APA 6th Edition Seferagić, D. (1999). Novo shvaćanje kvalitete ruralnoga i urbanog stanovanja. Sociologija i prostor, (146), 347-363. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/119975
MLA 8th Edition Seferagić, Dušica. "Novo shvaćanje kvalitete ruralnoga i urbanog stanovanja." Sociologija i prostor, vol. , no. 146, 1999, pp. 347-363. https://hrcak.srce.hr/119975. Accessed 26 Oct. 2021.
Chicago 17th Edition Seferagić, Dušica. "Novo shvaćanje kvalitete ruralnoga i urbanog stanovanja." Sociologija i prostor , no. 146 (1999): 347-363. https://hrcak.srce.hr/119975
Harvard Seferagić, D. (1999). 'Novo shvaćanje kvalitete ruralnoga i urbanog stanovanja', Sociologija i prostor, (146), pp. 347-363. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/119975 (Accessed 26 October 2021)
Vancouver Seferagić D. Novo shvaćanje kvalitete ruralnoga i urbanog stanovanja. Sociologija i prostor [Internet]. 1999 [cited 2021 October 26];(146):347-363. Available from: https://hrcak.srce.hr/119975
IEEE D. Seferagić, "Novo shvaćanje kvalitete ruralnoga i urbanog stanovanja", Sociologija i prostor, vol., no. 146, pp. 347-363, 1999. [Online]. Available: https://hrcak.srce.hr/119975. [Accessed: 26 October 2021]
Abstracts The article is an extract from two different sociological researches: Social
Structure and Quality of Living in the Period of Transition (CITADA - IDIZ, 1996),
Village in Transition: Developmental Possibilities of Rural Areas (IDIZ, 1996-1999),
and many other field and action researches on different topics, housing being one
of them, as the part of “quality of living” approach. The paper is, as well, the ‘synthesis’
of two papers from international housing conferences held in Tallinn -
Estonia, 1997 and in Vilnius - Lithuania, 1999-
In the article, the author starts with analysis of the social context marked by transition
on general level and specific Croatian features (in privatisation, urbanisation,
ruralisation, rurbanisation) influencing housing situation and housing policy. The
stress is put on similarities (convergences) and differences (divergences) in understanding
of housing in villages and cities.
The main hypothesis is that in spite of huge differences in understanding of rural
and urban housing, in quality of living in general, they are changing in favour of
convergence. The reasons are in urbanisation of villages (differentiation of social
structure and activities, increase of communal infrastructure and general social
changes) as well as in ruralisation of cities (immigration of rural population with it’s
own values and quality of living).
Measuring the quality of housing with numerous indicators (objective and subjective
ones) on the level of house/apartment, neighbourhood/quarter and on settlement
level all the data show less differences on house/apartment and neighbourhood/
quarter level (on elementary level) than on settlement level. Favours go for cities, and disadvantages for villages.
The conclusions are not pink. They show worse situation in villages and parish centres
(dying of small settlements), while in cities problems are connected with "false
standard”, ruralisation of the pheriphery and even the very cores, and weak urban
planning as their corrector.
The author is publishing her paper on quality of living in the villages (in Croatian
language) in Sociologija sela (Rural Sociology) quarterly no. 1-2/2000.