I grew
up in the 1950s and ’60s living in a small, two-bedroom bungalow where multiple
uses of space were common and privacy was minimal. As an adult, some of the
happiest years of my life so far were when my husband and I lived and worked in
a 500-square-foot apartment with a wall of south-facing windows. Maybe that’s
why I’ve never been attracted to those multi-bedroom, multi-bathroom,
increasingly large mansions that so many North Americans aspire to – even as the
average North American family size is decreasing.
In most of the world, micro-homes are the norm because land is
expensive and scarce and extended families are used to sharing their lives,
living spaces and other resources. Even new homes in places like Tokyo are built
on lots the size of many Western front yards. And now, there is a rising
interest in compact dwellings here in the land of wide open spaces, where
building big has been possible, so we have done it...and become used to it, even
addicted to it. Like so many other lifestyle addictions, this one has caused us
to hit a wall and many people are looking for antidotes in the smaller living
spaces with tiny footprints that are popping up amongst the “McMansions.”
Big houses cost big money and many people of my generation are
choosing to downshift, taking early retirement, switching careers in mid-life
and generally acting on a desire for simpler, more effective living. As a
result, many of us are “right-sizing” our living spaces, redirecting our
financial resources away from big mortgages and toward our dreams. At the same
time, many young people are having a harder time than their parents did getting
established in careers, and are therefore finding that small houses and
minuscule condos fit their economic conditions just fine.
Big houses are also resource-hungry. With the current blossoming
of concern about the environment, reducing the energy consumption of our houses
is, for many people, a personal step towards reduction of the greenhouse gases
that contribute to global warming. And, according to many experts, one of the
best ways to reduce a house’s energy consumption is by decreasing its size.
Writing in the Journal of Industrial Ecology (Winter/Spring
2005), Environmental Building News editors Jessica Boehland and Alex Wilson note
that a small house built to only moderate energy performance standards uses
substantially less energy for heating and cooling than a large house built to
very high energy performance standards. They also point out that as house size
increases, more land is occupied, increased impermeable surfaces result in more
storm-water runoff and construction resource use increases.
Aside from saving resources, there are other ecological
advantages to living in a small space. An obvious one is the need to own fewer
possessions and therefore to consume less. Another advantage is that if you are...
To read the rest of
this article,
subscribe to Natural Life's digital edition,
which includes access to this and other back issues.
Wendy Priesnitz is
the Editor of Natural Life Magazine and a journalist with over 30 years of
experience. She has
also authored nine
books.
Visit her
website.
