The Housing Dimension of Welfare Reform - the ICCR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Abstract The EUROHOME-IMPACT project funded under the Fifth Framework Programme and, specifically, the key action for the improvement of social science knowledge base had three main objectives: first, to use longitudinal survey data to explore housing integration and stress – pathways and risks; second, to evaluate social services and social reintegration programmes with a housing element or targeting homeless persons; third, on the basis of the above to draw conclusions and recommendations for policy, on the one hand, and policy impact assessment, on the other. The research commenced in 2000 and was completed in 2002. The project produced ten scientific deliverables and a final report. The study covered most European Union Member States but concentrated, in particular, on Austria, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland and Switzerland. The approach adopted by the EUROHOME-IMPACT project combines quantitative and qualitative methods as well as assessments with different units or at different levels of analysis. This approach can be generalised to social policies or programmes more generally in the framework of the open method of coordination for the promotion of a European social policy agenda. The key features of this approach are the following: (a) identify the target area and specify its scope thus also the boundaries of observation; (b) undertake historical and prospective institutional analysis; (c) chart aggregate outcomes with the help of socio-economic indicators; (d) explore the dynamics of exclusion and inclusion through micro-level analyses. The EUROHOME-IMPACT findings suggest that social policy must continue to invest in basic social infrastructures, like housing, education or health, and to support an inclusive labour market and the provision of jobs. The significant differences between countries with regard to key indicators on income inequality, income poverty and housing integration and their close association with the differences across welfare systems, suggest that welfare regimes are still very important. The more extensive these are in terms of social rights, the higher the standards of living and the lower the risks of exclusion across the population in general as well as specific social groups. Our findings speak in favour of continuing investment into housing as a public service. Investment into social housing is in this connection very important, especially for countries with a low-quality housing stock and EUROHOME-IMPACT FINAL REPORT 4
large numbers of persons facing housing stress as a result. Support provided to home-owners and/or tenants is equally important. Social programmes targeting persons facing social exclusion in various formats are an important extension of contemporary welfare policy. They are indispensable especially as remedial actions for addressing the needs of those persons who fall into the ‘poverty trap’ and/or face serious mental or health problems or life crises that lead to the loss of resources and homelessness. EUROHOME-IMPACT FINAL REPORT 5
Page 1 and 2: EUROHOME-IMPACT The Housing Dimensi
Page 3: Table of Contents Abstract_________
Page 7 and 8: [1.6] The most important actors in
Page 9 and 10: Germany, Luxembourg and the UK: the
Page 11 and 12: involvement: first, through the org
Page 13 and 14: 2 Background and objectives of the
Page 15 and 16: Deliverable R[4] has sought to form
Page 17 and 18: policy reform at the substantive le
Page 19 and 20: ole as that of supporting all to th
Page 21 and 22: Owner occupation is the primary pol
Page 23 and 24: of payment, disturbance of domestic
Page 25 and 26: Social housing The social housing s
Page 27 and 28: provide rent assistance to the poor
Page 29 and 30: Social tenants may purchase their h
Page 31 and 32: - The accommodation is characterise
Page 33 and 34: The summary statistics indicate tha
Page 35 and 36: Pure crowding or affordability prob
Page 37 and 38: Table 3. Any-time poverty rate vs.
Page 39 and 40: 3. Housing related characteristics
Page 41 and 42: The implications of our logistic re
Page 43 and 44: Europe. Across the EU-14, 54 per ce
Page 45 and 46: close to a 0 percent reduction rate
Page 47 and 48: Effectiveness Assessing the effecti
Page 49 and 50: Transferability This dimension comp
Page 51 and 52: activities and mediation have been
Page 53 and 54: The DCCSS staff support rough sleep
Page 55 and 56:
were less marginalized and deprived
Page 57 and 58:
isolation and lack of social networ
Page 59 and 60:
deliberation with service providers
Page 61 and 62:
4 Conclusions and recommendations I
Page 63 and 64:
(b) When evaluating the ‘success
Page 65 and 66:
like, for instance, the gini coeffi
Page 67 and 68:
anti-poverty strategies can therefo
Page 69 and 70:
5 Dissemination and exploitation of
Page 71 and 72:
70 pages Available also in French D
Page 73 and 74:
Berthoud, R. and Gerschuny, J. (eds
Page 75 and 76:
European Commission (1997), Social
Page 77 and 78:
Kleinman, M. (1996), Housing, Welfa
Page 79 and 80:
Whelan, C. T., Layte, R., Maître,
Page 81 and 82:
ueber Wohnquartiere in den alten un
Page 83 and 84:
Istat (1996), Famiglie, abitazioni,
Page 85 and 86:
Havel, M., Fink, K. and Barta, H. (
Page 87 and 88:
North Y. et al. (1996), Le Logement
Page 89 and 90:
Heitzmann, K. (1999), Transitions t
Page 91 and 92:
Whelan, C. T., Layte, R., Maitre, B
Page 93 and 94:
Redl, H. (2001), ECHP-Austria Forsc
Page 95 and 96:
Rossi, P. H. & Freeman H. E., Evalu
Page 97 and 98:
G. Schuler-Wallner/I. Mühlich-Klin
Page 99 and 100:
Kristensen, H. (1999) Housing Polic
Page 101 and 102:
Department of Health (2000): The He
Page 103 and 104:
Avramov, D. (1999a) Background Pape
Page 105 and 106:
Esping-Andersen, G. ed. (1996) Welf
Page 107 and 108:
EUROSTAT (2001) The Social Situatio
Page 109 and 110:
Pilgram A. H. Steinert (2001) Socia
show all

The Housing Dimension of Welfare Reform - the ICCR

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?