ÌìÃÀ´«Ã½

About the research

In 2022, Luton Borough Council commissioned the ÌìÃÀ´«Ã½ to carry out research to improve understanding of why people participate in ‘street activities’ in the town centre, despite significant efforts to prevent them. 'Street activities' means asking passers-by for money, street drinking, rough sleeping and public injecting. The ‘street community’ means people who engage in street activities.

Associated with addiction and extreme poverty, these are risky and demeaning activities. Research demonstrates the humiliation, violence, abuse and poor health that the street community endure. They are exploited, trapped in poverty and relegated to the fringes of society. Street activities may also have a detrimental impact on the wider community in terms of feelings of personal safety, quality of life, health and safety (human waste, discarded needles) and damage to trade and reputation of the area.

There are an estimated 30 people regularly participating in street activities in Luton. The research team conducted 24 qualitative interviews with people participating in street activities, in other words, more than three quarters of the street community. We also interviewed 15 professionals from support and enforcement services and conducted a literature review. The purpose of the literature review was to (1) gauge how typical the issues in Luton are in the light of previous research (2) explore whether the response in Luton is supported by evidence (3) identify key ideas and theories that improve understanding of the issue.

The study found strengths in Luton’s service provision including strong inter-professional working, street outreach and a ‘rough sleeping pathway’ which was implemented to help people get accommodation as quickly as possible. There was a genuine desire among professionals to improve the situation and balance the interests of the street community with the interests of the wider community. However, the study also identified significant barriers to access and uptake of Luton’s support services including high thresholds, long waiting lists, lack of flexibility, unhelpful and uncaring staff, poor communication, intimidating, unwelcoming and unsafe environments and disjointed and poorly coordinated services. Service level barriers were compounded by individual level barriers which included shame and embarrassment, lack of access to a phone or the internet, not being able to afford transport to appointments, not being able to read and write, physical, mental and cognitive disability and the psychological and physical effects of substance dependence. We identified gaps in service provision including inadequate food provision and access to toilet facilities. There was a consensus among the street community and professionals that, for the most part, enforcement did not achieve its primary aim of protecting the public from ‘harassment, alarm or distress’. The key findings of the literature review were that the causes and responses to street activities in Luton are typical of those in other parts of the country and that some approaches, particularly the diverted giving scheme, are not supported by existing evidence.

Project staff

Dr Sarah Wadd, ÌìÃÀ´«Ã½
Maureen Dutton, ÌìÃÀ´«Ã½