User Costs and Housing Expenses. Towards a more Comprehensive Approach to Affordability

Haffner, Marietta; Heylen, Kristof

doi:10.1080/02673037.2011.559754

Cited by 67 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Housing affordability is a complex and multi-dimensional issue. Accordingly, to gain a better insight into the problem, it should not be analysed using just one concept, measure or definition [26,27]. It is clearly difficult, perhaps impossible, to address all concerns related to affordability within one simple measure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability

Mulliner

Malys

Malienė

2016

Omega

404

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mulliner, Emma and Malys, Naglis and Maliene, Vida (2016) A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. AbstractWhile affordability is traditionally assessed in economic terms, this paper tests a new assessment method that draws closer links with sustainability by considering economic, social and environmental criteria that impact on a household's quality of life. The paper presents an empirical application and comparison of six different multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) approaches for the purpose of assessing sustainable housing affordability.The comparative performance of the weighted product model (WPM), the weighted sum model (WSM), the revised AHP, TOPSIS and COPRAS, is investigated. The purpose of the comparative analysis is to determine how different MCDM methods compare when used for a sustainable housing affordability assessment model. 20 evaluative criteria and 10 alternative areas in Liverpool, England, were considered. The applicability of different MCDM methods for the focused decision problem was investigated. The paper discusses the similarities in MCDM methods, evaluates their robustness and contrasts the resulting rankings.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability

Mulliner

Malys

Malienė

2016

Omega

404

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, some poor families may live in a dwelling that is too small or is of poor quality, in order to safeguard their other consumption options. In more general terms, the residual income method implicitly assumes that housing expenses are exogenously determined and that households do not have a free housing choice (Haffner & Heylen, 2011;Stone, 2006). If one keeps in mind these limits of the residual income approach, it can be used, especially if one is considering whether residual income is sufficiently high to pay for other consumption.…”

Section: Definition Of Income Poverty and Income Distribution After Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The explicit subsidies that are revealed by the residual income approach are the housing allowance for the rental market and tax relief for owner-occupiers (see also Haffner & Heylen, 2011). In Flanders, a selective system of housing allowances exists, which targets low-income households that move from an inadequate to a suitable dwelling or households that move to a dwelling that is rented by a so-called social rental agency (De Decker, 2002).…”

Section: Subsidization Instruments In Flanders and The Netherlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of Housing Expenses and Subsidies on the Income Distribution in Flanders and the Netherlands

Heylen

Haffner

2012

Housing Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores the role of housing expenses and subsidies with respect to income distribution in Flanders (the northern part of Belgium) and the Netherlands in [2005][2006]. It analyses income poverty and inequality by comparing equivalent disposable income before and after housing expenses with a relative poverty threshold and the Gini coefficient. Poverty and income inequality increase in both 'countries' when equivalent disposable income is corrected for housing expenses. Furthermore, the relative position of outright owners and social tenants regarding poverty improves. Housing subsidies play a (partly) different role in Flanders and the Netherlands. The implicit social rent subsidy in Flanders and the explicit housing allowance in the Netherlands serve the same goal; however, they both redistribute income relatively strongly in favour of low-income tenants. The tax relief system on the other hand increases income inequality in society, in both Flanders and the Netherlands, whereas our comparative analysis suggests that tax relief does not have a moderating effect on net housing expenses.

show abstract

“…of home ownership (for example, Haffner and Heylen, 2011). Furthermore, housing wealth is often the only source of wealth for low-income households, and may carry unanticipated costs for maintenance, renovation and utilities (McCarthy et al, 2001).…”

Section: A U T H O R C O P Ymentioning

confidence: 99%

Home ownership and support for government redistribution

André

Dewilde

2014

Comp Eur Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we investigate the relationship between home ownership and support for redistribution in 24 European countries, integrating research on housing regimes and welfare attitudes. We improve upon earlier research by taking into account withingroup heterogeneity of owners and tenants, by elaborating on social mechanisms (selfinterest and socio-spatial segregation), by researching a wide range of European (instead of Anglo-Saxon) countries and by recognizing differences in the meaning of tenure and home ownership across countries. We find that, while home owners are less supportive of redistribution, the effect of home ownership varies with age and income position. We furthermore find that housing regime characteristics matter, as owners and tenants have different welfare attitudes in different contexts. In settings where home ownership has become more financialized, support for redistribution is smaller, and more so among home owners. On the other hand, in settings where outright home ownership fills gaps in welfare provision, both owners and tenants prefer more redistribution.

show abstract

User Costs and Housing Expenses. Towards a more Comprehensive Approach to Affordability

Cited by 67 publications

References 24 publications

Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability

Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability

The Effect of Housing Expenses and Subsidies on the Income Distribution in Flanders and the Netherlands

Home ownership and support for government redistribution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About