Evaluation of the questionnaire

In order to develop a ‘narrative’ and explore the ranges of viewpoints amongst Fargemarka members, we sent out a Google Questionnaire.

realisation and longevity of Fargemarka.

In my opinion, me and my colleagues have been playing a very important role in the life of the Fargemarka Boligprosjekt so far. We have arranged many meetings, initiated sub projects and actions, and developed structures for the association. Each of us has individually contributed to the project, as well as in collaboration by reflecting, reviewing and brainstorming on the processes. I observed that there is a clear core group consisting of 5-10 enthusiasts, that have been driving the processes. In case of the absence of one or more of these core members, the process tends to stagnate. I am afraid that this could lead to an unsustainable future of Fargemarka, as the system is not able to sustain itself without the specific core enthusiasts. Another concern I have is the consensus, where decision making processes take a very long time, even with a relatively low number of people. From my standpoint, if Fargemarka wants to grow into a community of 50-100 members, it needs better organisational structures, models and routines, especially when it comes to conflict management and decision making processes.

The survey included questions about planning in Norway, the organisation and structure of the Fargemarka Association and individual intentions. The survey was introduced to members with the following text:

“As previously mentioned in our Fargemarka Sunday

Meetings, we (Fabian, Hamish and Laura) are students in Urban Ecological Planning at NTNU. As part of a course, we’re examining Fargemarka from the perspective of different planning theories. In particular, we want to understand the role of self-governance and insurgent planning in creating strong communities in a more fragmented society!

We hope that our research will support Fargemarka in promoting new ways of living not just within Trondheim, but around the world. It would be a great help for us, if you as a member of Fargemarka Boligprosjekt could help us by filling out this questionnaire!

It is of course anonymised, and we will share the results with you as soon our course is finished.”

17 out of 20 core members replied, a response-rate of around 85% whereas 52% of the answers came from participants who identified as female. Most of the respondents are between 19 and 30 years old.

When asking about the planning in Norway, there is a reasonable level of trust towards the Trondheim Municipality and its approach to Fargemarka. This is an interesting aspect since there was no formal or written commitment or support from the Municipality towards Fargemarka yet. The reason for this result is assumed to be the general high level of trust in

Norwegian authorities. On the other hand, participants noted a lack of financial support for self-built homes, as well as for community services. 29% of respondents saw their current housing as ‘very’ or ‘moderately unaffordable’, and 47% find their current housing situation only ‘moderately affordable’.

“If I had lower rent I would be able to save up more for building a home, some time in the future.”

- Answer of a participant.

When it comes to the current security of housing, the results were quite balanced between ‘secure’ and ‘insecure’. However, all participants agreed that Norway does not have sufficient experimental and alternative housing projects yet.

The results from questions about the Association itself showed that most people joined Fargemarka Boligprosjekt because of a desire to live communally, participate more in their living environment, or because Fargemarka represented many of their core values. Even if in the academic context Fargemarka can be labelled as an ‘intentional community’, the survey showed that the term does not seem to be as popular or known – 47% of the participants would define Fargemarka as a ‘collaborative housing project’.

The general level of satisfaction with Fargemarka’s way of operating averages 6.4 points out of 10. Satisfaction with power distribution is similar. An average of 8.4 out of 10 points were given when we asked to what extent inputs from members would be taken into consideration. These results overlap with our observations that a lot of members attend the weekly meetings and also express their feelings and contribute their ideas. Despite this, our observations indicated that it is mainly the same small core group of members who are leading the meetings and have the greatest influence.

“Flat structure was sought, but in reality three participants had more executive power because they joined all groups and had the final say.”

- Interview with a member

When asked about the reasons that people would leave Fargemarka, ‘lack of actions’ was mentioned as the main fear, possibly due to the relatively small number of actions carried out so far. Another mentioned reason was an inability to contribute to the Association. The observations of our research team overlap with those results. Despite the regular attendance at meetings, members might not have found a clear role or been allocated specific responsibilities and tasks. The skills amongst members were not mapped, making it difficult to distribute tasks on the basis of their abilities.

Summary of highlights

Level of trust towards the Trondheim Municipality = 5/10

Explainable as we had neither negative nor positive responses from the Municipality so far.

$47% of members are living only in moderately affordable situation

Rather low level of felt power distribution amongst members

Balance between feeling of in-/security regarding current housing situation

88% want to remain members in one year time from today