Financialisation, regulation and the “social and moral mission” of English housing associations

In recent years English housing associations have faced criticism on two principal fronts. Firstly, for placing greater emphasis on commercial development as opposed to social rented housing. Secondly, for numerous cases of disrepair, damp and mould. This thesis explores the role of financialisation in explaining the purported mission creep of housing associations, with sectoral governance transformed by the increased importance of financial actors, markets and practices post-2010. The thesis adopts a mixed-methods approach, combining longitudinal clustering of balance sheet data, analysis of a natural experiment, qualitative document analysis, and semi-structured interviews. The findings suggest that several forms of financialisation exist across the sector, but organisations share a common strategic principle of accessing capital by leveraging housing and land as an asset. This asset strategy has been a key driver of commercial activity and declining social rented supply among some associations. Moreover, a regulatory framework that prioritised financial viability over consumer standards has underpinned the increased importance of private finance. These findings challenge the notion that financialisation is consigned to large landlords, or is in retreat. Rather, financialisation is variegated and dynamic. The period of low-interest rates and low landlord expenditure that characterised the early 2010s has given way to a period of constrained borrowing capacity and significant investment in existing homes. Difficulties in accessing sufficient private and public funding are contributing to delays in remediating building safety issues and decarbonising social housing, as well as placing some associations at risk of financial collapse. Furthermore, the restrictions placed upon some landlords by their loan covenants are one of the contributing factors to disrepair. Nonetheless, housing associations are responsive to changes in their funding environment, and recent increases in government capital grant in areas of ‘high affordability pressure’ have led to a nascent increase in new social rent supply.