The decline of a homeowning society? Asset-based welfare, retirement and intergenerational equity in Australia

Stebbing, Adam; Spies-Butcher, Ben

doi:10.1080/02673037.2015.1070797

Cited by 59 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kemeny argued in his 1981 book "The Myth of Home Ownership" that countries where home ownership dominates generally have a poorly developed welfare system whereas countries where non-profit rental housing is dominant or very significant usually have a welldeveloped public welfare system (see also Kemeny 2005a). This idea came to be called the Kemeny Thesis, and it was taken up, discussed and tested more systematically by welfare state researchers, especially Stephen Castles and his team (Castles and Ferrera 1996;Castles 1998; see also Conley and Gifford 2006;Stamsø 2010;Doling and Horsewood 2011;Stebbing and Spies-Butcher 2016). Generally the Kemeny Thesis has received support in the empirical analyses though not all have shared the interpretation that Kemeny (and Castles) provided for the relationship (see Delfani, De Deken, and Dewilde 2014).…”

Section: Theory Of Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theory of Housing, From Housing, About Housing

Ruonavaara

2017

Housing, Theory and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four positions concerning theorising housing-related phenomena are discussed.(1) Theory of housing (v1) : It is possible and desirable to construct a theory of housing to which all housing-related research topics can be related. (2) Theory about housing: It is not possible, nor desirable to try to construct a theory of housing; one should rather apply theoretical resources developed in established disciplines and research fields in theorising housing-related topics. (3) Theory from housing: It is possible and desirable to theorise housing by scrutinising the nature of housing as a special activity and experience. (4) Theory of housing (v2) : It is possible and desirable to construct a theory about the invariable relationships between features of the housing system and features of society. Theory of housing (v1) is shown to be questionable basically due to the fact that housing is not a research topic but a common denominator of various topics. Theory about housing is acceptable with the qualification that housing research can feed back to more general theorising. Theory from housing offers a limited perspective on theorising but it can serve as a necessary check to other theorising. Problems with Theory of housing (v2) have to do with the balance between abstract generalisation and concrete empirical/historical analysis.

show abstract

Section: Theory Of Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theory of Housing, From Housing, About Housing

Ruonavaara

2017

Housing, Theory and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, levels of homeownership have recently been declining among younger cohorts (e.g. Stebbing and Spies-Butcher 2016;Udagawa and Sanderson 2017:2-6). This latter development is also readily explainable.…”

Section: Intergenerational Inequality: "A Perfect Storm"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergenerational Inequality? Labour, Capital, and Housing Through the Ages

Christophers

2017

Antipode

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the relevance of generational relations to emerging patterns of inequality in advanced capitalist societies, with a particular focus on inequalities related to housing wealth. At its heart is a critique of the increasingly prevalent argument that generational difference is a crucial axis of inequality today. It argues that while contemporary capitalist societies are certainly characterized by marked inequalities between generations and that the latter are manifested inter alia in housing ownership, understanding such inequalities principally in generational terms is problematic because they reflect deeper, more fundamental, structural inequalities and should therefore be conceptualized as such. The article suggests that the principal significance of generational relations to contemporary inequality dynamics actually concerns economic transfers rather than differences between generations. Within‐family transfers of wealth, especially housing‐related wealth, from older generations to younger ones tend to reproduce pronounced, structurally generated existing patterns of intra‐generational inequality.

show abstract

“…These critiques of ABW form a recognisable body of work that can be dubbed 'Housing Asset-based Welfare' (HABW). This research claims that ABW led to pathologies in the housing market that then affected the wider economy and society (Watson 2008;Toussaint and Elsinga 2009;Doling and Ronald 2010;Ronald and Doling 2011;Lowe, Searle and Smith 2011;Montgomerie and Büdenbender 2015;Stebbing and Spies-Butcher 2016;Walks 2016). This paper claims that HABW has taken the label ABW but has changed its original content.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…3 ABW focuses mainly on small amounts of financial wealth (Gregory 2016). However, this has prompted a criticism that ABW fails to recognise the dominant role that housing plays in the assets owned by large parts of the population (Watson 2008;Toussaint and Elsinga 2009;Doling and Ronald 2010a;2010b;Ronald and Doling 2011;Lowe, Searle and Smith 2011;Montgomerie and Büdenbender 2015;Stebbing and Spies-Butcher 2016;Walks 2016;Lennartz and Ronald 2017;Ronald, Lennartz and Kadi 2017;Soaita, Searle, McKee, and Moore 2017). Doling and Ronald write that the: 'asset in asset-based welfare has frequently become property or housing asset' (Doling and Ronald 2010a, 165, italics in the original).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A house divided: asset-based welfare and housing asset-based welfare

Prabhakar

2018

International Journal of Housing Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Asset-based Welfare (ABW) is a policy approach that claims the individual ownership of assets is important for individual welfare. It is concerned mainly with small amounts of financial wealth and has sparked growing scholarly criticism that argues that it ignores the dominant role of housing as a type of asset. This Housing Asset-based Welfare (HABW) critique also charts the ways that ABW leads to pathologies in housing markets. A major problem for ABW though is that HABW has emptied ABW of its original content. This paper claims that this results in a 'house divided', that is two separate literatures that both purport to study assets but talk past one another. This paper suggests that research would be enhanced by a greater dialogue between these different literatures. It further argues that a theme of egalitarian property-owning democracy is a way of uniting these different literatures. Creating an egalitarian property-owning democracy suggests that there should be shared research on taxing housing wealth and developing new models of home ownership.

show abstract

The decline of a homeowning society? Asset-based welfare, retirement and intergenerational equity in Australia

Cited by 59 publications

References 38 publications

Theory of Housing, From Housing, About Housing

Theory of Housing, From Housing, About Housing

Intergenerational Inequality? Labour, Capital, and Housing Through the Ages

A house divided: asset-based welfare and housing asset-based welfare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About