ao link
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In

You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles

The Thinkhouse Review: where should decisions be made – and by whom?

The latest housing research raises serious questions about where decisions are made in social housing and what this means for the validity and fairness of the outcomes, writes Dr Helen Taylor, senior lecturer in housing at Cardiff Metropolitan University, in this month’s Thinkhouse Review 

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Sharelines

The latest housing research raises serious questions about where decisions are made in social housing and what this means for the validity and fairness of the outcomes, writes Dr Helen Taylor, in this month's @ThinkhouseInfo review #UKhousing

COP26 dominated both general news agendas and those of the housing sector over the past two weeks. The Glasgow Climate Pact that was agreed was welcomed by some for its commitment to increasing adaptation finance and urging countries to commit to more ambitious pledges in the future. Other parties were disappointed in the outcome; for not responding to the urgency of climate change and its impact on vulnerable nations.

Much was made about who the representatives and involved parties were (and how they got there). The formal events were largely attended by world leaders – people with high levels of power and influence and sometimes a disconnect from the experiences of their citizens. Activists and citizens were part of the dynamic set of informal events, displaying a different kind of power.

This month’s Thinkhouse articles reflect both this important wider topic of climate change, but also the critical concept of decision-making and power – where are decisions made, who is involved and what does this mean for the validity, efficacy, and fairness of the outcome?


READ MORE

The Thinkhouse Review: ‘Everyone In’ – a watershed moment, but will the outcomes be squandered?The Thinkhouse Review: ‘Everyone In’ – a watershed moment, but will the outcomes be squandered?
The Thinkhouse Review: an equal housing offer for all? Not yetThe Thinkhouse Review: an equal housing offer for all? Not yet
The Thinkhouse Review: well-being and the future of the private rented sector – two key themes of post-pandemic researchThe Thinkhouse Review: well-being and the future of the private rented sector – two key themes of post-pandemic research

Savills’ report on Decarbonising the Housing Association Sector is just one example of an important report into how the housing sector can address or take forward activities related to the climate change agenda. It outlines the costs and potential funding arrangements for pursuing this agenda across housing associations in England. Lagging Behind provides recommendations for a central role for local government in supporting the retrofit agenda cross tenure in the context of regional variability in house prices.

There have also been several reports reviewed through Thinkhouse this month that reflect ongoing discussions about whose voices are heard and where decisions are made across a range of areas of the housing sector. These include who is involved in decisions around the regeneration and development of places and communities, as well as who should contribute to decisions around service design. These discussions are well-rehearsed within the housing sector; from regulatory frameworks that require tenants to be at the heart of decision-making, to new models, like climate juries, considering how decisions can be made on emerging issues.

The TAPPI Inquiry Report: Phase One proposes a set of principles around the use of technology in providing housing and care for older people. The research programme has two phases, and it is hoped that by the end of the broader inquiry, an industry standard will have been created for what ‘good’ looks like in technology for housing and care for an ageing population. The set of principles that have emerged from the first phase include technology being adaptable, preventative, and cost-effective. Importantly, principles are also included that require technological solutions to be person-centred, choice-led, and co-produced. It is argued, here, that individuals who are receiving services and using technological solutions for housing and care should be included in the design of these systems.

No Place Left Behind: the Commission into Prosperity and Community Placemaking presents a number of recommendations for government around improving places that are unlikely to generate financial value from development, as well as improving the well-being and prosperity of residents in these areas and contributing to broader debates around urban regeneration and community empowerment. The report outlines a broad swathe of recommendations aiming to address the geographical imbalances that impact ‘left-behind places’, which are described as “a legacy of post-war urban design, poor planning, centralised decision-making and under-investment in the social infrastructure that is so vital to local communities”. Part of the policy proposals included relate to supporting community asset acquisition, putting community asset ownership on an equal footing, and empowering communities to tackle dereliction and neglectful ownership.

Building Communities: Planning for a Clean and Good Growth Future equally supports the further decentralisation of power and decision-making relating to place. Published by Localis, the report considers the planning system through the lens of neo-localism, which focuses on giving people and places more control over the impacts of globalisation. Arguing that “community will have to lie at the heart of a housing-led recovery that is rooted in place”, it goes on to outline a strategic framework for a stewardship approach to decision-making. This involves recommendations that local government should, among other things:

  • Produce community value charters to provide a transparent picture of how procurement around development is benefiting the local area
  • Work with communities to embed local design codes into neighbourhood plans
  • Produce cultural statements for new developments containing the provision and protection of cultural assets and assets of community value

The final report to consider whose voices are heard within decisions around issues of housing and place is Outpriced and Overlooked. This research focuses on young people’s experiences of living in rural areas, with key findings around concern for being able to access affordable housing, issues around infrequent and unreliable public transport, and poor digital connectivity. Notably, the report emphasises how young people in these areas feel left out of the political discourse around rural issues. Based on a YouGov survey of 1,000 people between 16 and 25 years old, it outlines that fewer than one in 10 felt listened to by decision-makers as a young person in a rural area and 62% said that decision-makers didn’t pay enough attention to rural areas in general.

As the housing sector continues to tackle large and complex issues such as climate change, structural racism, and economic and geographical disparities, it’s important to consider whose voices are heard within decision-making. Who has the power to decide what happens? Where do these decisions happen? And where should they happen? This month’s reports make the case for a more diverse understanding of power and decision-making, and challenge us to think about not just what we do to tackle housing issues, but also how we do it.

Sign up for our care and support newsletter

Sign up for our care and support newsletter
Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.