Centre for Housing Policy

Good Neighbour Agreements and the Promotion of Positive Behaviour in Communities

DCLG Housing Research summary 220
Respect and Housing Management – Using Good Neighbour Agreements Download PDF

Croucher, K; Jones, A and Wallace, A (2007) Good Neighbour Agreements and the Promotion of Positive Behaviour in Communities Download PDF (Full report)

The research is concerned with establishing the extent of the use of good neighbour agreements and how they link to related initiatives such as tenancy agreements, incentive schemes and good neighbour awards in England. It will take the form of an electronic survey, plus internet-based review; telephone interviews with providers representing the current range of initiatives; and a number of focus groups providing a forum for key players to discuss the relative merits of the various forms of Good Neighbour Agreements.

Background to research

Anti-social behaviour has been a major area of concern for governments, housing and community managers and residents since the mid-1990s and tackling anti-social behaviour remains a key priority for the Government. Within the housing management arena it is seen as a problem that can impact on individuals, affect the whole standing of a locality or estate and influence housing management efficiency in areas such as allocations and void control. Anti-social behaviour not only diminishes the quality of life for individuals and communities it also ‘undermines confidence in the law and public services and reduces the willingness of law abiding citizens to defend and encourage reasonable standards of behaviour in their neighbourhoods'.

Research conducted for the ODPM found that Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) and social landlords have adopted a wide range of initiatives and measures designed to tackle anti-social behaviour. These include initiatives focusing on enforcement, prevention and, to a lesser degree, the rehabilitation of perpetrators of anti-social behaviour. Whilst enforcement and rehabilitation of offenders are important elements in addressing anti-social behaviour once it has occurred, it is clearly preferable that interventions are developed which prevent anti-social behaviour from escalating or even occurring in the first place. A range of preventative or early interventions are being used by social landlords including tenancy agreements, introductory tenancies, Acceptable Behaviour Agreements (or Contracts) and parenting contracts, as well as Good Neighbour Agreements.

Several Scottish local authorities introduced Good Neighbourhood Agreements or Good Neighbour Charters in the late 1990s. These are used to back up clauses in the tenancy agreement regarding anti-social behaviour. In Dundee for example, the Housing Department and Dundee Federation of Tenants produced a Good Neighbour Charter to be signed by all new tenants, giving their commitment to being a good neighbour. The Charter highlights what is expected of tenants as good neighbours, outlines examples of neighbour nuisance to make clear what activities are considered anti-social, it also makes clear what the landlord will do in response to anti-social behaviour and explains what legal action can be taken. In some areas local authorities have attempted to involve local residents as well as tenants, for example, North Lanarkshire Council made an explicit and concerted attempt to secure owner-occupiers as signatories to their Good Neighbour Agreements.

However, the extent and use of Good Neighbour Agreements or Charters in England remains unclear. Evidence suggests that some forms of charter or good neighbour agreement have been used in England since the mid-1990s usually within wider ranging estate or neighbourhood agreements. Estate Agreements (also referred to as neighbourhood agreements, particularly in mixed tenure areas and where there is more than one landlord) were first developed in 1990 by the London Borough of Camden as a means of improving consultation with tenants and strengthening the accountability of the Council. Since 1990 a number of landlords (both local authorities and registered social landlords) have introduced estate agreements into their tenant participation arrangements as a way of increasing, or at least, formalising, their consultation with tenants. Some estate agreements (but not all) contain elements similar to Good Neighbour Agreements, that is they also require residents and tenants to agree to abide by certain standards, but the extent to which this is the case is not clear.

The Report of the Policy Action Team 8 on Anti-social Behaviour recommended the use of neighbourhood or estate agreements as a first stage in the prevention of anti-social behaviour and highlighted the example of Monsall Future Partnership in Manchester, a joint estate agreement which established a common set of standards and targets for the delivery of services to the tenants of all the partner landlords. In return, tenants signed up to a Community Declaration, which included an agreement to behave in a neighbourly way.

A study for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation in 2000 identified 7 local authorities and 12 Registered Social Landlords that had introduced some form of estate agreement. Four of these agreements were intended as extensions of the formal landlord-tenant contract, with the aims of explaining obligations in more detail and fostering a sense of ‘neighbourliness'. The researchers concluded that neighbourhood agreements were still in their relative infancy and there was little consistency over scope, aims and function. In a 2003 ODPM study, 23 per cent of landlords (21% of LAs and 26 % of RSLs) reported that they were using some form of neighbourhood agreement but no specific details of these agreements are available. Reports on New Deal for Communities (NDC) Partnerships also suggest that some social landlords have developed tenancy agreements and other non-legal agreements that are specific to a particular neighbourhood. Their aim is to reinforce tenants' identification with their local area and to set standards of behaviour. In some cases these agreements even dictate minimum levels of active participation in the community. However, none of the NDC Partnerships made use of good neighbour agreements nor were they aware of a specific tenancy agreement for a particular area.

As earlier research suggests, from the little that is known of estate, neighbourhood or good neighbour agreements, they appear to take different forms, have different aims and be used in various ways. For example, the Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust has a ‘Good Neighbour Charter'. The Charter is a document that reinforces the tenancy agreement, clearly stating what it means to be a good neighbour but it does not require the tenant's signature. In other cases, Good Neighbour Agreements or Declarations set out what is and what is not acceptable to other residents in an area and can be used to reinforce tenancy agreements with new tenants. Such agreements can be initiated by any agency, for example the local authority, social landlords, residents' associations and Neighbourhood Watch Schemes. These agreements require the support of the community as a whole to abide by them and there are no legal sanctions if they are broken.

Good Neighbour Agreements can also be used in a similar way to Acceptable Behaviour Agreements (or Contracts) to stop anti-social behaviour or prevent it from escalating. Thurrock Council, for example, defines a Good Neighbour Contract as ‘a means of reinforcing, in a positive way, a tenant's responsibilities for the behaviour of themselves, their family or anyone else either residing at, or visiting their property, without recourse to legal sanctions'. Whilst the Good Neighbour Contract is not a legal contract any breach can be used in evidence in formal court proceedings.

This brief preliminary review suggests that there is some confusion about the nature and content of various agreements, some of which share the same name but have different aims and objectives. Whilst some research suggests that Good Neighbour Agreements have been effective in reducing anti-social behaviour in Scotland there is little or no research evidence of their effectiveness in England . Even less is known about how such agreements link to related initiatives such as tenancy agreements, incentive schemes (e.g. Gold Service Schemes) and good neighbour awards. There is clearly a need for greater understanding of the use of such informal initiatives in tackling anti-social behaviour.

Centre for Housing Policy
University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1904 321480 |  Fax: +44 (0)1904 321481 | chp@york.ac.uk