How do we fix the housing crisis? Welcome to The i Paper’s opinion series, in which our writers share their experiences of the UK’s dysfunctional housing system and examine how we can fix it.

Pensioners like me have a moral responsibility to downsize for young people
The biggest lie I was told about owning my own home
The UK’s new rental scandal that no one is talking about
The bizarre tricks estate agents are now using to sell a house

At first it seems so obvious. When people become older not only do they not need as much space as they used to, particularly if they were bringing up children, but also large homes are harder and more expensive to run. Add in the point that they probably have stairs the elderly may find difficult to climb, and of course the overriding societal need for family homes, and downsizing seems a no-brainer. But if you dig in, it would for many older people be a very bad idea indeed.

There are powerful arguments against encouraging downsizing, both for economic and social reasons – and sometimes for a mixture of both. Of course if people choose to downsize that’s fine. For many, it releases funds that can be used for that cruise to the Med, or more probably nowadays to top up the Bank of Mum and Dad. If you have been relying on your property to boost your pension, that makes sense too. For anyone who cannot climb stairs it may be the best option to move to a flat or bungalow – looking at the adverts for stair-lifts in some newspapers, that may indeed be a cheaper option. But let’s look at the arguments for not downsizing, starting with economics.

First, this does not increase the housing stock. All it does is to shuffle people around the existing homes. The population of the UK in 1950, around the time when the people now thinking about downsizing were born, was just over 50 million. Now it’s approximately 70 million. We only tackle the long-term issue by building a lot more homes.

Next, many of the places where people might downsize are not where young people starting families can get jobs. The strongest job market in England is the South East in the sense that it has the highest employment rate. But homes in the South East are not particularly under-occupied, for London apart, it has the second-lowest proportion of homes that qualify on this measure. By contrast the weakest job market is the North East, which also has the highest proportion of under-occupied homes.

Third, and this may sound strange, if more older people moved to smaller homes that might actually reduce the availability of certain types of accommodation. That’s because many older people with spare rooms rent them out to students or other lodgers, partly to help pay for the running costs of the home, but also because they like the company. If they were to sell and buy a flat, and a young family move in, those spare rooms would not be available. And the flat they bought probably would not have been affordable to the lodgers.

So while you can make an economic case for downsizing, it is not at all clear-cut. On the social side the argument is generally against it for a number of reasons.

For a start, a family home is part of the glue that holds people together. Neighbourhoods work best when people know each other and where there is a mixture of young and old. The more often homes are churned over, the weaker that glue. What works at a neighbourhood level also matters at a family level, for downsizing will probably mean that there is no spare space for the family’s children (and grandchildren) to stay. To some official with a clipboard, a bedroom that is only used for a couple of weekends a month may seem a measure of under-occupation. For a family, for grandchildren, or maybe a young person going through a tough time and needing shelter, it is a really important resource.

Finally, and this is surely the overwhelming argument for resisting downsizing, there is the issue of the health of older people, and their need to remain as independent as possible. It’s not simply that most older people would prefer to stay at home. It’s also important that they should have familiar surroundings, particularly if they are starting to suffer from confusion or memory loss. Successive editions of the English Housing Study shows very high levels of satisfaction among over 65-year-olds with their housing. Naturally some do plan to downsize, but by far the largest proportion say they like their homes and neighbourhoods and cite this as a reason for not wanting to move.

Inevitably, people become frailer and in extreme old age an increasing number will need to move into a care or nursing home. But there are profound social and economic arguments for seeking to postpone this as long as practicable. Someone who is indeed becoming frail is far more likely to be able to live independently, with appropriate support, in a home that is familiar to them for much of their life than some strange place they downsized to a couple of years earlier.

We’ve lived in the same tall, thin terraced house in Islington in London for nearly 53 years, buying it with what seemed a huge mortgage at 11.5 per cent interest, and moving in on my 30th birthday. It was built in 1817, and while it isn’t particularly huge, it does have five stories, so a lot of stairs. You might think this is not ideal for a couple of octogenarians, and of course we have considered moving. If we couldn’t climb stairs we’d have to. But here are the reasons for staying put:

It’s stunningly convenient, with everything you need – a supermarket, chemist, cafes and restaurants, Tube station, five bus routes – all in less than five minutes’ walk. So you don’t need a car. It’s big enough to have our daughters and grandchildren to stay. It’s a base for them, and other relatives and friends, in central London. If you are a writer you need space, so this is an office – the factory where the words are written – as well as a home. The stairs keep us fit.

Why go through the huge expense and hassle of moving when you don’t have to?