It's official - BTL destroys communities

carolt

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7755641.stm

Life in UK 'has become lonelier'

Community life in Britain has weakened substantially over the past 30 years, according to research commissioned by the BBC.

Analysis of census data reveals how neighbourhoods in every part of the UK have become more socially fragmented.

The study assesses the health of a community by looking at how rooted people are in their neighbourhood.

Academics created "loneliness indices", to identify where people had a "feeling of not belonging".

Substantial changes

The study ranks places using a formula based on the proportion of people in an area who are single, those who live alone, the numbers in private rented accommodation and those who have lived there for less than a year.

The higher the proportion of people in those categories, the less rooted the community, according to social scientists. They refer to it as the level of "anomie" or the "feeling of not belonging".

Professor Daniel Dorling, who headed the research team at the University of Sheffield, said the measures could also be described as "loneliness indices".

Comparing the figures from the 1971 census with those in 2001 reveals substantial change.

Every region in the UK, broadly defined by a BBC local radio areas, has seen its communities become less rooted.

Census figures for Northern Ireland in 1971 were unavailable but later census data reveals that this trend is reflected here too.

"Even the weakest communities in 1971 were stronger than any community now," says Professor Dorling.

The researchers conclude that the increase in anomie weakens the "social glue" of communities. The result, they suggest, is that neighbourhoods are likely to be less trusting and more fearful.

The local radio area with the strongest communities on this measure is Stoke-on-Trent. Edinburgh has the weakest communities.

Really2

carolt wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7755641.stm

Life in UK 'has become lonelier'

Community life in Britain has weakened substantially over the past 30 years, according to research commissioned by the BBC.

Analysis of census data reveals how neighbourhoods in every part of the UK have become more socially fragmented.

The study assesses the health of a community by looking at how rooted people are in their neighbourhood.

Academics created "loneliness indices", to identify where people had a "feeling of not belonging".

Substantial changes

The study ranks places using a formula based on the proportion of people in an area who are single, those who live alone, the numbers in private rented accommodation and those who have lived there for less than a year.

The higher the proportion of people in those categories, the less rooted the community, according to social scientists. They refer to it as the level of "anomie" or the "feeling of not belonging".

Professor Daniel Dorling, who headed the research team at the University of Sheffield, said the measures could also be described as "loneliness indices".

Comparing the figures from the 1971 census with those in 2001 reveals substantial change.

Every region in the UK, broadly defined by a BBC local radio areas, has seen its communities become less rooted.

Census figures for Northern Ireland in 1971 were unavailable but later census data reveals that this trend is reflected here too.

"Even the weakest communities in 1971 were stronger than any community now," says Professor Dorling.

The researchers conclude that the increase in anomie weakens the "social glue" of communities. The result, they suggest, is that neighbourhoods are likely to be less trusting and more fearful.

The local radio area with the strongest communities on this measure is Stoke-on-Trent. Edinburgh has the weakest communities.

Sorry to pick faults Carol but
A) it is not a official just somthing based on a formular (which seems a bit weird as you could ask people)
It says nothing of BTL. Surely the average BTL rents a family house not a 1 bed flat?

But I would agree life as become loanlier but I would say that is more down to people settling down later in life than BTL.

tyllwyd

I'd agree, I don't think the quote points towards buy to let being the cause of the problem. If you think about it, there are lots of families in council houses, which is rented accommodation, and they are often in a very close community with lots of family nearby. If you are moving away from your family, for work for example, you might well live in private rented accommodation until you are settled enough to buy, or maybe as a student - so it wouldn't be buy to let houses that would be the root cause of people being lonely, it would be economic issues encouraging people to move away from their original home areas.

carolt

BTL means the numbers in privately rented accomodation have shot up.

1 million plus BTL mortgages (let alone cash buyers/those who just remortgage original home to buy) mean a huge rise in the numbers of people renting out homes privately, in the last 10 years.

Which means, as the article says, more people who find it hard to put down roots, and more socially fragmented communites.

carolt

tyllwyd wrote: »

I'd agree, I don't think the quote points towards buy to let being the cause of the problem. If you think about it, there are lots of families in council houses, which is rented accommodation, and they are often in a very close community with lots of family nearby.

That's why the article specifies 'privately rented accommodation' - council tenancies are secure, so don't face this.

Really2

carolt wrote: »

That's why the article specifies 'privately rented accommodation' - council tenancies are secure, so don't face this.

But would an HA be Private? Most council houses have now been sent over to HA's?

PS how cant the formula acutaly indicate loanliness? Surely living in a privately rented house does not mean you are loanly?

ad44downey

No suprise there then. BTL chancers should be taxed till the pips squeak. These greedy swine are depriving hardworking people of the chance of owning their own home

dopester

Reminds me a bit of a document I skim-read the other night - but more for Northern Ireland, and published January 2007.

(Word doc: http://www.dsdni.gov.uk/hillyard_afford_response.doc)

Review into Affordable Housing: Interim Report.

The wider economic and demographic trends driving the NI housing market suggest that NI is on a trajectory to a substantial wealth gap between those who own property and those who do not. (20)

Yet there is no detailed analysis of the ways in which the housing market will sustain the ‘wealth gap’ or lead to further polarisation within Northern Ireland society.

Inequality in Northern Ireland

It is now widely accepted within social science that the greater the levels of inequality the higher the levels of ill-health, crime, suicide and accident rates and greater mortality differentials between the rich and the poor. High levels of inequality are accepted as being dysfunctional and have the potential to destablising the social order. From a number of different sources of information Northern Ireland is a very unequal society. One measure of inequality is the gini coefficient. A value of 0% represents a totally equitable society and conversely a value of 100% represents total inequality. Northern Ireland has a gini coefficient of well over 30 per cent.

The key question is what role does the housing market and the associated public policies play in maintaining these large social divisions in Northern Ireland society?

The buy-to let products of the banks and building societies has certainly revived the private rented market but at the same time curtailed the opportunities for first time buyers to enter owner-occupation. Moreover, the increases in capital value, which are mainly a product of the lack of supply coupled with social and demographic factors associated with new household formation, have accrued to the individual investor greatly enhancing their personal wealth. Part of this wealth creation has been assisted through a public subsidy to tenants via Housing Benefits. Thus although assisting the poor to obtain accommodation, a huge public subsidy is assisting in individual wealth creation to those who already have significant assets.

Similarly, the biggest increases in capital values in the owner occupied sector have accrued to those living in the largest houses, without any necessary improvement in the quality of the dwelling itself. Although the specific dynamics have not been researched in Northern Ireland, there is ample evidence to suggest that many people have released the increased equity of their property and bought more property as an investment. The reality of these dynamics is that the better off and the rich are getting richer and the poor and those on average incomes find it increasingly difficult to obtain decent accommodation or enter owner occupation. While those out of work have to rely on a declining public sector.

whathavewedone

I think it's got much more to do with people settling down later.

I bought a flat in London in 2002 - it was a new development, some people owned and some people rented. I barely spoke to any of my neighbours when I lived there. I didn't feel the need to tbh. I used to get home from work late most nights and if I didn't I was happy to come in close the door and watch Corrie.

Now I live in a house and most people on our road own but some do rent (privately) and they are just as friendly and chatty as the ones that own. That's because most people here have young families so are out with the children on their scooters etc. No one treats the people who are renting, they are not outcasts! Our next door neighbours rent privately, they've been here over 50 years, longer than anyone on the whole street! Their original landlord bought a load of properties to let years ago now his son has inherited his portfolio and owns a lot of the properties in the area.

chucky

it's not the best article Carol - to be fair it's had the desired response

tyllwyd

carolt wrote: »

That's why the article specifies 'privately rented accommodation' - council tenancies are secure, so don't face this.

Yes, I didn't make what I was trying to say very clear - what I meant to say was that it isn't owning your own home that governs whether you are lonely or not, so whether you are in a council tenancy or in a private buy to let house it isn't the fact of the ownership of your house that governs whether you are lonely. But people in a council/housing association house are more likely to be in an area where they have strong family roots, whereas if people are moving away from their family they may well end up in private rented accommodation. So if you look at people in private rented accommodation, my guess (and it is only a guess) is that a higher proportion of those will be living some distance away from family than in council housing.

House owners, I'm not so sure, but I'd guess that when you buy a house you put down roots - either you buy near family, or you perhaps start your own family and make friends that way, or you are just there for a longer time and make more friends. So my argument is that being in private rented accommodation is a symptom of being lonely rather than a cause.

That's certainly how it worked for us - we moved away from home first as students then for our first jobs, and lived in private rented accommodation. When we could afford to buy a house, we started to feel more settled and made more effort to get to know our neighbours, and when we had children, we made friends through school etc. So as home owners we feel more part of the community than when we were renting. But our landlords weren't responsible for us feeling separate from the local community when we were younger, it was just the way things worked out when we had to move to get employment.