Search results

Urban population growth has increased housing density, which has expanded the construction of low-cost low-rise residential in urban areas. Good building performance and effective low-cost low-rise residential quality lead to higher user satisfaction and improve building sustainability. This study aims to focus on the factors influencing the sustainability of low-cost low-rise residential in the West Malaysia urban area to assess resident satisfaction.

A mixed-mode approach with both qualitative and quantitative were used in this study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 stakeholders to identify the common factors influencing sustainability in low-cost low-rise residential. Subsequently, questionnaire surveys were formed and distributed among building users to determine the satisfaction level with low-cost low-rise residential building performance.

The finding demonstrates that accessibility is the key factor to achieving sustainability of low-cost low-rise residential. The finding also related to the factor that influences both stakeholders and building user satisfaction levels. This study also identifies key areas that require attention to improve user satisfaction with building sustainability and building performance of low-cost low-rise residential.

This study aims to determine stakeholder and building user satisfaction levels in relation to the sustainable building factor. A few indicators have been set up to identify the factors that most influence the sustainability and environment of low-cost low-rise residential buildings. Each subchapter has a few recommendations to improve the performance of low-cost low-rise residential. Each of the factors mentioned is related to social, economic and environmental sustainability. In addition, the study discovered a strong connection between low-cost low-rise residential performance and user satisfaction.

To provide low-cost housing, the Myanmar Government is attempting to use public–private partnership (PPP) to attract private investors. However, there is little information concerning the influencing factors for implementing PPP low-cost housing projects in Myanmar. This paper, therefore, aims to identify and analyse these factors.

A total of 51 in-depth interviews were conducted with interviewees involved in various kinds of housing projects implemented through the adoption of PPP or other approaches. The methods of data collection and the analysis are based on grounded theory (GT) methodology.

Using the GT method to analyse the interviews, five categories emerged from 50 influencing factors regarding the establishment and implementation of the PPP model for low-cost housing in Myanmar: provision of incentives; obstacles in implementing PPP for all stakeholders; barriers to private sector participation; public sector responsibilities and challenges; and attraction factors and challenges for financial institutions. Among 12 newly found factors, the three most important for PPP low-cost housing in Myanmar are the availability of project funding, the resolution of land-acquisition issues and the development of a sound financing system.

Our findings strengthen previous studies by identifying factors affecting PPP low-cost housing either specific to Myanmar or common among other countries. Of the 50 factors identified, 38 factors were found in previous studies, but 12 are likely specific to Myanmar.

Our findings can be used by governments, particularly the Myanmar Government, and financial agencies to understand the low attractiveness of PPP low-cost housing for investors and to develop/improve policies to stimulate PPP low-cost housing, especially in Myanmar.

Many previous studies have been undertaken to identify factors that influence the implementation of PPP for low-cost housing. However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are no prior studies specific to Myanmar in this context.

To date, low-cost housing held under the common-property regime is faced with various collective action or management issues in relation to common facilities. Understanding and unpacking key collective action components in a multi-dimensional and systematic fashion that help explain the status quo of the complex low-cost housing management is crucial, particularly in identifying potential factors contributing to the suboptimal self-governing outcome. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the collective action of low-cost housing in Malaysia using Ostrom's institutional analysis development and social-ecological system framework (IAD-SES framework) as a theoretical framework.

First, a mixed-method research design was adopted where issues relating to the management of common properties of low-cost housing were identified in the Malaysian context. Second, the components of Ostrom's IAD framework relevant to collective action were identified. Third, after interviewing six experts in the housing industry via semi-structured interviews, two more components (historical development/adaptability to new environment and ethnicity) were added to the questionnaire survey. From here, 633 respondents who lived in four low-cost housings in Kuala Lumpur from 1,598 households were surveyed in 2012. We then merged the IAD framework with the SES framework. Factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha analysis were conducted to uncover the underlying variables and the social ecological clusters that they belonged.

With average Cronbach's alpha of 0.83, the seven key SES components identified are able to cumulatively explain 71% variance of local collective action components. Based on the cumulative percentage explained, the top five key SES components are as follows: context (social, economic and political settings); ethnicity; outcome; resource system; and users characteristics.

This study identifies key components related to the collective action issues of low-cost housing management, where two additional components were also suggested to be added to the SES framework. Apart from the theoretical contribution, the study, serving as insights and potential solutions, is also of practical significance to the existing management practices of low-cost housing in Malaysia where policymakers and management corporations may prioritize primary SES components, helping them govern common properties more efficiently.

Homeownership is considered both economically and socially beneficial for homeowners. However, in the collective living arrangement, reaching a consensus with regard to the residential environment is difficult. The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that can reduce the conflict among the stakeholders in multi‐owner low‐cost housing in Malaysia.

This study tested three hypotheses examining whether the demographic and socio‐economic characteristics of owner‐occupants and occupancy rates affect owner‐occupants' satisfaction with stakeholders' relationships. Data were collected through questionnaires from owner‐occupants of multi‐owner low‐cost settlements in Selangor state. Data on housing characteristics were collected from chairpersons of the respective owners' organisations. The data were treated as parametric, and analysis of variance was conducted.

Four factors – number of children in the family, duration of residency, participation in social activities and participation in meetings – were found to affect owners‐occupants' satisfaction with the stakeholders' relationships. The significant effect of occupancy rates was also indicated.

The Management Corporations (MCs) should encourage social relationships among residents. To avoid conflict, the costs and benefits of participation must be balanced. Policy makers should take two key aspects seriously: owner‐managed strategy practices by the MCs and high rates of tenant‐residents. A mechanism should be identified for assisting the MCs in housing management and for protecting the benefits of homeownership for owner‐occupants.

Past studies on low‐income household settlements examined public housing or low‐income homeowners of single detached dwellings. This study adds to the existing body of knowledge by examining low‐income homeowners in multi‐owner low‐cost settlements.

Studies showed that policy influences housing provision. The review of these policies in the Southeast Asia's is possibly not yet adequate because of recent gap in housing demand-supply across the region. This review evaluates the state policy in low-cost housing (LCH) provision in Southeast Asian developing countries reported in published studies.

An electronic search (ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) was conducted using the following search terms: “Low-Cost Housing policy in Southeast Asia.” Reference list of identified studies was scanned to identify more studies. Studies published between 1991 and 2020 that focused either on the region or country within the region were selected. An independent reviewer extracted data from the studies using a standardised form and 27 studies were included in this review.

LCH developing countries experience, encumbrances and measures to mitigate LCH demand-supply gap in Southeast Asia were the issues addressed from the reviewed. Findings from the studies indicate that the level of lax state policy and enforcement of LCH varies across nations.

Findings and recommendations of this paper were based on systematically reviewed literature but does not compromise the robustness regarding state policy in low-cost housing provision in Southeast Asian developing countries. Thus, exploratory sequential mixed methods approach has been recommended as part of the implications for future research.

As part of the practical implications, this paper highlights the mechanism behind the success of Singapore LCH policy and transferability of the model to the developing countries within and outside the region, and open up the possibility to adopt these policies.

This study is probably the first systematic review on low-cost housing in Southeast Asia.

The purpose of this paper is to present how the state government can successfully intervene in providing better quality of urban living standard in Malaysia.

The paper approaches the issue of state intervention by using a case study of a former squatters’ colony area in Bandar Baru Sentul in the capital city of Kuala Lumpur.

The paper establishes that for many decades the governance of Kuala Lumpur has played an active role in designing and implementing a wide range of housing policies to eradicate squatters’ settlement in the city, consequently fulfilling the aspirations of low‐income people to become part of the home owning democracy.

This paper attempts to encourage public policy makers and local authorities to undertake a more active role in providing better quality of urban living standard through the establishment of strong institutional capacity.

The paper provides information on how the state government provides a range of mixed policies to rehabilitate squatters’ colonies in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The purpose of this study is to develop a dual-functional university-enabled social innovation process model on the subject of low-cost houses that addresses the distinct elements of social obligation and university teaching–learning.

This study has predominantly adopted a longitudinal single case study approach, where data have been collected through interviews, survey, participant observation, direct observation and document review. The case study details on the social innovation processes, which was conducted by Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

This study has demonstrated the social innovation processes toward addressing the issue of insufficient low-cost houses, concurrently benefitting the teaching–learning dimension. Three sub-innovations have been highlighted in the developed social innovation process model, which are collaboration process, teaching–learning and design-construct innovation.

Because the study has been based on a single prototype project, further investigation is necessary to confirm the applicability of the full-fledged model. The established social innovation process model is also suggested to be tested in other social fields.

The established social innovation process model has created a new perspective that enables universities to contribute in providing shelter for low-income families, simultaneously enhancing the teaching–learning dimension through experiential learning.

The dual-functional social innovation process model provides a synergistic relationship between the university and the society. Ultimately, the model could address social issues pertaining to low-income families with the built of low-cost houses, concurrently preparing graduates who are highly marketable, which could reduce the rate of graduate unemployment in the country.

The development of the social innovation process model for low-cost houses through university-enabled initiative is a novel establishment, particularly for developing nations, as limited studies have been conducted in this regard. The significant insights into how university could play a role in addressing major social issues, along with their core focus (teaching–learning and research development), is a breakthrough for further diffusions of social innovation by universities.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the factors that cause housing shortage for low‐income groups in Yemen and recommend some solutions to alleviate the problem.

A questionnaire survey has been used as the tool to carry out this study. The first part of the questionnaire consisted of three groups namely: economic, administrative, and legal factors. The second part consists of suggestions on housing supply, construction methods, and materials used for low‐cost housing in Yemen. The level of importance of the categories was measured and the relative importance of weightage was ranked.

The results show that the most important economic factors causing housing shortage were poor handling of available economic resources and shortage of economic resources. The most important administrative factors causing housing shortage were lack of organization and synchronization and not conducting studies on housing. The most important legal factor causing housing shortage was lack of legalization of housing.

The findings could be used to improve housing policies and strategy in Yemen in order to decrease the housing shortage, particularly for the low‐income group.

Focusing on small houses has become one of the recent trends in housing design in Japan, as has been observed in many house design works. Periodical coverage can tell that the number of such works has clearly been increasing since the 90s, as compared with the 70s and 80s. The trend of small houses was also observed in the 50s. In those postwar years of economic growth, it was driven by the conditions of the time, such as supply and housing shortages and urban centralization. Today’s social conditions are significantly different from those in the 50s, and naturally, the whole concept of small houses has greatly changed from the past.

In this research, we evaluate the experiments of small houses, from the view of the idea of sustainability and open building concept. Specifically, the study compares the small houses of the 50s and those after 1990 to examine their differences or similarities in terms of size, structure and building systems. And thus clarify how industrialization and standardization reflect on these experiments.

The former period, most were constructed on wood, with traditional construction method. The purpose of design was rather how to adapt the industrialization to the traditional construction and how to realize the modern way of living in the smallest space, than fulfillment of flexibility. Moreover, low cost was also included in the design purpose. In latest examples, the “small” means “small building area” rather than “small space for life and minimal cost for construction” The experimental projects were conducted by the intention exploring new possibilities and diversities of space design, with various highly industrialized materials. The small houses after 1990 can be regarded as experimental efforts to explore new approaches to skeletons within the context of urban tissue.

This study seeks to determine an appropriate form of yield analysis as a means of improving the supply of low cost rental housing within Australia.

Rental returns are quantified on a disaggregated basis based on the amalgamation of three major government property databases.

Much of the information on returns in low cost rental housing is based on erroneous assumptions. More accurate reporting of returns would put in place the appropriate risk premium for investment in low cost rental housing.

The study adds value by allowing policy makers to better understand the nature of returns required to increase the level of investment in the low cost end of the private rental market.