Latest housing research: organisations jostle to make their case to government

Leading off the homelessness theme is a rare output from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), a systems-wide evaluation of homelessness and rough sleeping policy by the Centre for Homelessness Impact and its partners. It examines the systemic impact of the policies and interventions, and evaluates the main schemes – the Rough Sleeping Initiative, the Homelessness Prevention Grant and the Rough Sleeping Accommodation Programme.

The research was commissioned by the previous government, but given the rising levels of both homelessness and rough sleeping, it remains a very pertinent contribution. In brief, it concludes that there is much to applaud but that there remains a lot more to be done. Seemingly, the search for homelessness solutions continues.

Alongside this comes a House of Commons Research Briefing on the causes and statistics around rough sleeping and the Centre for Homelessness Impact’s survey report on hostel accommodation in the UK, both thorough pieces. The Centre for Homelessness Impact’s report covers 104 local authorities and 317 hostel projects. The report is dedicated to the late Jeremy Swain, an inspiring leader in this area at Thames Reach and MHCLG.

The next reports are largely around social housing. The first is research output from the Co-operation in Social Housing Commission chaired by Sir Steve Bullock. This initial report from the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE) at the London School of Economics sets out what lessons might be learned from existing experience around power-sharing and co-operation between residents and providers. This is important work really aimed at creating a modern social housing sector

A further CASE report is on mitigating the impacts of overcrowding in Newham, London’s most overcrowded borough. While accepting that more social housing is needed, the report concludes that more partnership working with other bodies could have a material impact.

On this same theme is a report by the Understanding Society team, which runs the UK Household Longitudinal Survey at the University of Essex. Drawing on data from 2009 to 2022, it examines trends in overcrowding and impacts on children. Fifty per cent of overcrowding is in social housing (but 25% in homeownership). It is most common among children aged between five and nine.

We then plunge into housing conditions via a Chartered Institute of Housing/CaCHE report, Turning up the heat, asking questions about how we will manage rising temperatures in relation to domestic housing. This is a good read and very timely.

Partnership also stands at the heart of how health and housing providers in the East of England can come together to tackle asthma, damp and mould – all told in HACT’s report, The Story of ADaM.

“Rightly linking housing and the current push to improve the economy, the authors argue for Treasury rethinking”

Finally, the last two reports. The first of these is a CaCHE report on private rented sector landlords in Scotland, their motivations and behaviour as evidenced by 30 years of disparate surveys. It suggests that the industry has not consolidated and professionalised in this time, but rather has become more fragmented. It concludes by arguing for the government to put in place a regular landlord survey.

Last but not least, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research offers up a relatively rare housing contribution via a short policy paper, Housing the Economy. Written by two academics from CaCHE, it almost offers up a letter to the chancellor arguing that the government must take a more integrated view of housing and its policies, and recognise that supply is necessary but not sufficient and that taxation reform is essential. Rightly linking housing and the current push to improve the economy, the authors argue for Treasury rethinking.

The sum of the evidence and arguments presented in the 10 contributions is impressive and should be listened to. However, given the context of tight budgets, there was little of the detailed value for money arguments that might electrify the policymakers at this crucial juncture.

At the same time, as the evidence presented makes clear, a long-term housing strategy should be as much about how we aim to do things better as it is about what we spend.

Peter Williams, fellow in the department of land economy, University of Cambridge, and Thinkhouse Editorial Panel member