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.

The use of income valuation methods to value rural property

Despite the advances that have been made in relation to the valuation of commercial, industrial and retail property, there has not been the same progress in relation to the valuation of rural property. Although the majority of rural property valuations also require the valuer to carry out a full analysis of the economic performance of the farming operations, this information is rarely used to assess the value of the property, nor is it even used for a secondary valuation method. Over the past 20 years the nature of rural valuation practice has required rural valuers to undertake studies in both agriculture (farm management) and valuation, especially if carrying out valuation work for financial institutions. The additional farm financial information obtained by rural valuers exceeds that level of information required to value commercial, retail and industrial by the capitalisation of net rent/profit valuation method and is very similar to the level of information required for the valuation of commercial and retail property by the Discounted Cash Flow valuation method. On this basis the valuers specialising in rural valuation practice should have the necessary skills and information to value rural properties by an income valuation method. Although the direct comparison method of valuation has been sufficient in the past to value rural properties the future use of the method as the main valuation method is limited and valuers need to adopt an income valuation method as at least a secondary valuation method to overcome the problems associated with the use of direct comparison as the only rural property valuation method. This paper will review the results of an extensive survey carried out by rural property valuers in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, in relation to the impact of farm management on rural property values and rural property income potential.

The Influence of Farm Management on NSW Rural Property Income and Total Average Annual Returns

The importance of agriculture in many countries has tended to reduce as their economies move from a resource base to a manufacturing industry base. Although the level of agricultural production in first world countries has increased over the past two decades, this increase has generally been at a less significant rate compared to other sectors of the economies. Despite this increase in secondary and high technology industries, developed countries have continued to encourage and support their agricultural industries. This support has been through both tariffs and price support. Following pressure from developing economies, particularly through the World Trade Organisation (WTO), GATT Uruguay round and the Cairns Group developed countries are now in various stages of winding back or de-coupling agricultural support within their economies. A major concern of farmers in protected agricultural markets is the impact of a free market trade in agricultural commodities on farm incomes, profitability and land values. This paper will analyse both the capital and income performance of the NSW rural land market over the period 1990-1999. This analysis will be based on several rural land use classifications and will compare the total return from rural properties based on the farm income generated by both the average farmer and those farmers considered to be in the top 20% of the various land use areas. The analysis will provide a comprehensive overview of rural production in a free trade economy.

Comparing subjective and objective measures of health : Evidence from hypertension for the income/health gradient

Economists rely heavily on self-reported measures to examine the relationship between income and health. We directly compare survey responses of a self-reported measure of health that is commonly used in nationally representative surveys with objective measures of the same health condition. We focus on hypertension. We find no evidence of an income/health greadient using self-reported hypertension but a sizeable gradient when using objectively measured hypertension. We also find that the probability of a false negative reporting is significantly income graded. Our results suggest that using commonly available self-reported chronic health measures might underestimate true income-related inequalities in health.

Relative income, happiness, and utility : an explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles

The well-known Easterlin paradox points out that average happiness has remained constant over time despite sharp rises in GNP per head. At the same time, a micro literature has typically found positive correlations between individual income and individual measures of subjective well-being. This paper suggests that these two findings are consistent with the presence of relative income terms in the utility function. Income may be evaluated relative to others (social comparison) or to oneself in the past (habituation). We review the evidence on relative income from the subjective well-being literature. We also discuss the relation (or not) between happiness and utility, and discuss some nonhappiness research (behavioral, experimental, neurological) related to income comparisons. We last consider how relative income in the utility function can affect economic models of behavior in the domains of consumption, investment, economic growth, savings, taxation, labor supply, wages, and migration.

The causal effect of income on health: Evidence from German reunification

We investigate whether therewas a causal effect of income changes on the health satisfaction of East and West Germans in the years following reunification. Our data source is the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP) between 1984 and 2002, and we fit a recently proposed fixed-effects ordinal estimator to our health measures and use a causal decomposition technique to account for panel attrition.We find evidence of a significant positive effect of income changes on health satisfaction, but the quantitative size of this effect is small. This is the case with respect to current income and a measure of ‘permanent’ income.