Race, Class and the Allocation of Public Housing in Britain

Henderson, Jeff; Karn, Valerie

doi:10.1080/00420988420080281

Cited by 61 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although it was a working class population, it was prevented until the late 1960s from entering working class social housing, which constituted at that time about a fifth of the London housing stock (Burney 1967;Flett 1977Flett , 1979Henderson & Karn 1984, 1987Parker & Dugmore 1977/8;Sarre et al 1989). The Caribbean population was forced into privately rented, shared, overcrowded multi-occupied central London housing (see table 3).…”

Section: Settlement Patternmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pluralist and Assimilationist Models of Ethnic Settlement in London 1991

Peach

1997

Tijd voor Econ & Soc Geog

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

London 1991 census data are used to examine two theories of ethnic minority adjustment to dominant societies and their accompanying spatial patterns. The assimilationist model suggests a complete diffusion of residence over time and high rates of intermarriage or cohabitation; the pluralist model suggests continuing, moderately high levels of segregation and high degrees of social closure. The article argues that in London, the Caribbean population is following the melting pot route both in spatial and marital terms, while the Bangladeshi population is following the pluralist route. Indian patterns contain elements of each, but the high levels of concentration in the core settlements and high rates of homogamy, suggests more pluralist than melting pot trajectory.

show abstract

Section: Settlement Patternmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pluralist and Assimilationist Models of Ethnic Settlement in London 1991

Peach

1997

Tijd voor Econ & Soc Geog

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Commission for Racial Equality 1984; Henderson andKarn 1985, 1987;Clapham and Kintrea 1986;Phillips 1986) illustrated the tendency of council housing allocations systems operated at that time to generate outcomes seen as inequitable. Economically disadvantaged and/or socially vulnerable households were more likely to be rehoused in less desirable housing.…”

Section: A Existing Research Evidencementioning

confidence: 96%

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

Pawson¹

2004

European Journal of Housing Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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,

show abstract

“…In Scotland, social renters before the early 1990s were largely randomly allocated a dwelling by a housing officer, without the option to express any choice with regard to dwelling or neighbourhood. We do acknowledge however that allocation was not completely random as ethnicity, household size, and household structure all played a role in the allocation process (Duke, 1970;Simpson, 1981;Henderson & Karn, 1984;Clapham & Kintrea, 1984;Malpass & Murie, 1994;Peach, 1996;Somerville, 2001;Sarre et al, 1989). As a result of the allocation process in social housing, it is reasonable to argue that selection bias is less likely to influence model outcomes for social renters than for owner occupiers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neighbourhood Effects, Housing Tenure and Individual Employment Outcomes

Manley

Ham

2011

Neighbourhood Effects Research: New Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. www.econstor.eu This paper investigates whether individuals living in neighbourhoods with high concentrations of unemployment are less likely to enter work if they are unemployed and more likely to lose their job if they are employed. The main challenge in the neighbourhood effects literature is the identification of causal neighbourhood effects. A particular problem is that individuals do not randomly select neighbourhoods to live in: the selection process is often linked to the labour market situation and potential of individuals. To get more insight in neighbourhood effects we run separate models for social renters and owner occupiers. This study uses anonymised individual level longitudinal data from the Scottish Longitudinal Study for 1991 and 2001 with multiple neighbourhood scales operationalised. Based on the results we argue that any apparent neighbourhoods effects that were present in models of the full population are at least partly an artefact of different neighbourhood selection mechanisms. The conclusions of the paper call for a more nuanced treatment of neighbourhood effects and the development of models that seek to include neighbourhood selection from the outset. Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E SJEL Classification: I30, J60, R23

show abstract

Race, Class and the Allocation of Public Housing in Britain

Cited by 61 publications

References 8 publications

Pluralist and Assimilationist Models of Ethnic Settlement in London 1991

Pluralist and Assimilationist Models of Ethnic Settlement in London 1991

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

Neighbourhood Effects, Housing Tenure and Individual Employment Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About