How community led housing can lead to better health
Homes are more than just four walls and a roof - homes are where people grow, love and find a sense of belonging. A recent Power to Change report examines existing literature on the connection between community led housing (CLH), health and wellbeing. The report initially outlines that there is a shortage in affordable housing in the UK, along with insecure rental conditions. Much literature found refers to a developing desire for a sense of belonging, a need to feel connected to a community and an increasing urge to reject mainstream forms of consumption in housing (Javis, 2015).
The average UK citizen spends 90% of their time indoors (Klepeis et al, 2001).
For community led housing to be successful, it initially requires meaningful community engagement throughout its process, where the local community group or organisation owns, manages or stewards the condition of the homes for the benefit of that whole community. It challenges the idea of housing as just assets with inhabitants. CLH places a stronger emphasis on active participation of residents, in tailoring the homes to their needs. This in turn leaves CLH external to the mainstream market driven housing sector, tends to drive for profit at the expense of the social factors of living, including the community itself.
Stronger recognition of the relationship between health, housing, and planning is reflected in the health of people where they live. Health is influenced by people’s lifestyle choices, as well as the physical, social and economic environment we find ourselves in. However, housing conditions can directly influence our physical health, for example warm and dry homes generally reduce the risk of respiratory illness. These issues have proved prevalent in the UK where 1 in 5 homes fall below the national decent homes standard, as well as 1/3 of homes in the private rented sector are deemed non-decent for living (NAO, 2017). To add to this, the psychological aspects (affordability, running costs, security, age and disability-friendly), as well as connection to the community strongly effects mental health.
Barton and Grant’s (2006) ‘health map’ (below) represents a spatial planning for health, with a ‘ladder of place quality’ which reflects on a visual level what determines health.
Heath Map, Barton and Grant (2016).
The spheres of the diagram in more detail:
People - Genetics/Demographics
Lifestyle - Individual behaviours and personal health.
Community - The networks that people are involved in and how people feel connected to each other.
Local Economy - Includes individual wealth as well as private and public sector and markets in the area.
Activities - Relates to social and personal activities with additionally the production and movement of services. Barton and Grant (2006) express how these have a direct impact on health and well being.
Built environment - Has direct impact on the other spheres. Housing quality can directly impact health and well being such as walkability and warmth. Also, the built environment has more secondary relationships with climate conditions and biodiversity.
Natural Environment - Refers to the ecosystems in sustaining nature. This links to the idea that the built environment should look to reduce and prevent harm to the natural environment, but there is also a direct focus on health such as quality of air and water.
Overall, a key theme in the literature reviewed in this report suggests that living in a community positively impacts on an inhabitants’ quality of life. Within health and social care, there has been more attention on methods of supporting health and well being for ageing populations. The report reviewed clearly demonstrates how health and housing provision strongly correlate to healthier ageing in a community.