Chris Martin

Is Airbnb a sharing economy superstar? Evidence from five global cities

Abstract The “sharing economy” concept has been embraced by governments, entrepreneurs and commentators as delivering new forms of opportunity for local and national economies. Accommodation-sharing platform Airbnb is often considered a sharing economy exemplar, and has promoted itself as helping middle-class residents to gain and retain a foothold in expensive housing markets. This narrative is particularly salient in “global cities”, where poor housing affordability and high tourist demand inevitably coexist. However, critics claim many Airbnb listings are actually permanent short-term rentals. Thus, instead of enabling new efficiencies in the use of housing assets and providing financial security for existing residents, Airbnb may be a variation on an old theme: removing properties from the market for long-term rental or purchase. This paper has three aims: it critically interrogates the sharing economy concept in relation to Airbnb; it reviews the regulatory responses to Airbnb in five global cities; and it examines Airbnb listing data in each city. Ultimately, the paper argues that while some Airbnb listings do fit the sharing economy narrative, others are part of the traditional economy of short term letting. Policy makers need to recognise the different impacts of these uses in their responses to Airbnb and the sharing economy.

Clever Odysseus: narratives and strategies of rental property investor subjectivity in Australia

Abstract This paper is about property investment discourse in Australia, and how it constructs ‘property investor subjectivity’. Using the conceptual frameworks of financialization and governmentality studies, the paper examines current policy settings, media, books and, in particular, property investment seminars. Property investment discourse often takes the narrative form of the ‘property investment journey’, invoking Campbell’s ‘monomyth’ of the ‘hero’s journey’. It also presents a range of strategies of investment, underpinned by a common commitment to strategic thinking, and a rethinking of debt, such that an individual comes to know themselves through property investment. The paper shows how property investor subjectivity obtains purchase in contemporary subjectivity formation, and presents both challenges and opportunities for a counter discourse that advances the prospect of policies for more affordable, accessible housing and financial security.

Building Australia's affordable housing industry: capacity challenges and capacity-enhancing strategies

ABSTRACT As in many other nations, Australias intensifying shortage of affordable housing represents one of the most pressing policy challenges for government. Against a backdrop of ongoing population growth, the 20-year virtual moratorium on public housing construction means that, by 2016, the gross social housing provision deficit had reached 140,000 dwellings. And, while largely frozen in scale, the countrys public housing system has also become increasingly residualised and rundown. In tackling these twin problems, some policy-makers and advocates have invested hopes in an emerging non-government affordable housing industry, largely configured around not-for-profit community housing providers. For some government players, however, the sectors nascent status and therefore ‘restricted capacity’ has been judged a crucial limitation on the extent to which it can be reasonably delegated responsibility for easing national housing stress. Applying a system-minded conception of the ‘affordable housing industry’ and adopting a multidimensional ‘capacity’ framework, this research investigated the factors limiting the scope for the industrys further expansion. In highlighting industry capacity restrictions stemming from the hollowing-out of government and its institutions, our findings connect with a wider policy studies literature and will have resonance in many countries beyond Australia – particularly in the Anglophone world.

One Strike, Three Strikes: Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour in NSW Public Housing

In October 2015, following an election promise by the NSW Coalition government to crack down on crime and anti-social behaviour in public housing, the NSW Parliament passed the Residential Tenancies and Housing Legislation Amendment (Public Housing – Antisocial Behaviour) Act 2015 (NSW) (‘the PHAB amendments’). The main purpose of the PHAB amendments is to effect schemes for terminating social housing tenancies upon ‘three strikes’ (three instances of breach of the tenant’s obligations under their tenancy agreement) or ‘one strike’ (a single instance of serious criminal offending).The PHAB amendments operate on the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which hears and determines termination proceedings under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) (‘the RT Act’), by restricting the Tribunal from considering certain factors and, in certain circumstances, mandatorily requiring it to make termination orders.While ‘one strike’ and ‘three strikes’ slogans indicate a simplistic concept of justice, the schemes introduced by the PHAB amendments are complex. A review of the details of each scheme and past cases indicates that justice would be better done by allowing the Tribunal the discretion to treat each case according to its merits, than by devising complicated schemes that attempt to pre-empt and prescribe every response.