Counting the Costs of Public Housing Estate Redevelopment in Melbourne: A comparison of delivery options

ABSTRACT

Since 2001, social housing levels, traditionally a safety net for low-income households, have stagnated in Victoria. To increase social housing levels, the Victorian state government announced a programme to redevelop ageing public housing estates through public–private partnerships. This study compares private sector, community housing sector, and government-led redevelopment models, to determine which provides the best value for money method of redevelopment. Importantly, considering the Victorian government’s plans to increase social housing levels post-COVID19, the study found that the government is best placed to deliver social housing, due, in part, to lower borrowing costs and no requirement for making profit.

摘要

自2001年以来，社会住房水平（传统上是低收入家庭的安全网）在维多利亚州停滞不前. 为了提高社会住房水平，维多利亚州政府宣布了一项计划，通过公私伙伴关系重建老化的公共住房小区. 本研究比较私营机构、社区房屋机构及政府主导的重建模式，以决定哪种重建模式最具性价比. 重要的是，考虑到维多利亚州政府在COVID19之后增加社会住房水平的计划，研究发现，政府最适合提供社会住房，部分原因是借贷成本较低，不需要盈利.

KEYWORDS:

• Public housing
• social housing
• urban renewal
• housing policy
• housing affordability
• housing economics

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank those who participated in the interviews for this research. We would also like to thank the two referees for their valuable comments and suggestions which greatly improved the article. This study was supported through an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported through an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.