Abstract
This paper seeks to inject a new dimension into comparative housing research by exploring policy transfer in the case of choice-based lettings (CBL). Conceived in the Netherlands around 1990, CBL has attracted widespread interest in other developed countries as a ‘consumerist’ quasi-market technique replacing a traditionally bureaucratic process of regulating access to social housing. We examine the implications of importing the concept to two different social housing contexts—the UK and Australia. First, we identify the aspects of the CBL model found attractive in these jurisdictions and the extent to which it has been implemented in practice. Second, we explore how far it can be effectively operated within policy and institutional contexts substantially different from the country of origin. In ensuring compatibility with established institutional frameworks, has importation of CBL to the UK been rendered an empty gesture and to what extent have such frameworks acted as a barrier to the implementation of CBL in Australia? And, third, we consider the broader implications of the CBL case in relation to the international transfer of social policies as discussed in the literature.
Acknowledgements
This article draws on studies commissioned by the Communities and Local Government Department, by Glasgow Housing Association, and by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI). While the authors gratefully acknowledge the funding support provided by these organisations, the views expressed here are our own and do not necessarily reflect those of the research commissioning bodies. We are also grateful for the helpful comments provided by two anonymous referees responding to an earlier version of this paper.
Notes
‘At risk of poverty’ in terms of receiving incomes below 60 per cent of the median national value (equivalised income after social transfers).
‘Excellence’ in allocating housing was defined as where a landlord ‘Has a clear policy in place aimed at maximising choice for applicants in accordance with the allocation policy such as a choice-based letting scheme’ (p. 6).