Social Partnerships Addressing Affordable Housing in Australia
Introduction:
This paper examines the formation of a cross-sector partnership in which a collaborative response addressed the issue of affordable housing and homelessness in Melbourne, Australia. Factors leading to the formation and evolution of the relationship reveal how social partnerships in the housing/construction industry can be formulated.
Semi-structured interviews were held with representatives of the three sectors involved in an innovative social housing model, the Elizabeth Street Common Ground project. Supported with background documentation, interviews were coded and the results contrasted against theories pertaining to cross-sector collaboration.
Affordable Housing and Homelessness in Australia:
House prices in Australia are becoming more expensive and those under financial stress are not only unable to enter the property market but cannot afford the rental charges. In a recent paper, Worthington outlines in significant depth the housing affordability problem in Australia and he identifies the scarcity of available housing for those on low incomes and calls for urgent action. Displacement is one of the potential problems directly associated with affordable housing which will only contribute to the existing homelessness problem that is prevalent in Australia.
A cross-sector approach for affordable housing:
Cross-sector collaboration was considered a viable option to fulfill the vision and commitment put forth by the Federal and State governments. A cross-sector approach provides an opportunity for resources and knowledge to be shared, along with risk and responsibility. The purpose of this research paper is to exhibit one prominent and successful case where the three sectors, nonprofit private and government, collaborated in a project targeted at decreasing homelessness and providing affordable housing.
The Common Ground Model Affordable Housing:
The Common Ground Model identifies cross-sector partnerships as the most appropriate and effective mechanism to deliver solutions to affordable housing and homelessness. As Reynolds proposed, a “community wide approach” remains essential to successfully resolve homelessness. The success of the Common Ground concept has attracted interest from numerous countries including the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia. In Australia the Common Ground model has been embraced by multiple sectors in several states. Purposefully built accommodation has been provided for tenants in South Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland through the newly created Australian Common Ground Alliance.
Social Partnerships:
Cross-sector collaboration exists in various forms ranging from a simple philanthropic exchange to more complex compositions where financial and knowledge resources are shared within a partnership arrangement. Of the more complex relationships are those defined as social partnerships. Social partnerships involve sectors working collaboratively and cooperatively to solve a societal problem (Waddock, 1991). Social partnerships are formed on the basis of shared values or beliefs and a willingness to become involved in a complex societal issue.
Research Design:
Organizations adopting the Common Ground methodology employ a collaborative approach to the design and construction of properties. This research concentrated on the dynamics of the collaboration by examining the viewpoints of the nonprofit, private and government sector organizations involved. Four organizations represented the primary partners in this partnership, two nonprofit organisations, Yarra Community Housing and Home Ground Services; private sector organization, Grocon Pty Ltd; and the Victorian State Government.
Outcomes:
Elizabeth Street Common Ground has now been operational for two years. This form of affordable housing is designed for vulnerable people experiencing significant barriers to stable housing. This may be caused through extended periods of homelessness, the impacts of impaired physical and/or mental health, substance abuse, disability, entrenched disadvantage, and significant trauma.
Conclusion:
Three core themes have been identified, social value, resource dependency and the opportunity for employee engagement. All provide insight into the motives that encouraged inclusion. In addition, alignment of the societal issue with the core activities of each organization was imperative. A further aim of this investigation was to determine how the motivated organizations actually formed a tangible partnership.