Clinton Thedyardi Prawirodiharjo. Care Devolution and Inter-household Cooperation.

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institution of Land, Dwelling and Care

Clinton Thedyardi Prawirodiharjo Taught Master of Philosophy in Architecture and Urban Design (Projective Cities), 2019/2021 Architectural Association School of Architecture London

Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of the many people who have been involved in this 20-month process. First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to my family for their unconditional and constant support throughout the programme. Additionally, I would like to thank those who have been by my side during my studies, particularly Platon Issaias, Hamed Khosravi and Doreen Bernath, for their kindness, care and commitment in helping me develop my dissertation during the difficult circumstances thrown up by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation: Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institution

Moreover, I would like to thank my fellow students who have always

of Land, Dwelling and Care

been very supportive and helpful both inside and outside the studio.

Taught Master of Philosophy in Architecture and Urban Design (Projective Cities), 2019/2021

Finally, this research would not have been possible without the help

Architectural Association School of Architecture London

of Hannah Emery-Wright from London CLT and representatives

Author: Clinton Thedyardi Prawirodiharjo

from HEBA Women’s Project who gave me key insights and

Tutors: Platon Issaias and Hamed Khosravi

inspiration for the proposed project. Thank you for your valuable

Submission: 28 May 2021

contributions during my studies at the AA.

2

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

3

Reflecting on the ambitions of the 2017 London Health and Care Devolution Programme, the project proposes the creation of a cooperative mutual care organisation to enhance integration between the local council and vulnerable communities. Through a cooperative strategy, the dissertation aims to respond to the spatial and managerial challenges of social care and community services provision at the neighbourhood scale. The research traces the history of the architecture of collective care in London and revisits alternative approaches in terms of social structure, forms of sharing and daily rituals through a collective way of living. The dissertation rethinks care through cluster forms as a typological and urban question to generate new possibilities for community care activities and protocols.

Abstract

The proposed neighbourhood care model addresses the problematic Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation: Towards a Cluster Model

provision of space for social and care services, services that are

of Common Institution of Land, Dwelling and Care investigates alternative

sidelined by dominant commercial and residential developments and

forms of community care in the context of London. In recent times,

transport infrastructure and constrained by land value and limited

London municipalities have been responsible for delivering social

access to ownership and usership and the lack of coordination and

care services for local communities, the majority in collaboration

collaborative management. The design aims to propose a London

with private or volunteer agencies. Although the NHS delivers a

neighbourhood care model by rethinking the aforementioned social

high standard of service, health and care provision in London is still

care issues across three conditions: co-housing, the care cluster and

facing challenges regarding limited services, neglect and managerial

the high street in Tower Hamlets. The neighbourhood care model

barriers. Primarily, these issues are the legacy of the UK’s centralised

suggests a new mechanism for the provision of land, dwellings and

system of care and the emergence of contemporary issues such as

care by the Mayor of London. The proposal is underpinned by the

increasingly diverse communities, a growing elderly population and a

concept of the cluster to coordinate vulnerable groups through the

rise in demand for mental health services. In response, community-

collectivisation of domestic services, informal care and co-living

led care initiatives organised in collaboration with local municipalities

as a common framework. The research and design investigations

and care agencies are springing up in London in the form of daycare

respond to the question: how does a system of clusters provide the

centres, senior clubs, various associations and volunteer carers to

spatial organisation for collective care across the dwelling unit, social

provide collective modes of care. At the same time, the provision

infrastructure and neighbourhood plan as a series of interconnected

of land by the Community Land Trust raises another possibility

projects?

for establishing community-led care as a public-private project by shifting personal care in the dwelling unit to a neighbourhood care

Key words: devolution, social care, community-led, cluster form,

model.

neighbourhood care model

4

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

5

Table of Contents Abstract Introduction: Rethinking a New Model of Care: On the London Health and Care Devolution 1. Land for Community: Community Land Trust and Co-housing Model

1.1.

Community-led Housing in London

1.2.

Collectivised Domesticity: The Case of Cooperative Housekeeping and Co-housing

1.3.

The Cluster Type of Inter-household Care

Condition 1: Elderly Co-housing

2. Cluster Forms: The Collective Care Model in London

2.1.

Rethinking Care: Between Domestic Unit and Public Institution

2.2.

Case Study: The Architecture of Collective Care in London

2.3.

Cluster as Forms of Social Care Infrastructure

Condition 2: Community Care Cluster

3. Care Neighbourhood Model: The Community-led Care Framework

3.1.

Towards a Devolved Model of Social Care

3.2.

Case Study: The Community-led Care Network

3.3.

The Care Neighbourhood

Condition 3: The High Street and Care Neighbourhood

Conclusion Bibliography

6

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

7

Research Question Disciplinary Question How can the current regulatory framework for land, dwellings and care be reassessed to provide an affordable, community-led care framework?

How do the alternative forms of housing provision could

promote local autonomy?

How can this relationship be organised?

Research Aims and objectives Urban Question How can a series of mutual care activities and spaces be organised

The dissertation rethinks alternative modes of social care through

within a neighbourhood care model?

mutual care initiatives as a care neighbourhood model. The aim

How could forms of collective living enhance the connection

is to think beyond centralised care provision by investigating

between existing social care services and emerging

the practices of vulnerable groups to create a network of health

community-led care initiatives?

care, social and economic projects that increase the resilience of

What kind of social diagram produced by these different

underprivileged communities. In doing so, a neighbourhood care

care agencies? What are the protocols?

model is proposed as a spatial framework for organising care activities and social support and to create a cooperative mechanism

Typological Question

to support the Health and Social Care Devolution Programme. By

What are typological organisation of mutual care co-living in ?

investigating care provision and historical models of collective care

How are mutual care activities organised to form the basis

and community-led care projects in London, the research aims to

for alternative modes of care?

rethink multiple forms of inter-household cooperation as alternative

How does cluster type provides spatial organisation of

modes of care. Therefore, the proposed project aims to provide a

community-led care across housing cooperatives, clusters

spatial framework for new models of care through the arrangement

and neighourhood layers?

of multi-scalar care activities in cluster-type architecture and under different collective living conditions.

8

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

9

“It is alarming and disturbing that this report highlights the scale of delays and obstruction to urgent care facing migrants who are seeking asylum in our nation, including those who are entitled to free NHS care. Safeguards must be in place to protect people in vulnerable situations from inhumane delays to treatment, as well as ensuring that those who need immediate treatment aren’t deterred from seeking it.”

– Dr. Chaand Nagpaul, Chair of Council of British Medical Association

“These long delays involved a protracted period of all-consuming extreme uncertainty, and anxiety and distress for patients with cancer, kidney failure and heart problems, who end up in a state of horrendous limbo . . .”

“Migrants needing healthcare struggle to understand why one day a doctor tells them that their treatment is urgent and needs to start tomorrow and the next day they receive a letter from the hospital’s overseas visitor office seeking many, many thousands of pounds upfront, which obviously being destitute they can’t do.”

1.01

- Anna Miller, Head of Policy and Advocacy of Charity Doctors of the World

Image 1.01. Managerial Barriers of the current NHS Care Service.

Source:

https://www.theguardian.com/soci-

ety/2020/oct/14/migrants-denied-nhs-care-foraverage-of-37-weeks-research-finds

10

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

11

Introduction Rethinking a New Model of Care: On the London Health and Care Devolution Recently, the provision of social care has undergone a major shift towards a decentralised model. The exponential growth of the elderly population and the diverse background of vulnerable groups in London are amongst recent trends that have challenged the existing national health care model. Rapid, large-scale urbanisation Health & Social Care Act ·

·

· · ·

Transfer of health services responsibilities to local area by Clinical Commissioning Groups and private partners of NHS Create local authority structure for health and care provision

· ·

2015

2016

2017

New Care Models Programme

Cities & Local Government Devolution Act

London Health & Care Devolution

Greater Manchester's health & social care devolution deal Healthy London Partnership established

·

·

Transfer of managerial and planning power to elected mayor and local council Devolution of housing, transport and planning

· · · ·

for vulnerable groups. The criticism of the nationalised health care 2018

Localism Act

Infrastructure Act

Small Sites, Small Builder

·

Major selling of surplus public land & assets Transfer of properties

vulnerable communities rely on. Moreover, the current social care crisis has been exacerbated by a downturn in the growth of services

2011

·

affected the local support networks and forms of mutual care that

Releasing and make better use of surplus NHS land and buildings Transfer of health & social care decision making to local level Integration between local health institution and care organisations Social care and community services become priority

2011

Community Right to Challenge Community Right to Reclaim Land Community Right to Build

and gentrification of working-class neighbourhoods in London have

Devolution

Decentralisation

2012

·

model focuses on its centralised nature, which produces managerial barriers, resource dependency and uneven distribution that mean

Release of determined surplus land by Mayor of London for co-housing development

the National Health Service (NHS) is sometimes no longer able to address emerging issues.1 Moreover, centralised decision-making

1.02

can lead to limited resources and mismanagement by the NHS and its partners and thus delayed services.2 In 2017, the Health and Care Devolution Programme was introduced by the Mayor of London Image 1.02. Current Provision of Health and Social Care in London 1. London Health and Care Devolution Programme Team. Health and Care Devolution: What it means for London. (London: November 2017 Report.)

2. Cottam, H. Radical Help: How We Can Remake the Relationship Between Us and Revolutionise the Welfare System.

(London: Vigaro, 2018).

12

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

and the NHS. This programme makes local councils responsible for the provision of health care, social care and community services.

The transfer of managerial control from the national level to local boroughs opens up numerous possibilities regarding the provision of social care through public-private collaborations and community support networks. Furthermore, care devolution raises challenges concerning the spatial organisation of community-based social care beyond existing health care spaces such as hospitals, clinics, GP surgeries and care homes.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

13

Health and social care provision in London have always been challenging in terms of its ownership, management and the scope of services provided. The UK is well-known for the NHS, founded Health and Social Care

in 1948, and its public-private partnership (PPP) model adopted in 1991.3 The collaboration between the public and private sectors

National Health Service (NHS)

in health care has resulted in the establishment of NHS Trusts

Mayor of London London NHS NHS Trust Public Health England London Councils

and Foundation Trusts, which aims to decentralise care provision to the local level in the forms of primary care and community services. Health and social care PPPs in the UK have transformed

London Partners

public infrastructure from a public good into an investment asset,

Housing and Land

London Health and Care Devolution

enabling banks and private equity investors to extract wealth from

Mayor of London

the public sector via contracts enforced by the government.4 However, the complexity of sharing investments, responsibilities

Public Company

and accountability in PPPs creates major issues, such as the

Surplus Public-Owned Land & Building

Pilot Projects

privatisation of public health assets and managerial burdens, as well

Local Council Local Communities NGOs Health and Care Integration

Better Health for London - Prevention

Surplus NHS and Public Company Building and Lands

as creating care discrepancies across communities. Consequently,

Community-led Housing

the dissertation argues that the decentralisation of care in publicprivate collaborations should be rethought as a project that enables

collaboration & integration between primary care, social care and mental health

a secured model of ownership, the participation of the care subject

Community Land Trust (CLT)

Primary Care Infrastructure

and facilitates the shift from personal care at home to a care environment in the neighbourhood. The proposed care activities are

Community Care Infrastructure

Co-housing

organised across multiple scales through the collectivisation of care

Community Facilities

activities through a cooperative strategy and are spatially arranged social care facilities community centre care-based housing

as a cluster system. As increasing inadequacies of care do not only have an impact on physical health but can also have social and

Cooperatives

Image 1.03. Proposed Design Scheme Local Community (Vulnerable groups are prioritised)

3. Healthcare UK. Healthcare UK: Public Private Partnership. (London: UK Trade & Investment, 2013).

Proposed Design: Neighbourhood Care Model

1.03

14

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

psychological ramifications for vulnerable groups, multiple scales of intervention that enable informal care exchanges between the care subjects should be considered.5 Therefore, the shift from the cell unit to the cluster as the smallest unit reconceptualises care as a process involving extended households and informal care between

4. Jubilee Debt Campaign. The UK’s PPPs Disaster: Lessons on private finance for the rest of the world. (London: February 2017 Report).

multiple subjects as part of a collective way of living.

5. Cottam, H. Radical Help: How We Can Remake the Relationship Between Us and Revolutionise the Welfare System.

(London: Vigaro, 2018).

care initiatives are investigated as a potential support network that

In rethinking the current model of health and social care, mutual is initiated by vulnerable groups. Vulnerable groups in London, who come from a wide variety of cultural, ethnic and social

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

15

backgrounds, are affected by administrative, language and economic barriers that make health and social care inaccessible. Furthermore, the precariousness of these groups’ socio-economic situation makes them shifting entities, expanding, contracting and moving location and thus repeatedly creating new networks. In response to this, these vulnerable groups organise activities that go beyond the question of health care and towards resilience. These communityled care spaces are organised as informal support networks. In some local boroughs, these emerging informal support networks have started to be embraced by community care services. Therefore, the dissertation rethinks the Health and Social Care Devolution Programme as an alternative care model that enables a mutual care network as an integrated part of a sustainable care framework.

Social care devolution for vulnerable communities can also mean their right to affordable and appropriate housing, where the possibility for participation and negotiation of their modes of living can be enhanced. In this case, the secured model of land and housing becomes essential to protecting the vulnerable groups and local communities in a neighbourhood socially, culturally and financially. At the same time, the current decentralisation of land ownership releases surplus publicly owned land, most of which is owned by the NHS and Transport for London (TfL) and which can be obtained through community-related organisations. The exemplary community-led scheme for securing collective ownership of land in the UK is the Community Land Trust (CLT) model.

Community access to land is a major concern in contemporary London as ever-increasing land prices and privatisation leads to urban segregation and gentrification. Put simply, care and land are inseparable when discussing how best social care can be provided to vulnerable groups and local communities. Therefore, the dissertation 1.04

investigates and proposes multiple social care conditions (elderly cohousing, community care clusters and the high street) within a care Image 1.04. Series of Communityled Care Spaces in Whitechapel

16

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

neighbourhood model as a spatial framework for achieving social care decentralisation in contemporary London.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

17

1. Land for Community: Community Land Trust and Co-housing Model

Small Sites

0

1

5 km

Established Community-led Housing Emerging Community-led Housing

Image 1.05. Distribution of Community-led Housing in London 18

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

19

1.1 Community-led Housing in London London municipalities have encouraged community-led housing as a framework for affordable housing through self-governed management, local community enhancement and sustainable Public Land: Given/ Brought from Govt, Public Companies

development.6 However, the key challenge for new housing co-

Community-led Housing / Housing Coops / Cohousing

operatives is not the lack of enthusiasm; it is the high price of land in London, which has caused property prices to rise exponentially.

Since the 2000s, there has been a resurgent interest in communityled housing and experimenting with new models, including Mutual

Local Community/ Association

Resource Pooling: Adjustment to Basic Income

CLT Land

Community-led Construction

Home Ownership Societies (MHOSs) and CLTs encouraged by

Steward/ Management/ Maintenance

national legislation such as the Housing and Regeneration Act (2008) and the Localism Act (2011).7 In 2019, Mayor of London Sadiq Khan enhanced the conditions for community-led housing when he formed the London Community-led Housing Hub with

Network Support & Feasibility Studies: CLH Hub, Workers Coop, HCA, Borough

Grants / Subsidy / Financial Support

by Govt, Municipality, CDS, CLT Network

the support of the London Community Housing Fund (20192023). This collective housing platform was allocated funding to

1.06

Image 1.06. Proposed Project Scheme

act as capital for the implementation of community-led affordable

6. Mayor of London. The London Plan: The Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. (London: Greater London Authority, 2017). < https:// www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/ planning/london-plan/new-londonplan> [accessed 04 September 2020]

owned by TfL or public land reserved for small-scale community-

7. Baiges, C. Ferreri, M. Vidal, L. International Policies to Promote Cooperative Housing. (Barcelona: Lacol SCCL, 2017).

8. Ibid.

20

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

housing developments.8 Khan also established ‘small sites’ on land based developments. Information on small sites is available as open access data through the official website. Subsequently, the municipalities’ responsibilities have been devolved and now fall on communities, which must submit their project development proposal to the local CLT. The Community-led Housing Hub also assists with feasibility studies, small developers support construction efforts and the central government prepares grants and subsidies for land procurement or long-term rents.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

21

In the context of providing affordable housing in London, housing cooperatives as community-led housing offers a model to secure land ownership and tenancy by adopting common property, a highly

Surplus Public Land

relevant feature in the face of rising land values and privatisation.

Local Borough

The focus on actively involved community members as both clients, TfL Land

project teams and occupants signifies a paradigm shift in housing as

NHS Land

a process achieved through an act of appropriation, dissemination, empowerment, networking and subversion. The shift towards collective living has resulted in cooperation as the new subjectivity

NHS Trust

Mayor of London

and has produced multi-scalar design questions. The autonomy of the subject is reclaimed in daily life by providing the possibility for them to appropriate and change the spatial and social configuration

Small Sites

of their surroundings as agreed collectively. Spatial configuration, in

Neighbourhood

Community Land Trust

Building

this context, refers to a social space which is a product of the broader

Cooperatives

socio-economic and political context.9 Therefore, the housing cooperative as a model could be envisioned as an alternative way to provide housing in London. Although the number of communityled housing initiatives in London, especially housing cooperatives, is still low compared with other types of housing provision, there are

Cluster

several international examples of successful housing cooperatives.

In London, as previously noted, the key challenge for new housing

Vulnerable Groups

cooperatives is the high price of land and resultant exponential Image 1.07. Proposed Project Scheme within Health and Care Devolution

1.07

9. Lefebvre, H. The Production of Space. (Cambridge: Basil Blackwell, Inc., 1991).

10. Co-ops 4 London. Co-operate Not Speculate: A Report by the London Co-operative Housing Group. (London: Calverts Cooperative, 2016).

22

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

rise in property prices, not a lack of interest in these initiatives.

Furthermore, millions of low-income Londoners are now faced with the risk of losing their homes as government legislation now stipulates that new ‘affordable’ rents cannot be controlled because they must be fixed to market rates.10 Community-led housing thus has an important part to play in securing the ownership of land and dwellings as common property based on cooperative protocols.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

23

As a framework for the proposed care neighbourhood scheme, the dissertation rethinks care as a communal activity. Care as an interpersonal action provides possibilities for the exchange of collective resources between vulnerable communities. The shift from centralisation to devolution means care as an act should be related to generating collective activities among vulnerable groups.

Vulnerable groups should be understood not as customers, but as locals with the ability to organise care activities based on their needs.

For locals or collectives to establish autonomy vis-à-vis capital and the organisation of production processes is a form of resistance to social, economic and political forces and a means of establishing new forms of governance and non-state ‘rules’.11 Therefore, the dissertation puts forward cooperatives as a shared institution that acts as a mediator between local government support and Although the majority of these small sites are located in urban

vulnerable communities. More importantly, the cooperative strategy

peripheries, the small sites in the city centre (in Zone 1-2) become

is adopted to provide a collective platform for mutual care activities

a new opportunity in the housing cooperatives development, which

to accommodate and enhance resource and knowledge exchange

can be explored. Multiple small sites can be organised under the

between vulnerable communities and public and private health care

umbrella of Community-led Housing Hub for mediation between

organisations as a step towards locals achieving autonomy over

the smaller community groups or coops in the earlier phase, while

their care. Subsequently, the care neighbourhood scheme produced

each small site can be constructed, developed and managed in

within the devolution framework can be reproduced as a ‘common

later stages with Community Land Trust (CLT). At the same time,

ground’12, constructed to underline exception and made in line with

Community-led Housing Hub provides funding (for feasibility

local protocols obligations and forms of behaviour. In terms of

studies) and advice to set up housing cooperatives, working with

scale, the common ground can accumulate multi-scalar interventions

boroughs, developers, housing associations, and funders. For

based on common ownership and usership of vulnerable groups.

financing, aside from low-interest rates from the bank, the model of

11. Stavrides, S. Common Space: The City as Commons. (London: Zed Books, 2016).

rootstock (loan stock) enables coops that have surplus to invest in new coops. The combination of these regulatory frameworks, from the land stock, financial model and legislation might be the first step

12. Hardt, M. Negri, A. Commonwealth. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009)

in unlocking London housing crisis based on cooperation.

24

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

These series of spaces are organised based on collective resource management, related social agencies and how common boundaries are generated. Essentially, care neighbourhood as a common ground distributes care to address specific asymmetries of power, dismantling dominant hierarchies.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

25

1.2. Collectivised Domesticity: The Case of Cooperative Housekeeping and Older Women Co-housing The Cooperative Housekeeping Movement Cooperative housekeeping was a movement pioneered by Melunisa Fay Pierce. It championed the professionalisation of housekeeping as paid labour to realise a ‘domestic revolution’. In the following case studies, forms of care were envisioned as a space where women could be liberated from their daily responsibilities through the employment of paid or volunteer housekeepers and domestic carers. These housekeepers and carers provide assistance and social support within the kitchen, laundry, dining room, bedroom and other amenities. Housekeeping is organised as a cooperative process where the pooling of domestic activities leads to the more efficient distribution of resources and subsequently saves time, money and domestic labour.13 The systematisation of domestic activities in a cluster-type arrangement can exemplify the benefits of labour carried out as the result of an exchange between the private unit and shared services. Collectivised domestic work was intended for the middle-class under the influence of nineteenth13. Hayden, D. The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods, and Cities. (Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1982).

14. Federici, S. Revolution at Point Zero: Housework, Reproduction, and Feminist Struggle. (New York: PM Press, 2012).

26

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

century radical theories, from utopian socialism to cooperativism and even feminism. Cooperative housekeeping, from the feminist point of view, asserts that modes of reproduction can become the foundation of the ‘social factory’ and change the conditions under which we can reproduce ourselves through modes of sharing is essential to creating ‘self-reproducing movements’.14

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

27

Kitchen-less Apartment: Chelsea Cooperative Hotel (1883), New York

by Philip Hubert A further example of cooperative housing is the kitchen-less apartment, which was born when both housing and collective life were considered tools for social transformation. While many of the implications of the architecture of collective living were lost over the course of the twentieth century, primarily due to nefarious political agendas and the insistence on capitalism as the optimal way to organise market forces, these dwellings can be valuable 1.08

points of reference for domestic proposals.15 One early model is the apartment hotel or kitchen-less apartment in New York built between 1901 and 1929. The apartment hotel building was regulated

by Tenement House Law, which provided a loose legal framework that could be used to create kitchen-less apartments that would yield higher profits than those with kitchens.16 At the same time, rents could be reduced, making collective domestic services affordable to a broader segment of the population, including single working women. The detached domestic program of each apartment led to greater interdependency between the household and the community, creating more robust social and urban bonds between the domestic and public spheres. Apartment hotels as dwelling infrastructure not Image 1.08. Chelsea Cooperative Hotel

only facilitated domestic life in the small apartments but also linked

Image 1.09 Kitchen-less Apartment Map in New York, 1929

beyond the unit itself. Collective infrastructure was distributed to

the house to a more extensive collective infrastructure that went far allow people direct access to them from common hallways without

15. Caviar, S. Sqm The Quantified Home: An Exploration of the Evolving Indentity of the Home, From Utopian Experiment to Factory of Data. Biennale Interieur. (Belgium: Lars Muller Publishers, 2014).

1.09 16. Ibid.

28

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

the need to enter the apartments, thus protecting the privacy of residents and systematising domestic work. In the kitchen-less apartment, the domestic and urban spheres temporarily formed an indivisible whole, paradoxically materialising the tenets of radical socialism at the very heart of capitalist society.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

29

0

10m

1.11

0

10m

Image 1.10 Chelsea Cooperative Hotel Collectivised Domestic Infrastructure Plan

1.10

Image 1.11 Chelsea Cooperative Hotel Collectivised Domestic Infrastructure Axonometric

30

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

31

Quadrangle: Homesgarth Cooperative Quadrangle (1909), Letchworth

by H. Clapham Lander The organisation of dwellings in a cluster type is based on the centralisation of domestic services, as in the case of the cooperative housekeeping quadrangle model. As described above, cooperative housekeeping was a movement pioneered by Melunisa Fay Pierce to achieve ‘domestic revolution’ through the professionalisation of housekeeping and caregiving work. In Homesgarth, the quadrangle liberated women from their daily responsibilities through the employment of two to four paid housekeepers.17 These professional workers worked in the centre of the quadrangle where the kitchen, laundry, dining room and other amenities are located.

Domestic services were shared within the cluster containing six to eight households. Each unit was limited to a sitting room, living room and bedroom and catering, heating and maintenance of the Image 1.12. Homesgarth Cooperative Quadrangle 17. Borden, I. ‘Social Space and Cooperative Housekeeping in the English Garden City’, Journal of Architectural and Planning, Vol.16, No.3 (1999).<https://www.jstor.org/stable/43030503?seq=1> [accessed 30 April 2021]

1.12

32

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

properties and gardens were the responsibility of trained staff. The housekeeping system was organised as a cooperative where the pooling of domestic activities led to the more efficient distribution of resources and resulted in savings in terms of time, money and domestic labour. The systematisation of domestic activities in cluster type projects can thus create a productive exchange between the private unit and shared services.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

33

0

10m

1.14

0

10m

Image 1.13. Homesgarth Cooperative Quadrangle Collectivised Domestic Infrastructure Plan

1.13

Image 1.14. Homesgarth Cooperative Quadrangle Collectivised Domestic Axonometric

34

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

35

Neighbourhood: Cooperative Neighbourhood Tobolobampo (1885), unrealised, by Marie Howland, Albert Kimsey Owen and John Deery The collectivisation of dwelling infrastructure in a platform system does not necessarily mean creating a form of ‘housing’ as we may know it but establishing housework as a system of common networks. These platforms assemble different spatial relations, from the kitchen to the unit, cluster, pedestrian access, daycare, clinic, garden, etc., as a continuous process. Although they operate through the creation of limits and boundaries, their primary objective is to penetrate multiple spaces, scales and subjects through collectivisation.

An early example is the cooperative neighbourhood conceptualised for Topolobampo, Mexico, where the systematisation of the kitchen and dining room creates particular urban planning. Backed by the feminist movement, the project imagined paid housework as a domestic service system through which women could contribute at the neighbourhood-district level. However, this project was 0

Image 1.15 Cooperative Neighbourhood Tobolobampo Collectivised Domestic Infrastructure Plan

500m

1.15

36

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

not realised. A project that was realised was that of a community kitchen in Lima, Peru, which was built as a small-scale, autonomous initiative to provide food security for low-income households.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

37

Older Women Co-housing (OWCH), High Barnet, London, 2016 Older Women Co-housing (OWCH) is the first model of care-based co-housing seen in the UK. The movement has been active since 1999 when it began with just six members. They believed in the possibility of mutually organising collectivised modes of living through regular meetings and campaigns focused on their rights to live as they pleased.

Seven years after establishing themselves as a company limited by guarantee and opening a bank account, in 2006, they received funding from the Tudor Trust for running expenses and a Housing for Women grant for social rents.18 From 2009 to 2016, OWCH cooperated with the Hannover Housing Association and Housing & Communities Agencies to set up the co-housing model in which older women supervised and established co-living protocols, as well as overseeing project development and building construction.

OWCH’s mission is to create neighbourhood clusters that reduce health and social care demand and dependency.19 The older women aim to reduce primary care dependency, thus shifting their care demand to mutual interdependency as part of their daily routine. The shift towards mutual interdependency is also reflected in OWCH’s attempt to adopt alternative modes of co-housing, moving away from the current Image 1.16. Cooperative Neighbourhood Tobolobampo Collectivised Domestic Infrastructure Axonometric 0

500m

18. Older Women Co-housing (OWCH). OWCH History. (London: Calverts Cooperative, 2016). <https://www.owch.org.uk/history> [accessed 07 March 2021]

1.16

19. Brenton, M. ‘New Ground’ Cohousing Community, High Barnet: resilience and adaptability. (London: Housing LIN, 2020). <https://www.housinglin. org.uk/blogs/New-Ground-Cohousing-Community-High-Barnet-resilience-and-adaptability/> [accessed 07 March 2021]

38

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

care-based dwelling such as the retirement village and care homes.

Furthermore, the stigmatisation of the elderly as a burden on the family and the state, as well as generalisations about how they should live and be cared for, tends to overlook their demands and ability to contribute.

In contrast, co-housing offers an alternative way of living that gives the older women agency over their dwelling and care and thus open up the opportunity for them to determine forms of organisation and living protocols based on cooperation. Although facing financial difficulties and regulatory barriers, the older women have found another way to live established through common ownership, extended households, collectivised services and informal care within the grouping system of the cluster type.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

39

The cluster type is adopted to spatialise the grouping system of twoto-three older women as an extended household. Co-housing as an architecture of care is built with the purpose of establishing a domestic environment where community life becomes a new ‘family’ life, which can be achieved through solidarity and support. Although facing financial difficulties and regulatory barriers, the older women found an alternative modes of living, in this context, is established through common ownership, extended household, collectivised services, and informal care – within the grouping system of cluster type. Cluster type is adopted to spatialise the grouping system of two-to-three older women as an extended household. Co-housing as an architecture of care is built with the purpose of establishing a domestic environment where community become a new ‘family’ live can be found through solidarity support.

Currently, OWCH has 26 members who organise the management and operation of their living arrangements based on mutual support, with additional care provided by social workers in the Barnet neighbourhood.

The co-housing project features a cluster unit of one-bedroom to threebedroom units facing a communal garden. The unit adopts a deep plan type with a living room and kitchenette, while communal facilities such as the communal kitchen, dining area, laundry, garden and community farm on the ground floor. Every morning, the older women wake up, make breakfast with their household members and garden on the balcony or in the shared gardens. Next, they do laundry or go for a cycle around the neighbourhood. Workshops, dancing classes and community farming are weekly events that take place in the shared garden, while monthly meetings are held in the hall. In the evening, the women cook and eat together in the communal cooking and dining areas as their daily communal activities. From their first act of getting up in the morning, the

1.17

women move between rooms, clusters, buildings and neighbourhoods through collectivised domestic activities and personal desires that blur Image 1.17. Founding Members of Older Women’s Co-Housing (OWCH), 2016 Source: https://www.dezeen. com/2016/12/09/pollard-thomasedwards-architecture-first-older-cohousing-scheme-owch-uk/

40

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

the barriers between inside and outside. The example of OWCH shows that the nature of the household as a singular and private entity can be expanded by the collectivisation of domestic services to achieve the common ownership of property and nurture the concept of cohousehold family life.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

41

cluster

1 bedroom (11 unit)

building

neighbourhood

2 bedroom (11 unit)

care coordinator

3 bedroom (3 unit)

security guard

administration

family member

guest

social worker/ voluntary carers

neighbourhood nurse

Brent GP Practice

personal trainer/coach

art & music primary school teacher

Brent's resident association

art & music primary school teacher

green community

treasury

Older Women (leaseholder)

1.19

Image 1.18. Activities in Older Women’s Co-Housing Source: https://www.dezeen. com/2016/12/09/pollard-thomasedwards-architecture-first-older-cohousing-scheme-owch-uk/

1.18

Image 1.19. Older Women Co-housing (OWCH) Organisational Structure

42

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

43

1.20

1.21

0

10m

1.23

Image 1.20. Cluster Unit Type A (1 bedroom)

0

Image 1.21. Cluster Unit Type B (2 bedrooms)

5m

1.22

Image 1.22. Cluster Unit Type C (3 bedrooms) Image 1.23. Older Women Co-housing (OWCH) Site Plan

44

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

45

1.3. Cluster Type of Inter-household Care storage

looking from balcony bathroom

The architecture of collectivised domesticity shows that the nature

preparing breakfast elevator access getting out of bed changing clothes

of the household as a singular and a private entity can be effectively

having a breakfast & tea

challenged. The co-housing model has revealed that providing spatial organisation and social infrastructure on multiple scales, collectivising walking through inner court path

taking letters or ordered goods

housework activities and pooling resources can create an inter-household

sunbathing

care framework. Furthermore, the social structure of a household is redefined by grouping vulnerable subjects and introducing new forms of kinship beyond familial relations. Inter-household organisation questions the basis of care as an act and a process in terms of caring

communal cooking (once /week)

about, taking care of, caregiving and care-receiving. In this context, care is redefined as a non-linear ritual achieved through complex intergenerational structures that can be changed and reproduced daily. communal dining

Instead of positioning vulnerable groups as passive care-receivers, the

gardening, urban farming

spatial organisation of inter-household care proposes a new awareness of care labour through interdependency and social support. Through the organisation of care activities in the cluster type, interdependency between vulnerable subjects is set out as a pre-condition: it becomes walking through single-sided corridor

the first layer of informal care with the aim of reducing dependency on laundry drying laundry

bicycling, exercise around the neighbourhood

primary care. The collective organisation of care activities by the cluster type requires spatial interventions that enable informal care, modes of assistance and spatial appropriation within an integrated framework of inter-household care from the dwelling unit to the neighbourhood scale.

music lesson dancing class

playing bingo, scrabble, chess

The cluster type as a design proposition should organise cell, threshold and circulation elements as interchangeable components that enhance informal care exchanges across multiple scales. Furthermore, the enfilade type dismantles the traditional nature of domesticity, Image 1.24. Collectivised Domestic Activities in Older Women Co-housing (OWCH)

community meeting (once/month)

yoga / tai chi class

20. Evans, R. Translation from Drawings to Building and Other Essays. (London: Architectural Association Publication, 1st edition, 1996).

1.24

46

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

which constructs privacy, gender roles and the choreography of the household based on spatial hierarchies and disconnections.20 As modes of collective living require alternative responses, enfilade as a type proposes thoroughfare rooms that embrace spontaneous interactions, visibility and spatial flexibilities.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

47

The design proposes the hybrid of enfilade and linear type in light of users’ mobility concerns, to optimise the distribution of domestic services and to generate spatial connectivity that enables the collectivisation of domestic services, social support and supervision

kitchen

dining

salon = club

housekeeping

bathing

children's space

services

physical culture

individual living cell

between vulnerable individuals through inter-household forms of care. In doing so, the cluster type minimises circulation, provides the possibility for care acts appropriation and sets up spatial gradation as a series of interconnected spaces. Therefore, the cluster as a group form of architecture requires typological rethinking to ensure it can accommodate different care activities and establish new relationships between residents. In the context of co-housing, the cluster type

dining

adopts a mixed typology by combining separating the dwelling unit

services

kitchen

and common areas, which are organised according to accessibility, common activities, personal care and private units. The cluster type

children's space

housekeeping

bathing

physical culture

salon = club

individual living cell

is formed by the combination of a double-loaded system for dwelling units, open-plan common areas in the centre and a linear strip of connected terraces adjacent to the dwelling unit for outdoor activities.

Drawing on the study of shared elderly accommodation, in the

housekeeping

to 12 households in a duplex system that enables visual connection

household

inter-household

proposal presented here, each co-housing cluster accommodates 8

kitchen

and care supervision by carers while simultaneously providing larger spatial volume for diverse care activities in the common area. The first

bathing

floor is dedicated to the elderly and vulnerable people and is directly connected to the common area, including the terrace and shared children's space

dining

domestic services spaces. Each unit is equipped with a bathroom and

individual living cell

kitchenette, while domestic services such as cooking, washing and laundry are organised in separate areas. The common area is organised physical culture

as a multi-purpose space that enables shared informal care between

services

households. Meanwhile, gardening, clothes drying, sunbathing and Image 1.25. Reinterpreation of Minimum Dwelling; from Cells to Inter-Household.

salon = club

1.25

48

The notion of minimum dwelling, in terms of collectivised domestic services can be redefined through household reorganisation.

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

other outdoor activities can be practiced on the terrace as a cluster or inter-cluster space. Personal care demands can be satisfied in the private unit, while consultation, conversation and light exercise can be done in the common area or terrace. The second floor is intended for use by care workers or volunteers there to provide care assistance either person-to-person or through visual supervision.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

49

The Condition 1 project proposes an elderly co-housing model to be achieved through a cooperative mechanism under the CLT model. The project is designed for implementation on two sites. First, on the St Katharine’s and Wapping site, which is a small site on TfL land suitable for small builders and, second, on the NHS Royal Hospital site on Whitechapel High Street within the proposed neighbourhood care model. The elderly co-housing project aims to accommodate modes

Condition 1: Elderly Co-housing

of collective living for elder minority groups to give them common ownership of their dwelling space and, at the same time, to increase

Condition 1.1: Elderly Co-housing 01 in St. Katharine’s & Wapping (Small Sites Program)

their independence by reducing their dependency on primary care and public institutions in favour of community care activities. The co-housing organisational scheme is divided into three levels: (1) the cluster, where informal forms of care are practiced with the elderly subject, (2) the building, used by housing cooperatives to organise daily activities, pool resources and manage the co-housing, and (3) the neighbourhood, where the care manager helps to organise requests and schedules with the cooperatives and provide additional social care support. The proposed co-housing care activities are further organised into the unit (bedroom, closet, study), cluster (kitchenette, bathroom, storage, dining room) and inter-cluster (shared kitchen, dining area, laundry, drying area, living room, semi-outdoor garden, vertical circulation, etc.) according to the collectivisation of domestic work, circulation and inter-household relations involving the exchange of caregiving and care-receiving in the dwelling.

50

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

51

1.27

1.26

Image 1.26. Elderly Co-housing 01 Site in St. Katharine’s & Wapping (Small Site, Small Builder Program) Image 1.27. Proposed Care Activities of the Elderly Co-housing 01

52

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

53

0

4m

0

4m

0

4m

1.28

Image 1.28. Cluster Unit Module and Housing Infrastructure

1.29

Image 1.29. Cluster Type Plan in Elderly Co-housing 01

54

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

55

11

3 9

13

8

14

12 14

1 14

6

16 6 12

6

13

5

10 1

15

7

11

3

12 4

13

2

15

1

1. Main Access/Common Area 2. Cafe & Bengali Food Shop

0

3. Shared Courtyard

10. Vertical Circulation

4. Shared Storage

11. Common Areas

5. Day Care & Nursery

12. Communal Dining

6. Retail Unit

13. Shared Kitchen

7. Utilities & Storage

14. Cluster Unit A (3 Elderly)

8. ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Language) Course

15. Cluster Unit B (2 Elderly + 1 Carer)

9. Sewing & Fashion Design Workshop

16. Cluster Unit C (2 Elderly)

10

0

1.30

10

1.31

Image 1.30. Elderly Co-housing 01 Site Plan Image 1.31. Elderly Co-housing 01 Dwelling Floor Plan (3rd & 4th Fl.)

56

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

57

0

TRANSVERE SECTION

5m

1.32

1.33

Image 1.32. Elderly Co-housing 01 Transversal Section 1.33. Elderly Co-housing 02 4th FL. Image AXONOMETRIC Building Axonometric

58

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

0

10

59

Condition 1.1: Elderly Co-housing 02 in Whitechapel (Part of the Proposed Care Neighbourhood Model)

0

10

50

Image 1.34. Elderly Co-housing 02 Site in Whitechapel (TfL Public Land)

60

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

61

1.36

Image 1.35. Proposed Care Activities in Elderly Co-housing 02

1.35

Image 1.36. Proposed Elderly Cohousing 02 Organisation

62

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

63

0

4m

1.38 1.37 Image 1.37. Elderly Co-housing 02 Cluster Unit Type Image 1.38. Elderly Co-housing 02 Axonometric

64

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

65

0

4m

0

0

4m

4m

0

1.39

4m

1.40

Image 1.39. Cluster Unit 1st Floor Plan Image 1.40. Cluster Unit 2nd Floor Plan

66

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

67

0

5m

1.42

0

10m

1.41

Image 1.41. Elderly Co-housing 02 Building Plan Image 1.42. Elderly Co-housing 02 Section Perspective

68

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

69

Image 1.43. Elderly Co-housing 02 Axonometric

70

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

71

Image 1.44. Elderly Co-housing 02 Perspective from Outside-In

72

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

73

2.1. Rethinking Care: Between Domestic Unit and the Public Institution Care as an inter-personal relation is practiced in the domestic realm of the family in the form of domestic labour. As Donzelot argues, family has become the smallest unit of the state through marriage and the social roles imposed on each member, with the wife as the intermediary between the state and the family.21 From this perspective, care is conceptualised and performed as: (1) practical work or caring as labour towards the reproduction of the family through housework and childcare and (2) psychological care as an emotional phenomenon involving feelings of love and affection expressed through emotional support.22 Graham is similarly concerned with the reproduction of the family in the domestic domain as the essential inter-personal care relation.23 Within the domestic realm, care organises the household or oikos as an economic means of reproduction, where economic relations are reproduced and practiced through familial relations. Care, in

2. Cluster Forms: Collective Care Model in London

this sense, is an economic model of interrelation produced within the realm of the oikos (house, property, private space) through the affective labour of women. Care takes place in terms of the concern 21. Donzelot, J. The Policing of Families. (New York: Pantheon Books, 1977).

22. Graham, H. ‘Caring: A Labour of Love’, in J. Finch and D. Groves, (eds.). A Labour of Love: Women, Work and Caring. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983).

23. Ibid.

24. Tronto, Joan C. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethnic of Care. (New York: Routledge, 1994).

25. Ibid.

26. Trogal, K. ‘Caring for Space: Ethnical Agencies in Contemporary Spatial Practice’ (PhD thesis, University of Sheffield, 2012)

74

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

manifested when people live together day-to-day where it can be characterised as both a single activity and a process.24 As an act, care forms subject interrelation through four phases; caring about, taking care of, caregiving and care-receiving.25 The four phases of care create multiple agencies, social roles and forms of labour as inter-scalar practices that go beyond the walls of private homes and hospitals. As Trogal argues, care can also be understood as a civic activity that builds connections between people and thus communities.26 Therefore, care as forms of inter-personal relation has always been political in the sense that it creates the subject and organises behaviour and our existence as interdependent creatures.

In rethinking this issue, the spatial organisation of the household provides another possibility for social interdependencies and interpersonal modes of care.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

75

The concept of reproductive work, care as an act, reflects the larger issue of capitalism in terms of affective and immaterial labour. The notion of care work emerged in the 1980s with the division of labour within reproductive work and the separation of the physical aspects of this work from the emotional.27 Forms of care from the capitalist perspective were first discussed by Marx under the title ‘Fragment of the Machines’ in the Grundrisse (1857-58), Marx’s unpublished notes. Marx draws on technological advancement, capitalist modes of production and the class struggle as the issues underpinning his main arguments while ignoring the discussion of security in old age and elder care of the working class themselves.28 It is argued that cooperation is exclusively a qualitative form of inter-personal relations and the capitalist organisation of work to achieve maximum production and labour efficiency. However, this understanding of cooperation neglects solidarity and the many ‘institutions for mutual support’ such as associations, societies, brotherhoods and alliances that were present in the industrial population at that time.29 Capitalism dictates that the supposed 27. Federici, S. Revolution at Point Zero: Housework, Reproduction, and Feminist Struggle. (New York: PM Press, 2012).

28. Pitts, Frederick H. ‘Beyond the Fragment: Postoperaismo, Postcapitalism and Marx’s ‘Notes on Machines’, 45 years on’, Economy and Society, 46:3-4, 324-345 (2017) < https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ full/10.1080/03085147.2017.13973 60> [accessed 10 May 2021] 29. Kropotkin, P. Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution. (United States: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014).

30. Thomas, C. De-Constructing Concepts of Care. (Sociology Vol. 27, No.4, 1993) <https://www.jstor. org/stable/42855270> 31. Tronto, Joan C. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethnic of Care. (New York: Routledge, 1994).

76

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

solution offered by the technological innovation of eldercare is the only way forward. A change in social relations based on a collective process would undermine capitalisms command over social activity and reproduction. Care, in these terms, becomes both modes of reproduction and forms of cooperation that reproduce different engagement between people.

On the other side of the coin, the state manages care through public institutions within a welfare state framework. Social care, mainly eldercare, in capitalist society has been in a constant state of crisis for which the reasons are twofold: the devaluation of reproductive work in capitalism and the stigmatised of the elderly as no longer productive.30 Moreover, relentless campaigns by political economists and governments have portrayed eldercare provision as the goal for old age through the ‘rewards’ of a pension and social security despite the reality that is often poverty and a huge tax burden on younger generations.31

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

77

In recent times, a new notion of care has emerged in the form of mutual care practices. One example is the HEBA Women’s Project in Tower Hamlets. This group of women from minority backgrounds has gradually redrawn the notion of care as belonging neither to familial kinship relations nor public institutions. Although the gendered nature of care from the domestic realm continues, mutual care practices manifest care as mutually organised interhousehold activities undertaken with private and public parties and In London, the NHS provides health and social services on a

that exist between the domestic and the public. However, some

national scale within the British welfare state framework. Despite

vulnerable communities cannot access the care support they need

the fact that the domestic realm and public institution operate

due to centralised managerial issues and economic limitations.

at different scales and are organised differently, both are still

This interrelated form of care proposed by the HEBA Women’s

performed by women as day-to-day reproductive work. At the

Project supports social care at different scales. The intermediate

same time, caregiving and care-receiving are found in more than

nature of mutual care practices shows how care as a project can

one relationship. For example, a frail elderly person living alone may

be realised outside of both the domestic realm and the central

receive support from a daughter-in-law, a friend, a district nurse

public institution through mutual collaboration and common goals.

and social service workers32. Nonetheless, care still tends to be

Care thus becomes a spatial and organisational question based on a

provided in the form of a service industry that often generalises the

decentralisation model.

labour and affective subjectivities involved. Although the current provision of health and social care adopts a decentralised model

In line with the Health and Care Devolution Programme, care

through collaboration with private and volunteer organisations,

must be rethought as an alternative model of cooperatives that can

care providers continue to share the same gender, race and class

mediate the managerial and spatial gap between public and private

characteristics. In the West, the history of care labour is the history

care agencies. In so doing, this dissertation proposes a cooperative

of the work of slaves, servants and women. In modern industrial

strategy to create a common institution within the neighbourhood

societies, caring responsibilities continue to be disproportionately

to organise collective care. Moreover, the dissertation adopts

carried out by women, the working class and people of colour.33 The

a cluster type as the spatial configuration of inter-scalar care

pattern of employment in the care sector reveals that care activities

conditions: co-housing, the community care cluster and the high

are undervalued and care work is underpaid and disproportionately

street within the care neighbourhood. Furthermore, care as a form

conducted by women and minorities. This is without considering

of interdependency should not be understood as a contract but as

that women take on the majority of caring tasks in the home, such as caring for the infirm, children and elderly. The proposed scheme argues that care as a project should reduce dependency on a single and a centralised institution and create interdependencies between the practice of caregiving and care-receiving.

78

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

32. Thomas, C. ‘De-Constructing Concepts of Care.’ (Sociology Vol. 27, No.4, 1993) <https://www.jstor. org/stable/42855270>

a condition that is constantly changing through common protocols

33. Tronto, Joan C. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethnic of Care. (New York: Routledge, 1994).

the same time, allow care-receivers greater autonomy and choice

and inter-household support. The project aims to reduce the dependency on public institutions for economic purposes and at about their care.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

79

2.2. Case Study: Architecture of Collective Care in London

Early Model of the British Welfare State Collective care in the UK has a long history from the invention of the welfare state to the emergence of the community care model.

The early models of care architecture were aimed to establish a standard of living, manage society at large and normalise how people lived within the framework of the welfare state. As Foucault argued, the state organises health and social care by normalising regulation that regularises, administers and fosters the life of subjects into ‘biopolitics’.34 The provision of care was set up as the biopolitics (state’s control towards the body and modes of living) of the population and its architecture became an apparatus of the state, identifying the abnormal and transforming it into the normal in what can be seen as an early model of the welfare institution.35 Throughout the nineteenth to twentieth centuries, the welfare state organised care provision through the classification of vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, disabled and poor and their inclusion in care institutions, while the emerging middle-class family was organised in the domestic realm of council housing. By institutionalising modes of living within the context of religion, hygiene and morality, the state introduced the architecture of collective care as both infrastructure and institution to regulate Image 2.01. The New Poor Law Amendment Act (1842), by John Frederick Archbold.

Source:https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/outline-of-the-new-poorlaw-amendment-act#

2.01

34. Foucault, M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. (New York: Penguin Social Sciences, 1991).

35. Nilsson, J. Wallenstein, S. O. Foucault, Biopolitics, and Governmentality. (Stockholm: Södertörn Philosophical Studies, 2013).

80

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

vulnerable groups. In the context of the British welfare state, provision for the poor through the Corporation of the Poor and Poor Law (1647) became the early model of social care provision.

The regulatory framework allowed the government to pursue the primary mission of gathering beggars, vagrants and parish children in the workhouse where the poor were classified, categorised and required to work in return for a subsidised dwelling. Furthermore, under the significant influence of the Catholic Church in England at the time, priests and nuns were employed as caretakers within social institutions, delivering their religious teaching to the poor.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

81

Workhouse The implementation of the British Poor Law led to the emergence of the workhouse as the first welfare institution built in London with the initial mission of dealing with beggars, vagrants and parish children. The house was divided into two sections, a Keeper’s Side for the house of correction and a Steward’s Side, which functioned as a residential workhouse and industrial workshop for poor children. The organisation of vulnerable groups under the church not only aimed to provide welfare support but also to recruit the vulnerable, mainly the poor, as a workforce. Although perceived as a normalising institution, workhouses were developed ‘outside’ of the social system by adopting the impermeable courtyard type that organised the poor based on gender, age and types of work. Paupers were assigned penitentiary-type tasks such as stone-breaking and oakum-picking.36 It thus can be argued that the workhouse as a 2.02

social institution was the combination of prison, hospital and church. The recurring issues of inadequate diet and poor hygiene resulting in death prompted a movement against the workhouse.

An investigation by MPs and the House of Commons lists appalling workhouse practices. These included the elderly and infirm being removed from their homes and friends when they became destitute, husbands and wives separated in the workhouses, children forced Image 2.02. Painting of the Victorian Workhouse Interior. Source:

from their mothers and indecent behaviour by workhouse officers.

Image 2.03. Building Plan of Kennington Workhouse, London, 1724.

though, by this point, many workhouses had been renamed and

36. Foster, L. ‘The Representation of the Workhouse in the Nineteenth-Century Culture’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Cardiff University, 2014), p. 18

2.03

82

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

It was not until 1948 that the Poor Law was officially abolished, transformed into specialised institutions.37 Many of the buildings used as workhouses went on to become hospitals but the fear evoked by the workhouse did not dissipate after the function of the buildings changed. The negative associations of the physical site of

37. Crowther, M. A., The Workhouse System 1834-1929: The History of an English Social Institution. (London: Routledge, 2017).

the workhouse were such that, years after the last institutions closed,

38. Crowther, M. A., ‘The Workhouse’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 78, 183-194 (p.188).

the new model of lodging house and almshouse emerged as the

tales still circulated of a generation of working-class people reluctant to receive medical treatment in that institution. Subsequently, preferred approach to the vulnerable by the state.38

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

83

Almshouse The almshouse as a structure and social care provider has experienced multiple transformations. Originally, the almshouse was part of the church and how it provided for vulnerable communities and it adopted a monastic way of living. The current almshouses have been transformed into elderly housing to provide assisted living.

These almshouses are under the control of trustee organisations and a warden or scheme manager. The almshouse adopts a semicourtyard or quadrangle type consisting of buildings up to three storeys high and single-loaded circulation facing the central court.

Within the framework of the welfare state, the almshouse reflects a shift from an institutionalised form of care such as the workhouse to a more communal model where interaction between the vulnerable

2.04

is enhanced. The communal facilities such as dining areas and kitchens are placed in the middle section of the quadrangle, while the central court is used for gardening and parties. The residents organise workshops, sketch clubs, dance classes and bingo in the hall as their routine common activities.

As an archetype of care accommodation, the almshouse plays a crucial part in coordinating personal care support using the cluster type.39 This form of care accommodation creates inter-personal relations between vulnerable persons through extended household structures that share property, activities and domestic services as a group of two to four household units. The typological challenge of the cluster is to minimise internal mobility while enhancing Image 2.04. Hoptons Almshouse, London, 1752

room connections by centralising the corridor or adopting enfilade

Image 2.05. Building Plan of Hoptons Almshouse, London, 1752.

part of informal care and therapy achieved by creating a connection

39. Richards, C. Community Life in Richmond’s Almshouses. (London: Richmond Charities, 2017) 40. Best, R. Porteus, J. HAPPI: Housing our Ageing Population: Plan for Implementation. (London: Hannover Housing Association, 2012). <https://www.housinglin. org.uk/APPGInquiry_HAPPI>

2.05

84

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

organisation. Furthermore, spatial comfort is considered an essential between the indoors and the outdoors as in the case of the balcony, terrace and garden.40 In the context of London, this cluster type has been tested previously in the almshouse and care homes as collective care dwellings for the elderly. Although the almshouse still represents a heavily dependent form of care, the typological notion of the cluster in the almshouse shows signs of moving towards collective living.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

85

Care Homes As the twentieth century’s contribution to care accommodation, the nursing home or care home was first introduced as a result of the reformation of former workhouses. In 1927, the Nursing Homes Registration Act made care homes official institutions responsible for providing nursing care for those suffering from any sickness, injury, or infirmity.41 Consequently, the post-war UK formed the welfare state in response to the urgent need to provide mass health care services, which evolved into the NHS in 1948. Furthermore, the old Poor Law was abolished by the 1948 National Assistance Act, which made local authorities responsible for assisting ill, disabled and older people with care, primarily through care homes.

The growth of care homes came in the 1980s under the 1980 Right to Buy law under Thatcher, which enabled the privatisation of care homes as private businesses. Currently, there are approximately three times as many beds in care homes as there are in NHS hospitals.42 Although it can be argued that privatisation can improve the quality of services and space in care homes, it creates socio-economic and managerial barriers impacting the accessibility of care homes.

Furthermore, the relationship between private care homes and public health care is uncertain; care home residents have inequitable access to NHS services, particularly in terms of specialist expertise such as dementia, rehabilitation and end of life care.43 Therefore, an integrated model of care accommodation should be considered not only to better mediate the relationship between vulnerable groups and public health care but also to accommodate the independence of the care subjects. Typologically, care homes adopt a cluster form by grouping vulnerable subjects in two- to three-person clusters.

2.06 Image 2.06. Pilgrim Gardens Evington Perspectives 41. Goodman, C. ‘Care Homes and Health Services’, Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2016, Vol. 21, 1-3 (p. 2) 42. Ibid.

43. Goodman, C. ‘Care Homes and Health Services’, p. 3 86

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Care homes, however, do not provide collectivised domestic services, which can allow the elderly or frail to conduct their daily activities independently, as these services are assigned to care workers. The ability to reproduce daily and care activities through collective responsibility and cooperation must be introduced in care accommodation models. The act of caregiving and care-receiving should not become a one-way process to prevent the re-emergence of the past workhouse experience.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

87

2.08

0

2.09

10m

2.07

Image 2.07. Pilgrim Gardens Evington Dwelling Plan (Ground Floor) Image 2.08. Pilgrim Gardens Evington Cluster Type A Plan (twobedrooms)

0

5m

Image 2.09. Pilgrim Gardens Evington Cluster Type B Plan (one-bedroom)

88

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

89

2.3. Cluster as Forms of Social Care Infrastructure The cluster type has the potential to organise life across multiple

From Agamben’s point of view, states of exception revolve between

social and spatial conditions. In the above examples of collective care

the private life and the public sphere, not only as a citizen of state

models, the cluster type acts as a tool to choreograph daily activities

but even to the point of acting upon their own way of living.45 To

and establish the framework for daily rituals. As an architectural device,

spatialise this state of exception, the cluster operates both as an

a cluster organises the arrangement of rooms, the distribution of

enclave (space of containment) and armature (space of distribution)

collectivised services and creates privacy. Influenced by the specific

to maintain its porosity. Although the cluster proposes forms of

socio-political context of the early Poor Law provisions, the cluster

collective care, it could result in a closed enclave that excludes and

type was initially exploited as a politicised spatial strategy to control

distinguishes itself from the outside. On the urban scale, the cluster

vulnerable groups through spatial separation and disconnection

that loses its threshold character can become a fatal trap (if this

based on gender, age and labour in the workhouse. In the almshouse

enclave takes the form of camp) or a zone of protection (if this

and care homes, the cluster type acts as a socially embedded spatial

enclave takes the form of a secluded area of privilege), as in the case

configuration through the use of the courtyard, circulation design

of exclusive gated communities.46

and centralised communal facilities. Reflections on the agency of the cluster type are inseparable from the social understanding of

The second condition, the community care cluster, aims to propose

vulnerable groups that prevailed at that time. Currently, the existing

a spatial framework for social care decentralisation to enhance

model of institutionalised care provision is experiencing a shift to

community-led initiatives and promote collaboration between local

a greater focus on the resilience and autonomy of the subject, as

communities and the central health care body through a cooperative

seen in community-led care initiatives. In this emerging context,

strategy. The community care cluster is designed for implementation

care, as a political interrelation, is exercised through adaptation,

on the NHS Royal London Hospital site, Whitechapel, in response

collectivisation and cooperation, in which case the cluster type

to the 2017 London Health and Care Devolution Programme. The

should be able to organise unexpected activities, social interrelation

cluster is composed of an individual pavilion and pilotis system with

and multi-scalar activities from one’s room to the neighbourhood.

open space in-between that promotes interchangeable activities and sets out spatial relations between different groups. Care as a

The dissertation proposes the cluster type as a key design

44. Stavrides, S. Towards the City of Thresholds. (New York: Common Notions, 2019).

proposition for organising vulnerable groups within an extended household structure. The cluster, as a system of groupings, raises

45. Agamben, G. State of Exception.

(Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2005).

the possibility of practising informal care among the elderly by collectivising domestic activities and setting up boundaries from the outside. These boundaries are constructed through common

46. Sennett, R. Together: The Rituals, Pleasures and Politics of Cooperation.

(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2012).

protocols where the state of exception as trespassing, exceeding or crossing spaces is exercised.44 90

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

set of collective activities is exercised through the design principles guiding the articulation of movement, inside-outside relation and framework of appropriation. In the community care cluster condition, community-led care activities are defined as adaptable and periodically changing according to a common protocol. Thus, the pavilions are open plan structures with adjustable dividers, each equipped with a storage room for furniture and objects of use in multiple activities.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

91

Condition 2 proposes a community care cluster for implementation on the NHS land on which sits the Royal London Hospital within the neighbourhood care model for Whitechapel High Street. The project aims to convert the surplus public land into community care infrastructure that accommodates social care services through the cooperation of multiple community-led organisations in the neighbourhood. Within the community care cluster, the proposed activities are arranged based on modes of assistance, collective participation and exchanges with community-led care initiatives to create an integrated system of neighbourhood social support.

The proposed care activities relate to health (neighbourhood clinic, apothecary, outdoor gym), finances (workshops, training, ESL English courses, co-op store and café), social life (bingo hall, discussion area, seating area) and recreation (playground, community farm, greenhouse).

The community care cluster is developed as a series of interconnected pavilions using the pilotis system to create hybrid indoor-outdoor spaces. The difference in spatial qualities provides diversity in

Condition 2: Community Care Cluster

accommodating and appropriating spaces as part of a process of

Whitechapel, Tower Hamlets

independent cooperation. The proposed programmes are envisioned as collective care acts in the form of a spatial framework that can be changed as per the scheduled protocol. The architecture of the care cluster is developed as a group form, accommodating collectivised mutual care activities with the aim of producing common ground.

Common ground is both an organisational and spatial framework that provides collective autonomy for vulnerable communities in terms of ownership, decision-making and care activities. The cooperation between care collectives and vulnerable communities regarding care provision and daily management establishes a system of solidarity networks to reduce socio-economic dependency on institutionalised care. In the community care cluster, care as a political interrelation is exercised through adaptation, collectivisation and cooperation. The cluster type should organise unexpected activities, social interrelation and multi-scalar activities from a single room to the neighbourhood.

92

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

93

0

20m

2.11

2.10

0

10

50

Image 2.10. Community Care Cluster Site in Whitechapel (Royal London Hospital Land) Image 2.11. Community Care Cluster Site Plan

94

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

95

Image 2.12. Proposed Community Care Cluster Activities

2.12

2.13

Image 2.13. Community Care Cluster Building Axonometric

96

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

97

Image 2.14. Community Care Cluster Axonometric

98

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

99

Image 2.15. Community Care Cluster Perspective

100

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

101

3.1. Towards a Devolved Model of Social Care In rethinking the shift towards a decentralised and devolved proThe inheritance of the post-war period, the modern welfare state is facing multiple issues that go beyond the standardisation of health care services, such as mental health, emerging social care demands, community care movements and social inequalities.47 In Welfare 5.0, Cottam argues that these modern issues of care are rooted in the inability of the traditional welfare state to move away from its centralised character.48 The Localism Act (2011), which was enacted by the government to implement the wide-ranging decentralisation of public services and housing, may appear a promising first step in addressing this challenge. Decentralisation transfers the authority for administrative management from the central government to local councils. However, the decentralisation proposed by the Localism Act does not challenge the deep-rooted centralisation of service provision in London and the UK.49 An example is access to housing,

3. Care Neighbourhood Model: Community-led Care Framework

which is governed by the housing authorities which decide who to support and the conditions of support and express a preference for the homeless and people living in unsanitary conditions.50 Assessment and decision-making are still based on the centralised organisation system creating managerial issues that can lead to the neglect of certain vulnerable groups. These recurring managerial barriers have prompted further devolution initiatives in the 2016 47. Cottam, H. Welfare 5.0: Why we need a social revolution and How to make it happen. (London: UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, 2020).

48. Ibid.

49. Pipe, J. Two years on, what has the Localism Act achieved? (The Guardian, 2 November 2013). < https://www.theguardian.com/ local-government-network/2013/ n o v / 0 2 / l o c a l i s m - a c t - d e vo l u tion-uk-local-authorities> 50. Ibid.

102

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Cities & Local Government Devolution and the 2017 Health and Care Devolution Programmes. The devolution of social care responsibilities proposed by these programmes is designed to allow vulnerable groups and communities to participate in and contribute to social care provision at the borough level. With the emerging mutual care organisations at the borough and neighbourhood level, devolution opens up the possibility of integrating local council and community-led care practices using an intermediate organisational structure, alternative spatial conditions of care and other forms of social care infrastructure.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

103

Social care devolution in London aims to integrate existing public assets and infrastructure at the local level. In this case, social care devolution for vulnerable groups can not only improve health care accessibility but also these groups’ quality of life in terms of housing and socio-economic necessities. The integration of different social care conditions should establish a two-way system where vulnerable groups are able to contribute based on their ability and choosing in return for an affordable and secure model of provision model and the possibility of change.

Drawing on the CLTs’ secured model of land and housing ownership, the dissertation proposes cooperatives to act as intermediaries between the local council and vulnerable groups.

Under the supervision of the CLT, cooperatives can obtain secured co-ownership of their dwelling, organise their own mutual care and cooperate with local care agencies. As agency is described as the ability of the individual to act independently of the constraining structures of society51, care agencies should enable the vulnerable subjects to organise towards an independent care-based living.

Moreover, the establishment of a cooperative system aims to reduce dependency on health care services such as hospitals, clinics and care homes. The proposed mechanism of different social care conditions Image 3.01. Welfare 5.0 Components.

Source: Cottam, H. Welfare 5.0: Why we need a social revolution and How to make it happen. (London: UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, 2020).

3.01

51. Awan, N. Schneider, T. Till, J. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. (New York: Routledge, 2011).

104

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

conceptualises care as a multi-scalar intervention that enables care supervision whilst simultaneously providing care subjects with the spatial framework they need to independently organise their care activities as collectives. From making tea at breakfast in the living room to planting at the community farm, the proposed design rethinks each daily activity as a basic form of care from the scale of the room to the neighbourhood.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

105

3.2. Case Study: Community-led Care Network in Whitechapel In Whitechapel, community-led care initiatives are organised as mutual care activities for vulnerable groups. Established as mutual care initiatives and recently acquiring the support of the local council, these care projects provide an organisational and spatial understanding of community care that opens up the possibility of working within the social care devolution framework.

As a borough, Whitechapel has an historically diverse community that dates back to the early twentieth century and is the result of colonialisation and migration. The majority of minority communities in Whitechapel are Indian, Middle Eastern and Bangladeshi, who utilise spaces in multiple ways, on the one hand, to ensure their economic survival and on the other hand, to maintain their ethnicsocial ties within an alien culture and environment.52 As the dominant migrant population, the Bangladeshi community in Tower Hamlets share similar kinship ties and grouping patterns.53 The dissertation investigates Bangladeshi communities’ care networks as a case study of mutual care initiatives and considers its 52. Vaughan, L. ‘Clustering, Segregation and the ‘Ghetto’: the spatialisation of Jewish settlement in Manchester and Leeds in the 19th century’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Bartlett School of Graduate Studies, University College London, 1999).

53. Peach, C. ‘South Asians and Caribbean Ethnic Minority Housing Choice in Britain’, Journal of Urban Studies, 1981, Vol. 35, No. 10.

106

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

historical roots and more progressive activities within the context of Whitechapel. These community-led practices are attempts to frame care as a resilience project. The community-led care initiatives administer both the distribution and collectivisation of care as a system of solidarity networks. These solidarity networks focus on providing vulnerable groups with social care beyond their health demands, that is, with care that also addresses their socio-economic needs, among other issues

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

107

History of Familial Kinship in East London The history of familial kinship in East London can be traced back to the early twentieth century and the migration of Bangladeshi and Middle Eastern populations in response to the rapid industrialisation of the UK. One of the exemplary social studies on these migrant communities is Kinship and Family in East London, which is the result of interviews with a random sample of 96 households.54 The book charts multiple examples of household structure and kinship relationships. These relationships were found to be centred on the pivotal role of women and how they raised children and held families and communities together.

Contemporary housing policies aimed to build new council housing blocks, which prompted a middle-classes exodus into the inner suburbs of the city. Initially, Young and Willmott were interested in studying the socio-economic impact of the rehousing of the London workingclass family in suburban developments. However, contrary to their expectations, the majority of the Bangladeshi community formed a social support network. The cultural background of this community affected how this network was formed based on the role of women, especially the ‘pivotal kin’55 relationship between mothers and their married daughters in which they constantly visit one another and exchange goods and services. The pivotal kin relationship is then replicated with other relatives and in family affairs in the form of daily domestic activities, as well as rites of passages such as gatherings, engagements, weddings, christenings and funerals. Furthermore, Bangladeshi communities are composed of extended families of households consisting of more than one nuclear family.

3.02

Networks of kinship are determined by stage of life, cultural background Image 3.02. Familial Kinship in Whitechapel, East End, 1957.

54. Young, M. Willmott, P. Family and Kinship in East London. (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992).

55. Ibid.

56. Young, M. Willmott, P. Family and Kinship in East London.

108

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

and working-class affinity.56 Through sharing the same kind of life, the deep-rooted bonds between members of the family form the bonds between members of a class. Forms of interdependency in the case of Bethnal Green have become another form of care, which blurs the relationship between the domestic realm and public life as interhousehold care. With the emerging community initiatives, this interhousehold care is present now more than ever and collaboration with the local authorities begs the question of what sort of care framework can embrace this new set of relations.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

109

HEBA Women’s Project The mutual care initiative HEBA Women’s Project is a volunteer organisation that focuses on the empowerment of vulnerable groups by women. Launched by a group of Bangladeshi women, HEBA Women’s Project organises mutual care support for black, Asian, minority ethnic and refugee (BAMER) women’s groups in the multicultural East End of London. Language difficulties, childcare and lack of confidence were ascertained as the most difficult barriers for some BAMER women to overcome not only in terms of care but also life in general. The needs of individuals are frequently diverse, such as welfare information, access to housing, legal status, employment and education/training.57 Local council support exists but is patchy and support for immigrant women particularly suffers from a lack of capacity and funding.

Confronted with these barriers, these vulnerable women have organised and collectivised their care in the form of activities and networks that aim to fill gaps in service provision. Consequently, HEBA Women’s Project consists of multiple initiatives based on 3.03

intergenerational care support. These activities include sewing workshops, nurseries, ESL courses, school gardening clubs, charity lunches and community farming within the neighbourhood.58 HEBA Women’s Project shows how mutual care initiatives can challenge the Image 3.03. Sponsored Walk

by HEBA Women’s Project in Whitechapel 57. Women’s Resource Centre. Heba Women’s Project: Keeping the Door Open. (London: Women’s Resource Centre Report, 2011) 58. Ibid.

110

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

conventions around care through de-institutionalised organisation and by emphasising its domestic nature through care labour distribution to different subjects of multiple households. Therefore, an integrated system of care support should be proposed as a local approach within the devolved framework to enable collaboration between local welfare support and mutual care initiatives.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

111

Image 3.04. Series of Care Activities

by HEBA Women’s Project

112

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

113

Community-led Care Network in Whitechapel In Tower Hamlets, Whitechapel, a community-led care network has been organised as a mutual care initiative by a voluntary organisation peopled by vulnerable groups themselves. Started as a collective movement, community-led care in Whitechapel has since gained administrative support from the local council. The shift to local governance by the Mayor of London and community organisations has forced London boroughs to establish social and infrastructure frameworks.

The community care network established in Whitechapel forms inter-scalar spaces that organise multiple activities such as welfare support, elderly clubs, an informal economy, language classes, sewing workshops, food banks and community farming and redistribute

3.05

care labour within the neighbourhood. For example, the Spitalfields City Farm enlists volunteers from the elderly club with the help of voluntary carers from HEBA Women’s Project. These communityImage 3.05. Mapping of Community-led Care Spaces in Whitechapel

114

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

led care spaces involve cooperation between different social agents to conduct acts of care.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

115

Youth Club

Child Care

Public Space

Community Event

Elderly Club

Welfare Consultation

Bingo Hall

Kindergarten

Gardening Club

ESOL English Course

Day Care & Nursery

In providing the act and process of care, vulnerable communities are transformed into locals who decide for themselves what, when and how to produce and how to distribute the products of labour and tasks of social reproduction according to need, desire and

Child Care Centre

ability rather than money, managerial hierarchy and power.59 In this way, locals construct alternative infrastructure and modes of living,

Community Garden

resulting in the emergence of new subjectivities and the movement Food Bank

Lunch Club

outside of the state and the capitalist system.

Although local people practice care with limited intervention,

Women Group

their efforts aim to move towards collective autonomy. From this

Garment Workshop

perspective, autonomy is generated by the interaction between actors across a social network in such a way that the network produces Care Farming

Community Foundation

Community Garden

Cooking Class

Community Garden

3.06

116

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Image 3.06. Community-led Care Spaces and Programs in Whitechapel

these interactions and the social boundary is defined.60 New care agencies are constructed as a result of this bottom-up movement,

59. Angelis, M. Omnia Sunt Communia: On the Commons and the Transformation to Postcapitalism. (London: Zed Books, 2017)

which always tries to push the boundaries of centralised power and

60. Stavrides, S. Towards the City of Thresholds. (New York: Common Notions, 2019).

that it is within its capacity to design relationships, giving rise to the

control. In this case, architecture has experienced a significant shift from seeing itself as a space-making discipline to understanding possibilities of supportive co-existence.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

117

Bromley-by-Bow Centre I arrived in Bromley-by-Bow one cold November evening in 1984, to be greeted by 12 people, all over 70 years of age, in a 200-seat United Reformed church. I felt strongly that all of my theological training to date had been equipping me for working in the inner cities, but as I stood at the pulpit in the freezing church hall in the East End of London, I couldn’t help but wonder what I’d got myself into.

- ‘The art of doing good’, Andrew Mawson61 The Bromley-by-Bow Centre was founded in 1984 by Andrew Mawson alongside the local community to provide a centre for the community and entrepreneurship. This involved buying three acres of derelict land to create the first integrated health centre in Britain through a development trust built and owned by the community. The Bromley-by-Bow Centre aimed to re-conceptualise the prevailing social care model and move away from the traditional welfare state model offered by the NHS. At first, the proposal faced opposition from the NHS. The turning point came when the project won the support of the Tory Health Minister and the New Labour project in 1997, which was focused on ‘community’. The project proposed the integration of health, education, housing, environment, enterprise

3.07 Image 3.07. Bromley-by-Bow Centre, Bromley-by-Bow, 2015.

61. Mawson, A. ‘The art of doing good’, Guardian 9 January 2008, digital source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2008/jan/09/socialenterprises.regeneration [accessed 20 May 2021] 62. Ibid.

118

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

and the arts. The Bromley-by-Bow Centre brings together GPs, employment, housing advice, church, art organisations and cafés to provide a one-stop-shop for care in one of the poorest areas of the UK. Here, the doctor can prescribe more than tests and medications but also activities, including art courses, access to community care and an allotment.62 Bangladeshi women learn English, art skills and try to find a job.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

119

The architectural design of the Bromley-by-Bow Centre is centred on the relationship between community care spaces and the landscape.

With the use of glass oriented towards a large backyard garden, the building creates a dialogue between activities inside and outside.

Mawson and his team believed in the importance of gardens and landscapes for wellbeing and therapy, as well as to provide spaces for children to play, thus organising inter-household activities. Through the collectivisation of multiple neighbourhood households, the Bromley-by-Bow Centre provides alternative forms of care based on a support system for changing care demands that consider the increasing ageing population, social exclusion and mental health issues as part of health and social care provision by the community.

Currently, the Bromley-by-Bow Centre accommodates over 100 0

10m

activities each week in landscape-based architecture. Moreover, it received support to establish a local housing company that is

3.08

responsible for managing over 8,000 properties in the East End. The example of the Bromley-by-Bow Centre reveals the capacity of community care initiatives to bridge the gap between primary care and vulnerable communities and to produce an environment Image 3.08. Bromley-by-Bow Centre Site Plan

120

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

where care activities are reproduced collectively to provide socioeconomic resiliency in a neighbourhood.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

121

3.3. Care Neighbourhood The dissertation proposes neighbourhood care as a framework for community-led care networks and current social care devolution efforts.

In particular, the 2017 London and Care Devolution Programme proposes the transformation of how decision-making, ownership and agency of care provision is conducted with the intention of moving power from a centralised government system to a more collaborative one.63 Furthermore, the dissertation argues that devolution requires a shift in the spatial framework, modes of service and the scale of the social care services. Throughout the three care conditions proposed, elderly co-housing, community care clusters and the high street, the proposed social care framework is conceptualised on the scale of the neighbourhood. Moreover, the dissertation proposes a shift in our understanding of the scale of services from the listing system (based on postcodes, building numbers, and Trust numbers) to a network system of cooperatives that arrange multiple vulnerable groups and local communities based on mutual interdependency. The project understands that this shift is essential to providing forms of care for vulnerable communities that cannot be listed or are difficult to access due to managerial boundaries in the formal health care system.

While the NHS defines a ‘neighbourhood’ under their integrated care system as 30,000 to 50,000 people,64 the proposed care neighbourhood will be based on the district level, as in the case of Whitechapel. This model aims to provide a spatial framework for affordable and secure social care, as well as additional socio-economic support across the three care conditions to preserve the local community. The neighbourhood care model thus proposes a gradation of management through 63. London Health and Care Devolution Programme Team. Health and Care Devolution: What it means for London. (London: November 2017 Report.)

64. National Health Service. Designing Integrated Care System (ICSs) in England: an overview on the arrangements needed to build strong health and care systems across the country. (London: June 2019 Report)

122

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

cooperatives as the intermediate organisations standing between vulnerable groups, community-led organisations and the local council.

The cooperative strategy provides a common platform for vulnerable communities and organisations to collectively design and manage their ownership, protocols and activities and to actively participate in the development of spatial conditions in the neighbourhood. Therefore, the neighbourhood care model should be developed to establish a scale of service provision and a common space for community-led care.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

123

Social care devolution opens up possibilities for organising the socioThe neighbourhood care model proposes a spatial framework for

economic support of local communities that can enhance the existing

interdependency modes of care between the unit and the neighbourhood

solidarity network system. Although the framework is meant to be a

through the inter-scalar organisation of the cluster type. Across the three

community-led platform, it should provide spaces for collaboration

care conditions, the project proposes an architectural and urban design

with the local council for both financial and practical support. Care as

that provides spaces for caregiving and care-receiving. With vulnerable

a political act through devolution, provides new ground for the subject

communities the care subject of the neighbourhood, the design

to practice collective autonomy by giving them the ability to choose,

endeavours to integrate movement between inside and outside spaces.

participate and affect decision-making and to assess the overall output

Movement within the neighbourhood is enhanced through the use of

of care provision. Through collective ownership of the project to the

infrastructure that creates spatial connection, provides protection and

daily protocol of care activities, vulnerable communities shift from

accommodates potential informal care activities. Care infrastructure, in

being the ‘care subject’ to the ‘care agent’. Care agents are being given

this case, takes the form of inter-scalar components including not only

greater responsibilities in conducting the day-to-day necessities of care

the three care conditions proposed but also the in-between elements

activities, as well as exchanging care labour through interdependency.

that connect them such as the common areas, corridor, balcony, small

A change in the understanding of the caregiving and care-receiving

lobby, garden, courtyard and pilotis as a threshold system.

of these care agents is an essential step towards revolutionising care provision.

Although this infrastructure may not offer predefined programmes, it can act as both enclave and armature, both as a space to collect and

As elderly women’s groups, migrant communities and community

distribute, as a space of possibilities. This infrastructure is designed

support networks have demonstrated, vulnerable communities can

as semi-open spaces to produce a framework that can be adjusted

overcome their vulnerability by forming a state of exception outside

and reproduced by the collective, giving them common ground to

the formal institution of care. This state of exception will be developed

express their forms of cooperation through spatial appropriation. The

both in spatial and organisational terms in the project. Here, the cluster

organisation of these elements is based on the consideration of users’

type is designed as the spatial framework for modes of collective

mobility in their daily care activities and ranges from the domestic

living not to create disconnection but to provide manageable limits

unit to the socio-economic unit of the street. The interplay of the

in terms of inter-household cooperation. Social support, supervision,

cluster type between an enclave and pilotis as an armature provides

collectivised domestic activities and resource-pooling are some

spatial porosities that can be adjusted through the addition, infill

examples of inter-household cooperation that turns informal care into

and combination of different elements. Neighbourhood care as a

daily rituals that reduce dependency on primary care and thus reduce

spatial framework, in this case, is formed through the organisation of

the financial burden of vulnerable communities and the care demands

architectural elements, clusters and urban fragments that are arranged

made on public institutions. In the neighbourhood, the system of

in the neighbourhood. These arrangements require cooperation

inter-household care can be replicated through integrated social care

between vulnerable communities, care collectives and local authorities

devolution that shares power between vulnerable communities, care

to develop an integrated and multi-scalar care infrastructure.

organisations and public institutions.

124

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

125

Condition 3 proposes the appropriation of Whitechapel High Street to accommodate an inter-disciplinary network of community-led care practice in the neighbourhood. The high street distributes care for the vulnerable through various activities and subjects, such as informal economic activities and social support network. The proposed Whitechapel High Street aims to explore the spatial intervention of informal care activities by vulnerable communities in socio-economic relations. Furthermore, the project rethinks how public infrastructure can create the space to accommodate such care activities. Condition 3 redefines the high street as a care infrastructure where multiple care agencies and activities intersect and are practiced to achieve different forms of resilience.

The proposed model uses pilotis as elements to create both spatial and boundary frameworks that enhance the interplay between indoor and outdoor activities while giving users the freedom to appropriate space and engage in a variety of activities. The design adopts two

Condition 3: High Street and Care Neighbourhood

levels of intervention: (1) the freestanding pilotis structure for shelter,

Whitechapel, Tower Hamlets

the extended activities of shophouses and space for street vendors, and (2) the open street for more flexible activities and screening for street activities. The proposed activities aim to accommodate existing modes of resiliency into the high street (street vendors, bus stations, bicycle parking, food carts) while also establishing a spatial framework for other possible activities (community farm, street gallery, seating areas, outdoor cafés, artwork, information centres and even temporary accommodation for the homeless). The transformation of high street typology into a pilotis system of care infrastructure allows the street to become a space for the temporary shelter of the vulnerable subject and a space that can enhance the variety of movement and acts between the shop, the pilotis and the open street. Through condition 3, the project aims to rethink the street and conceptualise it as not only a channel of care distribution but also as a place of care where vulnerable communities can find protection and opportunities for participation to improve their living standards.

126

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

127

WELFARE SUPPORT

HEALTH SUPPORT

DWELLING

LOCAL ECONOMY

EDUCATION

WORKSHOP

FOOD

COMMUNITY ACTIVITY

REFUGEE ASSOCIATION

ELDERLY DAY CARE

COMMUNITY LAND TRUST

STREET VENDOR

ESOL

GARMENT WORKSHOP

TOWER HAMLETS FOOD NETWORK

COMMUNITY LUNCH

YOUTH BENGALI

NURSERY

HOUSING CO-OP

CONVENIENCE STORE

CHILDREN CENTRE

ART & CRAFT DAY CARE

CITY FARM

GUERRILLA GARDENING

SENIOR CLUB

EXTRA CARE HOUSING

CO-OP STORE

WOMEN'S TRAINING

WOMEN'S PROJECT

COMMUNITY GARDEN

ART GALLERY

CARE FARMING

FOOD BANK

3.10

0

10

50

3.09

Image 3.09. Whitechapel High Street Site.

Image 3.10. Multiple Care Network Connected by Whitechapel High Street.

128

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

129

Image 3.11. Collages of Design Proposition in Whitechapel High Street

130

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

131

3.13

Image 3.12. Possible Care Activities in Whitechapel High Street Image 3.13. Axonometric of Whitechapel High Street Intervention

3.12

132

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

133

Image 3.14. Axonometric of Proposed Model of Whitechapel High Street

134

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

135

Image 3.15 Perspective of Proposed Model of Whitechapel High Street

136

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

137

Image 3.16. Care Neighbourhood Model Axonometric 138

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

139

Fighting against the long-accumulated urban commodification, these networks of interdependency try to overcome ever-increasing land value, housing price and social care inaccessibility. In doing so, care become commons that are practised with the collective and non-commodified principles. The vulnerable groups overcome the process of capitalist urbanisation in London by depending upon their collective power, as Harvey argued, as one of the most precious

From an Act of Care to a Right to the City

yet most neglected of our human rights.66

On a larger scheme, the project aims to unveil the emerging

As Lefebvre argued in his theory of urban revolutionary

phenomenon of community-led care in contemporary London.

movements67, the dissertation believes that these vulnerable subjects

The importance of community participation shows the possibilities

did not wait for ‘the grand revolution’ by the private initiatives or

in redefining the right to the city to go against capitalist modes of

local authorities. They started a small urban revolution as a result of

production in social care. The case of community-led care initiatives

collective spontaneity by realising that their co-protocol can produce

in Whitechapel proves the argument of David Harvey on the ‘right

a change. The project aims to rethink the spatialisation of these

to the city’, in which he describes not as a pre-existing right nor

forms of social relation, where care neighbourhood as a scale can

right to citizenship, but as a collective struggle in producing the city

help vulnerable communities through commoning. Commoning, in

and creating the life in it.65 Although the scale of their action seems minute, working together as an oppressed community, they fought against the process of displacement and dispossession that creates urban restructuring.

140

65. Stobord, K., Swann, T. Management, Business, Anarchism. Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, Volume 14 No. 4 (Ephemera Press, 2014).

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

66. Harvey, D. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution.

(London: Verso, 2012) 67. Lefebvre, H. The Production of Space. (Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell, 1991).

this context, is created by transcending the public-private relation and providing the spatial framework for the reproduction of collective modes of living. In order to take back the right to the city not through violence, but through caring.

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

141

Image 3.17. Series of Care Conditions Spaces; from Room to the Neighbourhood

142

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

143

Conclusion The dissertation addresses the research question: how can a series of mutual care conditions be organised on the neighbourhood scale?

Using the cluster type as a design strategy to both collectivise and distribute care activities, this project proposes alternative modes of collective living in multiple conditions. Following the investigation of multiple models of collective care in London, the cluster type is adopted, inherited from past social care provision. Against the backdrop of emerging community-led care initiatives, meeting the demands of vulnerable subjects requires multi-scalar care infrastructure that enhances inter-household cooperation through collectivised domestic services in the dwelling, care labour exchanges in the community cluster and the redefinition of socio-economic activities on the high street. Through three design propositions, the dissertation rethinks collective life as the central concept of a new care model.

Social care devolution opens up new possibilities for conducting care and facing modern challenges as a new proposed framework based on interdisciplinary collaboration. Cooperatives are the proposed mechanism by which vulnerable communities can seek financial support, sustain their independence and maintain the model in the long run. Although supported by the CLT and local council, the previous models of community-led housing have faced challenges due to their over-dependency on subsidies, the long process of land allocation, administrative issues and the economic situation of the individuals involved.

144

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

145

The project shows how the act of care started to dismantle the notion of domesticity, disconnecting the distribution of affective labour from the domestic realm and opening up the notion of post-domesticity. A paradigm shift in what constitutes a care agency, which now includes women’s group, elderly co-housing, These socio-economic and political barriers have always been the

care collectives and technological tools, has redefined care through

main struggles not only for housing collectives but for community

inter-household relations that transcends the predefined structure

organisations in general. Therefore, social care devolution has to

of the nuclear family and ‘home’. The dissertation argues that

provide security and integration opportunities for cooperatives

post-domesticity, from a care point of view, was realised by the

or community-led care organisations by providing institutional

cooperative housekeeping movement, which itself was inspired

positions for care collectives to enable them to manage their own

by community care groups. Care, as a form of interdependency,

and subsidised resources. By doing so, cooperatives can become a

is used in the project as an intersectional theme to push the limits

common platform through which vulnerable communities can gain

of domesticity through the subject (elderly, migrant women,

collective ownership and craft protocols of mutual care in a manner

intergenerational subjects), cluster type (indoor-outdoor connect,

that prevents marketisation, exploitation and exclusion on the local

common spaces, thresholds) and modes of co-living (collectivised

level.

services, co-protocols, groupings).

Care, as the dissertation argues, has shifted from the practice of

The research proposes the cluster type as a formal tool to develop a

caregiving by the service industry to a form of interdependency

new socio-political context for social care. The cluster type is used

where each vulnerable subject practices their care acts in daily life.

as a biopolitical apparatus of the welfare state, as was and is the

The rise of community-led care practices has blurred the boundaries

workhouse, almshouse and hospital, and establishes a system of

of care and its relations and moved care away from the domestic

control over the movement and hygiene of the body within a mass-

unit and the public institution. Although care has always been a

produced service system. Additionally, the cluster type is a group

political act that includes interrelation between subjects, any new

approach to accommodating collective care activities (community

care model requires an understanding of the current issues of care

centre, women’s groups, elderly clubs), which is achieved by creating

(diverse communities, social exclusion and mental health issues)

boundaries and a state of exception for vulnerable people. States

and must embrace a democratic way of delivering care (community

of exception, in this term, does not means creating impenetrable

participation, adaptation and cooperation). The cooperation of

boundaries from the outside, but to produce common protocols that

multiple care agencies (household members, private and public

binds spatial, organisational and managerial system of the project.

parties) creates a paradigm shift of care as shared and formed

From these two opposing uses (between delineation and bringing

through the establishment of co-protocols as a state of exception.

the community together) of the cluster, the project understands

Therefore, the act of care can be redefined as part of a collective

the potential of the cluster type to give structural organisation to

struggle to achieve affordable and democratic care for vulnerable

vulnerable bodies and, at the same time, open up possibilities of

subjects.

interrelation.

146

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

147

Furthermore, the cluster type facilitates the multi-scalar grouping of vulnerable subjects to form a gradation of care activities and infrastructure. The cluster type is proposed as a spatial framework where both the inside (private space) and the outside (shared space) coincide, enabling unexpected exchanges between these areas as the care conditions. To prevent the cluster type from becoming a closed enclave, the porosity of the space should be maintained through the use of thresholds, circulation and openings that encourage the exchange of care labour from the scale of the dwelling unit to the neighbourhood. In this sense, the cluster type should not be reduced to a predefined spatial representation but should always be changing and reproduced collectively as a space of possibility.

In conclusion, the proposed neighbourhood care model is intended to become a new mechanism for social care devolution through the cluster-type organisation of inter-household care across three care conditions. This is achieved by rethinking care as an inter-scalar activity that fosters the wellbeing and socio-economic prosperity of local communities. The dissertation does not aim to identify a specific solution but to open up new possibilities and a discussion of new models of care that maintain and foster local support networks. A broader discussion between local councils, community care organisations, cooperatives and vulnerable communities should be the next step in developing social care devolution in terms of architecture and urban planning to implement the neighbourhood care model and care conditions. The provisional and spatial framework proposed by the dissertation should be revisited and further developed by the author through research and design innovations to build on the scope and viability of the project.

Ultimately, the project rethinks caring as a project designed to secure resilience and where care as commons.

148

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

149

Bibliography Books Harvey, D. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution.

(London: Verso, 2012).

Agamben, G. State of Exception. (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2005).

Hardt, M. Negri, A. Commonwealth. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009).

Angelis, M. Omnia Sunt Communia: On the Commons and the Transformation to Postcapitalism. (London: Zed Books, 2017).

Hayden, D. The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods, and Cities. (Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1982).

Awan, N. Schneider, T. Till, J. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. (New York: Routledge, 2011).

Caviar, S. Sqm The Quantified Home: An Exploration of the Evolving

Kropotkin, P. Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution. (United States: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014).

Indentity of the Home, From Utopian Experiment to Factory of Data.

Biennale Interieur. (Belgium: Lars Muller Publishers, 2014).

Lefebvre, H. The Production of Space. (Cambridge: Basil Blackwell, Inc., 1991).

Cottam, H. Radical Help: How We Can Remake the Relationship Between Us and Revolutionise the Welfare System. (London: Vigaro, 2018).

Nilsson, J. Wallenstein, S. O. Foucault, Biopolitics, and Governmentality.

(Stockholm: Södertörn Philosophical Studies, 2013).

Donzelot, J. The Policing of Families. (New York: Random House Inc., 1979).

Sennett, R. Together: The Rituals, Pleasures and Politics of Cooperation.

(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2012).

Evans, R. Translation from Drawings to Building and Other Essays.

(London: Architectural Association Publication, 1st edition, 1996).

Stavrides, S. Common Space: The City as Commons. (London: Zed Books, 2016).

Federici, S. Revolution at Point Zero: Housework, Reproduction and Feminist Struggle. (New York: PM Press, 2012).

Stavrides, S. Towards the City of Thresholds. (New York: Common Notions, 2019).

Foucault, M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. (New York: Penguin Social Sciences, 1991).

Finch, J. Groves, D. A Labour of Love: Work and Caring. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983).

Stobord, K., Swann, T. Management, Business, Anarchism. Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, Volume 14 No. 4 (Ephemera Press, 2014).

Hardt, M. Negri, A. Commonwealth. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009).

Tronto, Joan C. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethnic of Care. (New York: Routledge, 1994).

150

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

151

Best, R. Porteus, J. HAPPI: Housing our Ageing Population: Plan for Implementation. (London: Hannover Housing Association, 2012). <https://www.housinglin.org.uk/APPGInquiry_HAPPI> [accessed 12 January 2021]

Young, M. Willmott, P. Family and Kinship in East London. (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992).

Journals

Co-ops 4 London. Co-operate Not Speculate: A Report by the London Cooperative Housing Group. (London: Calverts Cooperative, 2016).

Borden, I. ‘Social Space and Cooperative Housekeeping in the English Garden City’, Journal of Architectural and Planning, Vol.16, No.3 (1999). <https://www.jstor.org/stable/43030503?seq=1> [accessed 30 April 2021]

Cottam, H. Welfare 5.0: Why we need a social revolution and how to make it happen. (London: UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, Policy Report, 2020)

Crowther, M. A., ‘The Workhouse’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 78, 183-194 (p.188).

Healthcare UK. Healthcare UK: Public Private Partnership. (London: UK Trade & Investment, 2013).

Goodman, C. ‘Care Homes and Health Services’, Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2016, Vol. 21, 1-3 (p. 2)

Jubilee Debt Campaign. The UK’s PPPs Disaster: Lessons on private finance for the rest of the world. (London: February 2017 Report)

Peach, C. ‘South Asians and Caribbean Ethnic Minority Housing Choice in Britain’, Journal of Urban Studies, 1981, Vol. 35, No. 10.

London Health and Care Devolution Programme Team. Health and Care Devolution: What it means for London. (London: November 2017 Report.)

Pitts, Frederick H. ‘Beyond the Fragment: Postoperaismo, Postcapitalism and Marx’s ‘Notes on Machines’, 45 years on’, Economy and Society, 46:3-4, 324-345 (2017) < https://www. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03085147.2017.1397360> [accessed 10 May 2021]

Mayor of London. The London Plan: The Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. (London: Greater London Authority, 2017). < https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/ new-london-plan> [accessed 04 September 2020]

Thomas, C. ‘De-Constructing Concepts of Care.’ Journal of Sociology, Vol. 27, No.4, 1993 <https://www.jstor.org/stable/42855270> [accessed 07 February 2021]

National Health Service. Designing Integrated Care System (ICSs) in England: an overview on the arrangements needed to build strong health and care systems across the country. (London: June 2019 Report)

Reports

Richards, C. Community Life in Richmond’s Almshouses. (London: Richmond Charities, 2017)

Baiges, C. Ferreri, M. Vidal, L. International Policies to Promote Cooperative Housing. (Barcelona: Lacol SCCL, 2017).

Women’s Resource Centre. Heba Women’s Project: Keeping the Door Open. (London: Women’s Resource Centre Report, 2011)

152

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

153

Web Page Brenton, M. ‘New Ground’ Cohousing Community, High Barnet: resilience and adaptability. (London: Housing LIN, 2020). <https://www. housinglin.org.uk/blogs/New-Ground-Cohousing-CommunityHigh-Barnet-resilience-and-adaptability/> [accessed 07 March 2021].

Mawson, A. ‘The art of doing good’, Guardian 9 January 2008, digital source: <https://www.theguardian.com/society/2008/jan/09/ socialenterprises.regeneration> [accessed 05 March 2021].

Older Women Co-housing (OWCH). OWCH History. (London: Calverts Cooperative, 2016). <https://www.owch.org.uk/history> [accessed 07 March 2021] Pipe, J. Two years on, what has the Localism Act achieved? (The Guardian, 2 November 2013). < https://www.theguardian.com/localgovernment-network/2013/nov/02/localism-act-devolution-uklocal-authorities> [accessed 12 January 2021]

PhD Thesis Foster, L. ‘The Representation of the Workhouse in the NineteenthCentury Culture’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Cardiff University, 2014), p. 18.

Trogal, K. ‘Caring for Space: Ethnical Agencies in Contemporary Spatial Practice’ (PhD thesis, University of Sheffield, 2012).

Vaughan, L. ‘Clustering, Segregation and the ‘Ghetto’: the spatialisation of Jewish settlement in Manchester and Leeds in the 19th century’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Bartlett School of Graduate Studies, University College London, 1999).

154

Care Devolution and Inter-Household Cooperation

Towards a Cluster Model of Common Institutions of Land, Dwelling and Care

155