Participation in the tradition of self-help housing: ‘community architects of change’

Housing Studies Association Conference 13-15 April, 2011Housing in Hard Times: Class, Poverty and Social ExclusionPatricia A. Jones, David Mullins & Simon TeasdaleThird Sector Research Centre

What is self-help housing?Self-help housing ‘‘involves local people bringing back into use empty properties to live in, organising whatever repairs are necessary to make them habitable’.

This is usually based on a time-limited licence or lease, but sometimes on a permanent basis, and there are possibilities for asset transfer Definition from http://self-help-housing.org/

Five Essential Ingredients

• PROPERTIES• WORKFORCE• RESIDENTS

• FUNDING• PARTNERS

Overview Self Help Housing (SHH) research project – TSRC with

partners: self-helphousing.org. Building Social Housing Foundation, Crisis, HACT,summer 2010

Summary of case studies The tradition of SHH SHH in context Housing policy context Traditional model of participation Innovation, focus & scale The economic rationale for localism Analysis: strategies, resources, impact, sustainability Concluding points: community architects of change

LATCH: SHH organisation set up by students in 1989

RIVERLINK Short-Life Housing Co-operative: formed in late 1970s

by local volunteers

Before and after

TAMIL COMMUNITY HOUSING ASSOCIATION: originally short-life

housing for refugees in the 1980s

FRESH HORIZONS: a community-based social enterprise set up via housing

and land asset transfer in 2002

Winning the Regional Social

Enterprise Award for using local

people to work on local projects

including renovation of derelict properties

Community Campus: social enterprise set up in 1987 in response to youth homelessness

Mini Case studies: exploring scope for SHH CENTREPOINT – national housing association

exploring two-year housing and employment pathways for young homeless

B4BOX – a social business bringing empty properties into use, delivering accredited construction skills training

SHEKINAH MISSION – charity set up to serve rough sleepers, renovating empty properties as an employment and training initiative

The Tradition of Self-Help Housing Approaches: Self-build/Vacant property strategies 

Organisational forms: Social movement/ co-operatives/ community social enterprise/asset transfer

Characteristics: Bottom-up from sub-regional level Strong volunteering culture Largely outside of institutional participatory structures Context driven - traditionally evolve as a response to failure or gap in service

provision Degrees of contestation with state Historically self-help and self-build have evolved with a co-operative ethos

from unmet needs that could only be addressed collectively Sustained by partnership working and strong asset base

Self-help Housing in Context TYPICAL HISTORICAL CONDITIONS:

– Economic crisis, rising unemployment, housing shortage VOLUNTEERING ETHOS:

– Defining feature - ‘sweat equity’ COLLECTIVE ACTION:

– Meeting unmet housing needs, protest, partnership

NO STRONG POLITICAL OR IDEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION:– Unlike public or market-orientated housing

policy– Different political persuasions have adopted

different definitions

Housing Policy Context

Social housing

Private housing

Hybrid sector

Economic crisisRising

unemploymentInstabilityHousing shortageIncreased mobility

SHH

Traditional Model of Participation

Innovation, focus, scale Control – starts where Arnstein’s Ladder ends… the ‘everyday maker’ who works actively in the

neighbourhood to resolve issues of community concern, outside of existing political frameworks

 Not just service users – employees, volunteers, managers, planners, employers, trainees, consumers, negotiators between different agencies

Holistic approach to participatory inclusion: opportunity to participate as a producer, consumer, decision-maker and member of social network

Operates at neighbourhood level

The economic rationale for localism

The ‘neighbourhood’ is an ill-defined unit of analysis within a congested and confused policy space (Lowndes & Sullivan, 2008).

Better able to:• identify local

needs• identify wasteful

processes• apply economy

of ‘scope’ not economy of ‘scale’

Starting points

LEADERSHIP

Addressing short-term hardship

Building trust

Involvement Strategies“Just trying to do something for our tenants, it’s never going to work, we’ve got to do it as part of the community…for instance we’re working in four schools”

Local ResourcesLOCAL LABOUR LESS CRIME:“S***** (is) known for theft on building sites. We have had none. I really think

that’s because people go, ‘no, that’s our Freddy in there, working up there, don’t nick their bricks’”

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT LESS TRAVEL:“We give everybody bikes, and that’s because everybody works within a two mile radius of where they live”

LOCAL STAFF MORE ACCOUNTABILITY:“The scariest part for me personally, being the caseworker up there in the office smack bang in the window was you’re not inclined to mess people about…I’m not going to spin you a line to make you feel better today because….chances are I’m going to walk past you on the street at the weekend”

Local Impact

Challenging stereo-types:“I had two girls at my house (decorating), I thought ‘Wow!’..it’s not

always for the boys and for the men”

Demographic change:“A number of Asian families have purchased. In terms of the social and economic class of people living in the area there’s been significant change…we have doctors and those types of professions. There’s been quite a demographic mix up and make up”

Sustainability

Economic SOCIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

Concluding Points‘Locally driven housing solutions’

Housing shortage – availability and affordabilityPolitical vacuumLevels of youth unemploymentSkills low cost because of recession Materials cheaply availableLevel of empty propertiesVolunteering ethos and promotion of itExemplar of localism - effective action at local

levelRecognition of ‘community architects of change’