5.social full

7/29/2019 5.Social Full

1/14

International Journal of Environment, Ecology,Family and Urban Studies (IJEEFUS)ISSN 2250-0065Vol. 3, Issue 1, Mar 2013, 45-58

TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

SOCIAL INTERACTION IN COMMUNAL OUTDOOR SPACES OF RESIDENTIAL

HOUSING ESTATES IN BISKRA-ALGERIA

NACEUR FARIDA

Department of Architecture, University of Batna, Algeria

ABSTRACT

This study tends to examine the relationship between the communal outdoor space design in a residential housing

estate and the residents social interaction. For the purpose of our study we chose a housing project situated in a Z.H.U.N

of Biskra, a middle city in the south of Algeria, namely Cit des 1000Logts. The study is based upon observations of the

ways in which the residents use their neighborhood spaces. Observations are supplemented by interviews with the

residents, about the perceived adequacy of these spaces for social interaction. Findings showed that the high degree of

openness of la cite des 1000 logts and the bad quality of its communal outdoor spaces discouraged all form of use and

reduced it to a transit area. These results revealed that the layout of buildings, the arrangement and the quality of common

outdoor spaces in residential neighborhoods have profound effects upon the use of the area and social interaction among

residents.

KEYWORDS:Communal Outdoor Space, Social Interaction, Design Layout, Housing Estates

INTRODUCTION

In Algeria, the fast population growth in the past 50 years has resulted in rapid urbanization all over the country.

Algerian cities experienced continuous population growth because of migration from rural areas and natural growth of

urban population and thus are faced with the problem of rapid housing production.

Unfortunately, there was no governmental housing policy to face this galloping growth. Government involvement

in public housing did not come about until the 1974. To deal with housing shortage, Z.H.U.N (Zone dhabitat urbaine

nouvelle), great public housing projects funded by the Algerian government were launched throughout the country. This

international model of housing, based on the process of prefabrication and standardization was intended to provide

Algerian urban population with modern, decent and affordable housing.

Most of the Z.H.U.N have been built on peripheral extensions and conceived in blocks of apartments arranged

freely on vast open spaces. Initially, it was foreseen to endow them with all necessary facilities in order to satisfy the needs

of the residents. Nevertheless, they remained incomplete, badly finished and deprived from all facilities for many years.

The question of whether this model of housing leads to more anonymityhas been an issue of concern to many

social psychologists and environmental designers. Researches revealed the negative effects of such living environments

which tend to be unfavorable to social relationship. (Lobout ,1968; Kaminski,1978; Keane, 1991; Coleman,1999)

Common areas between the houses are important features that afford social activities in neighborhoods.

Nevertheless, much of urban research seems to indicate that the decline of social life in housing estates is closely related to

the design of their communal outdoor spaces. It is the spatial arrangement of the blocks that have been found to reduce the

chance of social interaction among residents and influence the activity pattern. (Chombart de Lawe, 1952; Abu-Ghazzeh,

1999).


2/14

46 Naceur Farida

As in the other countries, many Z.H.U.N in Algeria encountered increasing problems. A research in Batna, a

middle city in East of Algeria revealed that the Z.H.U.N became an anonymous space in which the inhabitants endure

difficult conditions: social cohesiveness was deteriorated, neighborhood relations were damaged and tensions flared

between the residents. (Naceur F, 2003) Another research on a Z.H.U.N in Annaba (Mebirouk , 2005) showed that outdoor

spaces supposed to enhance social interaction between occupants were abandoned, deserted and diverted from their use.

Visibly all common spaces undergo an accelerated deterioration rightly after the occupation of the apartments; they

sometimes turn into support of rubbish and garbage. Vandalism and lack of maintenance had become real and pervasive

problem.

The above results show that the degree of alienation has become serious among Algerian Z.H.U.N residents. This

study aims to examine the problems related to the social life in the Z.H.U.N, by inquiring into the impact of outdoor

communal spaces on social interaction.

HOW CAN SPACE SERVE SOCIAL INTERCTION?

Many studies convey the idea that outdoor space can enhance social interaction. People go to outdoor spaces

because of the need for human. Cooper and al 1998) . Outdoor spaces are sites for chance encounters and potential

interactions (Drucker and al, 1998). They provide opportunities for space users by visual contacts and non verbal

communications for higher level social interactions. In large apartment buildings, individuals have been found to socialize

in outdoor common spaces, because this type of housing increase recreation outside of the home ( Glaeser, and al. 2000)

According to many researches we divided factors influencing social interaction in housing estates into two general

areas of focus: social variables and physical elements of communal outdoor spaces:

Social Variables

Presence of children at home, owner-renter status, length of residence and annual income are relevant socio-

demographic characteristics presumably associated with social interaction. Nevertheless, similarity is a precondition of the

development of social ties. People are more likely to engage in interactions and develop friendships with homogeneous,

like-minded others. (Haggerty,1982).

Physical and Spatial Elements

The physical elements which may affect the patterns of social contact among neighbors include layout pattern, site

plan, scale and proportion, land use mixandphysical features:

Layout Pattern

Refers to the spatial arrangement of a neighborhood. The layout plan of housing estates can contribute to interact

among residents within housing estates and turn the interaction into a social relationship. In 1960, Jacobs, drew attention

on the arrangement of traditional neighborhoods that can enhance social life, she asserted that physical features such as

sidewalks afford social activities. (Jacobs,1961). (Gehl,1986) found that long duration activities in a residential street

occurred in semiprivate zones, what he called soft edges (e.g. front gardens).

This point of view is supported by Newmans defensible theory. (Newman, 1972) According to this theory,

territoriality is a critical mechanism for creating a cohesive residential environment, making it well contained and easier to

monitor and control.


3/14

Social Interacton in Communal Outdoor Spaces of Residential Housing Estates in Biskra-Algeria 47

More intimate scale stimulates people more for spontaneous activities, neighboring can be engendered by having

small-scale, well-defined neighborhood with clear boundary.

In order to avoid confused spaces around the blocs in which it was unclear what the land was used for and who

policed it, Newman proposed two critical components:

Territorial definition of the physical environment: by subdividing the residential environments into zonestoward which adjacent residents can easily adopt proprietary attitudes.

Territorial markings and signage: zones of control can be created through the use of physical or symbolicbarriers that disrupt movement between public and private spaces.

Newman proposed many design guidelines that have been incorporated to residential environments for

enhancement of social interaction while providing security. (Newman, 1996).

Mixed Land Uses

Jacobs was the first one who articulated the relationship between mixed land uses, social interaction and sense of

community. She argued that public housing complexes destroyed the traditional mixed-use communities that produce a

vibrant street life. (Choay, 1965)

When place of residence is juxtaposed with places to shop or recreate, social interaction is encouraged since

people tend to walk more. The mixture of residential and commercial land uses increases opportunities for "chance

encounters". When there is nothing to do there a space will be empty and unused

Physical Features

A high quality of outdoor space can enhance social interaction, it invites people to come and stay for some time.

The more time people spent outdoors, the more activities may be grown. (Knack, 2000). Visual appearance of common

outdoor spaces is important for neighborhood relations (Skjaeveland et al, 1997)

Physical features have been identified as efficient design elements in outdoor spaces for encouraging social

contacts. They can attract people to stay in the places and stimulate their conversation. The existence of interesting objects

or events: water features, appropriately arranged seats encourages peoples use of public space.

The provision of greenery in residential communities increases the opportunity for social activity and enhances

the social bonding among the residents (Shu-Chun Lucy Huang, 2006) In addition, playgrounds containing recreational

facilities, especially those attractive to children, is more likely to make their custodians interact. (Lau, 1997)

STUDY SITE

For the purpose of our study we chose a housing project situated in a Z.H.U.N of Biskra, a middle city in the

South of Algeria. West Z.H.U.N in Biskra was built during the 1980s, a period when a large proportion of Algerian

Z.H.U.N were built.

Like other residential areas from that period, it was situated on the outskirts of the town, and had a specific

physical character of 4-5 storey housing and large communal outdoor spaces. It was completed and occupied in 1987.

La cite des 1000 logts is a housing project of 1000 dwelling units located in west Z.H.U.N The project has 1000

dwelling units arranged in four to five-story apartment buildings Fig.1 shows the location of the Z.H.U.N.


4/14

48 Naceur Farida

Figure 1: Location the West Z.H.U.N in Biskra

METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between the outdoor space design of housing estates

and the residents social interaction. The investigation draws on three sources of information, observations of peoples use

and activities in common outdoor spaces, the design characteristics of the neighborhood and interviews with a sample of

residents living in la Cit des 1000 logts .

The context of observations included the number of users, users gender, users age range (elderly, middle-aged,

young adult, and children), movement flow, as well as information about outdoor space uses and sociability: are the

residents using the space or is it empty? Is there a mix of ages and sexes? Do people cluster in groups? Sites were visited

repeatedly at different hours of weekends and working days. The field studies were carried out in February and March of2011 on the assumption that outdoor spaces are used more intensively at these times

Observations were supplemented by questionnaire survey with the residents, in order to collect information about

the profile of the population as well as the attitudes of residents toward neighbors and their uses of common outdoor

spaces. Data was collected from the owners of flats in the apartment blocks surrounding the open spaces. The number of

users interviewed was 230

RESEARCHRESULTS

Community Profile of the Cite Des 1000 Logts

As evident from Table 1, most of the households in la cite des 1000 logts were found to be large-sized nuclear

families with an average of 5-6 children. In spite of the preponderance of nuclear family 83,9% , large families still

represent 16,1%. Of the 230 respondents in the study, 7 had a female head only. Heads of households were predominantly

full-time employees.

The residents of cite des 1000 logts were relatively average educated and represent middle-class socioeconomic

levels. 90,9% of female were housewives, Only 9,1% among them were active. The majority of households head had

completed high school or done some college work and nearly 29,1 per cent had received a university degree . Only 8,2% of

head of household were unemployed. Occupations were as of the following. 51,3% were government employees, 31,7%

were retired, 18,3% per cent were skilled workers, 16,1% had their own business , small enterprises, small trades . Only


5/14


6,1% held minimally skilled jobs.Findings show a high percentage of owners among the dwellers: 60%. Only 40% of the

dwellings were still rented.

To get information about the approximate household incomes, we combined three sources of information:

Occupation of the head of household and his spouse and sources of wealth: possession of cars, trades , real estates.

Results allowed us to regroup households in three categories: low, middle and high incomes. Table 1, shows that

51,3% of household had a middle income, against 34,8% who had a low income . Thus the residents of the study area

represent middle class socio-economic levels in Biskra

Findings revealed that a majority of people living in cite des 1000 logts share a great number of socio-economic

conditions. They are relatively a homogeneous population.

Table 1: Household Characteristics

Socio-Economic Characteristics NumberValid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Person per Household

1-2

3-4

5-6

7-8

9 and more

02

25

82

72

49

0,9%

10,9%

35,6%

31,3%

21,3%

0,9%

11,8%

47,4%

78,7%

100%

Number of household per house

1

2

193

37

83,9%

16,1%

83,9%

100%

Marital status of head of household

Married

Divorced

Widowed

223

05

02

96,9%

2,2%

0,9%

96,9%

99,1%

100%

Number of children1-2

3-4

5 and more

32

115

83

13,9

50%

36,1 %

13,9%

63,9%

100%

Employment of head of household

Retired

Government Employee

Unskilled worker

Skilled worker

His own business (little tradesman)

Unemployed

73

45

14

42

37

19

31,7%

19,6%

6,1%

18,3%

16,1%

08,2%

31,7%

51,3%

57,4%

75,7%

91,8%

100%

Education of head of household

Primary school

High school or secondary level

Academic level university degree

22

141

67

9,6%

61,3%

29,1%

9,6%

70,9%

100%

Employment of household wife

Housewife

Employee

209

21

90,9%

9,1%

Income

High Income

Middle incomeLow income

No response

09

11880

23

3,9%

51,3%34,8%

10

3,9%

55,%90%

100%

Status of residency

Renter

Owner

92

138

40%

60%

40%

100%


6/14

50 Naceur Farida

Locations, Types and Facilities

Many services were initiated for the improvement of the project. A primary school and a college have been

inserted in the central area. A set of administrative equipments have been implanted all along the North urban artery, they

limit the project thus and form its urban faade. Fig.2 shows the location of these facilities they include: bank, insurance,

police station and several other administrative buildings. Bus station became a vital link joining the project to the inner

city.

Nevertheless there is no real mixture of residential and commercial land uses in the cit des 1000logtsto afford

social interaction. A limited number of shops emerged along the north urban artery, they include: a cafe, two fast foods, a

convenience store, a pharmacy, an internet and a videogame room. Except the unique cafe the other shops are focused on

the daily supply and necessities of the local residents; they lack the visual appearance and the attraction to stimulate urban

life in the neighborhood and to encourage social interaction. The internet and videogame room attract youngsters, however,

it appears that they cannot add vitality to the neighborhood as they are introverted

Communal outdoor spaces were provided in extremely poor conditions. Little attention was paid to the provision

of outdoor spaces with greenery and design furniture .Parklands was not created as was foreseen in the initial conception.

The character of the external spaces is till now marked by predominantly paved areas with little planting. Photo.1

The only recreational facility installed was a soccer field. Initially children playgrounds have been foreseen in the

areas between residential blocks. However no play equipment and no setting areas were provided in these spaces. They are

not even paved with the safety mat to afford a safe playing environment for the children.

Figure 2: Spatial Organization of the Cit Des 1000 logts


7/14


Photo 1: Bad Quality of Outdoor Communal Spaces

Accessibility

There are several types of access to the cite as shown in fig 2. Buses are the main modes of public transportation

in the planning scheme area. Public transport interchange facilities are provided at convenient locations.

In order to preserve the intimacy of the residential area, all entries to the blocks had been oriented toward the

inside of the neighborhood. The blocks opens up thus on the common outdoor spaces between the blocks rather than on the

outside public arteries. See Fig.2. Nevertheless this tentative of closing of the cit des 1000 logts remained without

impact on the selection of the accessibilities and especially the risks of intrusion in the neighborhood, because a large

percentage of interviewees reported the intensity of thefts and aggressions and said that in most of the cases offenders were

foreigners See Table.4

Social Interaction

In the questionnaire survey, the extensiveness of social networks was studied by investigating how well residents

knew others in both their building and in the neighborhood. Table.2 shows that the respondents have more extensive

networks of interactions as many of them said that they know neighbors not only in their buildings, but also in different

buildings of the same neighborhood.

In order to investigate the intensity of social interaction, fours indicators were designed in the questionnaire

survey:

friends in the neighborhood frequency of visits between neighbors nature of the exchanges and services between neighbors Talking with neighbors about personal problems as the most intense form of social contact.72 out of 230 respondents said that they have friends in the neighborhood. Respondents were asked how often do

they exchange visits with their neighbors .According to the statistics, 60,9% said that they often or sometimes visit their

neighbors. 23,9% said that they seldom visit their neighbors. Only 15,2% of the respondents said they never visit their

neighbors 45,6% of the respondents said that : death, marriage ceremonies or eventually illness are the only opportunities

for exchanges with their neighbors . For 43,5 % of the respondents the exchanges with their neighbors are more frequent


8/14

52 Naceur Farida

and more personal. Nature of exchanges varies from: taking care of children, loans of domestic objects to financial aid in

case of crisis. Finally, most of the respondents said that they would not talk with other neighbors about personal crisis.

Although the number of those who have friends in the neighborhood was restricted, results show that respondents

had more extensive networks of interactions , visits were more frequent and many services were exchanged between

neighbors. Accordingly we can affirm that contrary to our predictions there is no anonymity in cite des 1000 logts ,

degree of social interaction is rather higher than predicted .

Table 2: Social Interaction

Social interaction NumberValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Number of persons known by name in your building

all

almost all

half

very few

none

10

112

60

25

23

4,3%

48,7%

26,1%

10,9%

10,0%

4,3%

53,0%

79,1%

90,0%

100%

Number of persons known by name in different building of thesame neighborhood

all

almost all

half

very few

none

5

75

85

35

30

2.2%

32,6%

37,0%

15,2%

13,00%

2,2%

34,8%

71,8%

87%

100%

Do you have friend in the neighborhood

Yes

No

72

158

31,3%

68,7%

31,3%

100%

If you have a personal crisis you have a neighbor you can talk

to

YesNo

63

167

27,4%

72,6

27,4%

100%

Frequency of visits to people living in your neighborhood

Often

Sometimes

Seldom

Never

45

95

55

35

19,6%

41,3%

23,9%

15,2%

19,6%

60,9

84,8%

100%

Nature of exchanges and services

Loan of domestic objects

Taking care of children

Financial help

Ceremonies ,Death and illeness

None

35

42

23

105

25

15,2%

18,26%

10%

45,6%

10,9%

15,2%

33,5%

43,5%

89,1%

100%

Use of Outdoor Common Spaces

Observations showed that outdoor communal spaces are most of the time used as transit areas than spaces of stay

and leisure. Because of its situation, its high rate of public facilities, the bus station, la cit des 1000logts is crossed

continually by various external fluxes. Intense pedestrian fluxes were observed in the neighborhood all over the weekdays.

Records from site observations in the neighborhood which was visited repeatedly at different hours of weekends

and during working days have shown that passerby were the frequent users who made extensive use of open space. Most of


9/14


them come from adjacent neighborhoods and cross the study area to reach their various destinations. Consequently the rate

of social interactions was weaker during workdays. The only regular users were children, who because of the lack of

adequate playground used extensively open spaces for their games. Results of the interviews confirmed these observations:

A high percentage of respondents 69,1% said that the only use of common outdoor spaces is transit. Only 23,5% said that

they use outdoor spaces to socialize with others, or accompany their children and supervise them at play. Less than 8% said

they use outdoor spaces for taking a rest, going for a walk or practicing any form of sport.

A sensitive rise of use of outdoor spaces was observed during the week end. The rate of social interactions

increased slightly and outdoor spaces became spaces of stay and exchanges. Observations conducted during several

weekends, showed that specific groups have their own favorite activities to do in the outdoor common spaces. Men choose

to meet the most public spaces otherwise the cafe and the boutiques installed on the peripheral areas .They deliberately

move away from the spaces near blocks in order to preserve the intimacy of the neighborhood life Women used to cross

quickly the neighborhood. They never stay late in common outdoor spaces near the blocks for chatting or gathering. It is

not common to see women accompanying children to outdoor space and supervising them at play, this activity is strictly

reserved to men: fathers, grand brothers.

Children are the frequent users of communal outdoor spaces. Large open spaces provide opportunities for diverse

children games: foot ball game, biking, running, playing on toy vehicles. This presence of children in communal outdoor

spaces is also often source of problems and neighborhood conflicts .63% of the respondents mentioned the frequency of

neighborhood conflicts, 62,3% among them said that children are the main cause of neighborhood conflicts.

See table 3 . Because of the lack of adequate playing areas, most of children games turn into acts of vandalism and

deterioration of the blocks: throwing stones, breaking windows, graffiti , .Male teenagers , meet after school in the

outdoor spaces to talk or to play ball games before they go home. Older men are often observed gathering, talking, playing

traditional games. Because of the absence of appropriately arranged seats they generally carry away a chair, an old carpet,

or a cardboard to sit on it In addition to the lack of attractiveness, common outdoor spaces became intolerable and

uncomfortable during summer seasons.

They were not designed appropriately for the hot and dry climate of the region. They are too open and none

covered, none shelters were provided. Consequently outdoor common spaces became completely deserted all along the

summer days Respondents were also asked if the quality of outdoor space is good, will they use it or not. 202 out of 230

respondents said that they would go to this good quality space.

Table 3: Uses of Outdoor Common Space

Use of Outdoor Spaces NumberValid

PercentCumulative

Percent

Activities in outdoor common spacesTransit

Socialize with others or accompanying children

Taking rest

Going for a walk

Practicing a sport

159

54

4

5

8

69,1%

23,5%

1,7%

2,2%

3,5%

69,1%

92,6%

94,3%

96,5%

100

If the quality of outdoor space is good will they

use it?

Yes

No

202

28

87,8%

12,2%

87,8%

100%


10/14

54 Naceur Farida

Table 4: Frequency of Conflicts, Thefts and Aggression in the Neighborhood

NumberValid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Frequency of Conflicts

Always

OftenSeldom

Never

40

10554

31

17,4%

45,6%23,5%

13,5%

17,4%

63%86,5%

100%

Cause of conflicts

Children

Other

124

75

62,3%

37,7%

62,3%

100%

Rate of thefts or aggression in the neighborhood :

High

Average

low

very low

40

95

50

45

17,4

41,3%

21,7%

19,6%

17,4%

58,7%

80,4

100%

Do you thing that offenders are from the neighborhood

Yes

No

71

114

38,4%

61,6%

38,4%

100%

Form of Appropriations of Outdoor Spaces

The inhabitants of first floors are more likely to garden and engage in yard work, because these spaces are located

close to their flats. Outdoor space is regarded in this case as a natural extension of interior. In most of the case, gardens are

discerned like exclusive properties this is observed through the use of iron wire fencing in order to prevent any kind of

intrusion in these spaces and to limit its use to only residents.

Nevertheless, gardening remains an isolated action, it is not only limited to nearby outdoor spaces, but not all the

residents of first floors are engaged in such activity. In spite of the presence of the gardens, unfortunately many yards are

organized badly and little kept, they are not carved and tidy, they sometimes turn into a support of garbage, of rubbish, of

all sorts

Photo 2: Gardens Organized Badly and Little Kept


11/14


Comparison of Use and Interaction in Three Variety of Arrangement of Common Outdoor Spaces within Cite Des

1000 Logts

In order to better understand how different types of layout and their arrangement influence resident to gather and

interact around the blocks we distinguished three varieties of configurations of common spaces inside the study area and

we tried to compare the use and social interaction in the three types of communal outdoor spaces.

The cite of 1000 logts was composed of various forms of arrangements of blocks: blocks in I, Blocks in L,

blocks in U and blocks in H. All the blocks are organized around a big central space designed to be parkland or

playgrounds but currently these spaces are practically empty. For the purpose of the study, spaces between blocks have

been categorized into three groups in term of their degree of closing:

High degree of closing : Resulting from arrangements of blocks in U facing blocks in L Average degree of closing: Resulting from arrangements of a block in I with two linear blocks Low degree of closing: Resulting from arrangements of blocks in H organized in linear gradations.

Blocks in U Facing Blocks

in L

Because of the inexistence of any physical or symbolic

barriers to demarcate the arrangement of blocs in L and in U,

common spaces that result of such disposition lost their sense

of closeness. The absence of greenery and furniture increase

this sense of openness.

Block in I with Two Linear

Blocks

There is no connection between the block in I with the two

linear blocs. The space between blocks that results lack the

necessary degree of closing to insinuate to the intruders that it

is reserved to a residential use. In addition spatial proportion

of the space formed between blocs is not convenient , the

space seems too large and empty


12/14

56 Naceur Farida

Blocks in H Linear

Gradations

The space around blocs that result of such arrangement is

ambiguous and not clearly identified

Figure 3: Comparison of the Three Configurations of Common Outdoor Spaces inside the Study Area

The observations didn't show differences of use between the three types of outdoor spaces. There was not any

sensitive difference in the degree of use or social interactions between the three variety of arrangement of outdoor

communal spaces The degree of use and social interaction was reduced wathever was the arrangement of the space.

There was not any difference in the appropriation of the outdoor spaces between the different configurations of

spaces between blocks. Gardens were limited to the nearest spaces to blocks in the three varieties of arrangements.

CONCLUSIONS

Measure of social interactions shows a high degree of acquaintance in the study area although social relations

were moderate in the neighborhood. Degree of social interaction was rather higher than predicted. However results of

observation and interviews showed a very low rate of use of the outdoor spaces which demonstrate that outdoor space in

Cit des 1000 Logts is not the catalyst of neighborly interaction.

The observation of the degree of use in the various configurations of outdoor communal spaces within the study

area showed that rate of social interaction was reduced whatever is the arrangement of the space. The main hypothesis of

the present study that layout of cit des 1000 logts doesnt support lively interaction among the inhabitants is clearly

confirmed

Findings showed that the high degree of openness of the study area discouraged all form of use and reduced it to

a transit area. The blocks were not arranged appropriately to form small neighborhood grouping. the spaces between blocks

that result lack the necessary degree of closing to insinuate to the intruders that it is reserved to a residential use. There was

no strong sense of enclosure that can define the communal space and mark clearly its boundaries.

The multiple access to the cit des1000 logts reinforce its degree of openness and the ambiguity around its

status. Residential outdoor spaces supposed to be an extension of living space and part of the home turned into public areas

for transit. In addition to its influence on the daily life of the inhabitants, lack of planning and furniture, greenery

made the large spaces between blocks seem larger and more open.

The results were in accordance with finding of previous researches that bad qualities and attributes of the

communal space may not attract residents to spend some time, to stay ,or even to interact with neighbors. Outdoor spaces

were usually unused because they are unpleasant and there was nothing to do there. This became more serious during the

summery season because of the lack of shaded places to seat.


13/14


Results confirmed the relationship between mixed land uses and social interaction. Inadequate facilities inserted

into the neighborhood did not succeed to make it livable. Administrative amenities set in the neighborhood transformed it

into a space opened to all and browsed by various flux of users, which in turn discouraged any kind of use by the

occupants. Shopping facilities were insufficient and not appropriately designated to provide residents a shopping

experience while enjoying space, gathering with others .their impact on urban life and social interaction was reduced

Findings revealed that a majority of people living in cite des 1000 logts share a great number of socio-economic

conditions. The y were average educated and represent middle-class socioeconomic levels. They are relatively a

homogeneous population. this could explain the extensive networks of interactions in the neighborhood. As mentioned in

the theoretical framework, socio-demographic characteristics naturally influence residents' living style and their ways of

using open spaces and the patterns of social interactions.

Children who were expected to reinforce the ties between residents were a source of disturbance and conflicts in

the neighborhood. Because of the lack of adequate playground areas, many parents were not encouraged to accompany the

children outdoors and supervise them at play and in turn socialize with others. Because of their high rate of inoccupation,

women were supposed to be more involved in the neighborhood. However according to our observations their use of

outdoor space is restricted.

Because of its layout, the bad quality of its outdoor spaces cit des 1000 logts could not afford to its residents a

living residential environment which can be employed by its inhabitants for the enhancement of social interaction. These

result are in accordance with the hypothesis that the layout of buildings in residential neighborhoods, the arrangement and

the quality of common outdoor space have profound effects upon the use of the area and social interaction

REFERENCES

1. Abu-Ghazzeh, T.M. (1999), Housing layout, social interaction, and the place of contact in Abu-Nuseir, Jordan.Journal of environmental psychology, 19, pp 4173.

2. Coleman, A (1999): Le procs de lutopie Vision et ralit dans les conceptions de lhabitat Les cahiers de larecherche architecturale et urbaine. N 1, pp. 51-64.

3. Choay, F (1965), Urbanisme, Utopies et ralits. Editions Seuil, Paris, p. 368.4. Chombart de lawe, PH (1952) . Paris et lagglomration parisienne, tome II, Mthodes de recherches pour

ltude dune grande cit, tudes comparatives des units rsidentielles, PUF, Paris, p.63

5. Cooper Marcus, C. & Francis, C. (1998) People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Space: New Yok,John Willey &Sons.

6. Drucker, S. & Gumpert, G. (1998). Public Spaces and the Right of Association. Free Speech Yearbook, Vol.36 pp. 25-44.

7. Glaeser, E L. & Sacerdote,B. (2000). The Social Consequences of Housing. Journal of Housing Economics 9, pp123

8. Gehl, J. (1986). Soft edges in residential streets. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research. 3 , pp 89102.9. Haggerty,L.J. (1982), Differential Social Contact in Urban Neighborhoods: Environmental vs.

Sociodemographic Explanations . Sociological Quarterly, Vol 23 pp. 359-372.


14/14

58 Naceur Farida

10. Jacobs, J (1961), The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York.Random House.11. Kaminski. P (1978) Les femmes dans les grands ensembles. revue. Economie et statistique, volume 96, numro

01, 1978 pp.71-77 .

12. Keane, C., (1991). Socioenvironmental determinants of community formation. Environ. Behav. 23 (1),pp 2746.

13. Knack, R.E: (2000). Hanging Out: Teens Search for the Perfect Public Space. Planning vol 66, N 8, pp. 4-914. Lau, Ho-wai, Lucas; 1997 Examination of open space design in public housing estates of Hong Kong, Master of

Urban design Dissertation , University of Hong Kong.

15. Lobout .C (1968). Les relations de voisinage dans les grands ensembles. Etude psycho-sociologique des relationsde voisinage des femmes dans un grand ensemble H.L.M. Revue Population, N 3, pp563-564

16. Mebirouk, H (2005). Appropriation de lespace public dans les ensembles de logements collectifs, formedadaptabilit ou contournement de normes ? cas des Z.H.U.N dAnnaba (Nord est Algrien) Revue Norois, 195

17. Naceur, F & Farhi, A , Les zones dhabitat urbain nouvelles en Algrie : inadaptabilit spatiale et malaisessociaux.cas de Batna. Insaniyat N22, pp.73-81

18. Newman, O (1972). Defensible space. New-York, Macmillan.19. Newman, O (1996). Creating defensible space: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of

Policy Development and Research.

20. Skjaeveland,O & Garling,T. (1997). Effects of interactional space on neighbouring. Journal of EnvironmentalPsychology 17,pp 181198

21. Shu-Chun Lucy Huang (2006). A study of outdoor interactional spaces in highrise housing. Landscape andurban planning 78 ,pp.193204

5.social full

Documents