Search results

English social housing providers are increasingly turning to social impact measurement to assess their social value. This paper aims to understand the contextual factors causing this rise in the practice, specifically within this sector; the mechanisms that enable it to be effectively implemented within an individual organisation and the outcomes of successful implementation for individual organisations and more widely across the sector and beyond.

A realist theory-based approach is applied to the study of a small number of social housing organisations and leaders within the sector to explore the use of social impact measurement. The paper addresses three questions: Why is social impact measurement being adopted in this sector? How is it successfully implemented? And what happens (outcomes) when it is successfully implemented? Addressing these questions necessitates deeper insight into the contextual pressures that have brought to the fore social impact measurement within the sector and the beneficial outcomes the practice provides (or is anticipated to provide) to social housing providers. The methodological approach of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, 2004) is used to structure and analyse the empirical data and findings into a programme theory for social impact measurement. Realist Evaluation provides a programme theory perspective, seeking to answer the question “what works, for whom and in what circumstances?”. In this research, the “whom” refers to English social housing providers and the circumstances are the contextual conditions experienced by the sector over the past decade. The programme theory aims to set out the links between the contextual drivers for social impact measurement, the mechanisms that bring about its implementation and the outcomes that occur as a result. Within this, greater detail on the implementation perspective is provided by developing an implementation theory using a Theory of Change approach (Connell et al., 1995; Fulbright-Anderson et al., 1998). The implementation theory is then embedded within the wider programme theory so as to bring the two elements together, thereby creating a refinement of the overall theory for social impact measurement. In turn, this paper demonstrates its importance (the outcomes that it can achieve for organisations and the sector) and how it can effectively be implemented to bring about those outcomes.

Social housing providers use social impact measurement both internally, to determine their organisational priorities and externally, to demonstrate their value to local and national governments and cross-sector partners then to shape and influence resource allocation. The practice itself is shown to be an open and active programme, rather than a fixed calculative practice.

The intensive nature of the research means that only a limited number of cases were explored. Further research could test theories developed here against evidence collected from a wider range of cases, e.g. other types of providers or non-adopters.

The research makes a strong contribution to practice in the form of a re-conceptualisation of how social impact measurement can be shown to be effective, based on a deeper understanding of causal mechanisms, how they interact and the outcomes that result. This is of value to the sector as such information could help other organisations both to understand the value of social impact measurement and to provide practical guidance on how to implement it effectively.

As the practice of impact measurement continues to develop, practitioners will need to be aware of any changes to these contextual factors and consider questions such as: is the context still supportive of impact measurement? Does the practice need to be adjusted to meet the needs of the current context? For instance, the recent tragedy at Grenfell Tower has led to a reconsideration of the role of social housing; a new Green Paper is currently being drafted (Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2018). This may have a number of implications for social impact measurement, such as a rebalancing of emphasis on outcomes relating to environmental improvements, towards outcomes relating to the well-being of tenants.

Existing literature is largely limited to technical guides. This paper links theory-based evaluation to practice contributing to social housing practice.

The aim of this article is to explore the everyday life experiences of elderly (+70 years) living with young locals and refugees in a collaborative housing project before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden. The paper discusses the importance of the spatial dimension in the conceptualization of social integration.

The main method is a qualitative case study based on observations of settings, document/video analysis, online diary entries made by ten residents and eight semi- structured interviews conducted with the residents.

SällBo was conceived as a new type of collaborative housing in which elderly, young locals and refugees share common spaces with the aim of enabling social integration. In this context, COVID-19 interrupted the ongoing processes of living together after four months of moving to the house. The three main themes that emerge from the empirical material are (1) changes in the use of common spaces and social interactions, (2) residents' resilient coping responses during the pandemic and (3) insights for future design of collaborative housing based on their experience. The pandemic caused a moment of institutional vacuum, which triggered the agency of the residents whilst developing social bonds and social bridges among them.

Social connection created in everyday life at SällBo's common spaces has triggered processes of social integration.

The ongoing processes of social integration have included the spatial dimension. We understand social integration as a process that involves people from different generations and ethnical backgrounds, which takes place in common spaces and everyday life as different modes of socialization.

The purpose of this paper is to present new evidence on the reasons for and consequences of residualisation of the social rented sector in the UK.

The paper uses a new analysis of data from the 2001 Census at a small spatial scale (lower level super output areas) to produce estimates of the proportion of social housing in each area. The second piece of evidence is an analysis of who enters and leaves the social sector in England, drawing on survey data and an exit survey of tenants leaving social housing which asked their reasons for moving. The survey included people not normally captured by the main household surveys because they do not remain a reference person.

The analysis shows that very few places are still dominated by social renting. It suggests that in so far as the sector is becoming more residualised, this is caused by the differing profiles of those moving into and out of social housing.

While the small numbers in the exit survey mean that it is not statistically significant, it nevertheless suggests that leaving the social sector is largely a result of positive choices, whereas entering social housing is much more the result of constrained choices.

The paper concludes that it is poverty rather than tenure residualisation that needs to be addressed.

This paper presents two new pieces of evidence that together contribute to the residualisation debate in the UK and more widely in countries with a shrinking or small social rented sector.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a research agenda to underpin leadership development activity in the social housing sector, in the light of an identified need for effective leadership in this sector owing to the continual reform and changes it faces.

A literature review is conducted by searching a number of business and management, along with social sciences, databases and texts with the primary focus being leadership and management in social housing. Secondary focus is based around public sector organisations and agencies such as the police and education owing to lack of research in social housing.

There is a pressing need for leadership development in social housing, yet there is a limited evidence base from which to develop effective development interventions. The most relevant models of leadership appear to be those which focus on inter‐organisational and cross‐sector collaboration, but further research is required to develop a clearer picture of the nature of the leadership challenge within this sector.

The paper is only seen as a first stage as it attempts to draw from what has been already published. The paper develops the own research agenda for a second phase of empirical research in order to continue the debate further.

The paper adds to the discussion and debate around leadership in general but more crucially brings to the surface a number of questions not posed previously that involve the starting‐point for detailed empirical research. Relevant case examples exist within the National Health Service and education, but social housing has remained immune from this up until now.

Improving quality of life for older people calls for public policy initiatives that have a positive impact on the determinants of quality of life. This paper presents a review of current social welfare, housing and health policy in the Republic of Ireland relevant to older people and policy areas that are of particular relevance to the determinants of quality of life identified in the literature. The state pension, on which older people are heavily reliant, constitutes the main focus of social welfare cash payments. However, a general practice of marginal increments that fail to take adequate account of inflation and costs of living can leave older people living on the margins of society. In relation to housing policy, there is a need for improved policy implementation regarding housing maintenance and facilitating home comfort in the older population. Overall, greater consideration for the housing needs of older people in general and social housing needs in particular are required. Since 1988 a preference for community over institutional care has persisted throughout Ireland's health policy documents, although gaps between policy aspiration and implementation measures continue to be highlighted. Future policy needs to focus on the creation of enabling environments for social participation and in the optimising of opportunities for physical, social and mental well‐being. The review underscored the absence of a rights‐based approach in policy‐making to date and the need for substantial capacity building to be undertaken among older people themselves.

Prolonged life expectancy coupled with the retirement of the “post war baby boomers” has resulted in an exponential rise in the 50+ population, peaking in the UK in 2035. Recognising that longevity is often not accompanied by health, mobility or quality of life, the “shifting the balance of care” agenda promotes an integrated care model based around the resident’s home. This study aims to explore the adaptability of the existing social housing stock and how it relates to the requirements and preferences of the ageing population.

This research focuses at the local authority level, with the lead author embedded within North Ayrshire Council to establish the evidence base for their housing strategy for older people. Following a constructivist grounded theory approach, key themes emerge through consultation with a working group, wider stakeholder groups and an iterative review of policy and literature. These themes were explored through an evidence base of available health and housing datasets, and a questionnaire survey of 1,500+ people aged 50+ exploring housing preferences and needs for older people; six focus groups split between residents and social housing providers and stakeholder interviews.

The scale and acute nature of the problem facing social housing providers is highlighted and reveals an alarming information gap within housing data sets, exposing an in-balance between the supply and demand and realising the cost implications for adapting the housing stock.

It is important to resolve this information gap to develop the social housing stock to respond to preferences and establish solutions appropriate for its residents.

This work strengthens calls for a cohesive and integrated housing, health and social care system and exposes the challenge of delivering this at a local authority level.

The marginalisation of council housing in Britain since the Housing Act of 1980 threatens to obscure some of the very valuable lessons to be learned from almost a century of mass public housing provision. This chapter demonstrates that despite considerable economic problems, and in the face of social change since 1980, a relatively poor council estate remained a site of social capital, and that women were particularly prominent in working with local agencies to solve problems.

This chapter compares programmes for urban housing regeneration in France and England, showing how ideological similarities reflected in policy ideas and programmes played out differently in significantly different contexts.

The chapter draws on results of several major research programmes, including in-depth extensive fieldwork in a number of cities and regions in France and England. Field research included participant observation in participatory planning events, interviews, home visits, guided walks in the districts, etc. These enabled a multi-site and multi-perspective understanding of urban housing renewal at different sites.

In both contexts, early promises for participation in housing renewal gave way to an imperative for demolition, justified on purely technical grounds that were not shared with participants. The linking of social mix and demolition for local ‘improvement’ also then appeared to be a contradiction between different policies that few residents could endorse, other than selected beneficiaries. Participation, social mix and demolition thus formed an unholy trinity in urban renewal policies.

Housing renewal requires much greater commitment to the experience of residents, to avoid exacerbating social problems rather than relieving them.

The chapter reflects on a wealth of in-depth research over more than a decade to consider the broader implications and outcomes of housing renewal programmes in two countries. It highlights the different balances of power in the two cases and the trajectories of respective urban social politics, including the overlaps between policy objectives and similarities in the government of housing renewal. It also highlights the determination and commitment among residents to the value of housing that is judged from the outside to be ‘poor’.

Based on a case study of conversion of real estate complexes built in Turin at the time of the 2006 Winter Olympic Games into public and subsidized housing, the chapter compares policy goals aimed at producing social mix through the mixing of housing tenure, with actual outcomes and thus identifies possible advantages, challenges, and pitfalls of this kind of intervention.

The analysis is based on a survey and semi-structured interviews with residents, in-depth interviews with key actors, and observation of daily interactions in public and shared places.

Regeneration policies and tenure mix seem to be most effective at preventing neighborhood stigmatization and attract private investments in facility development (area-based effects), but not to be “automatically” a source of mixed social relations and positive role models able to limit socially disapproved behaviors (people-based effects).

The practical lesson which can be drawn from this chapter is that the achievement of people-based effects requires long-standing actions which go beyond the construction and allocation of new apartments.

The chapter engages critically with the idea that built environment has deterministic effects on social environment, and social mix resulted from regeneration and housing policies can work as a catch-all solution for activating and rehabilitating human and social resources in the target area. Specifically, we show how these processes require particular organizational and policy conditions that cannot be taken for granted.

Based on a case study in Halle-Neustadt, this chapter examines the changing configuration of social housing provision in a paradigmatic shrinking city in East Germany.

Social housing is under pressure in East Germany due to three developments. First, ‘social housing’ in Germany has always been a temporary affair such that the number of social housing units is decreasing rapidly all over Germany; this development is particularly pronounced in East Germany where most cities are struck by deindustrialization and poverty, and lack the resources for new social housing subsidies. Second, privatization has led to a reduction of the municipally and cooperatively owned housing stock and a growing relevance of financial investors. Third, most cities in East Germany have experienced severe population losses; this has stimulated ‘rightsizing’ policies and 350,000 housing units have been demolished since 2001. These three developments produce new concentrations of households living in poverty, accelerated downgrading and a crowding out of the poor to the least attractive parts of the city.

The chapter demonstrates how developments in different sectors result in the marginalization of impoverished groups in a low-demand environment. It emphasizes the interplay of planning strategies, housing privatization and changes in welfare provision which have had limited research attention.

This is the first study of the changes of social housing provision in the East German context characterized by deindustrialization, low demand, privatization and financialization.