The Impact of Housing Type on Community Well-being : Comparative Analysis between Rental Tenants living in Pure Rental Blocks and Integrated Blocks in Singapore = The Impact of Housing Type on Community Well-being: Comparative Analysis between Rental Tenants living in Pure Rental Blocks and Integrated Blocks in Singapore

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study explores how housing type shapes community well-being among public rental tenants in Singapore, comparing tenants of pure rental blocks and integrated blocks. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study combines quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews to assess the sense of belonging, social support, and reciprocal relationships. Findings revealed that tenants in pure rental blocks report significantly higher sense of belonging and stronger bonding capital than those in integrated blocks, whose relationships are more fragmented and limited by tenure differences. While integrated blocks aim to foster inclusivity, physical integration alone does not guarantee relational equality; community cohesion is generated by shared routines and informal obligations rather than spatial proximity. These results indicate the need for policies to go beyond architectural design and actively support ongoing programs, trust-building and stigma-reduction efforts.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 싱가포르의 공공임대주택 거주자를 대상으로, 주거 유형이 공동체 웰빙에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지를 순수 임대 블록과 혼합형(통합형) 블록을 비교하여 분석한다. 혼합연구 방법을 활용하여, 양적 설문조사와 질적 인터뷰를 결합함으로써 소속감, 사회적 지지, 상호호혜적 관계를 평가하였다. 연구 결과, 순수 임대 블록 거주자는 혼합형 블록 거주자에 비해 소속감이 유의미하게 높고 결속형 사회자본이 더 강한 것으로 나타났다. 반면 혼합형 블록에서는 거주 자격(소유·임대)의 차이로 인해 관계가 보다 파편화되고 제한적인 경향을 보였다. 혼합형 블록은 포용성을 증진하는 것을 목표로 하지만, 물리적 통합만으로는 관계적 평등이 보장되지 않으며, 공동체 응집력은 공간적 근접성보다는 공유된 일상적 관행과 비공식적 상호의무를 통해 형성됨을 시사한다. 이러한 결과는 주택 정책이 건축적 설계를 넘어, 지속적인 공동체 프로그램, 신뢰 구축, 그리고 낙인 완화를 위한 적극적인 지원이 필요함을 보여준다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• ABSTRACT i
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
• LIST OF TABLES iii
• LIST OF FIGURES iv
• CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
• Section 1. Research Background 1
• Section 2. Purpose of Research 4
• CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW 6
• Section 1. Mixed-Income Development 6
• Section 2. Low-Income Development 10
• Section 3. Theoretical Frameworks And Hypotheses 12
• CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 16
• Section 1. Research Design 16
• Section 2. Research Model and Hypotheses 17
• Section 3. Measurement 18
• Section 4. Sampling Method and Data Collection 20
• Section 5. Ethical considerations 22
• CHAPTER 4. ANALYSIS RESULTS 24
• Section 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents 24
• Section 2. Descriptive Statistics of Key Variables 26
• Section 3. Reliability test of the measurement scales 27
• Section 4. Comparisons of key variable outcomes between housing types 27
• Section 5. Regression Models with Alternative Controls 30
• Section 6. Moderated Mediation Analysis 33
• Section 7. Open-ended question analysis 38
• Section 8. Interview 43
• Section 9. Researcher’s Observations 48
• Section 10. Summary of hypotheses testing 50
• CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 52
• Section 1. Summary of findings 52
• Section 2. Theoretical contributions of the study 55
• Section 3. Policy implications of the study 56
• Section 4. Limitations and suggestions for future research 58
• BIBLIOGRAPHY 61
• ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 68