Search

This paper examines trends in the operation and financial performance of major UK housebuilders shortly before, during and after the global financial crisis (GFC) in 2008. It outlines two contrasting explanations of what has happened in the sector over this period. The first is described as an ‘institutional recovery’ perspective, in which a period of initial retrenchment after the crash was followed by steady reinvestment, and then a cautious move back to growth by the major housebuilding companies. This is set against what we describe as a ‘financialised recovery’ perspective. This explanation stems from our own analysis of the annual accounts of major UK housebuilders since 2005. It reveals the impact of the intensive financialisation of a sector initially weakened by the GFC, but where the strategic primacy of maximising shareholder value has been asserted more strongly than before. Our analysis of dividend payments post-GFC reveals this in the starkest of terms. We suggest that the sector has been in more robust financial health than implied by the ‘institutional recovery’ narrative, but that significant value is being extracted out of these companies, and indeed the sector overall, by institutional investors. The analysis provides unique insights into the financialisation of housing production, an issue which to date has received only limited attention. We reflect on the implications of identified trends for housing supply in the UK. We also sketch future research possibilities to examine the ongoing impact of intensive financialisation and the capital flows into, and out of, major housebuilders.

The introduction of the mandatory 'Right to Buy' (RTB) in 1980 for qualifying tenants in municipal housing was a significant development in British housing policy. It was an extension of the post-war 'social project' (Forrest and Hirayama, 2015) of the state-subsidised expansion of home ownership, leading to the sale of nearly two million dwellings over forty years. In 2015, the UK government sought to 'reinvigorate' RTB by extending it to the housing association (HA) sector in England, initially on a pilot basis.\ud This paper investigates the impact of this pilot programme and the response of eligible tenants to the opportunity to purchase. It compares the pilot programme to the local authority RTB in terms of the changing demographic base of social renting, increased spatial differentiation in the housing market, the different institutional framework for housing associations and the design of the pilot scheme. Research findings suggest that the take-up and impact of any national RTB scheme is likely to be limited, for a mixture of financial, institutional and demographic reasons. RTB will provide only a very selective route into home ownership for some HA tenants, as a specific segment of a more fragmented tenure than in 1980.

Increasing development of the electrical smart grid technology offers exceptional opportunities for more complex electrical supply and demand interactions in a relationship that has been historically unilateral. The smart grid allows for the application of modern communication technology, such as the internet of things, to develop electrical transmission and distribution systems. To meet the needs of a fast-evolving power sector, with requirements to host greater Renewable Energy Sources (RES) for decarbonization, it is essential that a range of breakthrough technology novelties in the energy sector be deployed across the energy value chain. The aim of this work is to propose a novel framework that will support future actors to benefit from their participation in a tamper-proof energy market. 1 5

This report builds on detailed analysis of the lessons from the pilot programme for the Voluntary Right to Buy (VRTB). The introduction of the right to buy (RTB) for eligible tenants in specified housing association dwellings was a manifesto commitment by the Conservative party for the 2015 general election. In October 2015, the government accepted a proposal by the National Housing Federation (NHF) on behalf of its members to deliver this commitment by way of voluntary agreement rather than legislation. The VRTB pilot scheme was set up by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) the following month.\ud \ud The research team was commissioned in January 2016 by the National Housing Federation (NHF) and the five pilot housing associations to investigate the programme using an action learning approach. Findings from this research were published in January 2017. These findings were published before the end of the pilot programme. The overwhelming majority of the purchases from the pilot housing associations have now completed. This short follow-up report provides an update on the progress of the pilot during its final months.

Housing costs in the south east of England are unaffordable for millennials, even in social housing. And the Shared Accommodation Rate could cause severe hardship for single 16–34 year olds claiming Housing Benefit.\ud \ud The housing aspirations identified during the research were tempered by realism, and younger people recognised the importance of increased earnings. However, most were pessimistic about the prospects of improving their housing situation.\ud \ud In terms of developing viable housing offers to meet this group’s needs, housing associations are hampered by the nature of the homes they own; the procedures and protocols they share with their local authority partners in relation to allocating and managing those homes; and the impending risk of the Shared Accommodation Rate, which could make tenancies unsustainable.

The research on which this report is based was carried out by the Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR) at Sheffield Hallam University. It was commissioned by Crisis in response to concerns that single homeless people are finding it difficult to access the private rented\ud sector, at a time when there is increased reliance on the sector to meet housing need. Changes introduced through the Localism Act 2011 in England, for example, allowed local\ud authorities to discharge their homelessness duty into the private rented sector (PRS) and gave them greater power to determine who qualifies for social housing. The consequence\ud is restricted access to social housing. In the meantime, however, the Government has introduced a raft of measures affecting the private rented sector, particularly at\ud the low cost end of the market, focused mainly but not exclusively on changes to Housing Benefit (HB). The concern is that the combined effect of policy changes in the social and private housing markets - alongside wider tenure restructuring and market change - will leave many homeless\ud people unable to resolve their housing problems. This study sought to unpick some of these issues, by exploring landlord views and lettings practices on the one hand, and\ud prospective (homeless) tenants’ experiences of trying to access the sector on the other. It also explored views and experiences of private rented access schemes - schemes\ud that seek to provide better

Introduction - Richard Crisp and Will Eadson.\ud \ud Crisis? What crisis? Housing policies from the main parties in England, Scotland and Wales for the 2015 general election - Ian Cole.\ud \ud Peering beyond the cliff-edge: what role for the voluntary sector in post-election United Kingdom? - Chris Dayson.\ud \ud Urban planning dilemmas: where next? - Karen Escott.\ud \ud Regional development: a casualty of the general election? - Steve Fothergill.\ud \ud The 2015 general election and the impending crisis in local public services - Tony Gore.\ud \ud Migration policy: stuck in a rut?\ud David Robinson

This report is the final evaluation of the recent changes to Local Housing Allowances (LHAs) \ud and Housing Benefit (HB) in the private rented sector (PRS) in Northern Ireland. This\ud report is based on primary research with landlords, claimants and housing advisers\ud undertaken in three local housing markets in the province - Armagh, Greater Shankill and\ud West Belfast. An initial report was published in 2012 on the first wave of this research.\ud This report focuses on the second wave of surveys and interviews and discusses the\ud longitudinal changes in the attitudes, perceptions and experiences of landlords, claimants\ud and housing advisers. When the second wave research was undertaken the LHA\ud measures had only just started to affect all claimants, so the research cannot be taken as\ud the conclusive statement on the effects of the measures, but it can provide insights into the\ud initial impacts on the attitudes and behaviour of the research participants in the three areas.

Vascular plants present in groundstoreys of variously–managed areas in four cemeteries in central western NSW – two on the Central Western Slopes (Garra and Toogong) and two on the Central Tablelands (Lyndhurst and Carcoar) – were recorded over periods of 6–10 years. It was hypothesised that (a) areas of the cemeteries with a history of nil or low disturbance would represent high quality remnant vegetation (i.e. contain a diversity of native species but few naturalised species), and (b) that clearing of woody vegetation, together with similar management (e.g. regular mowing) would result in homogenisation of the groundstoreys such that many species, native and naturalised, would be common to all sites. 344 species (176 native, 154 naturalised and 14 non–naturalised exotics) were recorded across the four cemeteries. Many native species that were rare in the surrounding agricultural lands were present in the cemeteries (enhancing their value as conservation areas) but no cemetery contained areas of groundstorey that would qualify as ‘pristine’. Across all management areas, the proportions of naturalised species in the native + naturalised floras of the cemeteries ranged from 46 to 55 %. Though never dominant, naturalised species also comprised high proportions (42 to 51 %) of the floras of the least disturbed (nil or infrequently mown) areas within each cemetery. Many (40 %) of the species recorded occurred at only one cemetery. This partly explained why the floras of similarly– managed parts of cemeteries on the Central Western Slopes were, contrary to expectations, markedly different to those on the Central Tablelands. However, within the same botanic subdivision, floras – particularly of naturalised species in regularly mown grasslands – were more similar (‘homogenised’) than those of nil or infrequently mown grasslands.