Which Women are More Likely to be Abused? Public Housing, Cohabitation and Separated/Divorced Women.

Data collected at Canadian public housing estates in eastern Ontario are used here to analyze two hypotheses. Overall these women report more violence than do otherwise situated women in other general surveys. More specifically, complex theoretical models were designed to generate two hypotheses for further analysis: First, that separated/divorced women are more likely to be abused within public housing than married women. Second, that cohabiting women will report violence victimization at a higher rate than separated, divorced, or married women. Some support for both hypotheses were found, and the theoretical models are used to discuss these findings.

Whole life cycle costing and quality satisfaction : public housing floor material

Most commonly, residents are always arguing about the satisfaction of sustainability and quality of their high rise residential property. This paper aim is to maintain the best quality satisfaction of the floor materials by introducing the whole life cycle costing approach to the property manager of the public housing in Johor. This paper looks into the current situation of floor material of two public housings in Johor, Malaysia and testing the whole life cycle costing approach towards them. The cost figures may be implemented to justify higher investments, for examples, in the quality or flexibility of building solutions through a long-term cost reduction. The calculation and the literature review are conducted. The questionnaire surveys of two public housings were conducted to make clear the occupants’ evaluation about the actual quality conditions of the floor material in their house. As a result, the quality of floor material based on the whole life cycle costing approach is one of the best among their previous decision making tool that was applied. Practitioners can benefit from this paper as it provides information on calculating the whole life costing and making the decisions for floor material selection for their properties.

Empowerment games : empathic design probes for user participation in community housing

This paper documents the empowering process of a group of public housing residents through different design probing exercises. These exercises worked along with existing social processes without any involvement of designers. This paper shows how a design researcher devised a series of probing tools called "empowerment games" with a group of active users. These games are self-learning tools for making the abstract language of design legible to users. The main purpose of this intitiative was to change the preconception of govenmental bodies and professional designers of the passivity of the users with regard to their designed environment. This was the first case of the application of a participatory design process in Hong Kong subsidized housing. Design empathy is a central skill when working with users throughout the whole design research project.

Constructing quality : the Hong Kong Housing Department journey

This paper explores the ‘journey’ along the ‘never ending quality road’ undertaken by the Hong Kong Housing Department over the last 15 years. It briefly covers the early history of public housing in Hong Kong, the catalytic effect brought about by the discovery of the infamous 26 sub-standard blocks in the mid-80s leading to the subsequent major improvements to process control and structural quality in the period 1985-1990. It then moves onto a discussion of initiatives taken since 1991, including the formation of the List of Building Contractors and the implementation of the Performance Assessment Scoring System (PASS). The paper ends with a discussion of the current status of quality issues within the Department and touches on future initiatives being developed to further enhance the quality of public housing in Hong Kong.

Building a successful partnership to increase affordable rental housing supply in Queensland

Accessibility to housing for low to moderate income groups in Australia has been experiencing a severe decline since 2001. On the supply side, the public sector has been reducing its commitment to the direct provision of public housing. Despite high demand for affordable housing, there has been limited supply generated by non-government housing providers. One possible solution to promote an increase in affordable housing supply, like other infrastructure, is through the development of multi-stakeholder partnerships and private financing. This research aims to identify current issues underlying decision-making criteria for building multi-stakeholder partnerships to deliver affordable housing projects. It also investigates strategies for minimising risk and ensuring the financial outcomes of these partnership arrangements. A mix of qualitative in-depth interviews and quantitative surveys has been used as the main method to explore stakeholder experiences regarding their involvement in partnership arrangements in the affordable housing sector in Queensland. Two sets of interviews were conducted following an exploratory pilot study: one set in 2003-2004 and the other in 2007-2008. There were nineteen respondents representing government, private and not-for-profit organisations in the first stage interviews and surveys. The second stage interviews were focussed on twenty-two housing providers in South East Queensland. Initial analyses have been conducted using thematic and statistical analyses. This study extends the use of existing decision making tools and combines the use of a Soft System Framework to analyse the ideal state questionnaires using qualitative thematic analysis. Soft System Methodology (SSM) has been used to analyse this unstructured complex problem by using systematic thinking to develop a conceptual model and carrying it to the real world situations to solve the problem. This research found that the diversity of stakeholder capability and their level of risk acceptance will allow partnerships to develop the best synergies and a degree of collaboration which achieves the required financial return within acceptable risk parameters. However, some of the negativity attached to future commitment to such partnerships has been found to be the anticipation of a worse outcome than that expected from independent action. Many interviewees agree that housing providers' fear of financial risk and community rejection has been central to dampening their enthusiasm for entering such investment projects. The creation of a mixed-use development structure will mitigate both risk and return as the commercial income will subsidise the affordable housing development and will normalise concentration of marginalised low-income people who live in a prime location with an award winning design. In addition, tenant support schemes and rent-to-buy incentive programs will encourage them to secure their tenancies and significantly reduce the risk of rent arrears and property damage. There is also a breakthrough investment vehicle offered by the social developer which sells the non-physical but financial product to individual and institutional investors to mitigate further financial risk. Finally, this study recommends modification of the current value-for-money framework in favour of broader partnership arrangements which are more closely aligned with risk minimisation strategies.

Affordable housing solutions : affordable housing providers’ perspective

Accessibility to housing for low to moderate income groups in Australia has experienced a severe decline since 2002. On the supply side, the public sector has been reducing its commitment to the direct provision of public housing. Despite strong demand for affordable housing, limited supply has been generated by non-government housing providers. This paper identifies and discusses some current affordable housing solutions which have been developed by non-government housing providers to ameliorate the problem. This study utilises case studies generated from nineteen housing providers during in-depth interviews in South East Queensland in 2007-2008. The case studies are classified into four categories which relate to the nature of their product: affordable rental housing, mixed housing, affordable housing for people with special needs and low cost home ownership. Each category is discussed on the basis of the characteristics typical of that organisation of housing provider, their partnership arrangements and main target market. In addition, the special design and facilities required for people with special needs which include high care accommodation and aged care are highlighted. Finally, this study recommends offering a continuum of solutions to affordable housing for low income people by means of a rent-to-buy scheme.

Affordable housing solutions : affordable housing providers’ perspective

Accessibility to housing for low to moderate income groups in Australia has been experiencing a severe decline since 2002. On the supply side, the public sector has been reducing its commitment to the direct provision of public housing. Despite strong demand for affordable housing, limited supply has been generated by nongovernment housing providers. This paper identifies and discusses some current affordable housing solutions to ameliorate the problem which have been developed by non-government housing providers. This study utilises case studies generated from nineteen housing providers during indepth interviews in South East Queensland in 2007-2008. The case studies are classified into four categories which relate to the nature of their product: affordable rental housing, mixed housing, affordable housing for people with special needs and low cost home ownership. Each category is discussed on the basis of the characteristics typical of that organisation of housing provider, their partnership arrangements and main target market. In addition, the special design and facilities required for people with special needs which include high care accommodation and aged care are highlighted. Finally, this study recommends offering a continuum of solutions to affordable housing for low income people by means of a rent-to-buy scheme.

Improving access to housing for low-income communities in Dhaka: From rhetoric to reality in community participation

The research explores how community participation can address affordable housing problems of the poor in Dhaka. The research, based on extensive interviews, community focus groups and household surveys in different Dhaka slums, identifies the limiting factors to promote community participation in affordable housing creation. In Dhaka housing options for poor are currently limited to affordable shelters in informal settlements. Public housing programs have failed to reach the poor and meet affordability levels due to a number of factors including lack of beneficiary participation. Beneficiary participation, though widely recognized for success in housing initiatives, often deteriorates in process of implementation into mere involvement, not reflecting community needs and aspirations and thus failing to meet its core objectives. This research identified the most significant impediments as well as opportunities to advance participation in their own housing provisions in Dhaka city.

Report : analysis of maintenance database inputs

In the previous phase of this project, 2002-059-B Case-Based Reasoning in Construction and Infrastructure Projects, demonstration software was developed using a case-base reasoning engine to access a number of sources of information on lifetime of metallic building components. One source of information was data from the Queensland Department of Public Housing relating to maintenance operations over a number of years. Maintenance information is seen as being a particularly useful source of data about service life of building components as it relates to actual performance of materials in the working environment. If a building is constructed in 1984 and the maintenance records indicate that the guttering was replaced in 2006, then the service life of the gutters was 22 years in that environment. This phase of the project aims to look more deeply at the Department of Housing data, as an example of maintenance records, and formulate methods for using this data to inform the knowledge of service lifetimes.

Accidental amenity

Landscape in Australian multi-unit residential developments has passed through a number of phases. Can we make the successes more intentional than serendipitous? When did the block of flats become renamed "multi-unit residential"? Perhaps it coincided with a realization by Australians that medium - and high-density urban housing was neither an attack on the quarter-acre block nor a synonym for public housing. Higher densities allow people to participate in the city, and the expansion of unit-based housing represents Australians' growing love of cities for their urban and cosmopolitan values. As our attitude to the city has changed, so have the types of multi-unit residential stock changed - in their spatial qualities as well as their role in the landscape.

Risk-assessment practices in the private rental sector : implications for low-income renters (Final Report)

This report focuses on risk-assessment practices in the private rental market, with particular consideration of their impact on low-income renters. It is based on the fieldwork undertaken in the second stage of the research process that followed completion of the Positioning Paper. The key research question this study addressed was: What are the various factors included in ‘risk-assessments’ by real estate agents in allocating ‘affordable’ tenancies? How are these risks quantified and managed? What are the key outcomes of their decision-making? The study builds on previous research demonstrating that a relatively large proportion of low-cost private rental accommodation is occupied by moderate- to high-income households (Wulff and Yates 2001; Seelig 2001; Yates et al. 2004). This is occurring in an environment where the private rental sector is now the de facto main provider of rental housing for lower-income households across Australia (Seelig et al. 2005) and where a number of factors are implicated in patterns of ‘income–rent mismatching’. These include ongoing shifts in public housing assistance; issues concerning eligibility for rent assistance; ‘supply’ factors, such as loss of low-cost rental stock through upgrading and/or transfer to owner-occupied housing; patterns of supply and demand driven largely by middle- to high-income owner-investors and renters; and patterns of housing need among low-income households for whom affordable housing is not appropriate. In formulating a way of approaching the analysis of ‘risk-assessment’ in rental housing management, this study has applied three sociological perspectives on risk: Beck’s (1992) formulation of risk society as entailing processes of ‘individualisation’; a socio-cultural perspective which emphasises the situated nature of perceptions of risk; and a perspective which has drawn attention to different modes of institutional governance of subjects, as ‘carriers of specific indicators of risk’. The private rental market was viewed as a social institution, and the research strategy was informed by ‘institutional ethnography’ as a method of enquiry. The study was based on interviews with property managers, real estate industry representatives, tenant advocates and community housing providers. The primary focus of inquiry was on ‘the moment of allocation’. Six local areas across metropolitan and regional Queensland, New South Wales, and South Australia were selected as case study localities. In terms of the main findings, it is evident that access to private rental housing is not just a matter of ‘supply and demand’. It is also about assessment of risk among applicants. Risk – perceived or actual – is thus a critical factor in deciding who gets housed, and how. Risk and its assessment matter in the context of housing provision and in the development of policy responses. The outcomes from this study also highlight a number of salient points: 1.There are two principal forms of risk associated with property management: financial risk and risk of litigation. 2. Certain tenant characteristics and/or circumstances – ability to pay and ability to care for the rented property – are the main factors focused on in assessing risk among applicants for rental housing. Signals of either ‘(in)ability to pay’ and/or ‘(in)ability to care for the property’ are almost always interpreted as markers of high levels of risk. 3. The processing of tenancy applications entails a complex and variable mix of formal and informal strategies of risk-assessment and allocation where sorting (out), ranking, discriminating and handing over characterise the process. 4. In the eyes of property managers, ‘suitable’ tenants can be conceptualised as those who are resourceful, reputable, competent, strategic and presentable. 5. Property managers clearly articulated concern about risks entailed in a number of characteristics or situations. Being on a low income was the principal and overarching factor which agents considered. Others included: - unemployment - ‘big’ families; sole parent families - domestic violence - marital breakdown - shift from home ownership to private rental - Aboriginality and specific ethnicities - physical incapacity - aspects of ‘presentation’. The financial vulnerability of applicants in these groups can be invoked, alongside expressed concerns about compromised capacities to manage income and/or ‘care for’ the property, as legitimate grounds for rejection or a lower ranking. 6. At the level of face-to-face interaction between the property manager and applicants, more intuitive assessments of risk based upon past experience or ‘gut feelings’ come into play. These judgements are interwoven with more systematic procedures of tenant selection. The findings suggest that considerable ‘risk’ is associated with low-income status, either directly or insofar as it is associated with other forms of perceived risk, and that such risks are likely to impede access to the professionally managed private rental market. Detailed analysis suggests that opportunities for access to housing by low-income householders also arise where, for example: - the ‘local experience’ of an agency and/or property manager works in favour of particular applicants - applicants can demonstrate available social support and financial guarantors - an applicant’s preference or need for longer-term rental is seen to provide a level of financial security for the landlord - applicants are prepared to agree to specific, more stringent conditions for inspection of properties and review of contracts - the particular circumstances and motivations of landlords lead them to consider a wider range of applicants - In particular circumstances, property managers are prepared to give special consideration to applicants who appear worthy, albeit ‘risky’. The strategic actions of demonstrating and documenting on the part of vulnerable (low-income) tenant applicants can improve their chances of being perceived as resourceful, capable and ‘savvy’. Such actions are significant because they help to persuade property managers not only that the applicant may have sufficient resources (personal and material) but that they accept that the onus is on themselves to show they are reputable, and that they have valued ‘competencies’ and understand ‘how the system works’. The parameters of the market do shape the processes of risk-assessment and, ultimately, the strategic relation of power between property manager and the tenant applicant. Low vacancy rates and limited supply of lower-cost rental stock, in all areas, mean that there are many more tenant applicants than available properties, creating a highly competitive environment for applicants. The fundamental problem of supply is an aspect of the market that severely limits the chances of access to appropriate and affordable housing for low-income rental housing applicants. There is recognition of the impact of this problem of supply. The study indicates three main directions for future focus in policy and program development: providing appropriate supports to tenants to access and sustain private rental housing, addressing issues of discrimination and privacy arising in the processes of selecting suitable tenants, and addressing problems of supply.