Introducing Social Geographies other. These changes are encapsulated in the contrasts between the two examples of urban morphology shown in Figures |0.2a and b, a change which produced the long rows of small terraced houses which we have come to associate with nineteenth-century working-class residential areas in Britain (Box |0.1). Up until the 1860s most additional working-class housing simply took the form of sub-dividing existing space. This produced tenement style housing with massive overcrowding, with families sharing houses and even rooms, and the indiscriminate mixing of people seeking accommodation. After this, by-law housing for some members of the working class predominated, consisting of small but, most significantly, separate family houses. At the same time, the increasing physical separation of home from work reflected ideas about women’s role in society (see section 6.2 of Chapter 6). In contrast to the type of housing discussed above, the municipal ‘garden suburbs’ were built with state subsidy after the First World War (Fig. 10.3). Swenarton (1981) has demonstrated how, in these ‘homes fit for heroes’, we can see ideology operating through design. The provision of state-subsidized housing was specifically aimed at maintaining social cohesion after the sacrifices of the First World War and in the face of the potential threat to other European ruling elites represented by the Russian Revolution of 1917. The wer-tine prime minister, Lloyd George, told the Cabinet in 1918, ‘In a short time we might have three-quarters of Europe converted to Bolshevism. ... Britain would hold out, but only if the people were given a sense of confidence’ (quoted in Swenarton, 1981:78). That confidence was to come from a new form of housing provision, As we saw in Chapter 4, ideological commitment, albeit of a different nature, also influenced the design of neighbourhood areas in the British New Towns programme after the Second World War. Here again, the nature of the residential built environment was shaped in an attempt to achieve specific social outcomes. If we are to fully understand the nature of our housing environments, therefore, we must comprehend that ‘design — the silent testimony of Figure 10.3 Inter-war council housing, Newcastle upon Tyne, attempting to create the atmosphere cond ‘cottage’ building styles of rural England. Credit: M, Barke. a2inarticulate objects ~ is one of the ways in which “suitable” ideas are propagated and reinforced’ (Swenarion, 198 1:196). 10.2.2. Home-making Having considered some aspects of the dwelling as a physical entity, we now tum to some more explicitly social considerations of housing, Paramount amongst these is the question of home-making, While this has always been important, many commentators have noted the development of what appears to be a more home-centred, ‘privatzed’, culture in most western societies (Saunders, 1990). Improvements in domestic technology have made the home a much more comfortable and welcoming place in which to spend leisure time. The growth of mass consumption, fuelled by more easily available credit, has allowed the purchase of consumer goods and a more home-centred life-style, Some have argued that an increase in home-centredness is also a natural response to increasing alienation in the workplace. As the world of work becomes increasingly impersonal, bureaucratic, routinized and demanding, so greater emphasis is placed upon one's own time and space. The spread of suburbanization may also be a contributory factor, with its distinctive physical form, which is both a product of and a promoter of a distinctive way ofllife, one that is essentially ‘private’ behind the front door, garden gate and privet hedge, but which also has elements of competition over domestic symbols of success and security. Others have argued that a sense of community emerges most strongly in circumstances of adversity, but as relative affluence has increased for many so the need for close-knit ties for community support recede into the background. The home has also been viewed asa site of emotional security. Some authors argue that this sense of security is enhanced by ownership of the dwelling (Saunders, 1990). This, however, is a function of national cultures where private domestic property is emphasized, a particular feature of the English-speaking countries. Psychological security may be enhanced through private ownership but emotional security may also be related to a sense of freedom from surveillance, where external social roles may be abandoned and where one can truly be ‘oneself (Sixsmith, 1986b). The warmth and security of the home is also often related to the significance of the family, a factor which is not restricted 1 owners only. The process of home-making also has symbolic significance. The type, size and location of the dwelling is an important signifier of position in sodety, and is indicated by the lengths that people go to to personalize their dwellings, The late twentieth-century boom in ‘do it yourself is indicative of this trend. The location and character of the local area are also important signifiers: even place names for newly built suburban estates are central in image creation (and marketability), and carry messages about social status (Eyles, 1987). However, different social groups have different perspectives on and relationships with the home. For example, many feminists would argue that the home may represent a sanctuary for men but a place of subordination and thankless work for 213 Ayaizos pue a2eds ‘Suisnoy10.3 Changing tenure structure and its significance 10.3.1. Variations in tenure structure Tenure is a fundamental variable in social structure, one that is strongly geographically expressed and which has profound social and geographical consequences. It is influenced by the prevailing political economy of the state and, ust as much as built form, has been the object of policies aimed at influencing society. However, tenure varies from country to country and by historical period, Table 10.1 shows the variation in tenure structure between some European countries at the end of the twentieth century. Table 10.1 Tenure structure in twelve European countries, «| 990 (%) Owner- Privately Social Co-ownership Other occupied rented rented or co-operatives Denmark 52 18 17 7 6 Sweden B 2 21 15 Nonway 60 18 4 Is - West Germany 38 B 15 - 4 Netherlands 45 7 36 \ Belgium 65 28 6 - \ France 54 20 17 9 Switzerland 30 66 4 - - Austria 50 18 21 Ul Spain 7 18 2 - 2 Greece 7 23 - - - United Kingdom* 66 9 24 (Scotland) 54 6 40 - “ * including Seotland Source: McCrone ané Stephens (|995:18) Although home ownership has increased in most European countries since the Second World War, it varies widely and in ways that are not explicable by variations in national wealth. Britain and Belgium have extremely high levels of ewner-occupation, but even higher are three of Europe's poorest countries — Ireland, Spain and Greece. Former West Gernany and Switzerland, despite being two of the wealthiest European countries, have relatively low levels of owner-occupation. Similarly, the significance of the social rented sector cannot be explained by differences in national wealth. The Netherlands, Sweden and Austria have relatively large socal rented sectors whilst Greece and Spain have very few dwellings in that sector. Various co-operative forms of ownership are particularly important in Scandinavia. These differences in tenure structure, which have existed over long periods, are part of the ‘national settlements’ discussed in Chapter 2. 215 Ayaizos pue a2eds ‘SuisnoyIntroducing Social Geographies 10.3.2 Implications of tenure structure ‘The structure of tenure varies widely across geographical space. We will examine some of the processes that have led to this situation in Britain in the next section, buthere we briefly outline some of the problems and advantages associated with each main tenure form. Renting from a private landlord is in many ways the most flexible tenure form, as entry does not require large amounts of capital or long-term indebtedness. The general absence of rules for entry also facilitates geographical mobility for employment or for those who wish to adjust the type of housing needed through their life course. However, security of tenure can be a problem and the absence of long-term commitment to the property by those living in it may have negative implications for fixed investments and improvements. In the second half of the twentieth century home ownership has permitted the accumulation of capital gains through the increase in the equity value of property. In the long term, inflation of house prices has been higher than general inflation. Before the Second World War, people purchasing their dwelling usually expected to live in that house for the rest of their lives. From the 1960s onwards, however, the demands of a more mobile labour market and the possibility of long-term capital gains through selling the present house and ‘trading up’ have greatly increased the number of housing transactions. Owner-occupied housing has become a source of personal wealth for the majority of the population and has major implications for the inheritance of wealth by the next generation (Hamnett, Harmer and Williams, 1991). Equally significantly, it has opened up a divide between the majority of households who own property and the substantial minority who do not. Owner-occupation is also a source of symbolic security. However, the sector is inherently inflationary as the system depends on continually increasing property values and prices. This exerts significant upward pressure on wages. As personal circumstances or the nature of the economy change, individuals may find themselves unable to pay and, as in the early 1990s (Box. 10.2), negative equity may result Social housing caters for those who cannot afford market rents or are not able to buy their own homes. However, the state may, from time to time, seek to economize on the costs of providing such subsidized accornmodation and may seek to control the lives of tenants, Bureaucratic entry rules may serve to exclude certain groups and have a negative impact on mobility at the inter-regional scale. 10.3.3 Changing tenure structure in Britain At the beginning of the twentieth century the vast majority of British households (90 per cent), including many of the wealthy, rented their homes from a private landlord, By the end of the century the tenure structure was entirely different (Table |(.2). The last two decades saw Britain abandon a model of housing provision with a strong role for subsidized housing for rent (council housing), and adopt one predominantly based on market forces through the stronger encouragement of owner-occupation. 216