Shaping the Housing Grey Zone: An Australian Retirement Villages Case Study

Abstract

Housing options for an ageing, predominantly home-owning society have evolved within the shifting context of social, economic, policy and locally-specific property conditions. Drawing on a case study of the retirement housing industry in Victoria, this paper finds that actor groups from overlapping aged care and housing agencies, from not-for-profit and for-profit sectors, have continuously redefined taken-for-granted housing “problems” of old age and developed solutions. The paper contributes to understanding the ideas and conditions that have shaped the retirement housing industry, and contributes theoretically to research that seeks to understand how ideas about housing and ageing are built into institutional arrangements.

在一个老年化且多数人拥有住房的社会里，住房选择随着社会、经济、政策和当地房地产条件而 变化。本文通过对维多利亚退休房地产业的个案研究，发现从养老机构到住房机构，从非营利机 构到营利机构，行为人群不断重新界定老年人想当然的住房“问题”，并据此寻找解决方案。本 文指出了影响退休房地产业的观念和状况，从理论上丰富了关于住房和老年观念与制度安排的内 在关系的研究。

Keywords:

• Housing
• ageing population
• retirement villages

Notes

1. Sources of data for Figure 1: 1983: 17 private for-profit villages, 18 not-for-profit villages (Government of Victoria 1984).

2002: 230 resident-funded villages, with roughly 8% operated by listed companies (Stimson 2002); Roughly 188 not-for-profit ILU villages, based on 6207 units and an average 33 units/site (McNelis 2004).

2014: 436 villages, 33,159 units (Thornton 2014).

2015: 19% operated by listed-for-profit companies, 33% by private for-profits, 48% by not-for-profits (Consumer Affairs Victoria 2015).