{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01956521739130435, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.607655502392345, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
POLICY REVIEW Estate-based Regeneration in England: Lessons from Housing Action Trusts

This paper presents an interim assessment of Housing Action Trusts (HATs)-special purpose, limited duration, Government agencies-charged with the task of comprehensively regenerating run-down housing estates in England. HATs' track record remains under-analysed despite the large sums of public money involved and their relevance to the latest experiments in estate regeneration. The paper briefly profiles the six HATs' designated areas, then assesses the degree to which they have achieved their main objectives. HATs have thus far had mixed success. They have attached greater priority to employment and training and quality of life measures, community empowerment and sustainability than earlier estate regeneration programmes. However, they have still devoted the lion's share of their resources to housing investment and the question remains whether they have gone far enough in tackling the deep-rooted social and economic problems of deprived neighbourhoods. HATs have proved relatively expensive compared with alternative methods of injecting new investment into social housing, largely because of their emphasis upon durable design, good space standards and energy efficiency and also resident empowerment and wider measures. Only time will tell whether the extra cost is justified.