with another tool to create equitable housing and integrate segregated areas by offering
multiple living options. Ethically developing coliving communities would require vigilance
against gentrifying tactics that enable profit-first mindsets. Replicable institutionalized
frameworks that prioritize specific holistic views of sustainability must be authorised now to
57

ensure that coliving housing can have the maximum benefit on interconnected neighbourhoods in
an increasingly interconnected world. As a nexus for sustainability education and cultural
exchange, coliving could in time spread crucial values and practices through the lives of the
people who benefited from the opportunities it offered. The unique solutions to the climate and
housing crises offered by coliving, and its positive externalities, necessitates government funding
in the future. By utilizing the untapped potential of coliving in urban planning, this could
revolutionize the way that we approach some of the biggest challenges of our generation.

58

7 REFERENCES
Addeo, F. Paoli, D. A. (2019) Assessing the SGDs: A Methodology to Measure Sustainability.

Athens Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 6, Issue 3. pp. 229-250.
https://doi.org/10.30958/ajss.6-3-4
Akademiska Hus. (2020). Framtidens delade boende - En rapport om hållbarhet i livsstil och
ccessed 22-12-2020 from
bostad. A
https://www.akademiskahus.se/globalassets/dokument/tekniska-publikationer--bilder/framtidens
_delade_boende_2020-webb_enkelsidig.pdf
Allihoop. (2020). Locations. Accessed 7-12-2020 from https://www.allihoop.se/
Almgren, M. & Melander, L. (2020). Co-living Real Estate in Sweden: A new investment
opportunity. M.S thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1439971
Bergan, T. L., Gorman-Murray, A. & Power, R. E. (2019) Coliving housing: home cultures of
ydney: Taylor & Francis Group.
precarity for the new creative class. S
https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2020.1734230
Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology
of Education, ed. JG Richardson, pp. 241-58. New York: Greenwood.
Boverket. (2010). Boendesegregation - orsaker och mekanismer. Appendix 1 to the report

“Socialt hållbar stadsutveckling - en kunskapsöversikt”. Accessed 31-12-2020 from
https://www.boverket.se/globalassets/publikationer/dokument/2010/bilaga-1.pdf
59

Boverket. (2018a). Rapport 2018:29, Uppdrag att följa utvecklingen på andrahandsmarknaden.

Accessed 18-11-2020 from
https://www.boverket.se/sv/om-boverket/publicerat-av-boverket/publikationer/2018/uppdrag-att-
folja-utvecklingen-pa-andrahandsmarknaden/
Boverket. (2018b). B
ehov av nya bostäder 2018–2025. Karlskrona: Boverket. Accessed
31-12-2020
https://www.boverket.se/globalassets/publikationer/dokument/2018/behov-av-nya-bostader-2018
_2025.pdf
Boverket. (2020).Utsläpp av växthusgaser från bygg- och fastighetssektorn. Accessed

3-01-2021
https://www.boverket.se/sv/byggande/hallbart-byggande-och-forvaltning/miljoindikatorer---aktu
ell-status/vaxthusgaser/
Bowen, G, A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. I Qualitative

Research Journal, 9 Iss: 2, pp. 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Campbell. S. (1996). Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities?: Urban Planning and the
Contradictions of Sustainable Development. Journal of the American Planning Association
(APA), 62:3, 296-312, DOI: 10.1080/01944369608975696
Campbell, S. (2016). The Planner’s Triangle Revisited: Sustainability and Evolution of a

Planning Ideal That Can’t Stand Still. Journal of the American Planning Association (APA), 8
2:4, pp. 388-397. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369608975696
Coliving Insights. (2020). Impact & Sustainability in Coliving. 3rd edition. Accessed 16-11-2020
from https://www.colivinginsights.com/publications/impact-and-sustainability-in-coliving
60

Conscious Coliving. (2020). About Conscious Coliving. Accessed 7-12-2020 from

https://www.consciouscoliving.com/about/
Chatterton, P. (2013). Towards an Agenda for Post-Carbon Cities: Lessons from Lilac, the UK’s
First Ecological, Affordable Cohousing Community. I nternational Journal of Urban and Regional
Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12009
Clark, P. (2017). Making Connections: the Narratives of Motivation for Moving to an

.S thesis, University of Surrey.https://westminster.academia.edu/PennyClark
Eco-community. M
Denscombe, M. (2018). Forskningshandboken: för småskaliga forskningsprojekt inom

samhällsvetenskaperna. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
EDCi. (2020). European Digital City Index 2016. Cities: Stockholm. A
https://digitalcityindex.eu/city/28
Emanuelsson, R. (2015).“Supply of housing in Sweden”. Financial Stability Department of the

Riksbank, Sveriges Riksbank Economic Review 2015:2. Retrieved 18-11-2020 from
http://archive.riksbank.se/Documents/Rapporter/POV/2015/2015_2/rap_pov_artikel_3_150917_
eng.pdf
European Commission. (2019). Eurostat – 2018 current market rents. Accessed 18-11-2020
from https://ec.europa.eu/

European Commission. (2020a). 2050 long-term strategy. A
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2050_en
European Commission. (2020b). Emissions monitoring & reporting. Accessed 18-11-2020 from
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/progress/monitoring_en/
61

Fainstein, S. S. & DeFilippis, J. (2016) Readings in Planning Theory. John Wiley & Sons,
ProQuest Ebook Central. Chapter 13: Spatial Justice and Planning.
ondon: SAGE publications.

Farthing, S. (2016). Research design in urban planning. L
Fastighetsvärlden. (2020). Wallenstam blir delägare i coliving-bolag. Accessed 3-1-2021 from

https://www.fastighetsvarlden.se/notiser/wallenstam-blir-delagare-i-coliving-bolag/
Forestier, O., Kim, E. R. (2020). Cherry-picking the Sustainable Development Goals: Goal
ustainable
prioritization by national governments and implications for global governance. S
Development, Volume 28. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2082
Fromm, Dd. (1991). Collaborative Communities. Cohousing, Central Living and Other New
Forms of Housing with Shared Facilities. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Hagbert, P, Larsen, HG, Thörn, H & Wasshede, C (2019) Contemporary Co-housing in Europe:
Towards Sustainable Cities? Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429450174
Hall, P. (2014). The City of the Tarnished Belle Époque. Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual
history of urban planning and design since 1880. 4th edition. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons,
Ltd. pp. 443-529
Interviewee 1. (2020). Interview with urban planner at Stockholms Stad. Ulrika Hafström.
2020-11-22.
Interviewee 2. (2020). Interview with coliving resident at K9. Ulrika Hafström. 2020-12-1.
Interviewee 3. (2020). Interview with a coliving consultant at Conscious Coliving. Ulrika

Hafström. 2020-12-2.
62

Interviewee 4. (2020). Interview with a co-founder of Allihoop. Ulrika Hafström. 2020-12-2.
Interviewee 5. (2020). Interview with coliving resident at K9. Ulrika Hafström. 2020-12-8.
IPCC. (2018). Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special
Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global
greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the
threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty
[Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W.
Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I.
Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. World Meteorological
ccessed 24-11-2020
Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. A
https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/
Kaijser, A. & Kronsell, A. (2013). Climate change through the lens of intersectionality.
Environmental Politics. Volume 23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2013.835203
.S thesis,
Karpmyr, S. & Landkvist, F. (2019). COLIVING - en boendeform för framtiden?. M
Lund University, Lund. https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/search/publication/8976507
Kim, J., Woo, A. & Cho, G-H. (2020),Is shared housing a viable economic and social housing
ities, Volume 102.
option for young adults?: Willingness to pay for shared housing in Seoul. C
ISSN 0264-2751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102732
Kvale, S. (2007). Doing Interviews. SAGE publications

https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849208963
Lélé, S. M. (1991). Sustainable development: A critical review. World Development, Elsevier,

vol. 19(6), pages 607-621, June. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(91)90197-P
63

McCamant, K. and Durrett, C. (1988). Cohousing – A Contemporary Approach to Housing

Ourselves. Berkeley, California: Habitat Press/Ten Speed Press.

Moore, K. (2018). Sweden’s housing problem. A
https://mundus-international.com/swedens-housing-problem/
Naturvårdsverket. (2019). Konsumtionsbaserade utsläpp av växthusgaser i Sverige och andra

länder. Accessed 23-11-2020 from https://www.naturvardsverket.se/
https://www.naturvardsverket.se/Sa-mar-miljon/Statistik-A-O/Vaxthusgaser-konsumtionsbaserad
e-utslapp-Sverige-och-andra-lander/#:~:text=De%20konsumtionsbaserade%20v%C3%A4xthusg
asutsl%C3%A4gen%20%C3%A4r%20cirka,globalt%20handelsutbyte%20mellan%20v%C3%A
4rldens%20l%C3%A4nder
ccessed 5-1-2021
Naturvårdsverket. (2010). The Climate Impact of Swedish Consumption. A
from https://www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/978-91-620-5992-7.pdf
Osborne, R. (2018). Best Practices for Urban Coliving Communities. M.S thesis, University of
Nebraska.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/arch_id_theses/16/
Pepper, S. and Manji, A. (2019). Co-Living as an Emerging Market: An Assessment of

Co-Living’s Long-Term Resiliency. M.S, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA.
https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/123605
Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist.
Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Regeringskansliet. (2017). Det klimatpolitiska ramverket. Accessed 10-12-2020 from

https://www.regeringen.se/artiklar/2017/06/det-klimatpolitiska-ramverket/
64

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity.Nature
461, pp.472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a
Savills. (2020). Högsta vakansgraden på fem år noterad i centrala Stockholm. 4 th of June.

Accessed 29-12-2020
https://www.savills.se/insight-and-opinion/savills-news/300742/hogsta-vakansgraden-pa-fem-ar-
noterad-i-centrala-stockholm
Shafique, A. (2018).Co-Living and the Common Good. London: RSA: Action and Research
Centre. Accessed 29-11-2020 from
https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/rsa-co-living.pdf
Statistiska Centralbyrån, SCB. (2019a). Sverige i siffror – Människor i Sverige - Hushåll i

Sverige. Statistiska Centralbyrån website. Accessed 18-11-2020 from
https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/sverige-i-siffror/manniskorna-i-sverige/hushall-i-sverige/
Statistiska Centralbyrån, SCB. (2019b). Antal hushåll och personer efter region, hushållstyp och
antal barn. År 2011 - 2019. Statistiska Centralbyrån website. Accessed 15-11-2020 from
http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101S/Hushall
T05/
Steding, D. (2019). Coliving: an emerging term without a common definition. M.S thesis, KTH
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1371948/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Stockholms stad. (2020). Befolkning. Accessed 5-1-2021

https://start.stockholm/om-stockholms-stad/utredningar-statistik-och-fakta/statistik/befolkning/
Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC). (2017). “How Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC)
ccessed
contributed to the 2016 Swedish Agenda 2030 High Level Policy Forum report” A
65

7-1-2020 from
https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2017-02-28-contributions-to-agend
a-2030.html
ccessed 3-1-2021
Stockholms stad. (2016). Stockholm places third in Sustainable City Index. A
from
https://international.stockholm.se/news/2016/09/stockholm-places-third-in-sustainable-city-index
Stockholms stad. (2018). Översiktsplan.

https://vaxer.stockholm/tema/oversiktsplan-for-stockholm/
Tummers, L. C. (2015). Understanding co-housing from a planning perspective: why and how?.
Urban Research & Practice, 8 (1): 64-78.https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2015.1011427
Tummers, L. C. (2016).The re-emergence of self-managed co-housing in Europe: A critical

review of co-housing research. Urban Studies. 53 (10): 2023–2040.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015586696

UNFCCC. (2020a). The Paris Agreement. A
https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement
nited N
UNFCCC. (2020b) What is the U ations Framework Convention o n C
limate C
hange?.
Accessed 1-12-2020 from http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/items/6036.php
UN. (2017). Sustainable development goals. Accessed 5-12-2020 from

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics/sustainabledevelopmentgoals
Vestbro, D. U. (2014). Cohousing in Sweden, history and present situation. Accessed from
http://kollektivhus.nu/pdf/SwedishCohousing14.pdf
66

Vestbro, D.U. (2010). Living together-cohousing ideas and realities around the world:
proceedings from the International Collaborative Housing Conference in Stockholm 5-9 May
2010. Stockholm: Division of Urban and Regional Studies, Royal Institute of Technology in
Collaboration with Kollektivhus NU.
WeLive, 2018. WeLive corporate website. Accessed 19-11-2020 from https://www.welive.com
World Bank. (2020). Urban Development. Accessed 02-01-202 from

https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment
Zoom Video Communications Inc. (2016). Security guide. Zoom Video Communications Inc.
Accessed 4-1-2021 from:
https://d24cgw3uvb9a9h.cloudfront.net/static/81625/doc/Zoom-Security-White-Paper.pdf

67

8 APPENDIX
APPENDIX 1 - Description of interviews
All interviews were conducted via Zoom using video and the audio was recorded for
transcription purposes. The duration of all interviews was 40 minutes.
Interview 1 was carried out with a planner from Stockholm City. The interviewee was identified
from emailing Stockholm city’s information centre, which provided the contact information.
Since both participants spoke Swedish fluently, the interview was conducted in this language
which encourages a more expressive conversation. The quotations that are presented in the
results section have hence been translated by the author, which is important to note as it may
influence the interpretation of the findings (see appendix 2).
Interview 2was conducted with a resident from K9 in Stockholm (see appendix 3). In
preparation for the thesis, the researcher attended a panel discussion hosted by the coliving
organization Co-Liv. One of the speakers was contacted with the intention to snowball and find
other interviewees who could provide a residential perspective on coliving. They shared a
message from the researcher to the K9 coliving community and two residents reached back with
interest in participating in the study.
Interview 3was conducted together with a team member from Conscious Coliving, an
organization that supports coliving spaces to help them “grow and thrive” (Conscious Coliving,
2020). The organisation provides support on sustainability, impact strategy and expertise about
community building. The interview was conducted in English (see appendix 4).
68

Interview 4was carried out with a co-founder of a coliving startup in Stockholm. Prior to the
meeting, different Coliving operators in Sweden were identified and contacted. The organisation
Allihoop is based in Stockholm with two existing coliving spaces. The conversation was in
English as both participants speak the language fluently (see appendix 5).
Interview 5was held with a second resident from K9. However, technical difficulties cut off the
conversation during the last part of the interview, and the last bit therefore not been recorded.
The last 10 minutes of conversation have been writtenly summarized by the researcher, which
makes it more difficult to cite the interviewee as the information has been interpreted. It is
important to note that all citations in this report derive from the material that was transcribed
before the recording ended.

69

APPENDIX 2
Interview Guide for Interview 1 - Urban Planner at Stockholms City with a focus on housing and
master planning.
The interview person

Head of Strategy and Development at the City Planning Office at Stockholm City.
The purpose of the interview

The interview was conducted with the aim to understand Stockholm city’s perspective on shared
housing and specifically coliving. The intention was to gain an understanding of how Stockholm
city is working to solve the housing crisis and perceive shared housing in this context.
Information about the interview

The interview was conducted through Zoom 22/11/2020 at 11.00 and the duration was 40
minutes. Permission to record and use quotes was given in connection with the interview.
Questions:
● Are there any coliving houses planned for from a municipal level?
● What are your thoughts on shared housing? Seen from a planning perspective?
● What opportunities and challenges arise with coliving?
● In what ways can coliving contribute in an urban planning context?
● What sustainability dimensions are prioritised in the housing development of Stockholm
city?
● What factors are driving the development of coliving in Stockholm?
● When it comes to environmental impact, both territorial and external carbon emissions
that play a role, how does the City of Stockholm work to reduce the ecological footprint
in housing?
● Is there a collaboration today between Coliving operators and the city of Stockholm?
70

○ If not, is there any interest? Do you think coliving developers can collaborate with
local municipalities to contribute to sustainability targets?

71

APPENDIX 3
Interview Guide for Interview 2 - coliving resident in Stockholm.

A resident at the coliving space K9 in Stockholm.

The aim with the interview was to gain an understanding of the lived experience in a coliving
space and how it may cultivate a more sustainable lifestyle in terms of social (community, social
capital, wellbeing), environmental (a culture of sharing through shared space and amenities)
dimensions of sustainability. The intention was also to elaborate on what someone who lives in a
coliving thinks about coliving and whether it could be suitable for a bigger population.

The interview was conducted through Zoom 1/12/2020 at 14.00 and the duration was 40 minutes.
Permission to record and use quotes was given in the beginning of the virtual meeting.
Questions:
● Can you tell me about your relationship to Coliving?
● How do you define Coliving? What does it imply for you?
● You mention that there is diversity in the coliving space? Can you explain a bit more in
which ways?
● What are you practically sharing at K9?
● Is there a particular group of people that live at K9?
○ If so, how are they described?
○ If not, is coliving for anyone?
72

● Can you explain the selection process of tenants? What factors play a role in determining
if someone “fits in” or not?
● Is coliving related to environmental benefits and social sustainability?
○ If yes, how and to what extent?
● What is the relationship between the coliving space and local neighbourhood? Are they
involved in some way? If yes, how?
● Is K9 working with local planning authorities in some way? If yes, how?

73

APPENDIX 4
Interview Guide for Interview 3 - researcher at the organisation Conscious Colving.

An employee at Conscious Coliving who manages research and sustainability questions. The
interviewee is conducting research on the environmental sustainability of intentional
communities and ecovillages.

The aim was to gain a better understanding of coliving in an international context. The main
themes discussed were challenges, opportunities and in what ways coliving is related to
sustainability. Since the interviewee has been involved in the coliving community for several
years, their experience is valuable to understand different coliving models.

The interview was conducted via Zoom 2/12/2020 at 13.00 for 40 minutes. Permission to record
and use quotes was given in the beginning of the virtual meeting and a consent form was signed
by the interviewee.
Questions:
● In an urban planning context, what role does coliving play?
● In what way can coliving be an alternative to other housing forms at a larger scale?
● How can coliving spaces and their communities influence local neighbourhoods and the
city at large? What are your thoughts from your experience?
74

● Do you see any problems with the rapid development of coliving? What problems can
occur in cities?

75

APPENDIX 5
Interview Guide for Interview 4 - one of the founders of a coliving startup.

Co-founder of the startup Allihoop with coliving spaces in Stockholm and Paris.

The interview was intended to give an understanding of the commercial side of coliving and
what opportunities and challenges exist with developing coliving in Stockholm. The aim was to
understand the driving factors for the development of coliving and to explore potential
collaborations between coliving operators and municipalities.

The interview was conducted via Zoom 2/12/2020 at 15.00 for a duration of 40 minutes.
Questions:
● Do you think coliving can become mainstream or is it a niche in the housing market?
● Can you explain the selection process of tenants? What factors play a role in determining
if someone “fits in” or not?
● Are you collaborating with local planning authorities in some way? If yes, how?
○ If not, is there an interest or future plans to do so?
● What is the relationship between the coliving space and local neighbourhood? Are they
involved in some way? If yes, how?
○ If not, are there any plans or strategies for this?
76

○ What are the strategies for ‘opening up’ and connecting coliving projects to the
city? (Coliving operators, coliving residents, urban planners).
● Are you measuring sustainability impact, environmental data or social factors in some
way?
● What are key factors to an inclusive coliving community?
● Are there any existing strategies for handling potential problems that arise from the
coliving spaces?

77

APPENDIX 6
Interview Guide for Interview 5 - coliving resident and engaged in the coliving community.

Resident at the coliving space K9 in Stockholm.

The purpose was to gain more information about the social and environmental aspects of
coliving through speaking with a stakeholder who has lived in coliving for several years. The
person is also involved in an international coliving community, which can be considered a bias
but also provides deep experience to draw from. Additionally, the aim was to connect the
insights to a planning context to discuss what challenges and opportunities arise with the housing
form.

The interview was conducted through Zoom 8/12/2020 at 13.20 and the duration was 40 minutes.
Questions:
● What are the main barriers for coliving? Why do you think it is not a more “common”
housing form?
● What is the relationship between the K9 coliving space and the local neighbourhood? Are
they involved in some way? If yes, how?
○ Are there collaborations with external actors or local planning authorities?
78
View publication stats

Appendix 7: Households in Stockholm
Table 5. Number of households by year and type of household in Stockholm. (SCB, 2019b).
The Stockholm
region 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Single without 375 560 379 058 387 088 397 159 406 334
children
Single with 67 441 68 201 69 248 70 309 71 149

children 0-24
years
Single with 12 834 13 940 14 877 15 660 16 394

children 25+
years
Cohabiting 191 485 194 600 197 800 201 847 205 238
without
children
Cohabiting with 215 796 217 737 220 019 222 526 225 118
children 0-24
years
Cohabiting with 12 404 12 993 13 808 14 640 15 174

children 25+
years
Other 51 171 52 739 53 917 53 995 54 165

households
without
children
Other 43 457 44 674 45 194 45 376 45 250

households
with children
0-24 years
Other 2 647 2 876 3 061 3 135 3 197

households
with children
25+ years
79

Hafström 2021 - Coliving in The Sustainable City

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hafström 2021 - Coliving in The Sustainable City

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hafström 2021 - Coliving in The Sustainable City

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Coliving in the Sustainable City - A study of coliving as a sustainable urban

Thesis · January 2021

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Coliving in the Sustainable City

Human Geography: Bachelor Thesis in Urban and Regional Planning

© Ulrika Hafström 2021

1.1 Aim and Research Question 7

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10

2.1 The Sustainability Paradigm 10

2.2 The Climate Impact of Housing 12

2.3 The Sustainability of Shared Housing 14

2.4 Research on Coliving 17

2.5 Summary 19

3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 20

​3.1 Chattertons Post-Carbon Cities 20

3.2 Social capital 22

3.3 The Planner's Triangle 23

3.4 Summary 25

4 METHODS AND MATERIALS 26

4.1 Research Design 26

4.1.1 Case-Study Method 27

4.1.2 Research Method 27

4.2 Interviews 28

4.2.1 Pre-interview phase 29

4.2.2 Semi-structured interviews 29

4.3 Document analysis 31

4.4 Data analysis 32

4.5 Reflections 35

5 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS 37

5.1 The Housing Situation In Stockholm 37

5.2 Drivers 40

5.2.1 Demand for Housing Diversification 40

5.2.2 Market Gaps 41

5.2.3 Isolation and demand for belonging 42

5.3 Potential Challenges 43

5.3.1 Size, Diversity, and Mixed-use 43

5.3.2 Stigmatization and Lacking Standardizations 47

5.4 Positive Implications of Findings 47

5.4.1 Social Capital: Exchanged Values Through Networks 48

5.4.2 Environmental Benefits of Sharing 49

5.4.3 Potential Positive Externalities of Co-living in Neighborhoods 51

5.4.4 Reducing Vacant Space and Need For Construction 52

5.5 Sustainability Analysis 53

6 FINAL DISCUSSION 55

6.1 Future Research 56

6.2 Closing Statement 57

Tables, figures & appendices

Figure 1. The United Nations 17 Sustainable Development Goals Integrated 12

Figure 2. Consumer-based greenhouse gas emissions 2009-2017. 13

Figure 3. Worldwide Google Searches for coliving. 18

Figure 4. The Planner's Triangle. 23

Figure 5. Research Design. 27

Figure 6. Inductive vs Deductive Research. 28

Table 7. The Seven Stages of Interview Investigation. 28

Figure 8. Summary of stakeholders. 30

Table 9. Summary of interviews. 31

Table 10. Summary of codebook. 34

Figure 11. Historical and expected population development 2000-2025. 38

3.1 Chattertons Post-Carbon Cities 20

Secondly, he emphasizes democratic accountability, self-determination and control.

Fifth, prioritizing strategic action planning to make community living replicable is of

priorities in each corner; economic development, environmental protection, a ndsocial justice.

4 METHODS AND MATERIALS

Figure 5. Research design (Hafström, 2020).

Table 7. The Seven Stages of Interview Investigation (Kvale, 2007).

Figure 8. Summary of stakeholders. (Hafström, 2020)

Table 9. Summary of interviews.

Table 10. Summary of codebook.

5 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS

Table 12. Commercial Coliving spaces in Stockholm. (Hafström, 2020)