Search

The paper contributes to research that examines how state actors support the financialisation of land via the development process and how planning systems have facilitated the accumulation of privately-owned land-based wealth. The empirical focus is the specialist residential land promoter sector in England. This is a particularly appropriate case study because of how this sector of the land market has become integrated with the planning system via crisis-driven planning reform that has facilitated the commodification of planning risk and the financialisation of land. The paper examines the business models and strategies of land promoters to show how they have been shaped both by the politics of planning reform as well as the financial objectives of their funders. The research is in dialogue with international literature on the relationship between planning and the land market, how this relationship is shaped by risk and uncertainty, and the role of state regulation in reshaping the physical environment in accordance with financial logics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractEthnic inequalities in housing in England are entrenched and long-standing. Minority ethnic groups are more likely than the White British population to experience housing disadvantage and deprivation. In recent years, little attention has focused on what steps housing policy is taking to promote race equality. This study fills this gap in knowledge. Focusing on four key housing policy interventions, it traces the policy approach to race equality in England since 2000. A paradigmatic shift is revealed. Previously, policy actively promoted race equality. Inequalities remained but progress was made tackling disadvantage. In contrast, the contemporary policy approach is characterised by non-intervention. This shift is related to the retreat from multiculturalism and increasing influence of postracial notions about the fading legacy of racism, allied with neoliberal understandings of inequality as the product of individual responsibility and choice. In conclusion, the paper calls for research to scrutinise these presumptions and explore whether policy is following a similar trajectory in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The movement of housing policy across space/time has attracted considerable policy and scholarly interest. But once we accept that policy moves, interesting questions arise. Particularly: what is it that moves? Why do some policies move but others do not? Academic conversations have involved concepts like "policy diffusion", "policy transfer", "lesson-drawing", "fast policy", "policy mobility" and "policy translation" - but a clear picture of how these concepts have been used to interpret housing policy developments is absent. Through systematic bibliographical searches, we identified 55 'housing' publications to review. Our concern is the theoretical assumptions underlying these studies and their implications for the questions stated above. Through a grounded analysis, we identified 'dominant knowledge' as the key element shaping housing policy movement; highlighted five strategic conditions for mobility (summarized as ontological, ideological, institutional, legitimizing devices, and contingency); presented the sporadic engagement with questions of immobility; and synthesized authors' policy recommendations, particularly their calls for deeper engagement with the people affected by policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is situated within wider debates about the changing shape of policy and practice within the field of homelessness. It reports on a small scale case study of an intensive key worker support service operating in England designed to move multiply disadvantaged rough sleepers off the streets. The discussion of the empirical data draws attention to different modes of control inherent within the project's working practices that are designed to incite rough sleepers to make positive changes. The article suggests that the project is a useful example of a 'nascent trend' within homeless support services of tolerant and less conditional approaches for those who are the most disadvantaged. The article suggests that this move towards tolerance offers positive benefits for rough sleepers with complex needs that mark a shift away from more punitive and coercive practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]