Industrialized housing in China : a coin with two sides

China today is experiencing a time when housing is needed more than ever and one approach satisfying this need is by industrialization - a streamlined process aimed at generating profits and promoting energy efficiency in the housing sectors. Although large housing programs have been completed in China, few housing projects have been built in an industrialized manner. One contributing factor is that industrialization is not omnipotent and, just as a coin has two sides, not all the outcomes of industrialization are beneficial. In this paper, a preliminary assessment is made of these two sides - the benefits and hindrances of industrialized housing in China - by literature review and survey. Case studies are used to verify the questionnaire survey results and from which the advantages and disadvantages involved are compared. The findings indicate the need for formulating policies to encourage industrialized housing in China and for well-planned R&D themes to be implemented simultaneously with industry practices in the near future.

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.

The implementation of sustainable housing through mutual benefits to key stakeholders

Among the Australian general public, there are increasing concerns about environmental issues. Accordingly, sustainability in the housing industry is also becoming a priority on the development agenda. However, putting the principles of ecological sustainability into practice within social and economic development requires intensive involvement of major stakeholders such as governments, developers, builders, consumers and a range of other professionals. Establishing a sustainable value entails asymmetric life-cycle returns, making it important for major stakeholders to appreciate the benefits of this new agenda not only for the individual businesses but also for other supply chain partners. This context warrants the study to promote collective benefits for key stakeholders by establishing a mutual-benefit framework for sustainable housing implementation. A research was carried out in the hope to establish a mutual-benefit framework by investigating challenges of achieving benefits (CABs) from sustainable housing development in a multi-stakeholder context. In the research work reported in this article, a comparative questionnaire study was first conducted among seven stakeholder groups in the Australian housing industry, to examine the importance and inter-relationships of CABs. In-depth interviews then furthered the survey findings with a focus on stakeholder diversity. The synthesized findings of the survey and interview study lead to the identification of 12 critical mutual-benefit factors and their mutual influence. Based on such a platform, a systematic framework is developed with the aid of Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM), to identify the patterns of stakeholder benefit materialisation, suggest the priority of critical factors and provide related stakeholder-specific action guide for sustainable housing implementation.

Critical Factors of Promoting Market Demand of Sustainable Housing in Australia

Strong regulatory pressure on environmental issues and the improved public awareness will continue to influence the market demand for sustainable housing in the coming years. Despite this potential, the voluntary up-take rate of sustainable practices is not as high as expected within the new built housing industry. This is in contrast to the influx of emerging building technologies, new materials and innovative designs as seen in office buildings and exemplar homes built worldwide. One possible reason for this is that key stakeholders such as developers, builders and consumers do not fully understand and appreciate the tangible and mutual benefits of sustainability in their professional and business activities. This situation warrants the study of a multifaceted strategy that integrates the needs of multiple stakeholders. This research investigates multiple factors that affect key stakeholder’s benefits in sustainable housing implementation. Drawing insights from a quantitative study on a questionnaire survey and a qualitative study of in-depth interviews with key stakeholders in the Australian housing industry, 11 critical factors of driving market demand for sustainable housing were unearthed. Their inter-relationships were identified with the aid of Interpretive Structural Modelling. The study concludes with a hierarchical model that amalgamates the strategies for the decision making of key stakeholders.

Inclusive housing in Australia – a voluntary response

The lack of inclusive housing in Australia contributes to the marginalization and exclusion of people with disability and older people from family and community life. The Australian government has handed over the responsibility of increasing the supply of inclusive housing to the housing industry through an agreed national access standard and a voluntary strategy. Voluntary strategies have not been successful in other constituencies and little is known about what would work in Australia today. Findings from a research project into the voluntariness of the housing industry indicate that a reliable and consistent supply is unlikely without an equivalent increase in demand. The strategy has, however, an important role to play in the task of changing housing industry practices towards building more inclusive communities.

The benefits of tree-based models for stock selection

The identification of the primary drivers of stock returns has been of great interest to both financial practitioners and academics alike for many decades. Influenced by classical financial theories such as the CAPM (Sharp, 1964; Lintner, 1965) and APT (Ross, 1976), a linear relationship is conventionally assumed between company characteristics as derived from their financial accounts and forward returns. Whilst this assumption may be a fair approximation to the underlying structural relationship, it is often adopted for the purpose of convenience. It is actually quite rare that the assumptions of distributional normality and a linear relationship are explicitly assessed in advance even though this information would help to inform the appropriate choice of modelling technique. Non-linear models have nevertheless been applied successfully to the task of stock selection in the past (Sorensen et al, 2000). However, their take-up by the investment community has been limited despite the fact that researchers in other fields have found them to be a useful way to express knowledge and aid decision-making...

A hybrid approach to combining CART and logistic regression for stock ranking

The benefits of applying tree-based methods to the purpose of modelling financial assets as opposed to linear factor analysis are increasingly being understood by market practitioners. Tree-based models such as CART (classification and regression trees) are particularly well suited to analysing stock market data which is noisy and often contains non-linear relationships and high-order interactions. CART was originally developed in the 1980s by medical researchers disheartened by the stringent assumptions applied by traditional regression analysis (Brieman et al. [1984]). In the intervening years, CART has been successfully applied to many areas of finance such as the classification of financial distress of firms (see Frydman, Altman and Kao [1985]), asset allocation (see Sorensen, Mezrich and Miller [1996]), equity style timing (see Kao and Shumaker [1999]) and stock selection (see Sorensen, Miller and Ooi [2000])...

Analyzing the literature for the link between the conservative Islamic culture of Saudi Arabia and the design of sustainable housing

Saudi Arabia experiences housing shortage for mid and low-income families, which is caused by rapid population growth. This condition is worsened by the fact that the current housing supply has problems in meeting both sustainable requirements and cultural needs of those families. This paper aims to investigate the link between the unique conservative Saudi culture and the design of sustainable housing, while keeping the housing cost affordable for mid and low-income families. The paper is based on a review of literatures on the issues of the Islamic culture and how can they be integrated into the design process of a Saudi house. Findings from literature reveiw suggest several design requirements for accommodating the conservative Saudi Culture in low cost sustainable houses. Such requirements include the implementation of proper usage of windows, and house orientation with a courtyard inside rather than facing the main street will provide natural ventilation while maintaining privacy. The main contribution to the body of knowledge is that this is a new approach to sustainable housing in Saudi Arabia considering not only energy use and architectural design issues but also socio-cultural issues as an essential part of sustainability.

Impact fees and new housing cost: A comparative analysis of the empirical models

Developers and policy makers are consistently at odds over the debate as to whether impact fees increase house prices. This debate continues despite the extensive body of theoretical and empirical international literature that discusses the passing on to home buyers of impact fees, and the corresponding increase to housing prices. In attempting to quantify this impact, over a dozen empirical studies have been carried out in the US and Canada since the 1980’s. However the methodologies used vary greatly, as do the results. Despite similar infrastructure funding policies in numerous developed countries, no such empirical works exist outside of the US/Canada. The purpose of this research is to analyse the existing econometric models in order to identify, compare and contrast the theoretical bases, methodologies, key assumptions and findings of each. This research will assist in identifying if further model development is required and/or whether any of these models have external validity and are readily transferable outside of the US. The findings conclude that there is very little explicit rationale behind the various model selections and that significant model deficiencies appear still to exist.