Demolition of Heygate: Causes and Consequences

Chapter 1: Introduction

Background of the study

The Heygate Estate was constructed between 1971 and 1974. It was a large housing estate in Walworth, Southwark, a part of South London. The estate was home to more than 1200 families. But it was demolished between 2011 and 2014 under the program of urban regeneration of the Elephant and Castle area (Moore, 2011). More than 3000 people lived in the estate. One of the main reasons for demolishing the estate was due to the increasing crime rates in the region, even though it had been extensively used as a filming location. Reeves and Simon (2010) stated there were several reasons for demolishing the estate. Apart from increasing criminal activities, the estate developed a reputation for poverty and dilapidation. Swan (2013) claimed that the estate was demolished only to appease the developer – Land Lease Group, to whom the estate and its land were sold for just £50 million while £44 million were spent on emptying the location and another £21.5 million spent on progressing the redevelopment phase. This indicates that the council sold the estate and the land at a loss (Steadman, 2013). Steadman (2013) further stated that demolishing the Heygate Estate showcases the condition of social housing in the country. The Sothwark Council not only lost a lot of money in this deal but it also destroyed the homes of thousands of people and scattered a well-established community throughout the nearby boroughs and beyond.

Aim and Objectives

Aim of the current study is “To analyze the economic impact of Heygate Estate on social housing stock in Southwark”. To achieve this aim the following objectives will have to be fulfilled:

To assess the factors that affected the Heygate Estate.

To analyze current trends of social housing stock in Southwark.

To evaluate the economic impact of demolition of Heygate Estate on Southwark's social housing stock

Research Questions

This study will answer the question – “How the Heygate Estate has impacted the social housing stock in Southwark, UK?”

Rationale of the study

The purpose of conducting this study is to assess the economic impact of the Heygate Estate and its demolition on the social housing stock in Sothwark. Jenkins (2010) argues that the estate was demolished only to appease developers such as the Land Lease Group, to whom the estate was finally sold to; while Taylor‐Gooby (2012) states that the estate was demolished because of increasing crime and poverty in the region. Through this study the researcher will analyse the impact of the estate on social housing stock in the region. Steadman (2013) stated that Heygate is a perfect example of the current condition of social housing in the country. Steadman (2013) further suggested that there is an increasing trend of shifting towards profit maximization. By conducting this study the researcher will analyse the factors that lead to demolition of the estate and also the impact that it had on social housing in the region. Furthermore, the researcher will also explore the current trends of social housing in the country.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction

In this section, the researcher has presented a critical evaluation of different aspects related to the subject matter. This chapter will help in developing a sound theoretical base and also gain conceptual clarity.

Reasons for the demolition of Heygate Estate

The Heygate Estate has been termed as a historic location by several experts. It was built in the 70s and consisted of 1200 flats which were home to more than 3000 people. However, it was demolished between 2011 and 2014 due to various reasons. According to Fitzpatrick and Hal (2014), one of the main reasons for such a decision by the council was that the estate had gained reputation from criminal activities and was also considered as the centre of poverty in the region. Steadman (2013) stated that while it’s nearby areas and the estate itself was valued very high, the people living in it were considered to be poor. Their income was not very high. In 1999 the Southwark council's Director of Regeneration Fred Manson stated that "social housing generates people on low incomes coming in and that generates poor school performances, middle-class people stay away” (Orr, 1999). On the basis of the statement, it can be said that many of the high ranking officials in the Southwark Council considered the estate as a magnet for poor and underperforming people.

According to Elsharkawy and Peter (2015), the main reason for demolition of the estate and regeneration of the area was to discourage people from moving out of the cities into the countryside, which was rapidly developing modern homes. However, to thwart the rate of people leaving the cities at 1700 per week the government and local councils had to find an immediate solution. Scanlon (2015) stated that the best way to achieve this objective was by mixing up the inner city communities. According to Lovell and Susan (2010), this would have helped in making the areas more appealing to the people and would have stopped them from moving out of the city.

On the other hand, Fitzpatrick and Hal (2014) stated that instead of demolishing the estate, the council could have invested in refurbishing it, which would have costed a lot less. Jenkins (2010) stated that after the redevelopment of the area, the new flats would be sold at upwards of £1.1 million. This clearly indicates that the Land Lease Group will earn a significant sum of money through the property (Dungan, 2013).

Current trends of social housing

(Wang, 2011)) stated social housing is a big part of the modern day society. Through such initiatives, the government provides housing facilities to the poor and underprivileged people. Further, such programs also help in improving the living condition of people in the country. According to (Bone, 2010) one of the main reasons for social housing is to enable the people to lead a better life without having to worry too much about the housing aspect (Foster, 2017). With the demolition of the Heygate Estate, one of the biggest trends in social housing is that the young people are at risk of becoming homeless. Scanlon and Whitehead (2017) stated that since local councils and local developers are focusing more towards profit maximisation, it can be said that under the pretext of regeneration and redevelopment of land, they are selling houses that were meant for the poor and economically weak people at very high prices. The Heygate Estate is a prime example of this.

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

Introduction

In this section, the various tools and methods that will be used to conduct the study have been presented and discussed.

Research Philosophy

It is related to the process of data collection and analysis. In this study, the researcher will use the interpretivism philosophy. Through the use of this philosophy, the researcher will be able to collect data about the impact of Heygate Estate and its demolition on social housing stock in Southwark. Since this study will be quantitative in nature, the use of interpretivism philosophy will enable the scholar to study and analyse the subject matter in greater detail (Flick, 2015). Through interpretivism, the researcher can obtain a plethora of information related to the topic, and thus, will be able to conduct the study effectively.

Research Approach

It consists of different steps and staged that need to be completed to successfully conduct the research investigation (Mackey & Susan, 2015). Primarily there are two types of approaches – inductive and deductive. In this study, the deductive approach will be used. It is based on the pretext that if the premise is true, then the conclusion will also be true. It is well-known that the demolition of the Heygate Estate affected the social housing in the UK. Thus by using this approach, the researcher will be able to analyse different aspects of the impact of demolition in a thorough and extensive manner. Further, by using this approach, the results can be generalised, which therefore will present a detailed picture of social housing in the Southwark region.

Data Collection

In this study, the researcher will use secondary data. Through this method, the researcher will be able to get a better understanding of the current condition of social housing in the region and also the impact demolition of the Heygate Estate had on it. Herein the researcher will access different journals and reports to acquire the necessary data. The main reason for selecting this method for data collection is that it would help in getting access to a significant amount of information pertaining to the research topic (Taylor & Robert , 2015).

Data Analysis

To analyse the data, a qualitative method of thematic analysis will be used. This will enable the researcher to thoroughly analyse the research topic (Neuman, 2013).

REFERENCES

Bone, J., 2010. No place called home: The causes and social consequences of the UK housing ‘bubble. The British journal of sociology , 61(2), pp. 231-255.

Elsharkawy, H. & Peter , R., 2015. "Retrofitting social housing in the UK: Home energy use and performance in a pre-Community Energy Saving Programme (CESP). Energy and Buildings, Volume 88, pp. 25-33.

Fitzpatrick, S. & Hal , P., 2014. Ending security of tenure for social renters: Transitioning to ‘ambulance service’social housing?. Housing Studies , 29(5), pp. 591-615.

Flick, U., 2015. Introducing research methodology: A beginner's guide to doing a research project. s.l.:Sage.

Jenkins, D., 2010. The value of retrofitting carbon-saving measures into fuel poor social housing. Energy Policy, 38(2), pp. 832-839.

Lovell, H. & Susan , S., 2010. Agencement in housing markets: The case of the UK construction industry. Geoforum, 41(3), pp. 457-468.

Mackey, A. & Susan, G., 2015. Second language research: Methodology and design. s.l.:Routledge.

Neuman, L., 2013. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. s.l.: Pearson education.

Reeves, A. & Simon , T., 2010. Modelling the potential to achieve deep carbon emission cuts in existing UK social housing: the case of Peabody. Energy Policy, 38(8), pp. 4241-4251.

Scanlon, K., 2015. Social housing in Europe. European Policy Analysis, Volume 18, pp. 1-12.

Silverman, D., 2016. Qualitative research. s.l.:Sage.

Swan, S., 2013. Adoption of sustainable retrofit in UK social housing.. Structural Survey, 31(3), pp. 181-193.

Taylor‐Gooby, P., 2012. Root and branch restructuring to achieve major cuts: The social policy programme of the 2010 UK coalition government.. Social Policy & Administration, 46(1), pp. 61-82.

Taylor, S. & Robert , B., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. s.l.:John Wiley & Sons.

Wang, P., 2011. The new affordable and social housing provision system in China: implications for comparative housing studies. International Journal of Housing Policy , 11(3), pp. 237-254.