It has been said that people need the confidence, continuity and trust in the world which comprise ontological security in order to lead happy and fulfilled lives, and furthermore that ontological security can be attained more through owner occupied than rented housing. Ontological security, however, can be elusive both in a real sense and in empirical research terms. As part of a study of the relationships between housing tenure and health, we explored through in-depth interviews with 43 adults the extent to which home owners and social renters in the West of Scotland obtained psycho-social benefits from their homes. It is important to acknowledge the regional context of the study, in particular the residualised state of social rented housing in the UK and the problematic, post-industrial nature of the Scottish regional economy. Interviewees felt protected by their homes when they were in a low crime area which was more likely to be in an area of owner occupied housing. For some interviewees owner occupation provided less protection than social renting from the threat of losing the home because of the risk of repossession. Inhabiting a house rather than a flat could promote autonomy over the home, as could having skills or income to carry out repairs and maintenance. Owner occupation was thought to be more prestigious than social renting, but whether being prestigious was desirable was sometimes contested. Interviewees also talked about ontological security in terms of the home being a site of constancy but this runs counter to the restless tendency to move house in order to progress in society and move up the housing ladder.

Background Recent work in a number of countries has identified growing geographical inequalities in health between deprived and non-deprived neighbourhoods. The health gaps observed cannot be entirely explained by differences in the characteristics of individuals living in those neighbourhoods, which has led to a concerted international public health research effort to determine what contextual features of neighbourhoods matter. This article reports on access to potentially health-promoting community resources across all neighbourhoods in New Zealand. Prevailing international opinion is that access to community resources is worse in deprived neighbourhoods. Methods Geographical Information Systems were used to calculate geographical access to 16 types of community resources (including recreational amenities, and shopping, educational and health facilities) in 38 350 small census areas across the country. The distribution of these access measures by neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation was determined. Results For 15 out of 16 measures of community resources, access was clearly better in more deprived neighbourhoods. For example, the travel time to large supermarkets was ∼80% greater in the least deprived quintile of neighbourhoods compared with the most deprived quintile. Conclusions These results challenge the widely held, but largely untested, view that areas of high social disadvantage have poorer access to community resources. Poor locational access to community resources among deprived neighbourhoods in New Zealand does not appear to be an explanation of poorer health in these neighbourhoods. If anything, a pro-equity distribution of community resources may be preventing even wider disparities in neighbourhood inequalities in health.