"In the paper three Swedish collective housing models and the experience of eco-village development, are analysed first in relation to globalisation, defined as movement of capital, migration of people, transfer of advanced technologies, and changing values, and then in relation to their potential to promote sustainable development, especially behavioural change. The paper is a pre-study, based mainly on existing literature, meant to form a basis for further research. The three collective housing models are: a) the service unit based on employed staff, b) the self-work model based on the residents’ own work, and c) the small commune, where a group of 5 to 10 people share facilities in a housing unit without a division into individual apartments (Vestbro 2000). Based on an analysis of existing literature a conceptual framework is presented. It is argued that the type neo-modernism in architecture, gaining momentum today, complies well with globalisation resulting in deregulation, privatisation, individualism, and consumerism. It is furthermore argued that although consumerism was an integral part of classical modernism, Scandinavian “functionalism” in architecture and town planning contains strong elements of efficient use of resources, which makes it more compatible with the paradigm of sustainability than with neo-modernism (Vestbro 2002; Nawangwe & Vestbro 2003).The classical collective housing unit (the service model) can be seen as a product of modernism. This type was developed during a time when environmental concerns were not on the agenda. Nevertheless some examples exist where private apartments have been reduced in order to get more communal space. This is even more the case in the self-work model. Reduction of space per person has gone furthest in the youth communes, where the residents may share a TV set, a video, a car, electric tools, newspaper subscriptions etc (Vestbro 2000).Some research point to the fact that the self-work model of collective housing and the small communes, as well as eco-villages, are inhabited by so called post-materialists, i.e. people who reject consumer society (Woodward 1989; Meltzer 2000; Vestbro 2000; Palm Lindén 1999). In the paper it is argued that collective housing is likely to facilitate the organisation of composting, waste separation, ways to save energy at home, and other aspects of sustainable lifestyles. Such assumptions are supported by the author’s own experience from living in collective housing (the self-work model). An important question is whether the post-materialist tendency is strengthened or weakened in the rich part of the world, and whether collective housing and eco-village living can maintain its resistance to consumerist lifestyles. Such lifestyles seem to be challenged by tendencies towards individualism, hedonism and consumerism, being part of the neo-liberal ideology. Another challenge is coming from innovations made in the field of eco-technology. These innovations make politicians and citizens tend to lean back, waiting for the factor 4 or factor 10 society to emerge. There are strong indications that the global growth race continues unabated and that real changes seem to take place only at the "edge of chaos" (Samuels 1997). Samuels maintains that changes in lifestyles are more important for sustainable development than ecological constructions and that some kind of self-organisation is required in order to achieve necessary changes in lifestyles. Such self-organisation exists in collective housing as well as in eco-villages."