An Integrative Propositional Analysis of Finland's Successful Homelessness Policy: A New Policy Design Insight

Guswin Wee

doi:10.1111/spol.13161

An Integrative Propositional Analysis of Finland's Successful Homelessness Policy: A New Policy Design Insight

Wee, Guswin 2025-09-10 00:00:00 Introduction: Successful Policy and Adding Novel PerspectiveHomelessness around the world can be seen as a complex problem that is very difficult to address. There are also multiple causes that contribute to homelessness or the risk of homelessness, including lack of affordable housing, unemployment, poverty, substance abuse and mental illness (Allegrante and Sleet 2021, 1). According to Foo et al. (2022), homelessness may be one of the toughest social concerns to address. However, the authors and studies around the world have pointed to the policy success of Finland in terms of dealing with homelessness, as Finland has successfully reduced homelessness rates and recently made global headlines (Bloone and Poulin 2021; Hancock 2022) declaring that the Finnish government is ‘eradicating’ homelessness by 2027. Finland has been steadily reducing their long‐term homelessness (Turunen and Granfelt 2023) through the introduction of four consecutive national homeless reduction policies, attributing their success to applying the Housing First strategy between 2008 and 2020. The policies are “The Programme to Reduce Long‐term Homelessness,” abbreviated as ‘PAAVO I’ (2008–2011) and ‘PAAVO II’ (2012–2015) from 2008 to 2015, The ‘Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland (AUNE here forth) 2016–2019’, and the Cooperation Programme to Halve Homelessness (2020–2022), where their success in combating homelessness is attributed to robust intergovernmental cooperation, consistent policies, and clear research indicating homelessness trends, successes, and failures (Dekker 2023, 14). The focus of this current study is primarily on the AUNE policy, 2016–2019.This exemplary national effort to tackle homelessness has motivated the country to solve the problem by 2027 (Y‐Foundation 2022). This remarkable ability to deal with homelessness in Finland puts Finland in an outlier category when it comes to homelessness, where based on their policies, there is a reduction in new entries into homelessness and effective dealing with preventing homelessness (Porchak et al. 2023).Drawing on this background, this paper is focused on analysing this AUNE 2016–2019 policy from a policy design‐as‐content perspective, responding to Siddiki's (2020) argument that despite the increasing value of thinking about policy design as content, theorising and research on policy is relatively limited. This is not a new phenomenon, as according to Weimer (1998, 182), ‘…scientists who study public policy tend to emphasise the process by which policies are made and implemented rather than the substantive content and impacts of policies themselves’. Reviewing various studies on Finland's homelessness policy, few studies focused, if at all, on the policy content and its relation to policy implementation, despite the fact that policy content is an important mediating factor in implementation outcomes (Lejano and Park 2015).Drawing on the development in the policy design literature, two analytical domains emerged. For ease of understanding and conceptual clarity, consider Siddiki's (2020, 1–2) heuristic: ‘policy design as formulation focuses on the choice of policy instruments, as well as the individual, societal and contextual factors that influence the instrument choice. For policy design as content, the focus is on the functional, structural, and substantive features of this content in which selected instruments are embedded’. The focus of the distinct conceptualisations is complementary with one focusing on the process of instrument selection to address a problem and second, studies the output of the process focusing on how policies are constructed and codified within the actual language in public policy. Siddiki (2022) suggests that understanding these topics can be leveraged towards the broader assessment of whether policies are or will be effective. Siddiki and Curley (2022, 122) suggested the need to develop approaches for valid and reliable measurement of policy design that can be used as a basis for drawing conceptual insights regarding information conveyed through policy language (Siddiki and Curley 2022, 122). The integrative propositional analysis (IPA) is proposed as such an approach.The paper utilises the IPA as a policy design‐as‐content method for studying policy designs. The paper draws on ‘structural logic’ as an abstractable unit of analysis by studying it as a conceptual system that, according to Wallis (2016), includes policies and policy models. The study is important in two ways. First, the IPA has been used in some studies (Shackelford 2014; de Wee 2020; de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022; Wright and Wallis 2019); however, they have been limited as they only studied parts of a policy (sample). These studies nevertheless provide proof of concept, and this work extends the work on the IPA and policy analysis, as Wallis and Valentinov (2017, 10) states that ‘the IPA is in the beginning stages as a methodology’ and that ‘it needs additional research to be generally accepted’. Second, it adds to the existing literature and extends it by proposing another tool for the analytical toolbox, as Siddiki's (2020) diagnostic research on policy conceived as such is relatively limited. Finally, the Finnish homelessness policy is an outlier case of policy success, and because of the emerging nature of the IPA and limited ‘successful’ policy, such a study has not been conducted (at this time).The paper is divided into six sections where in the first, policy design literature is reviewed to establish the analytical locus used for studying the AUNE policy; second, the chosen method, the IPA, is discussed for its ability to study policy content and measure the structural logic; third, the research methodological approach is discussed, followed by a description of the case, the description and analysis of the data; finally, the discussion including limitations, implications and future research is discussed with concluding remarks.Policy Design Conceptualised: Nature and Conceptual DivideIn the late 1980s, important debates took place in the policy sciences literature that had a great impact on policy design studies today. One of the key debates was that of Dryzek and Ripley (1988), who argued that those policies cannot be designed like a house or a piece of furniture. In a rebuttal, Linder and Peters (1989) made the case in the 1980s–1990s that the policy decision‐making process can be divorced from the abstract concept of policy design, just as architecture can be divorced from its engineering. This is important as it opened a new domain for scientific study in policy design studies, that of studying the policy content with rigour and valid methods, as called for by Siddiki and Curley (2022). Thus, Linder and Peters (1988, 742) suggested that once the concept of design is freed from the policy process, it ‘ceases to be a real‐time phenomenon’ and ‘becomes an activity directed towards the policy process but separated in time and even space’. From this idea, it can be deduced that policy design could be studied in two, but nested domains., The two co‐exist and co‐evolve as they have a nested relationship. This suggests that the study of policy design content should be used to help in the policy process to improve the policy, which in turn fulfils the historic mission of policy sciences to ‘improve the concrete content’ (Lasswell 1951, 3).In more recent conceptualisation, policy design can be both a ‘verb’, in the sense of a process of creating a policy configuration, and a ‘noun’, in the sense of an actual product or artefact (May 2003). Howlett et al. (2015) simplified this distinction by suggesting there was a shift from studying ‘designing’ (the process or verb) to the study of ‘designs themselves’ (content or noun) or design‐as‐formulation and design‐as‐content. Thus, policy design can now be studied in two analytical domains, and the two camps expanded the science over the next 30 decades, which was also the locus for this study.Policy design as content according to Schneider and Ingram (1997, 2) is the content or substance of the public policy, characterising it as ‘blueprints, architecture, discourses and aesthetics of policy in both its instrumental and symbolic form’. More literally, Ingram and Schneider and Ingram (1997) identified policy design here as wordy, formal texts in which they provided a list of these text‐based designed artefacts such as legislations, guidelines, pronouncements, court rulings, programmes and constitutions, which they also termed empirical examples of policies (Schneider and Ingram 1988). They argue that policy design has common elements ascribing who does what, when, why and how these elements have some ‘structural logic’ or what they referred to later as ‘structural logic’ that are found within these empirical documents/policy designs as content/substance (Schneider and Ingram 1988).Structural Logic: Identifying the Analytical LocusSiddiki (2020, 1–2) holds that in the domain of policy design‐as‐content, the focus is on the functional, structural, and substantive features of the content in which the selected instruments are embedded. This content is characterised in various ways in the literature, including having a structural logic, causal structure, or causal theory. Schneider and Ingram (1990, 68) defined structural logic as the ‘patterns through which policies address problems or seek to achieve goals’ and that ‘[j]ust as it is possible to diagram a sentence linking together the parts of speech, it is possible to diagram the structural logic of a policy by showing the relationships among these elements’. Cejudo and Michel (2016, 6) characterise policy content as having ‘causal theory that structures a policy, the internal coherence of policies (including)… logical connection and causal articulation between the definitions of the problem, the policy instruments and the expected solution’. An important deduction here is the idea that policy content exists out of some elements and their causal relations, which by definition can be seen as a system.Furthering this idea of ‘structural logic’, the concept of intra‐policy compatibility is used, which relates to the soundness of the structural logic embedded within policy design that links policy goals, targets, and instruments (Siddiki 2020). This compatibility concept explains how the structural logic in policy design reflects different relationships between the elements in the policy design. In earlier work, Siddiki (2018, 218) uses intra‐policy conflict, building on Schneider and Ingram (1993), referring to the incompatibility among instruments and goals embodied in policy design, where ‘intra‐policy conflict indicates that policy is design by an inappropriate causal logic’. This suggests that there is some interactive relationship between policy components from which the structural logic emerges, which affects implementation. For the operationalisation of these concepts, Siddiki (2018) suggests that policy maps can be built to investigate these interactions (of elements). Siddiki (2018, 221–222) strongly suggests that ‘policy mapping and interaction assessment should formally be incorporated as part of the policy analysis process’ by focusing specifically on ‘evaluating the causal assumption (logical connections between policy elements) underlying policies’. From a policy content/structural logic perspective, Siddiki (2018, 221–222) suggests that policy maps must be built where relations between the policy elements are studied, focusing on ‘policy mapping and interaction assessment’. She continues (Siddiki 2018, 222) that ‘policy analysis should formally incorporate evaluations of causal assumptions underlying policies’ so to ‘…ensure the validity of goals‐targets‐instrument relationships’. These important ideas are provided but with little clarity on how and or what tools/methods to be used to map the structural logic. As such, this paper adds to the literature by proposing the IPA because of its systems‐based foundations, which makes the mapping of policy content possible through studying the policy content itself as a system, a conceptual system.The different authors suggest that the content structure is important because it affects policy effectiveness, or is an important mediating factor for effective policy implementation with various role players (Lejano and Park 2015). Take, for example, the proposition by Siddiki (2018, 219) ‘policy effectiveness is predicated on the soundness of the policy's structural logic, as when it lacks integrity it tends to lead to policy failure’, and to some extent (Cejudo and Michel 2016; Wallis 2016). Similarly, Cejudo and Michel (2016) argue that consistency in causal theory fails, the policy loses effectiveness because implementation is based on false assumptions, as it does not coincide with reality. What is important here is that the structural logic can be mapped based on the relations between the elements, which, for this paper, opens up an analytical locus for policy analysis based on the structural logic of policies (with the focus on policy content). For the purpose of this paper, the unit of analysis (policy content) is called structural logic.Synthesising Some Policy Literature PerspectivesThe IPA method is proposed in this study, not to replace the existing policy scholarship in relation to homelessness or social policy in general. The purpose is to suggest a complementary tool to study the structural logic of policies and how it structures institutional and individual action among actors based on the way the policies are structured. For example, Béland (2019) and Béland and Powell (2016), focusing on institutions and ideas in social policy, can be seen as such a scholarly perspective. For example, drawing on Béland (2019) drawing on Parsons (2007, 13) discuss the structural and institutional explanations feature a logic‐of‐position that ‘explains by detailing the landscape around someone to show how an obstacle course of material or man‐made constraints and incentives channels her to certain actions’ (Parsons 2007, 13). Institutions are important for explaining this position and providing the landscape; however, the structural logic and the IPA methodological analysis help map this landscape to improve implementation with clear causal pathways between various aspects of the policy design. Fundamentally, the IPA analysis allows for the extraction of policy sentences/statements that convey policy actors, their prescribed interactions, and their actions, as well as lend understanding of the context in which these actions are occurring (Siddiki and Frantz 2024). Motivation for combining this line of research with other existing social policy scholarship, is the interest in explaining how the policy content structure the action or implementation situation, including delineating actor roles and responsibilities, prescribed action and finally how help explain how the complexity embedded in the policy text manifest in implementation, which is also compatible with actor‐network theory that is often used in social policy and governance (Määttä and Eriksson 2015; De Corte et al. 2017). The structural logic also assists in extracting and explaining the institutional arrangements, with potential insights to construct and improve policy coordination in the multi‐level network governance systems (de Wee 2024)—contributing to the logic‐of‐position and logic‐of‐interpretation (Parsons 2007). This current study also, in part, answers an important question in how we can structure the content of policy optimally pertain to actors and activities (policy targets, target populations, instruments and tool calibration; Howlett et al. 2023, 3). This is an often understudied perspective to which this current study attempts to fill the gap.Ideational analysis, which focuses on policy ideas of individual and collective actors, helps in explaining the agency of social and political actors in shaping ideas and discourse (Béland 2019). This is important as it is linked to the idea of policy paradigm1 (Hall 1993) or overarching goal, which in the case of the Finland homelessness policy shifted from ‘managing’ homelessness to ‘eliminating’ it; it became a core value embedded in a human rights' perspective (Pleace et al. 2016). These ideas are set in the agenda‐setting process, from which policies are developed as institutions as a product of power struggles (Campbell 2004, 1; Béland 2019). These have been fairly consistent in Finland as policy ideas and can be seen as being partly dependent since the inception of the national policies in 2007 (Pleace 2017)—enjoying political commitment and stability. The IPA focusing on the causal pathways in the structural logic extends the analysis to also focus not only on the power dynamics, which are important, but also the data quality on which these ‘causal theories’ or policy solutions are built, suggesting a more objective perspective to what constitutes a good social policy design. To analyse the structural logic, the IPA method is proposed for studying the policy content as conceptual systems.IPA Method for Analysing Conceptual SystemsWallis (2016, 579) defines conceptual systems as ‘any form…policy model, model, mental model, policy’. Each of these systems can be defined as a set of interrelated propositions (Weick 1989), which can be seen as ‘a declarative sentence expressing a relationship among some terms’ (Van de Ven 2007, 117). All policy documents are composed of policy statements characterised by propositions; it is possible to analytically map all policies based on their propositional statements (policy directives) and determine their structural logic. What is important to note here is that the concepts can be any of the attributes outlined in Appendix 3 and their relations. Policy designs as conceptual systems have been studied in various public policy cases over the past decade (Wallis 2011; Wallis 2013; Shackelford 2014; de Wee 2020; Wright and Wallis 2019; de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022; de Wee 2022).The IPA is a six‐step process for ‘deconstructing’ conceptual systems (in this case, policy designs) into their causal propositions, mapping those relations, and then evaluating the structure of the internal coherence of the map. In the method, we quantify and diagram the structural logic of the conceptual system and find links between the measure (percentage providing a predictor) of the policy structure and its effectiveness in the real world (de Wee 2022). The structure is expressed as a percentage and proved as a predictor for the effectiveness of the conceptual system/model.Methodologically, the IPA measures the structure of conceptual systems' text found in policy documents in a six‐step process (Wallis 2016):Identify the propositions (sentences declaring relationships between variables) within a document.Diagram the causal relationships between the concepts within the propositions.Synthesise those smaller diagrams where they contain the same or very similar concepts to create a larger, integrated diagram.Count the total number of concepts to determine the breadth of the plan (or another document) (simple complexity, by enumerating the concepts).Identify and count the ‘transformative/concatenated’ concepts (defined as those where two or more arrows are pointing towards the concept).Calculate the depth (structure) of the plan by dividing the number of transformative concepts by the total number of concepts (systemicity)The argument of this paper is that systemicity can be used as a measure for both internal coherence and structural logic, based on the IPA, as Wallis (2016) argues that in general, conceptual systems with a higher level of structure are more useful for practical application and implementation (Wallis 2016). ‘…there is a correlation between the quantifiable structure of a policy and the effectiveness that policy in practical application’ (Wallis 2011, 14). This proposition by Wallis is important as it coincides with the propositions posited by Siddiki (2018) and Cejudo and Michel (2016) that the structural logic or internal coherence is important for policy effectiveness.For example, steps 5 and 6 indicate two of the measures. Complexity is the conceptual ‘breath’ of a policy, and systemicity is the measure of ‘depth’ or structure of a policy, which is measured on a scale of 0 to 1 with one being the highest (Wallis and Valentinov 2017, 109). Zero is the least coherent and 1 is the most coherent/structured, according to Wallis (2019).Methodological ApproachThe interpretivist paradigm was key for this study, and this research paradigm also influenced adoption of the qualitative research methodology, as Jackson (1995, 7) argues, ‘qualitative methods are generally supported by the interpretivist paradigm, which portray a world in which reality is socially constructed, complex, and ever changing’. A case study approach was used focusing specifically on Finland's Homelessness policy between 2016 and 2019. A case study can be defined as ‘an in‐depth inquiry into a specific and complex phenomenon (the ‘case’), set within its real‐world context’ (R. K. Yin 2013, 321). Gerring (2004, 341–342) continues that a case study is an ‘in‐depth study of a single unit… that is relatively bounded’, such as the Finnish homelessness policy in this case. Furthermore, Yin (2018, 2) suggests that case studies are relevant for studying complex social phenomena and ‘allows investigator to retail holistic and meaningful characteristics of real‐life events’. The importance of the case study is that it enables in‐depth study and analysis of a phenomenon, which in this case was important.Data CollectionThe qualitative approach also uses various techniques to collect the data, ‘including focus groups… document analysis’ (R. K. Yin 2009, 11; Creswell 2013, 105). Document analysis was selected as a data gathering method, which is a qualitative methodology (Cloete 2007, 513) where documents are seen as social facts presented in a socially organised way (Atkinson and Coffey 1997). According to Auriacombe (2016, 12), document analysis is an unobtrusive research method/measure, which is ‘any method of data collection that directly removes the researcher from the interactions, events, or behaviour being investigated’. Auriacombe (2016) continues that, in this type of data collection, the researcher is unaware of the formation of the data and has little chance of manipulating it. For this study, document analysis is used because documents are easily accessible and very cost‐effective, relatively comprehensive allowing for in‐depth analysis. However, despite its practicality and convenience, there are limitations, including that they focus on one of many aspects of the complex policy process (Petek et al. 2022, 722). Document selection was executed using different secondary data sources, including primary sources such as implementation reports and annual progress reports (official documents) and also grey literature in the form of newspaper articles and opinions, and academic articles and book(s) or chapters, which were very rich in the search. The documents used in the analysis are all stored separately in the references list.Data AnalysisFirst, the AUNE policy was downloaded freely from the Finnish Ministry of Environment website; thereafter, the IPA analysis was applied, the policy was mapped and measured (see Figure 1). Thereafter, the official documents, grey literature, and scientific documents (articles, book chapters, etc.) were analysed to measure the implementation outcomes against the structural logic of the policy. This started with the brief history of homelessness and homelessness policy in Finland, followed by the analysis of the AUNE policy and the implementation outcomes of the policy.1FIGUREFinland Homelessness Policy Map. Source: ARA (2023, 16).Case Study: A Brief Contextualisation of Finnish Homelessness and Homelessness PolicyBrief History of Finnish HomelessnessHistorically, Finland has had a homelessness problem specifically after the war between Finland and the Soviet Union in particular as many veterans migrated to big cities (Helsinki) for potential employment opportunities. Additionally, in the territories ceded to the Soviet Union, people from these territories looked for homes in Finland, from which they had originally. In the 1960s, most homelessness was associated with unemployment and alcoholism and in the winter of 1967, almost 50 alcoholics died due to sub‐zero temperatures at night (Tainio and Fredriksson 2009, 185). This triggered ‘…action, and since then homelessness policy has been built as part of the national housing policy and programme’ (Saari 2015, 135, in Pulliainen 2021). The history of the policy can be traced more accurately after the introduction of a new paragraph in the Finnish Constitution, section 19 stating ‘it is the right task of public authorities to promote the right of everyone to housing and to the opportunity to arrange their own housing’ (Tainio and Fredriksson 2009, 185). This meant that the state and the local authorities have an obligation to take active measures to ensure that the civil right to a home is implemented (Timonen 1997, 33).Since the 1980s, two models have been used to address homelessness, the first was the staircase model, which required a demonstration of social acceptability and abstinence from intoxicants, the ‘treatment first’ methodology, before you can be assisted with a house (Pleace 2016). Using this staircase model, Pleace (2016, 15) found that it was ‘nearly impossible for a homeless individual with complex problems’ to receive housing, because of the difficulty getting through the treatment first process. The second, the housing first model was predicated on the idea that ‘…homelessness is addressed through non‐judgemental services, housing is separated from support, which means housing is not conditional on compliance with a treatment plan’ (Tsemberis 2011, 5). ‘In the Housing First model, a dwelling is not a reward that a homeless person receives once their life is back on track. Instead, a dwelling is the foundation on which the rest of life is put back together’ (Y‐Foundation 2017, 10). However, Finland's HF model is not like other countries (Pleace et al. 2015; Allen et al. 2020), as it is a systems‐led approach that moved beyond that of the North American model. The Finnish model provides people with high, and complex needs the choice to live how they want in their own homes. It provides flexible services which provide support through a mix of support for people threatened by homelessness, which are well integrated with homelessness, health, and other services. The policy is seen as an ‘integrated homelessness strategy’ that focusses on improving the supply of housing and services for people with complex needs; increasing work activities and meaningful everyday activities; more emphasis on prevention, the early identification of risks of homelessness and securing housing; the better integration of substance abuse, mental health, healthcare and housing services. These services are developed to tackle long‐term homelessness and through emphasising homelessness prevention and hidden homelessness (Pleace et al. 2015). Many authors suggest that the Finnish Housing First principle moves beyond the core principles of HF in other countries and suggest that the original feature (Housing First 2.0) is the foremost sign of success (Pleace et al. 2016, 431–434; Pleace 2019, 8; Allen et al. 2020). The various services with the housing‐led approach, which is fundamentally consumer‐centred, increase the probability to deal with the complexity of homelessness itself, which can be affected by various issues as outlined by Karppinen (2020, 8), which include employment, unstable employee relations, mental health challenges, socio‐economic and other intergenerational disadvantages. However, it is still the HF principle that was the cause of success in Finland.Background of Homelessness PolicyIn the early 2000s, policies were developed to deal with the high level of long‐term homelessness, based on the Name on the Door report that laid the foundations for the2 policies (Pitkäaikaisasunnottomuuden vähentämisohjelma) PAAVO I and II (Pleace et al. 2011, 430). The Constitution gave birth to two homelessness policies that developed from the ‘Name on the Door’ report from the Four Wise Men group and were implemented from 2008 to 2015 called PAAVO I and II. The core of PAAVO 1, 2008–2011, was to allocate services and safe independent housing solutions to long‐term homeless people with appropriate and tailored support (Fredriksson and Kaakinen 2018, 118). The aims for Paavo II, 2012–2015, were to eliminate long‐term homelessness by 2015 and to reduce the risk of homelessness by increasing social rental stock more efficiently to prevent homelessness and supporting scattered housing alternatives (those who receive housing individually within the country as opposed to communal where various people shared, for example, blocks of apartments) and providing appropriate floating support (Pleace et al. 2015, 20).The outcomes based on an international evaluation of the homelessness programme found good and successful outcomes. On long‐term homelessness, there was a downward movement, according to the annual count finding of 2628 long‐term homeless people in 2012 (end of 175 Paavo I) to 2047 in 2016, which was a 23% drop (ARA 2016). Between 2008 and 2015, the number of long‐term homeless people decreased by almost 1200 (Pleace et al. 2015), which is significant in dealing with the protracted issue of long‐term homelessness. According to ARA (2015, 2), post‐Paavo I and II programmes, homelessness was at 6785 homeless persons who lived alone, and 424 families, of which 54% were immigrants with a total of 437 children in these immigrant families.The Case of Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness (AUNE) 2016–2019The Action Plan builds on the Paavo programmes and draws on the results of the international review of Pleace et al. (2015). This was the third strategy called ‘Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness’ or AUNE, which began during spring 2016–2019. The objective of the policy is to ‘link the work of homelessness more extensively to the whole of the work on preventing social exclusion based on the HF principle’ (AUNE 2016, 3). Practically, this means ensuring that housing is secured whenever a client is met in the system (AUNE 2016). The plan describes the target group as a broad range of people for whom a comprehensive set of programmes is outlined in the policy, with the goal to reduce homelessness by ‘strengthening the prevention of homelessness and preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ (AUNE 2016, 4). This includes an increase in affordable housing supply and to construct 2500 new housing units, both ordinary and support housing units (AUNE 2016, 4). The policy is divided into various programmes to address the homelessness problem which can be categorised into ‘preventing homelessness’ and ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’.Preventing HomelessnessUnder preventing homelessness, the policy aims to increase the production of reasonably priced houses and diversifying the housing available for the homeless by building 2500 new dwellings and provide rental housing stock supported by the state with various housing opportunities for the youth, students and asylum seekers who have received a residence permit (AUNE 2016). This together with support systems designed to ensure transitions between reception centres and housing do not raise the potential risk of migrants—with residence permits—becoming homeless. Cities participating (10 signatories at the time) in the Action Plan are required to have a strategy in place by 2017, including preventative services, the use of affordable housing stock and plans for the use of Housing First and other support services. It is noted that services will need to include what are termed ‘location‐specific special measures’ to prevent homelessness and recurrent homelessness, which means cities' plans should reflect any local issues and challenges (AUNE 2016, 5).There will also be a focus on preventing eviction, with a specific concern to prevent eviction among younger people (aged under 25) and the use of ‘Pienlaina’, which are small loans, intended to prevent low‐income households being overwhelmed by debt (Pleace 2017, 104). This will work in combination with existing social lending by the municipalities, enabling debt management to prevent eviction for financial reasons. A history of rent arrears, where debts are comparatively minor and a repayment plan is in place, should not be a barrier to accessing housing. According to the Action Plan, new agreements and existing working arrangements are being put in place to reduce the challenge of debt as a barrier. A new project, ‘Riskivakuutus’ (risk insurance), led by the Ministry of the Environment, will enable the provision of cover similar to household insurance, for people who have lost their credit rating (Pleace 2017, 104). The aim is not to overburden people so that it becomes a threat to losing their house because of financial difficulties and access to housing is also made easier for those who have lost their credit rating.The AUNE (2016, 7) also makes provision for the strengthening and extending ‘housing guidance’ (the Finnish term for housing advice services), including making housing guidance available to low threshold services, which are designed to be accessible to groups like vulnerable young people, who may be intimidated or find it challenging to seek help from mainstream services. There will also be a focus on preventing eviction, with a specific concern to prevent eviction among younger people (aged under 25) and the use of ‘Pienlaina’, which are small loans (Pleace 2017). Housing guidance also provides service points with low threshold, such as the services for young people, immigrants, mental health or substance abuse issues and provides support services. In addition, the transition of ‘risk groups’ (transitioning from institutional settings such as long‐stay hospitals, psychiatric wards and facilities and prisons) from institutions or housing services to independent housing is secured, with various interagency social workers putting service packages together, with various support or peer work. This is intended to promote ‘seamless’ coordination between drug/alcohol, mental health, housing and housing guidance services (Pleace 2017, 104).Preventing the Recurrence of HomelessnessThe Finnish Government estimates an attrition rate of between 5% and 10% from existing homelessness services, that is, up to 10% of people having contact with current services may not exit homelessness on a sustainable basis (AUNE 2016). To make sure that there is successful transition, various ACT teams are used with the help of experts by experience (people who were formerly homeless, feature quite heavily in the Action Plan). Their role includes consultation about how services should be designed and run using a direct peer support approach (AUNE 2016). Programmes include the aim to have a comprehensive availability of housing services that allow the use of intoxicants, as well as abstinent housing services; the employment of formerly homeless people is supported. This is achieved through education and employment services focused on formerly homeless people, including provision of work‐related and ‘meaningful’ activities (an example would be using art‐based projects as a means of learning about structure and working with others) will also be promoted (Pleace 2017).There are other innovative programmes such as the ‘pienet tuvat’, which is small homes experiment providing a permanent, small, congregate home, with on‐site staffing, which may suit the 10%–20% of homeless people with high and complex needs, for whom Housing First can be unsuccessful (Pleace 2016). An emergency accommodation service for young people in Helsinki that will triage young people into appropriate support and housing services is also being developed (AUNE 2016, 11; Pleace 2017, 105).Political Will and Inter‐Agency GovernanceIn terms of the governance of the policy, a budget of €78 million was announced and secured, of which €24 million was allocated to service development and the rest for housing supply (AUNE 2016). Finland also has a high level of investment in social housing, both in a financial and political sense, which is not widespread in Europe (Pleace 2017, 170). There was strong political will in the application of the HF approach, and it had support from various cities that signed agreements as partners in the implementation of the policy. There are also a large number of actors and several sources of funding that can be seen throughout the policy and which spell out which agencies are involved in each aspect of this phase of the homelessness strategy, including the lead agency or agencies in each aspect of service planning and delivery (Pleace 2017). These programmes are built on joint development with the aim that all projects interact with each other and strengthen each other in solving problems (AUNE 2016, 12). The delivery is based on a series of formal agreements between the cities, municipalities and various governmental, quasi‐governmental and non‐governmental agencies. These agreements spell out what is required from each party, ensuring there is clear involvement from the required parties and that there is consistency across Finland (Pleace 2017). A key actor was the Y‐Foundation, and generally, the programmes were ‘a showcase of wide partnership and collaboration between several state authorities, ministries, cities, and NGOs both on local and national levels’ (Kaakinen and Turunen 2021, 46). According to Pleace et al. (2016, 437), the strategy for homelessness is highly coordinated, it has clear, logical goals and a mix of prevention and other support services.Overall, the policies desired outcome was to (1) reduce homelessness by reducing the number of homeless persons; (2) reform the service system so that it is more preventative and customer‐centred, by changing social welfare laws and practices; and finally, (3) achieve cost savings by homelessness prevention and by ending long‐term homelessness. Rather than using these savings to lessen public expenditure on homelessness—which is very much the agenda in countries like the United Kingdom or the United States—the Action Plan requires any savings to be invested in the expansion of preventative services (AUNE 2016; Pleace 2017).Data Description and Analysis: Policy Structural Logic and Implementation OutcomesAppendix 1 of this paper outlines the methodological process or application of the IPA for the analysis of the AUNE policy. There are 39 concepts (counting the total numbers in Figure 1); this is the first measure of the IPA, which is complexity. This indicates that the policy has a complexity of 39, which includes a conceptual representation of the various programmes, policy instruments, objectives involved in the policy and how they are meant to interact causally. The complexity is important as it provides the lens through which the various stakeholders involved in the implementation understand the problem and the possible solutions, the organisation of the various programmes and how it will decrease homelessness. However, the important measure is structure.There are 14 transformative or concatenated concepts (orange circles in Figure 1); therefore, 14 concatenated/transformative concepts divided by 39 (complexity) indexes a systemicity (structure) of 0.36, which is 36% structure of the elements in the policy. However, the structure could have been even higher if the IPA had been applied to supporting documents of the AUNE policy. Comparatively, studies analysing various policies using the IPA generally fall on the scale of 0.25 or below in the past decade (Wallis 2011, 2013; Shackelford 2014; de Wee 2020, 2024; de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022). This indicates that the AUNE policy has a higher structural logic, based on the systemicity index, of 0.11 or 11%. The policy was 15 pages long, and the entire policy was subjected to analysis (unlike in previous studies). There is a higher level of interaction between various concepts in the policy, and a higher level of structure indicates that there are more concepts with more than one arrow pointed to it, indicating a higher level of system based on the various interactions conceptually. de Wee (2024) found that the Scottish Alcohol policy, 2018, had a high complexity (more concepts) but very few causal relations between them; thus, the lower structure at the conceptual situation resulted in fragmented programmes and implementation among various agencies and policy instruments. In contrast, the higher level of structure as presented in this case is representative of the more integrated systemic implementation in the action situation. The AUNE is described as an ‘integrated homelessness strategy’ (Pleace et al. 2015) and is also seen empirically in the implementation of the policy. However, at the time of writing this paper, few studies have reported a policy with a structure higher than the AUNE policy; as such, outcomes might not be perfect but are scored among the better or successful policies as reported by de La Porte et al. (2022).In the policy map, it is also clear that most arrows focus on the concept ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ (13 arrows), ‘prevention of homelessness’ (9 arrows) and ‘reduction of homelessness’ (7 arrows). First, these concepts are the objectives/goals of this policy, which are the ‘macro level statements of government aims’ (Howlett 2011, 17) of which, the objectives are to operationalise these goals (Howlett et al. 2023, 4). The majority of the concepts pointing to these concepts are the ‘specific on the ground’, micro‐requirements necessary to attain policy objectives (Howlett 2011, 17) with ‘policy specification are actual targets expected to be achieved’ (Howlett et al. 2023, 4). The mapping of the policy indicates a structure that has its density around the key objectives of the policy, which is to prevent and reduce homeless in Finland. This suggests that the routes towards decreasing homelessness or achieving the goals and objectives in this policy were clearly articulated in the policy, with multiple causality pointing towards it (de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022; Siddiki 2020).The identified propositions and their causal relations were placed in an Excel workbook. Two worksheets were opened, the first was all the elements (or concepts as identified in the policy), and the second was the connections sheet that had the causal relations between the concepts. Take the proposition in step 1, for example, ‘financial issues’ would have been placed under the label ‘From’ and ‘new people becoming homeless’ placed under ‘To’. Thereafter, the ‘Type’ of connection would be ‘causes more’ or a ‘+’ symbol to indicate the (see Appendix 2). This was a template provided by Dr. Steven E. Wallis.For a higher pixel and more readable view, click on the link below, which is the software on which the map was generated. https://kumu.io/Guswn/preventing‐homelessness‐in‐finland‐2016‐2019‐map.Structural Logic and the Implementation OutcomesTheoretically, according to the policy, this should provide effective outcomes to achieve the goals. The IPA and the structural analysis allow for deeper investigation into how well the instruments or measures worked in the real world (implementation outcomes). From the implementation data, what is clear from Figure 2 is that homelessness in general decreased, specifically looking at the studied time of this case study, between 2016 and 2019. The data used in this evaluation was from 2016 to 2019; however, previous and later reports were also used in the context section of this case study.2FIGUREDevelopment of forms of homelessness 1986–2023.Based on Figure 2 and Table 1 below, generally, homelessness has decreased between 2016 and 2019, from around 6650 living alone in 2016, 2050 in long‐term homelessness, and 325 homeless families (ARA 2016, 3). In 2019, those living alone were 4600, and long‐term homelessness specifically fell to 961 (ARA 2019, 4). What is clear from the data is that homelessness in general and long‐term homelessness, in particular, decreased, which was an important goal in the preventative nature of the AUNE 2016–2019 policy.1TABLEHomelessness in the whole country between 2016 and 2019.YearOutside, in staircases, shelters, etc.In hostels, boarding housesIn housing service units, hospitals or other institutionsTemporarily with friends or relativesTotalLongterm homelessnessChange in long term2016425331433545566442047−2042017415244482552866151893−1542018a238158297232630631161−732201973942931231204600961−200aNo data available on the form of homelessness: 822. In 2018, the City of Helsinki specified its methods of collecting homelessness statistics, which reduced homelessness in Helsinki. Due to this change, the numbers are not comparable to previous years (ARA 2023, 28).Source: Author's compilation.Quantitatively, in the studied time, 2016–2019, the programme also looked at specific groups that were homeless under the various types of homelessness, which gives more context to Figure 1. For example, according to ARA (2016, 3), the number of women who were homeless increased by 60 people, including those in long‐term homelessness, but there was a decrease of 186 individuals among the youth (people 25 years or younger). In 2017, there were 6615 people who lived alone and 214 homeless families, which was a decrease of 111 from 2016. Long‐term homeless people decreased by 154 people, which took long‐term homelessness to 1893 (ARA 2017, 4). The number of women and the number of immigrants increased. The report also indicated for the first time a breakdown of the family situation and found that 123 families are headed by single‐parent families, which is 77.4% of homeless families. From this percentage, 123 of the single‐headed families, 45.9% were people with immigrant backgrounds (ARA 2018, 6). 2018 was also the first year where a new category, the first category added of homeless people with ‘no information available on the form of homelessness’ (the blue bar in Figure 2). The data suggests that there was generally a downward trend in homelessness in Finland, and the different groups experiencing different types of homelessness were generally decreasing. However, a change is also seen between 2017 and 2019, where the category of ‘outside, in stairwells, shelters, dormitories, etc.’ increased (pink bar). This is due to the fact that, in 2018, the Helsinki Metropolitan Area changed the way homelessness is recorded (defined), and because it covers a significant part of the homeless figures in the whole country, there is a new category of ‘no data available’. The data, however, are mainly self‐reporting, and the changes in the number of people shifting to other categories of homelessness were reported. There is therefore a bi‐directional change in the two types of homelessness (ARA 2023, 18). There were some changes in the various groups experiencing homelessness between 2016 and 2019; however, it is also worth noting that the changes in statistics of Helsinki also had an impact on these figures. The general trend, however, indicates a downward trend in these various groups.Drawing on Tables 1 and 2, and additional statistics in the years post‐implementation of the official policy and introduction of the subsequent policy, homelessness seems to be continually decreasing. There was a further decrease to 4100 people in 2021 (a reduction of over 77% since 1989) (ARA 2023). Based on the data reported by municipalities, long‐term homelessness decreased by about 70% between 2008 and 2023 (ARA 2023, 6). For those living outdoors, in temporary shelters and dormitories, the decrease since 2008 is 68%, in institutions 77%, temporarily with relatives and acquaintances 47% and for families 45%. Among the homeless groups, the largest decreases have been among homeless women (40%) and young people under 25 (38%). The number of homeless immigrants has doubled since 2008, but it has fallen since 2015. In 2022, there were 621 homeless immigrants, which is a reduction of 99 from 2021 (ARA 2023). The policy outcomes suggest a positive decline towards eradicating homelessness in Finland, with a focus on immigrants and women. However, there seems to be a slight increase in the category outside, in stairwells and so on (pink bar), and people in housing service units, hospitals, and institutions. It indicates a shift in the ‘types’ of homelessness but no change in the overall or general outcomes.2TABLEHomelessness by group between 2016 and 2019.YearWomenUnder 25 years of ageImmigrantFamilies201615541399180432520171538158517422142018124210011159264201911908501096264Source: Author's compilation.Policy Interaction Assessment and Implementation OutcomesQualitatively, one can also evaluate various propositions or policy statements from the map and evaluate them based on the implementation outcome—the policy interaction assessment. This is to walk the reader through the key clusters and causal pathways in Figure 1 as part of the analysis. The central idea is that the policy statements/propositions are written to construct new situations or existing action situations, and they may correspond to an observable action situation/implementation. These observable actions or outputs serve as measurable results produced by the public policy, which links the public policy to the desired outcomes and serves as a proxy indicator for the outcome (de Wee 2024, 184). In the map, most arrows cluster around the concepts ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’, ‘prevention of homelessness’ and ‘reduction of homelessness’. These are the central goals/objectives of the policy. The various ‘grey’ circles or concepts are the more ‘on‐the‐ground’ projects and programmes implemented by the various role players.There are various instruments/measures (programmes) that were calibrated and used to achieve these outcomes. However, first from these statistics in Figure 2, it can be argued that the goal of the policy has been achieved. During the implementation of this policy, long‐term homelessness decreased from 2050 in 2016 to 961 in 2019, which was 53% over the 3 years. This, in terms of policy implementation outcomes, was well over the average of what policies generally obtain, which is usually 20% (Light 2016). This is in line with the outcomes of the policy based on its structural logic, which is over the general 0.25 score in previous studies, and is 0.36 in this case, which correlates with an increase in structure and an increase in implementation outcomes.The policy was very focused on the targets, which the AUNE (2016, 2) defines as ‘the target group of the programme includes people who have recently become homeless and those who have been homeless for a long period, as well as people at risk of becoming homeless’. As per AUNE, the definition extends to explain who these different groups are. Another important aspect of the AUNE (2016, 5) is that those responsible for achieving a certain measure as per the policy are clearly outlined as the ‘responsible parties’. This helps with the coordination of the policy, which is an important policy capacity in the current complex governance systems (Howlett et al. 2015). In the AUNE case, a network of relationships between various stakeholders in the governance emerged and was very successful with efforts from the Y‐Foundation, the Ministry of the Environment, ARA, local municipalities and the private sector. The network governance model was also sustained by strong political commitment from the politicians, who created the local networks and other partners, which helped eliminate homelessness. The key here is that the various role players, interagency governance, were all clearly spelt out in the policy, which also enhanced transparent and accountable governance relations.In the policy, as captured in the policy map, there was a proposition or policy statement stating, ‘significant investment in new construction and renovations’ causes more ‘reduction of homelessness’. Various sources report that 2142 new dwellings were delivered, which exceeds the intended targets by a couple of hundred (Karppinen 2020, 26; ARA 2020). In Hyvinkaa municipality, for example, they stated that ‘(they) constructed new places where people can stay’ (ARA 2018, 10).In the AUNE (2016, 10), to prevent the recurrence of homelessness and as seen on the map, ‘expertise of fields is combined in a new way into a comprehensive service package brought into the home (ACT teams or mobile services)’. In an evaluative study by Ranta and Juhila (2020, 698), focusing on clients–worker interaction, they found that among those using drugs, providing a flat alone did not solve recurrent homelessness. Rather, it was in the ‘joint construction of a sense of home… was important to prevent homelessness’. In line with the literature on HF, in which Tsemberis (2011) provides early insights and later Granfelt (2003), without such services as outlined above, there will always be an increase in the risk for the recurrence of homelessness. Another important aspect for preventing the recurrence of homelessness was as per the map, ‘other preventative support services the utilisation of experts‐by‐experience’ (AUNE 2016, 5). The findings of Meriluoto (2018) found that experts‐by‐experience were crucial and necessary as they held key information that was useful for designing better function services and helped with the co‐creation and refined knowledge. This helped with policy relevance added to the representativeness. This measure can also be seen as a policy feedback mechanism built into the policy, as those who are assisted and out of homelessness are used to improve and help implement the current or new policy.Housing guidance, which according to the map, was important for ‘prevention of homelessness’. According to the ARA (2019), housing advice services and housing social work were expanded, which is in line with the policy suggesting ‘personnel increase’ (AUNE 2016, 2). The ARA (2018, 12) reports that budget was provided for housing advice and aid for 26 projects, of which 54 new housing projects were hired across Finland. The effectiveness of these services is also seen in Karppinen (2020, 6) as, by the end of 2019, there were 92 housing advisors who had significant output, and, as a result, in 2019, 5438 interventions to stop evictions were made. The AUNE 2016–2019 by The Ministry of the Environment (2019) found that compared to the 31% evictions implemented between 2012 and 2015, only 17% of evictions were implemented during the AUNE programme. Additionally, housing advice services for immigrants were established.The proposition for ‘city specific monitoring of evictions’, which is also important for ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ has proven to be effective in the implementation, state‐subsidised housing was provided, which in 2019, was around 7500 units (Tunström et al. 2020, 28–29). A comprehensive allowance system was also provided, which covered about 80% of the housing cost for low‐income households (Social Insurance Institution of Finland Kela 2019). This helped those struggling financially not to be evicted based on outstanding arrears, which, in turn, prevented recurring homelessness or prevented homelessness.For those with bad credit scores, who had the risk of not getting access to housing, there were measures used to achieve the proposition, ‘access to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit rating’. For example, Koivisto (2019) found that the Guarantee Foundation prevented low‐income households from being overburdened with debt and offered them solutions for risk insurance, which was equivalent to home insurance for those with no clean credit. This is seen in propositions, namely, ‘risk insurance and management for those who lost their credit score’, which causes more ‘access to housing made easier’ as seen in the structural logic of the policy. Furthermore, the proposition of ‘small loan model (Guarantee Foundation) causes more ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ was also achieved. According to the report by AUNE (2016, 10), ‘the programme helped prevent homelessness caused by financial problems’. There were, however, still challenges surrounding affordable housing.In the final analysis, (1) the policy can be seen to be successful as it achieved its desired outcomes with a reduction in homelessness and (2) ‘reform the service system that it is more preventative and customer‐centred by changing the social welfare laws and practices’ (AUNE 2016). In 2002, the Social Welfare Act (2022/790) was amended, which defines short‐term housing, emergency services, supported housing, community housing and Article 46c of the Act contains additional provisions on the organisation of community housing and round‐the‐clock service housing in the same building complex. The legislation further broadens and includes different housing types and mandates all governments to implement these directives as legislation. The third was to achieve cost saving, by preventing homelessness, this has been achieved, as can see on the map (Figure 2) there is a feedback loop developing between ‘allocating the savings achieved by management of homelessness’ ➔ + ‘preventing of homelessness’ ➔ + ‘reducing the need for corrective work’ + ➔ + ‘cost savings’ which again goes to allocating the savings… The loop as outlined conceptually, is effectively achieved in implementation, where cost saving has been achieved as according to ARA (2020) during the AUNE, at least €19.5 million was saved annually from the reduction in homelessness numbers. Additionally, €16.4 million was saved annually by decreasing long‐term homelessness.Implementation ChallengesIn the implementation process, one of the key challenges has been the lack of affordable rental apartments in the cities, which according to Kewoh‐Vainio (2022), also impacts the lives of asylum seekers and immigrants making them vulnerable to poverty and homelessness. This issue also transcends the different groups of homeless people, and Hyötyläinen (2019, 60) suggests that the housing policy of Finland ‘has not been able to intervene enough to curb the increases in the cost of housing’. From a structural perspective, interesting insight emerges as when the propositions were clear in the success aspects of the policy, as discussed, they had multiple arrows pointing towards that particular concept. However, the structure shows the proposition (more) ‘reasonable priced housing in all of the large urban areas’ will cause more ‘reduction of homelessness’. The problem, however, was that there were no causal arrows or connections towards the concept ‘reasonable priced housing in all of the larger urban areas’.Another challenge was unemployment and its impact on the sustainability of homelessness. In the new UURAS programme (2018–2020), the policy aims to help find employment, by providing employment for at least 2000 homeless people (Y‐Foundation 2019). This was also not something visible or explicit in the AUNE (2016) policy except the concept, ‘support participation of homeless people to improve their ability to find employment’. In the new policy, this is much more explicit, which shows again the prowess of the Finnish government to update their policy from a systems perspective to move back to equilibrium after not being able to address these issues in the AUNE policy.Another project in the new policy is to specifically consider and highlight female homelessness. As seen in the data, homelessness among females varies and has no clear trajectory. The new project, Naiserityisyys asunnottomuustyössä (Specificity of women in homelessness) project (2018–2020), is to make female homelessness more visible on the political agenda and to eliminate female homelessness (Y‐Foundation 2019). Again, female homelessness is not very explicit in the AUNE (2016) policy and is just referred to in the policy as ‘woman clients… need valuable skills, particularly one‐on‐one conversations, support in learning everyday life and domestic skills and taking advantage of the competences and talents obscured by the problems’. (AUNE 2016, 3). In the initial development of the AUNE, the policy did not speak specifically to how this segment of the population would be addressed as a target population. A reading of Figure 1, the map indicates no clear causal relations or concepts dealing with ‘women’ specifically, and as suggested immigrant women are more vulnerable to homelessness. Conceptually, this is absent in the policy (AUNE) and seems to be neglected in implementation.Discussion: Insights From the Structural LogicStructure and ComplexityThe Finland case showed higher structure, meaning more causal arrows creating the system (integrated homelessness strategy as conceptual situation/system on paper) and providing a deeply contextualised representation of the complex homelessness problem and possible solutions. However, the Finnish homelessness policy case also had shortcomings, which could be ascribed from a systems perspective to the lack of complexity (policy is only effective if it articulates problems, when it is not conceptually representative in the policy, the problem persists). This could be because the concepts in the policy represented empirical aspects of the real‐world system; however, this representation (policy structural logic) was too simple. This was reflected in the ‘implementation challenges’ section of the case, where the boundaries (in systems terms) of a conceptual system were demarcated through the concepts in the policy and their causal relations. See section below on Section 15.4. The higher systemicity score or structural logic, also indicated external validation/transferability to some extent, because it was not coincidental that the Finnish Homelessness Policy had the highest systemicity score ever recorded when IPA was applied. Again, the finding could be extrapolated to argue that ‘effective policy has a higher level of structural logic’. The findings found a correlation between the structural logic based on the systemicity measure, as proxy for soundness, and the implementation outcomes or policy effectiveness. Therefore, both structure and complexity are important indicators of how well the policy's structural logic represents the context. Therefore, the IPA enables the development of ‘deeply contextualised representations of a complex policy environment based on their structural logic’.The Importance of Good DataIn Finland's homelessness policy, it was clear that the policy was based on good data (see background of the strategy in the case study). The Finnish policy was created by a multi‐disciplinary team, as it was a multi‐disciplinary approach that dealt effectively with the complexity of homelessness in Finland (AUNE 2016, 4). The evidence suggested that the PAAVO programmes and the AUNE (2016) were all developed based on extensive international reviews of the policies in the academic space by Pleace and the European Academic Journal on Homelessness, with research‐oriented ‘academic research projects that have supported and evaluated the accomplishments of the programmes and produced empirically based knowledge for further developing them’ (Juhila et al. 2022, 504). According to Wright and Wallis (2019), what is important for the effective structure of a policy is that it should have good data that forms the foundation on which the rest of the conceptual system is built.The data and research of this policy that supported the structural logic of the policy were relatively good, and this was also found in the work of Juhila et al. (2022, 504) stating that there are reports and reviews on all homelessness policies offering a lot of information and evaluation knowledge. This can be seen in the Y‐Foundation, which has a website storing all the data that was also used in this case study (Y‐Foundation 2021). The case of Finland was not perfect; however, Pleace et al. (2016, 437) argue that the strategy (homelessness) was highly coordinated, as it had clear, logical goals and a mix of prevention and other support services. The case indicated that the structural integrity was clearer on the logic underlying the case and was highly coordinated in implementation. The IPA was effective in this case because of the data on which the causal pathways/propositions were built, and what is significant about the AUNE policy is the fact that they clearly specify the ‘responsible parties’ in each of the sections and sub‐sections of the policy. The deduction, therefore, is that the context of the AUNE policy in Finland is an important case, as it was a highly coordinated effort by the government that was facilitated by good data, directing the causal pathways ‘supported’ by those involved and their responsibilities clearly outlined in the paper. This is complementary to the idea of institutions and the logic of positions (Parsons 2007). This is supported by Fredriksson (2018), who states that building cooperation at the central government level meant that, from the outset, efforts were made to involve all relevant ministries, agencies, and donors in agreeing on common objectives and measures, as well as on the budget and human resources allocated to them. Inter‐ministerial cooperation between ministries was a challenge when there was no joint funding for proposed projects in the development of the policy; however, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Housing and Basic Services, agreed beforehand on alternative solutions (Fredriksson and Kaakinen 2018). Cases in which these two key elements are missing could prove to be challenging for the predictive or analytical power of the IPA. Therefore, the policy itself and its design, as well as the institutional and political context, are important.The IPA and the study of structural logic make it clear in some sense that data need to support the structural logic of the policy. Recall here the proposition by Cejudo and Michel (2016): there must be a logical connection and causal articulation that is coherent, or it will lose effectiveness as the implementation is based on false assumptions (not coincide with reality). Said differently, the structural logic must be built on good data and its relations as reflected in the real world.Institutional Context, Governance Structure and Core ValuesThe success of the homelessness policy in Finland can be ascribed to the homelessness system, which is a combination of actors, processes, and core values (Nelson et al. 2019). There are various role players, processes, and core values that lead to structural and operational shifts in the governance of homelessness with the aim of eliminating it (Housing First Europe Hub 2022). The IPA with the analysis of structural logic provides a way to study this system based on the content of the policy, including identifying the actors and processes; however, issues such as core values and political will are, in some sense, outside the scope of the methodology. However, it is important to understand the success of the AUNE homelessness policy in Finland in order to inform future policy‐making.HF‐based long‐term homelessness programs were launched at the governmental level, and big cities and non‐governmental organisations were willing to implement them effectively (Juhila et al. 2022, 509). The first national programme was created and is still governed and coordinated by the Ministry of the Environment, in collaboration with the Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland (ARA) at the national level, and the objectives and goals of the policy are institutionalised in administrative bodies from the state down to municipalities through agreements (Pleace et al. 2016, 427). Municipalities are thereafter mandated to create detailed agreements for concrete projects to access financial resources made available by the national government, especially in big cities and regions such as Helsinki, Tampere, Turku, Oulu and Jyväskylä, which include approximately 62 municipalities coordinating efforts (agreements on land use, housing and transport). However, not all municipalities signed this agreement. The third‐sector role players include the Networking for Development Project, which was created in 2013 with funding from STEA (The Funding Centre for Social Welfare and Health Organisations), which funds third‐sector role players for projects, including buying apartments from the market and renting them to homeless people, for health and social welfare services, and complementing the work of the state (Leni 2023, 8). Other organisations include the Y‐Foundation, a nonprofit landlord that is a key national developer of the policy. There are other key role‐players as well; however, the conclusion is in line with that of Juhila et al. (2022, 497) that the process success is evident in the careful, innovative development work that created the base for the government programmes, integrating various stakeholders into the process, and providing adequate funding, administrative resources, and realistic timelines. According to the Housing First Europe Hub (2022), the multiple actors or role‐players and how they implemented the HF policy is in a ‘network governance’ approach, which is in contrast to the fragmented governance approach of Spain, where the lack of institutional capacity at the regional level in coordinating funding, as well as of operational capacity at the local level, hindered the efforts of HF advocates.There was also a sustained or enduring political commitment to the HF homelessness policy in Finland, with sustained funding, guidance, and political support for homelessness policies despite changes in the government's composition (Pleace 2017). Juhila et al. (2022, 497) in their evaluation showed that the HF model enjoys fairly large support from political parties, municipal administration, grassroots professionals dealing with long‐term homelessness, and homeless people themselves, which marks political success and policy coordination.From a core value perspective, Finland's HF is socially and culturally specific, first, because it is a strong welfare state context, in which it is based on a social policy including cash benefits and health services, based on the universalistic Nordic model which, as noted above, is rooted in an enduring political consensus around egalitarian, inclusive values (Fitzpatrick and Stephens 2014). Compared to weaker welfare states, such as liberal welfare in the United States of America or Ireland, or corporatist welfare states in France, the political framing in Finland is much different; the individual is not held responsible for being homeless, instead of a systems‐wide perspective, such as Finland that focuses on the ethical and human rights first approach to homelessness. Finland's social‐democratic welfare regime also allows for a more inclusive value, which helps overcome political differences and allows for better political commitment and coordination, which, according to Parsell et al. (2025), makes international comparison anything but straightforward. The AUNE drafters also saw the prevention of homelessness as an important ‘social investment’ (Fredriksson 2018). Additionally, the Finnish government and municipalities own a substantial percentage of land and, therefore, through regulation, directly influence housing development; for example, 25% of new housing must be social housing, and the state guarantees subsidised mortgage loans built on public land owned by the city or the state. Land ownership is also an important enabling factor. HF has been on the political agenda since the inception of the first housing program. Political, ideological and socio‐economic systems seem to be a crucial factor in the case of Finland compared to the United States, Canada, Scotland, Ireland, Spain and even France (see comparative analysis in Housing First Europe Hub 2022; Allen et al. 2020; Tapta 2020). This could have implications for the analysis of the IPA and its applicability across various contexts, as the success of the AUNE policy has multiple causes, and the IPA and structural logic are among them. Studies focusing on these different contexts could provide good counterfactual conditionals (Powell and Greener 2024) for testing the IPA method.Conceptual Boundaries and Implementation LimitationsThe data showed a decrease in homelessness and success in addressing it; however, women's homelessness and housing issues related to immigration were not adequately addressed. A deduction was that because the policy did not have explicit policy statement/directive to address this population segment, the outcomes fluctuated. The new policy outlined key areas that were ‘missed’ in the AUNE (2016), and this included help finding employment, making female homelessness more 255 visible on the political agenda, eliminating female homelessness (Y‐Foundation 2019) and addressing issues of the homelessness phenomena including ‘young people only having a PO Box without a home, ‘large amounts of immigrants residing in the country illegally, or over‐indebtedness of even employed people’ (The Ministry of the Environment 2019, 5). The policy and concepts in the AUNE (2016) policy that were studied, did not explicitly deal with these issues or were not very effective (based on challenges identified in the case) or there was a misspecification in the policy that affected the effectiveness.Implications, Future Research and LimitationsFrom the analysis of this current study, structure is particularly important as an indicator of effectiveness based on assessing concept interaction. The IPA with its methodological and philosophical assumptions has been seen as fitting well into the larger literature of policy design and its analytical value is important for improving the analytical capacity of governments and policymakers (multi‐stakeholders in the case of New Public Governance, multi‐governance bodies). This paper concludes, therefore, that the IPA can be used for not just mapping policy, but also for assessing interaction using systemicity, the IPA can also provide a referential model to what ‘effective’ policy design might look like (e.g., a higher level of structure), and it could be placed in the policy analysis process and policy process as such. This is supported by the idea that the study of policy content (structural logic) can provide a nuanced frame, as the content is important for describing the governance conditions of a country (James and Jorgensen 2009). Another explanation is that multiple actors at different levels were integrated and committed to carry out the governmental programmes by using, for example, financial incentives and information steering (Juhila et al. 2022, 505).This study suggests IPA as a tool for analysing and explaining, in part, the success of the AUNE homelessness policy in Finland. The IPA method and the study of structural logic are not meant to ‘replace’ existing approaches. Rather, its usefulness lies in its complementary use with other methods in policy studies, such as policy discourse analysis, where dominant discourse is used to analyse the position, power, and roles in policy making and implementation (Lynggaard and Triantafillou 2023).With the bourgeons of the governance literature, policy integration, coordination and coherence become increasingly important to deal with contemporary fragmented administration (Trein et al. 2021). With the insight of the IPA for measuring the structural logic and utilising structure against policy implementation, additional research can include the analysis of ‘integrated structural logics’, where the coherence of multiple policies is evaluated to measure the extent of coherence and integration. This, with insight into the IPA and Institutional Grammar 2.0 could prove valuable insights (Frantz and Siddiki 2022) as decision‐making is important in policy integration and which informs policy coordination (Cejudo and Michel 2017). Such a policy design‐as‐content approach could provide valuable insight for embedding integration in nested multi‐level governance policy sub‐systems, mapping a policy landscape (Siddiki 2018).Future research should focus on the structural logic of a policy and the IPA's ability to trace policy evolution or change of a policy, as well as the IPA's usefulness for identifying policy layering, policy drift, policy conversion, policy replacement and policy exhaustion (Howlett et al. 2018). This is because layering, drift and conversion could lead to inconsistent and incoherent policy designs. Therefore, in case studies of these three concepts, the structural logic can shift but stay at a low level of structure. This theory‐centric exploration of empirical cases can be remarkably interesting.Additionally, most extreme cases could also be studied and compared to ‘successful policy’ in a sample to include theory testing extending from this study. Furthermore, studies could be done in developed countries and compared to developing countries and explore how the IPA might fare in these cases. There are some limitations to the study and IPA method, including the fact that the study is primarily based on policy documents and secondary data, which is focused on one aspect of the policy process, which is very complex. Also, the analysis focused on the explicit and codified actions and not on existing norms and practices that could have affected the outcomes. It should be made clear from the outset that the IPA is meant to be used complementarily with the public policy process, policy analysis, design and evaluation. Therefore, this research does not dispute the existing methods but adds an additional dimension. This being said, of course, structural logic/structure alone is not sufficient, but any policy should be created, analysed and evaluated for correspondence between empirical data and structural logic (de Wee 2024, 289–290).Conclusion RemarksFinland's homelessness policy is recognised as an outlier in terms of policies dealing with the complex issues of homelessness globally. Recognising this, this paper extended the existing insights of the policy success by adding a policy design‐as‐content perspective using the IPA to objectively study the policy content by measuring the structural logic. Important propositions investigated in this case are the idea that ‘more structural logic tends to lead to more effective policy’. The paper used the IPA to study the structural logic and measure it through mapping the structural logic creating an abstractable unit of analysis for descriptive and diagnostic analysis. The paper found that the structural logic, using the measure of systemicity, is relatively higher than in other studies of other policies using the IPA method. Generally, these studies would have a structure of 0.25 or less, and the AUNE policy had a structure of 0.36, which is a significant difference considering how well the policy performed against others (de Wee 2020; Shackelford 2014; Wallis 2011, 2013; Wright and Wallis 2019). For the IPA, this case shows correlation between the structural logic and the implementation outcomes. The policy map also allowed for policy map interaction assessment, in terms of the various causal relations and their interactions in the conceptual situation. The propositions as found in the policy, and analysed at the conceptual level, were also successfully completed in implementation. The paper also indicated various insights based on the policy content for governance and policy integration studies.The IPA method is proposed in this study, not to replace the existing policy scholarship in relation to homelessness or social policy in general. The purpose is to suggest a complementary tool to study the structural logic of policies and how they structure institutional and individual action among actors based on the way the policies are structured. The contribution of the paper using the IPA to study the policy's structural logic provides an additional dimension to study the effectiveness of policy designs, although the IPA is still in the preliminary stages of development. The structural logic also assists in extracting and explaining the institutional arrangements, with potential insights to construct and improve policy coordination in the multi‐level network governance systems (de Wee 2024)—contributing to the logic‐of‐position (Parsons 2007). The IPA and structural logic help explain how the policy content structures the action or implementation situation, including delineating actor roles and responsibilities, prescribed action and finally how it helps explain how the complexity embedded in the policy text manifests in implementation, which could prove important in social policy and governance.For the policy process, the insights generated here indicate the importance of maintaining a high level of structure in the policy through good knowledge utilisation or relevant data, which support the policy statements or structural logic for effective implementation. This study allowed for the analysis of the nuances of the policy but also allows for precise evaluation of shortcomings and successful leverage points in the policy. Finally, the paper proposes, in line with Siddiki (2020) that more work should be done in the area of policy design/analysis using the structural logic and policy mapping, and interaction assessment could prove valuable for designing effective policies, with valuable practical insight for policy practitioners.AcknowledgementsThis paper is adapted from my PhD (Public Administration) study submitted in 2023 for examination. This work is based on the research supported in part by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa. I acknowledge that the opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are my own and not those of the NRF.Data Availability StatementData are available on request from the authors.Endnotes1Considering this, policy paradigms are much more complex than stand‐alone problem definitions and policy solutions, as they articulate these with broader policy goals (Béland 2019, 17).2Jan Vapaavuori appointed a group of four men, later referred to as the ‘four wise men’, to create a basis for a new long‐term homelessness policy. The group included Paavo Voutilainen (Director of Social Services in Helsinki), Hannu Puttonen (the Chief Executive Officer of the Y‐Foundation at the time), Ilkka Taipale (PhD specialist in men's homelessness, civil activist and former politician) and Eero Huovinen (Bishop of Helsinki).ReferencesAllegrante, J. P., and D. A. Sleet. 2021. “Investing in Public Health Infrastructure to Address the Complexities of Homelessness.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 16: 8887.Allen, M., L. Benjaminsen, E. O'Sullivan, and N. Pleace. 2020. Ending Homelessness?: The Contrasting Experiences of Denmark, Finland and Ireland. Policy Press.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA). 2017. “‘ARA Implements Finland's Housing Policy.” https://www.ara.fi/enUS/About_ARA/ARA_implements_Finlands_housing_policy.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA). 2018. “Homelessness in 2018. The Housing Finance and Development Centre of Fin‐land.” https://www.ara.fi/download/noname/%7B0707CEDD‐2854‐4EA0‐ABDD‐352120B49731%7D/145931.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA) (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland). 2020. “Homelessness in 2020. The Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland.” https://www.varke.fi/en/node/8/homelessness/homeless‐people‐2023.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland) (ARA). 2015. Homelessness in 2015. Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.ara.fi/download/noname/%7BA7EFA385‐21B0‐40C2‐9798‐4EAEB9A5951E%7D/125476.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland) (ARA). 2016. Homelessness in 2016. Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.ara.fi/en‐US/Materials/Homelessness_reports/Homelessness_in_Finland_2016(42274).Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland) (ARA). 2019. Homelessness in 2019. Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.ara.fi/download/noname/%7B2B21B6E5‐3C0F‐4EA0‐B7DC‐F921D1E7F644%7D/156632.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA) (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland). 2023. Homelessness in 2023. The Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.varke.fi/en/node/8/homelessness/homeless‐people‐2023.Atkinson, P., and A. Coffey. 1997. “Analysing Documentary Realities.” In Qualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice, edited by D. Silverman, 45–62. Sage.AUNE (Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland 2016–2019). 2016. “Decision of the Finnish Government.” Ministry of the Environment. https://www.ym.fi/en‐US/Housing/Programmes_and_strategies/Actionplan_for_preventing_homelessness.Auriacombe, C. J. 2016. “Towards the Construction of Unobtrusive Research Techniques: Critical Considerations When Conducting a Literature Analysis.” African Journal of Public Affairs 9, no. 4: 1–19.Béland, D. 2019. How Ideas and Institutions Shape the Politics of Public Policy. Cambridge University Press.Béland, D., and M. Powell. 2016. “Continuity and Change in Social Policy.” Social Policy & Administration 50, no. 2: 129–147.Bloone, L., and M. Poulin. 2021. Finland's Zero Homelessness Strategy, Lessons From a Success Story. Ecoscope. https://oecdecoscope.blog/2021/12/13/finlands‐zero‐homeless‐strategylessons‐from‐a‐success‐story/comment‐page‐1/.Campbell, M. C. 2004. “Building a Common Table: The Role for Planning in Community Food Systems.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 23, no. 4: 341–355.Cejudo, G. M., and C. L. Michel. 2016. “Addressing Fragmented Government Action: Coordination, Coherence, and Integration.” Paper to be Presented at the 2nd International Conference in Public Policy, Milan, July 2015. https://www.ippapublicpolicy.org/file/paper/1434668940.pdf.Cejudo, G. M., and C. L. Michel. 2017. “Addressing Fragmented Government Action: Coordination, Coherence, and Integration.” Policy Sciences 50, no. 4: 745–767.Cloete, F. 2007. “Knowledge Management and Trust in Government: Lessons From South Africa.” In 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government: Building Trust in Government, 26–29. https://www.academia.edu/download/35345914/unpan025898.pdf.Creswell, J. W. 2013. Qualitative Enquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage.De Corte, J., B. Verschuere, and M. De Bie. 2017. “Networks for Welfare Provision: Getting a Grip on Processes of Social Exclusion by Evaluating Network Effectiveness.” Social Policy & Administration 51, no. 7: 1174–1190.de La Porte, C., G. B. Eydal, J. Kauko, D. Nohrstedt, P. 't Hart, and B. S. Tranøy. 2022. “Introduction: Studying Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries (Chapter 1).” In Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries. Oxford University Press.de Wee, G. 2020. “An Evaluation of the Integrative Propositional Analysis Model for Complex Policy Environments: The Case of the Drakenstein Housing Policy, 2010–2017.” Master's dissertations submitted at Nelson Mandela University.de Wee, G. 2022. “Comparative Policy Analysis and the Science of Conceptual Systems: A Candidate Pathway to a Common Variable.” Foundations of Science 27, no. 2: 287–304.de Wee, G. 2024. “Evaluating the Systems‐Based Integrative Propositional Analysis for Effective Policy Design: A Multiple Case Study Approach.” Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Nelson Mandela University.de Wee, G., and K. Asmah‐Andoh. 2022. “Model for Overcoming Policy Analysis Limitation and Implementation Challenges: Integrative Propositional Analysis of South African National Mental Health Policy Framework and Strategic Plan 2013–2020.” International Journal of Public Administration 45, no. 8: 658–674.Dekker, T. 2023. Can the Finnish Way to Reduce Homelessness Work in Canada? The Limits of Power Resource Approaches in a Time of Economic Crisis. Brock University.Dryzek, J. S., and B. Ripley. 1988. “The Ambitions of Policy Design.” Policy Studies Review 7, no. 4: 705–719.Fitzpatrick, S., and M. Stephens. 2014. “Welfare Regimes, Social Values and Homelessness: Comparing Responses to Marginalised Groups in six European countries.” Housing Studies 29, no. 2: 215–234.Foo, S., R. Hunjan, and A. Kleine. 2022. “Housing and Homelessness: Breaking Down Silos for Systems Change.” Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://doi.org/10.48558/4N11‐PG95.Frantz, C. K., and S. Siddiki. 2022. Institutional Grammar. Springer International Publishing.Fredriksson, P. 2018. “Modernin asunnottomuuspolitiikan synty [The Birth of a Modern Homelessness Policy].” In Yömajasta omaan asuntoon: Suomalaisen asunnotto‐ muuspolitiikan murros, edited by P. Fredriksson, 73–92. Into.Fredriksson, P., and J. Kaakinen. 2018. “Asunto ensin politiikan läpimurto.” In Yömajasta omaan asuntoon: Suomalaisen asunnottomuuspolitiikan murros, edited by P. Fredriksson, 113–136. Into.Gerring, J. 2004. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98, no. 2: 341–354.Granfelt, R. 2003. Vankilasta Kotiin Vai Kadulle? Vangit Kertovat Asunnottomuudesta, Suomen ympäristö 613 [Out of Prison and Back Home or on the Streets? Prisoners Describe Their Experience of Homelessness, Finnish Environment 613]. Ympäristöministeriö.Hall, P. A. 1993. “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain.” Comparative Politics 25, no. 3: 275–296.Hancock, E. 2022. “Helsinki is Leading the Way in Ending Homelessness—But How Are They Doing It?” World Habitat. https://world‐habitat.org/news/our‐blog/helsinki‐is‐stillleading‐the‐way‐in‐ending‐homelessness‐but‐how‐are‐they‐doingit/#:~:text=Finland%20committed%20to%20eradicating%20homelessness,Housing%20First%20units%20in%20Helsinki.Housing First Europe Hub. 2022. “A New Systems Perspective to Ending Homelessness.” https://housingfirsteurope.eu/wp‐content/uploads/2022/05/DRAFT‐HF‐Systems‐Change.pdf.Howlett, M. 2011. Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments. Routledge.Howlett, M., G. Capano, and M. Ramesh. 2018. “Designing for Robustness: Surprise, Agility and Improvisation in Policy Design.” Policy and Society 37, no. 4: 405–421.Howlett, M., I. Mukherjee, and J. J. Woo. 2015. “From Tools to Toolkits in Policy Design Studies: The New Design Orientation Towards Policy Formulation Research.” Policy & Politics 43, no. 2: 291–311.Howlett, M., M. Ramesh, and G. Capano. 2023. “The Micro‐Dimensions of Policy Design: A Key Challenge for Real‐World Policy Practice (April 5, 2023).” https://ssrn.com/abstract=4410177 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4410177.Hyötyläinen, M. 2019. “Divided by Policy: Urban Inequality in Finland.” Masters Manuscript. https://helda.helsinki.fi/items/78d9ee2a‐6be7‐4f9a‐86fe‐617db7a61321.Jackson, M. C. 1995. “Beyond the Fads: Systems Thinking for Managers.” Systems Research 12, no. 1: 25–42.James, T. E., and P. D. Jorgensen. 2009. “Policy Knowledge, Policy Formulation, and Change: Revisiting a Foundational Question.” Policy Studies Journal 37, no. 1: 141–162.Juhila, K., S. Raitakari, and J. Ranta. 2022. “Housing First.” Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries: Cases, Lessons, Challenges. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/60762/9780192856296.pdf?sequence=1#page=510.Kaakinen, J., and S. Turunen. 2021. “Finnish but not Yet Finished–Successes and Challenges of Housing First in Finland.” European Journal of Homelessness 15, no. 3: 81–84.Karppinen, J. 2020. “Varmista asumisen turva! Asunnottomuuden ennaltaehkäisyn toimenpideohjelman loppuraportti.” https://asuntoensin.fi/assets/files/2020/01/AUNEohjelman‐loppuraportti‐Karppinen‐Kehitt%C3%A4misosuuskuntaAvainv%C3%A4ki.pdf.Kewoh‐Vainio, V. 2022. “Peculiarities of Social Work With Young People Experiencing Homelessness.” Doctoral dissertation, Mykolo Romerio Universitetas.Koivisto, K. 2019. “Homelessness in Finland and Denmark.” Bachelor's thesis, Laurea University of Applied Sciences.Lasswell, H. D. 1951. “The Policy Orientation.” In The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope and Method, edited by D. Lerner and H. D. Lasswell, 3–15. Stanford University Press.Lejano, R. P., and S. J. Park. 2015. “The Autopoietic Text.” In Handbook of Critical Policy Studies, edited by F. Fischer, D. Torgerson, A. Durnová, and M. Orsini. Edward Elgar Publishing.Leni, E. 2023. “Case Studies on International Policy and Implementation—Case 4 Policy and Implementation of Deinstitutionalizing Response to Homelessness in Finland.” https://estrategiadesinstitucionalizacion.gob.es/wp‐content/uploads/2023/09/DI_Spain_case4_Finland_Homelessness_FINAL.pdf.Light, P. C. 2016. “Vision + Action = Faithful Execution: Why Government Daydreams and How to Stop the Cascade of Breakdowns That Now Haunts It.” Political Science & Politics 49, no. 1: 5–26.Linder, S. H., and B. G. Peters. 1988. “The Analysis of Design or the Design of Analysis?” Review of Policy Research 7, no. 4: 738–750.Linder, S. H., and B. G. Peters. 1989. “Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts.” Journal of Public Policy 9, no. 1: 35–58.Lynggaard, K., and P. Triantafillou. 2023. “Discourse Analysis and Strategic Policy Advice: Manoeuvring, Navigating, and Transforming Policy.” Journal of European Public Policy 30: 1936–1959. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2217846.Määttä, M., and K. Eriksson. 2015. “Network Governance and Programme Steering—Rationales and Tensions in Planning Child and Youth Policies.” Social Policy & Administration 49, no. 5: 631–648.May, P. J. 2003. “Policy Design and Implementation.” In Handbook of Public Administration, edited by B. G. Peters and J. Pierre, 223–233. SAGE Publications.Meriluoto, T. 2018. “Making Experts‐by‐Experience: Governmental Ethnography of Participatory Initiatives in Finnish Social Welfare Organisations.” JYU dissertations, Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy.Nelson, G., S. K. Worton, E. Macnaughton, et al. 2019. “Systems Change in the Context of an Initiative to Scale up Housing First in Canada.” Journal of Community Psychology 47, no. 1: 7–20.Parsell, C., J. Kaakinen, S. Fitzpatrick, and E. Kuskoff. 2025. “What Does It Take to End Homelessness? Tweaking or Transforming Systems.” Housing Studies: 1–19.Parsons, C. 2007. How to Map Arguments in Political Science. Oxford University Press.Petek, A., B. Zgurić, M. Šinko, et al. 2022. “From Hierarchy to Continuum: Classifying the Technical Dimension of Policy Goals.” Policy Sciences 55, no. 4: 715–736.Pleace, N. 2016. “Researching Homelessness in Europe: Theoretical Perspectives.” European Journal of Homelessness 10, no. 3: 19–44. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/111071/1/10_3_article_1_pleace.pdf.Pleace, N. 2017. “The Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland 2016–2019: The Culmination of an Integrated Strategy to End Homelessness?” European Journal of Homelessness 11, no. 2: 1–21. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/123783/.Pleace, N. 2019. “Preventing Homelessness: A Review of the International Evidence.” Research Report. Simon Communities of Ireland, Cork.Pleace, N., D. Culhane, R. Granfelt, and M. Knutagård. 2015. “The Finnish Homelessness Strategy—An International Review.” https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/153258/YMra_3en_2015.pdf.Pleace, N., M. Knutagård, D. P. Culhane, and R. Granfelt. 2016. “The Strategic Response to Homelessness in Finland: Exploring Innovation and Coordination Within a National Plan to Reduce and Prevent Homelessness.” In Exploring Effective Systems Responses to Homelessness, edited by N. Nichols and C. Doberstein. Canadian Observatory on Homelessness.Pleace, N., N. Teller, and D. Quilgars. 2011. Social Housing Allocation and Homelessness. FEANTSA.Porchak, E., A. Oudshoorn, S. Modanloo, et al. 2023. “Permanent Supportive Housing for Those Experiencing Chronic Homelessness With High Health or Social Support Needs: A Scoping Review.” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 34, no. 4: 1178–1209. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2023.a912712.Powell, M., and I. Greener. 2024. “It's a Wonderful NHS? A Counterfactual Perspective on the Creation of the British National Health Service.” Social Policy and Administration 58, no. 6: 875–888.Pulliainen, M. M. 2021. “Life on the Streets: An Ethnographic Study of Homeless Substance Users' Lives.” Qualitative Research 1, no. 3: 385–405.Ranta, J., and K. Juhila. 2020. “Constructing a Sense of Home in Floating Support for People Using Drugs.” Qualitative Social Work 19, no. 4: 685–700.Ritzer, G. 1990. “Metatheorizing in Sociology.” Sociological Forum 5, no. 1: 3–15.Saari, J. 2015. Huono‐osaiset–Elämän edellytykset yhteiskunnan pohjalla. Gaudeamus.Schneider, A. L., and H. Ingram. 1988. “Systematically Pinching Ideas: A Comparative Approach to Policy Design.” Journal of Public Policy 8: 61–80.Schneider, A. L., and H. Ingram. 1990. “Policy Design: Elements, Premises and Strategies.” In Policy Theory and Policy Evaluation: Concepts, knowledge, Causes and Norms, edited by S. S. Nagel, 77–102. Greenwood.Schneider, A., and H. Ingram. 1997. Policy Design for Democracy. University Press of Kansas.Shackelford, C. 2014. “Propositional Analysis, Policy Creation, and Complex Environments in the United States' 2009 Afghanistan‐Pakistan Policy.” Doctoral dissertation, Walden University.Siddiki, S. 2018. “Policy Design and Conflict.” In Routledge Handbook of Policy Design, 212–223. Routledge.Siddiki, S. 2020. Understanding and Analyzing Public Policy Design. Cambridge University Press.Siddiki, S. 2022. “Adaptive Governance Through Policy Design.” In Research Handbook of Policy Design, 310–322. Edward Elgar Publishing.Siddiki, S., and C. Curley. 2022. “Conceptualising Policy Design in the Policy Process.” Policy & Politics 50, no. 1: 117–135.Siddiki, S., and C. K. Frantz. 2024. “Understanding Regulation Using the Institutional Grammar 2.0.” Regulation & Governance 18, no. 3: 674–687.Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela). 2019. “Housing Benefits.” https://www.kela.fi/web/en/housing‐benefits.Tainio, H., and P. Fredriksson. 2009. “The Finnish Homelessness Strategy: From a ‘Staircase’ Model to a ‘Housing First’ Approach to Tackling Long‐Term Homelessness.” European Journal of Homelessness 3, no. 1: 181–199.Tapta, R. 2020. “The End of Homelessness Through Policies and Implementations: Case Studies of Finland and Ireland.” Chulalongkorn University theses and dissertations (Chula ETD), 264. https://digital.car.chula.ac.th/chulaetd/264.Timonen, V. 1997. “The Politics of Welfare State Restructuring in Finland and Sweden, 1991–1996.” Masters Thesis at University of Helsinki. https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/the‐politics‐of‐welfare‐state‐restructuring‐in‐finland‐and‐sweden.Trein, P., R. Biesbroek, T. Bolognesi, et al. 2021. “Policy Coordination and Integration: A Research Agenda.” Public Administration Review 81, no. 5: 973–977.Tsemberis, S. 2011. “Housing first: The Pathways Model to End Homelessness for People With Mental Illness and Addiction Manual.” European Journal of Homelessness 5, no. 2: 235–240.Tunström, M., C. Liliegreen, A. Kurvinen, J. R. Sveinsson, B. I. Nordahl, and A. Granath Hansson. 2020. “Building Affordable Homes: Challenges and Solutions in the Nordic Region.” Nordregio Report.Turunen, S., and R. Granfelt. 2023. “Homelessness in Finland.” In Routledge Handbook of Homelessness, 307–315. Routledge.Van de Ven, A. H. 2007. Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford University Press on Demand.Wallis, S. E. 2011. Avoiding Policy Failure: A Workable Approach. Emergent Publications.Wallis, S. E. 2012. “Existing and Emerging Methods for Integrating Theories Within and Between Disciplines.” This Paper is a Presentation at the 56th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Systems Sciences (ISSS). July 15–22, 2012, at San Jose State University, California.Wallis, S. E. 2013. “How to Choose Between Policy Proposals: A Simple Tool Based on Systems Thinking and Complexity Theory.” Emergence, Complexity & Organization 15, no. 3: 94–120.Wallis, S. E. 2016. “The Science of Conceptual Systems: A Progress Report.” Foundations of Science 21, no. 4: 579–602.Wallis, S. E. 2019. “The Missing Piece of the Integrative Studies Puzzle.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 44, no. 3–4: 402–429.Wallis, S. E., and V. Valentinov. 2017. “What is Sustainable Theory? A Luhmannian Perspective on the Science of Conceptual Systems.” Foundations of Science 22, no. 4: 733–747.Weick, K. E. 1989. “Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination.” Academy of Management Review 14, no. 4: 516–531.Weimer, D. L. 1998. “Policy Design for Democracy.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 559: 181–183.Wright, B., and S. E. Wallis. 2019. Practical Mapping for Applied Research and Program Evaluation. SAGE Publications.Y‐Foundation. 2021. https://ysaatio.fi/en/home/.Y‐Foundation. 2022. “Homes for the Homeless.” https://ysaatio.fi/en/y‐foundation.Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research. 4th ed. SAGE.Yin, R. K. 2013. “Validity and Generalization in Future Case Study Evaluations.” Evaluation 19, no. 3: 321–333.Yin, R. K. 2018. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. 6th ed. Sage.Y‐Säätiö (Y‐Foundation). 2017. A Home of Your Own: Housing First and Ending Homelessness in Finland. Y‐Säätiö.Y‐Säätiö (Y‐Foundation). 2019. “Y‐Foundation.” https://ysaatio.fi/en/y‐foundation.1AppendixIPA Analysis of the AUNE 2016–2019 PolicyStep 1: Identify the propositions in the different policy statements.In the first step, the policy was read and analysed by isolating the policy statements/propositions that were found in the policy. For example, on page 2 of the policy it states that ‘new people are becoming homeless due to the problems such as financial issues’ (AUNE 2016, 2). This can be rephrased to state, the more ‘financial issues people have’, the more it causes ‘new people to become homeless’.Step 2: Diagram the causal relationships between the concepts within the propositions.By way of illustration, consider the example in Step 1, ‘new people becoming homeless’, would be placed in a circle as well as ‘financial issues’. An arrow from ‘financial issues’ was connected with an arrow to ‘new people becoming homeless’ to indicate the causal relationship between the concepts. Here, the researcher adheres to Wallis (2012), drawing on Ritzer (1990), where the researcher does not speculate on interpretations of the authors' statements and refers to the original wording. This would also explain the long wording on the maps as they are the direct wording of policy statements.Step 3: Synthesise those smaller diagrams where they contain the same concepts (Find linkages between concepts and relationships across propositions).For example, in the AUNE 2016–2019, policy indicates that they want to ‘(a decrease in) ‘the need for corrective work, which also leads to cost saving in the long‐term’ (AUNE 2016, 3), and later it explains, which is similar to ‘fall out of the current services for the homeless, which result in a significant cost to society’. This can be mapped as ‘reduce the need for corrective work’ causes more ‘cost saving’ and the ‘more people fall out of the current services for the homeless’ causes less ‘cost savings’. Here, the concepts ‘a significant cost to society’ and ‘cost saving’ overlap and are, thus, one.Step 4: Count the total number of concepts to determine the breath or complexity of the policy (to find ‘simple’ complexity).In this step, the circles that represent the concepts were counted to find the total number of circles. Complexity is the measure of the breadth of the policy. In Figure 1, the map indicates that there are 39 circles with writing in them. That is a complexity of 39.Step 5: Identify and count the transformative concepts (defined as those where two or more arrows are pointing towards the concept).In this step, the circles with two or more concepts pointed to them were identified and counted. These are on the map in fig. 5.3 and were identified with an orange/yellow circle. Continuing with the example under Step 3, ‘Cost savings’ will be a transformative/concatenated concept.Step 6: Divide the concatenated/transformative concepts by the total concepts (systemicity or structure).The sixth and final IPA step was to divide the number of concatenated/transformative concepts (Step 5) by the total number of concepts (Step 4). The index is a number comprised of between 0 (least structure/systemicity) and 1 (most structure/systemicity). In this case, the systemicity/structural score is 0.36. In the analysis, it was also clear that the structure of the policy could have been higher as many concepts were also found in other official documents.2AppendixFinland Homelessness Policy Elements# of conceptsFinland Homelessness PolicyLabel—Concept/element1Financial and debt council ling services for young people2Significant investment in new construction and renovations3Encouraging low threshold work activities and meaningful everyday activities is created for the housing services for the long‐term homeless and the related emergency services4cost savings5(mobile support work model)the expertise of different professional fields is combined in a new way into a comprehensive service package brought into the home (ACT teams).6building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.7early identification of problems leading to homelessness8housing and integration services for those who receive a residence permit can be arranged in an effectively9when the payment defaults are minor and the applicant has a credible debt management plan10Criminal Sanctions Agency will hire an employee to coordinate the work11city specific monitoring of evictions12Prevention of Homelessness13financial and debt councilling services for young people14sufficient abstinent housing services available15housing guidance16of peer work (such as environmental work, mediation with neighbours, tenant sponsors, family networks) that strengthen the attachment of groups at risk to natural networks17allocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investments18preventing the recurrence of homelessness19Risk Insurance and management for those who lost their credit rating20cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actors21Reduction of homelessness22access to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit rating23other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measures24ensure that homeless young adults have a safe place to stay overnight and ensure their direction to services25400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clients26new small loan model (Guarantee Foundation)27social lending by municipalities28cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.29new preventive practices are developed by utilising joint development30reasonably priced housing in all of the largest urban areas31reduce the need for corrective work32factors that may threaten the success of independent living33support independent living and rehabilitation better34In the national ‘Onnistu asumisessa’ (Housing success) project of the Finnish Youth Housing Association, the cooperation between youth housing actors, the Ohjaamo service points and other low threshold service points is increased and local competence and expertise is strengthened.35monitor the tenants payment of rent36prevent the increase of arrears of rent37preventing arrears of rent from becoming court cases38supports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.39cities in the agreement ensure that housing services that allow the use of intoxicants are available in the whole country3AppendixFinland Homelessness Policy Element InteractionPolicy Statements or Propositions for the Structural Logic of the Policy MapProposition numberFromToType1other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measureshousing guidancecauses more2preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscost savingscauses less3early identification of problems leading to homelessnesshousing guidancecauses more4financial and debt council ling services for young peopleReduction of homelessnesscauses more5cost savingsallocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investmentscauses more6housing guidancefactors that may threaten the success of independent livingcauses less7ensure that homeless young adults have a safe place to stay overnight and ensure their direction to servicesPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more8cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.causes more9(mobile support work model)the expertise of different professional fields is combined in a new way into a comprehensive service package brought into the home (ACT teams).preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more10reduce the need for corrective workcost savingscauses more11of peer work (such as environmental work, mediation with neighbours, tenant sponsors, family networks) that strengthen the attachment of groups at risk to natural networkshousing and integration services for those who receive a residence permit can be arranged in an effectivelycauses more12cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clientscauses more13cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actorspreventing the recurrence of homelessness14financial and debt counselling services for young peoplepreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more15new preventive practices are developed by utilising joint developmentReduction of homelessnesscauses more16encouraging low threshold work activities and meaningful everyday activities is created for the housing services for the long‐term homeless and the related emergency servicessupports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.causes more17Criminal Sanctions Agency will hire an employee to coordinate the workpreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more18monitor the tenants payment of rentcity specific monitoring of evictionscauses more19of peer work (such as environmental work, mediation with neighbours, tenant sponsors, family networks) that strengthen the attachment of groups at risk to natural networkspreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more20400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clientsReduction of homelessnesscauses more21city specific monitoring of evictionspreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more22when the payment defaults are minor and the applicant has a credible debt management planaccess to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingcauses more23reasonably priced housing in all of the largest urban areasPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more24preventing the recurrence of homelessnessreduce the need for corrective workcauses more25social lending by municipalitiesaccess to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingcauses more26ensure that homeless young adults have a safe place to stay overnight and ensure their direction to serviceshousing guidancecauses more27In the national ‘Onnistu asumisessa’ (Housing success) project of the Finnish Youth Housing Association, the cooperation between youth housing actors, the Ohjaamo service points and other low threshold service points is increased and local competence and expertise is strengthened.Reduction of homelessnesscauses more28social lending by municipalitiespreventing arrears of rent from becoming court casescauses more29housing guidancePrevention of Homelessnesscauses more30supports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.factors that may threaten the success of independent livingcauses more31Risk Insurance and management for those who lost their credit ratingaccess to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingcauses more32allocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investmentsnew preventive practices are developed by utilising joint developmentcauses more33allocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investmentsPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more34cities in the agreement ensure that housing services that allow the use of intoxicants are available in the whole countryReduction of homelessnesscauses more35other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measurespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more36financial and debt council ling services for young peoplepreventing the recurrence of homelessness37sufficient abstinent housing services availablePrevention of Homelessnesscauses more38other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measuresPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more39Prevention of Homelessnessreduce the need for corrective workcauses more40significant investment in new construction and renovations400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clientscauses more41cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actorscity specific monitoring of evictionscauses more42significant investment in new construction and renovationsbuilding 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.causes more43significant investment in new construction and renovationssupport independent living and rehabilitation bettercauses more44In the national ‘Onnistu asumisessa’ (Housing success) project of the Finnish Youth Housing Association, the cooperation between youth housing actors, the Ohjaamo service points and other low threshold service points is increased and local competence and expertise is strengthened.new preventive practices are developed by utilising joint developmentcauses more45social lending by municipalitiespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more46supports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more47new small loan model (Guarantee Foundation)preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more48monitor the tenants payment of rentprevent the increase of arrears of rentcauses more49building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.support independent living and rehabilitation bettercauses more50other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measurescities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.causes more51new small loan model (Guarantee Foundation)preventing arrears of rent from becoming court casescauses more52building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more53housing and integration services for those who receive a residence permit can be arranged in an effectivelyPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more54access to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingReduction of homelessnesscauses more55early identification of problems leading to homelessnessPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more56encouraging low threshold work activities and meaningful everyday activities is created for the housing services for the long‐term homeless and the related emergency servicespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more57preventing arrears of rent from becoming court casespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more58cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.Prevention of Homelessnesscauses more59cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actorsmonitor the tenants payment of rentcauses more60significant investment in new construction and renovationsReduction of homelessnesscauses more http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Social Policy & Administration Wiley http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/wiley/an-integrative-propositional-analysis-of-finland-s-successful-08TgV0eczu

Loading next page...

References (91)

Siddiki S. (2022)
Conceptualising Policy Design in the Policy Process
Policy & Politics, 50
P. J. May (2003)
Handbook of Public Administration
E. Porchak, A. Oudshoorn, S. Modanloo (2023)
Permanent Supportive Housing for Those Experiencing Chronic Homelessness With High Health or Social Support Needs: A Scoping Review
, 34
Kaakinen J. (2021)
Finnish but not Yet Finished–Successes and Challenges of Housing First in Finland
European Journal of Homelessness, 15
(2015)
Homelessness in 2015
Pulliainen M. M. (2021)
Life on the Streets: An Ethnographic Study of Homeless Substance Users' Lives
Qualitative Research, 1
A. L. Schneider, H. Ingram (1990)
Policy Theory and Policy Evaluation: Concepts, knowledge, Causes and Norms
(2023)
Homelessness in 2023
Cejudo G. M. (2017)
Addressing Fragmented Government Action: Coordination, Coherence, and Integration
Policy Sciences, 50
The Micro-Dimensions of Policy Design: A Key Challenge for Real-World Policy Practice
Hall P. A. (1993)
Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain
Comparative Politics, 25
Tsemberis S. (2011)
Housing first: The Pathways Model to End Homelessness for People With Mental Illness and Addiction Manual
European Journal of Homelessness, 5
C. Porte, G. B. Eydal, J. Kauko, D. Nohrstedt, P. 't Hart, B. S. Tranøy (2022)
Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries
Tainio H. (2009)
The Finnish Homelessness Strategy: From a ‘Staircase’ Model to a ‘Housing First’ Approach to Tackling Long‐Term Homelessness
European Journal of Homelessness, 3
P. Fredriksson, J. Kaakinen (2018)
Yömajasta omaan asuntoon: Suomalaisen asunnottomuuspolitiikan murros
N. Pleace, N. Teller, D. Quilgars (2011)
Social Housing Allocation and Homelessness
Määttä M. (2015)
Network Governance and Programme Steering—Rationales and Tensions in Planning Child and Youth Policies
Social Policy & Administration, 49
Wallis S. E. (2013)
How to Choose Between Policy Proposals: A Simple Tool Based on Systems Thinking and Complexity Theory
Emergence, Complexity & Organization, 15
S. Foo, R. Hunjan, A. Kleine (2022)
Housing and Homelessness: Breaking Down Silos for Systems Change
Siddiki S. (2018)
Policy Design and Conflict
Campbell M. C. (2004)
Building a Common Table: The Role for Planning in Community Food Systems
Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23
Wee G. (2022)
Comparative Policy Analysis and the Science of Conceptual Systems: A Candidate Pathway to a Common Variable
Foundations of Science, 27
Parsell C. (2025)
What Does It Take to End Homelessness? Tweaking or Transforming Systems
Housing Studies
Schneider A. L. (1988)
Systematically Pinching Ideas: A Comparative Approach to Policy Design
Journal of Public Policy, 8
Permanent Supportive Housing for Those Experiencing Chronic Homelessness with High Health or Social Support Needs: A Scoping Review
S. Siddiki (2020)
Understanding and Analyzing Public Policy Design
A. H. Van de Ven (2007)
Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research
Linder S. H. (1988)
The Analysis of Design or the Design of Analysis?
Review of Policy Research, 7
Ranta J. (2020)
Constructing a Sense of Home in Floating Support for People Using Drugs
Qualitative Social Work, 19
S. Turunen, R. Granfelt (2023)
Routledge Handbook of Homelessness
Weimer D. L. (1998)
Policy Design for Democracy
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 559
Auriacombe C. J. (2016)
Towards the Construction of Unobtrusive Research Techniques: Critical Considerations When Conducting a Literature Analysis
African Journal of Public Affairs, 9
P. Atkinson, A. Coffey (1997)
Qualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice
H. D. Lasswell (1951)
The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope and Method
C. K. Frantz, S. Siddiki (2022)
Institutional Grammar
May P. J. (2003)
Policy Design and Implementation
Wee G. (2022)
Model for Overcoming Policy Analysis Limitation and Implementation Challenges: Integrative Propositional Analysis of South African National Mental Health Policy Framework and Strategic Plan 2013–2020
International Journal of Public Administration, 45
Dryzek J. S. (1988)
The Ambitions of Policy Design
Policy Studies Review, 7
Petek A. (2022)
From Hierarchy to Continuum: Classifying the Technical Dimension of Policy Goals
Policy Sciences, 55
S. E. Wallis (2011)
Avoiding Policy Failure: A Workable Approach
Frantz C. K. (2022)
Institutional Grammar
S. Siddiki (2018)
Routledge Handbook of Policy Design
S. Siddiki (2022)
Research Handbook of Policy Design
Powell M. (2024)
It's a Wonderful NHS? A Counterfactual Perspective on the Creation of the British National Health Service
Social Policy and Administration, 58
B. Wright, S. E. Wallis (2019)
Practical Mapping for Applied Research and Program Evaluation
Allegrante J. P. (2021)
Investing in Public Health Infrastructure to Address the Complexities of Homelessness
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18
Pleace N. (2017)
The Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland 2016–2019: The Culmination of an Integrated Strategy to End Homelessness?
European Journal of Homelessness, 11
Parsons C. (2007)
How to Map Arguments in Political Science
Porte C. (2022)
Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries
Weick K. E. (1989)
Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination
Academy of Management Review, 14
(2017)
A Home of Your Own: Housing First and Ending Homelessness in Finland
L. Bloone, M. Poulin (2021)
Finland's Zero Homelessness Strategy, Lessons From a Success Story
K. Lynggaard, P. Triantafillou (2023)
Discourse Analysis and Strategic Policy Advice: Manoeuvring, Navigating, and Transforming Policy
, 30
Wallis S. E. (2016)
The Science of Conceptual Systems: A Progress Report
Foundations of Science, 21
Pleace N. (2016)
Researching Homelessness in Europe: Theoretical Perspectives
European Journal of Homelessness, 10
Béland D. (2016)
Continuity and Change in Social Policy
Social Policy & Administration, 50
J. Saari (2015)
Huono‐osaiset–Elämän edellytykset yhteiskunnan pohjalla
Siddiki S. (2024)
Understanding Regulation Using the Institutional Grammar 2.0
Regulation & Governance, 18
Discourse analysis and strategic policy advice: manoeuvring, navigating, and transforming policy
Gerring J. (2004)
What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?
American Political Science Review, 98
Wallis S. E. (2017)
What is Sustainable Theory? A Luhmannian Perspective on the Science of Conceptual Systems
Foundations of Science, 22
T. Dekker (2023)
Can the Finnish Way to Reduce Homelessness Work in Canada? The Limits of Power Resource Approaches in a Time of Economic Crisis
De Corte J. (2017)
Networks for Welfare Provision: Getting a Grip on Processes of Social Exclusion by Evaluating Network Effectiveness
Social Policy & Administration, 51
James T. E. (2009)
Policy Knowledge, Policy Formulation, and Change: Revisiting a Foundational Question
Policy Studies Journal, 37
Light P. C. (2016)
Vision + Action = Faithful Execution: Why Government Daydreams and How to Stop the Cascade of Breakdowns That Now Haunts It
Political Science & Politics, 49
M. Howlett (2011)
Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments
Turunen S. (2023)
Homelessness in Finland
Howlett M. (2015)
From Tools to Toolkits in Policy Design Studies: The New Design Orientation Towards Policy Formulation Research
Policy & Politics, 43
Van de Ven A. H. (2007)
Engaged Scholarship
R. K. Yin (2018)
Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods
Jackson M. C. (1995)
Beyond the Fads: Systems Thinking for Managers
Systems Research, 12
R. P. Lejano, S. J. Park (2015)
Handbook of Critical Policy Studies
R. K. Yin (2009)
Case Study Research
Linder S. H. (1989)
Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts
Journal of Public Policy, 9
Fitzpatrick S. (2014)
Welfare Regimes, Social Values and Homelessness: Comparing Responses to Marginalised Groups in six European countries
Housing Studies, 29
Building affordable homes: Challenges and solutions in the Nordic Region
Siddiki S. (2020)
Understanding and Analyzing Public Policy Design
N. Pleace, M. Knutagård, D. P. Culhane, R. Granfelt (2016)
Exploring Effective Systems Responses to Homelessness
Nelson G. (2019)
Systems Change in the Context of an Initiative to Scale up Housing First in Canada
Journal of Community Psychology, 47
D. Béland (2019)
How Ideas and Institutions Shape the Politics of Public Policy
J. W. Creswell (2013)
Qualitative Enquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches
M. Allen, L. Benjaminsen, E. O'Sullivan, N. Pleace (2020)
Ending Homelessness?: The Contrasting Experiences of Denmark, Finland and Ireland
Béland D. (2019)
How Ideas and Institutions Shape the Politics of Public Policy
Howlett M. (2018)
Designing for Robustness: Surprise, Agility and Improvisation in Policy Design
Policy and Society, 37
Ritzer G. (1990)
Metatheorizing in Sociology
Sociological Forum, 5
Wallis S. E. (2019)
The Missing Piece of the Integrative Studies Puzzle
Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 44
R. Granfelt (2003)
Vankilasta Kotiin Vai Kadulle? Vangit Kertovat Asunnottomuudesta, Suomen ympäristö 613 [Out of Prison and Back Home or on the Streets? Prisoners Describe Their Experience of Homelessness, Finnish Environment 613]
Yin R. K. (2013)
Validity and Generalization in Future Case Study Evaluations
Evaluation, 19
Trein P. (2021)
Policy Coordination and Integration: A Research Agenda
Public Administration Review, 81
C. Parsons (2007)
How to Map Arguments in Political Science

Publisher: Wiley
Copyright: © 2025 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
ISSN: 0144-5596
eISSN: 1467-9515
DOI: 10.1111/spol.13161
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Introduction: Successful Policy and Adding Novel PerspectiveHomelessness around the world can be seen as a complex problem that is very difficult to address. There are also multiple causes that contribute to homelessness or the risk of homelessness, including lack of affordable housing, unemployment, poverty, substance abuse and mental illness (Allegrante and Sleet 2021, 1). According to Foo et al. (2022), homelessness may be one of the toughest social concerns to address. However, the authors and studies around the world have pointed to the policy success of Finland in terms of dealing with homelessness, as Finland has successfully reduced homelessness rates and recently made global headlines (Bloone and Poulin 2021; Hancock 2022) declaring that the Finnish government is ‘eradicating’ homelessness by 2027. Finland has been steadily reducing their long‐term homelessness (Turunen and Granfelt 2023) through the introduction of four consecutive national homeless reduction policies, attributing their success to applying the Housing First strategy between 2008 and 2020. The policies are “The Programme to Reduce Long‐term Homelessness,” abbreviated as ‘PAAVO I’ (2008–2011) and ‘PAAVO II’ (2012–2015) from 2008 to 2015, The ‘Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland (AUNE here forth) 2016–2019’, and the Cooperation Programme to Halve Homelessness (2020–2022), where their success in combating homelessness is attributed to robust intergovernmental cooperation, consistent policies, and clear research indicating homelessness trends, successes, and failures (Dekker 2023, 14). The focus of this current study is primarily on the AUNE policy, 2016–2019.This exemplary national effort to tackle homelessness has motivated the country to solve the problem by 2027 (Y‐Foundation 2022). This remarkable ability to deal with homelessness in Finland puts Finland in an outlier category when it comes to homelessness, where based on their policies, there is a reduction in new entries into homelessness and effective dealing with preventing homelessness (Porchak et al. 2023).Drawing on this background, this paper is focused on analysing this AUNE 2016–2019 policy from a policy design‐as‐content perspective, responding to Siddiki's (2020) argument that despite the increasing value of thinking about policy design as content, theorising and research on policy is relatively limited. This is not a new phenomenon, as according to Weimer (1998, 182), ‘…scientists who study public policy tend to emphasise the process by which policies are made and implemented rather than the substantive content and impacts of policies themselves’. Reviewing various studies on Finland's homelessness policy, few studies focused, if at all, on the policy content and its relation to policy implementation, despite the fact that policy content is an important mediating factor in implementation outcomes (Lejano and Park 2015).Drawing on the development in the policy design literature, two analytical domains emerged. For ease of understanding and conceptual clarity, consider Siddiki's (2020, 1–2) heuristic: ‘policy design as formulation focuses on the choice of policy instruments, as well as the individual, societal and contextual factors that influence the instrument choice. For policy design as content, the focus is on the functional, structural, and substantive features of this content in which selected instruments are embedded’. The focus of the distinct conceptualisations is complementary with one focusing on the process of instrument selection to address a problem and second, studies the output of the process focusing on how policies are constructed and codified within the actual language in public policy. Siddiki (2022) suggests that understanding these topics can be leveraged towards the broader assessment of whether policies are or will be effective. Siddiki and Curley (2022, 122) suggested the need to develop approaches for valid and reliable measurement of policy design that can be used as a basis for drawing conceptual insights regarding information conveyed through policy language (Siddiki and Curley 2022, 122). The integrative propositional analysis (IPA) is proposed as such an approach.The paper utilises the IPA as a policy design‐as‐content method for studying policy designs. The paper draws on ‘structural logic’ as an abstractable unit of analysis by studying it as a conceptual system that, according to Wallis (2016), includes policies and policy models. The study is important in two ways. First, the IPA has been used in some studies (Shackelford 2014; de Wee 2020; de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022; Wright and Wallis 2019); however, they have been limited as they only studied parts of a policy (sample). These studies nevertheless provide proof of concept, and this work extends the work on the IPA and policy analysis, as Wallis and Valentinov (2017, 10) states that ‘the IPA is in the beginning stages as a methodology’ and that ‘it needs additional research to be generally accepted’. Second, it adds to the existing literature and extends it by proposing another tool for the analytical toolbox, as Siddiki's (2020) diagnostic research on policy conceived as such is relatively limited. Finally, the Finnish homelessness policy is an outlier case of policy success, and because of the emerging nature of the IPA and limited ‘successful’ policy, such a study has not been conducted (at this time).The paper is divided into six sections where in the first, policy design literature is reviewed to establish the analytical locus used for studying the AUNE policy; second, the chosen method, the IPA, is discussed for its ability to study policy content and measure the structural logic; third, the research methodological approach is discussed, followed by a description of the case, the description and analysis of the data; finally, the discussion including limitations, implications and future research is discussed with concluding remarks.Policy Design Conceptualised: Nature and Conceptual DivideIn the late 1980s, important debates took place in the policy sciences literature that had a great impact on policy design studies today. One of the key debates was that of Dryzek and Ripley (1988), who argued that those policies cannot be designed like a house or a piece of furniture. In a rebuttal, Linder and Peters (1989) made the case in the 1980s–1990s that the policy decision‐making process can be divorced from the abstract concept of policy design, just as architecture can be divorced from its engineering. This is important as it opened a new domain for scientific study in policy design studies, that of studying the policy content with rigour and valid methods, as called for by Siddiki and Curley (2022). Thus, Linder and Peters (1988, 742) suggested that once the concept of design is freed from the policy process, it ‘ceases to be a real‐time phenomenon’ and ‘becomes an activity directed towards the policy process but separated in time and even space’. From this idea, it can be deduced that policy design could be studied in two, but nested domains., The two co‐exist and co‐evolve as they have a nested relationship. This suggests that the study of policy design content should be used to help in the policy process to improve the policy, which in turn fulfils the historic mission of policy sciences to ‘improve the concrete content’ (Lasswell 1951, 3).In more recent conceptualisation, policy design can be both a ‘verb’, in the sense of a process of creating a policy configuration, and a ‘noun’, in the sense of an actual product or artefact (May 2003). Howlett et al. (2015) simplified this distinction by suggesting there was a shift from studying ‘designing’ (the process or verb) to the study of ‘designs themselves’ (content or noun) or design‐as‐formulation and design‐as‐content. Thus, policy design can now be studied in two analytical domains, and the two camps expanded the science over the next 30 decades, which was also the locus for this study.Policy design as content according to Schneider and Ingram (1997, 2) is the content or substance of the public policy, characterising it as ‘blueprints, architecture, discourses and aesthetics of policy in both its instrumental and symbolic form’. More literally, Ingram and Schneider and Ingram (1997) identified policy design here as wordy, formal texts in which they provided a list of these text‐based designed artefacts such as legislations, guidelines, pronouncements, court rulings, programmes and constitutions, which they also termed empirical examples of policies (Schneider and Ingram 1988). They argue that policy design has common elements ascribing who does what, when, why and how these elements have some ‘structural logic’ or what they referred to later as ‘structural logic’ that are found within these empirical documents/policy designs as content/substance (Schneider and Ingram 1988).Structural Logic: Identifying the Analytical LocusSiddiki (2020, 1–2) holds that in the domain of policy design‐as‐content, the focus is on the functional, structural, and substantive features of the content in which the selected instruments are embedded. This content is characterised in various ways in the literature, including having a structural logic, causal structure, or causal theory. Schneider and Ingram (1990, 68) defined structural logic as the ‘patterns through which policies address problems or seek to achieve goals’ and that ‘[j]ust as it is possible to diagram a sentence linking together the parts of speech, it is possible to diagram the structural logic of a policy by showing the relationships among these elements’. Cejudo and Michel (2016, 6) characterise policy content as having ‘causal theory that structures a policy, the internal coherence of policies (including)… logical connection and causal articulation between the definitions of the problem, the policy instruments and the expected solution’. An important deduction here is the idea that policy content exists out of some elements and their causal relations, which by definition can be seen as a system.Furthering this idea of ‘structural logic’, the concept of intra‐policy compatibility is used, which relates to the soundness of the structural logic embedded within policy design that links policy goals, targets, and instruments (Siddiki 2020). This compatibility concept explains how the structural logic in policy design reflects different relationships between the elements in the policy design. In earlier work, Siddiki (2018, 218) uses intra‐policy conflict, building on Schneider and Ingram (1993), referring to the incompatibility among instruments and goals embodied in policy design, where ‘intra‐policy conflict indicates that policy is design by an inappropriate causal logic’. This suggests that there is some interactive relationship between policy components from which the structural logic emerges, which affects implementation. For the operationalisation of these concepts, Siddiki (2018) suggests that policy maps can be built to investigate these interactions (of elements). Siddiki (2018, 221–222) strongly suggests that ‘policy mapping and interaction assessment should formally be incorporated as part of the policy analysis process’ by focusing specifically on ‘evaluating the causal assumption (logical connections between policy elements) underlying policies’. From a policy content/structural logic perspective, Siddiki (2018, 221–222) suggests that policy maps must be built where relations between the policy elements are studied, focusing on ‘policy mapping and interaction assessment’. She continues (Siddiki 2018, 222) that ‘policy analysis should formally incorporate evaluations of causal assumptions underlying policies’ so to ‘…ensure the validity of goals‐targets‐instrument relationships’. These important ideas are provided but with little clarity on how and or what tools/methods to be used to map the structural logic. As such, this paper adds to the literature by proposing the IPA because of its systems‐based foundations, which makes the mapping of policy content possible through studying the policy content itself as a system, a conceptual system.The different authors suggest that the content structure is important because it affects policy effectiveness, or is an important mediating factor for effective policy implementation with various role players (Lejano and Park 2015). Take, for example, the proposition by Siddiki (2018, 219) ‘policy effectiveness is predicated on the soundness of the policy's structural logic, as when it lacks integrity it tends to lead to policy failure’, and to some extent (Cejudo and Michel 2016; Wallis 2016). Similarly, Cejudo and Michel (2016) argue that consistency in causal theory fails, the policy loses effectiveness because implementation is based on false assumptions, as it does not coincide with reality. What is important here is that the structural logic can be mapped based on the relations between the elements, which, for this paper, opens up an analytical locus for policy analysis based on the structural logic of policies (with the focus on policy content). For the purpose of this paper, the unit of analysis (policy content) is called structural logic.Synthesising Some Policy Literature PerspectivesThe IPA method is proposed in this study, not to replace the existing policy scholarship in relation to homelessness or social policy in general. The purpose is to suggest a complementary tool to study the structural logic of policies and how it structures institutional and individual action among actors based on the way the policies are structured. For example, Béland (2019) and Béland and Powell (2016), focusing on institutions and ideas in social policy, can be seen as such a scholarly perspective. For example, drawing on Béland (2019) drawing on Parsons (2007, 13) discuss the structural and institutional explanations feature a logic‐of‐position that ‘explains by detailing the landscape around someone to show how an obstacle course of material or man‐made constraints and incentives channels her to certain actions’ (Parsons 2007, 13). Institutions are important for explaining this position and providing the landscape; however, the structural logic and the IPA methodological analysis help map this landscape to improve implementation with clear causal pathways between various aspects of the policy design. Fundamentally, the IPA analysis allows for the extraction of policy sentences/statements that convey policy actors, their prescribed interactions, and their actions, as well as lend understanding of the context in which these actions are occurring (Siddiki and Frantz 2024). Motivation for combining this line of research with other existing social policy scholarship, is the interest in explaining how the policy content structure the action or implementation situation, including delineating actor roles and responsibilities, prescribed action and finally how help explain how the complexity embedded in the policy text manifest in implementation, which is also compatible with actor‐network theory that is often used in social policy and governance (Määttä and Eriksson 2015; De Corte et al. 2017). The structural logic also assists in extracting and explaining the institutional arrangements, with potential insights to construct and improve policy coordination in the multi‐level network governance systems (de Wee 2024)—contributing to the logic‐of‐position and logic‐of‐interpretation (Parsons 2007). This current study also, in part, answers an important question in how we can structure the content of policy optimally pertain to actors and activities (policy targets, target populations, instruments and tool calibration; Howlett et al. 2023, 3). This is an often understudied perspective to which this current study attempts to fill the gap.Ideational analysis, which focuses on policy ideas of individual and collective actors, helps in explaining the agency of social and political actors in shaping ideas and discourse (Béland 2019). This is important as it is linked to the idea of policy paradigm1 (Hall 1993) or overarching goal, which in the case of the Finland homelessness policy shifted from ‘managing’ homelessness to ‘eliminating’ it; it became a core value embedded in a human rights' perspective (Pleace et al. 2016). These ideas are set in the agenda‐setting process, from which policies are developed as institutions as a product of power struggles (Campbell 2004, 1; Béland 2019). These have been fairly consistent in Finland as policy ideas and can be seen as being partly dependent since the inception of the national policies in 2007 (Pleace 2017)—enjoying political commitment and stability. The IPA focusing on the causal pathways in the structural logic extends the analysis to also focus not only on the power dynamics, which are important, but also the data quality on which these ‘causal theories’ or policy solutions are built, suggesting a more objective perspective to what constitutes a good social policy design. To analyse the structural logic, the IPA method is proposed for studying the policy content as conceptual systems.IPA Method for Analysing Conceptual SystemsWallis (2016, 579) defines conceptual systems as ‘any form…policy model, model, mental model, policy’. Each of these systems can be defined as a set of interrelated propositions (Weick 1989), which can be seen as ‘a declarative sentence expressing a relationship among some terms’ (Van de Ven 2007, 117). All policy documents are composed of policy statements characterised by propositions; it is possible to analytically map all policies based on their propositional statements (policy directives) and determine their structural logic. What is important to note here is that the concepts can be any of the attributes outlined in Appendix 3 and their relations. Policy designs as conceptual systems have been studied in various public policy cases over the past decade (Wallis 2011; Wallis 2013; Shackelford 2014; de Wee 2020; Wright and Wallis 2019; de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022; de Wee 2022).The IPA is a six‐step process for ‘deconstructing’ conceptual systems (in this case, policy designs) into their causal propositions, mapping those relations, and then evaluating the structure of the internal coherence of the map. In the method, we quantify and diagram the structural logic of the conceptual system and find links between the measure (percentage providing a predictor) of the policy structure and its effectiveness in the real world (de Wee 2022). The structure is expressed as a percentage and proved as a predictor for the effectiveness of the conceptual system/model.Methodologically, the IPA measures the structure of conceptual systems' text found in policy documents in a six‐step process (Wallis 2016):Identify the propositions (sentences declaring relationships between variables) within a document.Diagram the causal relationships between the concepts within the propositions.Synthesise those smaller diagrams where they contain the same or very similar concepts to create a larger, integrated diagram.Count the total number of concepts to determine the breadth of the plan (or another document) (simple complexity, by enumerating the concepts).Identify and count the ‘transformative/concatenated’ concepts (defined as those where two or more arrows are pointing towards the concept).Calculate the depth (structure) of the plan by dividing the number of transformative concepts by the total number of concepts (systemicity)The argument of this paper is that systemicity can be used as a measure for both internal coherence and structural logic, based on the IPA, as Wallis (2016) argues that in general, conceptual systems with a higher level of structure are more useful for practical application and implementation (Wallis 2016). ‘…there is a correlation between the quantifiable structure of a policy and the effectiveness that policy in practical application’ (Wallis 2011, 14). This proposition by Wallis is important as it coincides with the propositions posited by Siddiki (2018) and Cejudo and Michel (2016) that the structural logic or internal coherence is important for policy effectiveness.For example, steps 5 and 6 indicate two of the measures. Complexity is the conceptual ‘breath’ of a policy, and systemicity is the measure of ‘depth’ or structure of a policy, which is measured on a scale of 0 to 1 with one being the highest (Wallis and Valentinov 2017, 109). Zero is the least coherent and 1 is the most coherent/structured, according to Wallis (2019).Methodological ApproachThe interpretivist paradigm was key for this study, and this research paradigm also influenced adoption of the qualitative research methodology, as Jackson (1995, 7) argues, ‘qualitative methods are generally supported by the interpretivist paradigm, which portray a world in which reality is socially constructed, complex, and ever changing’. A case study approach was used focusing specifically on Finland's Homelessness policy between 2016 and 2019. A case study can be defined as ‘an in‐depth inquiry into a specific and complex phenomenon (the ‘case’), set within its real‐world context’ (R. K. Yin 2013, 321). Gerring (2004, 341–342) continues that a case study is an ‘in‐depth study of a single unit… that is relatively bounded’, such as the Finnish homelessness policy in this case. Furthermore, Yin (2018, 2) suggests that case studies are relevant for studying complex social phenomena and ‘allows investigator to retail holistic and meaningful characteristics of real‐life events’. The importance of the case study is that it enables in‐depth study and analysis of a phenomenon, which in this case was important.Data CollectionThe qualitative approach also uses various techniques to collect the data, ‘including focus groups… document analysis’ (R. K. Yin 2009, 11; Creswell 2013, 105). Document analysis was selected as a data gathering method, which is a qualitative methodology (Cloete 2007, 513) where documents are seen as social facts presented in a socially organised way (Atkinson and Coffey 1997). According to Auriacombe (2016, 12), document analysis is an unobtrusive research method/measure, which is ‘any method of data collection that directly removes the researcher from the interactions, events, or behaviour being investigated’. Auriacombe (2016) continues that, in this type of data collection, the researcher is unaware of the formation of the data and has little chance of manipulating it. For this study, document analysis is used because documents are easily accessible and very cost‐effective, relatively comprehensive allowing for in‐depth analysis. However, despite its practicality and convenience, there are limitations, including that they focus on one of many aspects of the complex policy process (Petek et al. 2022, 722). Document selection was executed using different secondary data sources, including primary sources such as implementation reports and annual progress reports (official documents) and also grey literature in the form of newspaper articles and opinions, and academic articles and book(s) or chapters, which were very rich in the search. The documents used in the analysis are all stored separately in the references list.Data AnalysisFirst, the AUNE policy was downloaded freely from the Finnish Ministry of Environment website; thereafter, the IPA analysis was applied, the policy was mapped and measured (see Figure 1). Thereafter, the official documents, grey literature, and scientific documents (articles, book chapters, etc.) were analysed to measure the implementation outcomes against the structural logic of the policy. This started with the brief history of homelessness and homelessness policy in Finland, followed by the analysis of the AUNE policy and the implementation outcomes of the policy.1FIGUREFinland Homelessness Policy Map. Source: ARA (2023, 16).Case Study: A Brief Contextualisation of Finnish Homelessness and Homelessness PolicyBrief History of Finnish HomelessnessHistorically, Finland has had a homelessness problem specifically after the war between Finland and the Soviet Union in particular as many veterans migrated to big cities (Helsinki) for potential employment opportunities. Additionally, in the territories ceded to the Soviet Union, people from these territories looked for homes in Finland, from which they had originally. In the 1960s, most homelessness was associated with unemployment and alcoholism and in the winter of 1967, almost 50 alcoholics died due to sub‐zero temperatures at night (Tainio and Fredriksson 2009, 185). This triggered ‘…action, and since then homelessness policy has been built as part of the national housing policy and programme’ (Saari 2015, 135, in Pulliainen 2021). The history of the policy can be traced more accurately after the introduction of a new paragraph in the Finnish Constitution, section 19 stating ‘it is the right task of public authorities to promote the right of everyone to housing and to the opportunity to arrange their own housing’ (Tainio and Fredriksson 2009, 185). This meant that the state and the local authorities have an obligation to take active measures to ensure that the civil right to a home is implemented (Timonen 1997, 33).Since the 1980s, two models have been used to address homelessness, the first was the staircase model, which required a demonstration of social acceptability and abstinence from intoxicants, the ‘treatment first’ methodology, before you can be assisted with a house (Pleace 2016). Using this staircase model, Pleace (2016, 15) found that it was ‘nearly impossible for a homeless individual with complex problems’ to receive housing, because of the difficulty getting through the treatment first process. The second, the housing first model was predicated on the idea that ‘…homelessness is addressed through non‐judgemental services, housing is separated from support, which means housing is not conditional on compliance with a treatment plan’ (Tsemberis 2011, 5). ‘In the Housing First model, a dwelling is not a reward that a homeless person receives once their life is back on track. Instead, a dwelling is the foundation on which the rest of life is put back together’ (Y‐Foundation 2017, 10). However, Finland's HF model is not like other countries (Pleace et al. 2015; Allen et al. 2020), as it is a systems‐led approach that moved beyond that of the North American model. The Finnish model provides people with high, and complex needs the choice to live how they want in their own homes. It provides flexible services which provide support through a mix of support for people threatened by homelessness, which are well integrated with homelessness, health, and other services. The policy is seen as an ‘integrated homelessness strategy’ that focusses on improving the supply of housing and services for people with complex needs; increasing work activities and meaningful everyday activities; more emphasis on prevention, the early identification of risks of homelessness and securing housing; the better integration of substance abuse, mental health, healthcare and housing services. These services are developed to tackle long‐term homelessness and through emphasising homelessness prevention and hidden homelessness (Pleace et al. 2015). Many authors suggest that the Finnish Housing First principle moves beyond the core principles of HF in other countries and suggest that the original feature (Housing First 2.0) is the foremost sign of success (Pleace et al. 2016, 431–434; Pleace 2019, 8; Allen et al. 2020). The various services with the housing‐led approach, which is fundamentally consumer‐centred, increase the probability to deal with the complexity of homelessness itself, which can be affected by various issues as outlined by Karppinen (2020, 8), which include employment, unstable employee relations, mental health challenges, socio‐economic and other intergenerational disadvantages. However, it is still the HF principle that was the cause of success in Finland.Background of Homelessness PolicyIn the early 2000s, policies were developed to deal with the high level of long‐term homelessness, based on the Name on the Door report that laid the foundations for the2 policies (Pitkäaikaisasunnottomuuden vähentämisohjelma) PAAVO I and II (Pleace et al. 2011, 430). The Constitution gave birth to two homelessness policies that developed from the ‘Name on the Door’ report from the Four Wise Men group and were implemented from 2008 to 2015 called PAAVO I and II. The core of PAAVO 1, 2008–2011, was to allocate services and safe independent housing solutions to long‐term homeless people with appropriate and tailored support (Fredriksson and Kaakinen 2018, 118). The aims for Paavo II, 2012–2015, were to eliminate long‐term homelessness by 2015 and to reduce the risk of homelessness by increasing social rental stock more efficiently to prevent homelessness and supporting scattered housing alternatives (those who receive housing individually within the country as opposed to communal where various people shared, for example, blocks of apartments) and providing appropriate floating support (Pleace et al. 2015, 20).The outcomes based on an international evaluation of the homelessness programme found good and successful outcomes. On long‐term homelessness, there was a downward movement, according to the annual count finding of 2628 long‐term homeless people in 2012 (end of 175 Paavo I) to 2047 in 2016, which was a 23% drop (ARA 2016). Between 2008 and 2015, the number of long‐term homeless people decreased by almost 1200 (Pleace et al. 2015), which is significant in dealing with the protracted issue of long‐term homelessness. According to ARA (2015, 2), post‐Paavo I and II programmes, homelessness was at 6785 homeless persons who lived alone, and 424 families, of which 54% were immigrants with a total of 437 children in these immigrant families.The Case of Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness (AUNE) 2016–2019The Action Plan builds on the Paavo programmes and draws on the results of the international review of Pleace et al. (2015). This was the third strategy called ‘Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness’ or AUNE, which began during spring 2016–2019. The objective of the policy is to ‘link the work of homelessness more extensively to the whole of the work on preventing social exclusion based on the HF principle’ (AUNE 2016, 3). Practically, this means ensuring that housing is secured whenever a client is met in the system (AUNE 2016). The plan describes the target group as a broad range of people for whom a comprehensive set of programmes is outlined in the policy, with the goal to reduce homelessness by ‘strengthening the prevention of homelessness and preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ (AUNE 2016, 4). This includes an increase in affordable housing supply and to construct 2500 new housing units, both ordinary and support housing units (AUNE 2016, 4). The policy is divided into various programmes to address the homelessness problem which can be categorised into ‘preventing homelessness’ and ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’.Preventing HomelessnessUnder preventing homelessness, the policy aims to increase the production of reasonably priced houses and diversifying the housing available for the homeless by building 2500 new dwellings and provide rental housing stock supported by the state with various housing opportunities for the youth, students and asylum seekers who have received a residence permit (AUNE 2016). This together with support systems designed to ensure transitions between reception centres and housing do not raise the potential risk of migrants—with residence permits—becoming homeless. Cities participating (10 signatories at the time) in the Action Plan are required to have a strategy in place by 2017, including preventative services, the use of affordable housing stock and plans for the use of Housing First and other support services. It is noted that services will need to include what are termed ‘location‐specific special measures’ to prevent homelessness and recurrent homelessness, which means cities' plans should reflect any local issues and challenges (AUNE 2016, 5).There will also be a focus on preventing eviction, with a specific concern to prevent eviction among younger people (aged under 25) and the use of ‘Pienlaina’, which are small loans, intended to prevent low‐income households being overwhelmed by debt (Pleace 2017, 104). This will work in combination with existing social lending by the municipalities, enabling debt management to prevent eviction for financial reasons. A history of rent arrears, where debts are comparatively minor and a repayment plan is in place, should not be a barrier to accessing housing. According to the Action Plan, new agreements and existing working arrangements are being put in place to reduce the challenge of debt as a barrier. A new project, ‘Riskivakuutus’ (risk insurance), led by the Ministry of the Environment, will enable the provision of cover similar to household insurance, for people who have lost their credit rating (Pleace 2017, 104). The aim is not to overburden people so that it becomes a threat to losing their house because of financial difficulties and access to housing is also made easier for those who have lost their credit rating.The AUNE (2016, 7) also makes provision for the strengthening and extending ‘housing guidance’ (the Finnish term for housing advice services), including making housing guidance available to low threshold services, which are designed to be accessible to groups like vulnerable young people, who may be intimidated or find it challenging to seek help from mainstream services. There will also be a focus on preventing eviction, with a specific concern to prevent eviction among younger people (aged under 25) and the use of ‘Pienlaina’, which are small loans (Pleace 2017). Housing guidance also provides service points with low threshold, such as the services for young people, immigrants, mental health or substance abuse issues and provides support services. In addition, the transition of ‘risk groups’ (transitioning from institutional settings such as long‐stay hospitals, psychiatric wards and facilities and prisons) from institutions or housing services to independent housing is secured, with various interagency social workers putting service packages together, with various support or peer work. This is intended to promote ‘seamless’ coordination between drug/alcohol, mental health, housing and housing guidance services (Pleace 2017, 104).Preventing the Recurrence of HomelessnessThe Finnish Government estimates an attrition rate of between 5% and 10% from existing homelessness services, that is, up to 10% of people having contact with current services may not exit homelessness on a sustainable basis (AUNE 2016). To make sure that there is successful transition, various ACT teams are used with the help of experts by experience (people who were formerly homeless, feature quite heavily in the Action Plan). Their role includes consultation about how services should be designed and run using a direct peer support approach (AUNE 2016). Programmes include the aim to have a comprehensive availability of housing services that allow the use of intoxicants, as well as abstinent housing services; the employment of formerly homeless people is supported. This is achieved through education and employment services focused on formerly homeless people, including provision of work‐related and ‘meaningful’ activities (an example would be using art‐based projects as a means of learning about structure and working with others) will also be promoted (Pleace 2017).There are other innovative programmes such as the ‘pienet tuvat’, which is small homes experiment providing a permanent, small, congregate home, with on‐site staffing, which may suit the 10%–20% of homeless people with high and complex needs, for whom Housing First can be unsuccessful (Pleace 2016). An emergency accommodation service for young people in Helsinki that will triage young people into appropriate support and housing services is also being developed (AUNE 2016, 11; Pleace 2017, 105).Political Will and Inter‐Agency GovernanceIn terms of the governance of the policy, a budget of €78 million was announced and secured, of which €24 million was allocated to service development and the rest for housing supply (AUNE 2016). Finland also has a high level of investment in social housing, both in a financial and political sense, which is not widespread in Europe (Pleace 2017, 170). There was strong political will in the application of the HF approach, and it had support from various cities that signed agreements as partners in the implementation of the policy. There are also a large number of actors and several sources of funding that can be seen throughout the policy and which spell out which agencies are involved in each aspect of this phase of the homelessness strategy, including the lead agency or agencies in each aspect of service planning and delivery (Pleace 2017). These programmes are built on joint development with the aim that all projects interact with each other and strengthen each other in solving problems (AUNE 2016, 12). The delivery is based on a series of formal agreements between the cities, municipalities and various governmental, quasi‐governmental and non‐governmental agencies. These agreements spell out what is required from each party, ensuring there is clear involvement from the required parties and that there is consistency across Finland (Pleace 2017). A key actor was the Y‐Foundation, and generally, the programmes were ‘a showcase of wide partnership and collaboration between several state authorities, ministries, cities, and NGOs both on local and national levels’ (Kaakinen and Turunen 2021, 46). According to Pleace et al. (2016, 437), the strategy for homelessness is highly coordinated, it has clear, logical goals and a mix of prevention and other support services.Overall, the policies desired outcome was to (1) reduce homelessness by reducing the number of homeless persons; (2) reform the service system so that it is more preventative and customer‐centred, by changing social welfare laws and practices; and finally, (3) achieve cost savings by homelessness prevention and by ending long‐term homelessness. Rather than using these savings to lessen public expenditure on homelessness—which is very much the agenda in countries like the United Kingdom or the United States—the Action Plan requires any savings to be invested in the expansion of preventative services (AUNE 2016; Pleace 2017).Data Description and Analysis: Policy Structural Logic and Implementation OutcomesAppendix 1 of this paper outlines the methodological process or application of the IPA for the analysis of the AUNE policy. There are 39 concepts (counting the total numbers in Figure 1); this is the first measure of the IPA, which is complexity. This indicates that the policy has a complexity of 39, which includes a conceptual representation of the various programmes, policy instruments, objectives involved in the policy and how they are meant to interact causally. The complexity is important as it provides the lens through which the various stakeholders involved in the implementation understand the problem and the possible solutions, the organisation of the various programmes and how it will decrease homelessness. However, the important measure is structure.There are 14 transformative or concatenated concepts (orange circles in Figure 1); therefore, 14 concatenated/transformative concepts divided by 39 (complexity) indexes a systemicity (structure) of 0.36, which is 36% structure of the elements in the policy. However, the structure could have been even higher if the IPA had been applied to supporting documents of the AUNE policy. Comparatively, studies analysing various policies using the IPA generally fall on the scale of 0.25 or below in the past decade (Wallis 2011, 2013; Shackelford 2014; de Wee 2020, 2024; de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022). This indicates that the AUNE policy has a higher structural logic, based on the systemicity index, of 0.11 or 11%. The policy was 15 pages long, and the entire policy was subjected to analysis (unlike in previous studies). There is a higher level of interaction between various concepts in the policy, and a higher level of structure indicates that there are more concepts with more than one arrow pointed to it, indicating a higher level of system based on the various interactions conceptually. de Wee (2024) found that the Scottish Alcohol policy, 2018, had a high complexity (more concepts) but very few causal relations between them; thus, the lower structure at the conceptual situation resulted in fragmented programmes and implementation among various agencies and policy instruments. In contrast, the higher level of structure as presented in this case is representative of the more integrated systemic implementation in the action situation. The AUNE is described as an ‘integrated homelessness strategy’ (Pleace et al. 2015) and is also seen empirically in the implementation of the policy. However, at the time of writing this paper, few studies have reported a policy with a structure higher than the AUNE policy; as such, outcomes might not be perfect but are scored among the better or successful policies as reported by de La Porte et al. (2022).In the policy map, it is also clear that most arrows focus on the concept ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ (13 arrows), ‘prevention of homelessness’ (9 arrows) and ‘reduction of homelessness’ (7 arrows). First, these concepts are the objectives/goals of this policy, which are the ‘macro level statements of government aims’ (Howlett 2011, 17) of which, the objectives are to operationalise these goals (Howlett et al. 2023, 4). The majority of the concepts pointing to these concepts are the ‘specific on the ground’, micro‐requirements necessary to attain policy objectives (Howlett 2011, 17) with ‘policy specification are actual targets expected to be achieved’ (Howlett et al. 2023, 4). The mapping of the policy indicates a structure that has its density around the key objectives of the policy, which is to prevent and reduce homeless in Finland. This suggests that the routes towards decreasing homelessness or achieving the goals and objectives in this policy were clearly articulated in the policy, with multiple causality pointing towards it (de Wee and Asmah‐Andoh 2022; Siddiki 2020).The identified propositions and their causal relations were placed in an Excel workbook. Two worksheets were opened, the first was all the elements (or concepts as identified in the policy), and the second was the connections sheet that had the causal relations between the concepts. Take the proposition in step 1, for example, ‘financial issues’ would have been placed under the label ‘From’ and ‘new people becoming homeless’ placed under ‘To’. Thereafter, the ‘Type’ of connection would be ‘causes more’ or a ‘+’ symbol to indicate the (see Appendix 2). This was a template provided by Dr. Steven E. Wallis.For a higher pixel and more readable view, click on the link below, which is the software on which the map was generated. https://kumu.io/Guswn/preventing‐homelessness‐in‐finland‐2016‐2019‐map.Structural Logic and the Implementation OutcomesTheoretically, according to the policy, this should provide effective outcomes to achieve the goals. The IPA and the structural analysis allow for deeper investigation into how well the instruments or measures worked in the real world (implementation outcomes). From the implementation data, what is clear from Figure 2 is that homelessness in general decreased, specifically looking at the studied time of this case study, between 2016 and 2019. The data used in this evaluation was from 2016 to 2019; however, previous and later reports were also used in the context section of this case study.2FIGUREDevelopment of forms of homelessness 1986–2023.Based on Figure 2 and Table 1 below, generally, homelessness has decreased between 2016 and 2019, from around 6650 living alone in 2016, 2050 in long‐term homelessness, and 325 homeless families (ARA 2016, 3). In 2019, those living alone were 4600, and long‐term homelessness specifically fell to 961 (ARA 2019, 4). What is clear from the data is that homelessness in general and long‐term homelessness, in particular, decreased, which was an important goal in the preventative nature of the AUNE 2016–2019 policy.1TABLEHomelessness in the whole country between 2016 and 2019.YearOutside, in staircases, shelters, etc.In hostels, boarding housesIn housing service units, hospitals or other institutionsTemporarily with friends or relativesTotalLongterm homelessnessChange in long term2016425331433545566442047−2042017415244482552866151893−1542018a238158297232630631161−732201973942931231204600961−200aNo data available on the form of homelessness: 822. In 2018, the City of Helsinki specified its methods of collecting homelessness statistics, which reduced homelessness in Helsinki. Due to this change, the numbers are not comparable to previous years (ARA 2023, 28).Source: Author's compilation.Quantitatively, in the studied time, 2016–2019, the programme also looked at specific groups that were homeless under the various types of homelessness, which gives more context to Figure 1. For example, according to ARA (2016, 3), the number of women who were homeless increased by 60 people, including those in long‐term homelessness, but there was a decrease of 186 individuals among the youth (people 25 years or younger). In 2017, there were 6615 people who lived alone and 214 homeless families, which was a decrease of 111 from 2016. Long‐term homeless people decreased by 154 people, which took long‐term homelessness to 1893 (ARA 2017, 4). The number of women and the number of immigrants increased. The report also indicated for the first time a breakdown of the family situation and found that 123 families are headed by single‐parent families, which is 77.4% of homeless families. From this percentage, 123 of the single‐headed families, 45.9% were people with immigrant backgrounds (ARA 2018, 6). 2018 was also the first year where a new category, the first category added of homeless people with ‘no information available on the form of homelessness’ (the blue bar in Figure 2). The data suggests that there was generally a downward trend in homelessness in Finland, and the different groups experiencing different types of homelessness were generally decreasing. However, a change is also seen between 2017 and 2019, where the category of ‘outside, in stairwells, shelters, dormitories, etc.’ increased (pink bar). This is due to the fact that, in 2018, the Helsinki Metropolitan Area changed the way homelessness is recorded (defined), and because it covers a significant part of the homeless figures in the whole country, there is a new category of ‘no data available’. The data, however, are mainly self‐reporting, and the changes in the number of people shifting to other categories of homelessness were reported. There is therefore a bi‐directional change in the two types of homelessness (ARA 2023, 18). There were some changes in the various groups experiencing homelessness between 2016 and 2019; however, it is also worth noting that the changes in statistics of Helsinki also had an impact on these figures. The general trend, however, indicates a downward trend in these various groups.Drawing on Tables 1 and 2, and additional statistics in the years post‐implementation of the official policy and introduction of the subsequent policy, homelessness seems to be continually decreasing. There was a further decrease to 4100 people in 2021 (a reduction of over 77% since 1989) (ARA 2023). Based on the data reported by municipalities, long‐term homelessness decreased by about 70% between 2008 and 2023 (ARA 2023, 6). For those living outdoors, in temporary shelters and dormitories, the decrease since 2008 is 68%, in institutions 77%, temporarily with relatives and acquaintances 47% and for families 45%. Among the homeless groups, the largest decreases have been among homeless women (40%) and young people under 25 (38%). The number of homeless immigrants has doubled since 2008, but it has fallen since 2015. In 2022, there were 621 homeless immigrants, which is a reduction of 99 from 2021 (ARA 2023). The policy outcomes suggest a positive decline towards eradicating homelessness in Finland, with a focus on immigrants and women. However, there seems to be a slight increase in the category outside, in stairwells and so on (pink bar), and people in housing service units, hospitals, and institutions. It indicates a shift in the ‘types’ of homelessness but no change in the overall or general outcomes.2TABLEHomelessness by group between 2016 and 2019.YearWomenUnder 25 years of ageImmigrantFamilies201615541399180432520171538158517422142018124210011159264201911908501096264Source: Author's compilation.Policy Interaction Assessment and Implementation OutcomesQualitatively, one can also evaluate various propositions or policy statements from the map and evaluate them based on the implementation outcome—the policy interaction assessment. This is to walk the reader through the key clusters and causal pathways in Figure 1 as part of the analysis. The central idea is that the policy statements/propositions are written to construct new situations or existing action situations, and they may correspond to an observable action situation/implementation. These observable actions or outputs serve as measurable results produced by the public policy, which links the public policy to the desired outcomes and serves as a proxy indicator for the outcome (de Wee 2024, 184). In the map, most arrows cluster around the concepts ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’, ‘prevention of homelessness’ and ‘reduction of homelessness’. These are the central goals/objectives of the policy. The various ‘grey’ circles or concepts are the more ‘on‐the‐ground’ projects and programmes implemented by the various role players.There are various instruments/measures (programmes) that were calibrated and used to achieve these outcomes. However, first from these statistics in Figure 2, it can be argued that the goal of the policy has been achieved. During the implementation of this policy, long‐term homelessness decreased from 2050 in 2016 to 961 in 2019, which was 53% over the 3 years. This, in terms of policy implementation outcomes, was well over the average of what policies generally obtain, which is usually 20% (Light 2016). This is in line with the outcomes of the policy based on its structural logic, which is over the general 0.25 score in previous studies, and is 0.36 in this case, which correlates with an increase in structure and an increase in implementation outcomes.The policy was very focused on the targets, which the AUNE (2016, 2) defines as ‘the target group of the programme includes people who have recently become homeless and those who have been homeless for a long period, as well as people at risk of becoming homeless’. As per AUNE, the definition extends to explain who these different groups are. Another important aspect of the AUNE (2016, 5) is that those responsible for achieving a certain measure as per the policy are clearly outlined as the ‘responsible parties’. This helps with the coordination of the policy, which is an important policy capacity in the current complex governance systems (Howlett et al. 2015). In the AUNE case, a network of relationships between various stakeholders in the governance emerged and was very successful with efforts from the Y‐Foundation, the Ministry of the Environment, ARA, local municipalities and the private sector. The network governance model was also sustained by strong political commitment from the politicians, who created the local networks and other partners, which helped eliminate homelessness. The key here is that the various role players, interagency governance, were all clearly spelt out in the policy, which also enhanced transparent and accountable governance relations.In the policy, as captured in the policy map, there was a proposition or policy statement stating, ‘significant investment in new construction and renovations’ causes more ‘reduction of homelessness’. Various sources report that 2142 new dwellings were delivered, which exceeds the intended targets by a couple of hundred (Karppinen 2020, 26; ARA 2020). In Hyvinkaa municipality, for example, they stated that ‘(they) constructed new places where people can stay’ (ARA 2018, 10).In the AUNE (2016, 10), to prevent the recurrence of homelessness and as seen on the map, ‘expertise of fields is combined in a new way into a comprehensive service package brought into the home (ACT teams or mobile services)’. In an evaluative study by Ranta and Juhila (2020, 698), focusing on clients–worker interaction, they found that among those using drugs, providing a flat alone did not solve recurrent homelessness. Rather, it was in the ‘joint construction of a sense of home… was important to prevent homelessness’. In line with the literature on HF, in which Tsemberis (2011) provides early insights and later Granfelt (2003), without such services as outlined above, there will always be an increase in the risk for the recurrence of homelessness. Another important aspect for preventing the recurrence of homelessness was as per the map, ‘other preventative support services the utilisation of experts‐by‐experience’ (AUNE 2016, 5). The findings of Meriluoto (2018) found that experts‐by‐experience were crucial and necessary as they held key information that was useful for designing better function services and helped with the co‐creation and refined knowledge. This helped with policy relevance added to the representativeness. This measure can also be seen as a policy feedback mechanism built into the policy, as those who are assisted and out of homelessness are used to improve and help implement the current or new policy.Housing guidance, which according to the map, was important for ‘prevention of homelessness’. According to the ARA (2019), housing advice services and housing social work were expanded, which is in line with the policy suggesting ‘personnel increase’ (AUNE 2016, 2). The ARA (2018, 12) reports that budget was provided for housing advice and aid for 26 projects, of which 54 new housing projects were hired across Finland. The effectiveness of these services is also seen in Karppinen (2020, 6) as, by the end of 2019, there were 92 housing advisors who had significant output, and, as a result, in 2019, 5438 interventions to stop evictions were made. The AUNE 2016–2019 by The Ministry of the Environment (2019) found that compared to the 31% evictions implemented between 2012 and 2015, only 17% of evictions were implemented during the AUNE programme. Additionally, housing advice services for immigrants were established.The proposition for ‘city specific monitoring of evictions’, which is also important for ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ has proven to be effective in the implementation, state‐subsidised housing was provided, which in 2019, was around 7500 units (Tunström et al. 2020, 28–29). A comprehensive allowance system was also provided, which covered about 80% of the housing cost for low‐income households (Social Insurance Institution of Finland Kela 2019). This helped those struggling financially not to be evicted based on outstanding arrears, which, in turn, prevented recurring homelessness or prevented homelessness.For those with bad credit scores, who had the risk of not getting access to housing, there were measures used to achieve the proposition, ‘access to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit rating’. For example, Koivisto (2019) found that the Guarantee Foundation prevented low‐income households from being overburdened with debt and offered them solutions for risk insurance, which was equivalent to home insurance for those with no clean credit. This is seen in propositions, namely, ‘risk insurance and management for those who lost their credit score’, which causes more ‘access to housing made easier’ as seen in the structural logic of the policy. Furthermore, the proposition of ‘small loan model (Guarantee Foundation) causes more ‘preventing the recurrence of homelessness’ was also achieved. According to the report by AUNE (2016, 10), ‘the programme helped prevent homelessness caused by financial problems’. There were, however, still challenges surrounding affordable housing.In the final analysis, (1) the policy can be seen to be successful as it achieved its desired outcomes with a reduction in homelessness and (2) ‘reform the service system that it is more preventative and customer‐centred by changing the social welfare laws and practices’ (AUNE 2016). In 2002, the Social Welfare Act (2022/790) was amended, which defines short‐term housing, emergency services, supported housing, community housing and Article 46c of the Act contains additional provisions on the organisation of community housing and round‐the‐clock service housing in the same building complex. The legislation further broadens and includes different housing types and mandates all governments to implement these directives as legislation. The third was to achieve cost saving, by preventing homelessness, this has been achieved, as can see on the map (Figure 2) there is a feedback loop developing between ‘allocating the savings achieved by management of homelessness’ ➔ + ‘preventing of homelessness’ ➔ + ‘reducing the need for corrective work’ + ➔ + ‘cost savings’ which again goes to allocating the savings… The loop as outlined conceptually, is effectively achieved in implementation, where cost saving has been achieved as according to ARA (2020) during the AUNE, at least €19.5 million was saved annually from the reduction in homelessness numbers. Additionally, €16.4 million was saved annually by decreasing long‐term homelessness.Implementation ChallengesIn the implementation process, one of the key challenges has been the lack of affordable rental apartments in the cities, which according to Kewoh‐Vainio (2022), also impacts the lives of asylum seekers and immigrants making them vulnerable to poverty and homelessness. This issue also transcends the different groups of homeless people, and Hyötyläinen (2019, 60) suggests that the housing policy of Finland ‘has not been able to intervene enough to curb the increases in the cost of housing’. From a structural perspective, interesting insight emerges as when the propositions were clear in the success aspects of the policy, as discussed, they had multiple arrows pointing towards that particular concept. However, the structure shows the proposition (more) ‘reasonable priced housing in all of the large urban areas’ will cause more ‘reduction of homelessness’. The problem, however, was that there were no causal arrows or connections towards the concept ‘reasonable priced housing in all of the larger urban areas’.Another challenge was unemployment and its impact on the sustainability of homelessness. In the new UURAS programme (2018–2020), the policy aims to help find employment, by providing employment for at least 2000 homeless people (Y‐Foundation 2019). This was also not something visible or explicit in the AUNE (2016) policy except the concept, ‘support participation of homeless people to improve their ability to find employment’. In the new policy, this is much more explicit, which shows again the prowess of the Finnish government to update their policy from a systems perspective to move back to equilibrium after not being able to address these issues in the AUNE policy.Another project in the new policy is to specifically consider and highlight female homelessness. As seen in the data, homelessness among females varies and has no clear trajectory. The new project, Naiserityisyys asunnottomuustyössä (Specificity of women in homelessness) project (2018–2020), is to make female homelessness more visible on the political agenda and to eliminate female homelessness (Y‐Foundation 2019). Again, female homelessness is not very explicit in the AUNE (2016) policy and is just referred to in the policy as ‘woman clients… need valuable skills, particularly one‐on‐one conversations, support in learning everyday life and domestic skills and taking advantage of the competences and talents obscured by the problems’. (AUNE 2016, 3). In the initial development of the AUNE, the policy did not speak specifically to how this segment of the population would be addressed as a target population. A reading of Figure 1, the map indicates no clear causal relations or concepts dealing with ‘women’ specifically, and as suggested immigrant women are more vulnerable to homelessness. Conceptually, this is absent in the policy (AUNE) and seems to be neglected in implementation.Discussion: Insights From the Structural LogicStructure and ComplexityThe Finland case showed higher structure, meaning more causal arrows creating the system (integrated homelessness strategy as conceptual situation/system on paper) and providing a deeply contextualised representation of the complex homelessness problem and possible solutions. However, the Finnish homelessness policy case also had shortcomings, which could be ascribed from a systems perspective to the lack of complexity (policy is only effective if it articulates problems, when it is not conceptually representative in the policy, the problem persists). This could be because the concepts in the policy represented empirical aspects of the real‐world system; however, this representation (policy structural logic) was too simple. This was reflected in the ‘implementation challenges’ section of the case, where the boundaries (in systems terms) of a conceptual system were demarcated through the concepts in the policy and their causal relations. See section below on Section 15.4. The higher systemicity score or structural logic, also indicated external validation/transferability to some extent, because it was not coincidental that the Finnish Homelessness Policy had the highest systemicity score ever recorded when IPA was applied. Again, the finding could be extrapolated to argue that ‘effective policy has a higher level of structural logic’. The findings found a correlation between the structural logic based on the systemicity measure, as proxy for soundness, and the implementation outcomes or policy effectiveness. Therefore, both structure and complexity are important indicators of how well the policy's structural logic represents the context. Therefore, the IPA enables the development of ‘deeply contextualised representations of a complex policy environment based on their structural logic’.The Importance of Good DataIn Finland's homelessness policy, it was clear that the policy was based on good data (see background of the strategy in the case study). The Finnish policy was created by a multi‐disciplinary team, as it was a multi‐disciplinary approach that dealt effectively with the complexity of homelessness in Finland (AUNE 2016, 4). The evidence suggested that the PAAVO programmes and the AUNE (2016) were all developed based on extensive international reviews of the policies in the academic space by Pleace and the European Academic Journal on Homelessness, with research‐oriented ‘academic research projects that have supported and evaluated the accomplishments of the programmes and produced empirically based knowledge for further developing them’ (Juhila et al. 2022, 504). According to Wright and Wallis (2019), what is important for the effective structure of a policy is that it should have good data that forms the foundation on which the rest of the conceptual system is built.The data and research of this policy that supported the structural logic of the policy were relatively good, and this was also found in the work of Juhila et al. (2022, 504) stating that there are reports and reviews on all homelessness policies offering a lot of information and evaluation knowledge. This can be seen in the Y‐Foundation, which has a website storing all the data that was also used in this case study (Y‐Foundation 2021). The case of Finland was not perfect; however, Pleace et al. (2016, 437) argue that the strategy (homelessness) was highly coordinated, as it had clear, logical goals and a mix of prevention and other support services. The case indicated that the structural integrity was clearer on the logic underlying the case and was highly coordinated in implementation. The IPA was effective in this case because of the data on which the causal pathways/propositions were built, and what is significant about the AUNE policy is the fact that they clearly specify the ‘responsible parties’ in each of the sections and sub‐sections of the policy. The deduction, therefore, is that the context of the AUNE policy in Finland is an important case, as it was a highly coordinated effort by the government that was facilitated by good data, directing the causal pathways ‘supported’ by those involved and their responsibilities clearly outlined in the paper. This is complementary to the idea of institutions and the logic of positions (Parsons 2007). This is supported by Fredriksson (2018), who states that building cooperation at the central government level meant that, from the outset, efforts were made to involve all relevant ministries, agencies, and donors in agreeing on common objectives and measures, as well as on the budget and human resources allocated to them. Inter‐ministerial cooperation between ministries was a challenge when there was no joint funding for proposed projects in the development of the policy; however, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Housing and Basic Services, agreed beforehand on alternative solutions (Fredriksson and Kaakinen 2018). Cases in which these two key elements are missing could prove to be challenging for the predictive or analytical power of the IPA. Therefore, the policy itself and its design, as well as the institutional and political context, are important.The IPA and the study of structural logic make it clear in some sense that data need to support the structural logic of the policy. Recall here the proposition by Cejudo and Michel (2016): there must be a logical connection and causal articulation that is coherent, or it will lose effectiveness as the implementation is based on false assumptions (not coincide with reality). Said differently, the structural logic must be built on good data and its relations as reflected in the real world.Institutional Context, Governance Structure and Core ValuesThe success of the homelessness policy in Finland can be ascribed to the homelessness system, which is a combination of actors, processes, and core values (Nelson et al. 2019). There are various role players, processes, and core values that lead to structural and operational shifts in the governance of homelessness with the aim of eliminating it (Housing First Europe Hub 2022). The IPA with the analysis of structural logic provides a way to study this system based on the content of the policy, including identifying the actors and processes; however, issues such as core values and political will are, in some sense, outside the scope of the methodology. However, it is important to understand the success of the AUNE homelessness policy in Finland in order to inform future policy‐making.HF‐based long‐term homelessness programs were launched at the governmental level, and big cities and non‐governmental organisations were willing to implement them effectively (Juhila et al. 2022, 509). The first national programme was created and is still governed and coordinated by the Ministry of the Environment, in collaboration with the Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland (ARA) at the national level, and the objectives and goals of the policy are institutionalised in administrative bodies from the state down to municipalities through agreements (Pleace et al. 2016, 427). Municipalities are thereafter mandated to create detailed agreements for concrete projects to access financial resources made available by the national government, especially in big cities and regions such as Helsinki, Tampere, Turku, Oulu and Jyväskylä, which include approximately 62 municipalities coordinating efforts (agreements on land use, housing and transport). However, not all municipalities signed this agreement. The third‐sector role players include the Networking for Development Project, which was created in 2013 with funding from STEA (The Funding Centre for Social Welfare and Health Organisations), which funds third‐sector role players for projects, including buying apartments from the market and renting them to homeless people, for health and social welfare services, and complementing the work of the state (Leni 2023, 8). Other organisations include the Y‐Foundation, a nonprofit landlord that is a key national developer of the policy. There are other key role‐players as well; however, the conclusion is in line with that of Juhila et al. (2022, 497) that the process success is evident in the careful, innovative development work that created the base for the government programmes, integrating various stakeholders into the process, and providing adequate funding, administrative resources, and realistic timelines. According to the Housing First Europe Hub (2022), the multiple actors or role‐players and how they implemented the HF policy is in a ‘network governance’ approach, which is in contrast to the fragmented governance approach of Spain, where the lack of institutional capacity at the regional level in coordinating funding, as well as of operational capacity at the local level, hindered the efforts of HF advocates.There was also a sustained or enduring political commitment to the HF homelessness policy in Finland, with sustained funding, guidance, and political support for homelessness policies despite changes in the government's composition (Pleace 2017). Juhila et al. (2022, 497) in their evaluation showed that the HF model enjoys fairly large support from political parties, municipal administration, grassroots professionals dealing with long‐term homelessness, and homeless people themselves, which marks political success and policy coordination.From a core value perspective, Finland's HF is socially and culturally specific, first, because it is a strong welfare state context, in which it is based on a social policy including cash benefits and health services, based on the universalistic Nordic model which, as noted above, is rooted in an enduring political consensus around egalitarian, inclusive values (Fitzpatrick and Stephens 2014). Compared to weaker welfare states, such as liberal welfare in the United States of America or Ireland, or corporatist welfare states in France, the political framing in Finland is much different; the individual is not held responsible for being homeless, instead of a systems‐wide perspective, such as Finland that focuses on the ethical and human rights first approach to homelessness. Finland's social‐democratic welfare regime also allows for a more inclusive value, which helps overcome political differences and allows for better political commitment and coordination, which, according to Parsell et al. (2025), makes international comparison anything but straightforward. The AUNE drafters also saw the prevention of homelessness as an important ‘social investment’ (Fredriksson 2018). Additionally, the Finnish government and municipalities own a substantial percentage of land and, therefore, through regulation, directly influence housing development; for example, 25% of new housing must be social housing, and the state guarantees subsidised mortgage loans built on public land owned by the city or the state. Land ownership is also an important enabling factor. HF has been on the political agenda since the inception of the first housing program. Political, ideological and socio‐economic systems seem to be a crucial factor in the case of Finland compared to the United States, Canada, Scotland, Ireland, Spain and even France (see comparative analysis in Housing First Europe Hub 2022; Allen et al. 2020; Tapta 2020). This could have implications for the analysis of the IPA and its applicability across various contexts, as the success of the AUNE policy has multiple causes, and the IPA and structural logic are among them. Studies focusing on these different contexts could provide good counterfactual conditionals (Powell and Greener 2024) for testing the IPA method.Conceptual Boundaries and Implementation LimitationsThe data showed a decrease in homelessness and success in addressing it; however, women's homelessness and housing issues related to immigration were not adequately addressed. A deduction was that because the policy did not have explicit policy statement/directive to address this population segment, the outcomes fluctuated. The new policy outlined key areas that were ‘missed’ in the AUNE (2016), and this included help finding employment, making female homelessness more 255 visible on the political agenda, eliminating female homelessness (Y‐Foundation 2019) and addressing issues of the homelessness phenomena including ‘young people only having a PO Box without a home, ‘large amounts of immigrants residing in the country illegally, or over‐indebtedness of even employed people’ (The Ministry of the Environment 2019, 5). The policy and concepts in the AUNE (2016) policy that were studied, did not explicitly deal with these issues or were not very effective (based on challenges identified in the case) or there was a misspecification in the policy that affected the effectiveness.Implications, Future Research and LimitationsFrom the analysis of this current study, structure is particularly important as an indicator of effectiveness based on assessing concept interaction. The IPA with its methodological and philosophical assumptions has been seen as fitting well into the larger literature of policy design and its analytical value is important for improving the analytical capacity of governments and policymakers (multi‐stakeholders in the case of New Public Governance, multi‐governance bodies). This paper concludes, therefore, that the IPA can be used for not just mapping policy, but also for assessing interaction using systemicity, the IPA can also provide a referential model to what ‘effective’ policy design might look like (e.g., a higher level of structure), and it could be placed in the policy analysis process and policy process as such. This is supported by the idea that the study of policy content (structural logic) can provide a nuanced frame, as the content is important for describing the governance conditions of a country (James and Jorgensen 2009). Another explanation is that multiple actors at different levels were integrated and committed to carry out the governmental programmes by using, for example, financial incentives and information steering (Juhila et al. 2022, 505).This study suggests IPA as a tool for analysing and explaining, in part, the success of the AUNE homelessness policy in Finland. The IPA method and the study of structural logic are not meant to ‘replace’ existing approaches. Rather, its usefulness lies in its complementary use with other methods in policy studies, such as policy discourse analysis, where dominant discourse is used to analyse the position, power, and roles in policy making and implementation (Lynggaard and Triantafillou 2023).With the bourgeons of the governance literature, policy integration, coordination and coherence become increasingly important to deal with contemporary fragmented administration (Trein et al. 2021). With the insight of the IPA for measuring the structural logic and utilising structure against policy implementation, additional research can include the analysis of ‘integrated structural logics’, where the coherence of multiple policies is evaluated to measure the extent of coherence and integration. This, with insight into the IPA and Institutional Grammar 2.0 could prove valuable insights (Frantz and Siddiki 2022) as decision‐making is important in policy integration and which informs policy coordination (Cejudo and Michel 2017). Such a policy design‐as‐content approach could provide valuable insight for embedding integration in nested multi‐level governance policy sub‐systems, mapping a policy landscape (Siddiki 2018).Future research should focus on the structural logic of a policy and the IPA's ability to trace policy evolution or change of a policy, as well as the IPA's usefulness for identifying policy layering, policy drift, policy conversion, policy replacement and policy exhaustion (Howlett et al. 2018). This is because layering, drift and conversion could lead to inconsistent and incoherent policy designs. Therefore, in case studies of these three concepts, the structural logic can shift but stay at a low level of structure. This theory‐centric exploration of empirical cases can be remarkably interesting.Additionally, most extreme cases could also be studied and compared to ‘successful policy’ in a sample to include theory testing extending from this study. Furthermore, studies could be done in developed countries and compared to developing countries and explore how the IPA might fare in these cases. There are some limitations to the study and IPA method, including the fact that the study is primarily based on policy documents and secondary data, which is focused on one aspect of the policy process, which is very complex. Also, the analysis focused on the explicit and codified actions and not on existing norms and practices that could have affected the outcomes. It should be made clear from the outset that the IPA is meant to be used complementarily with the public policy process, policy analysis, design and evaluation. Therefore, this research does not dispute the existing methods but adds an additional dimension. This being said, of course, structural logic/structure alone is not sufficient, but any policy should be created, analysed and evaluated for correspondence between empirical data and structural logic (de Wee 2024, 289–290).Conclusion RemarksFinland's homelessness policy is recognised as an outlier in terms of policies dealing with the complex issues of homelessness globally. Recognising this, this paper extended the existing insights of the policy success by adding a policy design‐as‐content perspective using the IPA to objectively study the policy content by measuring the structural logic. Important propositions investigated in this case are the idea that ‘more structural logic tends to lead to more effective policy’. The paper used the IPA to study the structural logic and measure it through mapping the structural logic creating an abstractable unit of analysis for descriptive and diagnostic analysis. The paper found that the structural logic, using the measure of systemicity, is relatively higher than in other studies of other policies using the IPA method. Generally, these studies would have a structure of 0.25 or less, and the AUNE policy had a structure of 0.36, which is a significant difference considering how well the policy performed against others (de Wee 2020; Shackelford 2014; Wallis 2011, 2013; Wright and Wallis 2019). For the IPA, this case shows correlation between the structural logic and the implementation outcomes. The policy map also allowed for policy map interaction assessment, in terms of the various causal relations and their interactions in the conceptual situation. The propositions as found in the policy, and analysed at the conceptual level, were also successfully completed in implementation. The paper also indicated various insights based on the policy content for governance and policy integration studies.The IPA method is proposed in this study, not to replace the existing policy scholarship in relation to homelessness or social policy in general. The purpose is to suggest a complementary tool to study the structural logic of policies and how they structure institutional and individual action among actors based on the way the policies are structured. The contribution of the paper using the IPA to study the policy's structural logic provides an additional dimension to study the effectiveness of policy designs, although the IPA is still in the preliminary stages of development. The structural logic also assists in extracting and explaining the institutional arrangements, with potential insights to construct and improve policy coordination in the multi‐level network governance systems (de Wee 2024)—contributing to the logic‐of‐position (Parsons 2007). The IPA and structural logic help explain how the policy content structures the action or implementation situation, including delineating actor roles and responsibilities, prescribed action and finally how it helps explain how the complexity embedded in the policy text manifests in implementation, which could prove important in social policy and governance.For the policy process, the insights generated here indicate the importance of maintaining a high level of structure in the policy through good knowledge utilisation or relevant data, which support the policy statements or structural logic for effective implementation. This study allowed for the analysis of the nuances of the policy but also allows for precise evaluation of shortcomings and successful leverage points in the policy. Finally, the paper proposes, in line with Siddiki (2020) that more work should be done in the area of policy design/analysis using the structural logic and policy mapping, and interaction assessment could prove valuable for designing effective policies, with valuable practical insight for policy practitioners.AcknowledgementsThis paper is adapted from my PhD (Public Administration) study submitted in 2023 for examination. This work is based on the research supported in part by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa. I acknowledge that the opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are my own and not those of the NRF.Data Availability StatementData are available on request from the authors.Endnotes1Considering this, policy paradigms are much more complex than stand‐alone problem definitions and policy solutions, as they articulate these with broader policy goals (Béland 2019, 17).2Jan Vapaavuori appointed a group of four men, later referred to as the ‘four wise men’, to create a basis for a new long‐term homelessness policy. The group included Paavo Voutilainen (Director of Social Services in Helsinki), Hannu Puttonen (the Chief Executive Officer of the Y‐Foundation at the time), Ilkka Taipale (PhD specialist in men's homelessness, civil activist and former politician) and Eero Huovinen (Bishop of Helsinki).ReferencesAllegrante, J. P., and D. A. Sleet. 2021. “Investing in Public Health Infrastructure to Address the Complexities of Homelessness.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 16: 8887.Allen, M., L. Benjaminsen, E. O'Sullivan, and N. Pleace. 2020. Ending Homelessness?: The Contrasting Experiences of Denmark, Finland and Ireland. Policy Press.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA). 2017. “‘ARA Implements Finland's Housing Policy.” https://www.ara.fi/enUS/About_ARA/ARA_implements_Finlands_housing_policy.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA). 2018. “Homelessness in 2018. The Housing Finance and Development Centre of Fin‐land.” https://www.ara.fi/download/noname/%7B0707CEDD‐2854‐4EA0‐ABDD‐352120B49731%7D/145931.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA) (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland). 2020. “Homelessness in 2020. The Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland.” https://www.varke.fi/en/node/8/homelessness/homeless‐people‐2023.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland) (ARA). 2015. Homelessness in 2015. Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.ara.fi/download/noname/%7BA7EFA385‐21B0‐40C2‐9798‐4EAEB9A5951E%7D/125476.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland) (ARA). 2016. Homelessness in 2016. Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.ara.fi/en‐US/Materials/Homelessness_reports/Homelessness_in_Finland_2016(42274).Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland) (ARA). 2019. Homelessness in 2019. Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.ara.fi/download/noname/%7B2B21B6E5‐3C0F‐4EA0‐B7DC‐F921D1E7F644%7D/156632.Asumisen rahoitus‐ ja kehittämiskeskus (ARA) (Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland). 2023. Homelessness in 2023. The Housing Finance and Development Centre of Finland. https://www.varke.fi/en/node/8/homelessness/homeless‐people‐2023.Atkinson, P., and A. Coffey. 1997. “Analysing Documentary Realities.” In Qualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice, edited by D. Silverman, 45–62. Sage.AUNE (Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland 2016–2019). 2016. “Decision of the Finnish Government.” Ministry of the Environment. https://www.ym.fi/en‐US/Housing/Programmes_and_strategies/Actionplan_for_preventing_homelessness.Auriacombe, C. J. 2016. “Towards the Construction of Unobtrusive Research Techniques: Critical Considerations When Conducting a Literature Analysis.” African Journal of Public Affairs 9, no. 4: 1–19.Béland, D. 2019. How Ideas and Institutions Shape the Politics of Public Policy. Cambridge University Press.Béland, D., and M. Powell. 2016. “Continuity and Change in Social Policy.” Social Policy & Administration 50, no. 2: 129–147.Bloone, L., and M. Poulin. 2021. Finland's Zero Homelessness Strategy, Lessons From a Success Story. Ecoscope. https://oecdecoscope.blog/2021/12/13/finlands‐zero‐homeless‐strategylessons‐from‐a‐success‐story/comment‐page‐1/.Campbell, M. C. 2004. “Building a Common Table: The Role for Planning in Community Food Systems.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 23, no. 4: 341–355.Cejudo, G. M., and C. L. Michel. 2016. “Addressing Fragmented Government Action: Coordination, Coherence, and Integration.” Paper to be Presented at the 2nd International Conference in Public Policy, Milan, July 2015. https://www.ippapublicpolicy.org/file/paper/1434668940.pdf.Cejudo, G. M., and C. L. Michel. 2017. “Addressing Fragmented Government Action: Coordination, Coherence, and Integration.” Policy Sciences 50, no. 4: 745–767.Cloete, F. 2007. “Knowledge Management and Trust in Government: Lessons From South Africa.” In 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government: Building Trust in Government, 26–29. https://www.academia.edu/download/35345914/unpan025898.pdf.Creswell, J. W. 2013. Qualitative Enquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage.De Corte, J., B. Verschuere, and M. De Bie. 2017. “Networks for Welfare Provision: Getting a Grip on Processes of Social Exclusion by Evaluating Network Effectiveness.” Social Policy & Administration 51, no. 7: 1174–1190.de La Porte, C., G. B. Eydal, J. Kauko, D. Nohrstedt, P. 't Hart, and B. S. Tranøy. 2022. “Introduction: Studying Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries (Chapter 1).” In Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries. Oxford University Press.de Wee, G. 2020. “An Evaluation of the Integrative Propositional Analysis Model for Complex Policy Environments: The Case of the Drakenstein Housing Policy, 2010–2017.” Master's dissertations submitted at Nelson Mandela University.de Wee, G. 2022. “Comparative Policy Analysis and the Science of Conceptual Systems: A Candidate Pathway to a Common Variable.” Foundations of Science 27, no. 2: 287–304.de Wee, G. 2024. “Evaluating the Systems‐Based Integrative Propositional Analysis for Effective Policy Design: A Multiple Case Study Approach.” Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Nelson Mandela University.de Wee, G., and K. Asmah‐Andoh. 2022. “Model for Overcoming Policy Analysis Limitation and Implementation Challenges: Integrative Propositional Analysis of South African National Mental Health Policy Framework and Strategic Plan 2013–2020.” International Journal of Public Administration 45, no. 8: 658–674.Dekker, T. 2023. Can the Finnish Way to Reduce Homelessness Work in Canada? The Limits of Power Resource Approaches in a Time of Economic Crisis. Brock University.Dryzek, J. S., and B. Ripley. 1988. “The Ambitions of Policy Design.” Policy Studies Review 7, no. 4: 705–719.Fitzpatrick, S., and M. Stephens. 2014. “Welfare Regimes, Social Values and Homelessness: Comparing Responses to Marginalised Groups in six European countries.” Housing Studies 29, no. 2: 215–234.Foo, S., R. Hunjan, and A. Kleine. 2022. “Housing and Homelessness: Breaking Down Silos for Systems Change.” Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://doi.org/10.48558/4N11‐PG95.Frantz, C. K., and S. Siddiki. 2022. Institutional Grammar. Springer International Publishing.Fredriksson, P. 2018. “Modernin asunnottomuuspolitiikan synty [The Birth of a Modern Homelessness Policy].” In Yömajasta omaan asuntoon: Suomalaisen asunnotto‐ muuspolitiikan murros, edited by P. Fredriksson, 73–92. Into.Fredriksson, P., and J. Kaakinen. 2018. “Asunto ensin politiikan läpimurto.” In Yömajasta omaan asuntoon: Suomalaisen asunnottomuuspolitiikan murros, edited by P. Fredriksson, 113–136. Into.Gerring, J. 2004. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98, no. 2: 341–354.Granfelt, R. 2003. Vankilasta Kotiin Vai Kadulle? Vangit Kertovat Asunnottomuudesta, Suomen ympäristö 613 [Out of Prison and Back Home or on the Streets? Prisoners Describe Their Experience of Homelessness, Finnish Environment 613]. Ympäristöministeriö.Hall, P. A. 1993. “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain.” Comparative Politics 25, no. 3: 275–296.Hancock, E. 2022. “Helsinki is Leading the Way in Ending Homelessness—But How Are They Doing It?” World Habitat. https://world‐habitat.org/news/our‐blog/helsinki‐is‐stillleading‐the‐way‐in‐ending‐homelessness‐but‐how‐are‐they‐doingit/#:~:text=Finland%20committed%20to%20eradicating%20homelessness,Housing%20First%20units%20in%20Helsinki.Housing First Europe Hub. 2022. “A New Systems Perspective to Ending Homelessness.” https://housingfirsteurope.eu/wp‐content/uploads/2022/05/DRAFT‐HF‐Systems‐Change.pdf.Howlett, M. 2011. Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments. Routledge.Howlett, M., G. Capano, and M. Ramesh. 2018. “Designing for Robustness: Surprise, Agility and Improvisation in Policy Design.” Policy and Society 37, no. 4: 405–421.Howlett, M., I. Mukherjee, and J. J. Woo. 2015. “From Tools to Toolkits in Policy Design Studies: The New Design Orientation Towards Policy Formulation Research.” Policy & Politics 43, no. 2: 291–311.Howlett, M., M. Ramesh, and G. Capano. 2023. “The Micro‐Dimensions of Policy Design: A Key Challenge for Real‐World Policy Practice (April 5, 2023).” https://ssrn.com/abstract=4410177 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4410177.Hyötyläinen, M. 2019. “Divided by Policy: Urban Inequality in Finland.” Masters Manuscript. https://helda.helsinki.fi/items/78d9ee2a‐6be7‐4f9a‐86fe‐617db7a61321.Jackson, M. C. 1995. “Beyond the Fads: Systems Thinking for Managers.” Systems Research 12, no. 1: 25–42.James, T. E., and P. D. Jorgensen. 2009. “Policy Knowledge, Policy Formulation, and Change: Revisiting a Foundational Question.” Policy Studies Journal 37, no. 1: 141–162.Juhila, K., S. Raitakari, and J. Ranta. 2022. “Housing First.” Successful Public Policy in the Nordic Countries: Cases, Lessons, Challenges. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/60762/9780192856296.pdf?sequence=1#page=510.Kaakinen, J., and S. Turunen. 2021. “Finnish but not Yet Finished–Successes and Challenges of Housing First in Finland.” European Journal of Homelessness 15, no. 3: 81–84.Karppinen, J. 2020. “Varmista asumisen turva! Asunnottomuuden ennaltaehkäisyn toimenpideohjelman loppuraportti.” https://asuntoensin.fi/assets/files/2020/01/AUNEohjelman‐loppuraportti‐Karppinen‐Kehitt%C3%A4misosuuskuntaAvainv%C3%A4ki.pdf.Kewoh‐Vainio, V. 2022. “Peculiarities of Social Work With Young People Experiencing Homelessness.” Doctoral dissertation, Mykolo Romerio Universitetas.Koivisto, K. 2019. “Homelessness in Finland and Denmark.” Bachelor's thesis, Laurea University of Applied Sciences.Lasswell, H. D. 1951. “The Policy Orientation.” In The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope and Method, edited by D. Lerner and H. D. Lasswell, 3–15. Stanford University Press.Lejano, R. P., and S. J. Park. 2015. “The Autopoietic Text.” In Handbook of Critical Policy Studies, edited by F. Fischer, D. Torgerson, A. Durnová, and M. Orsini. Edward Elgar Publishing.Leni, E. 2023. “Case Studies on International Policy and Implementation—Case 4 Policy and Implementation of Deinstitutionalizing Response to Homelessness in Finland.” https://estrategiadesinstitucionalizacion.gob.es/wp‐content/uploads/2023/09/DI_Spain_case4_Finland_Homelessness_FINAL.pdf.Light, P. C. 2016. “Vision + Action = Faithful Execution: Why Government Daydreams and How to Stop the Cascade of Breakdowns That Now Haunts It.” Political Science & Politics 49, no. 1: 5–26.Linder, S. H., and B. G. Peters. 1988. “The Analysis of Design or the Design of Analysis?” Review of Policy Research 7, no. 4: 738–750.Linder, S. H., and B. G. Peters. 1989. “Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts.” Journal of Public Policy 9, no. 1: 35–58.Lynggaard, K., and P. Triantafillou. 2023. “Discourse Analysis and Strategic Policy Advice: Manoeuvring, Navigating, and Transforming Policy.” Journal of European Public Policy 30: 1936–1959. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2217846.Määttä, M., and K. Eriksson. 2015. “Network Governance and Programme Steering—Rationales and Tensions in Planning Child and Youth Policies.” Social Policy & Administration 49, no. 5: 631–648.May, P. J. 2003. “Policy Design and Implementation.” In Handbook of Public Administration, edited by B. G. Peters and J. Pierre, 223–233. SAGE Publications.Meriluoto, T. 2018. “Making Experts‐by‐Experience: Governmental Ethnography of Participatory Initiatives in Finnish Social Welfare Organisations.” JYU dissertations, Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy.Nelson, G., S. K. Worton, E. Macnaughton, et al. 2019. “Systems Change in the Context of an Initiative to Scale up Housing First in Canada.” Journal of Community Psychology 47, no. 1: 7–20.Parsell, C., J. Kaakinen, S. Fitzpatrick, and E. Kuskoff. 2025. “What Does It Take to End Homelessness? Tweaking or Transforming Systems.” Housing Studies: 1–19.Parsons, C. 2007. How to Map Arguments in Political Science. Oxford University Press.Petek, A., B. Zgurić, M. Šinko, et al. 2022. “From Hierarchy to Continuum: Classifying the Technical Dimension of Policy Goals.” Policy Sciences 55, no. 4: 715–736.Pleace, N. 2016. “Researching Homelessness in Europe: Theoretical Perspectives.” European Journal of Homelessness 10, no. 3: 19–44. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/111071/1/10_3_article_1_pleace.pdf.Pleace, N. 2017. “The Action Plan for Preventing Homelessness in Finland 2016–2019: The Culmination of an Integrated Strategy to End Homelessness?” European Journal of Homelessness 11, no. 2: 1–21. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/123783/.Pleace, N. 2019. “Preventing Homelessness: A Review of the International Evidence.” Research Report. Simon Communities of Ireland, Cork.Pleace, N., D. Culhane, R. Granfelt, and M. Knutagård. 2015. “The Finnish Homelessness Strategy—An International Review.” https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/153258/YMra_3en_2015.pdf.Pleace, N., M. Knutagård, D. P. Culhane, and R. Granfelt. 2016. “The Strategic Response to Homelessness in Finland: Exploring Innovation and Coordination Within a National Plan to Reduce and Prevent Homelessness.” In Exploring Effective Systems Responses to Homelessness, edited by N. Nichols and C. Doberstein. Canadian Observatory on Homelessness.Pleace, N., N. Teller, and D. Quilgars. 2011. Social Housing Allocation and Homelessness. FEANTSA.Porchak, E., A. Oudshoorn, S. Modanloo, et al. 2023. “Permanent Supportive Housing for Those Experiencing Chronic Homelessness With High Health or Social Support Needs: A Scoping Review.” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 34, no. 4: 1178–1209. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2023.a912712.Powell, M., and I. Greener. 2024. “It's a Wonderful NHS? A Counterfactual Perspective on the Creation of the British National Health Service.” Social Policy and Administration 58, no. 6: 875–888.Pulliainen, M. M. 2021. “Life on the Streets: An Ethnographic Study of Homeless Substance Users' Lives.” Qualitative Research 1, no. 3: 385–405.Ranta, J., and K. Juhila. 2020. “Constructing a Sense of Home in Floating Support for People Using Drugs.” Qualitative Social Work 19, no. 4: 685–700.Ritzer, G. 1990. “Metatheorizing in Sociology.” Sociological Forum 5, no. 1: 3–15.Saari, J. 2015. Huono‐osaiset–Elämän edellytykset yhteiskunnan pohjalla. Gaudeamus.Schneider, A. L., and H. Ingram. 1988. “Systematically Pinching Ideas: A Comparative Approach to Policy Design.” Journal of Public Policy 8: 61–80.Schneider, A. L., and H. Ingram. 1990. “Policy Design: Elements, Premises and Strategies.” In Policy Theory and Policy Evaluation: Concepts, knowledge, Causes and Norms, edited by S. S. Nagel, 77–102. Greenwood.Schneider, A., and H. Ingram. 1997. Policy Design for Democracy. University Press of Kansas.Shackelford, C. 2014. “Propositional Analysis, Policy Creation, and Complex Environments in the United States' 2009 Afghanistan‐Pakistan Policy.” Doctoral dissertation, Walden University.Siddiki, S. 2018. “Policy Design and Conflict.” In Routledge Handbook of Policy Design, 212–223. Routledge.Siddiki, S. 2020. Understanding and Analyzing Public Policy Design. Cambridge University Press.Siddiki, S. 2022. “Adaptive Governance Through Policy Design.” In Research Handbook of Policy Design, 310–322. Edward Elgar Publishing.Siddiki, S., and C. Curley. 2022. “Conceptualising Policy Design in the Policy Process.” Policy & Politics 50, no. 1: 117–135.Siddiki, S., and C. K. Frantz. 2024. “Understanding Regulation Using the Institutional Grammar 2.0.” Regulation & Governance 18, no. 3: 674–687.Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela). 2019. “Housing Benefits.” https://www.kela.fi/web/en/housing‐benefits.Tainio, H., and P. Fredriksson. 2009. “The Finnish Homelessness Strategy: From a ‘Staircase’ Model to a ‘Housing First’ Approach to Tackling Long‐Term Homelessness.” European Journal of Homelessness 3, no. 1: 181–199.Tapta, R. 2020. “The End of Homelessness Through Policies and Implementations: Case Studies of Finland and Ireland.” Chulalongkorn University theses and dissertations (Chula ETD), 264. https://digital.car.chula.ac.th/chulaetd/264.Timonen, V. 1997. “The Politics of Welfare State Restructuring in Finland and Sweden, 1991–1996.” Masters Thesis at University of Helsinki. https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/the‐politics‐of‐welfare‐state‐restructuring‐in‐finland‐and‐sweden.Trein, P., R. Biesbroek, T. Bolognesi, et al. 2021. “Policy Coordination and Integration: A Research Agenda.” Public Administration Review 81, no. 5: 973–977.Tsemberis, S. 2011. “Housing first: The Pathways Model to End Homelessness for People With Mental Illness and Addiction Manual.” European Journal of Homelessness 5, no. 2: 235–240.Tunström, M., C. Liliegreen, A. Kurvinen, J. R. Sveinsson, B. I. Nordahl, and A. Granath Hansson. 2020. “Building Affordable Homes: Challenges and Solutions in the Nordic Region.” Nordregio Report.Turunen, S., and R. Granfelt. 2023. “Homelessness in Finland.” In Routledge Handbook of Homelessness, 307–315. Routledge.Van de Ven, A. H. 2007. Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford University Press on Demand.Wallis, S. E. 2011. Avoiding Policy Failure: A Workable Approach. Emergent Publications.Wallis, S. E. 2012. “Existing and Emerging Methods for Integrating Theories Within and Between Disciplines.” This Paper is a Presentation at the 56th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Systems Sciences (ISSS). July 15–22, 2012, at San Jose State University, California.Wallis, S. E. 2013. “How to Choose Between Policy Proposals: A Simple Tool Based on Systems Thinking and Complexity Theory.” Emergence, Complexity & Organization 15, no. 3: 94–120.Wallis, S. E. 2016. “The Science of Conceptual Systems: A Progress Report.” Foundations of Science 21, no. 4: 579–602.Wallis, S. E. 2019. “The Missing Piece of the Integrative Studies Puzzle.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 44, no. 3–4: 402–429.Wallis, S. E., and V. Valentinov. 2017. “What is Sustainable Theory? A Luhmannian Perspective on the Science of Conceptual Systems.” Foundations of Science 22, no. 4: 733–747.Weick, K. E. 1989. “Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination.” Academy of Management Review 14, no. 4: 516–531.Weimer, D. L. 1998. “Policy Design for Democracy.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 559: 181–183.Wright, B., and S. E. Wallis. 2019. Practical Mapping for Applied Research and Program Evaluation. SAGE Publications.Y‐Foundation. 2021. https://ysaatio.fi/en/home/.Y‐Foundation. 2022. “Homes for the Homeless.” https://ysaatio.fi/en/y‐foundation.Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research. 4th ed. SAGE.Yin, R. K. 2013. “Validity and Generalization in Future Case Study Evaluations.” Evaluation 19, no. 3: 321–333.Yin, R. K. 2018. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. 6th ed. Sage.Y‐Säätiö (Y‐Foundation). 2017. A Home of Your Own: Housing First and Ending Homelessness in Finland. Y‐Säätiö.Y‐Säätiö (Y‐Foundation). 2019. “Y‐Foundation.” https://ysaatio.fi/en/y‐foundation.1AppendixIPA Analysis of the AUNE 2016–2019 PolicyStep 1: Identify the propositions in the different policy statements.In the first step, the policy was read and analysed by isolating the policy statements/propositions that were found in the policy. For example, on page 2 of the policy it states that ‘new people are becoming homeless due to the problems such as financial issues’ (AUNE 2016, 2). This can be rephrased to state, the more ‘financial issues people have’, the more it causes ‘new people to become homeless’.Step 2: Diagram the causal relationships between the concepts within the propositions.By way of illustration, consider the example in Step 1, ‘new people becoming homeless’, would be placed in a circle as well as ‘financial issues’. An arrow from ‘financial issues’ was connected with an arrow to ‘new people becoming homeless’ to indicate the causal relationship between the concepts. Here, the researcher adheres to Wallis (2012), drawing on Ritzer (1990), where the researcher does not speculate on interpretations of the authors' statements and refers to the original wording. This would also explain the long wording on the maps as they are the direct wording of policy statements.Step 3: Synthesise those smaller diagrams where they contain the same concepts (Find linkages between concepts and relationships across propositions).For example, in the AUNE 2016–2019, policy indicates that they want to ‘(a decrease in) ‘the need for corrective work, which also leads to cost saving in the long‐term’ (AUNE 2016, 3), and later it explains, which is similar to ‘fall out of the current services for the homeless, which result in a significant cost to society’. This can be mapped as ‘reduce the need for corrective work’ causes more ‘cost saving’ and the ‘more people fall out of the current services for the homeless’ causes less ‘cost savings’. Here, the concepts ‘a significant cost to society’ and ‘cost saving’ overlap and are, thus, one.Step 4: Count the total number of concepts to determine the breath or complexity of the policy (to find ‘simple’ complexity).In this step, the circles that represent the concepts were counted to find the total number of circles. Complexity is the measure of the breadth of the policy. In Figure 1, the map indicates that there are 39 circles with writing in them. That is a complexity of 39.Step 5: Identify and count the transformative concepts (defined as those where two or more arrows are pointing towards the concept).In this step, the circles with two or more concepts pointed to them were identified and counted. These are on the map in fig. 5.3 and were identified with an orange/yellow circle. Continuing with the example under Step 3, ‘Cost savings’ will be a transformative/concatenated concept.Step 6: Divide the concatenated/transformative concepts by the total concepts (systemicity or structure).The sixth and final IPA step was to divide the number of concatenated/transformative concepts (Step 5) by the total number of concepts (Step 4). The index is a number comprised of between 0 (least structure/systemicity) and 1 (most structure/systemicity). In this case, the systemicity/structural score is 0.36. In the analysis, it was also clear that the structure of the policy could have been higher as many concepts were also found in other official documents.2AppendixFinland Homelessness Policy Elements# of conceptsFinland Homelessness PolicyLabel—Concept/element1Financial and debt council ling services for young people2Significant investment in new construction and renovations3Encouraging low threshold work activities and meaningful everyday activities is created for the housing services for the long‐term homeless and the related emergency services4cost savings5(mobile support work model)the expertise of different professional fields is combined in a new way into a comprehensive service package brought into the home (ACT teams).6building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.7early identification of problems leading to homelessness8housing and integration services for those who receive a residence permit can be arranged in an effectively9when the payment defaults are minor and the applicant has a credible debt management plan10Criminal Sanctions Agency will hire an employee to coordinate the work11city specific monitoring of evictions12Prevention of Homelessness13financial and debt councilling services for young people14sufficient abstinent housing services available15housing guidance16of peer work (such as environmental work, mediation with neighbours, tenant sponsors, family networks) that strengthen the attachment of groups at risk to natural networks17allocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investments18preventing the recurrence of homelessness19Risk Insurance and management for those who lost their credit rating20cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actors21Reduction of homelessness22access to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit rating23other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measures24ensure that homeless young adults have a safe place to stay overnight and ensure their direction to services25400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clients26new small loan model (Guarantee Foundation)27social lending by municipalities28cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.29new preventive practices are developed by utilising joint development30reasonably priced housing in all of the largest urban areas31reduce the need for corrective work32factors that may threaten the success of independent living33support independent living and rehabilitation better34In the national ‘Onnistu asumisessa’ (Housing success) project of the Finnish Youth Housing Association, the cooperation between youth housing actors, the Ohjaamo service points and other low threshold service points is increased and local competence and expertise is strengthened.35monitor the tenants payment of rent36prevent the increase of arrears of rent37preventing arrears of rent from becoming court cases38supports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.39cities in the agreement ensure that housing services that allow the use of intoxicants are available in the whole country3AppendixFinland Homelessness Policy Element InteractionPolicy Statements or Propositions for the Structural Logic of the Policy MapProposition numberFromToType1other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measureshousing guidancecauses more2preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscost savingscauses less3early identification of problems leading to homelessnesshousing guidancecauses more4financial and debt council ling services for young peopleReduction of homelessnesscauses more5cost savingsallocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investmentscauses more6housing guidancefactors that may threaten the success of independent livingcauses less7ensure that homeless young adults have a safe place to stay overnight and ensure their direction to servicesPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more8cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.causes more9(mobile support work model)the expertise of different professional fields is combined in a new way into a comprehensive service package brought into the home (ACT teams).preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more10reduce the need for corrective workcost savingscauses more11of peer work (such as environmental work, mediation with neighbours, tenant sponsors, family networks) that strengthen the attachment of groups at risk to natural networkshousing and integration services for those who receive a residence permit can be arranged in an effectivelycauses more12cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clientscauses more13cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actorspreventing the recurrence of homelessness14financial and debt counselling services for young peoplepreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more15new preventive practices are developed by utilising joint developmentReduction of homelessnesscauses more16encouraging low threshold work activities and meaningful everyday activities is created for the housing services for the long‐term homeless and the related emergency servicessupports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.causes more17Criminal Sanctions Agency will hire an employee to coordinate the workpreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more18monitor the tenants payment of rentcity specific monitoring of evictionscauses more19of peer work (such as environmental work, mediation with neighbours, tenant sponsors, family networks) that strengthen the attachment of groups at risk to natural networkspreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more20400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clientsReduction of homelessnesscauses more21city specific monitoring of evictionspreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more22when the payment defaults are minor and the applicant has a credible debt management planaccess to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingcauses more23reasonably priced housing in all of the largest urban areasPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more24preventing the recurrence of homelessnessreduce the need for corrective workcauses more25social lending by municipalitiesaccess to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingcauses more26ensure that homeless young adults have a safe place to stay overnight and ensure their direction to serviceshousing guidancecauses more27In the national ‘Onnistu asumisessa’ (Housing success) project of the Finnish Youth Housing Association, the cooperation between youth housing actors, the Ohjaamo service points and other low threshold service points is increased and local competence and expertise is strengthened.Reduction of homelessnesscauses more28social lending by municipalitiespreventing arrears of rent from becoming court casescauses more29housing guidancePrevention of Homelessnesscauses more30supports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.factors that may threaten the success of independent livingcauses more31Risk Insurance and management for those who lost their credit ratingaccess to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingcauses more32allocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investmentsnew preventive practices are developed by utilising joint developmentcauses more33allocating the savings achieved by the management of homelessness into preventative investmentsPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more34cities in the agreement ensure that housing services that allow the use of intoxicants are available in the whole countryReduction of homelessnesscauses more35other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measurespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more36financial and debt council ling services for young peoplepreventing the recurrence of homelessness37sufficient abstinent housing services availablePrevention of Homelessnesscauses more38other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measuresPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more39Prevention of Homelessnessreduce the need for corrective workcauses more40significant investment in new construction and renovations400 dwellings of the total number of dwellings mentioned above is allocated to criminal sanction clientscauses more41cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actorscity specific monitoring of evictionscauses more42significant investment in new construction and renovationsbuilding 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.causes more43significant investment in new construction and renovationssupport independent living and rehabilitation bettercauses more44In the national ‘Onnistu asumisessa’ (Housing success) project of the Finnish Youth Housing Association, the cooperation between youth housing actors, the Ohjaamo service points and other low threshold service points is increased and local competence and expertise is strengthened.new preventive practices are developed by utilising joint developmentcauses more45social lending by municipalitiespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more46supports participation by formerly homeless people, improves their abilities to find employment and investigates the incentive traps against progress on the path to employment and education and finding solutions for them.preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more47new small loan model (Guarantee Foundation)preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more48monitor the tenants payment of rentprevent the increase of arrears of rentcauses more49building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.support independent living and rehabilitation bettercauses more50other preventative support services, the utilisation of experts by experience, as well as location‐specific special measurescities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.causes more51new small loan model (Guarantee Foundation)preventing arrears of rent from becoming court casescauses more52building 5–10 small separate dwellings in a communal format for clients that have not had success with the current forms of housing.preventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more53housing and integration services for those who receive a residence permit can be arranged in an effectivelyPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more54access to housing is made easier for those who have lost their credit ratingReduction of homelessnesscauses more55early identification of problems leading to homelessnessPrevention of Homelessnesscauses more56encouraging low threshold work activities and meaningful everyday activities is created for the housing services for the long‐term homeless and the related emergency servicespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more57preventing arrears of rent from becoming court casespreventing the recurrence of homelessnesscauses more58cities appoint a personal social worker for clients in a group at risk of homelessness; the social worker is responsible for the success of the transition and putting the service package together.Prevention of Homelessnesscauses more59cooperation between the National Administrative Office for Enforcement, Debt recovery, and social welfare services, as well as debt council ling actorsmonitor the tenants payment of rentcauses more60significant investment in new construction and renovationsReduction of homelessnesscauses more

Journal

Social Policy & Administration – Wiley

Published: Sep 10, 2025

Keywords: homelessness; housing first; housing policy; integrative propositional analysis; policy analysis; policy design; policy effectiveness

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

An Integrative Propositional Analysis of Finland's Successful Homelessness Policy: A New Policy Design Insight

An Integrative Propositional Analysis of Finland's Successful Homelessness Policy: A New Policy Design Insight

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

An Integrative Propositional Analysis of Finland's Successful Homelessness Policy: A New Policy Design Insight

An Integrative Propositional Analysis of Finland's Successful Homelessness Policy: A New Policy Design Insight

References (91)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.

Our policy towards the use of cookies