Suchergebnisse

Historically, social housing in Australia operated as a springboard for social mobility. For many working families, public housing tenancy was an opportunity to save for a house purchase deposit. Latterly, tenant exits from public to private housing have declined to very low levels. This has raised concerns about systemic barriers to residential and social mobility for social renters, and about the consequent longer waiting times for applicants in need of social housing. Drawing on administrative data collected by social housing providers in NSW and Victoria, and in‐depth interviews with 95 former and current social housing tenants in both states, this paper examines tenant attitudes, intentions and motivations as regards future house‐moves. We argue that the primary disincentives to exit relate to affordability and security of tenure in private rental, rather than factors related to the social housing system itself.

English
Despite a long period of public management reform in social housing, including shifts from state to non-profit providers and exit opportunities for tenants, access to new tenancies has until very recently continued to be mediated by bureaucratic rationing approaches. This article explores the reasons for the long dominance of rationing, and the factors that are now leading to its replacement with more consumerist approaches known as 'choice-based lettings'. Chaos and complexity theory are used to explore the role of market factors and changes in understanding in destabilising an entrenched initial attractor pattern, and the role of local experiment, policy transfer and new political agendas in establishing a new attractor pattern.

Preface -- Chapter 1. The context: A brief history of private renting in Australia -- Chapter 2. A lightly regulated sector -- Chapter 3. Private rental sector investment and investors -- Chapter 4. The trajectory into the private rental sector -- Chapter 5. Creating a sense of home -- Chapter 6. Renting and rental stress -- Chapter 7. Renting and permanent insecurity -- Chapter 8. The future -- Appendices: Methodology, profile of interviewees, questionnaire.

This fascinating book draws on a decade of research by three leading housing researchers to expose the dire circumstances of many among the growing number of Australian private renters. Placed in the context of past trends and policy failings, it provides a compelling account of the realities of private rental living, drawing on interviews with tenants to provide a vivid but depressing account of their countless struggles. Written for the general reader, it is highly recommended as an information source and a rallying cry for action Emeritus Professor Peter Saunders, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales Over a quarter of Australians are living in private rental housing and yet until now we have lacked an in-depth study of this important part of the housing market. This fascinating new book by three leading housing experts admirably fills that gap in our knowledge and understanding. Written in an engaging style, the authors provide a concise and comprehensive analysis that will be of interest to experts and those new to the subject. It is essential reading for anyone who wishes to better understand the past, present and likely future of private renting in Australia and beyond. Professor Peter A Kemp, Professor of Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford.

Introduction -- Why governments intervene in housing -- Unpacking Australia's housing affordability problem -- Social housing in Australia: Evolution, legacy and contemporary policy debates -- Home ownership and the role of government -- Private rental housing: Market roles, taxation and regulation -- The Indigenous housing policy challenge -- Financing and governing affordable rental housing -- Roles of land use planning policy in housing supply and affordable housing -- Housing policy in Australia: A reform agenda.

Cover -- Half-Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- List of Tables -- List of Figures -- List of Boxes -- List of Abbreviations -- Acknowledgements -- 1 Modernizing Social Housing -- Broader Context -- Public Policy Reforms -- Modernizing Social Housing Delivery -- International Dimensions -- What Real Difference Does Transfer Make? -- Structure of the Book -- 2 Tracking Stock Transfers -- Social Housing in 1988 -- Housing Policy and Legislation in the 1980s -- Stock Transfer Policy Origins and Antecedents -- Forms of Stock Transfer -- The Changing Geography of Stock Transfers -- Britain's New Social Landlords -- Chapter Conclusions -- 3 Stock Transfer Motivations and Processes -- Stakeholder Interests -- Housing Investment Drivers and Financing Stock Transfers -- Other Financial Drivers -- Non-Financial Drivers -- Developing and Delivering Stock Transfer Proposals: The Process -- Chapter Conclusions -- 4 The Politics of Stock Transfer -- National Politics -- Political Organization Against Transfer -- Politics of Choice -- Contestation Around Local Transfer Proposals -- The Politics of Post-Transfer Local Housing -- Politics of the Welfare State -- Chapter Conclusions -- 5 Governance and Accountability Consequences -- Early Transfers and the Local Public Spending Bodies Debate -- Changing Governance Models -- Post-Transfer Social Housing Governance in Practice: Tensions Played Out -- Evolving Organizational Forms and Governance Frameworks -- Accountability Impacts -- Chapter Conclusions -- 6 Organizational and Cultural Change in Stock Transfer Landlords -- Transfer as Culture Change -- Organizational Culture and Transfer Housing Association Aspirations -- Implementation of 'Culture Change' Reforms -- Customer-Focused Operation -- Organizational Life Cycles -- Intra-Sector Diversity -- Chapter Conclusions.

The rhetoric and practice of localism has attracted significant support within both political and academic circles in the UK in recent years. However, it is the contention of this article that there are, or should be, limits to localism as applied to the basic citizenship rights of vulnerable people. Drawing on a ten-year, mixed-methods study, we use the example of sharply rising homelessness in England to illustrate our argument that localist policymaking has an intrinsic tendency to disadvantage socially marginalised groups. While we acknowledge the central role played by austerity in driving up homelessness over the past decade, we advance the case that the post-2010 localist agenda of successive UK governments has also had an independent and malign effect. At the very least, we seek to demonstrate that localism cannot be viewed as a taken-for-granted progressive model, with centralism (that is, the consistent implementation of a policy across a whole country) also perfectly defensible on progressive grounds in relevant circumstances.