No abstract

Unlike debates about security for owner occupiers which recognise that security is complex and multi-layered, security for renters is often presented as single dimensional and conflated with de jure security of tenure, deriving from a property rights perspective. This article proposes a broader concept of 'secure occupancy' to enable a more nuanced understanding of security for tenants. A new framework is developed to enable investigation of the dynamic interactions between legislation/regulation, housing market conditions, public policies and cultural norms around renting, which shape security of occupancy for tenants. The paper illustrates this approach, drawing on a study of the rental systems of nine developed countries, identifying key factors that appear to have a strong bearing on strengthening, and weakening, of security of occupancy for renter households. The article concludes that this approach has the potential to deepen understanding of security for renters and to stimulate new avenues for research.

Related reports and documents AHURIAHURI is a national independent research network with an expert not-for-profit research management company, AHURI Limited, at its centre.AHURI's mission is to deliver high quality research that influences policy development and practice change to improve the housing and urban environments of all Australians.Using high quality, independent evidence and through active, managed engagement, AHURI works to inform the policies and practices of governments and the housing and urban development industries, and stimulate debate in the broader Australian community.AHURI undertakes evidence-based policy development on a range of priority policy topics that are of interest to our audience groups, including housing and labour markets, urban growth and renewal, planning and infrastructure development, housing supply and affordability, homelessness, economic productivity, and social cohesion and wellbeing.

No abstract

Interest in the concept of social cohesion has waxed and waned over the years since Durkheim's writing at the end of the nineteenth century, with the greatest interest being in times of fundamental economic, social and political change. The term is used in at least two different ways: firstly, in a policy context, to indicate the aims of, and rationale for, certain public policy actions; and secondly, as an analytical construct to explain social, political and sometimes economic changes. This article focuses on the first of these and traces the recent usage of social cohesion, spanning its take-up and influence within the Canadian policy environment, through to its usage (or otherwise) across liberal welfare regimes such as the UK, the US, Australia and New Zealand, and contrasting its application in European institutions. The differential usage across these geopolitical settings is highlighted. Drawing upon Esping-Andersen's welfare state typology, and an explicit acknowledgement of national differences in relation to ethnic and cultural diversity, various explanations for these differences are discussed and their policy consequences explored.