“Ambiguous, Confusing, and Not Delivering Enough Housing”

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings

Responsibility for affordable housing delivery is increasingly being delivered through collaborations between private, nonprofit, and state actors and operationalized through voluntary negotiations. Negotiation theory provides a lens for understanding why outcomes are often limited by highlighting the impact of stakeholder interests, the potential for mutual gains, trust between negotiating partners, and access to information. We surveyed 148 housing stakeholders in the state of Victoria (Australia) shortly after the passage of legislation that supported the negotiation of voluntary affordable housing agreements. We found that stakeholders share a belief in the necessity of affordable housing. However, the current institutional context often precludes opportunities for mutual gain because there is little incentive to engage in negotiations, provision of sufficient incentives is problematic, and contributions are difficult to enforce. We found large discrepancies in levels of training in development feasibility across sectors and low trust between negotiation participants. We argue that these factors are likely to reduce the efficiency and effectiveness of voluntary affordable housing negotiations in Victoria and other jurisdictions with weak institutional arrangements for affordable housing negotiations.

Takeaway for practice

Across sectors, respondents prefer mandatory rather than voluntary affordable housing provisions. Voluntary affordable housing negotiations are unlikely to be effective without institutional scaffolding to ensure that negotiations result in mutual gains for stakeholders. Planners should pair the introduction of voluntary affordable housing negotiations with training resources for the stakeholders who will participate in negotiations as well as mechanisms for enforcing negotiated agreements.

Keywords:

• affordable housing agreements
• development feasibility
• inclusionary zoning
• negotiation

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website.

Notes

1 A Section 173 agreement is a legal contract between the responsible authority (usually a local council) and a landowner that sets out conditions or restrictions on the use or development of land. It is most commonly used in Victoria to secure open space or preserve heritage features.

2 Deliberative development is a term used in Australia to refer to collaborative, self-organized, multifamily residential housing (often referred to as Baugruppen in other countries).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Katrina Raynor

KATRINA RAYNOR ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of Melbourne researching policy and partnerships for affordable housing.

Matthew Palm

MATTHEW PALM ([email protected]) is an assistant professor at Worcester State University researching transport planning and affordable housing.

Georgia Warren-Myers

GEORGIA WARREN-MYERS ([email protected]) is a senior lecturer in property at the University of Melbourne researching commercial real estate and housing.