Drawing on the case of Vienna, the article examines the role of third sector housing for social cohesion in the city. With the joint examination of an organisational and an institutional level of housing governance, the authors apply an interdisciplinary, multi-level research approach which aims at contributing to a comprehensive understanding of social cohesion as a contextualised phenomenon which requires place-based as well as structural (multi-level) solutions. Using a large-scale household survey and interviews with key informants, the analysis shows an ambiguous role housing cooperatives play for social cohesion: With the practice of "heme-oriented housing estates", non-profit housing returns to the traditional cooperative principle of Gemeinschaft. However, community cooperatives rather promote homogenous membership and thus, encompass the danger to establish cohesive islands that are cut off from the rest of the city. Furthermore, given the solidarity-based housing regime of Vienna, fostering bonding social capital on the neighbourhood level, might anyway just be an additional safeguarding mechanism for social cohesion. More important is the direct link between the micro-level of residents and the macro-level of urban housing policy. In this respect, cooperative housing represents a crucial intermediate level that strengthens the linking social capital of residents and provides opportunity structures for citizen participation. However, the increasing adoption of a corporate management orientation leads to a hollowing out of the cooperative principle of democratic member participation, reducing it to an informal and non-binding substitute. Thus, it is in the responsibility of both managements and residents to revitalise the existing democratic governance structures of cooperative housing before they will be completely dismantled by market liberalization and privatization. In contrast to other European cities, third sector housing in Vienna has the potential to give residents a voice beyond the neighbourhood and the field of housing. / Series: SRE - Discussion Papers

Wie sieht gute und alltagstaugliche Wohnarchitektur aus Sicht der Bewohner aus? 1.600 Mieterhaushalte in städtischen Wohnungen von acht deutschen Städten und eine kleine Kontrollgruppe von Eigentümern wurden in Face-To-Face-Interviews befragt. Ein Standardfragebogen wurde mit Computergraphiken und Animationen kombiniert. Der Blick gilt nicht der Gebäudehülle, sondern dem Inneren, dem Raumkonzept, der inneren Erschließung und der Freiraumzuordnung. Die Ergebnisse sind ein Leitfaden zum bedarfsgerechten Neu- und Umbau von städtischen Wohnungen für Bauherren und Planer. Die Architekturnutzer, überwiegend städtische Mieter, erhalten eine Stimme im Qualitätsdialog. Dem interessierten Laien wird eine Übersicht über vorhandene und mögliche Typologien des städtischen Wohnens vorgelegt. In den raumsoziologischen Diskurs wird ein Beleg dafür eingebracht, dass das Gebaute die Wohnweise und die Vorstellungswelt über richtiges Wohnen prägt. Die Studie ist ein Brückenschlag zwischen wohnsoziologischer Grundlagen- und anwendungsorientierter Marktforschung. Der Wunsch nach intelligenten Verbindungen von besonntem privaten Außenraum und Wohnung durchzieht die Ergebnisse wie ein grüner Faden. Es ist aus Sicht der Nutzer das Qualitätskriterium Nummer Eins und eine Kritik an vielen Defiziten städtischen Wohnens. Dem Planer zeigt es die Prioritäten eines bedarfsgerechten Neu- und Umbaus von städtischen Wohnungen auf. Das Gewohnte prägt das Gewünschte. Bewohnergruppen mit vergleichbaren soziodemographischen Merkmalen urteilen in Berlin anders als in Dresden oder Bochum. Der vorhandene Wohnungsbestand ist nicht nur das Ergebnis einer historisch spezifischen Wohnweise, sondern zugleich Prägestock und Begrenzung für das gelebte und das gewünschte Wohnen. / What has good housing architecture to be like, when the occupants are questioned.This leading question guidelines a survey among 1,600 tenants-households in eight German cities. Mainly designed as a post occupancy-evaluation the study contributes guidelines for a more userfriendly planning in urban housing construction and renovation. The survey was carried out by face-to-face interviews assisted by a standardized questionnaire, computer graphics and animation. It focuses on the inside, on floorplans, the idea of the floor plan, interior access and the combination of the interior and the private space outdoors. Space- sociology benefits from the results, as they prove, that the way of construction determines housing habits and housing needs. By means of a catalogue showing several common types of floor plans the occupants were consulted and got basic informations in order to distinguish, to evaluate and to choose among existing types of apartments. This work builds a bridge between basic resarch in housing sociology and user oriented market surveys. Unlike most studies on housing needs and demands, this survey does not operate by the fiction of a transparent line of products at housing markets and freedom of choice. Both, the design of the questionnaire and the shown types of floor-plans take the restrictions of the urban housing market into consideration as well as they mark the boundary of lower income demand and a limited knowledge about housing architecture. Many results underline the importance of intelligent links between interior and private space outdoors. Like a “green thread” running through the evaluation it’s a lesson about Number One quality issue from the view of users. We want, what we are used to. The existing housing stock engraves and restricts both, the historical residential manner and housing needs.