Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Planning and affordable housing in Australia, New Zealand and England: common culture; different mechanisms

  • Policy and Practice
  • Published:
Journal of Housing and the Built Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper compares approaches to planning and delivery of affordable housing across England, Australia and New Zealand. While all three nations began with a common starting point—early British town planning legislation—underlying differences in urban regulation, property rights and housing provision soon emerged. However, signs of convergence have lately re-appeared, as all three countries have responded to affordable housing shortages by exploring new strategies to boost supply through the planning system. In the tradition of comparative housing research, this paper examines these strategies in the context of each country’s particular historical, socio-cultural, governance and urban planning frameworks. Our analysis shows how differences in planning systems and approaches to housing assistance can delimit opportunities to secure new affordable homes, particularly in the context of increasing land values. Effective delivery of affordable housing through the planning system depends on consistent and enforceable policy articulation, government commitment, a mature affordable housing sector, and particular market conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ABS. (2009). Catalogue 65230, household income and income distribution, Australia 2007–08. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • ABS. (2010). Catalogue 6416, house price indexes, eight capital cities, September 2010. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • AIHW. (2011). Housing assistance in Australia 2011; Cat. no. HOU 236. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

  • Austin, P. M. (2009). The affordable housing: Enabling territorial authorities Act 2008—When policy transfer fails. Housing Finance International, 14–17.

  • Australian Government. (2011). Nation building economic stimulus and jobs plan—Social housing 2010. Retrieved February 7, 2011 from www.economicstimulusplan.gov.au/housing/pages/default.aspx.

  • Barker, K. (2004). Review of housing supply delivering stability: Securing our future housing needs, final report. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker, K. (2006). Barker review of land use planning—Final report—Recommendations. London: HM Treasury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, A., Kearins, B., & Pieters, H. (2007). Housing affordability and planning in Australia: The challenge of policy under neo-liberalism. Housing Studies, 22, 11–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calavita, N., & Grimes, K. (1998). Inclusionary housing in California—The experience of two decades. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64, 150–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calavita, N., & Mallach, A. (2010). Inclusionary housing in international perspective: Affordable housing, social inclusion, and land value recapture. Washington: Lincoln Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, R. L. H. (2007). Planning, land and affordable housing in Hong Kong. Housing Studies, 22, 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • COAG Reform Council. (2009). COAG Communique 7 December 2009. Canberra: Council of Australian Governments.

    Google Scholar 

  • COAG Reform Council. (2012). Housing supply and affordability reform. Canberra: Council of Australian Governments: Housing Supply and Affordability Reform Working Party.

  • Cowan, S. M. (2006). Anti-snob land use laws, suburban exclusion, and housing opportunity. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28, 295–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crook, A. D. H., Bibby, P. R., Ferrari, E. T., Jones, M., Monk, S., Tang, C., et al. (2011). New affordable homes: What, for whom and where were registered providers building between 1989 and 2009. London: Homes & Communities Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, A. D. H., & Monk, S. (2011). Planning gains, providing homes. Housing Studies, 26, 997–1018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crook, A. D. H., Monk, S., Rowley, S., & Whitehead, C. M. E. (2006). Planning gain and the supply of new affordable housing in England. Town Planning Review, 77, 353–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crook, A. D. H., & Whitehead, C. M. E. (2002). Social housing and planning gain: Is this an appropriate way of providing affordable housing? Environment and Planning A, 34, 1259–1279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davison, G., Gurran, N., van den Nouwelant, R., Pinnager, S., & Randolph, B. (2012). Affordable housing, urban renewal and planning: Emerging practice in New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) Final Report Series, 195. Melbourne: AHURI.

    Google Scholar 

  • DBH. (2010). New Zealand housing report 2009/2010: Structure, pressures and issues. Wellington: Department of Building and Housing.

    Google Scholar 

  • DCLG. (2010). Live tables. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • DCLG. (2011). Laying the foundations: A housing strategy for England. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • DCLG Various years. Housing strategy statistical appendix (HSSA) London: Department for Communities and Local Government.

  • De Kam, G. (1998). Value for money. Quality, and price of land for social housing in the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 13, 463–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of the Environment. (1977). Housing policy: A consultation document. Cmnd 6851. London: HMSO.

  • DPMC. (2007). Final report of the house prices unit: House price increases and housing in New Zealand. Wellington: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, G. (1994). Building the New Zealand dream. Palmerston North: The Dunmore Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmour, T., & Milligan, V. (2012). Let a hundred flowers bloom: Innovation and diversity in Australian not-for-profit housing organisations. Housing Studies, 27, 476–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleeson, B., & Low, N. (2000). Australian urban planning: New challenges, new agendas. Melbourne: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golland, A., & Oxley, M. (2004). Housing development in Europe. In A. Golland & R. Blake (Eds.), Housing development: Theory, process and practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurran, N., Milligan, V., Baker, D., Bugg, L. B., & Christensen, S. (2008). New directions in planning for affordable housing: Australian and international evidence and implications. AHURI Final Report Series, 120. Melbourne: AHURI.

  • Gurran, N., Ruming, K. & Randolph, B. (2009). Counting the costs: Planning requirements, infrastructure costs and residential development in Australia. AHURI Final Report Series, 140. Melbourne: AHURI.

  • Gurran, N., & Whitehead, C. (2011). Planning and affordable housing in Australia and the UK: A comparative perspective. Housing Studies, 26, 1193–1214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HNZC. (2005). Building the future: The New Zealand housing strategy. Wellington: Housing New Zealand Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmans, A. (2012). The implications of the 2008-based household projections for estimates of housing need. Town and Country Planning, 81, 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, K., Atkinson, R., Peisker, V. C., Berry, M. & Dalton, T. (2010). What future for public housing? A critical analysis. AHURI Final Report Series, 151. Melbourne: AHURI.

  • Louw, E., van der Krabben, E., & Priemus, H. (2003). Spatial development policy: Changing roles for local and regional authorities in the Netherlands. Land Use Policy, 20, 357–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meltzer, R., & Schuetz, J. (2010). What drives the diffusion of inclusionary zoning? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29, 578–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Memon, P. A. (1991). Shaking off the colonial legacy? Town and country planning in New Zealand. Planning Perspectives, 6, 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, W. W., & Lincoln, R. K. (1993). Linkage fees and fair share regulations—Law and method. Urban Lawyer, 25, 223–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • MfE. (2010). Building competitive cities: Reform of the urban and infrastructure planning system—A discussion document. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, V. (2003). How different? Comparing housing policies and housing affordability consequences for low income households in Australia and the Netherlands. Netherlands Geographical Studies, 318, 220 pp.

  • Milligan, V., Gurran, N., Lawson, J., Phibbs, P. & Phillips, R. (2009). Innovation in affordable housing in Australia: Bringing policy and practice for not-for profit housing organisations together. AHURI Final Report Series, 134. Melbourne: AHURI.

  • Monk, S., & Burgess, G. (2012). Capturing planning gain: The transition from S106 to the Community Infrastructure Levy, RICS Research Report. London: RICS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monk, S., Crook, T., Lister, D., Rowley, S., Short, C., & Whitehead, C. M. E. (2005). Land and finance for affordable housing. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, A. (2012). Review of barriers to institutional investment in private rented homes. London: Department for Communities & Local Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • NHPAU. (2009). More homes for more people: Advice to Ministers on housing levels to be considered in regional plans. London: National Housing and Planning Advice Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • NHSC. (2010). Second state of supply report. Canberra: National Housing Supply Council. Canberra: Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.

  • Norris, M. (2006). Developing, designing and managing mixed tenure estates: Implementing planning gain legislation in the Republic of Ireland. European Planning Studies, 14, 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NZPC. (2012). Housing affordability inquiry. Wellington: New Zealand Productivity Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parliament of Australia. (2008). A good house is hard to find: Housing affordability in Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, D., & Hackett, P. (2009). Mind the gap—Housing supply in a cold climate. London: The Smith Institute, Town and Country Planning Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Satsangi, M., & Dunmore, K. (2003). The planning system and the provision of affordable housing in rural Britain: A comparison of the Scottish and English experience. Housing Studies, 18, 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, M., Whitehead, C. M. E., & Munro, M. (2005). Lessons from the past, challenges for the future for housing policy: An evaluation of English housing policy 1975–2000. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

    Google Scholar 

  • UTAG. (2010). Report of the Minister for the Environment’s Urban Technical Advisory Group. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, M., & Allmendinger, P. (2003). Land-use planning and the housing market: A comparative review of the UK and the USA. Urban Studies, 40, 953–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, C. M. E. (2007). Planning policies and affordable housing: England as a successful case study? Housing Studies, 22, 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. (2000). Inclusionary zoning and affordable housing in Sydney. Urban Policy and Research, 18, 291–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P., Whitehead, C. M. E., Clarke, A., & Jones, M. (2012). Freedom to Succeed: Liberating the potential of housing associations. Cambridge: CCHPR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. (2001). Expectations of a better world. Canberra: Royal Australian Planning Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, J. (2008). Australia’s housing affordability crisis. Australian Economic Review, 41, 200–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Architecture and Planning, NICAI, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Patricia M. Austin

  2. Urban and Regional Planning Program, Faculty of Architecture Design and Planning, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Nicole Gurran

  3. Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Christine M. E. Whitehead

Authors
  1. Patricia M. Austin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicole Gurran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christine M. E. Whitehead
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patricia M. Austin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Austin, P.M., Gurran, N. & Whitehead, C.M.E. Planning and affordable housing in Australia, New Zealand and England: common culture; different mechanisms. J Hous and the Built Environ 29, 455–472 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-013-9356-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-013-9356-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation