Over 70 per cent of a sample of social landlords have taken some initiative to 'rebalance the communities' on their single-tenure estates by introducing a mix of tenures and incomes (other than occurs through the 'Right to Buy'). The study, by housing consultants Graham Martin and Judi Watkinson, also found that:

• A consistent feature of mixing tenures on estates has been an overall improvement in property prices, reduced turnover, increased demand, tenant satisfaction and improved area reputation.
• A clear north-south divide was evident in activities reported by local authorities, with more reporting an active tenure mixing programme outside London and the South-East. This regional distinction did not apply to housing associations.
• The experience of the Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust's SAVE (Selling Alternate Vacants on Estates) programme is that the benefits associated with mixed tenure justify selling alternate vacant properties on the open market (with the proceeds reinvested in replacement property).
• The introduction of mixed tenure has tended to be pragmatic and reactive rather than the result of logical evaluation and strategic decision-making.
• Whilst some social landlords are committed to the principle of mixed tenure, most initiatives have resulted from financial practicalities; for example, to reduce an excessive number of vacant properties, to reduce repair costs, to provide access to regeneration funding, or to reduce the number of surplus or unpopular social rented houses.

"High rates of joblessness trigger other neighbourhood problems that undermine social organisation, ranging from crime, gang violence and drug trafficking to family break ups and problems in the organisation of family life." (W J Wilson, When work disappears, New York, Knopf, 1996)

It is difficult to argue the case for investment in an area where few people would choose to live. In order to reverse this process and make places more attractive, it might be helpful to devise strategies that introduce a variety of household and economic mix similar to that in more popular neighbouring communities.

A scoping exercise was carried out to assess the extent, if any, to which social landlords were actively seeking to achieve mixed income communities on existing estates. Over 70 per cent of sampled landlords indicated that they had carried out initiatives on at least some of their estates to introduce mixed tenure (see Table 1) through:

• low cost home ownership (LCHO);
• full sale;
• selling vacant properties, or;
• introducing market or 'intermediate' renting.

Market and intermediate renting offer an alternative or complementary approach to selling existing properties: 27 per cent and 18 per cent of housing associations and local authorities, respectively, report activity in this area.

Additionally, 55 per cent of housing associations and 30 per cent of local authorities which replied also had projects involving the sale of vacant properties for owner-occupation, or were seriously considering one (see Table 2).

A clear north-south divide on the sale of vacant properties was evident among local authorities, with active programmes being located outside London and the South East. However, this was not the case for housing associations, which have adopted the policy on a wider and more inclusive basis.

Some social landlords have a long-standing commitment to mixed tenure:

"On many of our estates it is difficult to identify or differentiate one tenure from another." (local authority officer).

More typically, policies for introducing mixed tenure onto existing council-owned estates have been established to try to resolve a problem, for example, as a means to:

• access or generate regeneration funding;
• reduce the supply of surplus or unpopular rented housing; or
• avoid the costs of repairing the more expensive void properties.

Housing associations, in contrast, were more likely to cite the benefits of mixed-income communities as a reason for introducing mixed-tenure initiatives.

All landlords in the survey that have introduced mixed tenures reported a marked improvement in the area. Improvements include:

• higher property values;
• lower turnover rates;
• higher tenant satisfaction;
• improved demand;
• reduced stigmatisation; and
• improved household mix.

Right to Buy

• RTB purchasers are usually older residents who have been able to afford the discounted value but may not have a high enough income or capital to adequately maintain or carry out major repairs.
• A significant number of former RTB properties quickly move to the private rented sector, are often poorly managed and have adverse consequences for the estate.
• RTB involves selling property with discounts of up to 70 per cent, so the proceeds raised for replacement housing or estate improvements are far lower than from the sale of vacant properties.

Sale of vacant properties

• The sale of vacant properties is about attracting new middle-income households who are able to afford a full mortgage, are likely to be young and to have children who will attend local schools.
• It allows the landlord to choose which properties should be offered for sale - thereby maintaining a sustainable balance and mix.
• It can include a clause allowing the landlord the opportunity to buy back the property at a later date if appropriate.

Although the key drivers to the introduction of new initiatives tended to be financial reasons, once in place there has been almost unanimous, positive acknowledgment of both the social and financial benefits of mixed tenure schemes. These benefits include:

• reduced turnover (with related cost savings);
• increased demand;
• improved reputation and confidence in the area;
• reduced stigmatisation of residents;
• increased tenant satisfaction;
• a more broadly balanced household mix; and
• increased property values.

Debate on the merits of mixed-income communities has often focused on issues such as the development (or otherwise) of inclusive social networks or the development of common interests between neighbours. The findings emerging from this research suggest practical benefits through greater social stability and increased contentment by people with their home and neighbourhood.