Exploring exclusion in contemporary housing systems

Responses

Social housing providers may need to reflect on the success of their current approaches to responding to hate crime. How effective are third party reporting schemes and multi-agency partnerships? Are hate crime complaints or experiences subsumed under anti-social behaviour? Research highlights victims do not always know they have suffered a hate crime. This requires a professional intervention focused from the victim’s perspective. Evidence suggests that providing an empathic and compassionate service response that includes listening, validating, co-producing solutions and offering after-care is viewed positively by the victim regardless of the outcome of the complaint.

Experiences of hate based harassment, intimidation and threats in and around the home could be resolved through restorative justice practices. Restorative justice could become an important tool for housing practitioners that can respond to the context and complexity of hate crime, the harms caused, and explore with both parties the grievances beyond the limited legal approach that views disputes as singular

Reflections

Evidence-led approaches are available to housing providers to respond to hate crime. But the most compelling evidence is that positive interactions and responses between a support/caseworker and the victim can be the difference between suffering secondary victimisation and harm and supporting client empowerment.

The Housing and Hate Crime Knowledge Exchange project is supported by the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence. The project aims to synthesise current research evidence and create practice based tools for social housing providers, including a toolkit.

If you have any case studies, good practice and resources to share please contact: kusminder.chahal@bcu.ac.uk

Useful links: https://bit.ly/33qRP67 www.hatecrime.campaign.gov.uk/ https://bit.ly/38SM3eS www.why-me.org/evidence/

Dr Jenny Preece, UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence (CaCHE), University of Sheffield, discusses some of the key issues identified in a new research report.

Recent research commissioned by the National Housing Federation found that 8.4 million people in England are directly affected by the housing crisis, with one in seven of the population living in unaffordable, insecure, overcrowded or unsuitable homes. We explore these issues using the concept of ‘housing exclusion’, which includes social, spatial and financial dimensions.

Our evidence review looked at existing research into housing exclusion, organised around structural, individual, and institutional mechanisms. By carrying out interviews with a range of key stakeholder and housing providers from across social and private rental sectors, our research sought to add depth of understanding to contemporary debates about access to, and exclusion from, appropriate housing.

Worsening exclusion

The majority view among our participants was that housing exclusion was worsening, with very limited options and no access at all to decent housing for a large number of people on a regular basis. This was not just a matter of housing affordability but went beyond housing to other policy areas, such as support services and legal / advice services. There was also acknowledgement of disproportionate impacts on some groups and in different geographical areas.

Macro-drivers

Perhaps not surprisingly, the lack of affordable, appropriate, secure housing was one of the most commonly identified problems. This was exacerbated by longer term changes in funding and the Affordable Rent programme, which was described by one participant as ‘almost Orwellian’ because of its lack of affordability in some areas. Scarcity of social housing shifts households into the private sector, increasing competition for housing and pushing up costs. However, the issue is also more nuanced, since in some locations the issue was more the type of housing available and where, than an absolute lack of dwellings.

Changes to welfare policies were foregrounded as particularly important. For those already on a low and/ or precarious income accessing housing they can afford is a real challenge, especially in the PRS where a deposit may be required, but also in the social sector where rent in advance may be requested in order to account for delays in the processing of Universal Credit payments.