Introduction

Previous chapters (the ‘country chapters’) have looked at the development and implementation of housing renewal in nine countries of Europe, in many instances with case study examples of renewal programmes and projects. Housing renewal is a feature of policy in all the countries studied and although there is a common concern with improving the quality of the housing stock and the living conditions of the population, the extent to which these objectives are prioritised varies and is influenced by different traditions and capacities: financial, organisational and political. Throughout most of Europe in the years following the Second World War, governments took an interventionist approach to housing which, sooner or later, included housing renewal as one of the elements in housing policies and programmes. There have been changes since then in the nature and extent of state intervention and although in many countries governments continue to play a central role, in others, significant housing renewal responsibilities have been delegated to autonomous or semi-autonomous bodies, working at arm's length from government, while in some cases, the lead is taken by regional or local governments, acting within a framework laid down by national government.

The approach to housing renewal in individual countries reflects their individual circumstances and supports the view that housing history in Europe can be interpreted through the complementary notions of path dependency and change: see, for example, Lévy-Vroelant et al (2014) on social housing in Austria, France, the Netherlands and Scotland, and Bengtsson and Ruonavaara (2010) on Nordic housing regimes. As these and other studies show, policy issues are not the same everywhere although, as will be seen in Chapter Twelve, there is now more common ground between countries in the practice of housing and urban renewal than was found by Priemus and Metselaar (1992) and Skifter Andersen and Leather (1999).

One of the main changes from the 1980s onwards has been the growing tendency for governments to withdraw from or to reduce their commitment to state intervention in housing. This has significantly affected ‘tenure-related’ or ‘tenure-based’ policies, especially towards owner occupation, social housing and state housing. It has led to a much greater reliance on the contribution of private sector organisations, so that private sector concerns rather than social objectives tend to have primacy in housing. This trend has had consequences also for ‘topic-related’ policies, including housing renewal.