Chiang, Lee-Yun (2023) Affordable housing as an infrastructure asset: A public-private partnerships approach. PhD thesis, Griffith University, Australia.
Abstract
This thesis establishes new insights into providing and financing of Australia's social and affordable housing infrastructure within a public-private partnership (PPP) model. Social housing is considered an important piece of a broader housing continuum and is recognized as a type of social infrastructure (Infrastructure Australia, 2019). Social housing contributes to the effective functioning of society. Troy (2012) conceptualizes social housing as an essential infrastructure that enables economic productivity. From the perspective of affordable housing as an infrastructure asset, this research presents the outcomes to develop a new investment pathway via a PPP model highly used in procuring and financing infrastructure assets. In Australia, changing attitudes toward the role of government and housing policy have meant that funding and other support for the housing system have steadily decreased over the past decade. The shift of responsibility from federal to state governments has increased the importance of cross-sectoral partnerships and networks as vital institutional mechanisms. This responsibility shift points to the need to understand partnership arrangements to design and deliver housing and urban policy. Further, Australia's social housing reform promoting a multi-providers system has been characterised by contracts with community housing providers (CHPs). The multi-providers system guides the need for designing an investment incentive for CHPs to operate efficiently and leverage private finance. Lastly, an increasing housing policy imperative is identifying effective new ways of financing and delivering additional social and affordable housing infrastructure. Additionally, the establishment of the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation aims to provide long-term and low-cost finance to registered CHPs. Registered CHPs can also access two sources of funding: state government subsidies and Commonwealth Rent Assistance. The shift in funding and financing arrangements is called to explore financing mechanisms closely linked to partnership arrangements. Housing policy reforms and inquiries address the need to understand partnership arrangements, to design an investment incentive for CHPs, and to explore financing mechanisms for achieving Australia's social and affordable housing infrastructure. This thesis aims to address Australia's housing affordability to inform housing policy by applying the existing delivery and funding models in the infrastructure sector. Also, this thesis applies ownership rights, one of the widely discussed concepts in infrastructure literature, to social and affordable housing. Correspondingly, the three objectives are to: (1) apply a PPP project delivery approach to social and affordable housing delivery, focusing on understanding risks faced by the public sector in a PPPs model. (2) analyze the relationship between asset ownership and cost efficiency. (3) apply a project finance model to finance social and affordable housing assets, focusing on understanding subsidy levels and debt sizing in a PPP project finance model.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Liu, Benjamin; Roca, Eduardo D; Reid, Sacha and Earl, William G |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | affordable housing; social housing; infrastructure; public-private partnerships; community housing providers; Australia |
| Index terms: | investment incentive, society, urban policy, housing affordability, project finance, housing, cost efficiency, financing, infrastructure sector, subsidy, private finance, public sector, Australia, partnership, productivity, housing policy, ownership, funding, affordable housing, project delivery, social housing |
| Subjects: | Geography, communities and social development, housing and residential development, construction type, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, public policy, urban planning, economics, financial management, management, administrative law, industry analysis, partnership management, project delivery |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Governance, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Urban Studies, Procurement, Geographical Context, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here