Recent housing policy debates in the UK have shifted away from discussion of housing need to more market-oriented analyses of affordability . This article discusses the principles that lie behind the concepts of need and affordability and the ways in which they have been defined. It then traces the development of policy and debate in the UK with respect to both need and affordability . In particular it discusses the different ways in which policy is specified in different tenures and the extent to which implementation depends upon administrative allocation mechanisms . It concludes that up to the present time the shift in emphasis is more one of rhetoric than of reality and, more fundamentally, that the forms in which current policies are implemented bear very little relationship to those suggested by analysis of basic principles .

Swedish housing policy was dramatically changed during the 1990s. A traditional formally tenure-neutral and generous subsidy system has been replaced by much lower levels of assistance, more directed at lower-income households and depressed areas. This paper sets the Swedish policy in an international context as part of a much more general pattern of reduced and rebalanced expenditures associated with liberalisation and the transfer of risk. The paper then addresses the direct and indirect impacts of the Swedish 'grand restructuring', concentrating on the extent of the cutbacks; rents and prices; levels of output; and the potential for increased segregation. The evidence suggests that the policy changes, together with their effect on expectations, significantly modified the housing system. They reduced demand for new building, particularly in less-pressured areas; increased vacancies, especially in the social sector; transferred risk to both the social and private sectors; and increased outcome differentials between the well-off and those with fewer resources—both in terms of individuals and areas. The analysis presented here provides evidence against which the Swedish policy can begin to be evaluated. It also suggests lessons for other industrialised economies that are addressing similar issues.

No abstract

In seeking to understand the relationship between housing and health, research attention is often focussed on separate components of people’s whole housing ‘bundles’. We propose in this paper that such conceptual and methodological abstraction of elements of the housing and health relationship limits our ability to understand the scale of the accumulated effect of housing on health and thereby contributes to the under-recognition of adequate housing as a social policy tool and powerful health intervention. In this paper, we propose and describe an index to capture the means by which housing bundles influence health. We conceptualise the index as reflecting accumulated housing “insults to health”—an Index of Housing Insults (IHI). We apply the index to a sample of 1000 low-income households in Australia. The analysis shows a graded association between housing insults and health on all outcome measures. Further, after controlling for possible confounders, the IHI is shown to provide additional predictive power to the explanation of levels of mental health, general health and clinical depression beyond more traditional proxy measures. Overall, this paper reinforces the need to look not just at separate housing components but to embrace a broader understanding of the relationship between housing and health.