Search results

Using the resource‐based view, a study was conducted to identify resources required to successfully compete in the Malaysian housing development industry. Data was collected using postal questionnaires and interviews. From the statistical tests done on the data, it was found that variation in certain firm characteristics influenced the value the respondents attached to certain resources. In addition, the more housing segments the developers operated, the more emphasis are given to organisational strategy and policies. There is an inverted‐U relationship between product diversification and trade secrets and innovation, with the maximum value at four housing segments. The housing developers that practise strategic management emphasised significantly more on management expertise and experience than those that did not. No variation in the value attached to resources was found when the other two firm characteristics, i.e. legal status and geographical diversification, were examined. Given the small number of companies that participated in the study, the results should be treated with circumspect. What the study provided though are grounds for more in‐depth study to be conducted.

This paper aims to define intergenerational housing support and assesses and synthesizes the existing literature on intergenerational support for housing to identify trends and possible areas for future research.

The methodology employed in this paper is a systematic literature review. A total of 32 articles were chosen for assessment. Upon thorough review, summary and synthesis, general trends and three specific themes were identified.

The review of 32 papers found that intergenerational support is a crucial strategy to help younger generations achieve homeownership. However, it also highlights the potential for social inequity resulting from unequal distribution of housing resources within families, especially regarding housing. Several potential gaps in the current research are identified, including the need for explicit attention to the provider's intention, exploration into the size and form of financial support for housing, understanding how parental housing resources differ in their transfer behaviors, and examining how parental motivations influence them to provide housing support.

This paper provides recommendations for further research on the topic, while also adding perspective to understand the micro-social mechanisms behind the intergenerational reproduction of socioeconomic inequality, especially in the housing market.

It was not until the late 1960s that housing attracted much attention from academic social scientists. Since that time the literature has expanded widely and diversified, establishing housing with a specialised status in economics, sociology, politics, and in related subjects. As we would expect, the new literature covers a technical, statistical, theoretical, ideological, and historical range. Housing studies have not been conceived and interpreted in a monolithic way, with generally accepted concepts and principles, or with uniformly fixed and precise methodological approaches. Instead, some studies have been derived selectively from diverse bases in conventional theories in economics or sociology, or politics. Others have their origins in less conventional social theory, including neo‐Marxist theory which has had a wider intellectual following in the modern democracies since the mid‐1970s. With all this diversity, and in a context where ideological positions compete, housing studies have consequently left in their wake some significant controversies and some gaps in evaluative perspective. In short, the new housing intellectuals have written from personal commitments to particular cognitive, theoretical, ideological, and national positions and experiences. This present piece of writing takes up the two main themes which have emerged in the recent literature. These themes are first, questions relating to building and developing housing theory, and, second, the issue of how we are to conceptualise housing and relate it to policy studies. We shall be arguing that the two themes are closely related: in order to create a useful housing theory we must have awareness and understanding of housing practice and the nature of housing.

Of the many problems which confront urban policy makers and planners at the present time, that of housing the lower income groups is one of the most general and the most pressing. The term “lower income groups” is used advisedly and not merely as a euphemism for “the poor” who live in “slums”. Housing quality covers a wide spectrum from the most luxurious to the most spartan and while on the whole it is closely related to the current income of the household, the association is not perfect. The level of income is of vital importance in achieving a given level of quality but the contraction of incomes towards the end of the lifespan of a household is not necessarily associated with a lowering of housing quality. Equally, the slum is a multi‐dimensional concept which though easy to recognise is difficult to define. Not all housing occupied by low paid workers are slums and not all slum‐dwellers are poor. The term “slum” often denotes a type of neighbourhood in which flourishes a sub‐culture containing its own socio‐economic stratification. The solution of low income housing problems is obviously closely bound up with the question of slums but neither begins nor ends with it. The purpose of this paper is to examine the causes of the housing market manifestations of the problems of urban blight or congestion from the economic point of view (i.e. to consider the operation of the market mechanism in allocating resources) and to suggest an approach to the formulation of policy which will achieve an economically efficient distribution of housing resources.

This case is mainly about the development journey of Tujia, a unicorn in China's accommodations-sharing sector, as well as the development status of the sector. On December 1, 2011, Tujia.com—China's first medium- and high-end vacation apartment booking platform—was formally launched, and it announced the first round of capital injection in less than half a year after its launch. It completed D and D+ round of financing on August 3, 2015, securing $300 million with an estimated value exceeding $1 billion. The completion of this financing round meant that Tujia formally entered the $1 billion club composed of “unicorn” Internet companies. In June 2016, it announced the strategic M&A of Mayi; in October 2016, it announced its strategic agreement with Ctrip.com and Qunar.com for the M&A of their apartment and homestay businesses. The completion of these transactions manifested the matrix with the four major platforms Tujia, Mayi, Ctrip, and Qunar. Since then, Tujia has become the absolute pacesetter in China's online accommodations-sharing sector.

The purpose of this paper is to review the housing sector of Turkey and present the housing development strategies developed by government enterprises for the urban poor in Turkey as successful examples.

The methodology of the paper is descriptive. First of all, the literature on housing finance systems and sources of housing finance are stated. Then, the paper reviews housing finance systems applied in Turkey in the past to solve housing problems. Later, it describes current housing strategy to solve housing problems of low- and middle-income groups and also presents this strategy as a successful model to other countries. Moreover, mortgage law and the current situation of the Turkish housing sector are discussed within the study.

As a result of economic normalization achieved after 2002, mortgage loans extended by commercial banks have increased in Turkey. Besides, governmental institutions, such as Housing Development Administration of Turkey (HDAT) and Istanbul Public Housing Corporation (KIPTAS), apply very extensive projects to allow low- and middle-income groups to have their dwellings. In 2007, the Turkish Parliament enacted mortgage law and defined rules and actors of the mortgage sector. However, as a consequence of economic deterioration in the world economy, mortgage loan receivables-backed securities could not be issued to public yet. Public issuance of mortgage loan receivables-backed securities in the future are expected to direct more long-term funds to the housing sector and also to provide an additional investment instrument for the individual and institutional investors.

The housing production and finance models developed by the HDAT and KIPTAS can be good models for the solution of housing problems of urban poor in other countries.

The purpose of this paper is to identify resourcing challenges that face housing rebuild following the 2009 Victorian “Black Saturday” bushfires in Australia and to examine the impacts of resource shortages on longer term community recovery.

The research methodology included a longitudinal study which consists of a questionnaire survey, field‐based interviews and observations to track trends evident in the survey.

A total of 28 months after the bushfires, reconstruction in the worst‐affected area, the Shire of Murrindindi, was proceeding slowly despite the institutions and procedures set up for recovery. This slow reconstruction was due to the unavailability of building resources. Changed Building Standards, increased building markets outside the bushfire zone, lack of economic incentives, combined with home owners’ socio‐economic vulnerabilities, created a chain of impacts on households’ ability to get resources.

The evidence in this paper points to emergent resource issues that impeded recovery progress in the bushfire zone. These issues primarily come from technical decisions on building controls, economic conditions, and risk perceptions of construction professionals. Findings from this longitudinal study will inform the recovery planning of government agencies in future events.

This paper makes the case for a new approach to looking at resourcing problems following a major disaster. This study demonstrates that recovery planning needs to include a resource perspective which explains both impacts of recovery polices on resource availability and impacts of resourcing dynamics on the wider recovery environment.

The White Paper on learning disability has asked housing and social services to work together to expand housing, care and support options. The DoH and ODPM have recently issued new joint guidance. Learning disability partnership boards have been asked to develop local housing strategies for people with learning disabilities by the winter of 2002/3. Several authorities have already completed work on housing strategies for people with learning disabilities. This article is about one of these, recently published by Southdown Housing and West Sussex County Council: the preparation of the strategy, some comments on strategic planning in the public sector and ideas which might benefit other authorities engaged with their own local housing strategies.

Although rental housing has historically maintained a peripheral position within the community-building sphere, the current economic volatility is evidence of how imbalanced housing policy can impact overall stability, particularly among low-income people within low-income communities. Economic and other macro-environmental shifts will have lasting and poignant impacts on low-income geographies; therefore, the state of rental housing within the context of urban neighborhoods will continue to be a critical policy matter. This research explores whether the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) program encourages the development of housing with the physical and operational attributes that strengthen low-income neighborhoods. Given the program's growing dominance, this study analyzes whether specific characteristics associated with neighborhood revitalization are prevalent in LIHTC properties located within qualified census tracts. Also examined are the methodologies among nonprofit developers and for-profit developers relative to these development characteristics.

The findings indicate that properties under 50 units are more likely to be located within suburban qualified census tracts. Within the urban core, the results reveal that qualified census tract LIHTC developments are more often serving extremely low and low-income families. The research outcomes also show that nonprofit developers are more likely to serve lower incomes and utilize certified property management agents for these properties. Given the unique needs of urban and suburban low-income neighborhoods and a national environment that portents a growing dependence upon the LIHTC, the findings suggest that both enhanced coordination between state, regional, and local interests and innovation in resource allocation policy are critical to erasing the neighborhood divide that marginalizes low-income people in low-income communities.

The centralised system of apartment buildings was destroyed and replaced by a market‐type procedure of acquiring dwellings as private property. Privatisation started in Lithuania in 1991. At the beginning of 1996, 94 per cent of dwelling stock was privatised. One million two hundred thousand dwellings in Lithuania (including individual houses) with common space of 75,581,280 sq.m. existed ‐ that is 343 flats per capita. Physical lack of dwellings is the main problem. That is confirmed by number of families registered in municipalities in waiting lists for state support in order to afford dwellings. At the beginning of 1998, 96,661 families were included in the waiting lists for the support. Quantitative housing indicators are better in rural areas. However, lower qualitative indicators describe by provision with municipal service: water supply, sewerage, hot water, district heating. The urban population was not satisfied with size (living space), thermal and noise isolation characteristics. In this report Lithuanian household income and expenditures are shown for each of the ten income deciles. The affordability is greater in urban areas than the same deciles situated in the rural areas. Amendments to the Law on Housing Provision of the Republic of Lithuania were introduced on 21 October 1997. The main changes are presented in the article. Local government support in the housing sector of Vilnius is also described. The state government is responsible for the strategy in housing sector as well as government assistance. The main duties should be divided between state and local government. Social housing is the solution for needy people on condition of market economy, and financial support must be brought to the target groups of people.