Perpetuating polarized neighbourhoods? Analysing rehousing outcomes in the English housing association sector

Abstract

Social housing allocation systems have often been identified as contributing to the socio-economic polarization of neighbourhoods. Part of this argument has rested on a contention that - notwithstanding the impartial operation of 'needs-based' approaches - there is an inevitable tendency for the most disadvantaged households to be filtered into the least desirable housing. However, the empirical basis for this belief rests largely on a body of research dating from the mid-1980s and few studies have revisited the issue over the past decade. Drawing on a recently completed review of housing associations' allocation policies and practices, this paper presents important new evidence on that vital social policy question - who gets what? Broadly speaking, the analysis finds no evidence of any systematic tendency for potentially disadvantaged groups - e.g. single parents, black and minority ethnic households, low-income households, statutory homeless - to be rehoused in less desirable housing. Indeed, at the national scale some of these groups are somewhat more likely than other households to be rehoused in the best housing. However, because some of the likely explanations for these findings are specific to the housing association sector, it cannot be assumed that the conclusions can be read across to council housing. Further research would be required to explore this question.Social housing, housing allocations, discrimination,

Conceptualising Social Housing within the Wider Housing Market: A Vacancy Chain Model

“…Whether from the sociological perspectives afforded by the 'housing pathways' thesis of Clapham (2005), social policy concerns about spatial and social divisions (e.g. Forrest, 1987;Pawson, 2004), or economic modelling that treats more and more aspects of urban systems endogenously, the goal has increasingly been to integrate knowledge of different housing sectors rather than treat those sectors on their own terms.…”

Pervasive interactions: a purposive best evidence review with methodological observations on the impact of housing circumstances and housing interventions on adult mental health and well‐being

“…There is also a marked clustering of social housing stock (Wilmott and Murie, 1988;Ravetz, 2001;Pawson 2003) into neighbourhoods of greater deprivation. This phenomenon, one aspect of what is known as ''residential sorting'', is longstanding and international, but was significantly sharpened in the UK by the ''Right to Buy'' and other choice-based policies which have incentivised mobility in the housing market (Wilmott and Murie, 1988;Croft, 2004).…”