Assessing the impact of crime on residential property markets

The aim of this research is to determine if a range of crimes in a suburb have an impact on the residential property sectors in that particular suburb. With the increasing media coverage of crime in specific locations, this knowledge of crime in Brisbane Australia is more available to potential residential property buyers This research is based on the analysis of the crime statistics for 30 suburbs in Brisbane across a range of major crime activities and compares the level of crime to property median prices, sales volume and in a range of suburbs the volume of sale and lease listings. The results of the research show a significant variation in the response of buyers in residential property markets based on the type of crime and the socio-economic status of the suburb. In a range of suburbs, value factors other than crime are the major drivers of the market. The study provides an insight into consumer behaviour in a major city and the response of residential property buyers to an increasing level and awareness of crime statistics in the suburbs they are considering to buy. Implications of this research are that with a greater level of awareness of factors that could be a disadvantage to some potential buyers are not always reflected across a full residential property market. Valuers, property financiers and the public need to be aware of the type of crime and locations that have a direct impact on property prices and saleability These results expand on the current knowledge of value drivers in major residential property markets.

Playing Monopoly(TM) with 1st year property economics students

Game playing contributes to the acquisition of required skills and competencies whilst supporting collaboration, communication and problem solving. This project introduced the board game Monopoly CityTM to tie theoretical class room learning with collaborative, play based problem solving.

Professional indemnity insurance, performance and pre-emptive negligence: The impact of ‘non-claims’

As part of Australian licensing requirements professional valuers are required to maintain a level of professional indemnity insurance. A core feature of any insurance cover is that the insured has an obligation to notify their insurer of both actual and potential claims. An actual claim clearly will impact upon future policies and premiums paid. Notification of a potential claim, whether or not the notification crystallises into an actual claim, also can have an impact upon the insured’s claims history and premiums. The Global Financial Crisis continues to impact upon business practices and land transactions both directly and indirectly. The Australian valuation profession is not exempt from this impact. One example of this ongoing impact is reflected in a worrying practice engaged in by some financial institutions in respect of their loan portfolios. That is, even though the mortgagor is not in default, some institutions are pre-emptively issuing notices of demand regarding potential losses. Further, in some instances such demands are based only on mass appraisal valuations without specific consideration being given to the individual lot in question. The author examines the impact of this practice for the valuation profession and seeks to provide guidance for the appropriate handling of such demands.

The cluster effect in China: Real or imagined?

Policy makers, urban planners and economic geographers readily acknowledge the potential value of industrial clustering. Clusters attract policy makers’ interest because it is widely held that they are a way of connecting agglomeration to innovation and human capital to investment. Urban planners view clustering as a way of enticing creative human capital, the so-called ‘creative class’, that is, creative people are predisposed to live where there is a range of cultural infrastructure and amenities. Economists and geographers have contrived to promote clustering as a solution to stalled regional development. In the People’s Republic of China, over the past decade the cluster has become the default setting of the cultural and creative industries, the latter a composite term applied to the quantifiable outputs of artists, designers and media workers as well as related service sectors such as tourism, advertising and management. The thinking behind many cluster projects is to ‘pick winners’. In this sense the rapid expansion in the number of cultural and creative clusters in China over the past decade is not so very different from the early 1990s, a period that saw an outbreak of innovation parks, most of which inevitably failed to deliver measurable innovation and ultimately served as revenue-generating sources for district governments via real estate speculation. Since the early years of the first decade of the new millennium the cluster model has been pressed into the service of cultural development.

Implementation of National Rental Affordability Scheme in Queensland

In 2008 the Australian government introduced the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) to increase the supply of affordable rental in Australia. This Federal Government initiative was progressively rolled out through four different rounds over the years with fifth round to be announced some time in 2014. Although the scheme has been successful evident there have been numerous setbacks experienced. This paper focuses on understanding lessons learnt from the performance of the scheme to make recommendations for future government initiatives. This evaluation is based on the combination of document analysis, government officers as well as approved NRAS participants operating throughout Queensland. The most significant challenges for the NRAS participants is the involvement of three levels government which cause delays in the scheme approval process.

Barriers to entering affordable home ownership for young people: A preliminary study from university students’ perspectives

Over the last two decades, housing affordability has been a problem for young people, and identified as factor leading to youth homelessness. The National Youth Commission Inquiry into Youth Homelessness developed a roadmap for preventing this problem (National Youth Commission, 2008). The roadmap recommends increasing the supply of affordable housing for young people as an important strategy to reduce the risk of homelessness problems. In addition, understanding the barriers and the needs of young people is a significant part of the development of a national affordable housing strategy. This paper explores issues encountered by young people when they enter the housing market as first home buyers. A short survey was conducted to review the barriers to entry, classified by income levels, housing cost and availability of affordable housing. In the current competitive job market, young people have minimal work experience, relatively low job security and low income. In addition to these barriers, participants also suggested other barriers towards the purchase of their first home, such as lack of knowledge of legal issues and lack of government funding. This study suggests the need for both government and educational support for young people around housing choices and the development of financial strategies to manage barriers towards owning their first home.

The Australian Qualifications Framework for bachelor degree in property economics

The Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) requires every course in Australia to be reviewed and compliant by 2015. This paper compares the difference between AQF level 7 and level 8 and outlines the paradigm shift in course development, improvement and quality assurance. The AQF requires an outcome oriented process which influences the development, monitoring and implementation of AQF courses. Firstly the graduate profile is defined to underscore the direction of the property course development. Required graduate attributes are then defined, together with course learning outcomes. Each unit/subject assessment is then designed to reflect the desired learning outcomes, and then finally the unit/subject content is backfilled. This reverse engineered process will ensure that all students have been taught and assessed on the graduate attributes which will form the graduate profile. Therefore, monitoring the inclusion of learning outcomes on unit/subject level during course restructure and development is crucial to achieve the course learning outcomes. This paper recommends that further evaluation needs to be conducted in the course development phases by involving professional accreditation bodies, industry representatives, students and recent graduates in this course development process. It also discusses challenges for developing an undergraduate property course.

Blended learning extension in a global collaborative learning environment

The advancement of technology and the internet have created global collaborative learning opportunities and changed learning and teaching in any discipline around the world, including in developing countries. The availability of web-based resources and high-speed internet infrastructure has extended the opportunities to conduct blended learning and new ways of distance learning beyond virtual class room webinars. The aim of this exploratory paper is to review the challenges and opportunities for increasing student engagement in virtual learning. A reflective analysis of international collaborative learning case studies, published articles and practices in virtual learning is used to explore the extension of blended learning organised and participated by institutions from multiple countries. The lessons learnt from flexible learning delivery in professional practice courses in Property Education are used to evaluate potential extensions of blended learning implementation in a global context.

A new approach to presales?

The traditional residential development process uses pre-sales to manage risk and lock in demand so that development financiers can be kept happy. However, obtaining the requisite level of presales is an expensive business, a cost that is ultimately borne by the new home buyer. With housing affordability at the front of everyone’s mind, we ask: is there a better way? How can housing be supplied more innovatively? A research collaboration between QUT, Swinburne Social Research Unit and the Office of the Victorian Government has been investigating this very issue.

Developer charges and housing affordabilty in Brisbane, Australia

Purpose - This paper empirically examines the effect of developer charges on housing affordability in Brisbane, Australia. Developer paid fees or charges are a commonly used mechanism for local governments to pay for new urban infrastructure. Despite numerous government reports and many years of industry advocacy, there remains no empirical evidence in Australia to confirm or quantify passing on of these charges to home buyers. Design/methodology/approach - This research applies a hedonic house price model to 4,699 new and 25,053 existing house sales in Brisbane from 2005 to 2011. Findings – The findings of is research are consistent with international studies that support the proposition that developer charges are over passed. This study has provided evidence that suggest developer charges are over passed to both new and existing homes in the order of around 400%. Research limitations/implications - These findings suggest that developer charges are thus a significant contributor to increasing house prices and reduced housing affordability. Practical/Social Implications: By testing this effect on both new and existing homes, this research provides evidence in support of the proposition that not only are developer charges over passed to new home buyers but also to buyers of existing homes. Thus the price inflationary effect of these developer charges are being felt by all home buyers across the community, resulting in increased mortgage repayments of close to $1000 per month. Originality/value - This is the first study to empirically examine the impact of developer charges on house prices in Australia. These results are important as they will inform governments on the outcomes of growth management strategies on housing affordability, providing the first evidence of its kind in Australia.

De-risking development of medium density housing to improve housing affordability and boost supply

Housing price inflation is a national concern given the serious decline in the number of low and middle income households able to purchase housing. In addition housing supply lags well behind demand. In Melbourne, urban consolidation policies explicitly seek intensification to promote housing supply but planning regulation is often criticised for being a significant cost driver for medium density housing. It is assumed that easing supply constraints will improve affordability. We suggest that laissez-faire planning exacerbates affordability issues because this approach fails to address the basic economic problem: the current inability of the market to efficiently match supply and demand in order to progress an orderly and de-risked development process. The role of “exchange” one of the four housing market sub-systems identified by Burke (2012) has until recently generally been ignored but our examination reveals significant economic transaction costs that manifest as development risks that impact on affordability. Fortunately these can be mitigated, but only if there is a more consumer driven supply response.

Inefficient tax slugs all homebuyers

Housing affordability is more than just house prices. It also includes ready access to public transport, schools, good road networks, and of course access to all the basic utilities. However, local governments don’t have the money to build all the infrastructure new housing estates need. So developer charges were introduced as a “user pays” method of funding new urban infrastructure. These charges are levied on property developers by local authorities at the time of planning approval. Some think these costs are passed back to the original land owner by way of lower land prices. But property developers claim these charges are instead added on to new house prices, with a negative impact to housing affordability. When new house prices increase, existing house prices are also dragged up, extending the housing affordability issue throughout the community. However, new research by QUT has uncovered evidence that these costs are not merely passed on to homebuyers, but are passed on at significantly over-inflated rates. In an Australian first, the study empirically examines the impact of developer charges on housing affordability, providing evidence that developer charges are passed on to all homebuyers in the community. So while policy makers think they are charging developers for the provision of infrastructure in new communities, the cost is really being borne by all homebuyers.

An Uber for apartments could solve some common housing problems

Speculative property developers, criticised for building dog boxes and the slums of tomorrow, are generally hated by urban planners and the public alike. But the doors of state governments are seemingly always open to developers and their lobbyists. Politicians find it hard to say no to the demands of the development industry for concessions because of the contribution housing construction makes to the economic bottom line and because there is a need for well located housing. New supply is also seen as a solution to declining housing affordability. Classical economic theory however is too simplistic for housing supply. Instead, an offshoot of Game Theory - Market Design – not only offers greater insight into apartment supply but also can simultaneously address price, design and quality issues. New research reveals the most significant risk in residential development is settlement risk – when buyers fail to proceed with their purchase despite there being a pre-sale contract. At the point of settlement, the developer has expended all the project funds only to see forecast revenue evaporate. While new buyers may be found, this process is likely to strip the profitability out of the project. As the global financial crisis exposed, buyers are inclined to walk if property values slide. This settlement problem reflects a poor legal mechanism (the pre-sale contract), and a lack of incentive for truthfulness. A second problem is the search costs of finding buyers. At around 10% of project costs, pre-sales are more expensive to developers than finance. This is where Market Design comes in.

Submission to Senate Economics References Committee, An Inquiry in to Affordable Housing

Developer paid fees or infrastructure charges are a commonly used mechanism for local governments to pay for new infrastructure. However, property developers claim that these costs are merely passed on to home buyers, with adverse effects to housing affordability. Despite numerous government reports and many years of industry advocacy, there remains no empirical evidence in Australia to confirm or quantify this passing on effect to home buyers and the consequent effect on housing affordability. Hence there remains no data from which governments can base policy decision on, and the debate continues. This research examines the question of the impact of infrastructure charges on housing affordability in Australia. It employs hedonic regression methods to estimate the impact of infrastructure charges on house prices and vacant lot prices in Brisbane, Australia during 2005-2011, using a data set of 29,752 house sales, comprising 4,699 new house sales and 25,053 existing house sales and 13,739 lot sales. The regression results for the effect of infrastructure charges on house prices in Brisbane indicated that for every $1.00 of infrastructure charge levied on developers, all house prices increase by $3.69 or a 369% overpassing of these government levies onto home buyers. Thus, this one government levy could be responsible for $877 per month on home owner mortgage repayments in Brisbane, Queensland. This research is consistent with international findings, that support the proposition that developer paid infrastructure charges are passed on to home buyers and are a significant contributor to increasing house prices and reduced housing affordability. Understanding who really pays for urban infrastructure is critical to both the housing affordability and infrastructure funding debates in Australia and this research provides the first empirical data for policy makers to assess their policy objectives and outcomes against.

Identifying the financial barriers to deliberative, affordable apartment development in Australia

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the financial barriers to the supply of affordable apartments in Australia and examine whether demand aggregation and ‘deliberative development’ (self-build) can form a new affordable housing ‘structure of provision’. Design/methodology/approach Market design, an offshoot of game theory, is used to analyse the existing apartment development model, with ‘deliberative development’ proposed as an innovative alternative. Semi-structured interviews with residential development financiers are used to evaluate whether deliberative development could obtain the requisite development finance. Findings Our investigation into the financial barriers of a deliberative development model suggest that while there are hurdles, these can be addressed if key risks in the exchange process can be mitigated. Hence, affordability can be enhanced by ‘deliberative development’ replacing the existing speculative development model. Research implications Market design is a new innovative theoretical approach to understanding the supply of housing, offering practical solutions to affordable apartment supply in Australia. Originality/value This research identifies financial barriers to the supply of affordable apartments; introduces theoretical understandings gained from market design as an innovative solution; provides evidence that a new structure of building provision based on ‘deliberative development’ could become a key means of achieving more affordable and better designed apartments.