Commercial rented housing: two sectors in the Netherlands

This contribution analyses the different developments and roles of two commercial rented sectors in the Netherlands: rented dwellings owned by individuals (private landlords) and rented dwellings owned by institutional investors. Characteristics of properties and households are specified in relation to tenure. An analysis follows of household characteristics of non-movers and movers to, from and within the commercial rented sector. Some policy issues are dealt with, which are relevant for the commercial rented sector. The commercial rented dwellings owned by persons are predominantly pre-war, small, cheap dwellings with a modest quality. They form part of the urban renewal problem. The owners are small-scale landlords, mostly not professional, who do not invest in ambitious renovation or new dwellings. For this sector the future is not very bright. For starters on the housing market and elderly people, this urban sector may have a limited function. The commercial rented dwellings owned by institutions are predominantly post-war (built after 1960), spacious, expensive dwellings with a high quality. The owners are pension funds and insurance companies which sell their properties often after 15 to 20 years when conditions are favourable. This sector has a strategic function at the upper side of the rental market where rents are decontrolled. Well-to-do households in a flexible urban labour market and elderly people are the most important target groups for this sector. This sector demonstrates how a free rental market functions and enriches the whole housing sector with relevant market signals. Hugo Priemus holds the chair in housing at Delft University of Technology, where he is also managing director of OTB Research Institute for Housing, Urban and Mobility Studies.     

Investment in Rental Housing in Australia: Small Landlords and Institutional Investors

The private rental sector has always been an important part of the Australian housing system. Although declining in relation to home ownership in the two decades after the Second World War, private renting has never fallen below 20 per cent of the total housing stock, a share that it has maintained over the past 40 years. Small, scale petty landlordism has characterised this market sector, with a majority of rental stock owned by individuals. This paper summaries the specific characteristics of rental ownership in Australia, drawing on a recent national survey of landlords carried out by the Australian Bureau of Statistics and identifies the key factors responsible for the persistence of this pattern of ownership. The reasons for the absence of institutional investors from this sector are then discussed, based on selective interviews with key players in the banking, insurance and superannuation industries. Current changes in market and policy environments are identified which may, however, increase the likelihood of institutional involvement in the provision of rental housing, in general, and social housing, in particular. The analysis is informed by the results of financial modelling carried out at the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.     

Making a Rental Property Home

English-language literature on the relationship between home and dwelling has largely focused on the benefits of homeownership and (to a lesser extent) social rental in facilitating ontological security. Less consideration has been given to the experiences of private tenants. This paper draws on findings of a study on security of occupancy to discuss the ability of private renters to exercise control over their dwellings in Australia. The paper discusses the limitations of Australian legislation, within its policy, market and cultural context, in enabling private tenants to exercise control over their dwellings, and compares the Australian situation with Germany to demonstrate that alternative approaches that afford more control to private tenants are possible in rental systems dominated by private rental. The paper concludes with a call for a wider debate about the importance of home and the impact of social norms regarding the purpose of different types of tenure on housing policy and thus on the rights and well-being of tenants.     

Motives for Investments in Housing Rehabilitation among Private Landlords under Rent Control

In economic studies of the private rental sector of the housing market, and in political debates on housing policy, it is often assumed that private landlords are basically guided by rational economic motives. In this paper, which is based on a Danish study of housing rehabilitation activity among private landlords under rent control, it is shown that different groups of landlords exist who have many other motives for buying and maintaining rental property than those assumed in economic theory. It is concluded that private landlords do not behave as economic, rational and efficient actors as is often assumed, and that an understanding of these structures of landlordism is essential to an assessment of the role of private landlords in housing supply, and to an elaboration of public programmes for supporting housing rehabilitation in the private rental sector.     

Why is the German Homeownership Rate so Low?

The comparatively low homeownership rate in Germany is often referred to as a weakness of the German housing market. As it turns out, the situation in Germany is primarily due to four factors. First, rental housing makes up a larger share of the market because of an extensive social housing sector. The high quality standard of social housing and the fact that private investors were included in the subsidisation scheme from the beginning laid the foundation for a large private rental housing market. Second, homeowners in Germany did not benefit from the same high subsidies as in countries such as Spain or the Netherlands. Third, the German rental housing market was not rendered inoperative by excessive interventions in rents, as was the case in countries such as Spain and the UK. Finally, German house prices remained stable over a long period of time. Therefore, in view of these results, judgements on Germany's housing market should be revised.     

The supply of private rented housing in Canada

Canadian housing policy objectives are generally pursued through a market framework. There is little provision of non-market housing. Thus, while Canada has a substantial private rented sector, it has only a small social rented housing sector. About a third of all dwellings belong to private landlords for market renting and only six percent are owned by public and private landlords for non-profit renting. The supply of dwellings newly constructed specifically for private market rental has fallen over the last 20 years. This fall has been compensated for in part by the supply of existing dwellings that have been transferred from other tenures. There has also been a fall in the proportion of private market rented dwellings owned by corporate landlords and an increase in the proportion owned by small-scale individual landlords, including individuals buying existing dwellings in other tenures to convert to private renting. These recent supply-side changes have been in response to three factors. First, changes to the federal tax system and direct supply incentives have reduced the attractiveness of investing in private renting for corporations but increased it for individuals. Second, the demand for private renting has fallen amongst middle- and high-income households because of demographic and tax changes. This has reduced the numbers of private renting households able to pay the rents needed to make new construction profitable. Third, other public policies have also had an impact on supply, including rent controls imposed by provincial governments and land use planning restrictions and building standards imposed by local authorities. An important feature of the Canadian private rental market is its geographical diversity, with supply-side trends varying in different provinces and urban areas in accordance with variations in demand and local policies. Tony Crook is Professor of Town & Regional Planning and Head of Department at the University of Sheffield. His main current research interest is housing policy, especially the investment decisions of private landlords and housing associations and the relationships between housing policy and land use planning. His research work has been funded by DoE, ESRC and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. It has been widely published in books and in academic and professional journals. He is currently Chair of the Conference of Heads of Planning Schools. He is also active in the worlds of policy and practice. He is a member of the RTPI Housing and Renewal Panel, trustee of two housing associations, and an independent director of one of the new Local Housing Companies.     

“Building hope: from a shack to 3E house”—Innovative housing approach in the provision of affordable housing for Roma in Slovakia

The post-1989 objectives of the Slovak housing policy have resulted in the large-scale privatisation of state rental flats and the reduction in new rental housing. State-subsidised social rental housing programmes have been unable to meet the social demand for affordable rental dwellings. Socially marginalised groups, in particular Roma people, have been hit the most by the post-1989 changes and the lack of official social housing construction. Project Building Hope is an alternative integrated housing approach, offering Roma people better life conditions by integrating housing issues with other policies related to social empowerment. In order to implement the innovative project, a broad coalition between public and private sector actors is established, which is able to change the perception of Roma in the community and influence local policy-making processes.     

Happy Returns: The Individual Investor as a Source of New Capital for Rented Housing in a Time of Changing Social Welfare Structures

Recent changes in the ideology of welfare have led to reductions in the scope for some individuals to play their desired part in funding the social welfare system through taxation. At the same time, there is a widely held view in the housing world that over the next 20 years the supply of rented homes is going to be too low to meet rising demand. Prospects for significantly increased public investment in new rented housing look slight. Private finance is now seen by government as the preferred source of capital funds for the creation of extra housing, not only in the private rented sector but also in the housing association sector, and perhaps in future in the local authority sector. However, the financial institutions-the most often quoted source of private finance currently appear reluctant to take on this role, at least in the privately rented sector. Presently, little attention is being given to the individual, as opposed to the institutional, investor. This paper-based on evidence gathered in a national survey of individual shareholders in companies listed on the London Stock Exchange-explores the possibility of individuals becoming more involved in investing capital in rented housing, both private and public. It suggests that there is some interest in such investment among current shareholders who have considerable assets. More specifically, it argues that there is a group of ethical investors who would be willing to invest in rented housing, some of whom may be willing to accept a lower rate of return on rented housing than on competing investments. Together these groups (and other 'socially disenfranchised' citizens) may offer a source of considerable capital to complement that which institutional investors may provide. If such capital is to be forthcoming, policies are required which address their requirements. A number of suggestions are put forward.     

Private Rental Housing in Hong Kong

This paper examines selected aspects of housing policy and its influence on private rental housing in Hong Kong. Its ambitions are modest, in part because so little research has been conducted on the sector, as a consequence of the small size of the sector as well as the concentration of socio-political, economic and policy analyses on the other major housing sectors, namely public renting and home ownership. It is argued that a fundamental function of private renting, to provide a functional substitute and counter-balance to distortions in the market for private home ownership, has been systematically undermined in Hong Kong. In spite of its historical importance in meeting Hong Kong people's housing needs, the sector's decline has been steep and it can now be fairly described as a marginalised tenure, despite incomplete structural adjustment post- Asian Financial Crisis. It is suggested that a fundamental reason for the decline of the private rental sector has been the impact of government policy, which undermined the private rental sector and thus an important element of the market mechanism in housing provision. The government's ideology of home ownership has also functioned to transfer lower middle-income families into the owner occupied sector. Although the Hong Kong government has not been as overtly hostile to this sector as governments have been elsewhere, it nevertheless also seems to envisage no real role for the private rental sector in a housing delivery system molded by policy preference for home ownership, rather than fostering viable economic competition by also facilitating an efficient private rental sector.     

Private renting in England

This paper presents an overview of the privately rented sector of the housing market in England. The first section sets out some key features of privately rented housing in England that distinguish it from many other advanced industrial nations. The second section briefly summarises the main reasons for the decline of private renting. This is followed by sections dealing with the demand for private rental housing and tenants’ rents and incomes. The paper then moves on to the supply side, focusing on the stock of privately rented dwellings, the nature of private landlordism in England, finance and rates of return. The final two sections examine rent control and security of tenure legislation and current policy debates about the future of the privately rented sector.     

Band-aid or Panacea? The Role of Private Rental Support Programs in Addressing Access Problems in the Australian Housing Market

Australia has a significant private rental market with over a quarter of households renting their home from a private landlord. Many of these households are on low incomes and receive assistance from private rental support programs provided by each Australian state and territory. In spite of these large numbers, little is known about the effectiveness of policy initiatives to assist low-income private renters. Limited knowledge of the private rental support programs stands in stark contrast to the detailed research on programs established to address homelessness and problems within the public housing sector. This paper addresses this lacuna by reporting on the suite of initiatives currently funded by state governments to assist low-income households (for example, bond loans and rental deposits, advice and help with removal expenses). Based on a comprehensive study of Private Rental Support Programs (PRSPs) commissioned by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, it is argued that though policies to assist vulnerable tenants are acknowledged as a success by practitioners and clients, their effectiveness as a policy instrument is undermined by wider structural changes in the housing market. The paper concludes that the stress faced by many vulnerable households is likely to intensify over the coming years thereby compounding the pressure on state Housing Authorities to provide more comprehensive packages of support that extend beyond just a ‘one-off’ form of assistance.     

Rental housing in Central and Eastern Europe as no man's land

The central question addressed in this paper is whether both thesocial and private rented sectors in Central and Eastern Europeancountries are based on robust institutions or constitute a no man'sland. The latter case is a position a landlord tries to avoid andpublic authorities try to abandon by promoting home-ownership.As we argue in this paper, during the transformation of economic and housing policy in Central and Eastern Europe,the perception of the social rental sector as a no man's landis not far from the truth. The same applies for private renting,which has the reputation of being an extension of the owner-occupiedsector. A truly professional private rented sector is still lackingin Central and Eastern Europe. National and local governments try to get rid of rented dwellings by promoting owner-occupation.If they want to prevent the rented sectors from remaining orbecoming a no man's land, they have to create regulations andinstitutions like those in West European countries to supportboth social and commercial rented housing.     

Build-to-Rent and the financialization of rental housing: future research directions

Abstract

With the expansion of institutional investors into urban rental markets, many cities have witnessed a rise in Build-to-Rent (BtR). This article reviews the financialization of rental housing literature and identifies opportunities for urban housing scholars to progress understandings of BtR through future empirical and theoretical efforts. In particular, it proposes a broadening of the housing research agenda around three analytical entry points. These entry points relate to relatively understudied structural transformations of our urban housing systems implicated in the rise of BtR, namely: (1) the diversification of build-to-sell development models; (2) the evolution of the private rental sector; and (3) labour market–housing market realignments. Comparative inquiry promises to enrich understandings of BtR by revealing how city rental accommodation and tenancies are recalibrated by the investment imperatives of institutional investors and BtR asset shareholders, and with what benefits and at what costs to whom. Such contributions will also provide rich data to progress conceptual efforts to locate BtR within broader processes of housing financialization.     

The future of the private rental sector in sweden

The private rental sector in Sweden is competing on a less-regulated and less-subsidized housing market. The paper analyses the prospects of this sector. The private sector has the dual advantage of an older (more attractive and centrally located) stock and a slightly beter-off tenant profile than the municipal sector. Thus, the private sector will be less affected by the withdrawal of interest subsidies, as these were given to new stock. The rent-to-income ratio will surpass 30 per cent in all sectors of the housing market in the year 2002, according to a recent projection. The private sector suffers less from vacancies than the municipal sector. The economic situation is, however, characterized by high LTV ratios, due to a price and borrowing boom in the late 1980s. This has led to bankruptcies and a weak economic situation for many private landlords. The boom was followed by a bust in 1990–93. Both the upswing and the downturn can be explained by fundamentals such as changes in GDP, unemployment, housing subsidy and tax rules. In the present recession, the private rental sector will benefit from its large share of small dwellings, which will also be advantagenous in the longer run, in view of the demographic trend towards more small households. There is fierce competition between the private and the municipal housing sector. In the short run, the private sector will benefit from the removal of interest subsidies. The effects will be felt in the younger municipal sector. All in all, both short-run and long-run considerations point at a housing market in Sweden which will keep its dualistic character of free competition between the private and the municipal sector in the future. Bengt Turner is Professor of Economics and Chair of the Institute for Housing Research at Uppsala University. He is also chairman of the European Network for Housing Research and coordinates a working group on housing finance. His research area is housing policy, microeconomic analysis of the housing market, as well as housing finance. He has also analysed the housing situation in transitory (East European) countries. In Sweden he is actively involved in housing policy formation as an expert in Governmental commissions and as a member of a number of research boards. Tommy Berger is an economist at the Institute of Housing Research, Uppsala University. His main interest is in housing finance and taxation policy.     

Movement Into and Out of the Private Rental Sector in England

The private rental sector in England is often regarded as a largely transitional tenure. It is seen as forming the lower rung of a hierarchical tenure ladder, up which households move over time on the way to an ultimate destination of owner occupation or, failing that, social rented housing. It has been recognised, however, that households may 'fall out' of the two main tenures and return to private renting. Drawing on data from the 1996-97 Survey of English Housing, this paper examines the characteristics of households that had moved into or out of the private rental sector in the previous 12 months. Although the sector remains a net exporter of households, it was found that only part of the reverse flow back into private renting could be accurately described as a process of 'falling out' of the two main tenures. A significant share of the movement from social housing into private renting was due to households who had moved in order to live in a better house or neighbourhood. The paper outlines the reasons for this phenomenon and discusses its implications for the role of private renting in England.     

Private Renter Households: Who Are The Long-Term Renters?

Despite the perception that Australia's private rental market serves principally as a short-term transitional housing tenure, 40 per cent of households in this sector have rented for longer than ten years. This paper enlarges the housing career concept by proposing two types of long-term private renters: continuals (always rented since leaving the parental home) and returners (rented, purchased home, rented again). By using the multivariate statistical technique, CHAID, the analysis demonstrates that continuals and returners form ten distinct renter segments, defined largely by differences in age, marital status, source of income and household income. In the main, continual segments feature renters in the 30–44 year age group, not yet married or, if married (or formerly married), reliant on social security payments. In contrast, most returners earn private incomes, and tend to be older than the continuals (generally over 45 years). The segment most strongly associated with returning to rental housing exhibits the highest household income level, prompting speculation that some households may choose renting over ownership. The analysis further reveals that continual longterm renters encounter a disproportionate share of housing difficulties, including high rents, poor affordability and excessive residential upheaval.     

Social Assistance Recipients and Tenancy Conditions in the Private Rental Market

The proportion of public housing is very low in Norway. Low-income groups must therefore enter the private rental market in order to rent a dwelling. This paper focuses on tenancy conditions in the private rental market in two cities, Oslo and Trondheim, for recipients of social assistance. The analysis offers valuable insight into overall differences between social assistance recipients and other tenants. In particular, it is demonstrated that recipients of social assistance are predominantly found in the most expensive segment of the private rental market. However, within this segment the analysis is not conclusive with respect to differences in rental fees. Furthermore, in Oslo the tenancy conditions of social assistance recipients differ somewhat from the general rental market in that short-term contracts are used more often while this is not the case in Trondheim. In Oslo private landlords generally have information that the tenants receive social assistance, while they generally do not have such information in Trondheim.     

Transforming South Africa’s low-income housing projects through backyard dwellings: intersections with households and the state in Alexandra, Johannesburg

South Africa’s ‘housing programme’ transfers a fully-funded serviced site and house to qualifying beneficiaries with aims of progressively addressing poverty through homeownership. Despite delivering close to 3 million houses since 1994, informal housing persists, featuring even in some of these new neighbourhoods. This paper focuses on the intersection between a particular mode of informal housing, backyard dwellings, and state-subsidised low-income housing projects. Backyard dwellings arguably contradict state housing objectives by symbolising informality and disorder; a symptom of inadequacy that the housing programme strives to overcome. We consider first the views and experiences of landlords (owners of state-subsided houses) and tenants (occupiers of privately-provided backyard dwellings) in a section of Alexandra, Johannesburg. We then reflect on the potential of backyard accommodation within post-apartheid housing delivery, arguing that despite challenges, the phenomenon of planned, state-led infrastructure generating secondary accommodation represents an opportunity rather than an example of failed modernity. South Africa’s backyard dwellings resonate with similar forms of self-funded and managed rental stock across the global South. As a quick, flexible and regenerative housing asset, cumulative acceptance of such rental markets is necessary—along with viewing the driving actors as astute innovators in shelter and livelihood provision.     

Completing Post-Earthquake Replacement Housing in Rural Armenia: Did it Induce Further Investment?

The housing of families in rural areas of Southeastern European and CIS countries often lacks water and sewerage services and is frequently in poor physical condition. This paper explores the private investment made as a result of a donor program in rural Armenia that in 2003 completed dwellings that were replacements for those destroyed in the 1988 earthquake. The questions addressed are: did the donor-funded investment induce beneficiaries to invest their own funds additionally, and, did beneficiaries invest more than their neighbors who did not participate in the program? Data used in the analysis are from household surveys conducted in three villages where the program operated; beneficiaries were interviewed at the time the construction was finished and again six months later; non-beneficiaries (controls) were interviewed six months after the program construction was completed. The study finds that direct program beneficiaries supplemented the publicly financed improvements and that the program may have induced non-beneficiaries to invest as well. For both groups, available household economic resources were the primary determinant of investments, although non-beneficiaries living in temporary housing were discouraged from undertaking improvements.     

Investors,taxation and the housing boom

In recent years considerable attention has been paid to the activity of investors in private rental housing. Underpinning this interest has been the perceived effects of changes during the 1980s to the tax treatment of investment in private rental housing. Of particular interest has been whether or not landlords should be able to ‘negatively gear’, or deduct from their taxable income the interest losses they incur on the rental properties. According to real estate lobby groups, the federal government's decision in July 1985 to ‘quarantine’ negative gearing in residential investments decimated the supply of private rental housing, and this in turn was said to be the prime reason for escalating rents and tightening vacancy rates in some capital cities. The campaign by the real estate lobby groups received considerable media coverage and eventually led to one of the few policy backdowns by the current federal government. In August 1987, and in an otherwise very tight budget, negative gearing was fully reintroduced.