Many frameworks can be used to describe and understand the set of relationships involved in the production, consumption and distribution of housing. This chapter puts forward one way of looking at what will be termed the ‘housing field’. This is not to deny the validity or usefulness of other frameworks or to put forward a housing theory that explains all there is to know about the nature and meaning of housing. Any framework offers only a partial insight into any social phenomenon and may obscure as much as it clarifies. Frameworks can be judged on the basis of their internal consistency and of the value of the insights that they provide, which by their very nature will be contested. This chapter reviews very briefly some common ways of looking at the housing field and puts forward a framework, based on social constructionism, that aims to be internally consistent and relatively comprehensive in its coverage. This framework forms the cornerstone of the book and succeeding chapters explore and elucidate the approach outlined here.

Characterising the housing field

Much research into housing is often criticised, either for being atheoretical, or for not making explicit the framework adopted (see Kemeny, 1992). This criticism is undoubtedly correct. Since most housing research in Britain is commissioned by government departments concerned to evaluate the impact of specific government policies, it is oriented to practical and policy issues and adopts an atheoretical, empiricist approach. Its contribution to furthering an understanding of the housing field has been questioned (Kemeny, 1992). In response there has been an upsurge in theoretically aware approaches to the study of housing, which are briefly described here.

A common approach, particularly in introductory textbooks, is to describe and analyse government policy towards housing. It strongly emphasises the legislative and institutional structure of the housing field. Much of the work in this tradition assumes that government policy is an important determinant of housing outcomes. Usually the state is viewed as a neutral arbiter between different interests reacting to ‘housing problems’ as they emerge. Political ideology is given some prominence as a mediating factor between housing problems and government action to solve them.