Too Much ‘Stuff’ and the Wrong Space: A Conceptual Framework of Material Possessions

Main Article Content

Issue Vol 3 No 2 (2020)
Published Jul 30, 2020
Section Articles
Article downloads 102
DOI https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v3i2.78
Submitted : Feb 7, 2020 | Accepted : May 11, 2020

Elena Marco Katie Williams Sonja Oliveira

Abstract

Space for living in new build houses in the UK is at premium and households have more stuff than ever before. The way this stuff is accommodated in dwellings can significantly affect residents’ quality of life and well-being. This paper presents a new conceptualisation of material possessions that could be of use to those involved in housing design. Three universal characteristics of material possessions; value, temporality and visibility are used to identify the space in the home that possessions might require. A conceptual framework that integrates these characteristics with spatial information about the interior of the home is developed. The paper argues that the conceptual framework could help designers, policymakers and house builders to better understand first the nature of material possessions, and second how those possessions could be accommodated in contemporary homes, ultimately supporting improved quality of life and wellbeing for households.

Keywords: architectural design, design practice, interior design, housing, storage

Article Details

How to Cite
Marco, E., Williams, K., & Oliveira, S. (2020). Too Much ‘Stuff’ and the Wrong Space: A Conceptual Framework of Material Possessions. Interiority, 3(2), 219-242. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v3i2.78
Author Biographies

Elena Marco, University of the West of England

Elena studied architecture at the Universidad Politecnica de Catalunya and the University of Bath. She has worked as an architect in Spain and the UK for over 10 years, where she built a strong profile in sustainable design. Now in academia, she continues to develop her research interests, which focus on the crossover between health, sustainability and architecture.

Katie Williams, University of the West of England

Professor Williams is an urban theorist, planner and urban designer. She is Director of the Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments. Professor Williams specialises in sustainable urban environments and is known for her work on sustainable neighbourhood design, urban form and land reuse. She has undertaken evidence-based critiques of many key urban policies such as sustainable communities and the urban renaissance.

Sonja Oliveira, University of the West of England

Sonja trained in architecture and has held numerous senior design posts in award winning firms globally. Her research expertise is built on developing new insights in energy simulation and design practice across scales of analysis from policy level, organizational dynamics in implementing new digital technologies in design to household heating practices in low carbon architecture.

Share |

References

Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154

Building Research Establishment. (1993). BRE housing design handbook: Energy and internal layout. Watford: BREPress.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment. (2005). What home buyers want: Attitudes and decision making among consumers. London: CABE.

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment. (2009). Space in new homes: What residents think. London: CABE.

Chevalier, S. (1998). From woollen carpet to grass carpet: Bridging house and garden in an English suburb. In D. Miller (Ed.), Material cultures: Why some things matter (pp. 47–72). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cwerner, S., & Metcalfe, A. (2003). Storage and clutter: Discourses and practices of order in the domestic world. Journal of Design History, 16(3), 229–239. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1316333

Daniels, I. (2001). The ‘untidy’ Japanese house. In D. Miller (Ed.), Home possessions: Material culture behind closed doors (pp. 201–229). Oxford: Berg.

Disability Discrimination Act. (1995). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1995/50/contents.

Department for Communities and Local Government. (2015). Technical housing standards: Nationally described space standards. London: DCLG.

Department for Communities and Local Government. (2017). Fixing our broken housing market. London: DCLG.

Dittmar, H. (1991). Meanings of material possessions as reflections of identity: Gender and socio-material position in society. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 6, 165–186.

Dittmar, H. (1992). The social psychology of material possessions. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Hand, M., Shove, E., & Southerton, D. (2007). Home extensions in the United Kingdom: Space, time, and practice. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 25, 668–681. https://doi.org/10.1068/d413t

HATC. (2006). Housing space standards. London: Greater London Authority.

Hecht, A. (2001). Home sweet home: Tangible memories of an uprooted childhood. In D. Miller (Ed.), Home possessions: Material culture behind closed doors (pp. 123–145). Oxford: Berg.

Hirschman, E., Rubio, A., & Belk, R. (2012). Exploring space and place in marketing research: Excavating the garage. Marketing Theory, 12(4), 369–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593112457736

Karn, V., & Sheridan, L. (1994). New homes in the 1990s: A study of design, space and amenity in housing association and private sector housing. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the University of Manchester.

Laermans, R., & Meulders, C. (1999). The domestication of laundering. In I. Cieerad (Ed.), At home: An anthropology of domestic space (pp. 118–129). New York: Syracuse University Press.

Lury, C. (2011). Consumer culture. Rutgers University Press.

Mayor of London (2010). London housing design guide. London: London Development Agency.

Marcoux, J. P. (2001). The refurbishment of memory. In D. Miller (Ed.), Home possessions: Material culture behind closed doors (pp. 69–86). Oxford: Berg.

MHLG (Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government). (1961). Homes for today & tomorrow (Parker Morris Report). London: HMSO.

Miles, S. (1998). Consumerism as a way of life. London: SAGE.

Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401305

Oseland, N., & Donald, I. (1993). The evaluation of space in homes: A facet study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13(3), 251–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80177-X

Ozaki, R. (2003). The 'front' and 'back' regions of the English House: Changing values and lifestyles. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 18, 105–127. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023904826652

Park, J. (2017). One hundred years of housing space standards: What now? London: Levitt & Bernstein.

Pink, S. (2004). Home truths: Gender, domestic objects and everyday life. United States: Berg.

Pink, S. (2012). Situating everyday life. London: SAGE.

Raines, A. M., Portero, A. K, Unruh, A., Short, N., & Schmidt, N. (2015). An initial investigation of the relationship between insomnia and hoarding. Journal of Clinical Psychology,71, 707–714. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22161

Richins, M. L., (1994). Valuing things: The public and private meanings of possessions, Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), 504–521.

Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1086/209304

Roster, C. A., Ferrari, J., & Jurkat, M. P. (2016). The dark side of home: Assessing possessions ‘clutter’ on subjective well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 46, 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.03.003

Royal Institute of British Architects. (2011). The case for space. London: Cantate.

Saxbe, D. E., & Repetti, R. (2010). No place like home: Home tours correlate with daily patterns of mood and cortisol. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209352864

Schor, J. B. (1998). The overspent American. New York: Harper Collins.

Shove, E. (2003). Converging conventions of comfort, cleanliness and convenience. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26, 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026362829781

Shove, E., & Southerton, D. (2000). Defrosting the freezer: From novelty to convenience. Journal of Material Culture, 5(3), 301–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/135918350000500303

Shove, E., Watson, M., Hand, M., & Ingram, J. (2007). The design of everyday life. Oxford: Berg.

Smith, G. V., & Ekerdt, D. J. (2011). Confronting the material convoy in later life. Sociological Inquiry, 81(3), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.2011.00378.x

Thompson, M. (1979). Rubbish theory: The creation and destruction of value. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Williams, K. (2009). Space per person in the UK: A review of densities, trends, experiences and optimum levels. Land Use Policy, 26, 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.08.024