Igor Costarelli

Governments’ attempts to link the provision of welfare services to (more) responsible self-conduct of citizens (i.e. responsibilization) is seen as a distinctive feature of the post-welfare state. Responsibilization often requires welfare receivers to comply with specific duties or behavioural patterns (i.e. conditionality). Except for UK-based studies, little is known about responsibilization strategies of social housing tenants based on specific allocation policies or management approaches. To fill this gap, this paper examines recent cases of tenants’ responsibilization through conditionality, i.e. allocation of housing on the condition that receivers regularly engage in supportive activities, in Utrecht (The Netherlands) and Milan (Italy). Through a qualitative methodology, this paper unpacks the use of conditionality as a means to increase tenants’ responsibilization. The paper contributes by showing both innovative aspects, such as eligibility criteria, obligations, accountability measures, and potential pitfalls connected to diverging expectations between tenants and professionals, and to specific context-related factors.

The nature of housing management has often been contested between two main orientations, business-like (i.e. economic efficiency) and social welfare (i.e. social support), reflecting the dual identity of social housing providers, as both private enterprises and welfare promoters. Research shows that housing management is particularly susceptible to transformations in the broader social housing sector. Considering the last two decades, the demand for social housing has increased across Western Europe, involving different social categories, e.g. low-middle income and, more recently, asylum seekers. On the supply side, housing providers have become keener to involve residents in delivering and managing housing-related services. This paper explores how innovative management strategies are emerging in the context of broader changes in social rented sectors and welfare policies in countries characterised by different typologies of housing systems, Italy and the Netherlands. By means of case studies and semi-structured interviews, this paper scrutinizes specific management approaches, i.e. Integrated Social Management and self-management, in two recent social housing projects in Milan and Amsterdam, which target socially mixed tenants, i.e. status-holders, low-income and young locals. Despite several differences, management approaches in both cases aim to increase tenants’ responsibilisation but with different focus: towards the community, i.e. social integration of vulnerable tenants in the housing project (Dutch case), and towards individual dwellings, i.e. boosting individuals’ self-agency in relation to the maintenance of properties (Italian case). This paper discusses how distinct, and sometimes normative, premises underlying tenants participation in housing management shape specific relationships between residents and housing providers.

European countries are facing rising demand for affordable housing by a widespread and differentiated audience. Both in Italy and in the Netherlands policy-makers and practitioners address this emerging need by implementing new social housing projects targeting diverse social groups – such as students, young households, welfare dependents, and refugees – which results in a fine-grained social mix. This paper discusses the development of these initiatives within wider trends in housing policies and in relation to the domestic debate on social mix in the two countries. Drawing on Magic Mix and Housing Sociale projects as case studies, respectively in the Netherlands and in Italy, we aim to explore and unfold the contemporary meanings and the practices attached to the idea of social mix. In so doing, this paper paves the way for a new conceptualization of social mix in the current post-crisis and hyper-diversified European scenario. We discuss traces of continuity and discontinuity between these forms of social mix and the mainstream idea of tenure mix, which has been a cornerstone of area-based urban renewal policy in many European countries. This paper contributes to the existing literature by offering insights into new practices of social mix in housing sphere.

This paper addresses the residential patterns of four major ethnic minority groups in Milan, and discusses recent trends and transformations within the broader framework of housing studies and immigration in post-crisis Southern Europe. Before describing the main changes experienced in Milan in recent decades, we examine the Italian national scenario before focusing on the regional context of Lombardy. We found that the spatial distribution of immigrant populations, earlier characterized by low concentrations in some parts of the city, has been changing lately. Using Census data (2001-2011), we show that in ten years the "hotspots" of immigrant concentration had begun to expand towards the administrative boundaries of the city. Later, the paper discusses the residential patterns of Chinese, Egyptian, Filipino and Sri Lankan immigrants, which have adopted different strategies, highlighting the specificities of each ethnic group.

L'articolo intende confrontare l'Italia con altri Paesi Europei (quali Francia, Olanda e Gran Bretagna) sulle politiche di mix sociale, inteso principalmente come prossimità di tipologie miste di alloggi. L'articolo evidenzia che in Lombardia, e soprattutto a Milano, la sola prossimità residenziale non favorisce la coesione sociale e che l'intervento pubblico appare talvolta ancora poco chiaro, troppo debole e fragile. Tuttavia, alcune esperienze nei complessi di edilizia sociale basati sull'empowerment della comunità locale possono innescare processi di innovazione sociale in questo ambito.