Opiyo, Neema George (2022) Analysis of user (dis)engagement in the provision of affordable housing: Cases in the UK housing sector. PhD thesis, University of Manchester, UK.
Abstract
Inadequate and unaffordable housing is the world pandemic that have existed for decades. The need for affordable housing has in recent times become a prominent policy issue across the world. Among various challenges to affordable housing sector is the failure of supply to keep up with its ever-growing demand. A key focus of UK housing policy in recent years has been on the overall supply of housing. Consequently, it is unsurprising to find a wealth of studies that focus on supply-side concerns of accommodating the increasing demand for affordable housing. Furthermore, in the project/construction domain, most studies tend to focus on providers perspectives. However, such emphasis results in the relative neglect on the demand side interests. There is relatively limited focus on the user perspectives. Thus, this research was undertaken to investigate whether and how the demand side perspectives can influence the provision of affordable housing in the UK. In particular, the study looks at (dis)engagement activities and outcomes between the providers and users throughout the project life cycle. To meet the research aim and objectives, this study adopts qualitative stance using a multiple-case study design to unravel the complexities in the engagement between powerful providers and not so powerful users in affordable housing domain. With two purposefully selected UK registered social landlords, data was gathered through semi-structured interview, secondary data, archival data, and documentary analysis. The multiple sources of data gathered both users and providers experiences, meaning and perspectives from their standpoint and created a rich account for each case study. While one case evidences partially positive engagement outcomes, the other case presents quite a negative output in its (dis)engagement and management activities. The study findings indicate that there is deliberate disengagement of users by providers in the provision, maintenance, and management of affordable housing. This in turn tends to create hostile relationship between active users and providers who abdicate from their responsibility to provide affordable and decent housing. This relationship does not foster collaboration and co-creation between these actors. In the worst-case scenario, if unresolved, it could bring disastrous and fatal consequences. The findings highlight the importance of strong institutional and organisation arrangement that can be implemented and adhered to empower and give voice to users to actively contribute to the provisions, maintenance, and management of affordable housing. In view of these findings, this study contributes the knowledge on disengagement by making the hidden "thing" of deliberate disengagement visible. Furthermore, the research establishes a typology of users-providers interaction and engagement and proposes a model for end-users' engagement in the provision of affordable housing which combines power, voice and willingness to engage in attempt to advocate for meaningful and impactful end-user's engagement throughout project life cycle.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | interview, meaning, user perspective, collaboration, evidence, documentary analysis, complexity, housing, pandemic, case study, landlord, life cycle, secondary data, affordable housing, housing policy, co-creation, interaction |
| Subjects: | data science, data collection methods, value management, sociology, systems engineering, management, health risk and incident analysis, public policy, user focus, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, behavioral psychology, design process |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Health and Safety, Design Practice, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Governance, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here