"Housing in an Era of Change: New Directions for Housing"
Report of the 2010 HSA Conference, 14-16 April, York
The 2010 Housing Studies Association annual conference was held on 14-16 April at the University of York. The conference addressed the theme of the directions that housing research, scholarship, policy and practice would take (or need to take) in a new economic and political era. The conference was very successful and was attended by nearly 90 delegates.
The HSA is extremely grateful to all presenters and delegates for their contribution to the success of the conference and it is also indebted to the Chartered Institute of housing for its generous sponsorship. Six plenary speakers addressed the conference theme from different dimensions, drawing on their recent work:
Duncan Maclennan opened the conference by suggesting that our tendency to "believe in change" as a force for good needed to be supplanted by a "change in beliefs", challenging what housing means to us and how taxation and macroeconomic policy needed to find ways that did not rely on "leveraged household speculation" or "unearned wealth" in the future. He called for more attention on housing as a system of integrated quasi markets, with attention given to realistic pricing mechanisms, rather than as a fragmented set of provision systems.
Richard Ronald continued the theme of the 'end of an era' by considering how a range of other societies, including Japan, Singapore and Romania, have apparently hit the limits of owner occupation and that the close link between the market for private housing ownership and wider welfare policy is being challenged. Ronald drew on empirical material from his recent book to explore the complex social, cultural and economic terrains within local systems that, he argued, are re-emerging in importance following a period of neoliberal policy convergence.
Alex Marsh picked up again the subject of economics, which in many ways became one of the dominant themes of the conference. He moved to consider the need to extend our conceptualisations of the utility of housing beyond that of the shelter and investment goods with which we are now accustomed, by carefully exploring how we value housing as a social positional good. Marsh's talk drew on a wider corpus of theoretical work on behavioural economics, applying it to the case of housing in order to expose some of the limitations of conventional economic thinking and modelling of housing markets and individuals' behaviour as housing consumers.
Becky Tunstall further developed the focus on individuals by examining their life outcomes on the basis of their early housing circumstances. By means of a methodical analysis of several British birth cohorts studies, Tunstall was able to bring to life changing experiences of housing; how policy had changed and how the impacts of major policies could be identified through individuals' housing experiences; and the role of housing tenure and neighbourhood effects. Many delegates were clearly able to identify themselves as belonging to the various cohorts (spiritually, at least), and were introduced to the idea that Alan Sugar, Paul Merton and Geri Halliwell might well be symbols of Britain's changing housing through the years!
Tim Leunig used his time on the platform to show us why, with energy and ideas capable of turning conventional thinking on its head, he has become a regular commentator on housing within the professional press. In what would prove to be a controversial presentation, Leunig addressed the deficiencies in housing supply in the UK and presented an idea that he hoped would incentivise local communities to accommodate housebuilding by rewarding them with the direct payment of the value that is captured through the planning process. The session prompted a lively debate ranging from how (or whether) the pricing mechanisms could work to whether, fundamentally, regional (housing) policy needed to follow or to shape market forces as transmitted through labour market migration.
Abigail Davies closed the conference by offering a view from the world of policy and practice of recent trends and likely future trajectories. She argued that much will indeed change, regardless of the outcome of the General Election, as a consequence of deep seated demographic, social, fiscal and environmental challenges. The 'economy', she argued, would continue to dominate politicians' thinking and could eclipse housing and other non-protected policy areas. Davies' analysis of the future highlighted the consensuses (the environment, residential mobility, mutuals) and differences (localism, housebuilding targets, planning) between political parties but argued that some of the 'big questions' were missing. The Charted Institute of Housing's position on wishing to see more integrated housing policies that address fundamental change closed the conference in a way that was consistent with parts of Maclennan's opening plea.
An intellectually stimulating workshop programme was well attended. Over 30 high quality workshop presentations were given. There was also this year once again an Early Career Scholars' stream, with its own workshop track, at which 15 high quality papers were delivered. The HSA conference continues to promote rigorous debate by making a generous 45 minute slot available to presenters, enabling work to be presented and theoretical debates to be covered in some detail.
The conference dinner at the King's Manor in York on the Thursday night was a friendly event enjoyed by many delegates. Richard Ronald, representing the newly launched International Journal of Housing Policy, ensured the night got under way thanks to the drinks reception that he hosted. After an excellent meal, Duncan Maclennan told us why housing equity was over-rated, why free bus passes were not all that they're cracked up to be, and why 'Star Trek' continues to influence fashions to this day.
Thanks to Ed Ferrari (University of Sheffield) for organising this conference on behalf of the Housing Studies Association.
Details of next year's annual conference can be found on the HSA Website. The theme of the 2011 conference is 'Housing in Hard Times: class, poverty and social exclusion'. A call for papers will be circulated in the autumn:
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/chp/hsa/conference.htm
Tuesday 25 May 2010
NEWS FROM TOWN AND REGIONAL PLANNING, UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
New report on the use of Section 106 Planning Obligations in England
Researchers from Town & Regional Planning (with colleagues in Land Economy at Cambridge University, and Curtin Business School, Perth, Australia) have found that private developers have agreed to fund £5 billion of England´s local capital infrastructure, including roads, schools and new affordable housing in England. The research, which was commissioned by the Department of Communities & Local Government (CLG), shows planning obligations have led to the very substantial investments by developers. The full report can be found on CLG's website: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningobligationsreport
Planning obligations, known as S106 agreements, are negotiated by local planning authorities when granting planning permission for new developments. These obligations ensure that the necessary infrastructure to support new developments is in place and also that developers of private housing schemes create mixed communities by providing an element of affordable housing on new private estates.
The report shows that nearly two thirds of new affordable homes are now provided through S106 agreements. In principle many of these contributions are funded by developers from the increase in land value brought about by the granting of planning permission.
Until recently little was known about the extent and value of these obligations. This study is the third in a series commissioned by CLG and shows just how substantial these contributions have become. The value of S106 obligations has risen from £2bn in 2003-04 to £4bn in 2005-06 and to £5bn in 2007-08, of which around half in each year was for new affordable housing. This increase reflects both the greater capability of planning authorities when negotiating contributions and the rise in development values over that period providing the funds for developers to make their contributions.
The most recent research showed that, whilst planning authorities continued to focus their efforts on the largest sites, they were also negotiating more contributions from smaller sites than in earlier years. It further showed that there were still large variations in the extent to which planning authorities negotiated agreements and in the value of the contributions secured. This was partly due to the variations in demand for development and land values but also to significant variations in local authority policy and practice.
An important new finding from the latest research is that developers have been delivering a very large proportion of the agreed obligations. Allowing for changes to the timing of delivery, obligations were fully delivered on four in five of the sites where obligations were agreed in 2003-04 and 2005-06. Later agreements have been affected by the property downturn as sites have been developed much more slowly but planning authorities will require all the agreed obligations to be delivered once the market improves.
For more information, contact Professor Tony Crook on: a.crook@sheffield.ac.uk
Researchers from Town & Regional Planning (with colleagues in Land Economy at Cambridge University, and Curtin Business School, Perth, Australia) have found that private developers have agreed to fund £5 billion of England´s local capital infrastructure, including roads, schools and new affordable housing in England. The research, which was commissioned by the Department of Communities & Local Government (CLG), shows planning obligations have led to the very substantial investments by developers. The full report can be found on CLG's website: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningobligationsreport
Planning obligations, known as S106 agreements, are negotiated by local planning authorities when granting planning permission for new developments. These obligations ensure that the necessary infrastructure to support new developments is in place and also that developers of private housing schemes create mixed communities by providing an element of affordable housing on new private estates.
The report shows that nearly two thirds of new affordable homes are now provided through S106 agreements. In principle many of these contributions are funded by developers from the increase in land value brought about by the granting of planning permission.
Until recently little was known about the extent and value of these obligations. This study is the third in a series commissioned by CLG and shows just how substantial these contributions have become. The value of S106 obligations has risen from £2bn in 2003-04 to £4bn in 2005-06 and to £5bn in 2007-08, of which around half in each year was for new affordable housing. This increase reflects both the greater capability of planning authorities when negotiating contributions and the rise in development values over that period providing the funds for developers to make their contributions.
The most recent research showed that, whilst planning authorities continued to focus their efforts on the largest sites, they were also negotiating more contributions from smaller sites than in earlier years. It further showed that there were still large variations in the extent to which planning authorities negotiated agreements and in the value of the contributions secured. This was partly due to the variations in demand for development and land values but also to significant variations in local authority policy and practice.
An important new finding from the latest research is that developers have been delivering a very large proportion of the agreed obligations. Allowing for changes to the timing of delivery, obligations were fully delivered on four in five of the sites where obligations were agreed in 2003-04 and 2005-06. Later agreements have been affected by the property downturn as sites have been developed much more slowly but planning authorities will require all the agreed obligations to be delivered once the market improves.
For more information, contact Professor Tony Crook on: a.crook@sheffield.ac.uk
HOUSING CARE AND SUPPORT CONFERENCE
Housing Care and Support 2010: improving service, increasing choice and reducing the deficit: is it all possible?'
30th June, Manchester Conference Centre.
This conference will ask how we can mainstream good practice into daily reality at both the strategic commissioning level and also for service users and staff on the frontline. Responding to the impending crisis in public expenditure will focus minds and be a key theme for this conference. Speakers include:
*Gary Lashko, Chief Executive, Carr-Gomm
*Jeff Jerome, National Director Social Care Transitions, Department of Health
*Richard O'Driscoll, Head of Older People's Commissioning, Cambridgeshire NHS
*Nick Welch, Social Community Services, Oxfordshire County Council
*Rob Griffiths, CSED and New Path Consulting
*Dan Short Consultant, CSED, Department of Health
*Domini Pein-Gunn, Audit Commission
*Richard Brazil, Independent Consultant, Stamford Forum
Full details can be found on the conference website:
http://www.pavpub.com/pavpub/conferences/showfull.asp?Conference=881
30th June, Manchester Conference Centre.
This conference will ask how we can mainstream good practice into daily reality at both the strategic commissioning level and also for service users and staff on the frontline. Responding to the impending crisis in public expenditure will focus minds and be a key theme for this conference. Speakers include:
*Gary Lashko, Chief Executive, Carr-Gomm
*Jeff Jerome, National Director Social Care Transitions, Department of Health
*Richard O'Driscoll, Head of Older People's Commissioning, Cambridgeshire NHS
*Nick Welch, Social Community Services, Oxfordshire County Council
*Rob Griffiths, CSED and New Path Consulting
*Dan Short Consultant, CSED, Department of Health
*Domini Pein-Gunn, Audit Commission
*Richard Brazil, Independent Consultant, Stamford Forum
Full details can be found on the conference website:
http://www.pavpub.com/pavpub/conferences/showfull.asp?Conference=881
BOOK REVIEW
Brian Lund
Understanding Housing Policy
Bristol: The Policy Press
2006
£18.99 pbk pp.262
Lund’s Understanding Housing Policy is a volume within the Bristol Policy Press's practical 'Understanding Welfare' series, which present topical and innovative approaches to understanding social issues, policies and welfare delivery by leading experts. The book's main purpose is to provide a digest and explanation of the issues, problems and policies that have fashioned housing policy from the recent past to the present day. This it certainly achieves in a very clear and helpful manner.
The book's primary objective is housing in modern Britain and, as Lund writes in the Preface, is "…about why the state has intervened in the housing market, the forms this intervention has taken and the impact it has made". Thus social and economic developments and the policy reaction to them which have fashioned contemporary housing policy and practice are the essence of the book. Other topics such as theoretical perspectives, politics and comparative studies are also included.
Understanding Housing Policy is an introductory textbook aimed primarily at students new to housing studies. But it would also be of use to students studying subjects such as social and public policy, town planning, sociology, economics and politics and to anyone who wishes to know more about housing policy over the last decade or so. In my opinion it would also be of interest to researchers and housing practitioners and those in associated fields such as planning or other public services who want or need a useful summary and source about recent housing policy.
The format of each chapter seems ideal for such a book and particularly for those new(ish) to a topic. Each chapter begins with a summary of its contents and includes clear themed sections, which are necessarily abbreviated. Each chapter ends with an overview, questions for discussion and suggested further reading. Little or no prior knowledge of social or housing policy is assumed and important concepts, ideas and terms are carefully explained. A great deal of effort is made to counteract the alarm felt by many people when new to a subject – of being crushed by gobbledegook and jargon Throughout clear and simple language is used. Throughout too are helpful figures and tables together with useful little boxes emphasising or explaining key points.
In Chapter 1, Lund examines five theoretical approaches to understanding housing policy: laissez-faire economics, social reformism; Marxist political economy; behavioural and social constructionism. This is extremely helpful when attempting to understand the origins of housing policy although I suspect there may be other perspectives that Lund does not include. Certainly social science theory about the welfare state has traditionally included approaches such as convergence theory or technological determinism and functionalist perspectives. But perhaps Lund's choices are more appropriate and relevant today. Chapter 2 gives an account of housing policy from the mid-19th century when it began to be widely recognised that poor housing was a social problem that had to be addressed to the marketisation of housing supply and distribution by the Conservatives during the 1980s and 1990s. New Labour's approach to housing from 1997 is dealt with in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 introduces a comparative dimension by using five case studies chosen to illustrate housing policy in different country settings characterised by Esping-Andersen's 1990s classifications.
The rest of the book (Chapters 5 to 10) covers most of the important concerns impacting on housing and consequently on housing policy choices in the recent past, now and into the future. These are affordable housing, homelessness, decent homes, overcrowding/houses in multiple occupation, low demand and the relationship between housing and social justice. Each topic is covered succinctly, revealingly and intelligently, with regard to the main issues, problems and connections around and between them.
I have one minor quibble about the choice of topics. There is little about housing finance and might well have deserved a chapter of its own. New Labour has made several significant and far-reaching changes to public sector finance rules and practice, especially to those affecting local government including to capital finance, housing revenue accounts and rent restructuring/influencing. This could have replaced the chapter on comparative housing which has been better covered elsewhere and is of only marginal interest to most students on housing courses, especially since little is said about housing in Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales.
Lund’s conclusions (Chapter 11) about the future draw together the main themes of the book. He uses a ‘social constructionist’ perspective to explain New Labour’s interpretation of housing problems within ‘Third Way’ thinking. He suggests that New Labour’s emphasis on building strong communities and promoting choice can generate conflicting messages for those remaining in deprived areas.
Although up-to-date at the time of publication, inevitably the time elapsed since then has meant that in some cases the situation has changed – for example statutory homelessness is no longer rising and annual acceptances are now below the level experienced when New Labour came into office. Inevitably too some of the subject matter of the book has been overtaken by recent developments such as the replacement of the Housing Corporation with the Homes and Communities Agency and the Tenant Services Authority, the decision to allow local authorities to build again and, of course, the impact of the 'credit crunch' and economic recession on housing.
Understanding Housing Policy compares extremely well with alternative books covering similar or the same territory such as Mullins and Muries’ Housing Policy in the UK (2006) and Harriott and Matthews' Introducing Affordable Housing (2009).
Frankly I am unable to find serious fault with this book. Lund certainly fits the publisher's claim that this series is written by experts with his extensive experience and knowledge of housing affairs. Every student of housing should have a copy and keep it on their shelves. It does everything it says it will do and does it all extremely ably. It does, however, need updating. With a General Election imminent as I write, I hope the publisher is planning to ask the author to start thinking about and preparing for a new edition.
Paul Walentowicz
Senior Lecturer in Housing
Anglia Ruskin University
Understanding Housing Policy
Bristol: The Policy Press
2006
£18.99 pbk pp.262
Lund’s Understanding Housing Policy is a volume within the Bristol Policy Press's practical 'Understanding Welfare' series, which present topical and innovative approaches to understanding social issues, policies and welfare delivery by leading experts. The book's main purpose is to provide a digest and explanation of the issues, problems and policies that have fashioned housing policy from the recent past to the present day. This it certainly achieves in a very clear and helpful manner.
The book's primary objective is housing in modern Britain and, as Lund writes in the Preface, is "…about why the state has intervened in the housing market, the forms this intervention has taken and the impact it has made". Thus social and economic developments and the policy reaction to them which have fashioned contemporary housing policy and practice are the essence of the book. Other topics such as theoretical perspectives, politics and comparative studies are also included.
Understanding Housing Policy is an introductory textbook aimed primarily at students new to housing studies. But it would also be of use to students studying subjects such as social and public policy, town planning, sociology, economics and politics and to anyone who wishes to know more about housing policy over the last decade or so. In my opinion it would also be of interest to researchers and housing practitioners and those in associated fields such as planning or other public services who want or need a useful summary and source about recent housing policy.
The format of each chapter seems ideal for such a book and particularly for those new(ish) to a topic. Each chapter begins with a summary of its contents and includes clear themed sections, which are necessarily abbreviated. Each chapter ends with an overview, questions for discussion and suggested further reading. Little or no prior knowledge of social or housing policy is assumed and important concepts, ideas and terms are carefully explained. A great deal of effort is made to counteract the alarm felt by many people when new to a subject – of being crushed by gobbledegook and jargon Throughout clear and simple language is used. Throughout too are helpful figures and tables together with useful little boxes emphasising or explaining key points.
In Chapter 1, Lund examines five theoretical approaches to understanding housing policy: laissez-faire economics, social reformism; Marxist political economy; behavioural and social constructionism. This is extremely helpful when attempting to understand the origins of housing policy although I suspect there may be other perspectives that Lund does not include. Certainly social science theory about the welfare state has traditionally included approaches such as convergence theory or technological determinism and functionalist perspectives. But perhaps Lund's choices are more appropriate and relevant today. Chapter 2 gives an account of housing policy from the mid-19th century when it began to be widely recognised that poor housing was a social problem that had to be addressed to the marketisation of housing supply and distribution by the Conservatives during the 1980s and 1990s. New Labour's approach to housing from 1997 is dealt with in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 introduces a comparative dimension by using five case studies chosen to illustrate housing policy in different country settings characterised by Esping-Andersen's 1990s classifications.
The rest of the book (Chapters 5 to 10) covers most of the important concerns impacting on housing and consequently on housing policy choices in the recent past, now and into the future. These are affordable housing, homelessness, decent homes, overcrowding/houses in multiple occupation, low demand and the relationship between housing and social justice. Each topic is covered succinctly, revealingly and intelligently, with regard to the main issues, problems and connections around and between them.
I have one minor quibble about the choice of topics. There is little about housing finance and might well have deserved a chapter of its own. New Labour has made several significant and far-reaching changes to public sector finance rules and practice, especially to those affecting local government including to capital finance, housing revenue accounts and rent restructuring/influencing. This could have replaced the chapter on comparative housing which has been better covered elsewhere and is of only marginal interest to most students on housing courses, especially since little is said about housing in Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales.
Lund’s conclusions (Chapter 11) about the future draw together the main themes of the book. He uses a ‘social constructionist’ perspective to explain New Labour’s interpretation of housing problems within ‘Third Way’ thinking. He suggests that New Labour’s emphasis on building strong communities and promoting choice can generate conflicting messages for those remaining in deprived areas.
Although up-to-date at the time of publication, inevitably the time elapsed since then has meant that in some cases the situation has changed – for example statutory homelessness is no longer rising and annual acceptances are now below the level experienced when New Labour came into office. Inevitably too some of the subject matter of the book has been overtaken by recent developments such as the replacement of the Housing Corporation with the Homes and Communities Agency and the Tenant Services Authority, the decision to allow local authorities to build again and, of course, the impact of the 'credit crunch' and economic recession on housing.
Understanding Housing Policy compares extremely well with alternative books covering similar or the same territory such as Mullins and Muries’ Housing Policy in the UK (2006) and Harriott and Matthews' Introducing Affordable Housing (2009).
Frankly I am unable to find serious fault with this book. Lund certainly fits the publisher's claim that this series is written by experts with his extensive experience and knowledge of housing affairs. Every student of housing should have a copy and keep it on their shelves. It does everything it says it will do and does it all extremely ably. It does, however, need updating. With a General Election imminent as I write, I hope the publisher is planning to ask the author to start thinking about and preparing for a new edition.
Paul Walentowicz
Senior Lecturer in Housing
Anglia Ruskin University
BOOK REVIEW
Understanding the Policy Process
John Hudson and Stuart Lowe
Bristol, Policy Press, 2009, 336 pp., £21.99.
ISBN 978 1 84742 267 5
Hudson and Lowe's review of the policy-making process is an engaging text that seeks to provide readers with the conceptual tools to understand how social policy is conceived, developed and delivered. Whilst its primary function is to introduce students of social policy to the key themes of policy analysis, the book has a clear authorial voice in making the case for how and why the policy process needs to be adequately theorised. It is a textbook with a mandate.
Three core ideas underpin the book. The first is that social policy is traditionally an under-theorised subject that relies too heavily on 'well-worn pathways of empirical, policy-related research' (p296). The book is presented, therefore, as a corrective that injects the theoretical insights of political science into social policy analysis so as to enable the latter to reach its full potential as a multi-disciplinary field of inquiry. Secondly, the book emphasises the importance of the concept of 'path-dependency' in terms of the need to ground policy analysis in socio-historical context. The trajectory of welfare policies in any particular country can, the authors argue, only be understood by considering how social and cultural formations that have developed over time influence the policy process. The third idea is that theoretical analysis of social policy can be best approached using a three-tiered conceptual map of the scale at which policy-making is shaped and implemented: the macro, meso and micro levels (see below). Within this typology, the meso-level at which institutions and networks operate is identified as the most neglected element of social policy analysis. Accordingly, the book makes the case for a new emphasis on applying concepts from political science given its innate disciplinary capacity to explore the policy process at this level.
The book is divided into three parts that correspond to these three layers of the policy process. Part One concentrates on macro-level analysis with chapters on globalisation, political economy, the post-industrial economy, technological change and structures of power. Part Two introduces concepts relating to meso-level analysis with chapters on the changing nature of governance, policy networks, institutions and policy transfer. Part Three centres on the micro-level analysis of the policy process with chapters exploring decision-making and personality, implementation and delivery, and evaluation and evidence. Each chapter is topped with an overview and key concepts and tailed with a well-written summary as well as questions for discussion and suggestions for further reading.
The explicitly eclectic and theoretical approach to policy analysis taken by the authors is both comprehensive and convincing. The three-tiered structure of analysis largely works well and will undoubtedly help students appreciate the plurality of the spaces, actors and institutions that shape policy-making. As befits a text written by two political scientists, the meso-level analysis of the institutions is particularly well-constructed. For example, Hudson and Lowe argue convincingly that meso-level networks (e.g. the policy community or producer networks) and institutions (e.g. voting systems or welfare state agencies) filter broader macro-level factors in a way that encourages incremental rather sweeping change. As the authors note, this provides a compelling reminder of the need to avoid overemphasising the transformatory potential of macro-level phenomena such as globalisation and the 'Information Revolution'. The ability of well-organised groups with the medical and social care professions to resist the imposition of new Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) systems by the British government is a case in point.
There are some ambiguities, however, within this tripartite conceptual framework. In the macro-level section, for example, globalisation is presented as an almost unstoppable force that 'undoubtedly compelled significant reappraisal of the post-1945 Beveridge welfare state’ (p25, my emphasis). Such a claim overlooks the possibility that the economic dimensions of globalisation have themselves emerged from within the same 'ideational paradigms' (43) that supported the rollback of the welfare state. As Harvey's (2005) account of neoliberalism emphasises, economic change is, at least in part, the consequence of a carefully orchestrated political and ideological project that successfully supplanted Keynesianism with neoliberalism as economic orthodoxy. In other words, globalisation is not some external, implacable force driving social policy change but shaped itself by the same political processes that have reconfigured the welfare state. At times, the model deployed by the book oversimplifies this relationship by implying that macro-level forces like globalisation are catalysts for policy change, when perhaps the two should be seen as mutually constitutive.
Such contradictions do not detract however from this thoughtful, engaging book that has much to offer to both undergraduate students new to the policy process and those looking for a detailed review of the conceptual tools that can be used to aid analysis of any policy domain. Whilst it does not focus on any particular policy area, it uses well-chosen examples form a range of policy fields including housing, health and employment to support theoretical points. Moreover, the book is written in a lively and readable style that avoids the pedestrian tone characteristic of all too many textbooks. It is also unafraid to use popular, cultural examples such as The Matrix film or Alice in Wonderland to illustrate complex, theoretical points about the nature and distribution of power. Such examples are used sparingly but effectively and would certainly assist in teaching those new to the subject.
On the whole, the book delivers on its promise to demonstrate the value of infusing social policy analysis with conceptual insights from political science. Perhaps the only discordant note is the claim that this is important because of the 'overexposure' (p296) of social policy to the disciplinary influence of sociology. Given the authors' assertion of the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to policy analysis, it may be more productive to emphasise the complimentary strengths that each discipline offers. If sociology undoubtedly suffers from neglecting the role of political institutions and processes that pattern social change, then political science is perhaps equally inattentive to how those processes shape stratification. Hudson and Lowe's own account, for example, pays little heed to the way in which policy reforms can reinforce inequalities or create new divisions along race, class or gender lines.
Moreover, the book does not discuss how the capacity to construct welfare recipients as deserving or undeserving also plays an important role in shaping the parameters for policymakers to act (see for example Levitas, 2005). It is much easier to impose to impose workfare-style programmes, for example, if those targeted are deemed to lack motivation rather than to be the victims of a shortage of jobs. This is not to argue that such ideas should have been included in what is already a dense and comprehensive account, but to suggest that sociology has important insights to offer social policy, including insights that help us understand how policy is formed. These are minor criticisms, however, of a book that brings together an impressive range of theoretical insights to provide an innovative and refreshing perspective on understanding the policy process.
Richard Crisp
Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR)
Sheffield Hallam University, UK.
References
Harvey, D. (2005) A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lister, R. (2005) The inclusive society? Social exclusion and New Labour. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
John Hudson and Stuart Lowe
Bristol, Policy Press, 2009, 336 pp., £21.99.
ISBN 978 1 84742 267 5
Hudson and Lowe's review of the policy-making process is an engaging text that seeks to provide readers with the conceptual tools to understand how social policy is conceived, developed and delivered. Whilst its primary function is to introduce students of social policy to the key themes of policy analysis, the book has a clear authorial voice in making the case for how and why the policy process needs to be adequately theorised. It is a textbook with a mandate.
Three core ideas underpin the book. The first is that social policy is traditionally an under-theorised subject that relies too heavily on 'well-worn pathways of empirical, policy-related research' (p296). The book is presented, therefore, as a corrective that injects the theoretical insights of political science into social policy analysis so as to enable the latter to reach its full potential as a multi-disciplinary field of inquiry. Secondly, the book emphasises the importance of the concept of 'path-dependency' in terms of the need to ground policy analysis in socio-historical context. The trajectory of welfare policies in any particular country can, the authors argue, only be understood by considering how social and cultural formations that have developed over time influence the policy process. The third idea is that theoretical analysis of social policy can be best approached using a three-tiered conceptual map of the scale at which policy-making is shaped and implemented: the macro, meso and micro levels (see below). Within this typology, the meso-level at which institutions and networks operate is identified as the most neglected element of social policy analysis. Accordingly, the book makes the case for a new emphasis on applying concepts from political science given its innate disciplinary capacity to explore the policy process at this level.
The book is divided into three parts that correspond to these three layers of the policy process. Part One concentrates on macro-level analysis with chapters on globalisation, political economy, the post-industrial economy, technological change and structures of power. Part Two introduces concepts relating to meso-level analysis with chapters on the changing nature of governance, policy networks, institutions and policy transfer. Part Three centres on the micro-level analysis of the policy process with chapters exploring decision-making and personality, implementation and delivery, and evaluation and evidence. Each chapter is topped with an overview and key concepts and tailed with a well-written summary as well as questions for discussion and suggestions for further reading.
The explicitly eclectic and theoretical approach to policy analysis taken by the authors is both comprehensive and convincing. The three-tiered structure of analysis largely works well and will undoubtedly help students appreciate the plurality of the spaces, actors and institutions that shape policy-making. As befits a text written by two political scientists, the meso-level analysis of the institutions is particularly well-constructed. For example, Hudson and Lowe argue convincingly that meso-level networks (e.g. the policy community or producer networks) and institutions (e.g. voting systems or welfare state agencies) filter broader macro-level factors in a way that encourages incremental rather sweeping change. As the authors note, this provides a compelling reminder of the need to avoid overemphasising the transformatory potential of macro-level phenomena such as globalisation and the 'Information Revolution'. The ability of well-organised groups with the medical and social care professions to resist the imposition of new Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) systems by the British government is a case in point.
There are some ambiguities, however, within this tripartite conceptual framework. In the macro-level section, for example, globalisation is presented as an almost unstoppable force that 'undoubtedly compelled significant reappraisal of the post-1945 Beveridge welfare state’ (p25, my emphasis). Such a claim overlooks the possibility that the economic dimensions of globalisation have themselves emerged from within the same 'ideational paradigms' (43) that supported the rollback of the welfare state. As Harvey's (2005) account of neoliberalism emphasises, economic change is, at least in part, the consequence of a carefully orchestrated political and ideological project that successfully supplanted Keynesianism with neoliberalism as economic orthodoxy. In other words, globalisation is not some external, implacable force driving social policy change but shaped itself by the same political processes that have reconfigured the welfare state. At times, the model deployed by the book oversimplifies this relationship by implying that macro-level forces like globalisation are catalysts for policy change, when perhaps the two should be seen as mutually constitutive.
Such contradictions do not detract however from this thoughtful, engaging book that has much to offer to both undergraduate students new to the policy process and those looking for a detailed review of the conceptual tools that can be used to aid analysis of any policy domain. Whilst it does not focus on any particular policy area, it uses well-chosen examples form a range of policy fields including housing, health and employment to support theoretical points. Moreover, the book is written in a lively and readable style that avoids the pedestrian tone characteristic of all too many textbooks. It is also unafraid to use popular, cultural examples such as The Matrix film or Alice in Wonderland to illustrate complex, theoretical points about the nature and distribution of power. Such examples are used sparingly but effectively and would certainly assist in teaching those new to the subject.
On the whole, the book delivers on its promise to demonstrate the value of infusing social policy analysis with conceptual insights from political science. Perhaps the only discordant note is the claim that this is important because of the 'overexposure' (p296) of social policy to the disciplinary influence of sociology. Given the authors' assertion of the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to policy analysis, it may be more productive to emphasise the complimentary strengths that each discipline offers. If sociology undoubtedly suffers from neglecting the role of political institutions and processes that pattern social change, then political science is perhaps equally inattentive to how those processes shape stratification. Hudson and Lowe's own account, for example, pays little heed to the way in which policy reforms can reinforce inequalities or create new divisions along race, class or gender lines.
Moreover, the book does not discuss how the capacity to construct welfare recipients as deserving or undeserving also plays an important role in shaping the parameters for policymakers to act (see for example Levitas, 2005). It is much easier to impose to impose workfare-style programmes, for example, if those targeted are deemed to lack motivation rather than to be the victims of a shortage of jobs. This is not to argue that such ideas should have been included in what is already a dense and comprehensive account, but to suggest that sociology has important insights to offer social policy, including insights that help us understand how policy is formed. These are minor criticisms, however, of a book that brings together an impressive range of theoretical insights to provide an innovative and refreshing perspective on understanding the policy process.
Richard Crisp
Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR)
Sheffield Hallam University, UK.
References
Harvey, D. (2005) A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lister, R. (2005) The inclusive society? Social exclusion and New Labour. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tuesday 4 May 2010
NEW APPOINTMENTS AT HERIOT-WATT
Heriot-Watt is delighted to welcome Suzanne Fitzpatrick and Dr Sarah Johnsen who join the University’s Housing and Urban Society Research Group from July 2010. Having directed York University’s Centre for Housing Policy since 2003, Suzanne becomes Professor of Housing and Social Policy at Heriot-Watt. Sarah, a Research Fellow at York since 2005, becomes a Senior Research Fellow. At Heriot-Watt, Suzanne and Sarah will be working on a range of projects including an ESRC-funded study of multiple exclusion homelessness. Suzanne will retain her role as Editor of the International Journal of Housing Policy (formerly the European Journal of Housing Policy).
Also joining Heriot-Watt is Kirsten Besemer, Research Associate, who moves from Chester University where she has been completing her PhD on the effects of trade liberalisation on Vietnamese rice farmers. Kirsten will work with Professor Glen Bramley and other colleagues on the 2010-11 UK Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey, 2011. This ESRC-funded project is being undertaken in collaboration with the Universities of Bristol, Glasgow and Queens, Belfast. Following on from the Millenium Poverty survey of 2000, the Breadline Britain surveys of 1983 and 1990, and Peter Townsend’s 1969 study, the 2010-11 research will measure the incidence of poverty across the country and investigate the nature of poverty and social exclusion in different contexts.
Also joining Heriot-Watt is Kirsten Besemer, Research Associate, who moves from Chester University where she has been completing her PhD on the effects of trade liberalisation on Vietnamese rice farmers. Kirsten will work with Professor Glen Bramley and other colleagues on the 2010-11 UK Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey, 2011. This ESRC-funded project is being undertaken in collaboration with the Universities of Bristol, Glasgow and Queens, Belfast. Following on from the Millenium Poverty survey of 2000, the Breadline Britain surveys of 1983 and 1990, and Peter Townsend’s 1969 study, the 2010-11 research will measure the incidence of poverty across the country and investigate the nature of poverty and social exclusion in different contexts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
