As lead editor of the UK Housing Review 2025, Professor Mark Stephens of the University of Glasgow’s Urban & Social Policy division brings more than just academic rigour to the table - he brings a determined call for deeper structural change in how housing policy is made and understood in the UK.

In this year’s edition of the Review, Stephens and his editorial team delve into the shifting landscape of housing with clarity, evidence, and a desire to drive meaningful reform. Central to his message is the call for the Bank of England to take a more integrated role in housing policy - particularly in how monetary policy interacts with the rental market.

A Review Built on Evidence

The UK Housing Review is a major reference point in the housing sector, combining contemporary issue chapters, regular commentary, and a rich compendium of housing data. Stephens, who has contributed articles as well as directed the editorial process, describes the compendium as the “backbone” of the Review - an essential tool for ironing out inconsistencies in government housing statistics and providing clarity for both researchers and policymakers.

But as Lord Best noted on its launch, the Review “should, but seldom does” inform all housing policy decisions. Why? According to Stephens, “policy processes are complex and iterative”. Policy change, he argues, rarely stems from a single, well-evidenced idea. Instead, it reflects a cumulative weight of opinion and shifting political conditions. Even where clear evidence exists - as in the often heated debate around rent controls - it may not yield straightforward outcomes.

The Rent Control Debate: A Living Policy Experiment

Stephens uses Scotland’s rent control discussions to illustrate the fraught intersection of ideology, evidence, and economic reality. “There’s a degree of selectivity in the deployment of evidence by both sides,” he notes. Advocates point to international examples to defend their positions, but such comparisons often ignore local economic and legal contexts. “Whatever the evidence from elsewhere or historically, the circumstances in Scotland now are unique,” he cautions.

“This is an area that is particularly difficult and where the best evidence we can deploy can be used to inform policy. And to an extent, it’s also a kind of living experiment, isn’t it? That we had the Housing Bill published in one form and then the market institutions responded in particular ways and government then made some changes to the Bill.”

Importantly, Stephens urges honesty about the trade-offs inherent in policies like rent control. “It’s implausible to claim there will be no behavioural consequences,” he says. For instance, if tighter rent regulation leads to less private investment in housing, then governments must be prepared to bolster social housing provision in response - and answer difficult questions about how that will be funded.

“The debate should go a stage further and say, ‘if we’re to devote more resources to social rented housing, where are those resources going to come from?’” he adds. “Are we going to spend less on education? On health?”

A Call for Central Bank Accountability in Housing

Perhaps the most striking message from Stephens in this year’s Review is the call for the Bank of England to step into the housing policy frame - particularly with regard to its impact on rental markets. 

“Long-term trends in monetary policy have arguably had more impact on housing affordability than housing policy itself,” Stephens argues.

He points to a significant blind spot: the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) routinely assesses mortgage markets and house prices for their influence on consumption and inflation, but rarely discusses rental markets - despite rents being a direct component of the Consumer Price Index (CPI). “We really don’t understand fully how interest rate rises feed through into rents,” he says. “And yet the Bank seems surprisingly disinterested in this.”

The exclusion of owner-occupiers’ housing costs from the CPI - due to fears of circularity in monetary policy -is another structural issue Stephens believes must be addressed. “It raises the ethical question of whether one group is expected to bear a disproportionate amount of the pain,” he says, referring to mortgage holders affected by rate hikes.

More broadly, Stephens argues for better coordination between monetary and fiscal policy. “Why rely solely on interest rates to control housing costs? Fiscal tools - targeted subsidies or investment - could be more effective,” he suggests.

Joined-up government - and its challenges

The fragmented nature of housing governance is a recurring concern. Housing policy spans everything from local planning to macroeconomic regulation. “Because housing is spatially fixed, each property is unique. That means local governance is vital,” says Stephens. But that also complicates efforts to craft coherent national policy - particularly in a system where different departments and levels of government pull in different directions.

This fragmentation is illustrated in policies like Help to Buy, which emerged as a political response to affordability constraints created, in part, by prudential mortgage regulations introduced by another arm of government. The result, says Stephens, is a cycle of compensatory and often inefficient policies.

Social housing in Scotland: A renewed case for investment

In a climate of fiscal constraint, Stephens continues to press the case for social housing investment - particularly in Scotland, where there has been a partial restoration of cuts to the Affordable Housing Supply Programme. “I’ve been making this case for more than 30 years and will continue to do so,” he affirms.

However, he acknowledges the tough balancing act faced by ministers. With pressures on health, education, and an ageing population - especially acute in Scotland - Stephens warns of looming questions around the sustainability of the current fiscal settlement. “We’re going to have to think seriously about this over the coming decade,” he cautions.

If last year’s edition of the UK Housing Review spurred reflection inside Whitehall, with seminars at the Department for Work and Pensions and webinars drawing hundreds of civil servants, Stephens hopes the 2025 Review can have a similar impact - particularly by pushing the housing community to reckon with the macroeconomic levers shaping affordability.

“The Bank of England needs to be part of the housing conversation,” he insists. “We can’t afford to treat housing policy in isolation from the bigger economic picture.”

In a field where ideology, evidence, and politics constantly collide, Stephens’ work stands as a call for nuance, coherence, and above all, realism. As housing challenges deepen, that call has never been more timely.

The UK Housing Review series is published by CIH and the University of Glasgow and is available to buy via the CIH website with the exception of CIH members who receive it free of charge as a member benefit.