Breaking up communities? The social impact of housing demolition in the late twentieth century

在二十世纪的几个时期，英国中央政府和地方当局都进行了大规模的住房拆除。世纪。拆除住房主要是为了实现住房政策的目标，拆除不合格的住房，为新建筑开辟场地。1930年代、1950年代至1970年代以及可以说是1990年代末和2000年代的清除浪潮导致数百万家庭迁移。在1955年至1985年期间，即本研究所关注的时期，英格兰和威尔士有150万所房屋被拆除，1955年大都市地区所有房屋的15%到1985年已被清除。这意味着，通过清除贫民窟进行的人口流动已经成为联合王国各地大量少数家庭、街区和社区历史的一部分。对清除贫民窟有两种主要的解释。首先，从世纪末到1970年代：清除贫民窟被视为一个代价高昂的过程，有许多缺点，但对于最终的全社会收益来说是必不可少的，也是值得的。然后在世纪后期，有一个重新评估。人们越来越认为排雷是无效的，费用昂贵，而且在其他方面也很昂贵。特别是，学术观察家，从业者和受影响地区的成员认为，清除有一个巨大的，未被承认的社会成本，因为它“打破了社区”。例如，一位受影响的居民说：“当我们被搬出去时，社区的感觉消失了”（引用自Jones，2010年，第360页）。这些案例研究表明，上述两种解释都是正确的，在某些地方和某些人。一些个人和家庭以及一些整个社区自愿搬迁到更好的住房和更有吸引力的社区。他们要么是短距离迁移，要么是在社交网络完好的情况下聚在一起，要么是不关心甚至不愿意离开旧的网络。在其他情况下，人们不情愿地搬到模糊甚至更糟的新环境中，要么长途跋涉，要么发现有价值的社交网络被破坏了。直到2000年，“值得注意的是，没有关于英格兰和威尔士清除贫民窟情况的一般说明”（Yelling 2000，第126页）。关于它对社区的影响或它的“社会意义”，仍然没有权威的解释：“贫民窟清除和郊区化对工人阶级生活造成的大规模转变的更广泛的文化和政治意义几乎开始被探索”（Jones 2010 a，第513页）。该项目的目的是对有关清除贫民窟的现有证据进行系统审查，主要是根据分散的个案研究，以评估世纪后期拆除住房对社区的破坏程度。它使用系统的搜索和审查过程，以确保知名案例不会对整体结果产生太大影响，并确保其他案例不会被忽视。它的目的是尽可能从现有证据中了解在哪些地方，对何种拆除和迁移过程，以及对何种人和家庭，拆除和迁移确实造成了宝贵的社会联系的中断和丧失，以及在哪些地方没有造成这种情况。它旨在对世纪末的房屋拆除是否“破坏了社区”进行全面评估，并将产生一份总结证据的报告和一个证据数据库，可通过网站查阅。其目的是帮助学术和社区历史学家，并告知今天从事拆迁项目和受拆迁项目影响的人。结果将通过会议和研讨会传播，与会者包括学者、社区历史学家、社区活动家和住房工作者。

In several periods across the twentieth century, central government and local authorities across the UK have carried out large scale housing demolition. Homes were demolished principally to meet aims of housing policy by removing unsatisfactory homes and creating sites for new building. Waves of clearance in the 1930s, 1950s-1970s, and, arguably, in the late 1990s and 2000s, resulted in the movement of millions of households. Between 1955 and 1985, the period which this study focuses on, 1.5m homes were demolished in England and Wales, and 15% of all homes present in metropolitan areas in 1955 had been cleared by 1985. This means that population movement though slum clearance has been part of the history of a substantial minority of families, neighbourhoods and communities across the UK. There are two main interpretations of slum clearance. Firstly, from the late nineteenth century up to the 1970s: slum clearance was seen as costly process and having many drawbacks, but essential and worthwhile for the eventual society-wide, gains. Then in the late twentieth century, there was a reassessment. Clearance was increasingly seen as ineffective, expensive in money, and also costly in other terms. In particular, academic observers, practitioners and members of the affected areas argued that clearance had a huge, unrecognised social cost because it 'broke up communities'. For example, an affected resident said: "the community feeling went when we were moved out" (quoted in Jones 2010 p360).There are numerous case studies of individual and community experience of clearance and movement, produced by professional and community historians. These case studies suggest that both above interpretations are right, in some places and for some people. Some individuals and families and some whole neighbourhoods moved willingly, to much better homes and more attractive neighbourhoods. They either moved over short distances or all togther with their social networks intact, or were not concerned or even pleased to leave old networks behind. In other cases people moved unwillingly, to ambiguous or even worse new conditions, and either moved over long distances or otherwise found valued social networks disrupted. Until 2000, there was "remarkably, no general account of the incidence of slum clearance in England and Wales" (Yelling 2000 p126). There remains no authoritative account of its impact on communities or its 'social meaning': "the wider cultural and political significance of the massive transformation in working class life wrought by slum clearance and suburbanisation has barely begin to be explored" (Jones 2010a p513). This project aims to carry out a systematic review of existing evidence on slum clearance, mainly based on scattered case studies, to assess to what extent housing demolition in the late twentieth century broke up communities. It uses systematic search and review processes, to make sure well-known cases do not influence overall results too much, and to ensure that other examples are not overlooked. It aims to learn as much as possible from existing evidence about in what places, for what kinds of demolition and movement processes, and for which kinds of people and families demolition and movement did result in the disruption and loss of valued social ties, and where this was not the case. It aims to come to an overall assessment, on the balance of evidence, about whether late twenieth century housing demolition did 'break up communities'.The review will produce a report summarising evidence and a database of evidence, available through a website. The aim is to help both academic and community historians, and also to inform people working on and affected by demolition projects today. Results will be spread through conferences and a seminar involving academics, community historians, community activists and housing workers.