Contact us
CPRE in your area
Donate
Myth-busting social housing perceptions and finding exemplar schemes
Author: Annet Twinokwesiga
Annet is a CPRE rural affordable housing research volunteer. Views expressed in this article may not wholly reflect those of CPRE.
The UK’s systemic housing supply issues have been centre stage for several decades.
Current public debates about affordable housing exacerbate the severity of the crisis experienced in structurally constrained rural areas. Proponents of social housing argue for the delivery of non-market affordable homes to meet the rural need. However, many factors militate against the ability to act, not least in preservationist and planning policy constraints and a differentiated countryside.
As articulated in the Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act 1919, social or council housing provision is a statutory mandate of Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to meet the exponential demand for non-market homes by low-income households. In compliance with the Housing Act 1980 and under the Margaret Thatcher new right or neoliberal government, the ‘right to buy’, in total distaste, for council housing was introduced where previously social homes were rented out to people at below the market rate in preference for the English prestige of home ownership and a much faster property development process. Over a century after the enactment of its first regulatory framework, social housing provision is currently within the remit of LPAs in collaboration with diverse public-private social housing institutions as either enablers or providers.
This article seeks to demystify social housing myths or ‘rural idylls’ in England as part of CPRE’s campaign to reframe the perceptions related to the acceptability of social homes. Recent wide–ranging research explores several perspectives about social housing notably Reeves (2005) that covers overarching issues and Satsangi, Gallent and Bevan (2010) concerned with the lessons from the evolution of rural social housing. Some key themes are presented in the following sections of this article.
Marked by a decrease in the turnover in the social housing stock, demand by rural residents outstrips supply levels with a 15% national drop in the number of social rented households between 1980 and 2021. During the same period, the number of both owner-occupied and private-rented households experienced a steady increase. This could be attributed to the economic restructuring that led to a shift from the LPAs social commitment to systemic public investment into profitable housing schemes in prime locations and leaving the poorest in society with constrained access to decent homes. Social housing is a scarce and essential resource but inherently costly to the households that need it. LPAs as statutory providers currently lack enabling policies to enhance their capacity to develop the required affordable housing. Consequently, the available non-market housing stock provided by diverse social housing institutions will have to accommodate the same households for far longer than in previous years. This is further exacerbated by the associated price variation between reletting to another household and the maintenance of a ‘depreciating’ viable housing asset for existing multigenerational occupants.
A period of gentrification?
The timeline for rural social housing experienced a revolution since the 1940 post-war period when planning controls in favour of council housebuilding were unwelcome in many rural areas and the status quo remained as it was before the war making the countryside vulnerable to social and economic pressures generated by counter-urbanisation. Eventually in the 1980s, ‘Right to Buy’ priced out low-income rural residents who were in great housing need. Clapham’s (1989) criticisms of the 1980s Conservative government social housing policy highlight the particular focus on homeownership that might have neglected the needs of tenants who have no choice but to rent due to financial constraints or those that prefer to rent. Clapham (1989) states that whilst housing associations were always effective in providing social housing, the government’s lack of a clear vision for housing associations could have led to inconsistencies in their performance, coupled with the inefficiency of local authorities in managing social housing.
As a result of this policy reform and the prevailing economic restructuring, urban-to-rural migration saw new ‘middle-class’ residents buying out the existing residents and improving the housing or replacement of stock. As such, contributing to increasing property values and disregard for social housing – this led to a difficult set of conditions to meet the new housing need for the existing rural residents relative to demand. A similar recent trend was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic with the increase in home-based work and demand for second homes. The new rural residents experience a ‘sanitised and commodified’ idyll or myth that contrasts the longer-term residents’ ‘realistic and pragmatic view’ of the rural countryside. Such idyllic and partial representations of rural places have a profound impact on planning and housing policies at national and regional levels as well as on the local decisions that occasionally divide communities.
CPRE has historically advocated for sensible rural development and more recently supported building on rural exception sites to deter sprawling growth and promote the preservation of the attractive rural countryside.
Implications of the proposed planning reform
Evidence of severe shortages and policy failures challenge the myth of rural social housing in the UK, and a public awareness campaign of the benefits of having sufficient, high quality social homes with further challenge this notion. Despite government targets to build 1.5 million new homes, focusing on affordable and social housing, rural areas face unique challenges (Aref-Adib, Marshall and Pacitti, 2024; CPRE, 2023 ). The backlog is urgent, with estimates suggesting it would take 89 years to clear the rural social housing waiting list. Current policies are criticised as ineffective, with the proportion of social rent homes declining significantly by either a lack of homes being built or the number lost to the ‘Right To Buy’ scheme. There is hope that the reform of the NPPF will address these issues. The government’s approach appears more implied than explicit, often mentioning social housing within broader affordable housing contexts. While there are calls for stronger government intervention and policy reform, the current framework leaves room for local interpretation, potentially exacerbating rural housing issues. Addressing this crisis requires a more targeted approach to rural social housing needs.
Thus recommendations to the government include:
- Setting out national social housing targets and a minimum baseline for other affordable homes. Local Authorities can choose to go higher than the nationally prescribed target, however no areas should be underdelivering.
- Increase in S157 Restrictions in rural parishes with a population under 3000. This will ensure council housing stock remains in the hands of the local area.
- Housing standards (for all homes) ensuring that regardless of income everyone can live in a safe, secure and energy efficient home.
- Short term lets register and new use class – whilst not a main contributor, conversions to short-term lets in particular areas has had an adverse impact on the local housing markets pushing rents and house prices up. It’s also had an impact on the ‘feel of the community’ as referred to above. Restricting conversions would allow for tourism to continue, but at a more controlled pace.
- Further financial support for local authorities to build and housing associations to take on newly built social homes.
Author and references
About the author
Annet Twinokwesiga is a rural affordable housing research volunteer with CPRE and an architect with expertise in sustainable urban development. Originally from Uganda, her rural living and urban project management background inspired her to pursue postgraduate studies in Spatial Planning and Development at the University of Reading. With experience across East Africa and the UK, Annet’s work spans affordable housing, urban soundscapes, and city planning. She is dedicated to creating equitable development that preserves the essence of rural and urban communities.
References and bibliography
Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act 1919, c. 35. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1919/35/section/1/enacted (Accessed: 20 February 2024).
Housing Act 1980, c. 51. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/51/contents (Accessed: 20 February 2024).
Reeves, P. (2005) An Introduction to Social Housing. 2nd edn. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Satsangi, M., Gallent, N. and Bevan, M. (2010) The rural housing question: Communities and planning in Britain’s countrysides. Bristol: Policy Press.
Clapham, D. (1989) Goodbye Council Housing? London: Unwin Hyman Limited.
Aref-Adib, C., Marshall, J. and Pacitti, C. (2024) Building blocks: Assessing the role of planning reform in meeting the Government’s housing targets, September 2024, England and Wales: Resolution Foundation (Available at: https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/building-blocks/ )
Response to the draft NPPF Changes Consultation – September 2024 (From Brad https://cpretree.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/CPRENetwork/EYxtbn_ojW9Dom_dr4YZE0oBhCz7YYAeYEzeXVw-rOO1Gw?e=WUXj1p )
Social housing is a social commitment