Gypsy/Travellers - accommodation needs: evidence review

6. Gypsy/Traveller accommodation needs and aspirations

Across all the studies, the assessment of Gypsy/Traveller housing need and demand was considered a complex process involving a range of factors. There is no agreed methodology for quantifying the need for different types of accommodation among the population, particularly when attempting to account for future demand and cultural differences within Gypsy/Traveller communities. Quantification is made more difficult by a lack of visibility and information on large sections of the community, particularly those living in housing and on unauthorised encampments. There are also difficulties around what constitutes need, taking into account the existence of unused or underused site provision, transit or stopping places, and variation in accommodation aspirations. Further, Gypsy/Travellers as a group cannot be considered homogenous and a "one-size fits all" approach is inappropriate. Therefore, different groups require responsive and flexible approaches to meet their specific needs and contexts.

6.1 Assessing accommodation need

In those studies which sought to assess the accommodation needs of Gypsy/Travellers in a given area, robust data on population, sites and pitches was identified as key to measuring current provision and planning for future demand. In Scotland, the guidance on completing HDNAs requires local authorities to take into account evidence on the current type and level of needs and provision; any gaps or shortfalls in needs and provision, and the future type and level of needs and provision required. As previously noted, it also includes a requirement to consult with Gypsy/Travellers in planning for any future provision (Scottish Government 2018a).

In England and Wales, the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) in England (2007) and more recently, the Welsh Government (2015) have produced comprehensive guidance on conducting Gypsy/Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessments (GTAA). Local authorities in England and Wales are required to undertake a GTAA and to make provision for sites where the assessment identifies an unmet need for mobile home pitches. The guidance produced by the DCLG has also been adapted for use in accommodation needs assessments in Scotland (Craigforth 2007). The guidance outlines the initial step as the development of robust data on the profile of the population, household characteristics and accommodation circumstances of Gypsy/Travellers in a given area. This should take account of the demographics of the population, current site provision and accommodation preferences. The guidance produced in both England and Wales identified the following groups as particularly likely to give rise to pitch need, and which should provide inputs for baseline data:

Mobile home dwelling households:

• Who have no authorised site on which to reside;
• Whose existing site accommodation is overcrowded or unsuitable and are unable to obtain larger or more suitable accommodation;
• Who contain households who are unable to set up separate family units and who are unable to access a place on an authorised site or develop their own site.

'Bricks and mortar' dwelling households:

• Whose existing accommodation is overcrowded or unsuitable (unsuitable in this context includes unsuitability by virtue of psychological aversion to bricks and mortar accommodation);
• Which contain concealed households who are unable to set up separate family units and who are unable to access suitable or appropriate accommodation.

Concerns around the practicalities of quantifying some of these elements were raised in research undertaken in Scotland by Craigforth (2007). For example, difficulties were seen to exist where the need for accommodation arises from overcrowding if, for reasons of privacy, households choose not to disclose exact details of current living arrangements. However, arguably this holds true for several of the elements in the guidance.

One study carried out across the UK highlighted the importance of conducting Gypsy/Traveller accommodation needs assessments separately from wider generic needs assessments. An assessment of need that is specific to Gypsy/Travellers and actively engages with the community was seen to be important to ensuring that meaningful data is gathered, thus preventing the assessment becoming merely a 'tick-box' exercise (Richardson & Codona 2016).

The location of any new provision was also cited as a key factor in assessing need. Gypsy/Travellers have often not been able to access culturally appropriate sites in the areas they wish to live and enforcement activity may have distorted where they have settled (Welsh Government 2015). The literature suggests that Gypsy/Travellers prefer sites that strike a balance between access to local urban centres and some degree of seclusion, with access to public transport; shops; health services and education identified as key drivers of satisfaction (Craigforth 2007). Data on unauthorised encampments should be analysed to identify numbers, most occupied locations, the number of caravans present, and duration and reason of the stay to identify location for future provision (Welsh Government 2015). One study noted the importance of historical trends and seasonal fluctuations in a region, and recommended this data be taken into account in any assessment (Home & Greenfields, 2006). Where possible, local authorities may also need to work in partnership to find a shared solution to meet regional need (Welsh Government 2015; DCLG 2007). Such partnerships have also been identified as a way of saving costs and of improving baseline data (Welsh Government 2015). In one study, qualitative evidence provided by specialist Gypsy/Traveller Liaison Officers (GTLO) and Site Managers provided valuable insight into the level of need in an area as well as the challenges facing the local Gypsy/Traveller community (Clydeplan 2015b).

Secondary data analysis is also identified as a crucial component across the literature in estimating the size of the Gypsy/Traveller population and measuring or assessing need (Welsh Government 2015; DCLG 2007). Survey data should therefore be cross-checked against existing regional and national data. Possible sources used in the literature include the 2011 Census, housing records, local authority planning records, the caravan count, traveller education records and numbers from GTLOs and support organisations (Welsh Government 2015; Home & Greenfields 2006; DCLG 2007; Craigforth 2007).

6.2 Accommodation aspirations

As has been noted previously, the inadequacy of current site provision emerges as a theme throughout the literature (see section 5.2: Inadequacy of current site and stopping place provision). In Scotland, where minimum site standards have been in place since 2015, several sites are still failing to meet the standards, leaving many Gypsy/Travellers with little choice but to live in accommodation which does not meet their needs.

In addition to the guidance on undertaking Gypsy/Traveller accommodation needs assessments, the Welsh Government (2015b) and the DCLG in England (2008) have also produced guidance for local authorities on designing Gypsy and Traveller sites and making sure they are fit for purpose. The guidance outlines a number of factors that should be taken into account in site design, including size and layout, location, road access, access to local services, suitability of land and the surrounding environment (Welsh Government 2015b).

In the accommodation needs assessment carried out by Craigforth (2007), the majority of those consulted favoured living on official sites and wanted to continue to do so. This included the majority of older people interviewed as well as those with a disability. Participants in the Grampian study expressed similar preferences but only rated their accommodation as adequate given it is not permanent and there were ongoing concerns about the quality of sites (GREC 2017). Similar findings emerged in a study in England, where the need for further site provision was spoken about more than any other topic. Those in the English study expressed a preference for small, self-owned long stay sites for family groups, preferably on the edge of a village, and near established Gypsy/Traveller communities. (Home & Greenfields 2006). This echoes wider findings across the literature, which indicate the importance of family connection (Shelter 2008), access to services (GREC 2017) and support from the wider community (MECOPP 2015) as major factors influencing accommodation preference. In one study, having a warm and easy to heat home was also a driver in accommodation satisfaction (Craigforth 2007).

Two studies conducted in the Grampian area, as well as an additional study used in the development of the more recent study in 2017, indicated that there were mixed views in terms of ideal site size, though more participants would favour a small site i.e.less than 10 pitches (GREC 2009, 2015, 2017). Some participants expressed a need for more space on existing pitches to allow for separate sleeping arrangements for boys and girls, as well as to allow for more flexibility to accommodate friends and relatives (Home & Greenfields 2006). Another consideration noted by one study is that smaller sites can be easier to manage and are more likely to attract compatible family units, whereas as larger sites were seen to impact on community cohesion (Welsh Government 2015b). The need for privacy was also viewed as a key consideration in accommodation preference, particularly in relation to site design, layout and orientation. For example, where sites are shared by different communities a 'tree branch' design may be preferable to a 'circular' design (see Annex 4; Welsh Government 2015b).

The most common accommodation preference was for plumbed-in mobile homes on a fully-serviced site, in the form of static caravans (GREC 2017; Craigforth 2007) or larger chalet homes (Craigforth 2007). However, one study noted that accommodation preference can be particularly localised and can differ considerably between different cultural groups (Craigforth 2007).

In relation to private sites, participants indicated that there were too many barriers to developing private sites and due to the likelihood of inter-family tensions it was felt such an approach would only work on a one family per site basis (Craigforth 2007). This was confirmed by another study, where a majority (49%) wanted to own their own site but were put off by multiple barriers, including costs and difficulties with planning permission (Home & Greenfields 2006).

The reasons behind a move into housing were various but participants commonly referred to health considerations, or being fed up with living on site with other travellers or with the travelling lifestyle more generally. Those interviewed in the Scottish studies expressed a preference for social landlord housing over privately rented/owned accommodation (GREC 2017; Craigforth 2007). For a small number of participants there was no interest in permanent housing. However, they were interested in temporary housing for the winter period, to secure a healthier place to spend the harsher months of the year (Craigforth 2007). A factor which was also mentioned by one respondent in the Grampian study (GREC 2017).

One study which looked at the accommodation experiences of older Gypsy/Travellers, emphasised the need for flexibility in accommodation provision. In particular, to account for the high levels of health conditions and disability within the population. This means that provision should be able to adapt and accommodate changing needs over an individual's life course. As Gypsy/Travellers get older, for many the frequency of travel also declines, often resulting in a move into 'bricks and mortar' accommodation. Where this occurs, ways of facilitating the move while maintaining family networks and access to services should be explored (Hodges & Cemlyn 2013). Building the ability to adapt to changing circumstances as individuals age into the accommodation stock for Gypsy/Travellers will its ensure resilience and longevity.

The importance of selecting the correct location for sites was implicit across the literature. Local authorities were often seen to favour sites which already benefited from planning permission for a caravan site or sites which were likely to raise a relatively low level of opposition from the local community (EHRC 2015). Concerns about living in towns were raised in two of the studies, particularly by people with children, where fears about drugs and anti-social behaviour were commonly mentioned. In these cases, for this reason, a more rural setting was considered preferable by participants (Home & Greenfields 2006; Craigforth 2007).

Several studies also noted the importance of horses to Gypsy/Traveller culture (Richardson & Codona 2016; Welsh Government 2015b; DCLG 2008). The provision of grazing land, in consultation with residents and depending on resources available, may be appropriate if a clear plan can be agreed (Richardson & Codona 2016).

A small number of participants in the Craigforth study expressed an interest in the concept of grouped housing, where Gypsy/Travellers can live together as a group or community. Such developments have been used in Northern and the Republic of Ireland as an alternative approach to meeting needs (Craigforth 2007). In Scotland, a similar purpose-built development has recently been completed in South Ayrshire, which is described in the next section of this report.