Premium
Private Sentiments in a Public Context: Aspects of Co‐operative Housing in Oslo
Author(s) -
Gulbrandsen Lars,
Torgersen Ulf
Publication year - 1978
Publication title -
scandinavian political studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.65
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-9477
pISSN - 0080-6757
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9477.1978.tb00179.x
Subject(s) - landlord , politics , context (archaeology) , limiting , dominance (genetics) , interpretation (philosophy) , law and economics , political science , political economy , subject (documents) , market economy , business , economics , public administration , law , mechanical engineering , paleontology , biochemistry , chemistry , library science , gene , computer science , biology , programming language , engineering
The subject of the article is the Oslo model of co‐operative housing. A cooperative model may be considered a predominantly ‘public’ solution, or given a more ‘private’ flavor, depending on the different forms given to the co‐operative idea. This article considers the political consequences of alternative implementations. It presents a historical survey of the initial reactions of the tenant urban working class to the insecurities of the housing market, its inevitable clash with landlord interests, and the earlier varieties of radical and socialist responses to the housing misery. The search for a ‘public’ form of ownership leads to the gradual acceptance of the co‐operative solution, and the rise of one co‐operative organisation (OBOS) from a position of modesty to one of dominance. The administrative principles employed in the distribution of apartments lead to a number of unexpected consequences relating to the rights of the members and owners. While the OBOS administration is engaged in limiting the contagion of the ‘free market’, it is also concerned not to antagonize the opinions of the members. These conflicting interests lead to a number of administrative knots, particularly since new sentiments among both old and more recent members press towards a ‘private’ interpretation. The political parties react to these sentiments in the electorate in different ways, but with deep concern for the increasing interest in ownership.