2005 Large Housing Estates in Stockholm and Jönköping, Sweden. Opinions of residents on recent developments
by Roger Andersson, Eva Öresjö, Lars Pettersson, Emma Holmqvist, Christina Siwertsson and Dennis Solid
RESTATE report 4i.

The project is funded under Key Action 4: "City of Tomorrow and Cultural Heritage" in the "Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development" programme within the Fifth Framework Programme of the European Union.

Abstract
The basic question addressed in the present report reads as follows:
Which inhabitants profit from the developments and policies in the estates? Which inhabitants experience clear disadvantages?

This research question makes it clear that the inhabitants of the estates stand to the fore in this report. It seems logical to assume that current residents would profit from improvements made to their area. But favourable developments such as better housing, more employment opportunities, and better social cohesion may benefit some people or groups but may pass others by completely. Older people will not benefit from policies targeted at those of working age; childless households will not benefit from policies aimed at families; and residents will benefit differentially or at a different time or with different degrees of disruption depending on the part of the estate or the kind of housing in which they live. These patterns may mean that households from minority ethnic groups by and large gain less than others - or the other way around. Young people may profit more than old people, households with children more than singles or two-person households. Moreover, developments and policies may have perverse effects: higher quality housing may lead to higher rents and these may force people to move out. Increased social cohesion for some groups may increase exclusion for others; increased employment for some may result in fewer chances for others.

Most results in this report are based on a survey carried out in our estates. The opinions and experiences of the inhabitants of the estates stand to the fore in this survey.

In the second chapter of this report, we give a brief description of the estates that feature in this report: Tensta and Husby in Stockholm and Råslätt and Öxnehaga in the medium-sized city of Jönköping, all four post-WWII housing estates. In Chapter 3 we say something about the survey and give some first impressions of the results of the survey. Thereafter, we split the report into three separate chapters for each city. The survey is conducted in different ways in Jönköping and Stockholm and the policies targeting the estates in the two cities differ to a large extent. Therefore, to state this, we have chosen to have separate chapters presenting the results of the survey and outcomes of policies in the two cities. In the last chapter though, we discuss similarities and differences between the two cities. Chapters 4 to 6 cover Stockholm and Chapters 7 to 9 focus on the Jönköping estates. Chapter 4 (and 7) focus on the positive and negative aspects of the estates as seen through the eyes of the residents. Here we describe the kinds of people who are satisfied with their homes and with their environment and what they think about the social relationships on their estates. In Chapters 5 (and 8) we concentrate on the effects of the policies, again according to the respondents. Chapters 6 (and 9) concerns the future: do people think that the estate will be a better place to live in the future? Or do people want to move out as soon as possible? In Chapter 10 we present our general conclusions for all four estates.

This report is concerned with two Swedish cities, Stockholm and Jönköping, the same kind of information for estates in other countries in the RESTATE project can be found in the parallel reports.