Search

Since 2010 the English planning system, like others across Europe, has undergone a series of market- oriented reforms. There has been a concerted attempt to make state organisations, and those in receipt of public funds, more entrepreneurial and financially proactive and independent. This paper focuses on one manifestation of these wider trends - the regulation of English Housing Associations [HAs] as examples of organisations that are under pressure to take on more financial risks and deliver a wider range of affordable housing for communities in need. Drawing on in-depth qualitative research, the paper assesses some of the regulatory and governmental challenges that emerge in using market-led forms of coordination. It examines the role of new regulators and the ways which they seek to 'co- produce' regulations with HAs in more liquid and negotiated ways. We show that in reality decisions are taken in response to a polycentric mix of simultaneous regulatory pressures that act as gravitational pulls on the activities and decisions made by HAs, rather than enforcing a consistent and linear form of regulatory control. We conclude with wider reflections for planning theory and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We respond to the special issue's call for a multiscalar, historicised approach to state capitalism through an exploration of Sovereign Wealth Fund investment into London real estate. We point to how the UK's ostensibly market-led recovery since the 2008 financial crisis has relied in part on attracting 'patient' state capitalist investments. In this, we contextualise the relational regulation of real estate markets as the outcome of intersecting state projects by considering the investment motivations of the single largest owner of London real estate, the Qatari Investment Authority, and the utilisation of their investment by UK governance actors. Focusing on Qatari Investment Authority's involvement in London's Olympic Village, we highlight how this strategic coupling in the real estate market realised domestic and geopolitical aims for the Qataris while facilitating the UK government's strategy to ameliorate London's housing shortage by fostering a 'build to rent' asset class. In doing so, we contribute to readings of state capitalism as an 'uneven and combined' process beyond the traditional state/market binary by placing sovereign wealth fund investment into the context of city governance, the geopolitics of real estate and resultant relational forms of regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Patient capital' is presented by many policymakers as a panacea to address domestic (and sometimes city-level) gaps in financing urban development, particularly housing, that emerged in the post-2008 credit crunch. In this article, we analyse the complexities of patient investors' entry into residential markets in London and their response to the first major, and unexpected, crisis of demand: the COVID-19 pandemic and immediate falls in market demand. We focus on how patient capital and the firms invested in the professionalised rental market, build to rent (BTR), have responded. We highlight three main responses: (1) advancing their lobbying efforts to secure a more supportive political environment; (2) protecting their income streams by offering new payment plans and adaptability to prevent void rates; (3) turning to a 'reserve army' of renters backed by the state – so-called Key Workers (KWs). We argue these demonstrate a continual and co-evolutionary dimension to policy promoting patient capital and the need for patient planning to govern patient investment in housing systems. Our findings are in 'real-time' and highlight the importance of structural uncertainties and the breakdown of long-term assumptions in shaping investment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]