Repackaging the poor? Conceptualising neoliberal reforms of social rental housing

This paper considers the need for conceptual renewal in comparative housing research. Since the mid-1990s, Kemeny’s model of ‘unitary’ and ‘dualist’ rental markets and Harloe’s classification of ‘mass’ and ‘residual’ social housing provision have been repeatedly recycled in comparative studies of ‘social’ and ‘public’ housing provision. Amidst international neoliberal policy mobilities, their models based on liberal welfare regimes wield particular power. Conceived during neoliberal cutbacks of public services, Kemeny’s ‘dualist’ rental market and Harloe’s ‘residual’ model of social housing similarly depict state-subsidised rental housing provision as bureaucratic, and targeted to the poor. Despite empirical change, these models are still used to describe liberal welfare regimes, and to theorise international policy convergence. Based on a review of recent market-oriented reforms of state-subsidised rental housing provision in the US, Australia and England; original neoliberal ‘sites of production’, this contribution asks whether these conceptual models still reflect the empirics. Findings diverge from the models, undermining their assumptions about how neoliberal reforms progress.