Introduction

There is a long history of an association between housing researchand housing policy in Britain. However, recent evaluations of thisassociation show it to be uneven and inconsistent. Maclennan andMoore (1999), for example, conclude that “evidence has had aninconstant impact on UK housing policy and practice” (p 23). Theyattribute this inconstancy to deficient data “spread thinly on theground” and to “a persistent unwillingness” on the part of policymakers to “clarify ends and means, so that key policy questions haveremained unresolved” (pp 23 and 17). The blame, it appears – ifblame is to be attributed – lies with both researchers and policymakers. Deficiencies on the part of researchers are attributed tothe adoption of inadequate methodologies and to the relative neglectof policy relevant concepts such as “effectiveness” and“cost-benefit” analysis (p 23). Deficiencies in policy are revealedin the ambiguity and obfuscation that surround the formulation andimplementation of housing policy. While successive governments haveadopted and proclaimed universalistic objectives such as theprovision of ‘decent’ and ‘affordable’ homes, these terms have neverbeen clearly defined and the means and methods for their achievementhave not been adequately specified (Maclennan and Moore, 1999, p22).

This chapter starts with an historical overview which suggests that,with some exceptions, the current inconstancy, identified byMaclennan and Moore, has been a common characteristic of therelationship between housing research and British housing policyduring the past 150 years. Building on this overview, a moredetailed examination of the present day relationship reveals anapparent paradox whereby, at a time of unprecedented output,research evidence – although central to the evaluation of housingpractice – seemingly rarely percolates through the machinery ofgovernment to impact directly on housing policy formulation andimplementation. Two potential and complementary contributions tothis paradox are examined:

• • the changing nature of housing policy and its increasingcomplexity as it is implicated in a multitude of social,economic and political problems beyond the mere provision ofshelter;

• • the ‘filtering’ role played by political ideology indetermining the relationship between evidence and theshaping of policy agendas.