Search

Start Over Creator Stephens, Mark

2. State - Market - Family Triangle Revisited: Visualizing and Expanding a Housing Studies Theoretical Tool

Creator:
Tsachageas, Dimitrios P. and Stephens, Mark
Type:
article, model:article, and TEXT
Subject:
housing and state-market-family triangle
Language:
English
Description:
This paper revisits and revises the over-used State - Market - Household triangle as a theoretical analytical tool, proposing its repositioning at the centre of Housing and Welfare Studies, and reopening the debate. The goal is to eventually elaborate a dynamic visualization of the State - Market - Family triangle’s spatial and temporal transformations and transitions in housing provision, considering the relations of the actors involved. Towards this goal two conceptual adaptations are proposed. Firstly, it is suggested to add the parameter of time when assessing the triangle’s transformations from one era to another, or when comparing systems with similarities but on different evolutionary phases. Secondly, it is necessary to introduce - by default - an understanding of the triangle as a dynamic configuration, due to inter- and intra-polar shifts. It is argued that, apart from remaining a useful theoretical research tool, such visualization offers the opportunity to communicate various studies’ findings to a wider, often non-specialist audience.
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ and policy:public

3. Using Esping-Andersen and Kemeny’s Welfare and Housing Regimes in Comparative Housing Research

Creator:
Stephens, Mark
Type:
article, model:article, and TEXT
Subject:
welfare regime, housing system, housing research, and EU-SILC
Language:
English
Description:
This article provides a critique of the use of Esping-Andersen and Kemeny’s typologies of welfare and housing regimes, both of which are often used as starting points for country selections in comparative housing research. We find that it is conceivable that housing systems may reflect the wider welfare system or diverge from it, so it is not possible to “read across” a housing system from Esping-Andersen’s welfare regimes. Moreover, both are dated and require revisiting to establish whether they still reflect reality. Of the two frameworks, Esping-Andersen’s use of the state-market-family triangle is more geographically mobile. Ultimately, housing systems are likely to be judged on the “housing outcomes” that they produce. However, it is suggested that current use of variables within EU-SILC in order to establish “housing outcomes” may be misleading since they do not reflect acceptable standards between countries with greatly differing general living standards and cultural norms.
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ and policy:public