1
The Issue of Housing Affordability
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name and Number
Instructor's Name
Submission Date
2
Introduction
The affordability of housing has become a pressing social problem of the current society
in Australia that has affected different population groups and worsened existing disparities. This
causes a rather multi-faceted issue that has been precipitated by factors such as increased
population density, low interest and tax rates that favor property investors, and persistent acute
housing deficit peculiar to large cities. Some of the social consequences of this crisis include the
postponement of the formation of a new family, reduced levels of social mobility, and, in
general, the deterioration of the quality of life for many Australians.
Policy Options and Critique
Regarding this as a burning problem and challenging topic, several suggestions have been
provided by the different critics and policy makers with the strengths and weaknesses. One is the
geographic deregulation, particularly in zoning laws, or offering incentives to the developers to
provide more homes (Homsy & Kang, 2023). (Kuchler et al., 2023) has made a convincing case
that planning restrictions should be eased in inner and middle ring suburbs because measures
such as these may flood the market and ease the housing prices. They suggest that increasing
density to permit some other medium density in the current single-family neighborhoods could
bring more choices to the residents without necessarily transforming the communities.
Nevertheless, the opponents of this approach point out that supply-side measures and incentives
may not be enough to solve the problem and can contribute to over-urbanization of some regions.
The second policy option that is often considered in relation to private property is the
possible changes to the policy of tax incentives for property investment. Negative gearing policy
and capital gains tax discount has been blamed for promoting property speculation and putting
3
the cost out of reach for average first time homeowners. (Cho et al., 2022), indicated that to
reduce the dominance of negative gearing for existing properties, both its use should be phased
out gradually and the capital gains tax discount should be lowered. They say that the changes
could make the property market fairer to investors and those wanting a first home so that a wider
cross section of society is able to become homeowners. However, the critics of this approach
argue that such changes might ultimately discourage people from investing in rental property and
eventually lead to higher rents thus posing new problems for those unable to purchase houses.
A third strategy calls for even greater state activism in funding and developing social
housing and raising rent subsidies. As well (Clarke et al., 2024)recently pointed to a current
shortage of public and community housing stock, and advocated for enhancement of this sector
for affordable options for people with low income. They claim that this approach can provide
short-term assistance to those most affected by the crisis while at the same time seeking to
resolve the overall situation in the housing market. Critics of this strategy, however, much point
to the high costs of such programs as well as the tendency that such policies are likely to promote
geographic concentration of areas of socioeconomic deprivation.
Thus, it seems that in order to have a positive impact in addressing the crisis of
affordability of housing and to provide better solutions for the members of the community, it is
best to have a combination of features of these various strategies (Gurran et al., 2022). Of course,
one possibility for alteration of existing policies may include the development of a coherent
national housing policy where provincial, regional, and federal governments are aligned
(Madisha & Khumalo, 2024). The problem of housing affordability is a complex issue that
cannot be solved through a single approach.
Case for Amending the Policy
4
The first measure might involve deploying specific zoning amendments that would allow
for much-needed housing production in areas with elevated demand (Lastowka, n.d.). These
reforms will require focus on diverse housing types to cater for the different issues and income
statuses. At the same time, it is necessary to begin a gradual change in tax incentives. It implies
that the emphasis should be placed not on the speculation on the existing properties but on the
construct of new affordable housing units. This learnt shift in tax policy can assist in shifting
investment to improving the housing stock as a whole. Another important measure is the further
development of investment in social and community housing. However, it should be coupled
with programs that enhance social integration, which is vital to avoid the aggregation of the less
privileged in particular districts. This approach can go a long way in developing balanced and
integrated communities. These would necessitate those developers incorporate certain percentage
of such houses in their new projects. That, in turn, can prevent wealthy builders from buying out
all the choice sites, which would allow them to make more high-priced homes and exclude
cheaper ones from affluent neighborhoods.
Effecting these changes would entail a lot of coordination, time, paperwork, and much
political desire. It would entail the creation of broad policies at the federal level to create the
national housing policy and also provide overall objectives and frameworks. This would have to
be followed by consultations with state and local authorities on defining and coordinating the
planning policies and on how to introduce the zoning changes that would be relevant for the state
and adapted to its conditions. Last but not the least, there is a need to enact inclusionary zoning
policies. More particularly, the phasing in of tax changes would require to be gradual over three
to five years to permit markets to adjust themselves and gentle the economy down. This would
5
require a large budget for social housing development and management, which could be
provided by the state, or in cooperation with non-profit organizations and private companies.
The changes made in these social policies would have a significant effect on the economy
and welfare. The enhancement of the housing stock could lead to an increase in homeowners’
disposable income, which in turn could translate to higher levels of expenditure and hence
growth. It may also limit the dependency on welfare payments concerning housing stress and
promote more optimal distribution of the resources that are public. This shift would render
welfare and assistance more proactive and expansive which aims not only at providing income
support to citizens but also stable affordable housing in order to participate in social and
economic life.
Social policy in Australia and its role in income, education and health
Social policy in Australia, thus, depends on several interrelated factors, all of which
contribute to the overall social policy framework. Concerning education, these policies intend to
offer equally effective schooling and tertiary education to whoever seeks it, which determines
future earnings and social status. (Carter-Smith, 2020), stresses the provision of early childhood
education, which may help address long-term disadvantage and increase social wellbeing. Health
policies concern the protection of health care system’s capacity, as well as the questions of
availability and price for excluded population groups. (Walters et al., 2023), have pointed out
that there is a need for continuous improvement in sectors including primary care and mental
health, to achieve real Universal Health Care for all Australians. Policies on housing, as
highlighted earlier on are pivotal in determining the society and the economic progression. It
further concludes that there is a strong interconnectivity between housing affordability and social
policies noticeable in the various social fields.
6
Consequently, many of these areas rely on policies in the areas of economics such as
taxation and labour market policies that shape the general social priorities. Easy adaptability of
the labor market is crucial for future economic growth and social equity but has also highlighted
the necessity of the right amount of protection for workers.
Analyzing the approaches used in the gaming of social policies in Australia is very
informative as it shows how income distribution, education, and health are defined under the
social policies. However, there are still existing issues with progressive taxation and targeted
welfare payments and income differences. More recently, (Khatri & Assefa, 2022), annual report
has shown that there are existing disparities in health status between individuals with and without
a disability or living in disadvantaged areas.
Specific educational policy measures, for instance, needs-based financing of schools and
promoting vocational education and training, are geared toward enhancing social mobility.
Nevertheless, there is still a gap in the Mean Average Standard based on SES (Socio Economic
Status) and place/school location, which may indicate that more fine tuning of policy measures
might be needed (Suna et al., 2020).
The impact of social policy upon families and children, housing, community services and
the law and social order
Like any other developed countries, health policies in Australia aim at delivering
Universal Healthcare through Medicare and pharmaceutical benefit scheme. However, there is
still much to be desired on healthcare, particularly on mental health and indigenous health. The
Australian Medical Association has urged the government to extend funding in the area of
prevention of diseases and the-comprehensiveness enhancement of services to counter these
7
problems. The consequences of social policy initiatives are heart-felt where the families and
children are concerned. Housing is an important determinant of how families are formed and
whether they remain stable, and high housing costs can lead to people postponing becoming
parents or having to live in unsuitable conditions. Preschool and care programs, care benefits for
children, and parental leave legislation are important for organizing work and supporting
children’s growth and well-being. The social impact which these policies have in relation to
housing can define the state of families and their children in the future.
According to (Rolfe et al., 2020), housing stability a critical determinant of child welfare
and wellbeing with children living in homes that are affordable, safe, and secure experiencing
better health, education, and social outcomes. They stated that improving housing affordability is
not just an economic question, but rather it is an investment in the future of Australian society.
Conclusion
All in all, it will be seen that housing affordability concerns, and the mechanisms through
which they are currently being managed in Australia, cannot be isolated from myriad other social
policy domains. Unfavorable housing outcomes can be changed by precise improvements and
uniting top-down and bottom-up approaches of different governments and sectors of society.
This, in turn, could lead to better outcomes in terms of social justice, economic conditions, and
quality of life.
The way ahead will continue to involve research, development of policies, and efforts to
solve the factors that make houses unaffordable. While addressing this problem the society and
government of the country will have to come up with solutions, which will as complex as the
8
issue discussed since the potentially effective approach will imply collaboration of specialists
from various spheres and will have to evolve with the society of Australia.
9
References
Carter-Smith, G. (2020, September 17). Why early childhood education is important to you.
Faculty of Education.
https://education.unimelb.edu.au/news-and-events/news/2020/teaching/why-early-
childhood-education-is-important-to-you
Cho, Y., Li, S. M., & Uren, L. (2022). Investment Housing Tax Concessions and Welfare:
Evidence from Australia (SSRN Scholarly Paper 3760896).
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3760896
Clarke, A., Cheshire, L., Parsell, C., & Morris, A. (2024). Reified scarcity & the problem space
of ‘need’: Unpacking Australian social housing policy. Housing Studies, 39(2), 565–583.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2022.2057933
Gurran, N., Maalsen, S., & Shrestha, P. (2022). Is ‘informal’ housing an affordability solution
for expensive cities? Evidence from Sydney, Australia. International Journal of Housing
Policy. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19491247.2020.1805147
Homsy, G. C., & Kang, K. E. (2023). Zoning Incentives: Exploring a Market-Based Land Use
Planning Tool. Journal of the American Planning Association, 89(1), 61–71.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2022.2050935
Khatri, R. B., & Assefa, Y. (2022). Access to health services among culturally and linguistically
diverse populations in the Australian universal health care system: Issues and challenges.
BMC Public Health, 22(1), 880. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13256-z
Kuchler, T., Piazzesi, M., & Stroebel, J. (2023). Housing market expectations☆. In R.
Bachmann, G. Topa, & W. van der Klaauw (Eds.), Handbook of Economic Expectations
(pp. 163–191). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-822927-9.00013-6
10
Lastowka, L. (n.d.). Unifying Upzoning with Affordable Housing Production Strategies.
Madisha, M. G., & Khumalo, P. (2024). Intergovernmental Relations and implementation of
social housing policy in Gauteng Province, South Africa. International Journal of
Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478), 13(4), Article 4.
https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v13i4.3257
Rolfe, S., Garnham, L., Godwin, J., Anderson, I., Seaman, P., & Donaldson, C. (2020). Housing
as a social determinant of health and wellbeing: Developing an empirically-informed
realist theoretical framework. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1138.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09224-0
Suna, H. E., Tanberkan, H., Gür, B., Perc, M., & Özer, M. (2020). Socioeconomic Status and
School Type as Predictors of Academic Achievement. Journal of Economy Culture and
Society, 61, Article 61. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-0034
Walters, J. K., Sharma, A., Boyce, J., & Harrison, R. (2023). Analysis of Centralized Efficiency
Improvement Practices in Australian Public Health Systems. Journal of Healthcare
Leadership, 15, 313–326. https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S435035
