There has been some debate on whether or not cohousing can be described as 'affordable housing'. As this phrase has a particular technical meaning in the UK, it may be useful to explore it and consider whether or not cohousing fits this category – or if there are alternative ways in which cohousing might be made accessible to people on low incomes.

A formal description of 'affordable housing' can be found in official policy guidelines for new housing development. In Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing, (Communities and Local Government: Department, London, November 2006), affordable housing is defined as

'social rented and intermediate housing, provided to specified eligible households whose needs are not met by the market.

PPS3 states that affordable housing should:
'Meet the needs of eligible households including availability at a cost low enough for them to afford, determined with regard to local incomes and local house prices.

Include provision for the home to remain at an affordable price for future eligible households or, if these restrictions are lifted, for the subsidy to be recycled for alternative affordable housing provision'

The references made to social rented housing and to intermediate affordable housing are key to this definition of'affordable housing'.  PPS3 therefore also clarifies the description of these tenures:

Social rented housing is: 'Rented housing owned and managed by local authorities and registered social landlords, for which guideline target rents are determined through the national rent regime. The proposals set out in the Three Year Review of Rent Restructuring (July 2004) were implemented as policy in April 2006. It may also include rented housing owned or managed by other persons and provided under equivalent rental arrangements to the above, as agreed with the local authority or with the Housing Corporation as a condition of grant.'

Intermediate affordable housing on the other hand is: 'Housing at prices and rents above those of social rent, but below market price or rents, and which meet the criteria set out above. These can include shared equity products (e.g. HomeBuy), other low cost homes for sale and intermediate rent.'

These definitions replace guidance given in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing (PPG3) and DETR Circular 6/98 Planning and Affordable Housing.   PPS3 notes that the definitions do not exclude homes provided by private sector bodies or dwellings provided without grant funding. Where such homes meet the definition above, they may be considered, for planning purposes, as affordable housing. Those homes that do not meet the definition - for example, 'low cost market' housing, - 'may not be considered, for planning purposes, as affordable housing.'

In practice, administration of the affordable housing 'system' – certainly in England – involves an extensive range of interests. This overall 'system' includes, amongst other things:

1. local authority Registers of Housing Needs (i.e. Council 'waiting lists') listing households wishing to access affordable housing;
2. arrangements whereby local authorities nominate households from the Registers to vacant affordable housing, either council housing or dwellings operated by housing associations. In some areas, households on the Register declare an interest in a property but must meet the priorities of the housing provider.
3. the targeting of scarce affordable housing towards 'households in need'
4. substantial liaison between the local authority sector and the housing associations (registered social landlords or RSLs) which own more and more of the social housing stock across the country and are the main recipients of social housing grant for some of the costs of creating new affordable housing;
5. liaison between local authorities, RSLs and the private sector, as a planning requirement to provide affordable housing as part of mixed tenure private housing developments i.e. a combination of properties for sale or rent at open market rates and more affordable housing.

It is perfectly possible for cohousing to provide some dwelling units that meet the above definition of 'affordable housing' - providing of course, that the dwellings are at social housing rents levels, are linked in some acceptable fashion to local RSLs or the local authority or can demonstrate the characteristics of 'intermediate affordable housing' noted above. This, however is not the same as defining or describing 'cohousing' itself as 'affordable housing' as this term is officially understood.

In this affordable housing 'system' it is third parties (the organizations noted above) which allocate accommodation to 'people in need' and the system is governed by a set of established procedures and rules.  cohousing, on the other hand, is fundamentally about people arranging suitable housing and neighbourhood development for themselves.  Officially defined 'need' determines eligibility for affordable housing and herein lies a dilemma for cohousing, as a readiness to wait for cohousing accommodation would not be seen as evidence of genuine 'need'.

Importantly then, if cohousing is promoted as 'affordable housing', it is likely that its schemes will have to partake in and accept the conclusions of the same administrative structures that govern how other affordable housing accommodation is managed and allocated. It should be anticipated also that this might inevitably result in dwellings having to be offered to households keen on the chance to live in an attractive and friendly neighbourhood environment, but who have little or no real desire to contribute to the wider community ethos and relationships.

The one exception to the above scenario has been that of 'co-operative housing', which has remained basically social housing property for rent, controlled and operated by its own membership. It has a significant history in the UK and local co-op communities have been able to arrive at allocation arrangements with their local authorities for vacant properties that also help the council's waiting lists. In recent years, however, strained relationships have grown between communities wishing to take time in finding suitable and keen new members, and affordable housing 'operators' looking to make immediate use of available properties by filling them with the next household 'in need'.

Certainly cohousing could seek some potential advantage from the affordable housing 'system', as well offer a valuable contribution. One group might well decide that it would benefit from some social housing grant towards the costs of new cohousing development. It could gear its development phase towards persuading a prospective RSL or private sector partner that it could 'provide' member households in a way that meets local need. The development of mixed-tenure neighbourhoods by cohousing groups would welcomed, as this is increasingly the focus of government policies for creating sustainable housing and neighbourhoods. Cohousing groups accepting this challenge willingly can offer an attractive local development to potential partners at the same time as dispelling any misconceptions of cohousing as mutual benefit schemes for the well-off.

The other sense in which 'cohousing' might be described as a route to offer 'affordable' development is if it can create new development at a lower final cost to the incoming households than is usually found in other new housing developments. This is 'affordability' in the general sense.  If cohousing groups can develop good quality neighbourhoods as efficiently as possible and combine lower over-heads with an acceptance of out-turn profits lower than those usually demanded by conventional private sector developers, then perhaps this can materialize into lower final costs.  A development scheme led by the recipient households is certainly in a good position to secure the full economic worth of a scheme. How they do it will be up to those participating.