Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to use the example of public housing renewal public-private partnerships (PPPs) to build knowledge on whether social infrastructure PPPs may appeal to the private sector as a less risky investment in a time of global financial uncertainty. Design/methodology/approach-The research is based on an international literature review and a limited number of semi-structured interviews with social housing PPP participants in England, the USA and Australia. These interviews were conducted by Dr Gilmour as part of his doctoral research in 2008. Findings-The familiar distinction between social and other forms of infrastructure PPPs has been found to be unhelpful in the case of public housing renewal. This type of PPPs, through their cross-subsidisation model, face relatively high revenue risk during a recession. However, the commitment of the public sector to the social goals of such projects suggests contract negotiation rather than default is likely if problems occur. PPP risks need to be understood by studying their detailed contract terms, rather than by broad categorisations. Research limitations/implications-This paper provides a grounded discussion rather than detailed research findings. Only a small number of projects are included and they are not necessarily representative. Cross-national comparison is challenging because of different housing policies and economic conditions. Originality/value-This paper fills a gap in the literature by both contrasting approaches to a particular type of social infrastructure PPP in different countries, and by making an early assessment of the likely impact of recent turbulence in financial and property markets.
Over recent decades many developed countries have commercialised the provision of state-subsidised housing, and introduced a stronger role for market forces. Government financial support now often aims to leverage debt or equity investment. Spearheading this policy change is a quest for the 'Holy Grail' of contemporary social housing policy: private equity investment, sourced from large institutional investors such as banks and pension funds. For comparative housing research, this opens up exciting new territory. Recent Australian developments using tax credits to incentivise investment -based on a successful US schemeprovide a valuable opportunity for comparison. This exploratory paper contrasts the two countries' housing tax credit schemes, highlighting outcomes for investors, tenants and the wider housing system. Foregone corporate taxes provide governments with a powerful 'invisible hand' to incentivise flows of private equity, replacing direct public grants. Yet despite free market rhetoric, tax credit schemes still rely on additional government intervention -especially during financial market turbulence.
The expanding provision of affordable housing by non-profit community housing organisations, coupled with possibilities of substantial stock transfer from State Housing Authorities, suggest Australia's social housing sector may be entering a transformative phase. Based on a review of restructuring in Britain, where over the last 25 years, traditionally owned and managed 'council housing' has been reduced from over 90 per cent to less than 30 per cent of overall social housing stock, this article considers possible policy implications for Australia. In particular, it analyses British experience which could inform Australian decisions on organisational size, institutional vehicles and governance structures within the context of the future programme of stock transfers envisaged by many commentators on the Australian housing scene.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.