Social mix and its impact on access to housing for people who are homeless

1. Social mix and its impact on access to housing for people who are homeless 1. June 2007, FEANTSA seminar Volker Busch-Geertsema GISS, Bremen, Germany

2. An orthodoxy in housing policy? Social mix and �balanced communities� have become new orthodoxy in housing policy Are supposed to promote social cohesion and prevent negative effects of �poverty of space� adding to the disadvantages of economically disadvantaged people In reality the aim of social mix often further reduces the chances of poor and disadvantaged people to gain access to regular housing Social mix: A concept aiming at social cohesion and fostering exclusion?

3. Bad neighbourhoods ? �Underclass�; �culture of poverty�, welfare dependency Lack of positive role models of behaviour Lack of social network helping to gain access to jobs (informal information sources) Bad image of poverty areas � stigmatizing inhabitants and deteriorating job chances High level of deviant behaviour � increased fears of crime and high level of dissatisfaction Social rest and riots � negative publicity

4. Targets of social mix Promotes more social interaction and social cohesion Encourages mainstream norms and values Creates social capital Opens up job opportunities Overcomes place-based stigma Attracts additional services to the neighbourhood

5. Social Mix: What are we talking about? Geographical level; area, street, housing block? What kind of mix are we talking about? �All neighbourhoods are, of course, �mixed� to a degree � but some are more �mixed� than others.� (Cole and Goodshild 2001: 351) Degree of mix, tipping points, critical thresholds: What is a healthy mix?

6. More cohesion by social mix? Empirical Results not too convincing More affluent people in mixed communities tend to spend more time away from estates and use local facilities less Placing residents with different income levels in the same neighbourhood might create tensions and conflicts rather than social cohesion Existing and cohesive community networks in poor areas might be destroyed, increased social isolation of �dispersed� poor households Public awareness of social problems and the need to tackle them might be reduced: �Out of sight, out of mind� Additional resources might be lost by dispersing those in need of them

7. A case of social justice rather than of social cohesion? Stigma is a real problem and can be reduced by diversification strategies More shops and commercial services might be attracted by increasing social mix in poor areas Increased rates of crime and violence in specific areas are a real problem While in many social housing estates surpri-singly high rates of satisfaction of tenants can be found, there are areas where almost nobody wants to live. But poor people are often forced to live there.

8. A case of social justice rather than of social cohesion? Enforced segregation is much worse than segregation by choice Target would have to be: to open up additional housing options for the poor and disadvantaged In reality all to often the opposite is the rule Conflicting ideas about reducing concentration of �problem households� in one area and protecting �stable neighbourhoods� elsewhere

9. Perverse effects of discourse on social mix �Housing agencies generally find it easier to define and recognize the problems associated with imbalance rather than the advantages of balance as a social ideal.� �Under the discourse of inclusivity, the �balanced� community became paradoxically a means of leaving some unwanted participants out.� (Cole and Goodshild 2001: 358, 354)

10. Social mix. An achievable ideal? �The concept of social mix has never been extended to the rich, who still live in highly segregated areas.� Few targeted measures are taken for increasing the share of poor people in areas dominated by higher income households Option for new developments but not too popular among private developers Need for area based initiatives, investing in material resources, compensating social and educational infrastructure, transport etc.

11. Social mix � consequences for homeless people Too often used as an excuse for blocking access to regular housing Result can be and often is a much more dramatic concentration in dilapidated private estates or in temporary accommodation Even greater challenge for municipalities to search places for shelters and temporary accommodation for the homeless facing �nimby�-reactions everywhere Main question for local practice: Do concepts for social mix increase or decrease options of those most in need?

12. Thanks for your attention!

13. Contact Gesellschaft f�r innovative Sozialforschung und Sozialplanung (GISS e.V.)Volker Busch-GeertsemaKohlh�kerstra�e 22D-28203 Bremen (Germany) Fon: +49-(0)421 � 334708-2Fax: +49-(0)421 � 3398835Mail: vbg@giss-ev.de Internet: www.giss-ev.de