Abstract
This paper compares continuity and change in homelessness policy in Ireland, Scotland and Norway with a particular focus on the period of post-crisis austerity measures (2008–2016). The analytical approach draws on institutional theory and the notion of path dependency, which has rarely been applied to comparative homelessness research. The paper compares welfare and housing systems in the three countries prior to presenting a detailed analysis of the conceptualisation and measurement of homelessness; the institutions which address homelessness; and the evidence of change in the post-2008 period. The analysis demonstrates that challenges remain in comparing the nature of homelessness and policy responses across nation states, even where they have a number of similar characteristics, and despite some EU influence towards homelessness policy convergence. Similarly, national-level homelessness policy change could not be interpreted as entirely a result of the external shock of the 2008 general financial crisis, as existing national policy goals and programmes were also influential. Overall, embedded national frameworks and institutions were resilient, but sufficiently flexible to deliver longer term policy shifts in response to the changing nature of the homelessness problem and national policy goals. Institutionalism and path dependency were found to be useful in developing the comparative analysis of homelessness policy change and could be fruitfully applied in future longitudinal, empirical research across a wider range of countries.
Highlights
Despite progress made by FEANTSA and the introduction of ETHOS (European Typology of Homelessness and Housing Exclusion), comparing the exact number of homeless persons between different countries is still a considerable challenge
Due to unsystematic differences in the housing systems without any obvious pattern, comparative research and analysis has been hugely challenging in the field of housing (e.g. Crook & Kemp, 2014; Oxley, 2001; Stephens, 2016)
At the end of the day, regardless of the definition of homelessness and whether policy is primarily embedded in housing or welfare policies, housing is essential in order to end or alleviate homelessness
Summary
“We believe that Scotland can match the success of similar countries—Ireland to our west, Iceland to our North and Norway to our east, nations that sit at the top of world wealth league tables and form an arc of prosperity around our shores.” (Scottish Government, 2007, p. 9). While the devolved nature of Scottish government makes it appropriate to consider Scotland as a distinct nation in relation to housing policy and responses to homelessness (McKee, Muir, & Moore, 2016), Scotland experienced severe cuts to public expenditure and welfare services as part of the UK response to the GFC, in the post-2010 period (Lupton, Burchardt, Hills, Stewart, & Vizard, 2016), even though the UK avoided any troika ‘bail out’. A detailed critique of the impact of the GFC on Ireland, Scotland and Norway is beyond the scope of this paper, it is possible to examine whether and how homelessness policies developed and changed during the subsequent period of profound economic and social change in Europe. Taking account of differences in conceptualisation and measurement in the three countries, we examine whether there were changes in the nature of homelessness in the post-2008 period and what were the resultant policy challenges in sustaining a housing-led focus on resolving homelessness. Our analysis of homelessness in relation to notions of path dependency and institutional embeddedness enables development of our final comparative analysis and conclusions on homelessness policy continuity and change across the three countries (Sections 5 and 6)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
