Housing Policy and Strategy in the UK - Essay Example

HOUSING POLICY AND STRATEGY Introduction: Hall (1993) refers ideas as important precursors of agenda setting which not only provide goals for a policy but are also instruments to achieve those goals. According to Birkland (1997) agenda setting is the society acting through politicians and social institutions to apprise them of problems with acceptable solutions. The issue getting agenda status does not mean it would become a policy. The policy makers may have their own interpretations and priorities. The present study is an attempt to discuss role of agenda setting in policy making. It then presents UK housing policies based on three different agenda. 2. Agenda Setting Precedes Policy Framing: How do agenda become policies The two terms, which are often confused, need to be clarified. These are the agenda setting and problem definition. Agenda setting is bringing issues to active consideration by the government (Cobb and Ross 1997 as cited in Dery 2000 ) while problem definition is what issues are selected for agenda setting (Rochefort and Cobb, 1994 as cited in Dery 2000). Weiss (1989 as cited in Dery 2000) clarifies this hazy boundary between agenda setting and problem definition by stating that problem is defined as how people perceive a circumstance while agenda setting is process by which some problems come to public attention at a given time and place. In the past the policies were based on a general approach. During the past two decades , however, policies are outcome of creative inputs from local authorities, housing associations and lenders. The government is also required to play role in supporting and sustaining rather than directing and controlling. The implementers in UK judge an idea on pilot scale prior to changing it into a policy. (Williams & Holmans 1997). The UK policy making has undergone further change. The evidence based policy has taken over, to some extent, the earlier opinion based policymaking. Now the hard data, thoroughly analysed on statistical and economic scales, are central to a policy (Defra 2008). The development of a policy can be explained by technocratic or political model (Majone 1989). In the former, the policy develops or changes as per the preferences (or opinion) of policy makers . In the political model, the agenda setting occurs when the public support is gained for an issue. (Cobb & Elder, 1983; Kingdon, 1984; Baumgartner & Jones, 1993 as cited in Dery 2000). Several ideas generated by policy analysts, researchers, and others have become trends as these have been integrated into thinking and policy making (Basolo 2003). Evaluation of a policy brings necessary changes, if required. For e.g. many public housing developments, especially in cities, were originally designed and built to accommodate large numbers of households. The problems to residents in such houses brought attention to the design of public housing developments. It was also realised that the return of policy responsibilities to state and local governments from the central government would offer more suitable policy framing to the local needs.The ill effects of the concentration of poverty developed as observed by public officials and policy scholars. The minorities and poor were shifted to white areas. It is an example where significant amount of public policy attention is aimed at reducing the concentration of poverty (Goetz, 2000 as cited in Basolo 2003). Beland (2005) refers (Lieberman 2002) that while framing or changing a policy equal importance to ideas and institutions should be given. He thinks ideas are 'roadmap' to framing a policy. The pioneer in agenda setting study, Kingdon (1995) states that agenda could be defined as the most aggravated problem of the moment and alternative as policy options capable of solving it. He further elaborates that agenda and policy options arise by the interaction of three elements viz. Problem, policy and politics. The social groups and politicians to mobilize system in favour of a specific issue use these three elements. The policy issues generally come to the notice of bureaucrats, elected politicians and public through statistical data, wide protests or feedback of previous policies. Of the three interacting elements of policy framing, the policy stream contacts policy experts working for academic institutions, governmental agencies and interest groups related to the concerned policy field who propose legislation and alternatives. The political stream ensures that the proposals receive the direct backing of a major political advocate, usually the ruling government. The role of this third element (politics) is crucial in determining policy outcomes. The decision at this stage is influenced by electoral results, pressures from interest groups, and the public opinion. If a new government comes in or a powerful interest group with wide public support takes up the issue, it may be reshaped and pushed to the centre of the political debate. The agenda setters have their own favoured social and economic solutions or alternatives ready. They use the opportunity for legislative victory to their policy ideas. 3. How Agenda Setting Influences Housing Policy The political model of policy generation is based on preferences of the government in power. Usually the dominent interests prevailing at that time have more chances of getting the policy status. The authorities ponder over to determine whether a particular issue needs government attention. The thinking is different when the same issue is conceptualised into a policy (Kingdon 1984).With this overview of importance of idea generation and agenda setting prior to policy making, a discussion of three housing policies in UK based on different agenda, all of which had wide public support as common factor at the time conceptualised and protest leading to policy's review later to bring changes into it , are discussed below: 3.1 Choice based Lettings (CBL): It is a policy adapted from the successful Dutch model 'Delft'. The Government's policy emphasised four objectives - offering choice, tackling social exclusion, helping to create sustainable communities, and encouraging the effective use and management of social housing. choice-based lettings in the UK was emphasised by the English Housing Green Paper of 2000.Across nations the evidences showed that migrants and minorities experienced poor housing conditions, homelessness and relative deprivation.The situation projected wide social and economic gaps. The minorities, immigrants and blacks were living in isolated neighbourhood and settlements with poor infrastructures (Harrison et al, 2006; EUMC/FRA, 2007 as cited in Law 2007). The racial and ethnic discrimination being strikingly obvious. The agenda thus was social upliftment of minorities and low income groups and the inputs used to frame the policy came from extensive academic research. The policy also expected to prove effective in preventing concentration of poverty. CBL is an example of evidence based policy rather than one formed merely on the opinion. In a pilot programme the government launched this competitive bidding scheme to encourage innovative thinking. Over 90 responses were submitted by local authorities and their housing association partners and the outcome was that 27 were selected to run pilot schemes for a two-year period between 2001 and 2003. As well as the pilots, the Government commissioned evaluative research by the Universities of Bristol and Cambridge along with an advice and support service that was run from 2001 to 2004.((DETR & DSS, 2000 as cited in Brown & Yates 2005). The choice-based -lettings is different from the traditional method of allotting social housing. The applicant can see the property and decide which one he/she prefers. The preference is urgent need based , but wherever possible it is on the basis of waiting period. In case ,an applicant is not able to get the home of his choice, authorities help him when to apply again. A review funded by local government and communities revelaled that CBL leads to improved tenancy sustainment and tenant satisfaction; encourages applicants to think more flexibly about their housing choices; tends to reduce rather than compound ethnic segregation; and that outcomes for homeless households are largely positive. It also found that the costs of setting up CBL can be off-set by housing management efficiencies.The homelessness act 2002 included advertising scheme and statement by the local authorities about allocation as per choice wherever possible (community.gov.uk). 3.2 Right to Buy: First introduced in 1980, the Right to Buy scheme is aimed at secure tenants of councils housing and assured tenants of registered social landlords/housing associations who previously held secure tenancies with local authorities. It is open to virtually any secure tenant who can afford to buy. Tenants must have at least two years tenancy in council housing or five years tenancies after 18 January 2005 as declared after review of the policy. Some properties are exempt from the Right to Buy. These include dwellings occupied in connection with a tenant's employment, and housing specially provided for older people and people with disabilities. The flagship policy of Margaret Thatcher government is an example of political agenda (community.gov.uk 2008). The policy originated on the concept that public houses are marketable commodities. It was an attempt to derive political mileage by securing popular vote. The opposition initially did not support the move but later dropped their campaign considering it a lost battle. The right to buy policy made United Kingdom a land of homeowners. The council houses are given to tenants at a heavy discount whereby the amount they have paid as rent is deducted from cost (Jones .and Murie 2006). They further elaborate that the policy began by selling most attractive houses while retaining the less attractive portions for tenants. As a result the affluent became homeowners while remaining houses catered to low income black and minority communities. The policy was either applied in haste or formulated for immediate political gains. Since a review of the policy indicated severe affordability problem, growing number of residents, low vacancies in council housing, record homelessness and high home prices. The government is trying to rectify this fallout of the policy by constructing separate rental and sale units, introducing shared ownership financial help to new buyers and allow part buying initially and increase it overtime. 3.3 Antisocial Behavior: The antisocial behaviour became part of housing act in 2003 as a result of campaign highlighted particularly by media. The television show Neighbours from Hell presented antisocial behaviour in the council housing. It was demonisation of social housing, as media projection was known at that time . It showed these houses frequently experienced boundary disputes, dumping of rubbish and noise and that the people living in these were unable to form community. As a result the antisocial behaviour was incorporated in housing act in Britain (Knepper 2007). The Respect Standard for Housing Management, launched on Thursday 17 August 2006, outlines the core components essential to delivering an effective response to anti-social behaviour and building stronger communities, accountability, leadership, giving greater resident empowerment, and supporting community efforts at tackling anti-social behaviour (community.gov.uk). The respect task force and communities consult housing practitioners and the public on proposed changes to policy, issuie guidance for practitioners, provide advice to ministers and supporting them in taking new legislation through Parliament. The antisocial behaviour is not always serious criminal offence,but sometimes as in drug dealing or physical abusive behaviour, it may call for criminal proceedings. The antisocial behaviour may be racial abuse, creating fear, noise or rowdy behaviour, vandalism, litter throwing and drug dealing etc. Besides any other behaviour can be categorised as antisocial depending on its impact on people living there (community.gov.uk).. 4. Conclusion: The discussion above shows that agenda setting precedes a policy decision. The issue of importance gets agenda status due to public protests, Political opinion/ ambition or strong evidences. In UK the policy decisions have witnessed great change. These began as issues, which in the opinion of policy makers were suitable. Later, the political party in power used its position to garner public support. The Right to buy is one such housing policy and analysts wonder seeing its aftereffects whether it was wrongly implemented or the policy itself was an altogether mistake. Currently, the policy decisions are taken on strong evidences, which may be national or international. The last option may make policy makers act in more responsible manner and design effective policies. REFERENCES Basolo, V. 2003. 'Housing and Public Policy Trends: Extrapolating into the Future for Public Housing, Authorities'. Available at https://eee.uci.edu/clients/basolo/presentations.html Bland, D. 2005. 'Ideas and Social Policy: An Institutionalist Perspective', Social Policy and Administration, 39(1): 1-18. Birkland, T. A. 1997, After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy and Focusing Events, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Brown, T. & Yates, N. (2005) Allocations and Lettings - Taking Customer Choice Forward in England European Journal of Housing Policy Vol 5, No 3, pp343- 357 Choice based lettings, Right to buy and Antisocial Behaviour. 2008, Available at : http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housingmanagementcare/ Dery, D. 2000. 'Agenda Setting and Problem Definition'. Policy Studies, Vol. 21 (1):37- 47. Defra, 2008, 'Evidence Based Policy Making', Available at : http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/how/evidence.htm Hall, P. A. 1993, 'Policy paradigms, social learning and the state: the case of economic policy-making in Britain', Comparative Politics, 25(3): 275-296. Jones, C. & Murie, A. 2006. 'The Right to Buy: Analysis and Evaluation of a Housing Policy, Blackwell. Kingdon, J. W. 1984 Agendas Alternatives and Public Policy, Boston: Little, Brown. Kingdon, J. W. (1995....), Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, 2nd edn, New York: HarperCollins. Knepper, P. 2007. Criminology and social Policy, SAGE Law, I. 2007. 'Housing Choice and Racist Hostility.'A Race Equality Foundation Paper, Available at: http://www.reu.org.uk/housing/files/house-brief4.pdf Majone, G. 1989 Evidence, Argument, and Persuasion in the Policy Process, New Haven: Yale University Press. Shlay, A. B. 1995. 'Housing in the Broader Context in the United States', Housing Policy Debate, (Fannie Mae), 6(3): 695-720. Williams, P. and Holmans, A. E. 1997. Directions in Housing Policy: Towards Sustainable Housing policies in UK, SAGE, 226P. Read More