By Peter King
Read or Download Housing: Who Decides? PDF
Best public affairs books
The city main issue of the Sixties revived a dormant social activism whose protagonists positioned their was hoping for radical swap and political effectiveness in neighborhood motion. satirically, the insurgents selected the local people as their terrain for a political conflict that during fact concerned a couple of strictly neighborhood matters.
Social assistance in Albania: decentralization and targeted transfers
Albania presents a small quantity of social tips to just about 20% of its inhabitants via a process which permits a level of neighborhood discretion in making a choice on distribution. This examine investigates the poverty focusing on of this software. It shows that relative to different safeguard internet courses in low source of revenue nations, social suggestions in Albania is reasonably good specific to the terrible.
The Politics of Public Sector Reform: From Thatcher to the Coalition
The 1st accomplished 'bird's eye' account of public quarter reform supported by way of references from over four hundred reliable resources, this publication is a useful advisor to all these within the public, deepest and voluntary sectors grappling with the dual demanding situations of handling public spending austerity and the strain in accordance with rework public providers.
Poor Relief and Charity 1869–1945: The London Charity Organization Society
This quantity demanding situations many greatly held ideals concerning the efficacy of the London Charity association Society. Politicians, social directors, sociologists, economists, biographers and historians were swayed via the power in their propaganda. The Charity association Society remains to be used as an institutional version to demonstrate the alleged benefits of voluntarism over nation advantages.
Additional info for Housing: Who Decides?
Example text
Indeed, as Sen (1992) has suggested, when one discusses equality it is always equality of something. Thus equality never involves purely abstract questions. The issue, for Sen, is therefore to establish equality of what? So when egalitarians discuss equality it is with some goods, service or issue in mind. There is though an immediate problem even with this qualified form of equality; namely, on what basis it is assumed that equality should apply to the particular good and service. Presumably it is because individuals are already assumed to be equal.
In Britain concern has been expressed that teenage girls deliberately become pregnant to ‘jump the housing queue’ as lone parents’ (1997, p. 26, my emphasis). Hills quotes a 1991 study by Bradshaw and Millar which purportedly found little evidence for young women becoming deliberately pregnant. On the basis of this, Hills dismisses Murray’s notion that benefits alter behaviour. There are two points to consider here; firstly, whether Murray’s views are being accurately described – and the word ‘deliberate’ is important here – and secondly, that there appears to be a paradox whereby structures are seen to constrain and limit behaviour, in terms of employment and consumption, yet changes in that structure caused by increased benefits are seen as not causing any change in behaviour.
This means that when considering housing the concept of need is also apparent. In conventional policy terms housing need is used to refer to those households unable to provide for themselves. As I have discussed elsewhere (King, 1996, 1998a, 1998b) this is to confuse need with its fulfilment. My contention is that need should not be seen as a lack of something, but as a necessity. This means that the need does not diminish even when it is fulfilled. But this view of need means that it is overlaid with the issue of the means of fulfilment.