From Residualisation to Individualization? Social Tenants’ Experiences in Post-Olympics East Village

Abstract

This paper provides an insight into social tenants' lived experiences in post-Olympics East Village, exploring how they are shaped by new forms of neoliberalism embedded into housing provision. Focusing on allocations policy reform and housing providers' management strategies in East Village, this paper identifies a shift from patterns of residualisation to individualization, as self-reliant tenants are sought above those most in housing need. The housing provider's financial responsibilisation and contractual strategies work to construct tenants with enhanced consumer identities, which shifts risks from landlord to tenants, at a time when housing providers themselves are facing increased financial risks. The paper considers to what extent social housing discourse is shifting from notions of need to concerns with affordability, and how this exacerbates inequalities between working-class fractions. It is argued that it is not sufficient to simply call for more social rented housing, as housing providers' practices must also be closely examined.

Surplus to the city: Austerity urbanism, displacement and ‘letting die’

“…This is reflected in a 99% increase in the number of households with dependent children in temporary accommodation in Newham between 2012 and 2016 (Watt, 2018a). This bordering process represents a reframing of social housing as a privilege for the 'deserving' poor rather than a right (Humphry, 2019). This is part of a wider shift to a 'different kind of welfare state, concerned less with living standards and equality and more with individual responsibility and paid work ' (McEnhill and Taylor-Gooby, 2018: 252).…”

“…Those deemed undeserving are increasingly offered temporary accommodation in the PRS, often outside of their home borough and sometimes outside of the city altogether. In prioritising 'those who contribute to society' (defined as those in paid work and ex-armed forces members) when allocating social housing, Newham Council implicitly frame those outside of paid employment as economically unproductive and therefore undeserving (Humphry, 2019). The consequence is that those who are disadvantaged in labour markets, such as disabled people and women with young children, are increasingly offered poor quality, overcrowded housing outside of their own borough, sometimes hundreds of miles away from London (Watt, 2018a(Watt, , 2018b(Watt, , 2020.…”

Sport Mega-Events and Displacement of Host Community Residents: A Systematic Review

“…With 11 empirical studies, London 2012 has been by far the most investigated Games regarding displacement of residents (Mahon, 2007;Watt, 2011, 2012;Kavetsos, 2012;Sadd, 2012;Watt, 2013Watt, , 2018Cotton, 2018;Gillespie et al, 2018;Bernstock, 2020;Humphry, 2020). Some studies were conducted before the Games and others, after.…”

Social mixing or mixophobia in regenerating East London? ‘Affordable housing’, gentrification, stigmatisation and the post-Olympics East Village

“…For example, Humphry (2017) queries the notion of East Village as forming a cohesive and inclusive community, while Cohen (2017) analyses emergent tensions between social tenants and other residents. Humphry (2020) examines Triathlon Homes' social housing allocation policies and practices. Our paper advances on these existing studies by drawing upon a broader evidence base (including survey research), but also one which has been collected in the later period when East Village was fully occupied and hence at the stage when the full implications of social mixing and affordable housing policies have become clearer.…”