Tables on Housing in England - Essay Example

Tables on Housing in England The tables tell a lot about housing system of England. There are three tables presented in total and they tell various aspects of the housing patterns. For instance, table 1 is about the housing stock and shows quantitative data of various housing arrangements enlisting the dwelling and the region they belong to. In the North East, 87% of the dwellings are bungalows or typical houses while the rest are flats and maisonettes. North West presents a similar story with 89% of the houses are bungalows and the rest are flats and maisonettes. Out of the, nearly 22 million households of England, most of the dwellings are from South East and 28% of those dwellings are semidetached bungalows. The smallest number of dwellings is from the North East side with just over a million houses. But there is similarity between the two smallest and largest dwelled areas; the number of semidetached bungalows is the largest in numbers. For North East, they hold up to 41% of all dwellings. Table 2 presents data on house ownerships with categorization by ethnicity. Nearly 18 million household owners are White and British. Out of this number, 40 present of British Whites own their property through mortgage. On the other extreme of the stats, Bangladeshis hold live in 83 thousand houses and nearly half of these are rented from social sector. After the Whites, it’s the Indians that dwell in 335,000 houses and most of these are owned with mortgage, same patterns as the British dwellers. Outright ownership is lowest among Black Africans, which constitute of only 4% of their 247,000 houses while majority of these houses are privately rented. Outright ownership is the highest among British Whites followed by Indians and non-British Whites. Total number of dwellings in England is nearly 21 million and privately rented houses constitute only 12% of the lot. Majority of dwellings comes under the heading of mortgage ownership followed by outright ownership which comprises of 31percent. Table 3 shows interesting stats about English households in terms of the numbers of bedrooms per house. Single bedroom houses have gradually vanished over the past two decades. Last stats reported in 1996/97 suggest that only 1% of all the English houses were single bedroom and in later years, they have completely disappeared. Some interesting trends can be spotted in this table; back in 1991/92, nearly 74% of all dwellings were houses and the rest of them were flats but trends changed down the line, now flats and houses are equal in numbers. Numbers of flats have increased while houses have shrunk for England in the last two decades. A significant increase can be noticed in 2 bedroom flats from the year 2001/2 to 2007/8; two bedroom flats increased from 15% to 36% of total flats. Single bedroom flats show a strange pattern across the time line with gradually declining till 2001/2 then uphill drive reaching to 13% which is quite close to the percentage from where it started. Examine the argument that neighbourly relations are routinely subject to processes of making and remaking. The argument that neighbourly relations are routinely subject to processes of making and remaking also has its support from Chapter 4 where social life has been compared to an endless ‘slow dance’ where the participants are constantly moving and shifting. This is probably the best support that the above argument can get from the text book. Social lives demonstrate their most active display either inside the house or in a community, like a neighbourhood. Just like a dance, neighbours need to stay in proximity but avoid stepping on toes; this demands frequent making and remaking of neighbourly relations. People expect from neighbours to have a ‘general disposition towards friendliness’ but at the same time avoiding ‘intrusion’ (Willmott, 1986, p.55). Most of the interaction with neighbours is done in public spaces or sometimes over the fence (there is always some hindrance in between), to be able to connect with the neighbour this way demands constant shuffling of friendliness. Neighbours would want to know how others are doing but they cannot be too precise; they certainly can’t be too private. But on the other hand, without sharing of knowledge, interactions and conversations seem to go nowhere. That is why there is a very fine line between being friendly and keeping the distance. Moreover if the conversations only involve the usual pleasantries, it can get monotonous and unexciting therefore constant remaking of neighbourly relations becomes inevitable. Social order needs frequent adjustments as usual greetings can become mundane. This is how people learn the art of inventing new and exciting ways to greet each other and spark up a lively conversation. Most of the neighbourly interaction takes place in the front garden. It has become a custom in England to meet the neighbours in their front lawns rather than knocking at their door and seeking entrance into their house. As there is no rule book on neighbourhood behaviour, people develop their own set of rules and norms. These norms and customs keep on growing. New ways of living and community activities require adjustments in the way people meet each other therefore such customs cannot remain stagnant. They need to keep on changing, adjusting and remaking. This notion is worth mentioning that every locality or geographic location has its own way of meeting neighbours. UK neighbourhood is custom to more privacy of the residents, on the other hand things are different in other parts of the world. The text book mentions the environment of a village in Spain. The writer shares his experience of that place when he went there; a lot of people from the neighbourhood showed up to help the couple (writer and his wife) move the luggage in the house. Not only that, they even came in the house and started helping them place things in order. The only introduction that they gave was that they were Mr something and they were ‘the neighbours’. Such friendly and neighbourly gesture would definitely be considered rude in England. There is one thing very important to note here from the above scenario, the village that has been mentioned in the book was quite backward and poor. People were used to old conventional farming methods and in fact the whole neighbourhood depended on each other for their survival. That is why there was so little privacy and everyone was allowed to enter each other’s homes. There is only one thing that can be concluded from this; if that village prospers like other parts of Europe and poverty is eliminated, their neighbourly customs will reshape. The neighbourly norms will be remade and new and appropriate customs will become acceptable. Living so close to each other with almost no privacy has its downsides to. Theft and fraud can be frequent as was the case of that Spanish village. Neighbour relations can sometimes be demanding. When there is an infringement of privacy, issues start to arise. In England, most of the complaints about neighbours are about parking space, height of the fence or noise. When there is no rule book on neighbourly manners, people themselves have to adjust their interactions. It can get hard sometimes to manage neighbourly relations as the line between friendliness and intrusiveness gets smudged sometimes. That is where lies the need redefine the neighbourly relations; make adjustments to the interactions. When two neighbours don’t agree to same etiquettes, disputes rise up creating problems. Sometimes issues get resolved without the involvement of official authorities. This is the most sought after way of resolving neighbourly disputes. Other times the matter can go to court which wastes a lot of money and time. According to official UK Government website (Directgov, 2009), when some dispute arise in the neighbourhood, the best approach to resolve the issue is to ‘talking to whoever is responsible’. This way the matter can be prevented from going to court. This is the essence of neighbourly relations because disputes will always arise but it is the adjustments that people make in their relationships that resolve the disputes. Making and remaking neighbourly terms is the best way forward. One perfect example of neighbourly relations being redefined or adjusted given in the book is about the annoying noises coming from the bedroom of the next door neighbour. The noises mentioned are not annoying because of their volume but due to their nature. There are reports on record which show a neighbour complaining about the intimate noises coming from their neighbour’s bedroom. Such situations are very crucial and demand remaking of neighbourly relations. It would be odd to walk up to the neighbour next door and telling him/her to ‘keep it down’. That is why there are some ways which people have adopted that mitigate such problems without involving officials, such as physically moving the bed away from the adjacent wall. Every family prefers a friendly neighbourhood, where they feel secure and know a little about others. Having a sense of community in the neighbourhood is one of the greatest gifts humans can give each other. Whenever and wherever a residential property is bought or sold, neighbourhood is always considered. After all, it is the community that people have live in. Neighbourhood is a dynamic system, constantly evolving and changing. Issues and problems arise in this system as in any other relationship that is why neighbourly relations are routinely subject to processes of making and remaking. Work Cited Directgov (2009) ‘Noise nuisance and neighbour disputes’ [online], www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/WhereYouLive/NoiseNuisanceAndLitter/ DG_10029682 (Accessed 5 January 2011). Taylor, S., Hinchliffe, S., Clarke, J. and Bromley, S. (2009). (Living together, living apart: the social life of the neighbourhood) Making Social Lives. Milton Keynes: The Open University. 245-289 Willmott, P. (1986) Social Networks, Informal Care and Public Policy, London, Policy Studies Institute. Read More