Ownership, Narrative, Things

  • Dave Cowan
  • Helen Carr
  • Alison Wallace
Part of the Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies book series (PSLS)


This is a book about the everyday life of “shared ownership”, a peculiar pragmatic invention, both in label and in design. Although it is much messier than this, the marketing slogan for shared ownership is that it involves “part buy, part rent”. However, although shared ownership forms its substantive subject matter, the book ranges across, and makes a contribution to, various methodological pre-occupations of ours—legal consciousness, actor–network theory, property—and diverse interdisciplinary approaches to ownership, home, and things. In this chapter, we set out how we bring these diverse pre-occupations together and introduce this thing called “shared ownership”.


  1. Alexander, G., Panalver, E., Singer, J. and Underkuffler, L. (2009), ‘A Statement of Progressive Property’, 94(4), Cornell Law Review: 743–4.Google Scholar
  2. Apps, P. (2017), ‘25,000 Shared Ownership Homes Under Construction’, Inside Housing, 19th January.Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson, R. and Blandy, S. (2007), ‘Panic Rooms: The Rise of Defensive Homeownership’, 22(4), Housing Studies: 443–58.Google Scholar
  4. Atkinson, R. and Blandy, S. (2016), Domestic Fortress: Fear and the New Home Front, Manchester: MUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benson, M. and Jackson, E. (2017), ‘Making the Middle Classes on Shifting Ground? Residential Status, Performativity and Middle-Class Subjectivities in Contemporary London’, online first, British Journal of Sociology.Google Scholar
  6. Birch, J. (2017), ‘The Trouble with Leasehold’, Inside Housing, 13th April.Google Scholar
  7. Blackstone, W. (1765), The Commentaries on the Laws of England, London: Dawsons.Google Scholar
  8. Blandy, S. and Robinson, D. (2001), ‘Reforming Leasehold: Discursive Events and Outcomes, 1984–2000’, 23(3), Journal of Law and Society: 384–408.Google Scholar
  9. Blomley, N. (2003), ‘Law, Property, and the Geography of Violence: The Frontier, the Survey, and the Grid’, 93(1), Annals of the Association of American Geographers: 121–41.Google Scholar
  10. Blomley, N. (2014), ‘Disentangling Law: The Practice of Bracketing’, 10, Annual Review of Law and Social Science: 133–48.Google Scholar
  11. Blomley, N. (2016), ‘The Boundaries of Property: Complexity, Relationality, and Spatiality’, 50(1), Law and Society Review: 224–55.Google Scholar
  12. Boehm, T. and Schlottmann, S. (2008), ‘Wealth Accumulation and Homeownership: Evidence for Low-Income Households’, 10(2), Journal of Policy Development and Research: 225–56.Google Scholar
  13. Bowes, A. and Sim, D. (2002), ‘Patterns of Residential Settlement among Black and Minority Ethnic Groups’, in P. Somerville and A. Steele (eds), ‘Race’, Housing and Social Exclusion, London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  14. Bright, S. and Hopkins, N. (2011), ‘Home, Meaning and Identity: Learning from the English Model of Shared Ownership’, 28(3), Housing, Theory and Society: 377–96.Google Scholar
  15. Bumiller, K. (1988), The Civil Rights Society: The Social Construction of Victims, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Burridge, A. (2010), ‘Capital Gains, Homeownership and Economic Inequality’, 15(2), Housing Studies: 259–80.Google Scholar
  17. Callon, M. (1984), ‘Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay’, 32(1), The Sociological Review: 196–233.Google Scholar
  18. Callon, M. (1986), ‘The Sociology of an Actor-Network: The Case of the Electric Vehicle’, in M. Callon, J. Law and A. Rip (eds), Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology of Science in the Real World, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Callon, M. and Latour, B. (1981), ‘Unscrewing the Big Leviathan: How Actors Macro-Structure Reality and How Sociologists Help Them to Do So’, in K. Knorr and A. Cicorel (eds), Towards and Integration of Macro and Micro Sociology, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Carr, H. (2011), ‘The Right to Buy, The Leaseholder, and the Impoverishment of Ownership’, 38(4), Journal of Law and Society: 519–41.Google Scholar
  21. Christie, H., Smith, S. and Munro, M. (2008), ‘The Emotional Economy of Housing’, 40(1), Environment and Planning A: 2296– 312.Google Scholar
  22. Cloatre, E. (2013), Pills for the Poorest, London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cloatre, E. and Cowan, D. (forthcoming), ‘Materialities and Legalities: Some Observations’, in A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos (ed), Routledge Handbook of Law and Theory, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Cohen, M. (1927), ‘Property and Sovereignty’, 13(1), Cornell Law Review: 8–30.Google Scholar
  25. Cole, I. and Robinson, D. (2000), ‘Owners, Yet Tenants: The Position of Leaseholders in Flats in England and Wales’, 15(6), Housing Studies: 595–612.Google Scholar
  26. Cooper, D. (2007), ‘Opening Up Ownership: Community Belonging, Belongings, and the Productive Life of Property’, 32(3), Law and Social Inquiry: 625–64.Google Scholar
  27. Daily Telegraph (2013), ‘John Coward—Obituary’, Daily Telegraph, 21st November,
  28. Davies, M. (1997), Property: Meanings, Histories, Theories, London: Glasshouse.Google Scholar
  29. Department for Communities and Local Government (2015), Proposals to Streamline the Resale of Shared Ownership Properties, London: DCLG.Google Scholar
  30. Department of Environment (1971), Fair Deal for Housing, Cmnd 4728, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  31. Department of the Environment (DoE) (1977), Housing Policy—A Consultative Document, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  32. Department of the Environment (DoE) (1995), Our Future Homes: Opportunity, Choice and Responsibility, Cm 2901, London: DoE.Google Scholar
  33. Dowling, R. (1998), ‘Gender, Class and Home Ownership: Placing the Connections’, 13(4), Housing Studies: 471–86.Google Scholar
  34. Easthope, H. (2004), ‘A Place Called Home’, 21(3), Housing, Theory and Society: 128–38.Google Scholar
  35. Easthope, H. (2014), ‘Making a Rental Property Home’, 29(5), Housing Studies: 579–96.Google Scholar
  36. Elsinga, M., Hoekstra, J. and Dol, K. (2015), ‘Financial Implications of Affordable Home Ownership Products: Four Dutch Products in International Perspective’, 30(2), Journal of Housing and the Built Environment: 237–55.Google Scholar
  37. Engel, D. and Munger, F. (2003), Rights of Inclusion: Law and Identity in the Life Stories of Americans with Disabilities, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ewick, P. (2008), ‘Consciousness and Ideology’, in A. Sarat (ed), The Blackwell Companion to Law and Society, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Ewick, P. and Silbey, S. (1998), The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Flint, J. (2002), ‘Social Housing Agencies and the Governance of Anti-social Behaviour’, 17(4), Housing Studies: 619–37.Google Scholar
  41. Flint, J (2004), ‘Reconfiguring Agency and Responsibility in the Governance of Social Housing in Scotland’, 41(1), Urban Studies: 151–72.Google Scholar
  42. Forrest, R. and Hiroyama, Y. (2015), ‘The Financialisation of the Social Project: Embedded Liberalism, Neo-Liberalism and Home Ownership’, 52(2), Urban Studies: 233–44.Google Scholar
  43. Forrest, R., Lansley, S. and Murie, A. (1984), A Foot on the Ladder? An Evaluation of Low Cost Home Ownership Initiatives, Working Paper No 41, Bristol: School for Advanced Urban Studies, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
  44. Forrest, R., Murie, A. and Williams, P. (1990), Home Ownership: Differentiation and Fragmentation, London: Unwin HymanGoogle Scholar
  45. Fox O’Mahony, L. (2014), ‘Property Outsiders and the Hidden Politics of Doctrinalism’, 67(1), Current Legal Problems: 409–45.Google Scholar
  46. Freeman, R. (2008), ‘Learning by Meeting’, 2(1), Critical Policy Analysis: 1–24.Google Scholar
  47. Freeman, R. and Maybin, J. (2011), ‘Documents, Practices and Policy’, 7(2), Evidence and Policy: 155–70.Google Scholar
  48. Fritsvold, E. (2009), ‘Under the Law: Legal Consciousness and Radical Environmental Activism’, 34(4), Law & Social Inquiry: 799–824.Google Scholar
  49. Giuliani, M. (1991), ‘Towards an Analysis of Mental Representations of Attachment to Home’, 8(2), Journal of Architectural and Planning Research: 133–46.Google Scholar
  50. Grabham, E. (2016), Brewing Legal Times: Things, Form and the Enactment of Law, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  51. Graham, N. (2011), Lawscape: Property, Environment, Law, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Gurney, C. (1999a), ‘Lowering the Drawbridge: A Case Study of Analogy and Metaphor in the Social Construction of Home-Ownership’, 36(7), Urban Studies: 1705–22.Google Scholar
  53. Gurney, C. (1999b), ‘Pride and Prejudice: Discourses of Normalisation in Public and Private Accounts of Home Ownership’, 14(2), Housing Studies: 163–85.Google Scholar
  54. Halliday, S. and Morgan, B. (2013), ‘I Fought the Law and the Law Won? Legal Consciousness and the Critical Imagination’, 66(1), Current Legal Problems: 1–32.Google Scholar
  55. Hamnett, C. (1999), Winners and Loser: Homeownership in Modern Britain, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Hargreaves, J. (2014), Mr Messy, London: Egmont.Google Scholar
  57. Herbert, C., McCue, D. and Sanchez-Moyano, R. (2013), ‘Is Homeownership Still an Effective Means of Building Wealth for Low-Income Households? (Was It Ever?)’, Joint Centre for Housing Studies, Harvard University,
  58. Heywood, A. (2016), From the Margins to the Mainstream: A Study of the Prospects for Shared Home Ownership in the North West, London: The Smith Institute.Google Scholar
  59. Hillyard, P. and Watson, S. (1994), ‘Postmodern Social Policy: A Contradiction in Terms?’, 25(3), Journal of Social Policy: 321–46.Google Scholar
  60. Honore, A. (1961), ‘Ownership’, in A. Guest (ed), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  61. Hull, K. (2016), ‘Legal Consciousness in Marginalized Groups: The Case of LGBT People’, 41(3), Law and Social Inquiry: 551–72.Google Scholar
  62. Hume, D. (1740)[2004], A Treatise of Human Nature, London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  63. Hunter, C. (2015), ‘Solar Panels, Homeowners and Leases: The Lease as a Socio-Legal Object’, in D. Cowan and D. Wincott (eds), Exploring the ‘Legal’ in Socio-Legal Studies, London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  64. Hurdley, R. (2006), ‘Dismantling Mantelpieces: Narrating Identities and Materializing Culture in the Home’, 40(4), Sociology: 717–33.Google Scholar
  65. Jacob, M-A. (2017), ‘The Strikethrough: An Approach to Regulatory Writing and Professional Discipline’, 37(1), Legal Studies: 137–61.Google Scholar
  66. Jacobs, J. and Smith, S. (2008), ‘Living Room: Rematerialising Home’, 40(3), Environment and Planning A: 515–9.Google Scholar
  67. Jacobs, K. and Gabriel, M. (2013), ‘Introduction: Homes, Objects and Things’, 30(3), Housing, Theory and Society: 213–8.Google Scholar
  68. Johnson, J. (1988), ‘Mixing Humans and Nonhumans Together: The Sociology of a Door-Closer’, 35(3), Social Problems: 298–310.Google Scholar
  69. Jorgensen, C. (2016), ‘The Space of the Family: Emotions, Economy and Materiality in Homeownership’, 33(1), Housing, Theory and Society: 98–113Google Scholar
  70. Karn, V., Kemeny, J. and Williams, P. (1985), Home Ownership in the Inner City: Salvation or Despair?, Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
  71. Keenan, S. (2013), ‘Property as Governance: Time, Space and Belonging in Australia’s Northern Territory Intervention’, 76(3), Modern Law Review: 464–93.Google Scholar
  72. Keenan, S. (2015), Subversive Property: Law and the Production of Spaces of Belonging, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  73. Kennett, P., Forrest, R. and Marsh, A. (2013), ‘The Global Economic Crisis and the Reshaping of Housing Opportunities’, 30(1), Housing, Theory and Society: 10–28.Google Scholar
  74. King, P. (2010), Housing Policy Transformed: The Right to Buy and the Desire to Own, Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Latour, B. (1987), Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society, Harvard: Harvard UP.Google Scholar
  76. Latour, B. (2000), ‘When Things Strike Back: A Possible Contribution of “Science Studies” to the Social Sciences’, 51(1), British Journal of Sociology: 107–23.Google Scholar
  77. Latour, B. (2005), Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  78. Latour, B. (2010), The Making of Law: An Ethnography of the Conseil d’Etat, Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  79. Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1986), Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton: Princeton UP.Google Scholar
  80. Law, J. (1996), ‘Traduction/Trahison: Notes on Actor-Network Theory’, TMV Working Paper Number 106, Oslo, Norway: University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  81. Law, J. (1999), ‘After ANT: Complexity, Naming and Topology’, in J. Law and J. Hassard (eds), Actor-Network Theory and After, Sociological Review Monographs, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  82. Law, J. (2002), Aircraft Stories: Decentring the Object in Technoscience, Durham: Duke UP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Law, J. (2004), After Method: Mess in Social Science Research, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  84. Law, J. and Mol, A. (1995), ‘Notes on Materiality and Sociality’, 43(2), The Sociological Review: 274–94.Google Scholar
  85. Malpass, P. (2000a), ‘The Discontinuous History of Housing Associations in England’, 15(2), Housing Studies: 195–212.Google Scholar
  86. Malpass, P. (2000b), Housing Associations and Housing Policy: A Historical Perspective, Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  87. Manzi, T. and Morrison, N. (2017), ‘Risk, Commercialism and Social Purpose: Repositioning the English Housing Association Sector’, forthcoming, Urban Studies: 1–18.Google Scholar
  88. McDermont, M. (2010), Governing, Independence, and Expertise: The Business of Housing Associations, Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  89. McKee, K. (2011), ‘Challenging the Norm? The “Ethopolitics” of Low Cost Homeownership in Scotland’, 48(16), Urban Studies: 3399–413.Google Scholar
  90. McKenzie, D. (2006), An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Mercer, P. (2016), ‘Could Shared Ownership Help Sydney’s Housing Affordability Crisis?’, BBC Online News,
  92. Merrill, T. and Smith, H. (2001), ‘What Happened to Property in Law and Economics?’, 111(2), Yale Law Journal: 357–98.Google Scholar
  93. Merry, S. (1990), Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness among Working-Class Americans, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  94. Miller, D. (2010), Stuff, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  95. Morrison, N. (2016), ‘Institutional Logics and Organisational Hybridity: English Housing Associations’ Diversification into the Private Rented Sector’, 31(8), Housing Studies: 897–915.Google Scholar
  96. Mullins, D., Czischke, D. and van Bortel, G. (2014), Hybridizing Housing Organisations: Meanings, Concepts and Processes of Social Enterprise, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  97. Murie, A., Niner, P. and Watson, C. (1976), Housing Policy and the Housing System, London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  98. Murie, A. and Williams, P. (2015), ‘A Presumption in Favour of Home Ownership? Reconsidering Housing Tenure Strategies’, 30(5), Housing Studies: 656–76.Google Scholar
  99. Murtha, T. (2015), ‘The Housing Association that Will No Longer Build Homes for the Poor’, The Guardian, 7th August.Google Scholar
  100. National Audit Office (2006), A Foot on the Ladder: Low Cost Home Ownership Assistance, HC 1048 Session 2005–2006, London: NAO.Google Scholar
  101. Nedelsky, J. (1990), ‘Law, Boundaries, and the Bounded Self’, 30(1), Representations: 162–89.Google Scholar
  102. Nielson, L.B. (2000), ‘Situating Legal Consciousness; Experiences and Attitudes of Ordinary Citizens about Law and Street Harassment’, 34(4), Law and Society Review: 1055–90.Google Scholar
  103. Osborne, H. (2014), ‘Poor Doors: The Segregation of London’s Inner-City Flat Dwellers’, The Guardian, 25th July.Google Scholar
  104. Pawson, H. and Mullins, D. (2010), After Council Housing: Britain’s New Social Landlords, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Penner, J. (1996), ‘The “Bundle of Rights” Picture of Property’, 43(3), UCLA Law Review: 711–820.Google Scholar
  106. Penner, J. (1997), The Idea of Property in Law, Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  107. Piketty, T. (2015), ‘Property, Inequality, and Taxation: Reflections on Capital in the Twenty-First Century’, 68(2) New York University Tax Review: 631–47.Google Scholar
  108. Radin, M. (2012), Boilerplate: The Fine Print, Vanishing Rights, and the Rule of Law, Princeton: Princeton UP.Google Scholar
  109. Riles, A. (2006), ‘Introduction: In Response’, in A. Riles (ed), Documents: Artifacts of Modern Knowledge, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Riles, A. (2011), Collateral Knowledge: Legal Reasoning in the Global Financial Markets, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Robertson, D. (2006), ‘Cultural Expectations of Homeownership: Explaining Changing Legal Definitions of Flat “Ownership” Within Britain’, 21(1), Housing Studies: 35–52.Google Scholar
  112. Rose, C. (1985), ‘Possession as the Origin of Property’, 52(1), University of Chicago Law Review: 73–88.Google Scholar
  113. Rose, C. (1994), Property & Persuasion: Essays on the History, Theory, and Rhetoric of Ownership, Boulder, Col: Westview.Google Scholar
  114. Rose, N. (1999), Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought, Cambridge: CUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Sarat, A. (1990), ‘“The Law Is All Over …”: Power, Resistance and the Legal Consciousness of the Welfare Poor’, 2(2), Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities: 343–79.Google Scholar
  116. Sassen, S. (2014), Expulsions: Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy, Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Saunders, P. (1990), A Nation of Home Owners, London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  118. Savage, M., Bagnall, G. and Longhurst, B. (2004), Globalization and Belonging, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  119. Silbey, S. (2005), ‘After Legal Consciousness’, 1(1), Annual Review of Law and Social Science: 323–68.Google Scholar
  120. Silbey, S. (2010), ‘J. Locke, op. cit.: Invocations of Law on Snowy Streets’, 5(2), Journal of Comparative Law: 66–91.Google Scholar
  121. Silbey, S. and Cavicchi, A. (2005), ‘The Common Place of Law: Transforming Matters of Concern into the Objects of Everyday Life’, in B. Latour and P. Weibel (eds), Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  122. Silbey, S. and Ewick, P. (2003), ‘Narrating Social Structure: Stories of Resistance to Legal Authority’, 108(6), American Journal of Sociology: 1328–72.Google Scholar
  123. Smith, S. (2015), ‘Owner-Occupation: At Home with a Hybrid of Money and Materials’, 40(3), Environment and Planning A: 520–35.Google Scholar
  124. Tang, C., Oxley, M. and Mekic, D. (2017), ‘Meeting Commercial and Social Goals: Institutional Investment in the Housing Association Sector’, 32(4), Housing Studies: 411–27.Google Scholar
  125. Teruel, R. (2015), ‘The New Intermediate Tenures in Catalonia to Facilitate Access to Housing’, 2, Revue de Droit Bancaire et Financiere: 115–8.Google Scholar
  126. Underkuffler, L. (2016), ‘A Theoretical Approach: The Lens of Progressive Property’, in S. Blandy and S. Bright (eds), Researching Property Law, London: Palgrave MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  127. Valverde, M. (2003), Law’s Dream of a Common Knowledge, Princeton: Princeton UP.Google Scholar
  128. Valverde, M. (2005), ‘Authorizing the Production of Urban Moral Order: Appellate Courts and Their Knowledge Games’, 39(2), Law and Society Review: 419–56.Google Scholar
  129. Van Oorschott, I. and Schinkel, W. (2015), ‘The Legal Case File as Border Object: On Self-Reference and Other-Reference in Criminal Law’, 42(4), Journal of Law and Society: 499–527.Google Scholar
  130. Wallace, A. (2008), ‘Knowing the Market? Understanding and Performing York’s Housing’, 23(2), Housing Studies: 253–70.Google Scholar
  131. Walt, A van der (2009), Property in the Margins, Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  132. Watt, P. (2009), ‘Living in an Oasis: Middle-Class Disaffiliation and Selective Belonging in an English Suburb’, 41(12), Environment and Planning A: 2874–92.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dave Cowan
    • 1
  • Helen Carr
    • 2
  • Alison Wallace
    • 3
  1. 1.School of LawUniversity of BristolBristolUK
  2. 2.Kent Law SchoolUniversity of KentCanterburyUK
  3. 3.Centre for Housing PolicyUniversity of YorkYorkUK

Personalised recommendations