Transcript Building homes and a sense of community: the strengths and

Building homes and a sense of
community:
the strengths and limitations of
community land trusts
Tom Moore
Building and Social Housing Foundation
HSA Conference 19 April 2012
Structure of the talk

What is a community land trust (CLT)?

Background to the research and questions

Theoretical lens

How are CLTs enabled

What are their strengths and limitations?
What is a community land trust?

Seeks to develop and manage assets for local community.

Primary focus on affordable housing.

Often found in rural communities with high ratios between
property prices and local incomes.

Aim to develop affordable housing for local people (shared
ownership) with resale conditions attached to ensure it
remains affordable in perpetuity.

Areas untouched by planning policies.
Background information

International antecedents (USA, Scotland, Canada).

2006-08: National demonstration programme

2008: Legislated for in Housing & Regeneration Act.

2010: National membership body formed.

80+ CLTs and 229 homes built (Paterson et al, 2011)
Background to this research

Study took place from Oct ‘08 – Nov ‘11.

This was a period of significant change for CLTs.



Changing legislation
Government agendas of localism
Questions... (Conservative Party, 2009; Goodchild, 2010; Handy et al,
2011)
 How and why do they form?
 How are they delivered?
 What is their (potential) use and impact?

30 interviews with different stakeholders (15 CLTs)
Theoretical background

From government to governance: the enabling state


“Masters of their own destiny” (Grant Shapps, 2010)
Communitarianism a particularly influential strand of
thought for policymakers (Etzioni, 1995; Tam,1998)



Strengthening influence and giving responsibility to
communities.
Greater local decision-making – culture of self-management
and self-determination.
Enlargement of civic participation and influence beyond the
state
Theoretical questions

However, ‘community’ means many different things.

Grassroots oppositional activity? (Defilippis, 2006)

Identifies valued types of behaviour and living...

Active or perceived disengaged citizens? (Flint, 2003; McKee
and Cooper, 2008)

Social capital. Different power relations and abilities to
contribute to ‘community life’ (Elias and Scotson, 1965; Levitas,
2005)
Why do they form?

CLTs motivated by:

Creating a new delivery mechanism where current needs are
not being met by policies or providers.

Particular perspectives on affordability and local control.

Realign aspatial notions of housing need.
Reasons for formation

“The CLT aims to meet need unmet by others” (Director,Village CLT
in Cornwall) – intermediate housing rather than social or market.

“We wanted to protect the interests of local people ...To provide
facilities that would sustain our community, but also to take local
control, particularly around affordable housing” (Chair, CLT in Devon)
– social sustainability

“We're concerned if the need's not met from within the community
it would be met by an external agency that won’t meet local needs.
That could mean losing our ability to decide who occupies the
properties” (Board member, CLT in Gloucestershire) – set up to meet
needs of local people (existing and future generations)
New tenure arrangements

Important that CLTs “remain affordable to local people” unlike previous mechanisms of delivery.

CLTs make vital contribution to supply of rural housing
for local needs

Positive social effects of rural housing



School rolls
Local economies
How is this delivered?
Mechanisms/barriers to achieving this

Resources



Land
Finance
Human capital


Capacity and competence issues
Enabling support that is provided
Access to resources – land and finance

St Minver CLT – 24 homes in small affluent village (Rock,
Cornwall)

Access to land and finance by subsidy, loan or donation


Local landowners - philanthropy
Local authorities – asset transfer, dedicated lines of credit (revolving
loan funds, interest-free loans)

Collaborative arrangements with local authorities crucial

CLTs addressing ‘hard to reach’ areas



Key workers
Rural community resilience/place attachment
Shared ownership homes at 1/3 of market rate
Access to resources – land and finance

Less successful CLTs...
 “They seem to be very much tailored to the needs of a certain type
of clientele, you know, people who are really local” (Housing Officer,
Welsh LA)


“There’s a feeling that it’s a slightly, possibly, elitist type of
development ... People want houses built for specific types of people
..The community came to me saying the CLT, it’s not catering for
people in most need, ...They felt the CLT already had the names of
the people who would buy the properties – those in most need, not
just the village but the community council area, could not afford to
access those properties” (Rural Housing Enabler, Wales)
In some instances thought not to meet LA views of ‘affordability’
or ‘need’. Issues of power and accountability impede access to
resources.
Whose needs are being met?

“If you could not run a CLT to do anything other than intermediate
housing because those ‘undesirables’ from other parts of the county
came into it, I’d be well and truly behind the CLT with its current
form and objective” (Local community member,Village CLT in
the SW)

“Many communities are sceptical about working with housing
associations as they lose control and rural houses will be let to
‘outsiders’” (SW District Council)

Denotes ‘insiders and outsiders’ to a community which can
make it difficult for local authorities to support.
Human resource barriers

Who forms CLTs?

CLTs formed by affluent middle class – reliant on individual local
leaders
“I think if you were in a community where you didn’t have that kind of
strength of local leadership it would really struggle.” (Community Strategy
Officer, Devon)

“The CLT has a lot of money tied up in it and I’m uncomfortable sorting
through the paperwork and accounting properly” (Anonymous CLT board
member)

Human capital an issue.

Significant range of technical skill required

Community consultation, business planning, legal incorporation
Human resource barriers

Also crucial to unlocking resources



The CLT ... “lacked the expertise and resources to make a
convincing business plan” (Welsh LA, 2011)
Funding also demands accountability and technical skills (HCA
grant)
Umbrella CLTs formed to assist with this



Professionalised bodies – growing in number
Formed to ‘breathe life’ into organisations
Of high value to volunteers and stakeholders
Umbrella CLTs

“The process of forming a CLT is daunting. It’d
have been a much longer process and we’d have
been more likely to give up because of the time
and we’re all volunteers.You don’t even have the
sense of where to begin” (CLT volunteer,
Cornwall)
Umbrella CLTs

Well established in Cornwall, where 50% of all CLT
homes are developed.

Important intermediaries.




Provision of expert advice
Provide professional legitimacy
Connection with networks and resources
Not a panacea


Local stakeholder relations (patchwork funding)
Relationship with communities + appropriate geographical level
To conclude...

Strengths




Rural housing supply & wider community effects
Mechanisms of philanthropy to unlock land
Innovation by local authorities
Limitations/implications




Forming and benefiting from CLTs it not open to all.
Local variation and context important (issues of power & skill)
High levels of human capital required (professionalisation)
Success of localism/communitarian agendas dependent on
active facilitation and capacity building
References

Conservative Party. (2009) Strong Foundations: building homes and communities. Policy Green Paper No.10.
Available online.

DeFilippis, J, Fisher, R and Shragge, E. (2006) Neither Romance nor Regulation: Re-evaluating community,
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30(3), 673-689.

Elias, N. and Scotson, J. (1965) The established and the outsiders: a sociological enquiry into community problems.
Reprint, London: Sage, 1994.

Etzioni, A. (1995) The Spirit of Community. London: Fontana Press.

Flint, J. (2003) Housing and Ethopolitics: constructing identities of active consumption and responsible
community, Economy and Society, 32 (4): 611-629.

Goodchild, B. (2010) Conservative Party policy for planning: caught between the market and local
communities, People, Place & Policy Online, 4(1): 19-23.

Handy, C, Gulliver, K and Morris, J. (2011) Exceeding expectations: the nature and extent of resident-controlled
housing. Birmingham: Human City Institute.

Levitas, R. (2005) The Inclusive Society? Social Exclusion and New Labour. Palgrave Macmillan.

McKee, K and Cooper,V. (2008) The paradox of tenant empowerment: regulatory and liberatory
possibilities, Housing, Theory and Society, 25(2): 132-146.

Paterson, B. et al. (2011) Community land trusts: proof of concept. Community Finance Solutions: Salford.

Shapps, G. (2009) Housing – A rural revolution. Speech to the Conservative Party,
http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2009/12/Grant_Shapps_Housing_-_A_rural_revolution.aspx