Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 1
Dominique Copeland, Isha Gupta, & Angela Unubun
Professor Matthaei
Econ 243
21 May 2019
History of Cooperative Housing
The first housing cooperatives in the United States were established in the late 1800s in
New York (Sieger & Levy). There was a big spike in housing cooperatives after World War 1.
Housing cooperatives were also on the rise in the 1920s (Sieger & Levy). A lot of housing
cooperatives survived during the 1920s, but most housing cooperatives did not survive the Great
Depression of the 1930s. Initially these housing cooperatives were for lower income families.
Today, half of all co-ops in the U.S. are in New York, and a vast majority are in urban areas.
These housing cooperatives paved the way for student housing cooperatives to exist.
Student housing cooperatives are a type of non-profit housing. These houses lower
housing costs. They also provide students with an educational and community environment for
them to live in. Most student housing cooperatives share operation of the house. They put a big
emphasis on collaboration and mutual benefit. Members share living spaces that they themselves
manage. Students have to have a great sense of responsibility as they are taking on the roles of
both tenant and landlord. Tasks that students partake in include cleaning, cooking, repairing,
overseeing financial records, and abiding by rules (Lendingtree) . Student housing cooperatives
are not only beneficial in a monetary way, but this style of living teaches many other skills like
reaching compromises, working towards goals, sharing resources, and getting along with others.
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 2
The skills students learn in student housing cooperatives are not only helpful in their respective
living spaces, but for the whole community.
Student housing cooperatives can be traced back to the first cooperative, The Rochdale
Society of Equitable Pioneers, founded in the 1844 in England (US Archives). Cooperatives
around the world operate according to their same set of core principles and values. The first
principle is voluntary and open membership. Membership is open to all people willing to accept
to accept all responsibilities that come with being a member without racial, religious, gender, or
economic discrimination. The second is democratic member control, which means cooperatives
are controlled by members who set policies and make decisions. Next is member’s economic
participation. Members are expected to contribute equally to the cooperative. Fourth is autonomy
and independence. Cooperatives are autonomous and controlled by its members. If they ever
enter agreements with other organizations it is based on terms that protect democratic control by
the members and preserve the cooperative’s self-government. The fifth principle is education,
training, and information. Cooperatives provide elected representatives, members, and
employees with training so everyone can contribute effectively to the development of their
cooperative. Cooperative members also inform the public about cooperatives and all the benefits
of them. Sixth is cooperation among cooperatives which means through the collaboration of
cooperatives locally, nationally, and internationally they are able to strengthen the cooperative
movement and deal with social and community needs. The last principle is concern for the
community. Concern for the community means cooperatives not only focus on member needs
but they work for the sustainable development of communities (US Archives).
Canada and US Student Housing Cooperatives work together through NASCO. NASCO
is the North American Students of Cooperation. NASCO is the successor of the North American
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 3
Student Cooperative League (NASCL). NASCO is a network of co-ops across United States and
Canada. Before NASCO was the North American Student Cooperative League which was
founded in 1946, but it was never a strong organization (nasco.coop).The needs for
communication, assistance, education, and other services did not end and NASCL remained as a
concept in Michigan. In 1968 NASCO was formed for the purpose of expanding the cooperative
movement across college campuses (nasco,coop) . They began their work immediately on co-op
development. Student co-ops were able to get the federal government to allow the College
Housing Program to make loans directly to them. These loans allowed more student co-ops to be
built. NASCO also added to the strong student co-op development activity in Canada. According
to their website their vision is “to achieve a socially and financially responsible North American
cooperative economic sector for all people and organization interested in applying the principles
and practices of cooperation” (nasco.coop). Their principles line up with the set of core
principles for cooperatives. NASCO hosts an annual conference of cooperators across the
continent, offers regional support to local groups to organize gatherings of cooperators, provides
training and cooperative educational workshops, supports groups to start new cooperatives,
organize the voices of the North American co-op housing movement, and many more
(nasco.coop). Anyone can join NASCO, as a cooperative, individual, or a partner. Wellesley
College student cooperatives differ from other student housing cooperatives because they are not
recognized by NASCO and do not follow the core principles.
Student cooperative housing at Wellesley has changed positively over time. Initially they
were formed for overcrowding, but they are formed now based on common goals and needs. In a
newspaper clipping from June 4th, 1932 the headline reads, “Munger Hall: Wellesley’s New Co-
operative Dormitory” (Boston Evening Transcript).Over a hundred students were assigned to live
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 4
in Munger. The article says, “Wellesley at present has set apart two of its dormitories,
Norumbega and Freeman halls, as co-operative houses for students who earn part of their
college fees by assisting in the lighter house work” (Boston Evening Transcript). By the time
Munger was built there were three existing cooperative houses. Jessie Munger class of 1886 gave
the dorm as a gift in honor of her mother Gertrude C. Munger. Munger had a floor dedicated to
maid work and a furnished kitchen. This student housing co-operative was not built on shared
values and beliefs, it was built due to overcrowding. It was considered a co-op because tasks and
responsibilities were shared amongst those living there.
In 1980 administrative assistant, Dorothy Duquet, wrote to all the departments at
Wellesley College that Wellesley’s first co-op has successfully opened in September.
Documentation from a lawyer to vice president of business affairs at Wellesley outlined multiple
reasons why a co-op should be formed (Duquer). The biggest reason was the overcrowding at
Wellesley. Another main reason was because the cost of education was rising. At the time there
were students attending Wellesley that had been out of college for a few years and returned, but
they would find a co-op house a more congenial environment. Following this proposal for a co-
op to be built there was a lot of backlash from Wellesley neighbors. The co-op would be placed
in the middle of a residential area. The college talked to the neighbors and listened to their
concerns. Residents were concerned about the downgrading of the neighborhood. Many
neighbors also felt as if the college was taking over the town. Some were concerned about the
noise. Lastly, some did not provide a reason to be opposed, but were opposed. Once the co-op
was established all members had to sign a room and board contract. This co-op was similar to co-
ops now because the room and board contract that specifies, “Co-op residents are required to
establish a work schedule by which all custodial functions will be performed on a regular
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 5
schedule basis. In return for those services a coop resident receives a $200 room fee reduction”
(Duquet). Although this cooperative housing was not founded for typical purposes, it is similar in
the way it is run. In order to live in Crawford students applied and were chosen from a lottery.
They also had a head of the house, Priscilla Cook who overseed the amount. She was the
coordinator of the house, kept financial records, and supervises choors and per semester. Now,
every single responsibility in co-ops at Wellesley are shared by the members.
The first student housing cooperative with shared interests was not established until the
late twentieth century and it was called Oakwoods. The other student housing cooperatives were
for reasons like overcrowding, but this one was the feminist co-op. Oakwoods was created
because it allows more students the experience of living in a setting of mutual interdependence
and individual responsibility.
Instead Feminist Cooperative
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 6
Instead & its Origins
The first feminist student cooperative at Wellesley began in 1982, as the Oakwoods
Feminist Coop. Oakwoods was a house in Wellesley originally built for the College President
Caroline Hazard in 1901 and subsequently used as the residence for the Dean of Students
beginning in 1926. In 1982, after Dean of Students Florence Ladd vacated Oakwoods to move
back to her house in Cambridge, the residence was to, “provide a small number of students on
campus with the opportunity to live cooperatively,” according to a letter sent from Director of
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 7
the Women’s Studies Program, Frances Gouda, to the Trustee Committee on Student Life.
Furthermore, it was noted in the letter that “the unifying characteristic of the students who will
occupy Oakwoods, next year, is their long-standing concern with and commitment to women’s
issues” and “many of us are therefore extremely pleased with the decision to transform
Oakwoods into a cooperative space…” According to a memo addressed to the campus
community, members of the Oakwoods Feminist Coop were “hoping to work with the entire
College community in planning interesting and relevant feminist programs” and established that
they would “subscribe to journals that the Margaret Clapp Library is not receiving, as well as
purchase pamphlets and less well-known resource materials.”
In 1985, the cooperative rebranded as the Instead Feminist Cooperative and moved to
another house on the far east side of campus, opposite the Wellesley College Club. The
cooperative also houses the Women’s Resource Library, which contains books about feminism,
women and gender studies, queer theory, and critical theory. The house has space for six
occupants and has a kitchen and a communal closet. When Instead first started in 1985, it was
mandated in the Constitution that the cooperative would be “financed primarily through each
resident $500 per semester payment” and would use member consensus to determine how SOFC
grant money would be allocated for the house. At present, members do not need to pay anything
on top of Wellesley tuition to live in the house.
Instead & its Vision
According to Instead’s Facebook page, the members of the cooperative are “advocates of
feminism and communal living.” Even enshrined in the 1985 - 1986 Constitution, it is stated that
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 8
the purpose of Instead is “to provide a cooperative living situation incorporating feminist
philosophies and fostering the growth and maintenance of feminist cooperation throughout the
Wellesley College Community.” In addition, Instead also hosts parties, lectures, and more
intimate discussion nights. It is also stated on their Facebook page that they welcome other
campus organizations, particularly those with a cultural or social justice focus, to use the space
for their needs. While Instead is documented to have had a correspondence with Wellesley
administration, including former College President Nannerl O. Keohane, and the Women’s
Studies Program in its early years, there is presently no indication of the cooperative on
Wellesley’s official website. Instead’s lack of presence on Wellesley’s official materials
regarding student activities indicates that Instead’s values are those that might come into conflict
with those of the College. Some Instead members implied that the cooperative wanted to keep
the College out because “[the institution] does not match up with our ideals”; members went on
to further suggest that Wellesley and much of its student body are emblematic of white
feminism, which Instead has sought to distance itself away from.
Instead & Interviews
In interviewing current members of the Instead cooperative, it became apparent that
Instead’s appeal was far broader than feminist communal living. All members interviewed had
the common experiences of feeling isolated and missing a sense of community in Wellesley’s
traditional dorms. Moreover, all members wanted a community that was cultivated on an
intentional basis with set values. According to one Instead member, “I knew I would be much
happier if I lived in a different space with a more intentional community.” Another Instead
member added, “I was excited about sharing a space with other feminists so we could learn from
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 9
each other.” The third Instead member I interviewed moved to the cooperative for the additional
reason of having her own “static” space. She explained to me that it could be exhausting to
constantly uproot to a different living space with different people every year, and Instead
provided her with a “set place I can call my own.”
One of the central values that Instead strives to promote is feminism, specifically
intersectional feminism. As explained by one Instead member, “While feminism has many
different meanings, our community has put a great effort into embodying the following definition
of feminism - feminism as a radical act of empathy. We believe embodying feminism means
making the effort to radically understand and care for one another, especially in the face of how
different we all are as individuals.” Other Instead members echoed the cooperative’s goal of
promoting radical empathy, noting, “Feminism for many of us currently means taking care of
ourselves and being radically empathetic towards others. We invited people in the communities
we're involved in to use the space as a cozy place for fun things like bonding events.”
Furthermore, all the members concluded their answers to this question with other values that
they would “like to see in the world” and are against all forms of oppression.
As there are only six members in the house, the division of labor is fluid and there is a
group chat in place for members to voice concerns. All members I interviewed did not see the
division of labor in the house being a pressing concern and felt comfortable talking to other
members of the cooperative if issues arose. In addition, one member stated that she always saw
“accountability moving forward” when problems with living cooperatively came up. When asked
about the history of the house, members only knew of facts passed down through word of mouth
or through the inherited items they found in the house. However, they noted that when the
cooperative was first founded, it was centered around white feminism; the feminism that Instead
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 10
has come to value has become more intersectional and a majority of residents have been people
of color for the past two years.
Instead & the Processes
Questioning and Envisioning Process
Members questioned their experiences in traditional Wellesley dorms and envisioned an
intentional community for their time at Instead. According to one Instead member, “We come
from different backgrounds and heritages, and in every semester that I have lived there...we have
all tried our level best to change our culture, or put another way, created a new culture (from that
of Wellesley or the initial years of the cooperative), that accommodates the needs and wants of
our members.” They continue to do this by being radically empathetic towards one another,
through learning from their mistakes, and continuing to grow. Furthermore, they continue to
question the status quo and institutionalization of some inequalities by Wellesley College.
Equal Rights and Opportunity Process
Through defining Instead’s central value as feminism, which is defined as advocating for
the equality of all genders through the viewpoint that women and other people who embody
feminine characteristics have been disadvantaged throughout history, the cooperative advocates
for the equal rights and opportunity process. In addition to advocating for feminism, the
members are against all forms of oppression, including, “racism, homophobia, transphobia,
ableism, class based oppression and more.” In addition, members do not have to pay an extra fee
anymore to live in the house, as the cooperative is committed to reducing class inequalities
within their own members.
Combining Process & Discernment Process
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 11
The combining process is extremely important to the present-day functioning of Instead.
All Instead members I talked to stressed the importance of intersectional feminism in light of the
white feminist history of the cooperative in its early years. One member highlighted an incident
in particular, where “about a year ago, a student, not an Instead resident, found a yearbook
picture from over two decades ago that showed a white student in blackface at a Halloween party
in Instead.” All the current Instead members I interviewed, who were all of color themselves,
stated that the feminist values they now try to cultivate at the cooperative are more inclusive of
other race and class inequalities. Some members felt that their view of feminism went beyond
Wellesley’s message of feminism, which they still find to be white and elitist; this sometimes
puts the cooperative at odds with the College.
Glocalizing Process
Cooperatives and groups centered around feminism can be found in other parts of the
country and the world. Instead is part of the global movements of feminism and student
cooperative housing. However, while Instead brings these movements to Wellesley and
contributes to global solidarity of values, the cooperative is also local and self-sustaining.
Therefore, Instead, like other student cooperative housing groups, exemplifies the “glocalizing”
solidarity process.
SCoop & Its Origins
This analysis will now move on to discuss SCoop, also known as the Sustainability Co-
op. This section on SCoop will first look at SCoop’s history, then it will describe and analyze
interviews of SCoop members carried out by Dominique Copeland, then it will discuss the
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 12
inequality and solidarity processes associated with the interviewees’ answers, and finally it will
discuss possible shortcomings of Co-ops as a part of the shift toward a solidarity paradigm.
SCoop was founded in 2008. The Wellesley College website defines SCoop’s residents,
or SCoopies, as individuals who focus on ways to reduce their environmental footprint in
effective and practical ways. They cook their own meals from sustainably grown food and they
strive to reduce energy and water usage. They also plan outreach programs to cultivate a culture
of environmentalism on Wellesley’s campus, and serve as a community space for programs with
stellar focus. SCoop’s mission states that they live in a conscientiously sustainable and
thoughtful manner, working to reduce their impact on Earth and its resources. Their goals are to
provide, grow, and cook food for themselves in a sustainable conscious manner; to educate the
Wellesley Community on issues of the environment and sustainability; to give back to their
community through both a strengthening of their own and broader community; and to commit in
their daily lives to taking measures to conserve all of their resources including water and
electricity. Their pledge as a committed group of young activists, farmers, advocates, educators,
leaders, and students is to take their passion of sustainability out and beyond SCoop in ways that
promote a sustainable justice. Their plan of action includes buying food locally from stores and
nearby farms, hosting dinners open to the greater Wellesley College community, and providing
community service to local farms and environmental organizations.
In order to gain a better understanding of SCoop this paper will discuss a blog that they
used within their first two years of being founded. The first post to discuss is titled “Are You
Sustainable Enough For SCoop?”. This blog post was made when they were going through the
application process for the 2010-2011 school year. The author, Leslye a member of SCoop
during the 2009-2010 academic year, tries to explain that everyone can be sustainable and that
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 13
there’s no such thing as being “not sustainable enough” that can be given as a reason to not apply
to SCoop. I liked this post because she outlines what “sustainable” means to people within
SCoop. She offers three definitions of sustainability. The first one is from the United Nations,
they define sustainability as forms of progress that meet present needs without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their needs. The second definition is from Wikipedia, they
describe sustainability as the potential for long-term maintenance of wellbeing, which in turn
depends on the wellbeing of the natural world and the responsible use of natural resources. The
third definition is from the World Wildlife Fund, they describe sustainability as improving the
quality of human life while living within the carrying capacity of supporting ecosystems.
Based on these definitions, Leslye explains that sustainability should be thought of in a
very broad sense centering on the long term existence of humans, resources, and the world. She
offers an example of how to think sustainably by looking at “whole generations, whole foods,
whole earths” (Are You Sustainable Enough For SCoop?). She uses a meat example where she
states, “instead of thinking of meat in terms of price and nutrition, I think of it in terms of local
vs. non-local, organic vs. non-organic, grass-fed or corn-fed—all of which, by the way, influence
the price, nutrition, deliciousness, and impact of the total life cycle of that meat” (Are You
Sustainable Enough For SCoop?). In the closing of the blog post, she ties up loose ends of why
everyone can apply to be in SCoop by emphasizing that there is not only one way to be
sustainable. She says that, “There is no standard for what it means to ‘Be Sustainable’ in SCoop.
We are all committed to the idea in different ways. Some of us can whip up tofu and vegetables
into something delicious. Some of us are activists and volunteers. Some of us have bikes instead
of cars. One among us would rather bike 20 feet than walk (ahem). We don’t expect that you
embody the perfect environmentalist when you apply to SCoop: we only expect that you have
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 14
begun to think critically about your life’s whole impact, and that you’re willing to try putting
those thoughts into action” (Are You Sustainable Enough For SCoop?). The other two blog
posts that are relevant to this topic are “Thoughts On The Internal Battle With Eating Local” and
“Sustainability Versus Environmental Health”. The first one just discusses how local items are
not readily available and the second one discussed how sustainability and environmental health
go hand in hand and that one accompanies the other.
SCoop & Its Interviews
With regards to the interviewing process, three interviewees delineated interviewee one,
interviewee two, and interviewee three, were each asked four questions. The first question was
“Why did you decide to join this co-op on campus, instead of continuing to live in the dorms?”.
Interviewee one stated “I wanted an intentional community to live with on a day-to-day basis
that I could share and create a home with because regular dorms are too impersonal and
isolating. I wasn’t getting anything out of living in dorm-style housing”. Interviewee two stated,
“I joined SCoop on a whim. I knew I was interested in something other than dorm life because I
wanted to feel like I had a home and a family to come back to every day. Living in dorms made
me feel so alone and detached from the things I loved. The structure of Residential life was too
connected to the administration for me. I wanted more agency in the decisions made that affected
my living space including RA events, throwing social get-togethers in my room, keeping police
out of my space, etc. Finally, I really (REALLY) believe in communal living and plan to do it for
my whole life. It makes a lot of sense in terms of sustainability, given that things are shared and
collective so they are accessible to more people”. Interviewee three stated, “I joined SCoop first
semester sophomore year after living in McAfee. I loved dorm life and actually was going to be
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 15
an RA, but I had some friends who lived in SCoop and I loved the community and the idea of
having a home to come back to after a day of classes”.
The second question was “What values do you try to cultivate in the co-op?”. Interviewee
one answered, “SCoop is a co-op committed to economic, cultural, and environmental
sustainability. We work toward those aims every day in various ways. We hold communal
dinners five days a week where we cook food that reminds us of our homes. This helps us share
our different cultures with the rest of the house. We also have shared chores to keep our house in
tip-top shape. Finally, we have our flexible payment plans where we pay what we can toward
groceries, and so on!”. Interviewee two stated, “SCoop is all about learning how to cultivate a
sustainable community. The kinds of sustainability we practice are: cultural for example
upholding culinary traditions outside the milieu of Wellesley, where whiteness is the norm;
emotional for example taking breaks and reaching out if we need help to take care of ourselves;
and financial for example maintaining a communal bank account and funds that we use to make
group decisions. This allows us to operate in a capitalist framework while simultaneously having
food to sustain ourselves. It is important to keep in mind that contributions are flexible and we
contribute to the house in more ways than monetarily. We contribute environmentally by
composting; and socially by building a community and friendships that are healthy and last a
long time!”. Interviewee three stated, “We try to practice sustainability in all aspects, with a
focus on cultural sustainability”.
The third question was “How is the division of labor within the co-op? Have you
encountered problems with it?”. Interviewee one stated “It’s pretty equal, albeit it depends on
people’s schedules. We have occasionally had trouble getting people to sign up for cleaning or
cooking shifts during particularly busy weeks, but we have worked on being more upfront and
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 16
accountable with one another to prevent that from happening! We all sign up for a different
chore each week i.e. dishes, vacuuming, etc. Chores include taking out the compost when it’s
full, keeping the living room tidy if we see that it’s messy, etc.”. Interviewee two stated, “We
don’t have a general manager, but we do have two financial managers who maintain the
anonymity of the amount of money each person contributes, calculate our expenses, and run the
bank account. Every night, two people cook dinner and two people clean. These are shifts that
you have to sign up for. Each person has to have 3 shifts within each two week period. We also
have weekly chores that we rotate. These chores include keeping an eye on the dishwasher,
vacuuming, cleaning out the fridges, being SCoop’s ‘RA’ etc.”. Interviewee three stated, “We
have semester and weekly jobs. Sometimes we do run into small problems with people not
completing their tasks, especially since we are all busy Wellesley students”.
Question four was “Do you know anything about the history of the co-op?”. Both
interviewee one and interviewee three had no knowledge of SCoop’s history; however,
interviewee two did. She stated, “I know that two years before I joined SCoop, so about four
years ago, SCoop had a radical transformation. The house was veering in a very ‘white
environmentalism’ direction. This included things like not buying meat for people’s culturally
significant dishes, enforcing veganism and vegetarianism, facilitating and limiting people’s
showers, etc. It wasn’t good and I think more than half the house left. So there was this massive
restructuring and now it is so different”.
Overall, there were overlapping answers amongst the three interviews. The first
question’s answers were intentional community, sense of sharing, regular dorms being
interpersonal and isolating, feelings of wanting to have a home/family to return to each day,
decreasing connection to administration, and increasing sense of agency over one’s personal
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 17
space e.g. less campus police presence and easier ability to host small gatherings. The second
question’s answers were communal dinners five days a week, shared chores, and flexible
payment plans. The third question’s answers were problems with accountability, timeliness, and
cultural sensitivity.
SCoop & Its Processes
The inequality processes SCoop encounters are domination & subordination and
essentialism. The solidarity processes SCoop uses to counteract these inequalities are valuing the
devalued and combining. Domination and subordination presents itself amongst SCoop members
and between SCoop and the greater Wellesley community. Looking within SCoop first, it is
possible that some individuals within the co-op in the past felt as if they could rule other
members because they led more sustainable lives than those they made their subordinates. SCoop
counteracted this by devaluing the valued. In a sense, they dismantled the notion that there is
only one way to be sustainable and increased their diversity in perspectives while moving
towards “cultural sustainability”. Looking between SCoop and the greater Wellesley
Community, some of the interviewees express that the administration and security structures put
in place dominated the public space they felt they were entitled to as students. This breach of
personal space made them choose to live in a co-op instead of dorms. In a sense, this is also
devaluing the valued. They are affirming that surveillance and policing is not as important as
creating a sense of community where personal space is fluid and agency within reason is
unlimited.
An example of essentialism is once again the idea that all sustainable people are one in
the same with little differentiation. This is counteracted through the solidarity process of
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 18
combining. As stated throughout the interviews, SCoop is moving towards or has moved towards
sustainability that acknowledges cultural differences and intersectionality between race and class
and the bearings that has on the possible inaccessibility to various resources needed to adhere to
a specific type of sustainability.
SCoop & Future Inquiries
Due to possible shortcomings of the interviews and limited historical context on SCoop,
there are some questions that remain unanswered. There has been no research conducted on the
application process, so the fairness aspect of the acceptance and rejection process for SCoop is
still looming.
Conclusion
Student cooperatives have had a rich history around the world but especially at
Wellesley. Furthermore, student cooperatives attempt to break free from the inequality processes
and promote the solidarity processes in cultivating intentional communities based on shared
values that aim to promote awareness for a particular topic. On Wellesley’s campus, we are
fortunate to have SCoop and Instead - two cooperatives that strive to provide a space for students
of all different backgrounds with shared interests to live together. We identified the inequality
processes that SCoop and Instead combat and the solidarity processes that they aim to promote.
We hope that our information on student cooperative housing motivates other students to
seriously consider them as positive alternatives to regular campus housing, possibly find the
funds (and lobby the administration) to start their own cooperatives on campus, or join student
cooperative housing in the future.
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 19
Works Cited
Altus, Deborah. “A Look at Student Housing Cooperatives.” Foundation for Intentional
Community, 2018, www.ic.org/wiki/look-student-housing-cooperatives/.
Duquet, Dorothy. “Crawford House.” Received by All Departments, 29 Sept. 1980, Wellesley,
Massachusetts.
“Munger Hall: Wellesley's New Co-Operative Dorm.” Boston Evening Transcript, 4 June 1932.
NASCO. “About Us.” NASCO, www.nasco.coop/.
NRECA. “Understanding the Seven Cooperative Principles.” America's Electric Cooperatives, 1
Dec. 2016, www.electric.coop/seven-cooperative-principles%E2%80%8B/.
Siegler, R. and H.J. Levy, “Brief History of Cooperative Housing,” Cooperative Housing Journal
(1986), 12-19
“United States of America Archives - Co-Operative Housing.” Co,
www.housinginternational.coop/co-ops/united-states-of-america/.
“What Is Cooperative Housing? | LendingTree Glossary.” LendingTree, 2016,
www.lendingtree.com/glossary/cooperative-housing/.
https://www.facebook.com/InsteadFemCoop/
Wellesley Archives
SCoop, and Leslye. “Are You Sustainable Enough For SCoop?” WordPress, 17 Feb. 2010,
wellesleyscoop.wordpress.com/.
SCoop, and Jennie. “Thoughts On The Internal Battle With Eating Local.” WordPress, 11 Mar.
2010, wellesleyscoop.wordpress.com/.
SCoop, and Emily. “Sustainability Vs. Environmental Health.” WordPress, 13 Apr. 2010,
wellesleyscoop.wordpress.com/.
Copeland, Gupta & Unubun 20
Matthews, Genae. “Wellesley Cooperatives Promote Community.” The Wellesley News -, 5 May
2016, thewellesleynews.com/2016/05/05/wellesleys-cooperatives-promote-community/.
https://www.facebook.com/wcscoop/