IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v40y2003i4p767-789.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Limits of Housing Reform: British Social Rented Housing in a European Context

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Stephens

    (Department of Urban Studies, University of Glasgow, 25 Bute Gardens, Glasgow, G12 9RS, UK, M.Stephens@socsci.gla.ac.uk)

  • Nicola Burns

    (Department of Geography and Topographic Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK, nburns@geog.gla.ac.uk)

  • Lisa MacKay

    (Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Glasgow, Lilybank House, Bute Gardens, Glasgow, G12 8RT, UK,)

Abstract

The British social rented sector has been characterised as operating like a socialist `command' system. It places a much greater emphasis on housing very poor households than its counterparts in other European countries, most of it is still owned and managed by the (local) state and pricing policies are not sensitive to demand. Consequently, allocation decisions rely on bureaucratic processes. Some other European countries have more socially diverse social rented sectors and make much greater use of price signals. These systems have been characterised as 'social markets'. It has been suggested that Britain could adopt some of the organisational structures and practices used elsewhere and move away from the present `command' system towards a 'social market'. Comparative evidence confirms that the British social rented sector does contain much greater concentrations of poor households and that this does not simply arise from the types of household housed in the sector. But further analysis of the distribution of income and work suggests that the divisions in the housing sector may primarily reflect these broader contextual divisions. Greater poverty and inequality imply a greater need for the housing system to provide a safety-net and make the introduction of market and quasi-market mechanisms problematic. This is illustrated with reference to allocations and pricing reforms currently under consideration. It is concluded that, given the socioeconomic context in which housing policy is formulated, it might be best to concentrate on providing an effective and high-quality safety-net.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Stephens & Nicola Burns & Lisa MacKay, 2003. "The Limits of Housing Reform: British Social Rented Housing in a European Context," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(4), pages 767-789, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:40:y:2003:i:4:p:767-789
    DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000065290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/0042098032000065290
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0042098032000065290?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Gregg, 1996. "It Takes Two: Employment Polarisation in the OECD," CEP Discussion Papers dp0304, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. Tom Clark & Andrew Dilnot & Alissa Goodman & Michal Myck, 2002. "Taxes and Transfers 1997--2001," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(2), pages 187-201, June.
    3. Peter A. Kemp, 2000. "The Role and Design of Income‐Related Housing Allowances," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 43-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Morelli, Carlo & Seaman, Paul, 2009. "Devolution & Entrenched Household Poverty: Is Scotland less mobile?," SIRE Discussion Papers 2009-06, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    2. Paul Gregg & Rosanna Scutella & Jonathan Wadsworth, 2010. "Reconciling workless measures at the individual and household level. Theory and evidence from the United States, Britain, Germany, Spain and Australia," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 23(1), pages 139-167, January.
    3. Colin C. Williams & Jan Windebank, 2000. "Self-help and Mutual Aid in Deprived Urban Neighbourhoods: Some Lessons from Southampton," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(1), pages 127-147, January.
    4. Aedin Doris;, 1999. "The Means Testing Of Benefits And The Labour Supply Of The Wives Of Unemployed Men: Results From A Mover-Stayer Model," Economics Department Working Paper Series n940999, Department of Economics, National University of Ireland - Maynooth.
    5. Marcelo Arbex & Dennis O'Dea, 2011. "Informal work networks," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 247-272, February.
    6. Francis Green, 1999. "It's been a hard day's night: The concentration and intensification of work in late 20th century Britain," Studies in Economics 9913, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    7. Marloes Graaf-zijl & Brian Nolan, 2011. "GINI DP 5: Household Joblessness and its Impacts on Poverty and Deprivation in Europe," GINI Discussion Papers 5, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    8. Stephan Klasen & Ingrid Woolard, 2009. "Surviving Unemployment Without State Support: Unemployment and Household Formation in South Africa," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 18(1), pages 1-51, January.
    9. Peter Dawkins & Paul Gregg & Rosanna Scutella, 2002. "The Growth of Jobless Households in Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 35(2), pages 133-154, June.
    10. Peter Dawkins & Paul Gregg & Rosanna Scutella, 2005. "Employment Polarisation in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 336-350, December.
    11. Guillaume Allegre, 2012. "Work, Family or State? From wage inequalities to standard of living inequalities and inwork poverty in a European cross-country perspective," Working Papers hal-01070340, HAL.
    12. Aedin Doris, 1999. "The Means Testing of Benefits and the Labour Supply of the wives of Unemployed Men: Results from a Fixed Effects Model," Economics Department Working Paper Series n930999, Department of Economics, National University of Ireland - Maynooth.
    13. Bargain, Olivier & Morawski, Leszek & Myck, Michal & Socha, Mieczyslaw, 2007. "As SIMPL As That: Introducing a Tax-Benefit Microsimulation Model for Poland," IZA Discussion Papers 2988, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Francis Green, 2000. "Why has Work Effort become more intense? Conjectures and Evidence about Effort-Biased Technical Change and other stories," Studies in Economics 0003, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    15. Véronique Delarue, 2000. "Le Working Families Tax Credit, un nouveau crédit d'impôt pour les familles de travailleurs à bas revenus au Royaume-Uni," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 335(1), pages 47-61.
    16. Deborah Cobb‐Clark & Chris Ryan & Robert Breunig, 2006. "A Couples‐Based Approach to the Problem of Workless Families," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 82(259), pages 428-444, December.
    17. Sten Dieden, 2003. "Integration into the South African Core Economy: Household Level Covariates," SALDRU/CSSR Working Papers 054, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    18. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/c6t1fl36hv9s7q89j8m8gcgk9 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Paul Gregg and Jonathan Wadsworth, 2004. "Two Sides to Every Story : Measuring the Polarisation of Work," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 04/03, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Apr 2004.
    20. Paul Gregg, 2008. "UK Welfare Reform 1996 to 2008 and beyond: A personalised and responsive welfare system?," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 08/196, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    21. Francis Green, 2002. "Why Has Work Effort Become More Intense?," Studies in Economics 0207, School of Economics, University of Kent.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:40:y:2003:i:4:p:767-789. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.