Livable Housing Design : Who will take responsibility?

Current housing design and construction practices do not meet the needs of many people with disability and older people, and limits their inclusion and participation in community and family life. In spite of a decade of advocacy for regulation of access within residential environments, the Australian government has opted for a voluntary approach where the housing industry takes responsibility. Housing industry leaders have indicated that they are willing to transform their established practice, if it makes good business to do so, and if there is a demand from home buyers. To date, there has been minimal demand. In 2010, housing industry and community leaders formalised this commitment in an agreement, called Livable Housing Design, to transform housing design and construction practices, with a target of all new housing providing minimal access by 2020. This paper reports on a study which examined the assumption behind Livable Housing Design agreement; that is, individuals in the housing industry will respond voluntarily and take responsibility for the provision of inclusive housing. From interviews with developers, designers and builders in Brisbane, Queensland, the study found a complex picture of competing demands and responsibilities. Instead of changing their design and construction practices voluntarily to meet the future needs of users over the life of housing, they are more likely to focus on their immediate contractual obligations and to maintain the status quo. Contrary to the view of the government and industry leaders, participants identified that an external regulatory framework would be required if Livable Housing Design’s 2020 goal was to be met.

The link between infrastructure charges and housing affordability in Australia: Where is the empirical evidence?

Developer paid charges or contributions are a commonly used infrastructure funding mechanism for local governments. However, developers claim that these costs are merely passed on to home buyers, with adverse effects to housing affordability. Despite a plethora of government reports and industry advocacy, there remains no empirical evidence in Australia to confirm or quantify this passing on effect to home buyers and hence no data for which governments to base policy decision upon. This paper examines the question of who really pays for urban infrastructure and the impact of infrastructure charges on housing affordability. It presents the findings of a number of international empirical studies that provide evidence that infrastructure charges do increase house prices. Based on international findings, and in the absence of any Australian research, then these findings suggest that if the international findings are transferable, then there is empirical evidence to support the proposition that developer paid infrastructure charges are a significant contributor to increasing house prices.

Strategies and solutions for housing sustainability : building information files and performance certificates

The overall aim of this research project was to provide a broader range of value propositions (beyond upfront traditional construction costs) that could transform both the demand side and supply side of the housing industry. The project involved gathering information about how building information is created, used and communicated and classifying building information, leading to the formation of an Information Flow Chart and Stakeholder Relationship Map. These were then tested via broad housing industry focus groups and surveys. The project revealed four key relationships that appear to operate in isolation to the whole housing sector and may have significant impact on the sustainability outcomes and life cycle costs of dwellings over their life cycle. It also found that although a lot of information about individual dwellings does already exist, this information is not coordinated or inventoried in any systematic manner and that national building information files of building passports would present value to a wide range of stakeholders.

Critical factors affecting the implementation of sustainable housing in Australia

Improved public awareness of the environment and available technologies will continue to highlight the importance of sustainable housing in the coming years. Despite this potential, the majority of new housing development in Australia is still “project homes” with few tangible sustainability measures. Stakeholders tend to have different perceptions and priorities on sustainability. To promote the uptake of sustainable housing products, a study of the critical issues affecting the implementation of sustainable housing is necessary. This research investigates multiple factors that may influence key stakeholders’ decision-making towards sustainable housing adoption. Drawing insights from combined questionnaire and interview studies, 12 critical factors and their interrelationships are identified based on professional views in the Australian housing industry. The mutual influences, or driving force and dependency, of these factors are further investigated via Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) to distinguish those requiring prominent and immediate attention. A hierarchical model is developed to help key stakeholders prioritise actions when implementing sustainable housing.

Livable housing design : the voluntary provision of inclusive housing in Australia

This paper reports on a study of the voluntary provision of inclusive housing. The impetus for the study is the Livable Housing Design initiative, an agreement among Australian housing industry and community leaders in 2010 to a national guideline and voluntary strategy with a target to provide minimum access features in all new housing by 2020. Situated in and around Brisbane, Australia, the study problematises the assumption that the housing industry will respond voluntarily; an assumption which this study concludes is unfounded. The Livable Housing Design initiative asks individual agents to consider the needs of people beyond the initial contract, to proceed with objective reasoning and to do the right thing voluntarily. Instead, the study found that interviewees focused on their immediate contractual obligations, were reluctant to change established practices and saw little reason to do more than was legally required of them. This paper argues that the highly-competitive and risk-averse nature of the industry works against a voluntary approach for inclusive housing and, if the 2020 target of the Livable Housing Design initiative is to be reached, a mandated approach through legislation will be necessary. The Livable Housing Design initiative, however, has an important role to play in preparing the Australian housing industry to accept further regulation.

Does the housing market respond to information disclosure? : Effects of toxicity indices in Japan

The policy instruments that provide information on a firm's or facility's environmental performance, such as the U.S. Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) and the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register system (PRTRs) used in some European countries and Japan, play an important role in encouraging firms or facilities to improve their environmental performance, if investors, consumers and residents recognize their environmental performance. This study uses a hedonic approach to explore how the Japanese rental housing market responds to carcinogenic risk arising from releases and transfers of chemical substances produced and used at close facilities. We found that residents do not perceive carcinogenic risk generated more than 1.0 km away from their residence and that they seem to recognize the increased carcinogenic risk at distances from 0.5 km to 1.0 km away; a 1% increase in carcinogenic risk reduces the average rent by 0.0007%. The distance at which residents perceive the risk arising from such facilities is less than in previous studies. This suggests that the risk perception recognized in previous studies may capture the other externalities in addition to the chemical risk because the risk is measured by the distance.

Examining the potential for design and renewable energy to contribute to zero energy housing in Queensland

This was a comparative study of the possibility of a net zero energy house in Queensland, Australia. It examines the actual energy use and thermal comfort conditions of an occupied Brisbane home and compares performance with the 10 star scale rating scheme for Australian residential buildings. An adaptive comfort psychometric chart was developed for this analysis. The house's capacity for the use of the natural ventilation was studied by CFD modelling. This study showed that the house succeeded in achieving the definition of net zero energy on an annual and monthly basis for lighting, cooking and space heating / cooling and for 70% of days for lighting, hot water and cooking services.

Case study analysis for the development and implementation of sustainable housing in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Rapid urbanization in developing countries is putting stress on current infrastructure, which is resulting in the rapid consumption of natural resources to cope with the increasing demand of the population. Saudi Arabia is one of the developing countries facing rapid urbanization where its infrastructure is facing a huge demand by the increasing urbanization levels of its major cities. Developing sustainable housing in Saudi Arabia is a must for the preservation of resources for future generations of the region and of the world. In the coming years, several resources (such as fossil fuels and natural water) will be facing shortage if not managed properly. Providing electricity for housing in Saudi Arabia is one of the biggest challenges facing the country, where it is estimated that by 2050 energy demand in the Kingdom will be approximately 120 GW, and to meet this growing demand, 8 million barrels of oil per day will be required. However, implementation of Sustainable Housing in Saudi is still problematic to reach the desired goals of various key Saudi stakeholders. This paper analyses three case studies that have adopted sustainable construction methods and compares them to traditional non-sustainable houses. The outcome suggests that there is a viable chance for development of sustainable housing in the region if supported by the government with less red tape to deal with. This paper recommends that the Saudi governments should mandate new laws to reduce the overall consumption of energy and water to reduce the overall consumption of natural resources to secure the future generation’s demand of natural resources.

The role of the Saudi government and the Saudi building code in implementing sustainable housing construction in Saudi Arabia

The housing construction industry in Saudi Arabia has been booming rapidly in the past two decades. This boom has faced multiple downfalls in relation to government regulations and building codes, one of which is the application of sustainable methods to the housing construction. This paper sheds some light on the current role of the Saudi government and the role of the Saudi Building Code (SBC) in the housing construction industry. The methodology utilised in this paper was a Delphi survey that was distributed to twenty-five key stakeholders in the housing construction industry in Saudi Arabia. The results indicate that there is a lack of integration between the Saudi Building Code and the current construction methods used in the current construction industry. Some factors and elements are recommended to be incorporated into the Saudi Building Code and to be adopted as regulations in the Saudi housing construction industry.

Person-Centred Approaches to Private Housing for People with Disability : Impediments, Difficulties and Opportunities

Objective The main objective of the project was to explore the barriers and obstacles impeding a person-centred approach to planning and private housing for people with disability. Method Methodologically, the project involved explanation building using a multiple case study approach supported by a contextual study. It focussed initially on three organisations and their attempts to integrate innovative and what they regarded as person-centred models of housing into the private housing market for people with disability. It also included a fourth case highlighting the experiences of individuals with disability in accessing suitable and affordable housing. Results Using an ecological framework, the project found that: • Challenges exist within systems (such as the macro cultural, economic, regulatory systems through to local community, family and intra personal systems) as well as with interaction between systems • Reaching across systems is a key role for organisations and individuals but is very challenging with distance from the individual as well as from the policy/funding/service systems being a key aspect of the nature and extent by which they are challenged • In the case of housing for people with disability a ‘disability space’ is assumed and maintained disparately within each system and is separate from the ‘mainstream space’ with the established policy, legal, funding structures making it difficult to move between the two spaces. Conclusions Based on these findings, the project makes recommendations for government, community organisations, the housing industry, people with disability and their families and support networks, as well as for future research. An overarching recommendation is the need to address housing stock availability and suitability by adopting a mainstream approach rather than a disability-first/disability-specific approach.

Reshaping housing using prefabricated systems

Prefabricated housing innovations have the potential to reduce the environmental impact of construction through improvements to efficiency and quality. The current paper presents a number of recommendations for increasing the adoption of prefabrication based on a review of published evidence. The recommendations consider multiple stakeholders including builders and other intermediaries, suppliers, end-users, as well as their interaction with the broader policy context and technical issues

Developing affordable and sustainable housing through energy, transport, and building utility integration

Housing affordability and sustainable development are not polarised ideologies as both are necessary with increasing urbanisation. We must bridge the gap between current median house pricing and target affordable house pricing whilst pursuing sustainability. This paper examines the potential of initial construction cost and ongoing utilities and transport cost reduction through the integration of sustainable housing design and transit oriented development principles in a Commuter Energy and Building Utilities System (CEBUS). It also introduces current research on the development of a Dynamic Simulation Model for CEBUS applications in the Australian property development and construction industry.