Search

This paper reviews recent developments regarding social housing policies in Hong Kong and the UK. Underlying the analysis is the fact that, during the last 40 years or so, both countries have been major global players in financial markets and thus pursued aggressive market-driven approaches to economic development. Notwithstanding that fact, each followed a different direction regarding housing policy reforms in the period. In Hong Kong (HK), the system of public housing provision was expanded; in the UK, the system of housing provision was scaled down. The argument being developed here is that a pro-public housing approach in HK should not be seen as a threat to capitalism in any way or measure. On the contrary, land development as well as land-originated fiscal revenues is a crucial part of HKSAR government's revenues. In the UK, this is no different. The return (through various forms of privatization) of the public housing stock (Council housing) to private hands (homeowners and housing associations) meant also to enhance businesses, in particular the mortgage and real estate markets. In both cases, there were also clear political reasons that justify developments in housing policy. The idea that Council housing served as a stage in the passage from a time when housing was predominantly provided in a largely unregulated private-rental market to a time when most people became homeowners is also discussed. This was what defined the ‘modernization’ of housing in the UK. The of ‘residualization’ was adopted to discuss the UK case. One important question is to know whether Hong Kong will follow the same path of ‘modernization’ as the UK, in the future. So far, HK has resisted; public housing has been ‘resilient’, ensured by a proper repair and maintenance policy, redevelopment and production of new housing throughout the last decades. Resilience is also granted by people's recognition and attachment to public housing and low stigmatization. More importantly, public provision of housing continues to be regarded, in both countries, as a necessary development to grant quality of life and a better distribution of income, avoiding the sharpening of social and territorial segregation, gentrification and stigmatization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research aims to review the total collection of literature on the 'residential satisfaction' concept used in social research from 1961 to 2020, and provides a complete overview on how social research concerning 'residential satisfaction' has emerged and developed in the last 60 years. We follow the theoretical framework of bibliometric analysis and use the bibliometric datasets retrieved from Web of Science and Scopus's online resources. After compiling and processing the datasets, we used a final dataset containing 877 documents on residential satisfaction. The open-source statistical and visualisation software packages R and VOSviewer were used mainly for processing and analysing datasets. The results visualise information on the top authors, the most influential documents by citation, the most productive countries, and other criteria. The lexical network analysis shows that residential satisfaction has a strong co-occurrence association with the two frequently occurring terms 'neighbourhood' and 'satisfaction'. The majority of research on residential satisfaction has been conducted in the United States, China, and the United Kingdom. The top three most influential journals for residential satisfaction research are 'Social Indicators Research', 'Environment and Development', and 'Habitat International'. This bibliometric analysis frames the future research demand for residential satisfaction in social research. • This paper presents how the 'residential satisfaction (RS)' concept used in social science since its inception in 1961. • Bibliometric issues, e.g. lexical, temporal and spatial network of residential satisfaction concepts are discussed. • Bibliometric methodology is employed in open-source statistical and visualisation software packages R and VOSviewer. • 'Neighbourhood' and 'satisfaction' are the two frequently occurring terms in co-occurring association. • Majority of research on RS has been conducted in the United States, China, and the United Kingdom. • Top journals for RS research are 'Social Indicators Research', 'Environment and Development', and 'Habitat International'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]