IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/urbpla/v4y2019i3p299-314.html

Between Rationalization and Political Project: The Existenzminimum from Klein and Teige to Today

Author

Listed:
  • Marson Korbi

    (Department ICAR, Polytechnic of Bari, Italy)

  • Andrea Migotto

    (Faculty of Architecture, KU Leuven, Belgium)

Abstract

A critical reflection on the II CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne; in Frankfurt, 1929) should not limit itself to a purely historiographic reconstruction. The article discusses the II CIAM reflection on the Wohnung für das Existenzminimum (dwelling for the minimum level of existence) by means of a comparison between the official positions of participants and those of two architects, Alexander Klein and Karel Teige, who gravitated around the Frankfurt and Brussels meetings. The confrontation will unlock a double scenario. On the one hand, it will depict a multifaceted and more precise account of the discussion developed in the late 1920s on the minimum dwelling, integrating CIAM discussions with alternative theories and methods developed to face housing shortage and degraded living conditions. Investigating the impact of socio-economic conditions on household forms of life, Klein and Teige presented two paradigmatic and autonomous approaches that tackled the traditional solutions of architecture for the Existenzminimum. On the other hand, we argue that a broadened revision of the themes discussed at the end of the 1920s, namely the transformation of household compositions, the criticism of the paradigms of liberal urban development, the relation between production and forms of life as well as the position of the architect in housing production, proves to be useful for the understanding and overcoming of the fragmentation that still nowadays characterizes the reflection on domestic space.

Suggested Citation

  • Marson Korbi & Andrea Migotto, 2019. "Between Rationalization and Political Project: The Existenzminimum from Klein and Teige to Today," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 299-314.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v4:y:2019:i:3:p:299-314
    DOI: 10.17645/up.v4i3.2157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/2157
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/up.v4i3.2157?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    2. Francesco Chiodelli & Valeria Baglione, 2014. "Living together privately: for a cautious reading of cohousing," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 20-34, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alessandro Porotto & Chiara Monterumisi, 2019. "New Perspectives on the II CIAM onwards: How Does Housing Build Cities?," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 76-82.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marson Korbi & Andrea Migotto, 2019. "Between Rationalization and Political Project: The Existenzminimum from Klein and Teige to Today," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 299-314.
    2. Piotr Lis & Zuzanna Rataj & Katarzyna Suszyńska, 2022. "Implementation Risk Factors of Collaborative Housing in Poland: The Case of ‘Nowe Żerniki’ in Wrocław," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Alina Mirela Teacu (Parincu), 2019. "Neuromanagement – the Impact of Neuroscience on the Organizational Performance," Risk in Contemporary Economy, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, pages 487-493.
    4. Ethan Ilzetzki & Saverio Simonelli, 2017. "Measuring Productivity Dispersion: Lessons From Counting One-Hundred Million Ballots," CSEF Working Papers 483, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    5. Alona Goloborodko, 2022. "Theoretical and Methodological Principles of Managing the Enterprise's Integrative Development," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 139-146, December.
    6. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1119-1154, September.
    7. Gus diZerega & David F. Hardwick, 2011. "The Emergence of Vancouver as a Creative City," Chapters, in: David Emanuel Andersson & Åke E. Andersson & Charlotta Mellander (ed.), Handbook of Creative Cities, chapter 18, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Michel Anteby & Curtis K. Chan, 2018. "A Self-Fulfilling Cycle of Coercive Surveillance: Workers’ Invisibility Practices and Managerial Justification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 247-263, April.
    9. Carolyn J. Heinrich & Gerald Marschke, 2010. "Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 183-208.
    10. David Vallat, 2015. "Une alternative au dualisme État-Marché : l’économie collaborative, questions pratiques et épistémologiques," Working Papers halshs-01249308, HAL.
    11. Marinov, Marin & Şahin, İsmail & Ricci, Stefano & Vasic-Franklin, Gordana, 2013. "Railway operations, time-tabling and control," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 59-75.
    12. Jeremy Atack & Robert A. Margo & Paul Rhode, 2020. "‘Mechanization Takes Command’: Inanimate Power and Labor Productivity in Late Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 27436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Raphaëlle Stewart & Faheem Ali & Casper Boks & Niki Bey, 2018. "Architect, Catalyst, Advocate, and Prophet: A Four-Lens View of Companies to Support Ecodesign Integration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-27, September.
    14. Elizabeth-Anne Thomas, 2019. "How Useful Is the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Reporting Framework to Identify the Non-financial Value of Corporate Social Performance (CSP)?," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, in: Nicholas Capaldi & Samuel O. Idowu & René Schmidpeter & Martin Brueckner (ed.), Responsible Business in Uncertain Times and for a Sustainable Future, pages 37-87, Springer.
    15. Yan Jin & Raymond E. Levitt, 1993. "i‐AGENTS: Modeling Organizational Problem Solving in Multi‐Agent Teams," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(4), pages 247-270, December.
    16. Roy, Kaushik & Khokle, Pradyumana, 2009. "Integrating Resource-Based and Rational Contingency Views:Understanding Design of Dynamic Capabilities of Organisations," IIMA Working Papers WP2009-02-02, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    17. Dave Buchanan, 1999. "Ways Ahead for Organisations: Disappointing Guidebooks," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 13(2), pages 399-402, June.
    18. Jinia Mukerjee & Roy Thurik & Olivier Torrès & Annelot Wismans, 2024. "Measuring organizational play in small businesses," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2443-2476, December.
    19. Alpenberg, Jan & Paul Scarbrough, D., 2018. "Trust and control in changing production environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 527-534.
    20. Fracarolli Nunes, Mauro & Lee Park, Camila & Shin, Hyunju, 2021. "Corporate social and environmental irresponsibilities in supply chains, contamination, and damage of intangible resources: A behavioural approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v4:y:2019:i:3:p:299-314. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.