Locked-out: generational inequalities of housing tenure and housing type

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to first explore whether Australia and the main metropolitan areas demonstrate significant differences in tenure and property type between generational groups. Second, whether the millennial generation is more likely to rent rather than own. Third, if such variation in tenure and property type by millennials is one of individual choice and lifestyle or the impact of housing market inefficiencies.Design/methodology/approachThis paper employs a comparative research approach using secondary data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) to consider housing tenure and type distributions across generations as well as through cross-city analysis.FindingsThe results show that home ownership is still the dominant tenure in Australia, but private rental is of increasing significance, becoming the tenure of choice for Millennials. Owner occupation is shown to remain and high and stable levels for older generations and while lower in percentage terms for Generation X; this generation exhibits the highest growth rate for ownership. Significant differences are shown in tenure patterns across Australia.Originality/valueThe significance of this paper is the focus on the analysis of generational differences in housing tenure and type, initially for Australia and subsequently by major metropolitan areas over three inter-census periods (2006, 2011 and 2016). It enhances the understanding of how policies favouring ageing in place can contradict other policies on housing affordability with specific impact on Millennials as different generations are respectively unequally locked-out and locked-in to housing wealth.

Housing Inequalities: The Space-Time Geography of Housing Policies

“…In summary, housing inequalities are characterised by disparities in the distribution of characteristics of the housing market across population groups and geographical regions, with greater equalities observed when these disparities are reduced. Housing inequalities include discrepancies in the distributions of tenure types and levels of home ownership (Bonnet et al, 2018;Hochstenbach, 2018;Lowies et al, 2022;Smith et al, 2022), house prices and capital gains (Mayock & Malacrida, 2018;Wind & Hedman, 2018) and availability of housing in well-connected areas (Martínez et al, 2018;Rokem & Vaughan, 2019). Housing inequalities may reflect the varying needs of different population groups and may not be considered inherently "unfair" or inequitable, depending on the way one defines "fairness".…”

“…Housing inequalities are structural in nature in that they reflect persistent disparities in the distribution of housing across population groups (James et al, 2022). They may indicate differences in levels of home ownership (Bonnet et al, 2018;Hochstenbach, 2018;Lowies et al, 2022;Smith et al, 2022), disparities in capital gains over time (Mayock & Malacrida, 2018;Wind & Hedman, 2018) and availability of housing in centrally located and well connected areas (Martínez et al, 2018;Rokem & Vaughan, 2019). Housing inequalities are rooted in multiple causes.…”