Gypsies,
Travellers and
accommodation  
Margaret Greenfields
A Race Equality Foundation
Briefing Paper
January 2009
Better
Housing
Briefing
10
       
1
2
3
4
5
Introduction
Gypsies and Travellers are one of the most marginalised, vulnerable and socially excluded populations in the UK
today (CRE, 2006, p. 1). Of the diverse travelling communities in the UK, only Romany Gypsies and Irish
Travellers are currently recognised in law as minority ethnic communities (Clark and Greenfields, 2006). Estimates
of the size of the Gypsy and Traveller population (including Scottish Gypsy-Travellers, Welsh Gypsies and New
Travellers) are problematic in the absence of ethnic monitoring, administrative statistics or their inclusion within
census categories. In 2000, it was calculated that there were approximately 300,000 members of these
communities in the UK (Morris and Clements, 2002). With a high rate of population increase, estimated at 3 per
cent per annum (Niner, 2003), the community is growing and in need of appropriate accommodation to meet its
requirements. 
It is believed that over half of Gypsies and Travellers live in housing (CRE, 2006). Emerging evidence from Gypsy
Traveller Accommodation Assessments (GTAAs), undertaken under the Housing Act 2004, supports findings
from a number of earlier studies of Gypsies/Travellers in housing (see Clark and Greenfields, 2006, Chapter 5).
These indicate that many community members are resident in housing as a result of inadequate supply of
Gypsy caravan sites. In circumstances where Gypsies and Travellers experience psychological distress as a
result of settlement into housing or cannot rent a licensed pitch or afford to purchase land with existing planning
permission for an authorised Gypsy site, the shortfall in site provision is often met by resort to roadside
accommodation (Niner, 2004; Clark and Greenfields, 2006; CRE, 2006). Alternatively, some families purchase
land and set up unauthorised developments (private sites) contrary to planning legislation, often leading to
considerable friction between Gypsies, Travellers and neighbouring sedentary populations. Community tensions
are frequently exacerbated by grossly irresponsible and racist media reporting (Morris, 2006). 
1
6
Key messages
Ensuring access to appropriate accommodation is key to engaging
with the diverse inequalities and barriers to service provision
experienced by Gypsies and Travellers
One in four Gypsies and Travellers living in caravans does not have a
legal place on which to park their home. They are thus, in law,
homeless 
Gypsies and Irish Travellers live in or pass through 91 per cent of
local authority areas in England and Wales, but in 2003 over 70 per
cent of local authorities did not refer to Gypsies or Travellers within
their Homelessness Strategies
The great majority of applications for Gypsy sites are refused at first
hearing, often following orchestrated campaigns by local residents,
leading to community tensions
Recent multi-agency policy drives are beginning to have an impact on
addressing site shortages, although the majority of new pitches are
on private sites funded by owner-occupiers
Those Gypsies and Travellers who reluctantly resort to living in
housing, in the absence of site provision, experience excessively high
levels of anxiety and depression. They are frequently victims of racist
abuse, threats and discrimination and experience cultural trauma.
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
1
2
Ensuring access to appropriate accommodation is key
Accommodation is key to understanding the numerous inequalities and barriers to accessing public services that
are experienced by Gypsies and Travellers (CRE, 2006; Van Cleemput, 2008; Cemlyn et al., 2009, forthcoming).
Access to appropriate accommodation (whether on sites or in housing) is fundamental to enabling people to avail
themselves of health, education and other public services, which the majority population takes for granted.
Residents of roadside sites in particular are frequently unable to access appropriate facilities, with predictably
negative impacts on population well-being. 
From the 1990s onwards, as a result of changes in government policy, the stock of available publicly funded
pitches declined steeply, while the supply of residential private sites remained too small to meet demand (Clark
and Greenfields, 2006). Despite explicitly sedentarist state policies in recent decades, which have actively
encouraged Gypsies and Travellers to settle on to permanent sites or into housing (Crawley, 2004; Richardson,
2006), many families continue to have difficulty in self-funding, applying for or receiving planning permission for
private sites (Morris and Clements, 2002; Niner, 2003; Greenfields, 2008). In the absence of adequate supplies of
licensed sites, the visibility of Gypsies and Travellers living at unauthorised roadside sites (CRE, 2006; Richardson,
2006) has led to considerable public and policy debate. The ability of minority ethnic and cultural groups to follow
their traditional lifestyle is a fundamental human right (see Johnson and Willers, 2007). This fact, coupled with
government recognition that a significant number of Gypsies and Travellers wish to actively nomadise on a full-
time basis or reside at residential caravan sites, either permanently or for some months of the year, has led to a
major policy review of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation. 
In 2003, local authorities were encouraged to use Best Value methodologies to encourage site delivery (Home
Office, 2003). The following year a full review of all aspects of government guidance and policy was announced,
including a replacement to planning guidance (implemented as Circular 01/06 [ODPM, 2006], which specified
how local authorities should respond to planning applications and identify land for new sites). Guidance on
GTAAs was subsequently issued, which provided detailed advice on the conduct of assessment of need for
Gypsy and Traveller communities (CLG, 2007a). Importantly, housed Gypsies and Travellers needs for site
provision were also to be considered and built into Local Development Frameworks and Regional Spatial
Strategies (see Richardson, 2007; Greenfields, 2008). Numerous government reports, recommendations and
guidelines (e.g. CLG, 2007a, 2007b, 2008a) have followed, aimed at clearing the blockage on site provision,
simplifying planning procedures and ensuring that Gypsies and Travellers who wish to reside on sites are
facilitated in meeting their accommodation needs. 
One in four Gypsies and Travellers living in caravans is, by law, homeless
Despite recent policy activity, currently around one in four Gypsies and Travellers living in caravans does not have a
legal place on which to park their home. They are thus, in law, homeless (Johnson and Willers, 2007; Richardson,
2007). Not all such families are resident on roadside sites. A significant percentage of homeless families are living
on their own land without planning permission. So while generally they are able to access education and health
services, they remain under threat of eviction, seizure of their homes and even imprisonment if they fail to comply
with directions to leave their land (Clark and Greenfields, 2006; Johnson and Willers, 2007). 
The high percentage of unauthorised private sites results from the fact that the majority of applications for private
sites have (until very recent policy changes) only been granted on appeal. Williams (1999) found that over 90 per
cent of applications for Gypsy sites were refused at first hearing, often following orchestrated campaigns by
aggrieved (settled) local residents. 
The situation of roadside Gypsies and Travellers is even more precarious. Home and Greenfields (2006) and
Thomason (2006), in studies in diverse areas of the UK, found patterns of repeat evictions for Gypsies and
2
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
4
3
Travellers resident on the roadside. Over one-third of respondents in both
studies stated that they had been evicted on at least thirty occasions within the
previous five years. Thomason (2006) found only a low number reporting being
asked about their needs or personal circumstances before they were moved on.
Richardson (2006) refers to the social control of Gypsies and Travellers through
the development of multi-agency proactive strategies that explicitly seek to
contain Gypsies and Travellers within certain defined locations. 
Absence from local authority Homelessness Strategies
Despite high rates of homelessness among the Gypsy and Traveller population,
Avebury (2003) found that over 70 per cent of local authorities did not include
these populations within their Homelessness Strategies. Additionally, very few
strategies referred to local authority Race Equality Statements. Of particular
concern, the Homelessness Strategies reviewed all failed to consider ?the Race
Relations (Amendment) Act itself, which imposes a duty on all local authorities
to ensure that in the delivery of their services they promote racial equality?
(Avebury, 2003, p. 3). These findings are particularly shocking given that the
then Commission for Racial Equality (CRE, 2006, p. 24) found that ?Gypsies and
Irish Travellers live in or pass through 91 per cent of local authority areas in
England and Wales, and 13 per cent of authorities say they are the largest
ethnic minority groups in their area.?
Refusal, hostility and tension
Niner (2003, 2004) noted that the main barrier to provision is the planning
system and, more fundamentally, resistance from the settled population to the
idea of new sites for Gypsies and Travellers. The CRE (2006) inquiry into
equality, race relations and site provision endorsed these findings. It found
evidence of tensions between settled and travelling people; discrimination and
racism; breaches of equality legislation; and weak local leadership, with elected
officials often driven by political fear over their careers and their own lack of
knowledge or their discriminatory beliefs. The CRE (2006) and Richardson
(2007) were unequivocal in noting that political resistance to engaging with the
controversial issue of planning permission could create significant local-level
barriers to site provision. 
A number of reports (e.g. Niner, 2004; CRE, 2006; Greenfields and Home,
2006; Richardson, 2007) have identified that the most effective way of ensuring
social inclusion and meeting Gypsy and Traveller accommodation needs is for
local authorities to engage with members of the travelling communities to plan
and deliver good-quality, well-designed services. There are pockets of good
practice and proactive engagement with Gypsies and Travellers and, indeed, the
wider sedentary community to deliver appropriate services (CRE, 2006).
However, all too often the needs of Gypsies and Travellers are either overlooked
or ignored by politicians and local authority staff. 
Resources 1
3
Bristol City Council 
www.bristol.gov.uk/ccm/content/
Environment-Planning/Parks-and-
open-spaces/gypsies-and-
travellers/gypsies-and-travellers-
myth-buster.en;jsessionid=3D1EF26
92131E59FECAD70E7AC507F1D.
tcwwwaplaws3
This local authority is noted for
its community development work
and for reducing costs of
policing unauthorised
encampments by developing
new local authority sites. Its
booklet Myth Busting: Gypsies
and Travellers has been
replicated across the country.
Available at the website above.
Communities and Local
Government
www.communities.gov.uk/housing/
housingmanagementcare/gypsiesand
travellers
Policy guidance, consultation
documents and links to key
agencies are available at the
dedicated Gypsies and
Travellers Housing resource
page on the website above. 
Derbyshire Gypsy Liaison
Group
www.dglg.org
DGLG is a Gypsy-led and staffed
policy and advice organisation.
Recent publications include
planning advice and consultation
leaflets for local authorities, and a
range of health resources. 
Friends, Families and
Travellers
www.gypsy-traveller.org
FFT engages with all types and
communities of Travellers.
Recent FFT web publications on
planning and community
engagement include: Staines, S.
(2007) Planning Policy
Development and Provision for
Gypsy and Traveller Sites in
England (www.gypsy-
traveller.org/pdfs/planning_
FFT_survey.pdf).
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
5
Lack of adequate site supply is directly related to a decline in community relations between sedentary
populations and travelling people (Niner, 2004; CRE, 2006; Richardson, 2006). Gypsies and Travellers resident at
unauthorised sites are often subjected to racist abuse and threats of violence (Power, 2004; Morris, 2006;
Richardson, 2007). This is in addition to living with the constant insecurity (Goward et al., 2006) of not knowing
when they will be required to move or face eviction, with consequent disruption to family, education and medical
treatment (Van Cleemput, 2008).
For families who are evicted, the human cost of the eviction is high (Power, 2004; CRE, 2006). Clark and
Greenfields (2006) reviewed the impact of eviction on Gypsies and Travellers, citing references and eye-witness
accounts of damage, trauma and injury caused during eviction from both unauthorised roadside and self-owned
sites. The CRE (2006, pp. 146-9) reported on council approaches to eviction and the sometimes brutal behaviour
of bailiffs when carrying out such work. Police responses to eviction are largely more nuanced, with a clear
reluctance expressed by many officers to use their powers of eviction, and an awareness of the pointlessness of
continually churning families from one location to another (Coxhead, 2005; CRE, 2006). 
Richardson (2007) reported that four prerequisites must exist for site provision to be addressed positively at a
local level. These are: a positive context for exploring the debate, including from local media; effective
management of existing authorised and unauthorised sites; effective consideration of new sites, with clear, well-
managed communication of proposals; and strong political leadership to set the context for action, including
recognition of the business case for local authorities to consider alternative approaches to eviction. Substantial
evidence exists that repeated eviction and clean-up of unauthorised encampments costs tax payers significantly
more than would the provision of permanent residential or transit sites (Crawley, 2004; CRE, 2006; Richardson,
2006). Morris and Clements (2002) demonstrated that the financial costs to local authorities of policing and
evicting Gypsies and Travellers exceeded ?6 million per year at the beginning of the century. 
Recent multi-agency policy drives are beginning to impact
Since 2004, a plethora of guidance and consultations has been issued by government departments and other
key policy players (e.g. CRE, 2006; LGA, 2006). The Local Government Association report detailed examples of
good local authority practice. It also made a series of policy recommendations that included enhanced central
government funding for refurbishment of poor-quality existing public sites; the development of tools and guidance
to assist local authorities in dealing with unauthorised encampments; strengthened powers for agencies working
on enforcement issues; and the use of local development frameworks to deliver greater numbers of authorised
sites (LGA, 2006). The government-mandated Independent Task Group on Gypsy and Traveller issues, which
reported in 2007 (ITG, 2007), made thirty-six recommendations covering the roles of both central and local
government and other stakeholders. The most urgent focused on the need to monitor delivery of sites within the
new planning regimes. In the government response to the Task Group (CLG, 2008a), all recommendations were
(broadly speaking) accepted and will be subject to further partnership working to deliver appropriate sites. The
Government has made clear its determination to oversee and monitor local delivery of additional sites for those
Gypsies and Travellers who wish to live in caravan accommodation (CLG, 2007a, 2008a). The Royal Town
Planning Institute (RTPI, 2007) produced best practice guidance for its members on Gypsy and Traveller
accommodation. This highlighted the need for continuous monitoring of baseline caravan count data for
robustness and reminded planners that estimates of need should be regularly reviewed in partnership with Gypsy
and Traveller community members. Further best practice recommendations on engaging with Gypsies and
Travellers have been produced by voluntary sector agencies such as Shelter (2007) and the Irish Traveller
Movement in Britain (2006).
Where resistance occurs to delivery of new pitches (whether privately provided or publicly funded) there is a
mechanism for requiring a review of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation issues at Regional Spatial Strategy level.
Based on emerging data, this seems an effective way of ensuring that GTAAs and local authority approaches to
planning and delivery of sites are subject to independent scrutiny. Where, after scrutiny, concerns exist over the
4
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
robustness of GTAA findings on pitch requirements, the imposition of a formula
(Niner, 2007), while controversial (Greenfields, 2008), is effective in ensuring that
provision will be met in due course, despite the potential for foot-dragging by
reluctant authorities. 
Self-provided private sites remain the preferred option for the majority of
Gypsies and Travellers interviewed for GTAAs and other associated studies (e.g.
Niner, 2003; Greenfields and Home, 2006; Thomason, 2006). However, financial
and planning constraints often mean that the only feasible alternative to housing
is residence on public sites. Long waiting lists (Niner, 2003; Clark and
Greenfields, 2006; Richardson, 2007; various GTAAs) and the very poor
condition of a number of public sites (e.g. see Niner, 2003; Crawley, 2004; CRE,
2006; Richardson, 2007; Van Cleemput, 2008) are all factors that may increase
movement into bricks and mortar accommodation or residence at
unauthorised locations. 
In 2007, with the intent of disseminating best practice on appropriate (publicly
funded) site design and enhancing partnership and consultation methods, the
Government issued draft guidance on the design of both residential and transit
sites (CLG, 2007b). Lishman and Richardson (2007, p. 7), in a review of the
impact of new planning policies, found that Circular 01/06 (ODPM, 2006) has
had an impact on the provision of private (self-funded) residential sites, which
are being passed at a faster rate than before its implementation. Greenfields
and Home (2006), however, suggest that progress on the development and
provision of public sites is likely to remain slow in contrast to that of private
sites. 
Under the Gypsy and Traveller Sites Grant (2006-2008), the Government made
the sum of ?56 million available to local authorities and registered social
landlords for the refurbishment of existing public sites and development of new
facilities. Figures published in December 2008 (CLG, 2008b) demonstrated that
applications for grants have been spread unevenly across the country and
anecdotal evidence suggests that considerable variation exists in terms of local
authorities willingness to apply for such funding. While it could be argued that
the sum available is small in relation to identified need, local authorities should
be actively encouraged by stakeholders to apply for such grants to meet the
shortfall in sites and to improve existing facilities.
Overall, the key message emerging from central government, professional
associations and voluntary sector agencies is that the only effective way to
break the cycle of inter-community tension is through consultation and
partnership working with Gypsies and Travellers to engage with initiatives that
support the development of new high-quality sites in appropriate locations.
Consultation and planning between community members and service providers
is often mediated through community support groups or developed through the
mechanism of setting up specialist multi-agency forums, such as those
developed to support GTAA research (Greenfields and Home, 2006; Cemlyn et
al., 2009, forthcoming). In particular, effective, culturally appropriate consultation
methods will ensure that individuals voices are heard and that health,
education, social inclusion and accommodation support becomes available to
marginalised community members. Such techniques also provide a forum for
families resident in housing who, while ably supported in a few locations by
specialist local authority housing officers, may be profoundly disadvantaged
through isolation, lack of literacy and unfamiliarity with the administrative and
economic requirements of residence in such accommodation.  
5
Resources 2
Housing Corporation
www.housingcorp.gov.uk/server/show/
ConWebDoc.14707
A government agency replaced in
November 2008, the Housing
Corporation published a social
landlords Gypsies and Travellers
Financial Toolkit for RSLs (2008)
on providing and managing
pitches for Gypsies and Travellers.
Available at the website above. 
Irish Traveller Movement in
Britain
www.irishtraveller.org.uk
The ITMB is the UK branch of the
major Irish movement, working
mainly with Irish Travellers. ITMB
advocates in terms of Traveller
accommodation, health and
community development and
holds frequent conferences on
general Traveller well-being.
Publications are available from the
website above.
National Federation of Gypsy
Liaison Groups 
www.nationalgypsytraveller
federation.org
This is a network site containing
details of local Gypsy and Traveller
community groups actively
engaged in accommodation,
health, education and other
projects. The website is divided
into regions and provides
information on the expertise of
each group. A number of satellite
networks meet on a regular basis
to facilitate contact and
disseminate local good practice to
and with Gypsies and Travellers
across each region. 
Royal Town Planning Institute
www.rtpi.org.uk/item/441/23/5/3
The RTPI is the professional body
for town and country planners. In
2006 the RTPI published a good
practice note detailing a series of
recommendations and examples
of best practice in consulting with
Gypsies and Travellers and
planning for site provision.
Available from the website above. 
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
6The human costs of enforced residence in housing 
Although there is little published research into the experiences of housed Gypsies and Travellers, the wealth of
anecdotal data on experiences of racism, discrimination and poor health outcomes is compelling. Emerging
GTAA findings indicate that between half and two-thirds of Gypsies and Travellers in housing report that they
moved into such accommodation as a result of inadequate site provision and exhaustion caused by a constant
cycle of eviction, or to meet the health or educational needs of family members. Isolation from relatives and
community structures, resulting from enforced movement into housing and repeated experiences of high levels of
racism and discrimination, has a profoundly negative impact on well-being, social functioning and both mental
and physical health (Parry et al., 2004; Power, 2004; Goward et al., 2006; Thomason, 2006; Greenfields and
Smith, 2007; Karlsen, 2007; Shelter, 2007). 
Power (2004) and Cemlyn et al. (2009, forthcoming) report that the transition into housing, coupled with low self-
esteem as a result of experiences of racism and discrimination, can lead to a breaking away from Gypsy/Traveller
constraints and conventions in urban situations. This in turn may result in high rates of marriage break-up and
alcohol abuse due to cultural trauma. Reports from community workers and anecdotal evidence from within
Gypsy and Traveller communities indicate that individuals may seek to distance themselves from experiences of
racism, discrimination, unemployment and poor life chances through substance abuse, leading to a negative
cycle of contact with the criminal justice system and high rates of suicide (Cemlyn et al., 2009, forthcoming).
Parry et al. (2004) found that the health impacts of residence in housing were profound, with travelling acting as a
protective factor in terms of both physical and mental health. In contrast, Gypsies and Travellers living in housing,
who rarely travelled, had the worst health status of all groups, reporting the highest levels of anxiety.
Numerous GTAAs have reported housed Gypsies and Travellers experiencing hostility from neighbours. For
children, the regularity of experiences of racist abuse, when coupled to a lack of positive images of Gypsies and
Travellers, can lead to negative self-image and fear of revealing their ethnicity. The Ormiston Trust Children?s
Voices research (2006, p. 3) indicated that ?for those living in houses a lack of safety often meant exposure to
racism from neighbours. Indeed houses were the type of accommodation where children felt they were most
likely to experience racism.?
Conclusion
Eradicating the legacy of generations of racism, discrimination, neglect and enforced sedentarism of
Gypsies and Travellers will be a slow process even if full support exists from public bodies and politicians
to redress the wrongs experienced by these communities. 
Good practice guidance in terms of consulting with Gypsies and Travellers on accommodation needs has
been published by a number of statutory and voluntary sector agencies. In the wake of GTAAs a number
of localities have established forums for engaging with Gypsies, Travellers and Showpeople in terms of
accommodation, community cohesion and needs planning. Accommodation needs and desires vary
across different communities of Gypsies, Travellers and Showpeople, and by regional and local area.
There is no definitive set of requirements for any one locality and the needs of each local community
must be consulted on, met wherever possible and respected. Above all, however, sound community
development practice and respectful partnership working must be undertaken in the spirit of
reconciliation and equity.
6
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
References
Race Equality Foundation
Unit 35   
Kings Exchange
Tileyard Road   
London N7 9AH   
T: 020 7619 6220   F: 020 7619 6230   
www.raceequalityfoundation.org.uk
Margaret Greenfields initially trained as
a lawyer before transferring to the field
of social policy research. Her PhD
consisted of an exploration of Travellers
engagement with family law
proceedings. Margaret has over twenty
years experience of working with Gypsy
and Traveller communities and is a
Trustee of the Travellers Aid Trust. She
is currently employed as a Senior
Lecturer in Social Policy at
Buckinghamshire New University.
Readers 
Trevor Diesch
Pat Niner
Charmaine Vallely
We welcome feedback on this paper and
on all aspects of our work. Please email 
briefings@racefound.org.uk
Copyright ' Race Equality Foundation January 2009
Copy-edited by Fiona Harris 01908 560023
Graphic design by Artichoke 020 7060 3746
Printed by Crowes 01603 403349
ISBN 978 1 873912 62 5
? Avebury, E. (2003) Travellers and the Homeless Act, www.gypsy-traveller.org/pdfs/homeless.pdf 
(last accessed October 2008).
? Cemlyn, S., Greenfields, M., Matthews, Z., Whitwell, C. and Burnett, S. (2009, forthcoming) Inequalities
Experienced by Gypsy and Traveller Communities: A review, University of Bristol/Buckinghamshire New
University/Equality and Human Rights Commission.
? Clark, C. and Greenfields, M. (eds) (2006) Here to Stay: The Gypsies and Travellers of Britain, Hatfield:
University of Hertfordshire Press.
? Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) (2006) Common Ground: Equality, good race relations and sites for
Gypsies and Irish Travellers: Report of a CRE inquiry in England and Wales, www.equalityhumanrights.com/
Documents/Race/Services/Common%20ground%20full%20report.pdf 
(last accessed October 2008).
? Communities and Local Government (CLG) (2007a) Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs
Assessments, London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
? Communities and Local Government (CLG) (2007b) Draft Guidance on the Design of Sites for Gypsies and
Travellers: A consultation paper, London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
? Communities and Local Government (CLG) (2008a) Government Response to The Road Ahead: The final
report of the Independent Task Group on site provision and enforcement for Gypsies and Travellers, London:
Department for Communities and Local Government.
? Communities and Local Government (CLG) (2008b) Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople: Funding
from the Gypsy and Traveller Sites Grant 2008/9, www.communities.gov.uk/housing/
housingmanagementcare/gypsiesandtravellers/ (last accessed January 2009).
? Coxhead, J. (2005) Moving Forward ? How the Gypsy and Traveller communities can be more engaged to
improve policing performance, London: Home Office.
? Crawley, H. (2004) Moving forward: The provision of accommodation for Travellers and Gypsies, London:
Institute for Public Policy Research.
? Goward, P., Repper, J., Appleton, L. and Hagan, T. (2006) ?Crossing boundaries. Identifying and meeting the
mental health needs of Gypsies and Travellers?, Journal of Mental Health, 15, 3, pp. 315?27.
? Greenfields, M. (2008) ?Accommodation needs of Gypsies/Travellers: new approaches to policy in England?,
Social Policy and Society, 7, 1, pp. 73?89.
? Greenfields, M. and Home, R. (2006) ?Assessing Gypsies? and Travellers? needs: partnership working and
?The Cambridge Project??, Romani Studies, 16, 2, pp. 105?31.
? Greenfields, M. and Smith, D. (2007) Travellers and Housing: Social housing exchange and the construction
of communities, unpublished conference paper, Social Policy Association Conference, July 2007,
Birmingham.
? Home, R. and Greenfields, M. (2006) The Dorset GTAA, Chelmsford: Anglia Ruskin University.
? Home Office (2003) Draft Framework Guide on Managing Unauthorised Gypsy/Traveller Encampments,
London: The Stationery Office.
? Independent Task Group (ITG) (2007) The Road Ahead: The final report to ministers of the Independent Task
Group on site provision and enforcement, www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/roadahead.pdf
(last accessed April 2008).
? Irish Traveller Movement in Britain (ITMB) (2006) A Good Practice Guide for Involving Travellers in
Accommodation: Guidelines for housing services on effective engagement and consultation with Irish
Travellers and Gypsies, London: Irish Traveller Movement in Britain.
? Johnson, C. and Willers, M. (2007) Gypsy and Traveller Law (2nd edn), London: Legal Action Group.
? Karlsen, S. (2007) Ethnic Inequalities in Health: The impact of racism, Better Health Briefing 3, London: Race
Equality Foundation.
? Lishman, R. and Richardson, J. (2007) Assessing the Impact of Circular 1/06 on the Supply of New
Gypsy/Traveller Sites, Leicester: De Montfort University.
? Local Government Association (LGA) (2006) Report of the LGA Gypsy and Traveller Task Group, London:
Local Government Association.
? Morris, R. (2006) ?Nomads and newspapers? in Clark, C. and Greenfields, M. (eds) Here to Stay: The Gypsies
and Travellers of Britain, Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press.
? Morris, R. and Clements, L. (2002) At What Cost? The economics of Gypsy and Traveller encampments,
Bristol: The Policy Press.
? Niner, P. (2003) Local Authority Gypsy/Traveller Sites in England, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
? Niner, P. (2004) ?Accommodating nomadism? An examination of accommodation options for Gypsies and
Travellers in England?, Housing Studies, 19, 2, pp. 141?59.
? Niner, P. (2007) Preparing Regional Spatial Strategy Reviews on Gypsies and Travellers by Regional Planning
Bodies, London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
? Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (2006) Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites, ODPM
Circular 01/2006, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
? Ormiston Trust (2006) Children?s Voices: Changing futures. The views and experiences of young Gypsies and
Travellers. Research summary, Ipswich: Ormiston Trust.
? Parry, G., Van Cleemput, P., Peters, J., Moore, J., Walters, S., Thomas, K. and Cooper, C. (2004) The Health
Status of Gypsies and Travellers in England, Sheffield: School of Health and Related Research. 
? Power, C. (2004) Room to Roam: England?s Irish Travellers, London: Brent Irish Advisory Service.
? Richardson, J. (2006) The Gypsy Debate: Can discourse control?, Exeter: Imprint Academic.
? Richardson, J. (2007) Providing Gypsy and Traveller Sites: Contentious spaces, Coventry: Chartered Institute
of Housing/York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
? Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) (2007) RTPI Good Practice Note 4 Part B: Gypsy and Traveller needs
assessments, London: Royal Town Planning Institute.
? Shelter (2007) Good Practice Briefing: Working with housed Gypsies and Travellers, London: Shelter.
? Thomason, C. (2006) Here to Stay: An exploratory study into the needs and preferences of Gypsy/Traveller
communities in Cheshire, Halton and Warrington, Chester: Cheshire, Halton & Warrington Race Equality
Council.
? Van Cleemput, P. (2008) ?Health impact of Gypsy sites policy in the UK?, Social Policy and Society, 7, 1, 
pp. 103?17.
? Williams, T. (1999) Private Gypsy Site Provision, Harlow: Advisory Council for the Education of Romany and
other Travellers.
Better Housing Briefing 10
Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation