Utställningen Allmänningen handlar om våra gemensamma rum. De torg, stråk och gröningar dit allmänheten idag har tillträde. Mellan tätort och landsbygd, längs med åar och vattendrag, via våtmarker och kulturminnesplatser, över höjder och ängsmarker. Det är platser för demokrati, kulturellt utbyte, handel och rekreation.

I utställningen Allmänningen möts historiska spår, planerare och några nedgrävda kartor. Genom olika kartläggningspraktiker som rör sig mellan plats och representation visas hur allmänningen som fenomen har transformerats över tid. Den har genomgått ett antal olika förändringar och människor har trots dessa skiften alltid tagit platser i anspråk: gröningar, gator, parker, stråk, torg – på landsbygd, i tätort, längs med åar och vattendrag, via våtmarker och kulturminnesplatser, över höjder och ängsmarker. Det är platser för demokrati, kulturellt utbyte, handel och vila. 

Här presenteras allmänningen som ett begrepp, som fysisk plats och kulturell enhet. Från kroppens intima skala till värderingen och regleringen av mark. 

Utställningen är kopplad till forskningsprojektet Allmänningar och stråk för rumslig rättvisa i urban fullåkersbygd finansierat av forskningsrådet FORMAS.

Gated communities and gated housing enclaves have primarily been identified as elite spaces of privilege that support self-imposed disaffiliation and spatial and social withdrawal by the affluent. Over the past decade, however, European countries have also seen a rise of gating in large housing estates. Drawing on previous research and a comparative case study that includes interviews, observations, and mapping, this article analyses policies and practices of gating in large housing estates since 2010 in Malmo, Sweden and since 2000 in Paris, France. We argue, first, that gating is legitimised by policy arguments about 'defensible space', by a critique of the modernist design, and by a perceived need for diversification. Secondly, we expand the notion of urban gating and identify four types of enclosure: complete enclosure, semi-enclosure, enclosure through densification, and enclosure of parks and playgrounds. We conclude that the notion of the welfare state has changed, not only in financial terms but also as an urban form, leading to the micro-segregation of housing and land, which makes visible the social stratification within large housing estates. Gating of large housing estates thus leads to 'enclosed communities' rather than 'gated communities'.

Los trabajos reunidos en esta colección tienen en común la aplicación de perspectivas interseccionales para entender la vida urbana desde los bordes, a través de situaciones observadas en diversos contextos nacionales y regionales, en el espacio público, el acceso a la vivienda, experiencias y estrategias de resistencia espacial, entre otros tópicos relevantes.

The Folkhem era in Sweden set high architectural standards for social infrastructures dispersedly located in cities. Over the past two decades, however, Swedish planning, when it comes to the localization of social infrastructure, has been increasingly characterized by privatized social infrastructures added to housing. Methodologically, this article draws on a compilation of architectural designs of shared housing that includes social infrastructure, 12 interviews with developers, and 22 interviews with residents. The article argues, first, that two historical approaches can be identified: one in which porous borders support urban social life in and around the housing complex and another where distinct boundaries form an edge where things end. Secondly, the article argues that in recent shared housing complexes, the infrastructures of fitness, health care, and privatized services—previously available solely in the public realm—have moved physically and mentally closer to the individual, largely replacing residents’ everyday use of public space. The article concludes that in recent shared housing complexes, ambiguous borders are formed. Ambiguous borders allow a flow of goods and people, but the flow is based on the needs and preferences of residents only. Overall, such privatization counteracts the development of urban social life while adding to housing inequality, as this form of housing is primarily accessible only to the relatively wealthy. Furthermore, there is a risk that urban planning may favour such privatization to avoid maintenance costs, even though the aim of planning for general public accessibility to social infrastructure is thereby shifted towards planning primarily for specific groups.

For almost a century, Swedes living in shared housing have resided in 'kollektivhus', a form of co-housing that support sharing reproductive work. However, during the past decade, new forms of exclusive shared housing have emerged on the Swedish housing market. In contrast to international trends of vulnerable singles being forced to share housing, this Swedish example shows that also financially privileged singles reside in shared housing. Based on a survey of housing companies and a case study the article argues that mobility has been a driver for this new form of shared housing. In the article, 'dwelling on-the-move together' is identified as a new practice of residing in exclusive shared housing. This practice is characterised by sharing private, exclusive facilities, sharing paid services and sharing spaces for both home and work, in an environment that certifies that residents can come and go as they please while hired staff takes care of their property. While exclusive shared housing is an asset for residents, it also privatise facilities and reintroduces domestic workers to middle-class housing. In all, the marketization of shared housing risks introducing a stratification of shared housing which may reinforce the geographic and social polarisation of Swedish cities.

Durante casi un siglo, los suecos que viven en viviendas compartidas han residido en ‘kollektivhus’, una forma de co-vivienda que sostiene el trabajo reproductivo compartido. Sin embargo, durante la última década, han surgido nuevas formas de vivienda compartida exclusiva en el mercado inmobiliario sueco. En contraste con las tendencias internacionales de solteros vulnerables que se ven obligados a compartir vivienda, este ejemplo sueco muestra que también los solteros económicamente más privilegiados residen en viviendas compartidas. Basado en una encuesta de empresas de vivienda que ofrecen vivienda compartida exclusiva y un estudio de caso, el artículo sostiene que la movilidad ha sido un motor para el desarrollo de esta nueva forma de vivienda compartida. En el artículo, ‘vivir juntos en movimiento’ se identifica como una nueva práctica de residir en viviendas compartidas exclusivas. Esta práctica de residir se caracteriza por compartir instalaciones privadas y exclusivas, compartir servicios pagados y compartir espacios tanto para el hogar como para el trabajo, en un ambiente que certifica que los residentes pueden entrar y salir cuando les plazca mientras el personal contratado se ocupa de su propiedad. Si bien la vivienda compartida exclusiva es un activo para los residentes, esta forma de vivienda también privatiza las instalaciones y reintroduce a los trabajadores domésticos en viviendas de clase media. El artículo concluye que la mercantilización de la vivienda compartida corre el riesgo de introducir una estratificación de la vivienda compartida que, a su vez, puede reforzar la polarización geográfica y social existente de las ciudades suecas.

Depuis presque un siècle, les Suédois qui vivent en co-logements ont habité dans des « kollektivhus », un genre d’habitat qui encourage le partage du travail reproductif. Néanmoins, au cours de la dernière décennie, de nouvelles formes de logements partagés grand standing sont apparues au sein du marché immobilier suédois. À l’opposé de la tendance mondiale qui voit les célibataires vulnérables forcés à cohabiter, cet exemple suédois montre également que les célibataires plus privilégiés financièrement vivent en co-logements. Reposant sur une enquête auprès d’entreprises immobilières qui offrent des logements partagés grand standing et sur une étude de cas, cet article soutient que la mobilité a été un vecteur du développement de ce nouveau type d’habitat partagé. Dans l’article, le phénomène appelé « dwelling on-the-move together », ce qui veut dire « habiter en déplacement ensemble », est identifié comme étant un nouveau mode de vie consistant à vivre dans des logements partagés grand standing. Ce mode de vie se caractérise par le partage de luxueuses installations privées, de services professionnels rémunérés et d’espaces pour le domicile autant que pour le travail, dans un environnement qui garantit que les habitants peuvent aller et venir à leur gré tandis qu’une équipe d’employés prend soin de la propriété. Bien que ces logements partagés soient avantageux pour leurs occupants, ce type d’habitation privatise aussi les installations et réintroduit le personnel de maison dans les résidences des classes moyennes. L’article conclut que la commercialisation de l’habitat partagé risque d’introduire une stratification des co-logements, ce qui à son tour pourrait renforcer les polarisations géographique et sociale des villes suédoises.

Sharing housing is more often than not seen through a positive lens of togetherness, de-growth, community spirit and as a driver of the sharing economy but as the urban population increases and affordable housing decreases, sharing housing is also a basis for economic profiteering. This article explores the socio-material differences in housing specifically designed to be shared, and which exist on the Swedish housing market in the 2020s. The historical trajectories of three key shared forms of housing in Sweden, the kollektivhus, the residential hotel and the co-living hub, are analysed after which a four-field figure is developed, coupling material and social aspects of shared forms of housing. The article argues that housing designed to be shared is both a way to counteract and a driver for spatial inequalities. There is a risk of inequalities in material standards, inequalities based on concentration or lack of facilities and services, and a risk of economic profiteering of vulnerable groups. One challenge for future housing in Sweden is to counteract housing inequality by supporting affordable housing designed to be shared, while at the same time safeguarding the interests of vulnerable groups.