UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Co-operative housing : a study of user satisfaction Davidson, Jill 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A8 D38.pdf [ 8.95MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093769.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093769-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093769-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093769-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093769-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093769-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093769-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093769-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093769.ris

Full Text

CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING - A STUDY OF USER SATISFACTION by JILL DAVIDSON B.A., Queen's University, 1972 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN THE REQUIREMENTS MASTER PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF FOR THE DEGREE OF OF ARTS in The School of Community and Regional Planning We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1976 0 H i l l Davidson, 1976 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree l y ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th i s thes is for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th is thes is fo r f i nanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten permission. Department of (2&r^yy<-^u^jJj^ Qag^<y-rs»ll Plce<wx>-r^ The Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date 2^ i ABSTRACT The purpose of t h i s thesis i s to evaluate the s a t i s f a c t i o n which co-operative housing members experience during the process of obtaining and l i v i n g i n t h e i r dwellings. With the recent surge of growth of housing co-operatives i n B r i t i s h Columbia, an evaluation of t h i s form of tenure seems timely. T r a d i t i o n a l l y evaluation studies have assessed a program or agency by r e l y i n g on the input of the administrators. Although several government studies have investigated co-operative housing, l i t t l e work has been completed which assesses t h i s type of tenure from the user point of view. A d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of co-operative housing i s the opportunity for the members to be t o t a l l y involved i n the planning and management of the project. This study therefore evaluates co-operative housing by i n v e s t i g a t i n g the s a t i s f a c t i o n which users derive from t h e i r l i v i n g environment. Members of co-operatives i n the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t whose projects were completed or i n the planning stages were personally interviewed and factors r e l a t i n g to s a t i s f a c t i o n were discussed. From t h i s survey, i t became clear that the majority of people are very s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r housing and the process they experienced to obtain i t . In the case of completed projects, s a t i s f a c t i o n was strongly linked with co-operators' perceptions of a strong sense of community, attendance at recent co-operative housing meetings, understanding of co-operative ownership, the^kind's of-expectations of co-operative l i v i n g which members have, and previous co-operative experience. For members of projects i n the planning .stages s a t i s f a c t i o n was linked with understanding of co-operative ownership, ability to''Contact the co-operative's Board of Directors and desire to j o i n other i i co-operative a c t i v i t i e s . Recommendations for improving or in f l u e n c i n g those factors which are related to s a t i s f a c t i o n are suggested. Two major issues emerged that r e l a t e to the co-operative housing movement i n general. These are: user p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning and management of the project, and member education. I t i s suggested that by enlarging and improving the education program the f i n a n c i a l and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of co-operative housing w i l l be better understood and more people w i l l take advantage of the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e . i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page i . v ~vi v i i -CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE AND HISTORICAL REVIEW 4 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 4 2.2 DEFINITIONS 8 2.3 HISTORY OF CO-OPERATIVES IN CANADA 11 2.4 GROWTH OF HOUSING CO-OPERATIVES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 16 CHAPTER THREE - THE METHOD 20 3.1 RESEARCH MODEL 20 3.2 MEASURES OF USER SATISFACTION 23 3.3 APPROACH TO USER SATISFACTION EMPLOYED IN QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY 24 3.4 INTERVIEW TECHNIQUE 26 3.5 CONSTRAINTS 30 3.6 CRITERIA FOR ANALYSIS 30 CHAPTER FOUR - RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 32 4.1 SENSE OF SATISFACTION 32 4.1.1 Level of S a t i s f a c t i o n 33 4.1.2 Important Factors i n S a t i s f a c t i o n Levels Experienced by Members of Projects i n the Planning Stages 34 4.1.3 Important Factors i n S a t i s f a c t i o n Levels Experienced by Members of Completed Co-ops 36 4.2 USER EXPECTATIONS OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING 39 4.3 UNDERSTANDING OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING 41 4.4 CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD BOARDS OF DIRECTORS 44 4.5 ATTITUDES TOWARD THE CO-ORDINATING ORGANIZATION -UHF 46 ABSTRACT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i v 4.6 CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD PARTICIPATION 4.6.1 P a r t i c i p a t i o n During the Planning Stages 4.6.2 P a r t i c i p a t i o n A f t e r Co-ops are Completed 4.7 SUMMARY CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGES 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING COMPLETED PROJECTS 5.3 THE MAJOR ISSUES - PARTICIPATION AND EDUCATION 5.4 STUDY PARTICIPANTS' REACTIONS TO RECOMMENDATIONS 5.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 5.6 CONCLUSIONS LITERATURE CITED APPENDIX 6.1: Questions Asked of Members of Completed Projects APPENDIX 6.2: Questions Asked of Members Whose Projects Were i n the Planning Stages APPENDIX 6.3: Highlights of U s e r - s a t i s f a c t i o n Study APPENDIX 6.4: Correlations Between Levels of S a t i s f a c t i o n arid Respondents' C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s V LIST OF TABLES Page I: Number of Continuing Par-value Co-operative Units In Projects whose Mortgages have been Approved by CMHC 15 I I : C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Co-operatives and Numbers of Members Interviewed i n Each 27 I I I : S a t i s f a c t i o n with Co-op L i v i n g as Expressed by Members'of Completed Projects and S a t i s f a c t i o n with the Planning Process as Expressed by Members of Incomplete Projects (In Percent) 33 IV: Expectations of Co-op Housing Which Members Express by Project Type (In Percent) 41 V: Members Who Did Not Understand Certain Character-i s t i c s of Co-op Housing (In Percent) 43 VI: F a m i l i a r i t y of Co-op Members with Their Boards of Directors 45 VII: Representativeness .of ..Boards of Directors (In Percent) 45 VIII: Members of Projects i n Planning Stages Who Expressed Interest i n S p e c i f i c A c t i v i t i e s (In Percent) 49 v i LIST OF FIGURES Page I: Co-op Housing 10 I I : DeCosmos V i l l a g e 17 I I I : Housing Costs i n Vancouver 19 IV: Evaluation Process 2 2 V: Location of Surveyed Co-operatives 28 VI: Mountain View 35 VII: Co-op Meeting 37 VIII: DeCosmos V i l l a g e 40 IX: Kanata 42 X: Azalea Gardens 47 XI: DeCosmos V i l l a g e 50 XII: Mountain View 57 XIII: DeCosmos V i l l a g e 59 XIV: Mountain View 6 2 XV: Mountain View 64 XVI: Co-operative Planning 67 v i i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would l i k e to express my appreciation to the following people who have helped me i n preparing t h i s t h e s i s . Dr. Ann McAfee acted as my advisor and provided many useful suggestions. I am also g r a t e f u l to Dr. Henry Hightower for h i s contributions as reader. The co-operative members who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study deserve s p e c i a l thanks for the giving of t h e i r time and many thoughts and ideas. United Housing Foundation provided me with employment i n order that t h i s study could be ca r r i e d out and I am g r a t e f u l for t h e i r support. A l l members of the s t a f f were very h e l p f u l and I would e s p e c i a l l y l i k e , to express my appreciation to Michael Ryan and the co-op co-ordinators. I am also indebted to Bonnie Schoenberger who p a t i e n t l y typed the manuscript. F i n a l l y I would l i k e to mention Nancy Hood and Eliza b e t h C u l l , two friends who have helped make my f i n a l year at U.B.C. so s a t i s f y i n g . 1. CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION Co-operative housing has been i d e n t i f i e d as a p o t e n t i a l l y p o s i t i v e response to urban housing problems i n several government reports ranging from the Curti s Report of 1944 to the recent Housing and Rent Control i n B.C. Study. This form of housing has been suggested as a means to address the continuing problem of providing affordable shelter to a l l Canadians (Midmore, 1962). At the same time co-operative housing has been suggested as a panacea to the a l i e n a t i o n and lack of community that reportedly pervades urban centres (Co-operative League of the U.S.A., 1962). While several reports document government reaction to co-operative housing, l e s s i s known about the reactions of the people who a c t u a l l y l i v e i n these housing projects. People are obviously drawn to housing co-operatives to s a t i s f y . t h e i r basic need for shelter but the nature of the co-operative s i t u a t i o n has c e r t a i n economic and s o c i a l advantages. If co-operative housing i s to continue to provide an a l t e r n a t i v e to other types of housing tenure, i t i s important to i d e n t i f y the goals and expectations of co-op users and to evaluate whether these goals and expectations are f u l f i l l e d . Some evaluative studies of co-operative housing from the viewpoint of the user have been undertaken but these have focussed e x c l u s i v e l y on the s i t u a t i o n i n Eastern Canada or the United States. In addi t i o n these investigations have used the case study approach which methodologically 2. precludes generalizing the findings to statements about co-operatives i n general. Certain c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the B.C. s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l climate indicate that B.C. co-op members might have d i f f e r e n t experiences than t h e i r counterparts i n Eastern Canada and the United States. These differences include the existence of a number of s o c i e t i e s interested i n non-profit housing, three years of a p r o v i n c i a l government w i l l i n g to commit funds to co-operative programs, housing prices which are almost the highest i n Canada, and a large community of people seeking a l t e r n a -t i v e l i f e s t y l e s . In B r i t i s h Columbia co-operative housing has become -• ~s i d e n t i f i e d with the p r a c t i c e of people p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the design and planning process of the housing. In the United States and i n European countries co-operatives are 'turn-key' operations i n which members become involved only i n the management a f t e r the project has been completed. Research which examines user s a t i s f a c t i o n i n co-operatives i n Western Canada would therefore seem necessary. Unlike most other forms of tenure, co-operative housing i n B.C. demands involvement from i t s members during the planning stages and with management a f t e r the residents have moved i n . For some people t h i s opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i s the most important aspect of co-operative housing because i t give them an added degree of control over t h e i r l i f e . The process of obtaining the housing i s often seen as an end i n i t s e l f where the learning and adhering to a co-operative philosophy has personal and s o c i a l rewards. A second approach to co-operative housing i s to view i t simply as low cost sh e l t e r . Co-operative housing provides many fam i l i e s with home ownership which would otherwise be f i n a n c i a l l y impossible. 3. The objective of t h i s thesis i s to evaluate the s a t i s f a c t i o n which members of nine co-operatives i n the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , B r i t i s h Columbia, experience both before and a f t e r moving into t h e i r p rojects. The research w i l l examine the perceptions of members who are at d i f f e r e n t stages of the co-operative housing process. This w i l l involve co-operative projects which are i n the planning stages and projects which are completed. The s a t i s f a c t i o n that i s evaluated i s a subjective statement of people's reactions to a p a r t i c u l a r form of housing and the process they experience to obtain i t . The reported l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n are related to the socio-economic, a t t i t u d i n a l and behavioural c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the co-operative members. No attempt i s made to compare s a t i s f a c t i o n between d i f f e r e n t types of tenure or through time. 1976 would seem to be an excellent time to assess the co-operative movement due to the December 1975 change of p r o v i n c i a l p o l i t i c a l power. It i s suggested that the recent growth i n the co-operative housing movement i n B.C. has reached i t s peak and i n the future, new economic and p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t i e s may well constrain the development of new projects. This f i r s t chapter has served to introduce the topic of co-operative housing and to present the subject which w i l l be investigated. The next chapter w i l l review some of the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e which r e l a t e s to user s a t i s f a c t i o n of co-operative housing. A h i s t o r y of the co-operative housing movement i n B.C. w i l l be given within the context of the growth of co-operatives i n Canada. The methodology and approach used for evaluating user s a t i s f a c t i o n w i l l be presented i n the t h i r d chapter with the r e s u l t s of the empirical survey following i n the fourth chapter. F i n a l l y these r e s u l t s w i l l be discussed and recommendations suggested i n the concluding chapter. 4. CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE AND HISTORICAL REVIEW This chapter provides a framework for the empirical survey which investigates the s a t i s f a c t i o n of members of co-operative housing. From a review of the l i t e r a t u r e , a t h e o r e t i c a l base for the research i s suggested and a summary of other studies which have investigated s i m i l a r problems i s presented. A h i s t o r i c a l perspective of the co-operative movement i s given s t a r t i n g with the d e f i n i t i o n s of the various types of housing co-operatives. Emphasis i s placed on the growth of housing co-operatives, p a r t i c u l a r l y those i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The content and impact of various government reports pertaining to co-operative housing are discussed and several reasons for the growth of t h i s type of housing i n B.C. are suggested. 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW This thesis evaluates a .type of housing tenure where p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the users i s possible not only i n the management of the project but also during the design stage. The thrust of community planning i n recent years has been to encourage the involvement of c i t i z e n s i n decisions that a f f e c t t h e i r l i v e s . This l i t e r a t u r e review w i l l point to some of the theory of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n to provide a base for the subsequent empirical survey of co-operative housing where user involvement i s p o t e n t i a l l y unlimited. Other studies which have investigated t h i s type of tenure from the user point of view w i l l be reviewed to i l l u s t r a t e the s i m i l a r i t i e s and differences 5. i n the approach taken i n t h i s thesis. During the nineteen s i x t i e s a tremendous amount of energy on the part of c i t i z e n s was directed toward encouraging changes i n bureaucratic and s o c i a l structures. The uprisings on U.S. and Canadian campuses and the r i o t s by minority groups demanding s o c i a l equality i l l u s t r a t e a common attempt by people seeking more control over the events i n t h e i r l i v e s . In community planning a s i m i l a r movement was manifested i n the r i s e of c i t i z e n groups who demanded more con t r o l over the planning and decision making process. Friedmann (1969) described an innovative framework for planning which was termed a " s o c i a l action model". He c a l l e d f or the "creation of new organizations for guidance r o l e s , improvement i n the performance of e x i s t i n g r o l e s and t h e i r reorganization into more e f f e c t i v e patterns" (p. 315). This model implies that the bureaucratic structures which guide our planning are inadequate and suggests the involvement of the c i t i z e n r y as new input sources. In h i s l a t e r work Friedmann (1973) further enlarges upon these ideas and espouses a transactive s t y l e of planning where the importance of the education process i s stressed. According to t h i s view, not only the p o l i t i c i a n s and professionals but the public should learn through the process of making decisions. Thus a dialogue can be created between planner and c l i e n t where mutual learning can occur. Friedmann expresses hope that by introducing a "feedback guidance system, 1 the trend toward non-participation and a l i e n a t i o n w i l l be reversed. S i m i l a r l y , the l i t e r a t u r e on c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n suggests that user involvement i s important for several reasons. 1) In a s o c i e t y characterized by increasing d i v i s i o n of labour, the i n d i v i d u a l i s l o s i n g his/her a b i l i t y to control many decisions that 6. a f f e c t his/her l i f e . Involvement can bring a sense of s e l f -determination that many consider to be an important aspect of mental health (Vrooman, 1972). 2) Involvement with other people demands the a c q u i s i t i o n of c e r t a i n s k i l l s which i s b e n e f i c i a l from a personal growth viewpoint (Government of Ontario, 1972). 3) Decisions that are made w i l l be of a higher q u a l i t y and p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l be more committed to the dec i s i o n (Government of Ontario, 1972). IiEriedmanass cbheeptua'ltigramewoirk eandpetheiv.idea'ssiof c;the c i t i z e n FparMeipateibnraadvoca.ueser^ housing. The members of co-operatives have the opportunity to play a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n guiding the development of t h e i r housing project. By becoming involved i n t h i s process, a "mutual learning" can occur to the benefit of both members and planners and other bureaucrats. When users can influence the design of the project and the management of the co-operative a f t e r moving i n , high q u a l i t y decisions can be expected. Turner (1972) stresses the users', sense of con t r o l of the housing and suggests that t h i s v a r i a b l e i s c r i t i c a l l y l i n k e d to a sense of w e l l being. He uses the term "housing" not i n the usual sense to i d e n t i f y a noun, that i s a commodity, but rather as a verb which describes the process or a c t i v i t y of housing. This approach has a p p l i c a b i l i t y i n co-operative housing where user involvement i s possible. Turner r e l a t e s the p r i n c i p l e of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n to the housing process i n studies which i n v e s t i -gate the following hypothesis: "When dwellers c o n t r o l the major decisions and are free to make th e i r own contributions i n the design, construction, or management of t h e i r housing, both t h i s process and the environment produced stimulate i n d i v i d u a l and s o c i a l well-being. When people have no 7. control over nor r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r key decisions i n the housing process, on the other hand, dwelling environments may instead become a b a r r i e r to personal f u l f i l l m e n t and a burden on the economy" (p. 241). Implied i n t h i s quotation i s the assumption that user s a t i s f a c t i o n i s r e l a t e d to user involvement. Andrews and Breslauer (1975) attempted to e m p i r i c a l l y prove a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between these v a r i a b l e s i n t h e i r study of a co-operative i n Missasauga, Ontario. Several measures of s a t i s f a c t i o n were correlated with p a r t i c i p a t i o n l e v e l s and inconclusive r e s u l t s were found. The researchers suggest that the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two v a r i a b l e s i s quite complex and therefore d i f f i c u l t to measure. They emphasize the benefits of user co n t r o l i n co-operative housing and conclude that t h i s type of housing should be viewed as a means of increasing the a v a i l a b l e choices i n the housing market.(p. 708). Other l i t e r a t u r e has appeared which investigates co-operative housing from the user point of view. S u l l i v a n (1969) s p e c i f i c a l l y studies the s o c i a l e f f e c t s of co-operative tenure of a project i n New York C i t y . He hypothesizes that c e r t a i n aspects of s o c i a l behaviour, for example neighbourly i n t e r a c t i o n , community s o l i d a r i t y , and community p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l occur more often i n co-operative housing projects than i n p u b l i c r e n t a l accommodation. Although he expresses some reservations about h i s r e s u l t s , the study f a i l s to f i n d any s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n the behaviour and at t i t u d e s of co-op members and renters. A study done by Tate (1973) investigates both the at t i t u d e s of members of a co-operative housing project and those of residents of a p r i v a t e r e n t a l development i n London, Ontario toward permanency of t h e i r housing s i t u a t i o n . His r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e a perception of a greater degree of permanency on the 8. part of the co-operative resident. The t h e o r e t i c a l studies by Friedmann and Turner emphasize the importance of c i t i z e n involvement i n planning r e l a t e d issues that a f f e c t t h e i r l i v e s . This research i s s i m i l a r i n design to the empirical work done by Andrews and Breslauer i n that the focus is. on co-operative housing and the s a t i s f a c t i o n experienced by i t s users. This i s i n contrast to the investigations of S u l l i v a n and Tate where user s a t i s f a c t i o n of co-operative housing i s compared to the s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s of residents of a r e n t a l project. This study seeks to uncover the major issues of co-operative housing as viewed by members of projects i n the Vancouver area. Before the co-operative housing a c t i v i t y i n B.C. i s put i n an h i s t o r i c a l context, the terms used i n the remainder of t h i s thesis w i l l be defined. 2.2 DEFINITIONS Co-operative housing i s a "general term r e f e r r i n g to any of many ways i n which people may get together co-operatively to provide housing for themselves" (Co-operative Union of Canada, 1968, p. 6). The term from a l e g a l viewpoint r e f e r s to a group of people who have organized and incorporated themselves for the purpose of owning and c o n t r o l l i n g the property and buildings of a housing development which they occupy (United Housing Foundation, 1974, p. 7). This d i f f e r s from the condominium which r e f e r s to "one o v e r - a l l area having within i t s boundaries c e r t a i n s p e c i f i e d parts owned i n fee simple by the i n d i v i d u a l owners and other areas owned by a l l the i n d i v i d u a l owners as tenants i n common'1 (Hamilton et a l . , 1971, p. 2). Within t h i s broad framework two types of co-operative housing e x i s t . 9. A 'building co-operative' i s a kind of housing development common i n Nova Scotia and often created by 'sweat equity' where the future owners a c t u a l l y engage themselves i n the construction of the houses. This kind of co-operative i s generally not found i n urban areas where multi-family dwellings predominate and thus compound the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n co-ordinating construction. What d i f f e r e n t i a t e s t h i s type of co-operative housing from others i s that although during construction the group c o l l e c t i v e l y owns the houses, upon completion the ownership reverts to the i n d i v i d u a l (Co-operative Union of Canada, 1968, p. 7). A second type of co-operative housing i s the 'continuing co-operative' where members " j o i n t l y own a multiple family housing development and i n d i v i d u a l l y lease t h e i r units to themselves at cost" (United Housing Foundation, Information Pamphlet No. 2). This type of housing i s novel because the co-operative member i s at the same time a landlord (owning a share i n the society that owns the development) as well as a tenant (resident members lease the units from the s o c i e t y ) . When a member wishes to move from the development the share i s sold back to the co-operative at the same p r i c e for which i t was bought, adjusted f o r the rate of i n f l a t i o n . For t h i s reason the term 'par-value continuing co-operative' i s often used to d i s t i n g u i s h these co-ops from those commonly found i n Europe and the United States where the dwelling units can be sold at market p r i c e . This research concentrates s o l e l y on par-value continuing co-operatives because these are the most popular type i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Throughout the remainder of t h i s thesis the shortened form of 'co-operative' or 'housing co-operative' w i l l be used to r e f e r to a par-value continuing co-operative. The term 'housing co-operative' i s often used ambiguously to r e f e r to both the people who form the co-operative and the buildings which they inhabit. For t h i s study 'co-operative' i s used to indic a t e a 10 . FIGURE I: CO-OP HOUSING group of people, a person who is a member of a co-operative is called a co-operator, and a co-operative project refers to the buildings which they occupy. 11. 2.3 HISTORY OF CO-OPERATIVES IN CANADA The co-operative movement has i t s o r i g i n s i n Rochdale, England where s t r i k i n g weavers founded a co-operative store i n 1844. These weavers pooled t h e i r meagre savings and bought basic foodstuffs which they then sold at market p r i c e s . Rebates were issued on the p r o f i t s which were earned i n proportion to the purchases of each member, and an education fund was set up to spread the ideas of co-operative enterprises. The extension of co-operatives into the housing f i e l d f i r s t occurred i n Germany and has since become well developed i n Scandinavian countries and i n Poland. The wide-spread use of the co-operative idea for e s t a b l i s h i n g d i f f e r e n t kinds of enterprises, for example food stores, insurance, a g r i c u l t u r a l equipment, led to the a r t i c u l a t i o n of several basic co-operative p r i n c i p l e s . These p r i n c i p l e s were adapted by the International Co-operative A l l i a n c e i n 1966 as applicable to any kind of co-operative a c t i v i t y . The s i x p r i n c i p l e s as they apply to housing are: 1) Voluntary and open membership. No person s h a l l be r e s t r i c t e d from membership because of r a c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , or r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n s . Housing co-operatives attempt to eliminate the concentration of low income people i n s p e c i f i c geographic areas by encouraging a mixture of income l e v e l s within each project. Waiting l i s t s for housing units are formed on a f i r s t come, f i r s t served b a s i s , while allowing for matching of house sizes with family s i z e and income. 2) Democratic co n t r o l . Each member of the housing co-operative has equal voting r i g h t . 3) Limited i n t e r e s t on c a p i t a l . No i n t e r e s t i s paid on the i n i t i a l share that the member purchases upon j o i n i n g the co-operative. However a par-value co-operative ensures a return i n constant d o l l a r s , meaning that a cost of l i v i n g adjustment i s made. 4) D i s t r i b u t i o n of surplus. Because a housing co-operative attempts to 12. balance revenue with costs, a surplus i s r a r e l y generated. However should a surplus occur i n any one year, i t i s used to reduce monthly charges or to provide members with a refund. 5) Promotion of education. The creating of co-operative housing i s a complex venture and many s k i l l s have to be acquired. Equally important to the te c h n i c a l information that should be mastered i s the learning of co-operative ideas and p r i n c i p l e s . 6) Co-operation among co-operatives. Other types of co-operative a c t i v i t y , for example day care centres and food co-ops, can be generated from a housing co-operative. Members are encouraged to p a r t i c i p a t e and support these other forms of co-operative a c t i v i t y as well as other housing projects. In Canada the co-operative idea was f i r s t applied i n Ontario and the Maritimes to consumer associations founded i n the early nineteen hundreds. Although coastal fisherpeople have created strong co-operative organiza-tion s , most a c t i v i t y has been centred i n the P r a i r i e s with a g r i c u l t u r a l production. Credit unions, introduced i n Quebec i n 1900, have spread throughout the rest of Canada. Co-operative a c t i v i t y i n the housing sector was begun i n the t h i r t i e s i n Cape Breton when coal and s t e e l workers joined together to form bu i l d i n g co-operatives. In 1964 the f i r s t par-value continuing co-operative housing project i n Canada was b u i l t i n Winnipeg. L i t t l e government action was taken to encourage co-operatives u n t i l 1973, although many reports had urged a l l l e v e l s of government to recognize the tremendous p o t e n t i a l of t h i s type of housing. The Curti s Committee i n 1944 described co-operative housing as "an excellent medium through which a combination of government assistance and group s e l f - h e l p may be secured" (p. 266). The Midmore Report of 1962 pointed to the need for increased density i n urban areas to ensure a more economical use of land while admitting to the ever present Canadian s i n g l e family dwelling dream. Co-operative housing was seen as "a means of r e c o n c i l i n g these two divergent a t t i t u d e s , providing home ownership and more economical housing at the same time" (p. 73). Although the Hellyer Report of 1969 recognized that co-operative housing did not receive s p e c i a l treatment under the National Housing Act, t h i s report f a i l e d to recommend s p e c i f i c changes i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n . The Dennis and F i s h Report published i n 1972 a r t i c u l a t e d the s o c i a l and economic benefits derived from co-operative l i v i n g as c i t e d by the National Commission on Urban Problems i n the United States (1971,;pp. 140-These are: S o c i a l Benefits - working together produces a f e e l i n g of i d e n t i t y and a desire to help - projects are run democratically - other co-operative ventures are often i n i t i a t e d - a sense of ownership i s created - vandalism and delinquency have been very low i n most projects Economic Benefits - low i n i t i a l purchase p r i c e because i n f l a t e d r e a l estate values are not added to the p r i c e - low maintenance and supply costs through bulk purchases - low costs for parking, recreation and community f a c i l i t i e s by sharing. 14. The Dennis and F i s h Report also urges that changes be made to the National Housing Act to encourage the growth of co-operative housing. In 1973, a year a f t e r t h i s study was completed, new fe d e r a l regulations were enacted to permit the following: - non-profit co-operatives became e l i g i b l e for 100% loans, c a p i t a l grants up to 10% of costs, and s t a r t up funds (grants to finance preliminary organization); - the loans could apply equally to new construction or r e h a b i l i t a t e d buildings and i f r e h a b i l i t a t i o n occurred a d d i t i o n a l loans and grants were av a i l a b l e under a s p e c i a l r e h a b i l i t a t i o n program - members of housing co-operatives became e l i g i b l e for home ownership grants and subsidies previously only a v a i l a b l e for public housing tenants. Since the enactment of these regulations, a s u b s t a n t i a l increase i n the number of s t a r t s of co-operative housing projects has occurred. As the following table i l l u s t r a t e s many of these s t a r t s have been i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The major events and conditions that are responsible f o r t h i s high l e v e l of co-operative housing a c t i v i t y w i l l be explored i n the following section. Table IX: Number of Continuing Parc-yaiLueiCo-operative Units i n Projects whose Mortgages have been Approved by CMHC 1973 1974 1975 (Jan.-Oct.) Canada B.C. Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Quebec New Brunswick Nova Scotia P.E.I. Newfoundland 180 74 106 1,011 466 94 140 314 1,366 805 11 150 358 37 5 15 . Source: 1973, 1974 Figures - CMHC Index, S t a t i s t i c a l  Handbook, Section B-43. 1975 Figures - CMHC Index, NHA S t a t i s t i c a l Summary. Although these data r e f e r only to CMHC funded projects, i t i s believed that these comprise the majority of continuing par-value co-operatives i n Canada. In summary i t would appear that the establishment of a co-operative housing movement i n Canada i s a r e l a t i v e l y recent event and has r e a l l y only gathered momentum i n the l a s t three years. I t i s clear from the table presented that co-operative housing has only become a r e a l i t y i n a few provinces of which B r i t i s h Columbia i s one. 2.4 GROWTH OF HOUSING CO-OPERATIVES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA The early h i s t o r y of co-operative housing i n B.C. i s characterized by by several f r u i t l e s s attempts at developing projects. The f i r s t attempt to es t a b l i s h co-operative housing i n 1958 was unsuccessful because of a lack of leadership and p o l i t i c a l opposition (Constantinu, 1970). In 1969 the Western Co-operative Housing Society f a i l e d because of f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s incurred a f t e r p a r t i a l completion of a project i n Port A l b e r n i . The f i r s t successful project was started i n Abbotsford i n 1969 when a group of people received strong backing from a l o c a l c r e d i t union and managed to complete a project which now houses both senior c i t i z e n s and f a m i l i e s . In Vancouver another organization was formed from which the present United Housing Foundation (UHF) developed. UHF i s a non-profit organization which serves as a resource group for housing co-operatives i n B.C. by providing organiz-ation, administrative, f i n a n c i a l , educational, developmental and managerial services. I t s presence i s probably one of the most important factors i n explaining the growth of co-operative housing i n B.C. In 1975 UHF was a f f i l i a t e d with more than eight projects which were i n operation and about 16 . F I G U R E LT : DECOSrios V I L - L . A G E . twenty i n the various planning stages (United Housing Foundation, 1975). Another important factor i n accounting for the sub s t a n t i a l growth of co-ops i n B.C. i s government support. Following the e l e c t i o n of the New Democratic Party i n 1972, the province had a firm p o l i c y i n support of co-operative housing. This p o l i c y was reinforced by the success of early co-operative projects such as the one i n Abbotsford and DeCosmos V i l l a g e i n Vancouver. Haire (1975) reports i n h i s survey of co-operative and non-profit projects across Canada that B r i t i s h Columbia extended more 17. support to these groups than any other p r o v i n c i a l government. P r o v i n c i a l assistance includes: - purchase of land for co-operatives or preference i n the d i s p o s i t i o n of Crown land - provision of land leases at a s p e c i a l rate - provision of a high impact grant which i s designed to ease the f i n a n c i a l burden of the early years of the co-operative - provision of interim financing pending mortgage arrangements with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) - funds for deposits and rent supplements f or low income residents (B.C., Department of Housing, 1975, p. 15). The growth of co-operatives has been encouraged by the presence of several other f a c t o r s . The f i r s t of these i s the support i n the form of land leases or rezonings that most m u n i c i p a l i t i e s have been w i l l i n g to give to co-operative housing. A second factor which makes co-operative housing an a t t r a c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e i s the high cost of home ownership i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The Real Estate Board said i n 1974 that the average house . p r i c e i n Vancouver i s second only to Toronto i n expense. The presence of a strong c r e d i t union network and labour movement throughout the province i s a t h i r d factor which has encouraged the growth of housing co-operatives. B.C. Central Credit Union has often provided financing to the co-operatives and l o c a l c r e d i t unions have informed t h e i r customers of newly developing co-operatives which are seeking members. S i m i l a r l y labour unions have been eager to support low cost housing and have committed funds to various projects. A f i n a l factor encouraging co-operatives i s the existence of a f a i r s i z e community of people seeking a l t e r n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e s . A recent p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s community makes these comments about co-operatives. 18 . "A v i t a l part of the developing a l t e r n a t i v e way of l i f e i n B.C. i s the co-op movement. The essence of t h i s approach i s gaining r e a l control of our own l i v e s i n tangeable every day ways" (B.C. A l t e r n a t i v e , 1975, p. 4). Figure I I I : Housing Costs i n Vancouver From t h i s discussion several factors have been i s o l a t e d that could help explain the growth of co-ops during the l a s t f i v e years i n B.C. It should be emphasized that t h i s analysis applies to the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l 19. climate i n mid 1975. With the recent p o l i t i c a l and accompanying s o c i a l changes mentioned e a r l i e r , t h i s study might be documenting a b r i e f growth period within a longer h i s t o r y of minimal co-operative housing a c t i v i t y . The discussion thus far has centred on the co-operative housing a c t i v i t y movement i n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l , n a t i o n a l , and p r o v i n c i a l framework. The empirical research done i n t h i s study aims to discover how the i n d i v i d u a l co-op member perceives the advantages and disadvantages of co-operative housing. For co-operative housing to meet the needs of i t s users i t i s important to discover which advantages, on a continuing b a s i s , are most important to the members. A f t e r describing the methodology used both i n the thesis and i n data c o l l e c t i o n the r e s u l t s of the case study w i l l be described. 20. CHAPTER THREE - THE METHOD The research model used i n t h i s thesis i s based on a framework proposed by McAfee (1975) i n which the r o l e of the user of the program under evaluation i s su b s t a n t i a l . The ra t i o n a l e behind t h i s model and i t s a p p l i c a -ti o n i n t h i s thesis w i l l be presented i n t h i s chapter. The concept of s a t i s f a c t i o n w i l l be explored and the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n o p e r a t i o n a l i z i n g a measure w i l l be discussed. The approach used i n t h i s thesis w i l l be presented with reference made to the questions asked during the data c o l l e c t i o n . F i n a l l y the techniques, constraints, d e f i n i t i o n s and methods of s t a t i s t i c a l analysis used during the survey w i l l be discussed. 3.1 RESEARCH MODEL Research intended to evaluate a project or program usually e n t a i l s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of dimensions f o r study, formulation of a research design, data c o l l e c t i o n , data analysis and formulation of conclusions. Many of the t r a d i t i o n a l evaluation studies have r e l i e d almost e x c l u s i v e l y on the input of programme administrators and evaluators with the ideas of the programme p a r t i c i p a n t s only being used at the data c o l l e c t i o n stage. In contrast to t h i s , a study by .McAfee has created a methodology where the user as well as the researcher can play major r o l e s i n a l l aspects of the evaluation process. This provides a user perspective of the project which, due to the perceived high s o c i a l and economic costs of data c o l l e c t i n g , had not previously been adequately considered. McAfee 21. concludes that project evaluations which involve the user w i l l be more responsive to the needs and perceptions of the p a r t i c i p a n t s and i n the long run the s o c i a l and economic costs w i l l probably be minimized. This study concentrates on the perceptions and expectations of co-op  members. An important part of the co-operative philosophy i s the involve-ment and p a r t i c i p a t i o n of people within the co-operative organization. For t h i s reason i t was f e l t e s s e n t i a l that the co-op members be involved as much as possible. The survey was undertaken during the summer of 1975 when the author was employed by United Housing Foundation to evaluate the user s a t i s f a c t i o n of co-operative housing. Figure IV i l l u s t r a t e s the evaluation process that was followed and the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the co-operators, evaluator, and project administrators. Those f a m i l i a r with McAfee (1975) w i l l note the s i m i l a r i t y to her approach. The co-op members (as well as UHF) were consulted at a l l stages as i l l u s t r a t e d ; namely, i n i d e n t i f y i n g the dimen-sions for study, i n t r a n s l a t i n g the concepts and problems into e a s i l y understood questions, i n the c o l l e c t i o n of the data, and i n the r a t i f i c a -t i o n of conclusions. Results from the questionnaires were coded and the data were analyzed both q u a n t i t a t i v e l y and q u a l i t a t i v e l y . Results emerged through quantita-r • t i v e analysis that indicated the attitudes of the majority of respondents, while the q u a l i t a t i v e analysis i d e n t i f i e d s p e c i a l topics which were c r i t i c a l to the s a t i s f a c t i o n of smaller numbers of co-operators. The findings of the study were sent to a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s to inform them of the outcome of the research and to s o l i c i t reaction to the conclusions. The response to t h i s e f f o r t was minimal but the information obtained i s presented i n Chapter 5 and a sample of the summary sheet which was mailed 22. E l GUR E. EL : EVALUATION P R O C E S S EVALUATION a e q u e s T F12.0H A C & M C V A C . & N C V C o - o f E p / \ T o ? S PI MB.MSIO M X . t ? E . N T i r i c A T i o N A C E N t Y I N P U T AGENCY I K POT ACE-MC-y RA,TiPy S T U O V rota. MO i-ATE R B S E ^ a c M X D A T A C O U C E C T I O M 1 PAT A ANALYSIS I DENTlFtcATJOU U S S R . TB.Atfsi_A.roR. US«ER EATiT=> 23. out can be found i n Appendix 6.3. 3.2 MEASURES OF USER SATISFACTION Although the concept of s a t i s f a c t i o n i s quite e a s i l y understood on an i n t u i t i v e l e v e l , the problems with t r a n s l a t i n g t h i s idea into measurable factors are very complex. Andrews and Breslauer (1975) point out that although many 'conceptual frameworks', 'paradigms' and 'models' e x i s t i n the l i t e r a t u r e on t h i s subject, most lack explanatory power and are d i f f i c u l t to operationalize. In t h e i r work the notion of user s a t i s f a c t i o n i s explored using the t r a d i t i o n a l economic concepts of u t i l i t y functions and i n d i f f e r -ence curves. I t i s suggested that within the b u i l t environment, an . i n d i v i d u a l trades o f f c e r t a i n quantities of one commodity, for example kitchen space, for quantities of a second commodity such as the number of bedrooms. Although they suggest that conceptually t h i s type of reasoning has a c e r t a i n a t t r a c t i o n , the authors admit to several overwhelming operational problems i n moving from economic theory to s o c i a l theory and then to r e a l i t y . For example, i n economic theory the u t i l i t y function i s obtained from the behaviour of consumers whereas with s a t i s f a c t i o n , the e f f e c t s are often a ' f e e l i n g state' rather than a se r i e s of observable actions. In addressing the problems of pinpointing factors that influence an i n d i v i d u a l ' s perception of s a t i s f a c t i o n with the b u i l t environment, Gutman and Westergaard (n.d.) bring up the following points. F i r s t l y , i t i s d i f f i c u l t to i s o l a t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the b u i l t environment that a f f e c t s a t i s f a c t i o n from a v a r i e t y of other p o t e n t i a l f a c t o r s . Secondly, d i f f e r i n g cognitive structures make i t dangerous to propose r e l a t i o n -ships between users and" the environment when the perception of environment va r i e s greatly between people. In a s i m i l a r way, people's expectations of the b u i l t environment also d i f f e r s u b s t a n t i a l l y due to d i f f e r e n t preference structures. T h i r d l y , Gutman and Westergaard point to the temptation of erroneously generalizing experiences of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with one specific item of a building to the whole building. In this research the attempt to investigate user satisfaction i s complicated by the fact that the evaluation is concerned with user percep-tion of a type of housing tenure rather than the built environment. If the d i f f i c u l t i e s in isolating c r i t i c a l factors in the,built environment are as great as has been suggested above, then operationalizing a person-tenure satisfaction measure is probably more d i f f i c u l t considering the abstract nature of 'tenure'. A major problem is differentiating between reactions of the user to the built environment under study and to the tenure form under which that built environment is occupied. 3.3 APPROACH TO USER SATISFACTION EMPLOYED IN QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY Having no strong theoretical base on which to anchor this user satisfaction study of co-operative housing, the author chose to approach the topic by investigating the attitudes of members to a variety of topics. Two series of variables were identified; the f i r s t set was chosen because the factors were considered potentially important to the sense of satisfaction as experienced by the co-op members whereas the second set contained variables that were potentially important to policy formulation. From the i n i t i a l set of variables questions were formulated that probed the users' attitudes toward characteristics of the co-operative structure. For example, an internal subsidy exists within each co-operative where people of higher income pay higher monthly charges for a unit for which lower income families would pay less. Co-operatives therefore try to encourage a community where there is a mixture of income levels. Members were asked i f they agreed or disagreed with these characteristics 25. and why. Other variables that were i d e n t i f i e d and questioned were the s o c i a l and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the respondent such as income l e v e l , m a r ital status, previous dwelling type. A second series of variables was chosen because i t was anticipated that planning p o l i c y could be drawn from the r e l a t i o n s h i p s that were investigated. Expectations of co-operative housing. The l i n k between the expectations and the reported s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s could indicate whether people with c e r t a i n preconceptions of co-op housing were more l i k e l y to be happy with t h e i r l i v i n g environment than others who had d i f f e r e n t expectations. Pre-occupancy education sessions could then be created which would lead to refinement of these expectations ora withdrawal of unsuitable members. Understanding of co-operative housing. If s a t i s f a c t i o n i s rela t e d to the f u l l understanding of the nature of co-operative housing, pre-occupancy education sessions should ensure that a l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h i s type of housing were c l a r i f i e d and c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s frequently misunderstood could be stressed. In the questionnaires',co-operators' "understanding of the following major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s - o f co-op housing was investigated: - the member does not own the unit i n the fee simple sense but owns a share i n the organization that owns a l l the dwellings - the member w i l l not be forced to leave his/her unit unless rules of the co-operative are broken. The decision i s made by the Board of Directors - the member does not b u i l d up equity - a l l members have equal voting r i g h t s i n the management of the co-op - an i n t e r n a l subsidy system e x i s t s as described above. Attitude of members toward co-op Board of Directors. Each housing co-operative annually e l e c t s a Board of Directors to manage the a f f a i r s of the project. Major decisions are made in consultation with the entire membership and open meetings are held throughout the year. How satisfied a member is with his/her living environment could be closely connected with the way in which the Board of Directors handles i t s responsibility. Attitude toward the resource group. As mentioned in the previous chapter, the task of developing co-operative housing is a complex one and in B.C. co-operatives have been aided by a resource group known as U.H.F. This organization has a delicate role in encouraging while not dominating the growth of co-operatives. For some members, exposure to the resource group is f i r s t and sometimes strongest contact with the co-operative movement. Satisfaction with co-operative housing could be linked to attitudes held toward the resource group. Attitude toward participation. Co-operative housing provides a unique opportunity for a group of people to plan and manage a multiple family development. For future policy decisions i t would be interesting to discover i f satisfaction is derived from or related to this process. 3.4 INTERVIEW TECHNIQUE A random sample strati f i e d by housing projects was followed using membership l i s t s obtained from UHF. The table below shows the breakdown of the sample by co-op.and illustrates some characteristics of each project. The locations of .'.the projects are shown on the map which follows the table. Seventy-seven personal interviews were conducted by the researcher in the homes of co-op members. It was decided to use personal interviews because, with the quantity and the nature of the data required, phone or mail surveys would probably have been ineffective. People were approached i n i t i a l l y by telephone and an appointment was arranged. A letter of confirmation followed when sufficient time and adequate postal service allowed. Table I I : C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Co-operatives and Number of Members Interviewed i n Each v r c ^ TT • ^  J m -i No. of Individual -Name of Co-op Units and Types Completion w . T . Members Interviewed Completed De Cosmos 110 Townhouses 1972 14 Azalea Gardens 65 Apartments 1973 14 Kanata 150 Townhouses 1975 14 Mountain View 215 Apartments 1975 14 540 Under Construction New Westminster 42 Townhouses & 5 Apartments False Creek 200 Townhouses 5 Klahanie 74 Townhouses 5 Penta 26 Townhouses 3 Penticton Plaza 42 Townhouses . 3 384 29. The interviews took place during the s i x week period from June 9 to July 21, 1975. One f i f t h of the interviews were conducted with both the ) husband and wife. In the remaining cases either the husband or the wife was interviewed i n d i v i d u a l l y . Interviews lasted from f i f t e e n minutes to two hours with an average length of about f o r t y minutes. Printed question-naires, examples of which are shown i n Appendix 6.1 and 6:2 were used by the interviewer to record respondents' comments. F i f t y - s i x of the interviews were conducted with members of completed projects and twenty-one with people whose projects were i n the various planning phases. Certain words and phrases are used throughout the report and should . be explained at t h i s point Those interviewed were i n "UHF-assisted co-operatives," co-operatives who had contracted to use the services of UHF, with the exception of the Fales Creek Co-operative. I t was included i n the survey because at the time of the sample s e l e c t i o n the signing of a UHF assistance contract seemed imminent. However, due to p o l i t i c a l problems a f f e c t i n g UHF, t h i s did not occur. For an analysis of these problems the reader i s referred to a thesis by E. C u l l (1976). Nonetheless the False Creek Co-operative worked with UHF and the process of development of that co-op was s i m i l a r to other UHF-assisted co-ops. The study examines co-operator s a t i s f a c t i o n with a process which progresses through several d i s t i n c t stages. "Planning stages" r e f e r to the development of the co-operative from the f i r s t o rganizational meeting to the time when the members move into t h e i r dwellings. A f t e r t h i s point, the term "completed project" i s used. "Planning process" indicates the series of decisions taken before the housing units are completed and ready f o r occupancy. 30. P a r t i c i p a t i o n r e f e r s to the involvement that members have with t h e i r co-operative. Involvement can take the form of attendance at meetings and committees but also includes i n t e r a c t i o n with fellow co-op members. To d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the Board of Directors of UHF and the Boards of the i n d i v i d u a l co-operatives, the l a t t e r w i l l be indicated by "Co-op Board of D i r e c t o r s " . 3.5 CONSTRAINTS When choosing a sample siz e and a method of obtaining data, the a b i l i t y to project the sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to the f u l l population i s often traded o f f against the amount and depth of information that can be obtained. In t h i s case, i t was decided that personal interviews would produce a wealth of information that would j u s t i f y the n e c e s s a r i l y small sample of 77. The co-operative housing movement i n Canada i s a r e l a t i v e l y new phenomenon and has resulted i n few user s a t i s f a c t i o n studies. As a r e s u l t , t h i s research had no d i r e c t l y comparable studies to draw on. The nature of the data c o l l e c t e d i n t h i s study was inherently value-laden. A concerted e f f o r t was made by the researcher to avoid expression of bias i n the phrasing and intonation of questions. Certain v a r i a b l e s such as s a t i s f a c t i o n are not e a s i l y q u a n tified and a loss of richness of information i s i n e v i t a b l e i n order to e l i c i t comparable r e s u l t s . 3.6 CRITERIA FOR ANALYSIS Since the data did not show a normal d i s t r i b u t i o n , non-parametric s t a t i s t i c s were used to analyze the data. Kendall rank-order c o r r e l a t i o n was used to measure :the association o f . s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the various independ-ent variables-. This-was f e l t .to' be the most appropriate test because a 5 point scale was used r e s u l t i n g i n o r d i n a l catagoric data. 31. The use of Kendall's tau i s often l i m i t e d to c o r r e l a t i o n s between two o r d i n a l scales. Several of the v a r i a b l e s used i n t h i s survey are v a r i a b l e s with only two possible categories. However, following the reasoning of Norman H. Nie (1970), a dichotomy here i s treated as an o r d i n a l measure thus making the a p p l i c a t i o n of Kendall's tau appropriate. Nie argues that although a rank order may not be inherent i n the category d e f i n i t i o n s , placing the v a r i a b l e s i n t h i s order s a t i s f i e s the mathematical requirements of ordering. Only those r e l a t i o n s h i p s between va r i a b l e s whose c o r r e l a t i o n s t a t i s -t i c s were s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l or l e s s were used i n the a n a l y s i s . This chapter has presented the framework under which t h i s research was undertaken. The methodological issues such as the constraints of the research, the d e f i n i t i o n of terms, and methods of s t a t i s t i c a l analysis have been addressed. The next chapter describes the r e s u l t s of the questionnaire survey which was- administered to co-op members. 32. CHAPTER FOUR - RESULTS OF THE SURVEY In t h i s chapter the r e s u l t s of the survey of the members of nine co-operative housing projects are presented. The findings are grouped according to respondent reactions to the following s i x subject areas: 4.1 Sense of S a t i s f a c t i o n 4.2 Expectations of Co-op Housing 4.3 Understanding of Co-op Housing 4.4 Attitudes Toward the Boards of Directors 4.5 Attitudes Toward UHF 4.6 Attitudes Toward P a r t i c i p a t i o n Within each of the above sections, the relevance of the subject and the methods of e l i c i t i n g response are f i r s t discussed. Secondly, the findings of the survey are presented. Although the tables provide an exact statement of the various numbers and s t a t i s t i c s , approximate numbers have been used i n the discussion to enhance the r e a d i b i l i t y . 4.1 SENSE OF SATISFACTION Although several d i f f e r e n t means of measuring s a t i s f a c t i o n were used, the most d i r e c t was a question asking the co-operator to take a l l things into consideration and to rank his/her s a t i s f a c t i o n with co-operative housing on a fi v e - p o i n t scale. Less d i r e c t measures were obtained from questions concerning the 33. length of time the respondent anticipated l i v i n g i n the project and whether he/she had ever suggested co-op housing to friends or r e l a t i v e s . Similar measures were used f o r those people whose projects were i n the planning and b u i l d i n g stages but the questions related to t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n with the process of obtaining co-op housing. Using these i n d i c a t o r s of s a t i s f a c t i o n the following section examines the l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n that i s experienced by a l l surveyed co-op members. The important factors that are rel a t e d to t h i s sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n are then discussed looking f i r s t at the r e s u l t s from members of projects i n the planning stages and then at the r e s u l t s from members of completed projects. 4.1.1 Level of S a t i s f a c t i o n The majority of co-op members are very s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r l i v i n g environment. Taking a l l aspects of t h e i r housing into consideration, almost three-quarters of the co-operators surveyed considered themselves to be quite s a t i s f i e d . People whose projects are presently i n .the planning stages report s i m i l a r high l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n with the process they are experiencing. Table H I provides the exact f i g u r e s . Table I I I : S a t i s f a c t i o n with Co-op L i v i n g as Expressed, by Members of Completed Projects and S a t i s f a c t i o n with the Planning Process as Expressed-by Members of Incomplete Projects (In Percent) S a t i s f a c t i o n Levels (in Percent) Type of Project Low High Completed Projects (n=56) Planning Stage Projects (n=21) Both (n=77) 5.4 1.8 17.9 32.1 42.9 4.8 9.5 14.3 23.8 47.6 5.2 3.8 16.9 29.9 44.2 34. The enthusiasm which some people f e l t f o r t h e i r housing was e x c i t i n g . One person described i t as "the clo s e s t thing to heaven that I have ever experienced". Other people mentioned that to them co-op housing was "a great place where people are working together to get things done". However, a tenth of those surveyed reported some d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the housing or the process. The s t a t i s t i c a l analysis which follows i n the rest of the chapter points to some of the reasons behind t h i s d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n . The comments below should help to humanize the numbers: As far as I'm concerned i t ' s the same as l i v i n g i n a ... prison. (When questioned as to which aspects of co-op housing were s i m i l a r to that of a prison, the person answered that i t was because of the rules and regulations.) Other people misunderstood or d i s l i k e d the non-equity c h a r a c t e r i s t i c and, as a r e s u l t , were d i s s a t i s f i e d . If you are i n here you f e e l l i k e , "I've h i t the bottom and I ' l l never get out!" I'm not happy here because no matter how long you are l i v i n g here you never get anything more than what you pay for i t . A few f a m i l i e s reported s o c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s with t h e i r neighbours and a t t r i b u t e d t h i s to the physical layout of townhouse developments. 4.1.2 Important Factors i n S a t i s f a c t i o n Levels Experienced by Members  of Projects i n the Planning Stages The analysis attempted to uncover r e l a t i o n s h i p s between•satisfaction with the planning process and various c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the co-op members. Only three c o r r e l a t i o n s could be considered significant."*" Appendix 6.4 shows the c o r r e l a t i o n c o - e f f i c i e n t s and l e v e l s of s i g n i f i c a n c e . 35. Those people who c l e a r l y understood the differences between co-operative and fee simple ownership reported high l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n . Co-op members who are s a t i s f i e d with the planning process have no problems contacting t h e i r Board of Directors. Also, high s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s were found to be related to a desire to j o i n other co-operatives such as baby-s i t t i n g and food co-ops. F l GrUR.E- ~3L '. KOUfJTAlM VIEW 36. These findings indicated that s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s are associated with co-op member c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which could be influenced by education programmes encouraged by the co-op organizers. Although the implications of these r e l a t i o n s h i p s are not c l e a r , by emphasizing the d e t a i l s of co-operative ownership and the other forms of co-operative a c t i v i t i e s that could be i n i t i a t e d , user s a t i s f a c t i o n could perhaps be increased. In addition, encouraging greater communication between co-op Boards of Directors and members could lead to higher s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s . 4.1.3 Important Factors i n S a t i s f a c t i o n Levels Experienced by Members  of Completed Co-ops The v a r i a b l e s that were found to be most strongly related to co-op members' sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n were: a strong sense of community, attend-ance at the l a s t group meeting, understanding of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of co-op housing, the kinds of expectations that are f e l t , and experience or knowledge of other co-operative a c t i v i t i e s . Each of these r e l a t i o n s h i p s to s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s w i l l be discussed i n d i v i d u a l l y . The survey found that the l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n that co-op people experience i s r e l a t e d to perceptions of a strong sense of community. Important components of community s o l i d a r i t y were taken to be i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with the community and the sharing of common values ( S u l l i v a n , 1969). Thus, people reporting high l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n also approved of the i n t e r n a l subsidy system, thought that the s o c i a l mixture of people i n co-ops was a p o s i t i v e feature, and f e l t that the people i n co-ops rel a t e d d i f f e r e n t l y to each other than did those i n adjacent neighbourhoods. The r e s u l t s also indicated that people's s a t i s f a c t i o n was re l a t e d to t h e i r attendance at the l a s t group meeting and to the importance people placed on becoming involved with a c t i v i t i e s that were going on i n the co-op 37. F I G O C E . 3Z3L co-op HEE - n U G r community. Although i n the interviews respondents often mentioned informally how boring or f r u s t r a t i n g the meetings could be, i t seems that s a t i s f a c t i o n i s c l o s e l y and p o s i t i v e l y related to attandance. A t h i r d area that was strongly linked with s a t i s f a c t i o n was clear understanding of some of the basic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of co-operative housing. For example, those people who stated that co-op housing was d i f f e r e n t from home ownership i n the fee simple sense reported high l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n . 38. The converse i s also true - people who reported low l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n often expressed some misunderstanding about the nature of co-operative ownership. The reasons for s a t i s f a c t i o n are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the expectations that people have on j o i n i n g co-operatives. A c o r r e l a t i o n was found between s a t i s f a c t i o n and hopes for security of tenure, and the s o c i a l benefits of a strong sense of community and sharing. An i n t e r e s t i n g point here i s that the co-operators who did not mention costs as an a t t r a c t i o n to co-ops expressed high l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n . It was thought that t h i s could be caused by the number of people entering co-ops with the misunderstanding that they would be making a p r o f i t on t h e i r unit. If t h i s were true, d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n would then be r e l a t e d only to the discovery of the actual f i n a n c i a l arrangements and not to the mentioning of costs as an a t t r a c t i v e feature. However, when a l l those who had experienced f i n a n c i a l misunder-standings were excluded from the s t a t i s t i c a l analysis (n=37), satisfaction levels were s t i l l higher among those who had not mentioned costs as an i n i t i a l cause f o r a t t r a c t i o n to co-ops (Tau = -.02). A group of r e l a t i o n s h i p s also e x i s t s between s a t i s f a c t i o n and experience with or knowledge of other co-operative a c t i v i t i e s . High s a t i s f a c t i o n was reported by people who would be interested i n j o i n i n g co-ops such as a food or b a b y s i t t i n g co-op i f one was started i n t h e i r area. Other r e l a t i o n s h i p s that were i d e n t i f i e d as l i k e l y to show strong c o r r e l a t i o n s did not materialize from the analysis. No s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a -t i o n was found between s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s and factors such as stage i n the l i f e c y c l e , m a rital status, age or type of u n i t . When a d i r e c t measure of amount of p a r t i c i p a t i o n was compared with s a t i s f a c t i o n , no s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s were evident. However the r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that s a t i s f a c t i o n l e v e l s are linked to variables such as sense of community and attendance at the last group meeting which imply a high level of community involvement. This is interesting because these are factors that the organizers and co-operative members can influence. It would seem also that satisfaction is related to user expectations which can be modified by effective education. These expectations are discussed in the following section. 4.2 USER EXPECTATIONS OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING People's expectations of co-op housing are greatly influenced by how clearly the concept is understood. These anticipations in turn have a large effect on the housing satisfaction that they experience. To discover the expectations of those who are liv i n g in UHF-assisted co-ops, the members were asked why they originally wanted to join. Co-op members hold a range of opinions about what co-operative housing is and what i s attractive about i t . One person saw i t as "a training ground for socialism and hopefully for communism". Others described i t as "no different than other townhouse developments". Certain trends became apparent in the quantitative analysis. The survey confirmed that the most common reason people join housing co-operatives is financial. Almost three-quarters of those questioned volunteered 'reasonable costs' as one of the prime motives for joining."*" It was interesting to . note that - the. /second mssteaconmon reason for joining co-ops was the perceived social benefits of co-op housing. One-third of the people said that they anticipated that co-op This is not in contradiction to the previously reported findings which showed lower levels of satisfaction among those who mentioned costs; rather the two sets of findings show that although the majority of co-operators are attracted by reasonable costs, their average satisfaction tends to be lower than the minority's. 4 0 . F I G U R E M L * . DECOSMOS vii_»- AGE. housing would provide a greater sense of community and a greater f e e l i n g of support and neighbourliness than they had previously experienced. Other frequently mentioned a t t r a c t i o n s were the knowledge that they could not be forced to vacate without reasonable cause and the anticipated f e e l i n g of home ownership. The expectations of people who l i v e d i n completed projects were very 41. s i m i l a r to those whose projects were i n the planning stages. Table IV i l l u s t r a t e s those findings. It has always been suspected that cost factors are the prime motiva-t i o n for j o i n i n g housing co-ops and these findings confirm that t h i s i s true i n UHF-assisted co-ops. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g that the s o c i a l benefits ranked second i n importance, i n d i c a t i n g that f o r a good proportion of people, co-op housing s a t i s f i e s more than a need for sh e l t e r . Table IV: .Expectations of Co-op Housing Which:Members'. Express by Project Type ( i n Percent) Completed Planning Stage B o t h Factor Mentioned Projects Projects , _ 7 7 \ (n=56) ,(n=21) ^ " } Costs 71 76 73 Soc i a l Benefits 34 24 31 Security of Tenure 30 29 30 Sense of Ownership 25 33 27 Physical Characteris-t i c s of Site and Unit 27 20 25 Sense of Support from Neighbours 27 23 12 Location 18 5 11 Able to have Pets/ Children 7 0 5 4.3 UNDERSTANDING OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING The term 'co-operative housing' can be interpreted i n many d i f f e r e n t ways. UHF attempts to help people understand the term by issu i n g several pamphlets as well as by making verbal explanations at group meetings. How c l e a r l y the idea ends up being understood was examined by asking people to explain i t as they would to a curious f r i e n d who knew nothing about i t . 42 FIGURE IX: KANATA Certain c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were mentioned immediately such as the security of tenure. Other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s seemed to be part of the respon dent's understanding but these were mentioned only a f t e r prompting. When co-op c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s could not be obtained even with prompting, the respondent was c l a s s i f i e d as not understanding that c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . For example, only one-half the people f e l t that co-op housing i s created by people getting together to solve t h e i r housing problems. The other h a l f did not f e e l that any more i n d i v i d u a l i n i t i a t i v e was required i n j o i n i n g a co-op than i n using any other government housing program. 43. About ten percent of the respondents said they r e a l i z e d only a f t e r they moved i n (some s t i l l did not r e a l i z e ) that they did not own t h e i r house i n the fee simple sense. However, almost a l l those people whose co-ops were i n the planning and b u i l d i n g stages were aware of c o l l e c t i v e ownership, suggesting that the education program at UHF may. have improved with.experience. The i n t e r n a l subsidy system was a t h i r d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c with which a tenth of the people surveyed were unfamiliar. The people who were waiting to get into t h e i r units were less aware than those already l i v i n g i n the projects. This could be because t h i s factor i s not stressed or understood by people u n t i l monthly payments are required. A fourth c h a r a c t e r i s t i c about which some of the respondents were not know-ledgeable concerns the running of the co-operative a f t e r moving i n . In p a r t i c u l a r the e l e c t i o n procedures and functions of the co-op boards of d i r e c t o r s were unclear to ten percent of the respondents whether l i v i n g i n co-operative housing developments or waiting to get into t h e i r u n i t s . The above findings are summarized i n Table VI. These findings should provide i n d i c a t o r s f or UHF concerning which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are being understood through present communication channels and which need more emphasis. Table V: Members Who Did Not Understand Certain C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Co-op Housing In Percent C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Completed Planning Stage Projects (n=56) Projects (n=21) Both Types (n=77) Internal Subsidy System Non-profit Management of co-ops a f t e r Move-in Security of Tenure Created by People to Solve Own Housing Problem 9 5 14 0 10 4 10 7 10 0 10 5 9 0 7 44. 4.4 CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD BOARDS OF DIRECTORS How people perceived t h e i r Board of Directors was thought .to be important to the co-operators' s a t i s f a c t i o n . Each respondent was asked to describe t h e i r Board of Directors i n terms of what i t d i d , who i t s members were and how the members were selected. The degree to which the Boards represent the members was examined. Another area of i n v e s t i g a t i o n was the understanding which co-op members had of the self-governing process. No strong c o r r e l a t i o n was found between s a t i s f a c t i o n and understanding of the Boards of Directors. As was expected, the co-op members whose projects had not yet been completed knew l e s s about who was on the Board and how the Board was selected than those co-operators who were l i v i n g i n th e i r projects. The worst example was i n the area of knowing who comprises the boards of d i r e c t o r s . Here, 33% of the members i n the planning stage co-ops showed a lack of f a m i l i a r i t y . The number of members of incomplete projects who could describe the Board was approximately the same as i n completed projects. Table VI i l l u s t r a t e s these fi n d i n g s . Table VI: F a m i l i a r i t y of Co-op Members with Their Boards of Directors Percentages of Members Who Answered "Don't Know" or Equivalent Question Members of Completed Projects Members of Projects i n Planning Stages Who i s on the Board of Directors? 24% 33% What the Board of Directors does 12% 9% How they are selected 7% 19% 45. I t had been thought at the beginning of t h i s study that the longer the co-operative was i n existence, the more representative the Board of Directors would become. Unfortunately, due to the wide v a r i a t i o n s i n rates of progress during the planning stages there did not seem to be any s u i t a b l e v a r i a b l e against which t h i s hypothesis could be tested. However, people whose co-operatives are i n the planning stages thought t h e i r boards of d i r e c t o r s were r e f l e c t i n g membership views more often than did those who are presently l i v i n g i n t h e i r u n i t s . This i s probably because more issues which d i r e c t l y a f f e c t the everyday l i v e s of members are discussed at meetings a f t e r moving i n than before. More people have opinions.on these tangible issues and thus the opportunity for disagreement with members of the Board i s greater. See Table VII. Table VII: Representativeness of Boards of Directors (in Percent) How Often does the Board of Members of Members of Projects Directors Represent Your Views? Completed Projects i n Planning Stages Most of time 45 68 Sometimes 32 26 Occasionally 23 5 Another issue was revealed i n open ended discussions with members who were l i v i n g i n co-operative projects. In co-ops where one vote was allowed per u n i t , many people, often women, f e l t alienated from the running of the co-operative. Several women commented that since they were home during the day they were i n a better p o s i t i o n to understand and deal with problems of the co-op than the men who served on the boards of d i r e c t o r s . In Kanata, where a l l adults have one vote, s a t i s f a c t i o n , with the system was expressed. 4.5 ATTITUDES TOWARD THE CO-ORDINATING ORGANIZATION - UHF As indicated i n the f i r s t chapter, UHF plays a very important r o l e i n the organization of co-operatives. Because d i r e c t i o n of the organization has been under review, i t was thought useful to discover how the co-op member viewed UHF. In order to approach the issue of r o l e s and respon-s i b i l i t i e s without biasing the response, the question was phrased as follows: Some people have suggested that UHF should take l e s s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for developing the housing and have the co-op members take more of the necessary steps themselves. Other people have suggested that co-op members don't have enough time and i n t e r e s t to take on more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and would rather have UHF make most of the decisions. Respondents were asked to comment on t h e i r view of the controversy. In addition, respondents were then asked to describe what functions UHF performs at present. A majority of people f e l t that UHF was doing a good job and that t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s should not be decreased. The following comment was t y p i c a l : We couldn't have got t h i s place without UHF. Let's face i t . Who's going to lend me a m i l l i o n d o l l a r s ? Besides, I'm not very bright with figures and things. UHF knows costs and things. That's t h e i r job. Better l e t them do most of i t . Many people also f e l t that UHF has learned through experience with e a r l i e r co-ops and so can help the new ones avoid the p i t f a l l s . On the other hand, a l e s s e r number of people protested with strong words what was c a l l e d the "heavy-handedness" of UHF. I t was suggested that UHF should provide unbiased resumes of contractors and a r c h i t e c t s and allow pressure-free s e l e c t i o n of professionals by the i n d i v i d u a l boards of d i r e c t o r s . 47. The answers to the question regarding UHF's present function ( i n summer 1975) showed that many people whose projects were i n the planning stages had d i f f i c u l t y d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the co-op boards of d i r e c t o r s and UHF. Often the perceived functions of both groups were intertwined and vaguely defined. This suggests that e f f o r t could be made to c l a r i f y the roles of these two bodies not only at the i n i t i a l contact with co-op members but throughout the planning process. The question of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i s c l o s e l y related to p a r t i c i p a t i o n which i s discussed i n the following section. 4.6 CO-OPERATORS' ATTITUDE TOWARD PARTICIPATION The question of i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n co-operative housing i s a controv e r s i a l one. Some people f e e l that involvement i n the planning and design stages by co-operators i s a waste of time and money. Some s t a f f members at UHF would argue that the involvement by the co-operators does not mean a delay and that i t allows people to have contact with th e i r future neighbours. S t i l l other people would say that UHF does not allow more than FIGURE X: AZALEA GARDENS token p a r t i c i p a t i o n and that t h i s i s because the ultimate r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s with UHF, not with the co-op members. Therefore, the question that comes to mind i s how the people who are l i v i n g i n completed projects and those who are presently involved i n the planning process view the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e . The subject was approached i n several d i f f e r e n t ways. For the people who were already l i v i n g i n t h e i r projects, the amount of involvement experienced before moving i n and the importance each i n d i v i d u a l placed on p a r t i c i p a t i o n a f t e r moving i n was ranked on a 5-point scale by asking the co-op members how many a c t i v i t i e s they had engaged i n , and by rank, the importance they considered p a r t i c i p a t i o n to have. A d d i t i o n a l questions investigated whether an absence of p a r t i c i p a t i o n opportunities, both before and a f t e r they moved i n , would have influenced t h e i r reported l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n . Members were also queried about t h e i r desire to p a r t i c i p a t e i n p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s concerned with the co-operative. For example, people were asked i f they would l i k e to become involved i n working on treeplanting p a r t i e s , rummage sales and car washes, or phone committees. Similar questions ascertaining the l e v e l and importance of p a r t i c i -pation were asked of the co-operators s t i l l waiting to move into t h e i r u n i t s . 4.6.1 P a r t i c i p a t i o n During the Planning Stages More than h a l f of the members whose projects are i n the planning stages stated that they attended or t r i e d to attend meetings on a regular basis. The same proportion indicated that involvement during planning and construction stages was important and that i f they did not have t h i s opportunity t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n would be diminished. S i m i l a r l y , close to one-half of co-operators now l i v i n g i n t h e i r units had been involved on a regular basis i n the planning of t h e i r housing and more than one-third f e l t that the p a r t i c i p a t i o n aspect was so important that had i t not been a v a i l a b l e t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n with co-operative housing would be lower. Co-op members who had gone through the process indicated that at several times during the planning process they wished to take on a more acti v e r o l e but were not sure how to go about i t . Respondents suggested that personal communication with Board members or other a c t i v e members would have been an e f f e c t i v e means of encouraging t h i s involvement. Co-operators were asked i f they were interested i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n several s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s such as rummage sales and ear washes and the majority of respondents reacted p o s i t i v e l y . These r e s u l t s are summarized i n Table VIII. Table VIII: Members of Projects i n Planning Stages Who Expressed Interest i n S p e c i f i c A c t i v i t i e s ( i n Percent) A c t i v i t y Percent of Members Interested Working on painting or tr e e -planting p a r t i e s 67 Contributing or attending bake sales, rummage sales or car washes to c o l l e c t money for buying common equipment 71 Phoning people to t e l l them about co-op meetings 38 During the interviews some people talked about the s i t u a t i o n where they would have been eager to p a r t i c i p a t e during the planning stages but had been admitted as members too l a t e to do so. This s i t u a t i o n a r i s e s 50. because of people who j o i n two or three co-ops or become co-op members without being convinced that t h i s i s the type of housing that best s u i t s t h e i r needs. When these people drop out of a co-operative l a t e i n the planning stages, a newcomer from a v i s i t i n g l i s t i s selected but the opportunity to plan has passed. FIGURE XI: DECOSMOS VILLAGE In several cases i t was mentioned that the co-operatives were having d i f f i c u l t i e s maintaining i n t e r e s t i n the running of t h e i r projects. I t was also mentioned that the same people were carrying out the necessary tasks i n running the organizations year a f t e r year and these people wished other co-op members would take on some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . It seems clear that a continual rejuvenation of leadership i n the co-operatives i s needed as well as a commitment by the membership to the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of running a housing project. 51. A small proportion of the sample (less than a tenth) reported some d i f f i c u l t i e s i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r neighbours. Some cases of vandalism and m a r i t a l breakdown were c i t e d along with problems of dogs and use of barbeques. The r e s u l t s concerning co-operators' at t i t u d e s toward p a r t i c i p a t i o n during the planning stages indicate that a simple, si n g l e approach to the question i s not possible. For h a l f the people presently going through the planning and designing of t h e i r homes, t h i s was a very important part of t h e i r reason for j o i n i n g the co-operatives. More than a t h i r d (40%) of the people who had already experienced the process thought i t was c r i t i c a l l y important. Several d i f f e r e n t approaches to these r e s u l t s are possible. I t could be argued that because those interested i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning do not represent a clear majority, the opportunity should be discontinued. On the other hand, for those people who were interested i n involvement during the planning stages, t h i s represents a c r i t i c a l component of t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n with co-op housing. Furthermore, t h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y which members assume, not only during planning but a f t e r project completion, i s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c which d i s t i n -guishes co-operative housing from most other types of housing presently a v a i l a b l e at s i m i l a r moderate costs. The p a r t i c i p a t i o n exercise might also have i n i t s e l f some s o c i a l benefit i n that demands are made.on people which forces the acquiring of c e r t a i n s k i l l s , e s p e c i a l l y i n working with groups of people. This opportunity for p a r t i c i p a t i o n perhaps should be strengthened and made more i n v i t i n g to a larger number of co-op members. 52. 4.7 SUMMARY The research showed that the majority of co-operative members express considerable satisfaction with thei-r housing and the„process they experience-to obtain i t . In the case of completed projects, satisfaction was strongly linked with co-operators' perceptions of a strong sense of community, attendance at recent co-operative housing.meetings, the kinds of expectations of co-operative livi n g which members have, and previous co-operative experience. For members of projects in the planning stages satisfaction was linked with understanding of co-operative ownership, a b i l i t y to contact the 2" r . co-operative's Board of Directors and desire to join other co-operative ac t i v i t i e s . Satisfaction levels were not found to be strongly related to income or participation in the planning process. This suggests that, although participation during the planning stages is not c r i t i c a l to satisfaction, involvement with the community after moving in JLS_ important to user satisfaction. The major reason co-op members gave for joining was financial. The second most frequently given reason referred to the social benefits of co-op housing, i.e. a strong sense of community and a feeling of support and neighbourliness. This indicates that the social benefits of co-operative housing are recognized by members and are more important as an attractive force than the physical characteristics of the project and i t s location. The majority of respondents showed a high level of understanding of the concepts and characteristics of co-operative housing. However, the characteristics which were least understood were the existence of an internal subsidy system and the management of the co-operative after move-in. These areas could be stressed in UHF's education programme. 53. In terms of representativeness of the individual Boards of Directors, a majority of members of projects in the planning stages f e l t that their Boards of Directors were reflecting membership views most of the time. A smaller percentage of people living in completed projects f e l t this way. It seems that more contentious issues are discussed after project comple-tion than during the planning stages, thereby providing more of a forum for divergent opinion. In general co-op members indicated that they were satisfied with the job that UHF is doing. However, many members of planning-stage projects had d i f f i c u l t y distinguishing between the responsibilities of the co-op Boards of Directors and those of UHF. This suggests that these roles could be made more clear to co-op members. When asked about participation, one-third of the surveyed co-op members presently liv i n g in their units stated that their sense of satisfaction would have been lower i f the opportunity to participate in the planning process had not been available. The other two-thirds did not feel this opportunity for participation was c r i t i c a l to their satisfaction. Surveyed members whose projects were in the planning stages were sp l i t over the issue - half f e l t that the opportunity to participate was a significant factor in their sense of satisfaction while half f e l t indifferent toward i t . Such a division in opinion suggests that the opportunity for participation during the planning stages should vary according to the needs of each individual co-operative. The implications that these findings have for the co-operative housing movement w i l l be discussed in the next chapter and related to studies with similar concerns. 54. CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The r e s u l t s of the user s a t i s f a c t i o n study ind i c a t e that the majority of co-op members surveyed were very s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r housing and the process they experience to obtain i t . However c e r t a i n problems were i d e n t i f i e d i n both completed co-ops and planning stage co-ops. This chapter w i l l examine several topics r e l a t e d to these fi n d i n g s . To begin, solutions to the problems that were noted during the survey w i l l be discussed and recommendations w i l l be proposed. The discussion w i l l f i r s t focus on recommendations for a l t e r i n g the operational and organiza-t i o n a l structure of the surveyed co-operatives by examining possible changes f i r s t with projects i n the planning stages and then with completed p r o j e c t s . From these proposals several issues that r e l a t e to the co-operative housing movement i n general w i l l become apparent and w i l l be explored. As mentioned i n an e a r l i e r chapter, research on co-operatives from a user point of view has been c a r r i e d out i n Eastern Canada. The r e s u l t s of those studies w i l l be discussed i n r e l a t i o n to the findings of t h i s research. Some of the recommendations which are proposed here have been implemented i n other co-operatives i n the United States and these experiences w i l l be noted. To conclude the t h e s i s , several suggestions for further research w i l l be made and a summary of findings of t h i s study w i l l be given. 55. 5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGES As described in the previous chapter, more than one-third of the people in completed projects and one-half of the people in planning stage projects f e l t that participation in planning was c r i t i c a l to their level of satisfaction. Although this is not an overwhelming majority in either case, i t does show that for a substantial proportion of co-op members, considerable involvement during-the planning stages is important. It is therefore recommended that the co-op organizers continue to encourage the formation and growth of co-operatives where members have an opportunity to be involved in the planning stages of the project. The degree of involvement desired by co-op members varies considerably and therefore a range of services is demanded from the co-ordinating group. As each co-operative i s begun people are brought together to form a unique blending of a b i l i t i e s and interests, and the co-ordinating group should be responsive to the different needs. The services, fees and contracts that are offered by UHF should be sufficiently flexible to meet the different demands of the various co-operatives. The research indicated that people whose projects were in the planning stages were enthusiastic about their co-operative and eager to become involved. However, there seemed to be a question in many people's minds as to exactly what was happening and how they could contribute to the process. Usually these people f e l t that they had a certain s k i l l which could be useful but did not know whom to approach and whether their input was wanted. In addition people expressed a feeling of distance from the project and from the people who were involved. It i s suggested that more interaction between members of co-op Boards of Directors and the other co-operators on an individual basis be encouraged. Also increased interaction among theomembers-of a "Co-op is_-suggested. 56. More energy should be directed towards encouraging members to attend meetings and s o c i a l events, and to j o i n committees. The need for member involvement should be linked to the successful organization of the co-operative.~The-responsibilities asso'eiated with membership i n a co-operative should be c l e a r l y spelt out. Respondents suggested"some possible ways of-implementing t h i s recommendation: -Phone committees could be established where one person c a l l s f i v e people, each of whom c a l l s 5 more people. - Many people signed up for committees hoping to become involved i n that way but then did not hear anything more. A f t e r people volunteer for a committee, they should meet once, immediately, to make cl e a r how and when t h e i r committee w i l l be needed. - A welcoming committee could be set up to t a l k with people who j o i n the co-op a f t e r the organizational meeting. This would serve to humanize the f i r s t contact as well as provide an opportunity for the new member to catch up on what has happened i n the past. In addition, face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n could clear up any i n i t i a l misunderstandings about the nature of co-operative housing and the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s that go with i t . - Sessions could be held with o f f i c i a l s and planners from a l l three l e v e l s of government to explain and emphasize the process that co-operative housing projects go through. Problems such as rezoning a p p l i c a t i o n s , funding for start-up and mortgages could be discussed and methods of lobbying could be explored. Although on a whole the concept of co-operative housing was f a i r l y w e l l understood, c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were not t o t a l l y c l e a r . People reported that even though they read the printed material provided by UHF most of that understanding of co-operative housing came from verbal explanations at meetings. 57. F I G U R E . X3L: HOUWTWIJ VI&\AJ The r e s u l t s o f t he s u r v e y p o i n t t o h i g h s a t i s f a c t i o n e x p e r i e n c e d by p e o p l e who have a c l e a r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a l l t h e a s p e c t s o f c o - op h o u s i n g . Co-op members who u n d e r s t a n d o n l y t h e f i n a n c i a l s i d e a r e l e s s l i k e l y t o e x p e r i e n c e s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a n t h o s e p e o p l e who a n t i c i p a t e b o t h economic and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . More t ime and ene r g y s h o u l d be s pen t on e x p l a i n i n g t h e n a t u r e o f c o - o p e r a t i v e h o u s i n g t o new and p o t e n t i a l members. 58. - Integrated with a s o c i a l and business event could be t r a i n i n g workshops where people break into small groups and t a l k about the various character-i s t i c s of co-op housing. These workshops should be compulsory f o r a l l people who plan to move into co-op housing projects, j u s t as a f i n a n c i a l commitment i s necessary. Asking people to explain the term to others often brings up points that are not c l e a r l y understood. For example, when this-method was used i n t h i s survey, many people who i n i t i a l l y said that they completely understood the term often began to wonder about what happened to t h e i r payments a f t e r the 40-year mortgage was paid. - The differences between fee simple ownership and co-operative ownership could be made more clear i n written and verbal educations. For example, use of various scenarios which project the f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n of Mr. CO-OP and Ms. FEE-SIMPLE over time could be u s e f u l . In t h i s way the differences i n payments and equity could be c l a r i f i e d . - The possible r o l e s of UHF, the co-op Board of Directors and the member-ship could be explained several times as part of an educational package. Aft e r the appropriate r o l e s have been decided upon by a l l the actors, they should be stressed several times to the membership The s i t u a t i o n where some members j o i n several co-ops which are i n the planning stages, s e l e c t i n g t h e i r choice only l a t e i n the process should be changed. F i n a n c i a l commitment on the part of the co-op members should be made at an e a r l i e r stage than the present $550 share purchase - a f t e r the a r c h i t e c t i s selected, a refundable $200 should be co l l e c t e d from each co-op member. In some co-operatives discontent was expressed because not a l l adult residents had f u l l membership and voting r i g h t s . It i s therefore suggested that UHF continue to make the options concerning voting r i g h t s known to the co-operative when the c o n s t i t u t i o n i s being drafted. 59. 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING COMPLETED PROJECTS It was often mentioned, p a r t i c u l a r l y from people i n the larger co-ops that the Boards of Directors had a tremendous amount of work placed on them. I t was f e l t that t h i s could be lessened by having the project broken into small f u n c t i o n a l groups. UHF should continue to encourage the breaking down of larger projects into c l u s t e r s , each with i t s own c l u s t e r council as has been done i n Kanata. Some concern was expressed over the regulations which state who within the co-op gets p r i o r i t y when a unit becomes vacant. Confusion and resentment has occurred i n the past because these guidelines were either not decided on or not p u b l i c l y a v a i l a b l e . Guidelines concerning the a l l o c a t i o n of units which become vacant a f t e r the project i s completed should be c l e a r l y spelled out as early as possible, preferably during the planning stages. These guidelines should c l a r i f y both the c r i t e r i a by which fa m i l i e s within the co-operative move to a new unit as well as c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i o n of new residents. FIGURE XIII: DECOSMOS VILLAGE 60. Much hardship and resentment has occurred i n co-ops over issues such as pets and the use of barbecues. The l i n e where pri v a t e enjoyment meets pub l i c annoyance i s only vaguely drawn. One of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of l i v i n g i n co-operative housing i s an agreement to abide by the ru l e of the majority. The f u l l implications and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of democratic government within a co-op should be stressed during the educationals. Also, the rules of the co-operative should be c l e a r l y spelled out to a l l members as soon as they are decided upon. The survey showed a strong r e l a t i o n s h i p between attendance at meetings and s a t i s f a c t i o n . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i s often d i f f i c u l t to encourage but personal approaches were suggested by co-op members as an e f f e c t i v e means of increasing attendance. UHF should stress to co-op members and Boards of Directo r s that attendance at meetings i s important to the continuing success of the co-op. Individual Boards of Directors should attempt to develop methods and means of p a r t i c i p a -t i o n that w i l l encourage t h e i r members to attend. For some co-ops t h i s might mean organizing b a b y s i t t i n g while f o r others combining s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s l i k e pot-luck dinners with business events might be needed. Several people expressed concern that the monthly payments were not alter e d often enough to r e f l e c t changes i n family income. It i s suggested that income be reviewed every two years and monthly payments be alte r e d to account f o r large changes i n family income. 5.3 THE MAJOR ISSUES - PARTICIPATION AND EDUCATION These recommendations have been concerned with issues that are of s p e c i f i c i n t e r e s t to the co-operatives that were surveyed. From these conclusions two general issues emerge that r e l a t e to the co-operative housing movement i n more general terms. These are: user, p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n 61. the planning stages of the project and user education. Both these issues w i l l be discussed i n turn. The c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e referred to i n Chapter Two suggested that user involvement i s important because of the sense of contr o l that i s experienced by active i n d i v i d u a l s . However attempts by Andrews and Breslauer to e s t a b l i s h an empirical l i n k between user involve-ment and user s a t i s f a c t i o n were unsuccessful. The survey completed by t h i s author yielded s i m i l a r r e s u l t s i n cor-r e l a t i o n s between p a r t i c i p a t i o n during the planning stages and measures of s a t i s f a c t i o n . However when the question of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i t s importance was approached i n another manner, i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s were discovered. When asked d i r e c t l y how they would be affected i f they did noc have the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e during the planning stages, f i f t y percent of those people s t i l l i n the planning process said they would be less s a t i s f i e d . The opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the designing and planning of an urban home for moderate income people i s unique to co-operative housing. Unless one i s i n the f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n to af f o r d h i r i n g an ar c h i t e c t and bu i l d i n g one's own home, most urban dwellers have l i t t l e choice but to adapt one's housing needs to s u i t the e x i s t i n g stock. From the point of view which encourages a wide range of housing choices, i t would therefore seem that such an opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e should be maintained. This issue i s of considerable importance when i t i s considered that the p r o v i n c i a l housing corporation, D u n h i l l , had been encouraging UHF during 1975 to co-ordinate turn-key co-operatives which would by d e f i n i t i o n exclude t h i s user involvement. However a B.C. p r o v i n c i a l government review of the a c t i v i t i e s of UHF advised against continuing such action (Review Committee of UHF, 1975). At the time of the survey, UHF did mention the need to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the information brochures i t published as w e l l as at organizational meetings of new co-operatives. For example i n one pamphlet the question i s asked, "What do I have to do to j o i n a housing co-op?" The response i s quoted below. 63. Go-operators should be prepared to agree to three basic p r i n c i p l e s : that they own t h e i r own homes c o l l e c t i v e l y as members of the co-operative rather than i n d i v i d u a l s ; secondly,- that they a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n the design, development and continuing management of t h e i r co-operative; t h i r d l y , that they accept a par value redemption of t h e i r share purchase-(adjusted, -of'course, to. the,cost of l i v i n g ) , i n return to q u a l i t y housing at reasonable cost. However no means has been a v a i l a b l e to ensure the co-op members agree with or understand the commitment. By enlarging the education programme as i s suggested below, a commitment to p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be obtained from the co-op member. This leads to the second issue, education, which has relevance f o r both the Canadian and American co-operative housing movement. Although the majority of the surveyed co-op members expressed s a t i s f a c t i o n with t h e i r l i v i n g environment, the need f o r a pre-occupancy education program became apparent. Education i n t h i s context r e f e r s to an understanding of the 'complex aspects of l i v i n g i n a co-operative, the f i n a n c i a l obligations which must be assumed, and the benefits which can be derived i f co-op members p a r t i c i p a t e f u l l y i n the communal l i f e of the co-operative' (State of New York, 1963). In every project surveyed some members expressed ignorance of some of the basic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of co-operative housing. Examples of people b e l i e v i n g they would eventually s e l l t h e i r unit at a p r o f i t were c i t e d i n the previous chapter. In other cases the co-op member asked the researcher to explain basics such as d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n monthly payments according to income. F I G U R E . XZ. \ hootOTAVM u i e w In addition to a lack of knowledge of the f i n a n c i a l aspects of co-operatives, complaints were often voiced about the ph y s i c a l defects < a project, the noise made by other people's children and pets, or poor management practices blamed on an i n e f f i c i e n t Board of Directors (which had been elected by the co-operators). Although these complaints were j u s t i f i a b l e i n some cases, they often indicated the d i f f i c u l t i e s faced by co-operators who had not yet made the adjustment from being a tenant 65. with a1 landlord to a member of a co-operative group who share ownership r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . Very r a r e l y did co-op members see that they were part of a larger movement of co-operative a c t i v i t y which embraced the p r i n c i p l e s enun-ciated i n the f i r s t chapter. Andrews and Breslauer's study i n Ontario also indicated that t h i s education process was lacking. A member of a Toronto-based organization s i m i l a r to UHF was reported as saying, "I don't think we did a very good job of the whole community development process ... and I spent most of my time worrying about r e l a t i o n s h i p s with the contractor and making sure the b u i l d i n g was going along" (p. 714). S u l l i v a n suggests that the s o c i a l e f f e c t s of any housing programme are l a r g e l y dependent on educating the residents to the general norms and values of the r e s i d e n t i a l development. He asserts further that the "success or f a i l u r e of tenant education may a f f e c t the o v e r a l l s o c i a l climate of a co-operative - by a f f e c t i n g the extent that residents are both able and w i l l i n g to understand and accept the p r i n c i p l e s of co-operative housing" (p. 20). In the recommendations a r t i c u l a t e d e a r l i e r i n t h i s chapter, an enlarged and more e f f e c t i v e education programme i s suggested. Several proposals concerning the form t h i s programme should take within the Lower Mainland context are also given. In support of t h i s suggestion, a . d e s c r i p t i o n i s given here of the large and reportedly successful educa-t i o n programme i n New York State. The programme i s provided by the New York State D i v i s i o n of Housing and Community Renewal to a l l sponsors of co-operative housing developments. Although i t was organized to f a c i l i t a t e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of members i n management, the programme could be extended using a s i m i l a r framework i n U H F - a f f i l i a t e d co-operatives where user p a r t i c i p a t i o n begins during the planning stages. Usually a consultant i s assigned to one project and begins work wittu.the future residents approximately a year before occup-ancy. Before a membership meeting i s c a l l e d , questionnaires are sent to members o u t l i n i n g the committees that w i l l be formed and asking them to indi c a t e i f they would l i k e to j o i n one or more. The p o s s i b i l i t y of e n r o l -l i n g i n a volunteer leadership course i s also presented. At the general meeting committees are formed and these groups continue to report back to the general membership u n t i l occupancy occurs. During the year meetings are held where members learn of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , both s o c i a l and f i n a n c i a l , they are undertaking. About s i x weeks p r i o r to moving i n , a serie s of 'Meet your Neighbours' meetings are held. These are usually arranged i n small groups and there i s informal discussion on what the co-operators a n t i c i p a t e , what they are apprehensive about and what they expect to contribute to the co-operative. Several s i x to eight-week volunteer leadership courses are also held which cover a l l aspects of housing co-operatives ( l e g a l , f i n a n c i a l and managerial). People learn how to conduct meetings, organize committees, and evaluate the work of i n d i v i d u a l s and groups. A survey of the co-operative housing movement and discussion of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between housing co-operatives and the surrounding community are included. The New York State D i v i s i o n of Housing and Community Renewal i s quite s a t i s f i e d with the achievements of t h i s programme. United Housing Foundation and other organizing groups could draw from t h i s programme to create an e f f e c t i v e education service. In t h i s context, the process of involving the members would begin when the co-operative i s i n i t i a l l y created. 67. This chapter has served to a r t i c u l a t e recommendations which stemmed from the findings of the survey and to expand upon some of the ideas presented i n the recommendations. The major issues which emerged were, f i r s t l y , the need for continuing the opportunity f or co-op members to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the planning and designing of t h e i r projects and, secondly, the need for an enlarged and improved education program. Where these issues had been mentioned i n other research projects, the context and findings were discussed. A large education program for co-operators i n New York State was described to support t h i s study's recommendations. Before summarizing the substance and conclusions of this study, the reactions of the study XS*.*S».6?S2G*?:r.--t CV» C^ :«NJ»,C: S <?--» Q> < V i !&Q.tv3 CO,*>»,<VO,CSa ^ ? <N» <V3 tfS* <N»C>» ; FIGURE XVI: CO-OPERATIVE PLANNING 68. p a r t i c i p a n t s to these recommendations w i l l be presented and issues for further research i n related topics w i l l be suggested. 5.4 STUDY PARTICIPANTS' REACTIONS TO RECOMMENDATIONS A summary of the findings of t h i s study and the recommendations that were drawn from i t were sent to a l l the people surveyed. Reactions were s o l i c i t e d by asking co-operators whether they agreed or disagreed with the recommendations. Mail surveys generally do not e l i c i t a wide response and t h i s survey was no exception. Methodological problems abound i n terms of the unrepresentativeness of the people who do respond. Although only 6% of the p a r t i c i p a n t s mailed t h e i r reactions back, the e f f o r t of providing the summary and recommendations was considered worthwhile because a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s were informed of how the majority of other surveyed co-op members viewed the major issues. R e a l i z i n g that the reactions which were received are not i n d i c a t i v e of any generally held a t t i t u d e s , i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that on a l l but two recommendations the p a r t i c i p a n t s indicated unanimous agreement with the proposals. 5.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH A major thrust of t h i s paper has been to assess the importance of user p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Andrews and Breslauer also concerned themselves with :how t h i s v a r i a b l e correlated with user s a t i s f a c t i o n : Both the research of Andrews and Breslauer (1975) and t h i s study f a i l e d to f i n d s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the two v a r i a b l e s . However, several problems with the measures e x i s t . Andrews and Breslauer suggest that intervening v a r i a b l e s caused the low-percentage of t o t a l variance explained between the factors of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and user s a t i s f a c t i o n . They conclude that the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two variables which are examined is at best only a partial summary of the 69. two concepts. I t i s suggested that these two v a r i a b l e s , whose r e l a t i o n s h i p i s important to p o l i c y decisions, be examined much more c l o s e l y . A second rel a t e d issue i s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between pre-occupancy involvement and post-occupancy involvement. This has been impossible to investigate in B.C. in the past because of the youthfulness of most co-operative housing p r o j e c t s . However as the projects mature and with the wealth of information provided i n studies as Andrews and Breslauer, such a task becomes both possible and i n t e r e s t i n g . A t h i r d area of possible i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s the s o c i a l benefits of co-operative housing. Dennis and F i s h (1972) assert that 1. co-operatives lead to stable, a t t r a c t i v e communities 2. le s s vandalism and delinquencies occur i n co-operatives. Empirical data have yet to.be produced which support such statements. In f a c t i t was suggested to t h i s researcher at several times during the survey that the reverse was true and i n f a c t , f a m i l i a r i t y as i s encouraged within co-operatives could lead to high divorce rates, vandalism and personal c o n f l i c t s between neighbours. 5.6 CONCLUSIONS While t h i s thesis has focussed on i n v e s t i g a t i n g user s a t i s f a c t i o n of co-operative housing, the r e s u l t s can be r e l a t e d to community planning theory and p r a c t i c e . The housing co-operative could be seen as a microcosm of the society described by Friedmann where mechanisms for 'feedback' and 'guidance' have been created. During the planning stages, bureaucrats, planners and co-op members meet to 'guide' the development of the projects and 'mutual learning' can occur. S i m i l a r l y when the project i s complete, the management i s 70. c a r r i e d out by elected representatives who r e f e r back to the membership at large. The problems which a r i s e from the management of a co-operative create a s i t u a t i o n where learning i s ongoing. 'The demand for increased c o n t r o l over l i v i n g environments, as outlined by Turner can p o t e n t i a l l y be f u l f i l l e d by co-operative tenure. Although the benefits are d i f f i c u l t to measure i n q u a n t i f i a b l e or d o l l a r terms, c o l l e c t i v e d i r e c t action has provided some co-op members with a psycho-l o g i c a l sense of well-being. The recent i n t e r e s t i n s e l f - h e l p housing and the desire for f l e x i b l e housing i n terms of i n t e r i o r design are other examples of society's desire to obtain t h i s kind of c o n t r o l . From the investigations c a r r i e d out for t h i s study, high l e v e l s of s a t i s f a c t i o n are experienced by people who enjoy a co-operative type of tenure where both Turner's 'control' and Friedmann's 'guidance' and 'mutual learning' are possible. However, the opportunities for involve-ment within the co-operative and the context of each co-operative within the larger co-operative movement should be stressed through member education. 71. LITERATURE CITED Alternate Community Group. B.C. A l t e r n a t i v e . 1520 W. 6th Ave., Vancouver, B.C., 1975. Andrews, H.F. and H.L. Breslauer. Cooperative Housing: A Case Study.of  Decision Making i n Design and User S a t i s f a c t i o n . Ottawa: M i n i s t r y of State of Urban A f f a i r s , 1975. Constantinu, Marianthi. Housing Cooperatives i n B.C. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Vancouver, B.C.: Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970. Co-operative League of the U.S.A. Plus Values i n Co-operative Housing. Chicago, 1962. Co-operative Union of Canada. See Midmore, J.F. C u l l , E. ..The Rise and F a l l of U.H.F.: A Case Study of a Co-operative Housing Resource Agency. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Vancouver, B.C., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976. Curtis Report. See Government of Canada. Dennis, Michael and Susan F i s h . Programs i n Search of a P o l i c y , Low  Income Housing i n Canada. Toronto: Hakkert, 1972. Friedmann, John. "Notes on S o c i e t a l Action," Journal of the American  I n s t i t u t e of Planners, XXXV (Sept. 1969): 311-318. . Retracking America: A Theory of Transactive Planning. Garden C i t y , N.Y.: Anchor Press, 1973. Government of B r i t i s h Columbia. F i r s t Annual Report, Department of Housing. V i c t o r i a , B.C.: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1975. Government of Canada. Advisory Committee on Reconstruction (Report on  Housing and Community Planning). Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1944. . Report of the Federal Task Force on Housing and Urban Development. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1969. Government of Ontario. C i t i z e n Involvement, Committee on Government Pro d u c t i v i t y . Toronto: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1972. Gutman, R. and B..Westergaard. "Building evaluation, user s a t i s f a c t i o n and d e s i g n , " B u i l t environment research Paper No. 19. Princeton University - Rutgers University, no date. Haire, Christopher. In Want of P o l i c y : A Survey of the Needs of Non-Profit Housing Companies and Co-operative Housing S o c i e t i e s . Ottawa: Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development, 1975. 72. Hamilton, S.W., I. Davis and J . Lowden. Condominium Development i n  Metropolitan Vancouver. Vancouver, B.C.: Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver, 1971. Hellyer, Paul. See Government of Canada, Report of the Federal Task  Force on Housing and Urban Development. Interdepartmental Study Team on Housing and Rents. Housing and Rent  Control i n B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a , B.C., 1975. McAfee, R.A. Interactive Evaluation: A User-Oriented Process to A s s i s t  Housing Program Reformulation. Unpublished Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n . Vancouver, B.C.: Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975. Midmore, J.F. Report on Co-operative Housing. Ottawa: Co-operative Union of Canada, 1962. Nie, Norman H. S t a t i s t i c a l Programmes for the S o c i a l Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970. Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver. The Land Development Process As  It A f f e c t s the Supply of New Housing Within the Greater Vancouver  Regional D i s t r i c t . Vancouver, B.C., May 1974. State of New York, D i v i s i o n of Housing and Community Renewal. Education  for Co-operative L i v i n g . New York, May 1963. S u l l i v a n , Donald. Cooperative Housing and Community Development. New York: Praeger, 1969. Tate, J.V. Towards an Understanding of Co-operative Housing. • Unpublished Master's Thesis. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's Uni v e r s i t y , 1973. Taylor, Andy, Cathie Macleod (t e x t ) , Louise Roy (graphics). Co-op Housing. The National Film Board of Canada: Coach House Press, May 1975. Turner, John F.C. "Housing As A Verb," Freedom to B u i l d , Turner, J.F.C. and Robert F i c h t e r (eds.). New York: The MacMillan Company, 1972. United Housing Foundation. Notes on Co-operative Housing, 3rd E d i t i o n . Vancouver, B.C., A p r i l 1974. 3 Information Pamphlet No. 2, What i s Co-operative Housing. Vancouver, B.C., no date. Vrooman, P.C. "The Power Dilemma i n C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " Canadian  Welfare, May/June 1972. 73. APPENDIX 6..1 QUESTIONS ASKED OF MEMBERS OF COMPLETED PROJECTS 1. Type of previous dwelling 2. Tenure of previous dwelling 3. How did you i n i t i a l l y hear of co-operative housing? 4. Upon moving i n , what was your anticipated length of tenure? 5. Length of present residence i n dwelling? In project? 6. At present, what i s your anticipated length of tenure? 7. What were the features of co-operative housing that attracted you? 8. Have you suggested co-operative housing to friends? To r e l a t i v e s ? 9. Does knowing some of your neighbours before you move i n make any diffe r e n c e to the continuing management of the co-op? 10. Do people i n t h i s project r e l a t e d i f f e r e n t l y to each other than those i n an adjacent neighbourhood? 11. Do you approve of the mixture of people and family structures i n the co-operative? 12. Are you f a m i l i a r with the i n t e r n a l subsidy system and i f so do you approve of i t ? 13. What i s your t o t a l monthly payment? 14. How much, i f any, have you spent on maintenance, r e p a i r s , home improvements i n the past year? 15. Present family income? 16. Occupation of head(s) of household? 17. Do you have enough opportunity to take part i n decisions you f e e l are important? I f no, which decisions would you l i k e more opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n and how could t h i s happen? 18. Do you ever f e e l pressured into p a r t i c i p a t i n g when you would prefer not to? If yes, i n what ways have you f e l t t h i s pressure and how could i t be stopped? 19\ Are you presently working on a committee, or on the Board of Directors? If yes, which committee, Board of Directors? If not, on the Co-op Board of Directors can you describe - whom i t consists of - how the members are selected - what i t does 74. Do you have any problems contacting the Board of Directors? Do you think they reflect your views? Do you see yourself some day on the Board of Directors? 20. In the last year how often did you attend general meetings? 21. Did you attend the last meeting or election? 22. Which of the activities were you involved with during the planning stages? 23. What functions does UHF perform? Do you have an opinion as to how well i t performs these functions? 24. Have you been involved in other types of co-operative activity? Type? 25. Would you be interested in joining a food or other type of co-operative? If yes, how should these be started? 26. Would you be interested in - attending pot luck suppers - phoning people to t e l l them about co-op meetings or events - typing notes for meetings - working on painting and tree planting - contributing or attending bake sales, rummage sales, car washes to collect money for common equipment - showing other people how to do a s k i l l - taking children on Saturday outings 27. Imagine I was a friend who had never heard of co-operative housing and wanted an explanation. How would you describe it? 28. Taking everything into consideration, how satisfied with this co-op as a place to live? 29. If there had not been the meeting where co-op members had the opportunity to participate in planning and design would you s t i l l rate your satisfaction the same? 30. If the management was not done by co-op members, would you s t i l l rate your satisfaction the same? 31. If you could own the same type of unit you have now, would you prefer that to co-operative ownership? 32. If you could own a house, would you prefer that to the unit you now own co-operatively? APPENDIX 6.2 QUESTIONS ASKED OF MEMBERS WHOSE PROJECTS WERE IN THE PLANNING STAGES 1. How did you f i r s t hear of co-operative housing? 2. What type of dwelling w i l l you be moving into? 3. How long do you plan on staying? 4. What were the features of co-operative housing that attracted you? 5. Have you suggested co-operative housing to friends? To r e l a t i v e s ? 6. Does knowing some of your neighbours before you move i n make any difference to the continuing management of the co-op? 7. Do you think people i n t h i s co-op w i l l r e l a t e d i f f e r e n t l y to each other than those i n adjacent neighbourhoods. 8. Do you approve of the mixture of people and family structures i n the co-operative? 9. Are you f a m i l i a r with the i n t e r n a l subsidy system and i f so do you approve of i t ? 10. What w i l l your t o t a l monthly payment be? 11. Present family income? 12. Occupation of head(s) of household? 13. Do you have enough opportunity to take part i n decisions you f e e l are important? I f no, which decisions would you l i k e more opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n and how could t h i s happen? 14. Do you ever f e e l pressured into p a r t i c i p a t i n g when you would prefer not to? I f yes, i n what ways have you f e l t t h i s pressure and how could t h i s be stopped? 15. Are you presently working on a committee, or on the Board of Directors? If yes, which committee, Board of Directors? I f not on the Co-op Board of Directors can you describe - whom i t consists of - how the members are selected - what i t does Do you have any problems contacting the Board of Directors? Do you think they r e f l e c t your views? Do you see yourself some day on the Board of Directors? 16. In the l a s t year how often did you attend general meetings? 17. Did you attend the l a s t meeting or election? 76. 18. Which of the a c t i v i t i e s were you involved with during the planning stages? 19. What functions does UHF perform? Do you have an opinion as to how w e l l i t performs these functions? 20. Have you been involved i n other types of co-operative a c t i v i t y ? Type? 21. Would you be interested i n j o i n i n g a food or other type of co-operative? If yes how should these be started? 22. Would you be interested i n - attending pot luck suppers - phoning people to t e l l them about co-op meetings or events - typing notes for meetings - working on painting and tree planting - contributing or attending bake sales, rummage sales , car washes to c o l l e c t money for common equipment - showing other people how to do a s k i l l - taking c h i l d r e n on Saturday outings 23. Imagine I was a f r i e n d who had never heard of co-operative housing and wanted an explanation. How would you describe i t ? 24. Taking everything into consideration, how s a t i s f i e d with t h i s co-op as a place to l i v e ? 25. If there had not been the meetings where co-op members had the oppor-tunit y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n planning and design would you s t i l l rate your s a t i s f a c t i o n the same? 26. If the management was not done by co-op members, would you s t i l l rate your s a t i s f a c t i o n the same? 27. I f you could own the same type of unit you have now, would you prefer that to co-operative ownership? 28. If you could own a house, would you prefer that to the unit you now own co-operatively? APPENDIX 6.3 HIGHLIGHTS OF USER-SATISFACTION STUDY How s a t i s f i e d are co-op members with t h e i r housing? The majority of co-op members are very s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r l i v i n g environment. When asked to take a l l aspects of t h e i r housing into consider-ation, almost three-quarters of those interviewed said they were quite s a t i s f i e d . The enthusiasm which some people f e l t f o r t h e i r housing was quite e x c i t i n g . One person described i t as "the closest thing to heaven that I have ever experienced". Other people mentioned that to them co-op housing was "a great place where people are working together to get things done". However a tenth of those surveyed stated that they were very d i s s a t -i s f i e d with the housing. The following comments show t h i s . "As f a r as I'm concerned, i t ' s the same as l i v i n g i n a ... prison." " I f you are i n here you f e e l l i k e , 'I've h i t the bottom and I ' l l never get out!" "I'm not happy here because no matter how long you are l i v i n g here you never get anything more than what you pay f o r i t . " Why do some people f e e l s a t i s f i e d and others don't? The people who expressed the strongest sense of s a t i s f a c t i o n also said that they were involved with the other people i n t h e i r community. This usually meant going to general meetings, serving on committees or spending s o c i a l time with t h e i r neighbours. Those people who were very s a t i s f i e d also f e l t that most of the features of co-operative housing were p o s i t i v e , for example having a v a r i e t y of family sizes and income l e v e l s , and having d i f f e r e n t monthly payments according to income. 78. How well people understood the financial side of their housing was also important to their satisfaction. Those people who saw that co-op housing was different than outright home ownership (eg., no profit i s made on moving out) said that they were very satisfied. It also seemed that the people who had joined the co-operative but did not realize what i t would mean financially, were often most dissatisfied. How important is involvement with the designing and planning of the housing? For half the people who are now waiting for the units to be bu i l t , the opportunity to have a say in the design and planning was very important. Those people now livi n g in completed projects and looking back on their experience were less enthusiastic about this involvement. A third said that i f they had not had this opportunity to be involved their satisfaction with co-op housing would be less. CONCLUSIONS OF USER-SATISFACTION STUDY Projects in the Planning Stages Agree Disagree I. Many people whose projects were in the planning stages were enthusiastic about their co-operative and eager to become involved. However people didn't always know what was happening and how they could become involved. To avoid this situation the following changes are suggested: 1. Phone committess could be established where one person calls 5 people, each of whom calls 5 more people. 79. Agree Disagree 2. After people volunteer f o r a committee, they should meet once, immediately, to make clear how and when th e i r committee w i l l be needed. 3. A welcoming committee be set up to t a l k with people who j o i n the co-op a f t e r the f i r s t organizational meetings. I I . For many people i t i s important that they can become involved i n the planning and designing of t h e i r co-operative. Often people j o i n two or three co-ops or become members without being sure that they want to l i v e i n the project. These people usually drop out l a t e i n the planning stages and the newcomers that f i l l the openings have missed the opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e . 1. I t i s suggested that a f i n a n c i a l commitment be necessary at an e a r l i e r stage than the present $500 share purchase. A f t e r the a r c h i t e c t i s selected a refundable $200 could be c o l l e c t e d from each co-op member. II I . The people who are most s a t i s f i e d with co-operative housing are those who c l e a r l y understand both the s o c i a l and f i n a n c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . To make sure t h i s information i s given to co-op members more time and energy should be spent. 1. Combined with a s o c i a l or business event could be workshops where people break into small groups and ta l k about what co-op housing i s . These workshops could be compulsory for a l l people who plan to move i n , j u s t as a f i n a n c i a l commitment i s necessary. 80. Agree Disagree 2. The r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of United Housing Foundation and the co-op Board of Directors were often confused i n the minds of many people. The possible jobs each group could take on, as well as exactly how i n d i v i d u a l members can p a r t i c i p a t e should be decided upon and made more clear to a l l people involved. Projects which are Completed I. Some people were concerned about the regulations which state who within the co-op gets p r i o r i t y when a unit becomesvacant. Confusion and resentment has occurred i n the past because these guidelines were either not decided upon or not p u b l i c l y a v a i l a b l e . It i s suggested that these guidelines be made clear and pu b l i c i z e d . I I . Much hardship and resentment has occurred over issues such as pets and the use of barbecues. Before people move i n i t i s suggested that they be f u l l y aware of th e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to abide by the decisions of the majority. I I I . The people who were most happy l i v i n g i n t h e i r homes were those who were involved with t h e i r neighbours and the running of the co-operative. Boards of Directors as well as co-op members should t r y to entice people to meetings and s o c i a l happenings. A personal approach was suggested by most people to be most i n v i t i n g . IV. Some people expressed concern that the monthly payments were not al t e r e d often enough to r e f l e c t changes i n family income. It i s suggested that income be reviewed every two years and monthly payments be al t e r e d to account for large changes i n family incomes. Name Co-op 82. APPENDIX 6.4 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN LEVELS OF SATISFACTION AND RESPONDENTS' CHARACTERISTICS A. Completed Projects (N=56) The following l i s t orders the variables which show a c o r r e l a t i o n with s a t i s f a c t i o n i n terms of importance according to Kendall's Rank Correlations, Significance l e v e l s on a two t a i l e d test for each c o r r e l a t i o n are shown. Level of Corr e l a t i o n Variable Name Significance C o - e f f i c i e n t Community s o l i d a r i t y .001 .37 Agreement with i n t e r n a l subsidy system .001 .28 Consider that people i n co-op .001 .28 re l a t e d i f f e r e n t l y to each other than people i n adjacent neigh-bourhoods Attended l a s t co-op meeting .001 .30 Show understanding of non-profit .001 .33 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c Approve of s o c i a l mix .003 .26 Name sec u r i t y of tenure as an .006 .23 a t t r a c t i v e factor of co-op Consider involvement i n community .009 .22 a c t i v i t i e s important Have had previous involvement with .01 .20 co-operative a c t i v i t y Mention s o c i a l benefits of co-ops .02 .15 as a t t r a c t i v e factor, i . e . sense of community or f e e l i n g of sharing Show i n t e r e s t i n j o i n i n g other .05 .14 co-operative a c t i v i t i e s Mention costs as an a t t r a c t i v e .05 -.14 factor to j o i n i n g housing co-op 83. B. Planning Stage Projects (N=21) Level of Cor r e l a t i o n Variable Name Signi f i c a n c e C o - e f f i c i e n t Show an understanding of .01 .37 co-operative ownership versus fee simple ownership Have no problem i n contacting co-op .01 .36 Board of Directors Would l i k e to j o i n other co-operative a c t i v i t i e s i f av a i l a b l e i n housing project .05 .31 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093769/manifest

Comment

Related Items