Private housing market settlement for

newly arrived migrants Hazel Easthope (UNSW) & Wendy Stone (Swinburne)

SwinburneUniversityofTechnology

Destination Australia

232 million migrants globally

(2013)

244,400 migrants to Australia

(2012-13)

2/3rd of migrants from non-English speaking countries & 1/3rd from English

speaking countries move to Sydney & Melbourne (Edgar 2014)

Migrant suburbs

• Many migrants settle near existing communities with ethnic services,

social support networks & lower-cost housing (Edgar 2014,

Johnston et al. 2001)

• Focus of this presentation – 2 suburbs with many migrants:

Springvale (Melbourne) & Auburn (Sydney)

Migration & disadvantage

• Some areas of high migrant concentration are also areas that score

poorly on measures of disadvantage – e.g. SEIFA index

Concentrations of disadvantage

• Australian Housing & Urban Research Institute Multi-year Research

Project

Aim: “to develop a more sophisticated understanding of how

disadvantage is shifting across the urban landscape; what role housing

markets and systems play in this process; and how policymakers and

communities might better respond to the forms of disadvantage that

ensue.” (Cheshire et al. 2014:1)

Typology of disadvantage

• Socio-economic statistics & housing market performance in Sydney,

Melbourne and Brisbane.

• 4 distinct types of disadvantaged suburbs identified

Category Distinguishing features Disadvantaged suburbs

Syd, Melb & Bris

Suburbs Population

Type 1 High on young people & single parent

households

8% 3%

Type 2 High on overseas movers, high on two

parent families

41% 55%

Type 3 High on residential mobility (but low on

overseas movers), high on older people &

lone person households

15% 8%

Type 4 High on overseas movers, on reduced

unemployment & on reduced incidence of

persons in low-status employment

35% 33%

Disadvantaged suburbs

• Suburbanisation of disadvantage

• Cross-tenure nature of disadvantage

Case studies

• 6 case study areas (2 in each state).

• Focus today: the ‘type 2’ case study locations – Auburn (Sydney)

and Springvale (Melbourne)

• Housing market: “characterised by high and growing levels of

private rental and higher density housing, suggesting rapid change

in which investor landlord activity has been a key housing market

driver” (Hulse et al. 2014:4)

• Desk-top review of data, documents and media reports; in-depth

interviews with local stakeholders & community reps (n=18); & focus

groups with residents (n=23)

Gateway suburbs

Population born in Australia

Auburn 32% Sydney 60%

Springvale 30% Melbourne 63%

Most common language spoken at home

Auburn Arabic Sydney English

Springvale Vietnamese Melbourne English

Population lived overseas 5 years ago

Auburn 17% Sydney 7%

Springvale 17% Melbourne 8%

“A lot of people come

straight from the airport

to Auburn”

[Auburn, NGO Community

worker/support provider]

Concern for wellbeing of migrants

• Difficulty accessing work:

- Overseas qualifications not recognised

- Decline of manufacturing industry jobs

- English language skills

• Difficulty navigating Australian systems

• Difficulty finding affordable and appropriate housing

“ Many new arrivals experience multiple disadvantage including

poverty, housing stress, previous experiences of trauma, interrupted

education experiences, health problems, disability and unemployment

which require additional resources to target their complexities of need.”

(Auburn City Council 2013:21)

Disadvantaged people

• High unemployment (11%)

• High proportion of residents in low-skilled / low-status jobs (46-

57%)

• High proportion of households with weekly incomes less than

$600 (22-26%)

• High proportion of people living in private rental housing (31-

33%)

• High proportion of all low-income households paying more than

30% income in rent in Auburn (33%)

Not disadvantaged places

• Good public transport

• Good access to shops and services

• Hubs providing resources to support new and established migrant

communities

Popular places to live – housing stress

• Almost all housing is private

• More than half live in owner-occupied housing (with and without a

mortgage)

• Approximately a third in private rental

• Proportion in social housing lower than metropolitan averages

Owner occupation

• Outright ownership high in Springvale (more mortgages in Auburn)

Private rental

• Marginal rental sector

• Sharing / overcrowding

• Poor quality housing

• Housing stress

Private rental

“Rental stock is in bad dis-repair. Refugees/recent arrivals go into these

houses. Real estate agents slow to act people living in sub-standard

conditions and reluctant to do anything about it.” [Springvale, community

NGO community worker/support provider]

“There’s a lot of overcrowding in Auburn.” [Auburn, NGO community

worker/support provider]

Expectations

“Both sides very happy. Landlord getting cash, residents pay less cash.”

[Springvale, community NGO community worker/support provider]

“Households have to settle for a property that is both smaller and older

than they would prefer.” [Auburn, NGO community worker/service provider]

The ‘choice’

• …. between living in overcrowded and/or substandard conditions or

moving to a more affordable area with fewer facilities and support

services.

• Disadvantaged people being pushed to more disadvantaged places.

• Why?

– Broader housing market changes in both cities: declining rental

and ownership affordability, growing populations, decrease in

availability of public housing and hostels.

– Increasing desirability of both suburbs for new migrants & more

established residents and people from elsewhere. Now

competitively close to CBD.

Gentrification?

• Not simply new residents pushing out old . Existing and longer-term

residents happy with improved fortunes and improved image of their

local area.

• A lot of pride in multicultural community in both areas – they are

places of welcome and opportunity based on grass-roots responses

to community needs.

• Can they continue to play the role of places of welcome – gateway

suburbs – as housing affordability constraints get more acute?

Findings

• Places where disadvantaged people live are not necessarily

disadvantaged places.

• Might be seen as undesirable to create places with concentrations of

disadvantage, but they can play a very important function.

• Concentrations of disadvantaged people can be associated with

high levels of service and community support.

• In this case these suburbs were so advantageous that they appear

to be pricing out new disadvantaged residents.

What will happen next?

• Will gateway suburbs form in the same way in the future given

changes to labour & housing markets?

• Will there be less concentration in migrant settlement because jobs

& affordable housing are not as concentrated? Will this itself be a

cause of disadvantage?

“It was a bit of a magnet for those on

restricted incomes, it's not so affordable

any more. This has implications for new

arrivals who want to join in with a culturally

diverse community.” (Springvale, community

NGO community worker/support provider)

• Will new migrants be forced to live further out in more

disadvantaged places?

• If they do, will the support services follow them, and will the same

process happen again?

• If the services don’t follow them, will this compound disadvantage for

new migrants?

• For those residents who have ‘hung on’ in the area, how will they

fare?

• What does this mean for the future of new migrants to Australia?