Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of placebased policy in austere times
FERRARI, Edward <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5506-7670>
Available from Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at:
http://shura.shu.ac.uk/23143/
This document is the author deposited version. You are advised to consult the
publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.
Published version
FERRARI, Edward (2018). Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of placebased policy in austere times. People, Place and Policy, 11 (3), 143-149.
Copyright and re-use policy
See http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html
Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive
http://shura.shu.ac.uk
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149. DOI: 10.3351/ppp.2018.4889247933
Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of placebased policy in austere times
Ed Ferrari*
CRESR, Sheffield Hallam University
Abstract
This paper revisits an assessment, published ten years ago in PPP, of the then-flagship
regeneration programme Housing Market Renewal. It finds that the emergent concerns
in 2007 with affordability, which partly underscored a justification for the programme's
cancellation, remain while suggesting that HMR's key regeneration objectives have
gone unaddressed. The paper briefly reviews some ways that the landscape now is
similar and different to 2007. The key difference is in the government's overall
approach to regeneration, which now relies more on attempts to foster regional
economic growth through people-based strategies. By looking at HMR through the lens
of competing logics of economic geography at a time of 'austerity urbanism', the paper
tentatively concludes that government needs to rediscover a more obviously placebased approach to regeneration.
Keywords: Housing Market Renewal, economic regeneration, agglomeration, placebased policy.
In 2007 the Government's then-flagship regeneration programme, Housing Market
Renewal (HMR), was living on borrowed time. Conceived in 2002 as part of John
Prescott's Sustainable Communities Plan, 25 local authorities, organised into nine subregional 'Pathfinders', shared a pot of over £2 billion aimed at reversing the fortunes of
the weakest urban housing markets in the North and Midlands of England (Ferrari and
Lee, 2010).
HMR was a sub-regional area based regeneration programme which aimed to
restructure local housing markets through a combination of environmental
improvements, property rehabilitation and the comprehensive masterplanning and
redevelopment of housing estates, sometimes involving demolition, building
replacement housing, and tenure diversification. It was focused on those parts of
England considered most at risk of low demand, as evidenced by a combination of
indicators about low/falling house prices, high rates of turnover and empty properties,
and socioeconomic characteristics (Leather and Nevin, 2013). According to estimates
drawn together by Leather and Nevin (2013), by the time it was cancelled. the
programme had refurbished over 85,000 homes to the Decent Homes Standard or
above, cleared over 21,000 homes, and replaced them with around 29,000 newly built
homes.
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149
p. 144. Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of place-based policy in austere times
Yet, less than five years after its inception, the programme was already being
overtaken by events. Critics were calling into question the wisdom of such an expensive
intervention into a job that it appeared that the market was performing perfectly well.
House price rises in the type of deprived Northern neighbourhood that characterised
HMR areas were outstripping those in the wealthy South East, and a new malaise -unaffordability -- was rife throughout HMR's industrial heartlands, standing in direct
contrast to a narrative of decline and abandonment. These price rises were interpreted
as an indicator of healthy demand and were therefore undermining a programme
designed to "eradicate the problems of low demand housing by 2020" (ODPM, 2005:
10) and whose defining characteristic was, accurately or otherwise, wholesale
demolition and redevelopment of homes. HMR's approach to community engagement
needed further development (Cole and Flint, 2007) and its underlying rationale too
complex and too poorly articulated, and these weaknesses led, it would seem, to a
clamour for its demise. The incoming Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, was saying a lot
less about regeneration and a lot more about the need for a step change in new
housing delivery everywhere. The economic evidence supplied by two reviews by Kate
Barker (2004; 2006) seemed to suggest (albeit not without important caveats) that,
fundamentally, to bring down prices required a return to the levels of mass
housebuilding not seen since the 1970s.
'Housing Market Renewal in an Era of New Housing Supply' (Ferrari, 2007) was my
attempt to understand how HMR could survive this turn in the political discourse. But
the biggest change, not entirely without its foreseers, was just around the corner. The
original article, in the third issue of People, Place and Policy, was written just before
and published just after the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the onset of the Global
Financial Crisis. For at least 12 months prior to this, the UK government was
preoccupied with rampant housing inflation. Yvette Cooper, then the Housing Minister,
began attending Cabinet meetings in a sign of how seriously the Brown government
was taking the developing housing crisis. Buoyed by his success in pulling off a tricky
"soft landing" in the UK economy as Chancellor in the latter half of the 1990s, Brown
seemed insistent that the same feat could be achieved in the 2008 housing market. In
the event, the crash did come, albeit in a form modified from Britain's previous housing
downturn experience in the early 1990s: repossessions this time were mercifully low,
interest rates did not spiral out of control (the opposite, indeed), and, while taking a hit,
prices did recover reasonably quickly in many parts of the country, at least in nominal
terms. Structurally, however, many of the same issues that afflicted urban housing
markets in 2007 would appear to remain: widening gaps both between the haves and
the have-nots, and between house prices (and rents) and incomes; and the persistence
of pockets of disadvantaged and the "left behind".
It is arguably in what is different after 2007 that helps to explain some of the
fundamental structural problems with housing markets in England. That is why looking
back to articles such as those published in those early issues of People, Place and
Policy, can be so instructive. Reading the original article again I was struck by both
what remains the case and what is different. Yet, reflecting on events in the decade
since the article was written, I remain unconvinced that pulling the rug from under
programmes like HMR was a good idea.
This paper briefly reviews some of the main features of urban housing markets in
the former HMR areas and discusses the extent to which the issues prevalent in 2007
remain and reflects also on the key differences now. It puts forward a tentative
argument that we are still dealing with housing market issues that are structurally
similar to those that were facing HMR pathfinders, while the language and practices of
economic regeneration that so fundamentally frame any approach to housing renewal
have transformed in intent and effect.
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149
p. 145. Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of place-based policy in austere times
What's the same? The persistence of housing market structures
It is now evident that encouraging the delivery of new housing supply remains as
foundational to the government's strategic response to housing problems as it was
rapidly becoming in 2007. As noted above, this was a feature of the subtle discourse
change as Blair gave way to Brown. Part of the important regional dynamic which
underpinned the Sustainable Communities Plan and its regionally variegated strategy
gave way to a more national approach focused on growth. This staged HMR as a
housing programme first and foremost. Arguably some of the strategic planning
responses to this challenge, such as relaxing controls and, as I put it then, 'questioning
the sanctity of green belt land' (Ferrari, 2007: 125) have since become normalised and
embedded.1
The original paper identified concerns about house price inflation and the
decoupling of prices from incomes as leaving 'no corner of the country untouched' (p.
125). Notwithstanding a mushrooming of unaffordability in London, ONS data suggests
that on average in England affordability has largely remained stable at just over seven
times earnings for the lower-quartile affordability ratio (see Figure 1).
Those regions containing HMR areas2 have all seen affordability improve marginally
by this measure. It is noteworthy that in all regions the ratio for lower quartile prices to
earnings remains substantially higher than the 3-4x benchmark traditionally used for
mortgage approvals. Yet, all told, the intervening period has been characterised by a
remarkable amount of stability, suggesting that the most significant problems with
affordability actually emerged during the years prior to the crash in 2007-8.
Paradoxically, perhaps, it was the extended period of economic growth and the
increased household incomes, stability and confidence that this gave rise to which
helped to push house prices up so unsustainably.
The data are not without their problems, however. Affordability ratios track prices of
sold properties; the ratio is not affected where households are not accessing properties
and where properties go unsold. The conventional metrics do not detect such 'latent'
unaffordability, which is instead laid bare through analysis of other measures such as
the average age of first time buyers and the deposits of them (see DCLG, 2017). While
problems in the housing market may manifest themselves most visibly at the
neighbourhood level, they reflect a complex intersection of structural economic and
social changes at the regional and national scale. Moreover, these structural changes
have been decades in the making, both predating and likely surviving interventions like
HMR.
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149
p. 146. Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of place-based policy in austere times
Figure 1: Ratio of lower-quartile prices to gross annual earnings, selected regions in
England, 2007-2016
Ratio
Ratio of lower-quartile prices to gross
annual earnings
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
England
13.52
9.33
North East
7.21
7.16
5.68
North West
4.61
Yorkshire and the
Humber
West Midlands
Source: Office for National Statistics.
What's different? ‘Austerity urbanism' and blind faith
Housing Market Renewal was not a typical housing-led regeneration programme and
stood by way of contrast to previous initiatives - such as Housing Improvement Areas,
Estates Action and Housing Actions Trusts - in that its central diagnosis was an
economic one, rooted in an analysis of long term structural economic change at the
regional scale. HMR thus reflected a view of economic cause-and-effect and what
should be done about it that stands by way of marked contrast to the approach
adopted since 2010.
The notion of 'market failure' as promulgated by HMR practitioners referred to a
pathology that saw local housing market dynamics not endogenously but as highly
related to changes in sectoral economic performance, labour market conditions, choice
and socio-spatial mobility in households, infrastructure, and public expenditure, within
a multi-scalar framework. Pathfinders faced different combinations of issues, which
reflected the variegated impacts of structural change experienced in different
demographic, spatial and economic configurations within and across sub-regions. With
such a diagnosis, HMR was fundamentally an economic tool: "The aim of HMR in these
areas was to support economic growth and to ensure that its benefits were spread to
communities in adjacent inner city areas suffering high levels of deprivation" (Leather
et al., 2012: 6). In other words, the problems faced by localities were to some extent
structural and could not be solved by a local approach to renewal alone.
This difference between this and today's prevailing logics can be seen best not in
housing policy but in what has replaced HMR and other area based initiatives (ABIs) in
the space of sub-regional economic and spatial regeneration. The establishment in
2010 of Local Enterprise Partnerships, given a wider remit following a review by
Michael Heseltine (2012), and a quasi-devolved landscape of city deals and growth
deals have been tantamount to a ‘shift in emphasis from neighbourhood renewal under
the previous “New” Labour administrations to an almost exclusive focus on promoting
local economic growth’ (Crisp et al., 2015: 168). Crisp et al (2015), drawing on Meegan
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149
p. 147. Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of place-based policy in austere times
et al. (2014), note the consistency between this recent experience and a broader (and
longer) trajectory of ‘austerity urbanism’, characterised by Peck (2012) as involving
public-sector retrenchment, the paring back of third sector institutions providing the
‘shadow welfare state’, continuing replacement of funding programmes with
competitions, and the reliance by restructuring cities upon symbolic economic
‘placebos’ involving aspirations such as 'creativity, sustainability, livability, etc.' (Peck,
2012: 648).
To some extent this may be regarded as the triumph of the New Economic
Geography (NEG), in which a hegemonic narrative about cities, agglomeration
economics and the knowledge economy has been 'enthusiastically picked up by
policymakers over the last decade and increasingly drummed to inhabitants of lagging
and/or declining areas as the way forward" (Rodriguez-Pose, 2017: 7). In contrast to
HMR's logic of reconnection, the fundamental premise of the NEG is that people will
gravitate towards jobs as firms cluster to take advantage of ‘absorptive capacity’ and
knowledge spillovers (Cohen and Levinthal, 1989) and because ‘Put bluntly, firms …
have few locational choices in [leading] sectors because inputs (people, skills and
organizational competences) are rare and specialized and outputs are nonstandardized’ (Storper, 2011: 339).
Adherence to NEG tenets within economic and social welfare strategies has
supplanted a focus on place with one on people-based policies. The policy implications
of this – focusing blind faith in hoped-for ‘trickle down’ effects of economic growth and
social mobility policies such as a focus on education and skills – are attractive in the
context of costly physical regeneration programmes. The effectiveness of such
programmes has been subject to a largely ideological and un-evidenced critique (Crisp
et al, 2015), and arguably helps to explain the almost entire cessation of regeneration
funding streams since 2010 identified by Lupton and Fitzgerald (2015). While
seemingly attractive in concept - focusing on human capital rather than the valorisation
of place (and thus avoiding the moral hazard of giving landowners an unearned
increment) - such people-based approaches have arguably an infinitely more pernicious
corollary: the expectation, especially among free-marketeers, that people should
gravitate by course to denser areas of prosperity, growth and economies of scale, and
allow left-behind regions to naturally run their course. Propounded by Leunig and
Swaffield (2007) in a Policy Exchange report, this approach has arguably suffused
government's thinking on a range of policy areas, including approaches to housing
investment, devolution and infrastructure policy in what might be termed "picking
geographical winners".
In mounting a defence of area-based policy it will be important to remember that
the NEG is not without substantial critique and limitations, both in terms of explanatory
power and policy prescription. As Storper (2011) finds, most spatial economic models
(including the NEG) 'totally ignore' the 'forces of discontinuous and complex change'
that are found in areas of industrial decline where degraded built environments are
persistent, migration flows are inhibited and labour market adjustments slow, and
where there are labour price rigidities. Consequently, the likelihood of the most
impoverished moving to areas of jobs growth and opportunity as envisioned by some
practitioners of NEG-flavoured policy is low, while the opposite proposition, favoured by
the LEP approach (firms moving to cheap labour pools), is equally improbable (Storper,
2011). Consequently, trickle-down likely never happens to the required extent, and
localist 'bootstraps' approaches to economic policy (see Eisenschitz and Gough, 1993)
flounder in the prevailing winds of spatial agglomeration. This is why efforts to promote
social mobility without a complementary focus on place and their underlying economies
is potentially a very bad idea: they will further erode communities through the inevitable
requirement to move to areas of opportunity and they will widen the cleaves between
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149
p. 148. Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of place-based policy in austere times
those who get on and those whose sociospatial immobility can be perhaps described
euphemistically as 'prescribed belonging' (Jeffery, 2016; cf. Savage et al., 2005). In this
context, Rodríguez-Pose is right to call for 'better … place-sensitive territorial
development policies' (2017: 2).
If this suggests a weakness in the HMR approach it is that at worst it may only have
been a palliative. More kindly it suggests a certain philosophical dissonance in the
early 2000s: arguably, despite a well-funded regional development apparatus, New
Labour's enthusiastic embrace of the knowledge economy was simultaneously aiding
and abetting a process of regional economic clustering of growth sectors within those
areas best equipped with the institutional infrastructures, R&D capacity and creative
milieus (London and the south east, and, within the regions, cities like Manchester) just
as it was seeking to upgrade and reconnect disconnected and deprived areas. For all
its potential limitations and spatial imbalances, the May government's commitment to
an Industrial Strategy (see Fothergill et al., 2017) at least has the potential to broaden
the conceptualisation of economic value within the economy. But without a serious
approach to regeneration of place alongside commitment to social regeneration, the
most deprived and disconnected neighbourhoods will continue to risk being
residualised as processes of economic sorting and social segregation play out through
the housing market.
Notes
Although at the time of writing the incoming housing minister Dominic Raab has
signalled a more protectionist approach towards the green belt.
1
2
North East, North West, Yorkshire & the Humber, and West Midlands.
* Correspondence address: Professor Ed Ferrari, CRESR, Sheffield Hallam University,
Unit 10, Science Park, Howard Street, Sheffield, S1 1WB. Email: e.ferrari@shu.ac.uk
References
Barker, K. (2004) Delivering Stability, Securing our Future Housing Needs. Final report
of the Barker Review of Housing Supply, March 2004. London: HM Treasury.
Barker, K. (2006) Barker Review of Land Use Planning. Final report, December 2006.
London: HM Treasury.
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1989) Innovation and learning: The two faces of
R&D. Economic Journal, 99, 569-596.
Cole, I. and Flint, J. (2007) Addressing Housing Affordability, Clearance and Relocation
Issues In the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinders. York: Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Crisp, R., Pearson, S. and Gore, T. (2015) Rethinking the impact of regeneration on
poverty: a (partial) defence of a ‘failed’ policy. Journal of Poverty and Social
Justice, 23, 3, 167-87.
Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (2017) English Housing
Survey: First Time Buyers 2015-16. London: DCLG.
Eisenschitz, A. and Gough, J. (1993) The Politics of Local Economic Policy. London:
Macmillan.
Fothergill, S., Gore, T. and Wells, P. (2017) Industrial Strategy and the Regions: The
shortcomings of a narrow sectoral focus. Sheffield: Centre for Regional Economic
and Social Research.
Heseltine, M. (2012) No Stone Unturned in Pursuit of Growth, Report of the Heseltine
Review. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149
p. 149. Housing Market Renewal revisited: a defence of place-based policy in austere times
Jeffery, B. (2016) 'I probably would never move, but ideally like I’d love to move this
week': class and residential experience, beyond elective belonging. Sociology (in
press).
Leather, P., Nevin, B., Cole, I. and Eadson, W. (2012) The Housing Market Renewal
Programme in England: development, impact and legacy. Report for the Chairs of
the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinders. Sheffield: Centre for Regional Economic
and Social Research.
Leather, P. and Nevin, B. (2013) The Housing Market Renewal Programme: Origins,
Outcomes and the Effectiveness of Public Policy Interventions in a Volatile
Market. Urban Studies, 50, 5, 856–875.
Leunig, T. and Swaffield, J. (2007) Cities Unlimited: Making Urban Regeneration Work.
London: Policy Exchange.
Lupton, R. and Fitzgerald, A. (2015) The Coalition’s record on Area Regeneration and
Neighbourhood Renewal 2010-2015. Social Policy in a Cold Climate Working
Paper 19. London: Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of
Economics.
Meegan, R., Kennett, P., Jones, G., Croft, J. (2014) Global economic crisis, austerity and
neoliberal urban governance in England. Cambridge Journal of Regions Economy
and Society, 7, 1, 137–53.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (2005) Sustainable Communities: Homes for
All. A Five Year Plan. London: ODPM.
Peck, J, (2012) Austerity urbanism. City: Analysis of urban trends, culture, theory, policy,
action, 16, 6, 626–55.
Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2017) The revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do
about it). Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. ISSN 1752-1378
(In Press)
Savage, M., Bagnall, G. and Longhurst, B. (2005) Globalisation and Belonging. London:
SAGE.
Storper, M. (2011) Why do regions develop and change? The challenge for geography
and economics. Journal of Economic Geography, 11, 333-346.
© 2018 The Author
Journal Compilation © 2018 PPP
People, Place and Policy (2018): 11/3, pp. 143-149