Housing First in Northern Europe: What is Needed for Cities and their Stakeholders to Put their Money where their Mouth is, also for 'Complex Groups’?

EUROPEAN RESEARCH CONFERENCE

Housing First. What’s Second?

Berlin, 20th September 2013

What is Needed for Cities and their

Stakeholders to Put Their Money Where

Their Mouth Is?

Nienke Boesveldt

External PhD and Policy Manager

[email protected]

Insert your logo here




Forthcomming

This presentation of Vu University Amsterdam contains interim results of PhD research. The presentation provides a

basis for professional discussion as part of the research process. Readers should note that results and interpretations in

the final report or article may differ from the present presentation. All rights reserved. The content of this presentation

may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including ©-notice, is given to the source.




Why can nothing be second?

Aim workshop: explain why housing first is

not yet the mainstream provision

By looking at

the local governance constellation

the wickedness of the policy challenge at

stake




My Theoretical Model on

Governance




HF Example of Paradigm Shift

To expand institutionalised services reduces rough

sleeping (= goal)

Research showed (e.g Jencks, 1994; Van Doorn, 2002):

persons housed independent again experience relapse

into homelessness

Recently: more research available on improved

successful methodologies (such as HF)

New causal assumptions are possible

Two dominant paradigms now coexist




Research approach

Case studies Copenhagen, Glasgow and

Amsterdam

Documentation study and interviews all relevant

stakeholders




Finding 1

Strong Images Debating and

Contesting Basics of HF

HF paradigm still highly debated and

contested

less by Government respondents

more by Care Professionals and Clients




Finding 1 Continued

Policy documentation at times inconsistent

‘A stay in a temporary housing provision will help to be

able to clarify what needs the homeless must have’

Addicts or Group-Unsuitable persons only get access.

Complex groups such as youth, women, mentally ill

rough sleepers and chaotic substance abusers are

excluded in some cases




Strong Images I

Misinterpretation:

‘having to move out again can be seen as a

punishment (client)’

Efficiency:

‘wanting to save money (over our backs, client)’

Cherry picking:

‘we might again loose the weakest people (NGO)’




Strong Images II

Hospitalized

‘they cannot sleep inside, some people need

shelters , some cannot live in their own apartment

(client)’ (R&W ‘73: old solution cause new problem)

Loneliness

‘people in COUNTRY don’t care about others

mentally ill, they get even more frustrated (client)’

Refusal

‘People are not prepared to have a house (client)’

Cost effectiveness (specialist -> generalist)

‘No psychiatrist laying the floor’ (NGO)




Strong Images III

Regarding Complex Groups

‘they're not ready’

‘they're not able to stay in independent living is

because they've got complex unmet need’

‘you can't repair 15 years of hurt by six months of

cognitive behavioural therapy (all: Care)’




Theory Corporatist governance structure in two

cases (Ams, Cph) make these opinions or

images possibly strongly influential to

counter expertise on HF

Political instead of technical (merit) criteria

dominate in this type of administration

(Painter and Peters, 2010)




Corporatist Close linkage between state and society,

some official sanctioning of interest groups

by government. Particular interest groups

are accorded a legitimate role as

representatives of their sector. Only a

limited number of actors can play the

game, and those that do are bound closely

with the power of the state (Pierre and

Peters, 2000).




Pluralist Government little involved with interest

groups directly, establishes arenas

through which groups work out their own

political struggles, establishes set of ‘rules

to the game’ about how decisions will be

made. No group considered dominant, all

groups have relative equal chances of

winning on any issue. Groups move in and

out relatively easily, largely at their own

initiative (Pierre and Peters, 2000)







Finding 2

Governance support HF too

isolated

Funds and Responsibility traditionally in Care

and Welfare Dept. instead of Housing Dept.

A case description




Local Administration: let us use the co-funds from the

national strategy meant to build shelters to construct own

permanent housing

Regulations behind the cofounded money prevented this

Almost ½ of the shelter funds has been refunded to the

state (whilst the number of rough sleeping in this case

increased)

National Strategy aims at Housing First, in two cases the

state Ministries of Housing are not involved

leading ministry homelessness strategy also only sees the

solution in the shelter system as a result




Result: Muddling through

‘they are increasing the numbers of temporary

accommodation, because there is no other

option other than that we have to make an offer

to people (...) which for me means that people

are getting caught up in the homelessness

system rather than going straight to where they

need to be (NGO)’

‘There is a five year waiting list for HF, which is

targeted specifically at persons that get expelled

a lot’ (NGO)




Wickedness (Rittel&Webber,’73) a problem that is difficult or impossible to solve

because of incomplete, contradictory, and

changing requirements that are often difficult to

recognize

because of complex interdependencies, the effort

to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may

reveal or create other problems

In this case the policy (e.g. to shelter persons) has

become part of the social problem and might even

have become the reason for the problem to exist

or persist (cf. Beck, 1992).

Housing First in Northern Europe: What is Needed for Cities and their Stakeholders to Put their Money where their Mouth is, also for 'Complex Groups’?

Business

goal research

research available

temporary housing provision

strong images

complex groups theyre

hf political

client cherry

apartment client rw