Housing, Theory and Society

ISSN: 1403-6096 (Print) 1651-2278 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/shou20

A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s

Arguments on High Home Ownership, the
Retirement Pension and the Dualist Rental System
Focusing on Australia

Alan Morris

To cite this article: Alan Morris (2016): A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments
on High Home Ownership, the Retirement Pension and the Dualist Rental System Focusing on
Australia, Housing, Theory and Society, DOI: 10.1080/14036096.2016.1190785

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2016.1190785

Published online: 16 Jun 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 12

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=shou20

Download by: [UQ Library] Date: 21 June 2016, At: 12:11

 Housing, Theory and Society, 2016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2016.1190785

A Qualitative Examination of
Jim Kemeny’s Arguments on High Home
Ownership, the Retirement Pension and the
Dualist Rental System Focusing on
Australia
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

ALAN MORRIS
Institute for Public Policy and Governance, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia

ABSTRACT A key aspect of Jim Kemeny’s argument is that in advanced economies that have
high levels of home ownership, the age pension is only adequate if you have low accommoda-
tion costs. A related argument is that these societies will be dominated by what he calls a
dualist rental market. In this rental market regulation is minimal and landlords hold sway.
Kemeny’s thesis, was given added support by Castles’ (1998) more extensive comparative
analysis. He concluded that his findings were ‘extremely supportive’ of Kemeny’s conclusion.
In this paper, I use in-depth interviews to test Kemeny’s thesis. The circumstances of older
homeowners and older private renters in Australia are compared. All of the interviewees were
dependent solely or primarily on the government age pension. The interviews indicated that
almost all of the older homeowners felt that the age pension was adequate. They were able to
consume adequately, engage in leisure activities, run a car, go on holiday and they had little
anxiety about their financial situation. This was especially so in the case of those interviewees
drawing the couples pension. In contrast, most of the older private renters suffered from sev-
ere financial stress. Invariably they had to use a large proportion of their income to pay for
accommodation, and as a result, they found it difficult to purchase basic items and any unex-
pected expense precipitated much anxiety. Their limited resources severely impacted on their
capacity to sustain social contacts, engage in leisure activities and look after their health. In
addition to having limited resources, many had minimal security of occupancy. The interviews
strongly substantiated Kemeny’s original thesis. They illustrated that within a dualist rental
market the housing tenure and attendant accommodation costs of a person dependent on the
government age pension are crucial determinants of their capacity to live a decent life.

KEY WORDS: Kemeny’s thesis, Dualist rental market, Older private renters, Older
homeowners, Age pension, Australia

Correspondence Address: Alan Morris, Institute for Public Policy and Governance, University of Tech-
nology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia. Tel.: +61-2-9514 4880; Email:
alan.morris@uts.edu.au

© 2016 IBF, The Institute for Housing and Urban Research

 2 A. Morris

Introduction
A major policy development in many advanced economies over the past three dec-
ades has been the strong stress on market-governed housing provision and an atten-
dant emphasis on home ownership and a withdrawal of government support for
social housing (Elsinga 2015; Ronald 2008; Scanlon, Whitehead, and Fernandez
Arrigoitta 2014). Probably, the most dramatic example has been England and Wales
where the social housing stock declined from 31% in 1981 to 18% in 2011, and the
home ownership rate increased from 50% in 1971 to 69% in 2001 declining to 64%
in 2011 (Office for National Statistics 2013). However, even in countries like
Sweden where historically the social housing sector has appeared rock solid, govern-
ment policy has resulted in a decline in social housing and substantial increases in
home ownership (Christophers 2013; Doling and Elsinga 2013; Hedin et al. 2012).
In a few EU countries, the decline of social housing has been accompanied not only
by an increase in home ownership but also by an increase in the proportion of house-
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

holds that are dependent on the private rental sector (PRS) (O’Sullivan and
De Decker 2007). For example, in England and Wales, the proportion of households
in the private rental sector has increased from around 10% in 1991 to 18% in 2011
(Beckett 2014; Office for National Statistics 2013).
In countries where there is minimal regulation of the PRS and there is conse-
quently no rent control and minimal de jure security of tenure, the PRS can be an
extremely challenging housing tenure for low-income households (Kemeny 2006;
Morris 2009; Van der Heijden 2013). For example, in Australia, the focus of this
study, just under four in five of the poorest 20% of households in the PRS are having
to use more than 30% of their income to pay for accommodation and their protection
against eviction is minimal (Hulse et al. 2015).
A group that is particularly vulnerable in a lightly regulated PRS and in a context
where government benefits are low are older people on a low income. In Australia,
this would be older (defined as 65 years and older) people dependent solely or pri-
marily on the government age pension.1 The quantitative research on the relationship
between housing tenure and the capacity of people on the age pension/low income
to manage financially is substantial (Castles 1998; De Decker and Dewilde 2010;
Delfani, De Deken, and Dewilde 2014, 2015; Dewilde and Raeymaeckers 2008;
Fahey and Maitre 2004; Yates and Bradbury 2010), and it is evident that in an
increasing number of countries, home ownership is a key protection against poverty.
In their comparative analysis of Belgium, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands,
Delfani, De Deken, and Dewilde (2015) conclude that outright home ownership
among the income poor elderly plays a major role in reducing poverty. In the case of
Ireland, Fahey and Maitre (2004) reach a similar conclusion. In relation to Australia,
Yates and Bradbury (2010) show that older people who miss out on home ownership
are highly disadvantaged and have a significantly higher after-housing poverty rate.
Kemeny’s (1980, 1992, 2001, 2005, 2006) pioneering work on the relationship
between home ownership and the welfare state has been critiqued for underestimat-
ing the extent to which social housing would be dented and home ownership would
become the dominant housing tenure in almost all advanced economies regardless of
the welfare regime (Schwartz and Seabrooke 2008). Further, his argument that hous-
ing policy shapes the welfare regime and vice versa has been contested (Hoekstra
2009; Van der Heijden 2013). However, his conclusions that home ownership, espe-
cially in weak welfare states, is essential to prevent poverty in old age and that in
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 3

what he calls dualist rental markets, older private renters are often in dire straits,
continue to resonate (Morris 2009).
The central aim of this article was to test (primarily qualitatively) these central
arguments of Kemeny’s drawing on in-depth interviews with older homeowners and
private renters in Sydney, Australia and regional New South Wales, the state in
which Sydney is located. Kemeny’s work has rarely been tested using qualitative
methods. What I examine in this article is his thesis that in an advanced economy
with a high level of home ownership and a dualist rental system, a prerequisite for
an older person on a low income to avoid poverty is outright home ownership. Older
people in the private rental sector (PRS) will usually be in dire circumstances due to
the minimal regulation/security of tenure and high accommodation costs that charac-
terize the dualist rental market.
The following section outlines Jim Kemeny’s arguments. This is followed by a
discussion of the methodology for this study. I then sketch the relationship between
housing tenure and the cost of accommodation for older Australians using available
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

quantitative data. The next section draws on the in-depth interviews and examines
the circumstances of older homeowners and private renters. I conclude by discussing
how the in-depth interviews give credence to Kemeny’s analysis. Kemeny concluded
that although the quantitative data strongly support his thesis, “much is impossible
to measure with statistics … Statistical analyses will have to be supplemented with
qualitative studies that provide researchers with insights into what life is like for the
elderly …” (Kemeny 2005, 74). The article is following his advice.

An Outline of Kemeny’s Framework

Home Ownership and the Welfare State
Kemeny argues that in developed economies, the extent of home ownership has a
fundamental impact on the welfare state, age pensions and the private rental market.
In regards to the welfare state, he argues

Countries with high owner-occupation rates tend also to have relatively poorly
developed welfare states, while countries with low owner-occupation rates tend
to have highly developed welfare states. (Kemeny 1980, 381)

In countries where home ownership represents a substantial part of the housing stock
and is highly valued and sought after, there will be strong pressure from the citizenry
to keep taxes low and they will resist any push to extend the welfare state (Kemeny
1980). Homeowners will be interested in retaining as much of their income as possi-
ble in order to pay the mortgage and expenses associated with home ownership and
urban sprawl such as motor vehicles (Kemeny 2005). He further argues that the drive
to keep taxes low is also part of a privatized ethos that is encouraged by home own-
ership. The notion that government should use taxation to significantly redistribute
income is not accepted by a large section of the population and the political estab-
lishment.
The high levels of home ownership and the attendant privatized ethos and low tax
regime work against universal benefits. Rather, government benefits in these contexts
are means-tested and are low. In regards to the age pension, the high level of outright
home ownership in the older age cohorts and resultant low accommodation costs
 4 A. Morris

encourages a perception that the age pension does not have to be substantial. A perva-
sive narrative is that almost all households will be homeowners by retirement age will
thus have low accommodations costs and, in line with a limited welfare state, there is
therefore no need for a substantial age pension. As Kemeny (2001, 63) argues,

There will be less pressure on politicians to introduce high retirement pensions

because the living costs of the elderly-in a society where owner occupation is
widespread, or even the norm-can be subsidised by low running costs resulting
both from zero mortgage debt and the running down and neglect of mainte-
nance.

An implicit assumption is that older individuals/households who have failed to

acquire home ownership by the time they retire are somehow “delinquent”, and their
situation and resultant high housing costs are due to their own failings. Further, they
cannot expect government to pay for their high accommodations costs (Kemeny
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

2001).
Kemeny’s thesis was given further credence by Castles and Mitchell’s (1994)
study of 13 OECD countries. Their comparative analysis concluded that Kemeny’s
thesis was generally valid – where home ownership rates are high, welfare expendi-
ture and age pensions tend to be low and vice versa. A later study by Castles (1998,
11) further validated Kemeny’s “trade off hypothesis”. Using data from 18 OECD
countries, Castles concluded,

For the past three decades, and dramatically so between 1960 and 1980, high
levels of home ownership in Western societies have gone along with weakly
developed welfare states, manifested in lower aggregates of government rev-
enues and expenditures and in lower levels of pension and other non-health,
welfare spending.

As mentioned, more recent analyses have indicated that the divergence between wel-
fare states has narrowed, and in many advanced economies, including the social
democratic regimes identified by Esping-Andersen, the promotion of and high levels
of home ownership are now the norm (Christophers 2013; Doling, Ford, and Horse-
wood 2003; Van der Heijden 2013). Although it can be argued that Kemeny under-
estimated the level of housing market deregulation and increasing convergence, it
does appear that his thesis that high levels of home ownership has conservative pol-
icy ramifications cannot be easily dismissed. As Schwartz and Seabrooke (2008,
240) conclude,

In many countries perceptions of self-interest in relation to housing markets

have been dramatically realigned away from communal wealth and towards
increasing individual wealth, even within countries in which property was com-
monly considered a social or communal right.

Home Ownership and the Capacity to Avoid Poverty on the Age Pension
Kemeny’s contention that for older people home ownership is crucial to avoid pov-
erty is a truism for an increasing number of countries as deregulation becomes more
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 5

pervasive, and not only for the countries historically associated with liberal welfare
regimes. Delfani, De Deken, and Dewilde (2015, 262) conclude in relation to their
study of Belgium, Ireland, Germany and the Netherlands “that outright homeowners
have lower housing costs than tenants, and hence can live on a low pension without
being deprived”.
In the case of Australia, the data supports Kemeny’s analysis. The Australian gov-
ernment age pension (eligibility for the age pension is to rise from 65 to 67 by
2023) is only 27.7 5% of Male Total Average Weekly Earnings (Australian Govern-
ment 2014). Eligibility is means-tested and recipients receive either a full or part
government age pension depending on their income and assets. In June 2012, 76%
of Australians aged 65 years and over received a full or part government age pension
– 59% of recipients received a full pension (Australian Institute of Health and
Welfare 2013a). Yates and Bradbury (2010) found that in the case of older house-
holds, Australia has one of the highest before-housing-poverty rates in the OECD,
19.1%, which is higher than the United States of America. However, they concluded
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

that due to most older households being homeowners and having low accommoda-
tion costs as a result, it has one of the lowest after-housing poverty rates.

The Dualist and Integrated Rental Market

Kemeny argues that in countries with high levels of home ownership, the private
rental market is characterized by what he calls a “dualist rental market”. In these
contexts, typified historically by liberal welfare regimes but no longer (Van der
Heijden 2013), the non-profit or social housing part of the rental market is small,
means-tested, reserved for very low-income households and does not compete with
the for-profit rental sector (Kemeny 2006). Certainly this is the case in Australia
where the social housing sector accounts for only 3.9% of the housing stock and is
now reserved for the most severely disadvantaged households (Australian Institute of
Health and Welfare 2013b).
In a dualist rental market, the dominance of the for-profit rental sector means that
the regulation of the rental sector is limited. The situation in the PRS in Australia is
a perfect example of what occurs in a dualist rental market. The term of the written
agreement or lease rarely extends beyond a year. Once the fixed term of the written
lease ends (except where the fixed term is two years or more), the landlord has the
de jure right to increase the rent as many times as they like as long as they give the
tenant the required written notice. Tenants can appeal against the increase. In New
South Wales, tenants “can apply to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal
(NCAT) for an order that the new rent is excessive” (Tenants NSW 2016). However,
unless the rent is increased to a level that is substantially higher than the market
average for comparable properties, with the onus on the tenant to establish this,
appeals are unlikely to succeed. Landlords are able to give a tenant written notice to
vacate for a range of reasons or, indeed, no reason at all (Martin 2012). In the latter
instance, all that is required is written notice of 90 days. If the landlord sells the
property, only 30 days written notice is required. If the written notice is properly
served, the NCAT has no discretion and must make a termination order. In stark con-
trast tenants in the social housing sector are given leases of two, five or ten years
and these leases are invariably renewed (NSW Government 2008). Prior to October
2006, public housing tenants were given lifelong leases. Rents are set at 25% of
income. Noteworthy, is that the small social housing sector is under increasing
 6 A. Morris

pressure as state governments endeavour to reap a windfall from an enormous

increase in the value of public housing in certain neighbourhoods. Thus, in Sydney,
public housing residents of an area called Millers Point which is in walking distance
of the iconic Sydney Opera House are being forced to relocate and their homes are
being sold on the private market for millions of dollars (Morris 2016).
In this context, home ownership, if it can be attained, is a logical choice. As
Kemeny (2006, 13) observes,

The choice for most households in such a rental system is between profit-dri-
ven rental dwellings with high rents and weakened rights to retain their con-
tract on the one hand, and home ownership on the other. Thus it is not strange
that most households choose to own their own home …

The dualist rental market is contrasted with the integrated rental market. The
integrated or unitary rental system Kemeny associates with corporatist and social
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

democratic welfare regimes (Kemeny 2001, 61). In the integrated rental system, the
non-profit rental sector is a major player and acts to constrain the private rental mar-
ket. The size of the non-profit sector determines the extent to which it is able to limit
the power of the for-profit sector. Thus, in countries such as Germany and Switzer-
land, the relatively small size of the non-profit rental sector means that “the providers
of non-profit housing have a limited impact on the rental market” (Kemeny 2006,
13), whereas in Denmark, Sweden, Austria and the Netherlands where the non-profit
sector is as large or larger than the for-profit sector, the constraining power of the for-
mer is substantial. A key feature of the integrated rental market is that the non-profit
rental sector is accessible to all – it is not restricted to poor households.
Kemeny’s analysis of the dualist verse integrated rental market has been examined
by Hoekstra (2009). He concludes, based on an analysis of six countries (Austria,
the Netherlands, Ireland, the UK, Denmark and Belgium), that although Kemeny
overestimates the differences between the two rental systems identified, there are cer-
tainly differences. Thus, in the dualist rental system there are greater differences in
relation to housing quality, and the rental differences between the non-profit and for-
profit sectors are larger and the degree to which the social housing sector is residual-
ized is greater. Also, countries with a dualist rental system do tend to have a larger
home owning sector. He does conclude that more empirical work needs to be done
to test Kemeny’s thesis and that the ongoing reorganization of the welfare state in
many countries means that the differences between the two rental systems are
narrowing.
In sum, Kemeny concludes that in countries where home ownership is high and
the dualist rental market holds sway, the age pension will only be adequate if the
households concerned own their home outright or alternatively are in subsidized ren-
tal housing (social housing) and thus have low accommodation costs. Households
who are dependent on the PRS for their housing and the age pension for their
income will be (as this article illustrates) severely disadvantaged. Their reliance on
the barely regulated PRS means that they have to use a substantial part of their age
pension to pay for accommodation. Their vulnerability is accentuated by the small
and residual social housing sector generally not being accessible. In New South
Wales, the state where the interviews were conducted, healthy older people depen-
dent solely on the age pension for their income, are only placed on the priority list
for social housing when they turn 80 (New South Wales Government 2006).
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 7

Methodology
The study is based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 32 older homeowners
and 40 private renters. The interviews conducted are part of a broader study that
examined the impacts of housing tenure on older Australians dependent on the age
pension. Eighteen of the older homeowners lived in Sydney and 14 in regional New
South Wales (the state in which Sydney is located). Nine were between 65 and
70 years of age; 12 between 71 and 79 and 10 were 80 plus. Only eight of the home-
owners interviewed were male.
In the case of the older private renters interviewed, 25 lived in Sydney and the
remainder in regional New South Wales. Only two were aged 80 plus; 25 were
between 65 and 70 and 13 between 71 and 79. Thirteen were male and 27 female.
The interviews covered the following themes or topics – housing career; the ade-
quacy of the accommodation; the cost of the accommodation and its impacts;
finances, budgeting and consumption; health; leisure, social connections and the
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

neighbourhood; social and family support; perceived security of tenure and future
housing plans. In the case of private renters, the security of tenure theme covered the
landlord–tenant relationship and maintenance. The broader study was an endeavour
to examine how the housing tenure of older Australians dependent on the age pen-
sion for their income influenced their lives. The selection of the themes (a theme in
this study is defined as a topic that covers a key area of enquiry) was shaped by the
knowledge that although the income received by older Australians dependent on the
age pension was equivalent; their housing tenure played a central role in establishing
how much disposable income they had after housing costs and also impacted on
their security of tenure. The selection of the themes was determined by the study’s
intention to examine all the key aspects of interviewees’ lives and how the cost of
accommodation had a bearing on these aspects.
For the purposes of this article, the key themes were the cost of the accommoda-
tion and its impacts; finances, budgeting and consumption; leisure, social connec-
tions; perceived security of tenure and health. These themes allowed me to
investigate interrelated aspects of Kemeny’s thesis. Firstly, that countries with high
levels of home ownership will tend to have low retirement pensions and in these
contexts, the housing tenure of an older person dependent on a government age pen-
sion becomes a crucial determinant of their capacity to lead a decent life; outright
older homeowners will be able to live a decent life due to their low accommodation
costs, whereas older private renters will be severely constrained by their high accom-
modation costs. This focus is linked to Kemeny’s argument that advanced economies
with high levels of home ownership are likely to have a dualist rental market and for
people dependent on a government age pension (or another government pension
such as disability or unemployment) for their income and on the PRS for their
accommodation, everyday life will be extremely difficult. The minimal regulation
that characterizes the dualist rental market results in the cost of accommodation in
this tenure being high and the security of occupancy low. In sum, the interview data
collected and organized using the themes cost of the accommodation and its impacts;
finances, budgeting and consumption; leisure, social connections; perceived security
of tenure and health, allowed me to examine Kemeny’s contention that the housing
tenure of a person on the age pension in a context dominated by a dualist rental mar-
ket is usually a fundamental determinant of their capacity to lead a decent life. In
line with Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach, I define a decent life as people having
 8 A. Morris

the capacity “to pursue the objectives they have reason to value” (Drèze and Sen
2002, 36).
There are certainly gaps in the study. There is limited input from interviewees
who do not speak English at home and no Indigenous older people were inter-
viewed. This was mainly a result of the mode of recruitment. Interviewees were self-
selected. They responded to advertisements placed in a free publication called
Seniors and the Council on the Ageing (COTA)2 website or heard about the study
through fellow residents, family or friends. Interviewees were paid $30 for their
time. This may have being a factor in some instances for a person agreeing to be
interviewed. However, it was concluded that paying interviewees for their time
would facilitate recruitment and was the right thing to do.
Of course all interviewees will exaggerate certain aspects, omit important informa-
tion and distort “reality”, but I sensed that the interviewees endeavoured to answer
questions as honestly as their memory allowed. A key aspect was to develop a rap-
port with the interviewees or what Minichiello et al. (1995) have called a “produc-
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

tive interpersonal climate”. I did this by clearly conveying to interviewees that I was
there to learn about their experiences, interpretations and perceptions and not to
judge.
A thematic approach was used to analyse the interviews. Analysis of the inter-
views involved identifying key themes and using the NVivo software program to
organize the content within the themes identified.
Ethics permission for the study was obtained from the respective Ethics Offices at
the University of New South Wales and the University of Technology Sydney. All
the interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. All of the names used are pseudo-
nyms.

Housing Tenure and the Cost of Accommodation for Older Australians

At present, most Australians aged 65 and over, own their own home outright. The
historical emphasis on home ownership (Paris 1993) and the acute awareness that
the PRS is not a sensible housing tenure to be located in if dependent on the age
pension, meant that in 2011–2012 about four in five older Australians owned their
home outright. Noteworthy, as illustrated in Table 1, is that people living in lone per-
son households are less likely to be outright homeowners and more likely to be pri-
vate renters.
Although close to one in ten lone person households are private renters, Table 1
indicates that the overall proportion of older Australians (65 plus) living in the PRS
is small, about 6.7%. The small proportion has meant that older private renters have
not had the capacity to shift policy and their desperate circumstances have been lar-
gely ignored. Older private renters are subject to the same legislation as all private
renters.
The profound impact of housing tenure on the accommodation costs of older
Australians is illustrated in Table 2.
Table 2 shows that in 2011/2012, private renters aged between 65 and 74 years
were on average paying close to eight times more for their accommodation than their
homeowner counterparts. Presuming that all households were drawing the maximum
single age pension payable in 2011 ($365 a week), and their housing costs per week
were the average amount established by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the older
homeowners would have $328 a week to spend on other items besides housing;
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 9

Table 1. Housing tenure of older Australians and all households, 2011–2012

Couple only, reference

person aged 65 and over Lone person All Australian
Housing circumstance Proportion of households aged 65 and over households

Owner 90.3 76.7 67.5

Owner without a mortgage 82.1 71.9 30.9
Owner with a mortgage 8.2 4.8 36.6
Renter 7.9 19.3 30.3
Renting from state or 2.6 7.2 3.9
territory housing
authority
Renting from private 3.9 9.3 25.1
landlord
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

Source: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2013a, 38).

Table 2. Cost of accommodation by housing tenure, 2011–2012

Disposable
income after
accommodation
Age costs*
Mean housing cost per week by age 65–74 75+ Income 65–74 75+

Owner without a mortgage $37 $34 $365 $328 $331

Renter, State/territory $120 $120 $365 $245 $245
Private landlord $283 $203 $416 $133 $213

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2013) Housing Occupancy and Costs 4130.0.
*Premised on the only source of income being the maximum single age pension and in the case of older
private renters, the maximum single age pension and Commonwealth Rent Assistance.

social housing tenants would have $245 a week; private renters aged between 65
and 74, $132.50 a week and private renters aged 75 and over, $212.50 a week. In
the case of private renters, I have added the maximum Commonwealth Rent Assis-
tance3 ($50.50 a week in June 2011) to the income they receive from the age pen-
sion ($365 a week).
The disposable income ($132.50 a week) of older private renters between 65 and
74 years was substantially below the poverty line which in December 2011 for a sin-
gle person not in the labour force, the Melbourne Institute calculated was $221 a
week after housing costs were taken into account (Melbourne Institute, 2012).4 If we
present the cost of housing as a proportion of income, in 2011–2012, older home-
owners living by themselves and drawing the full age pension and paying the mean
cost for their accommodation would have been using around 10% of their income
for accommodation; older social housing tenants, 25% (the rent of almost all social
housing tenants is set at a maximum of 25% of their income); older private renters
aged 65 to 74 years, 67%, and older private renters 75 and over, 48%.
 Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

10
A. Morris

Table 3. Median rent in Sydney as a proportion of income of households dependent on the age pension, June 2015

Rent as a proportion of
income for a person on
Median rent the single age pension if
Region per week* paying the median rent**
Rent as a proportion of
income for a household
Amount of money left per on the couple age Amount of money left per
week after paying the pension if paying the week after paying the
median rent median rent** median rent

Greater Sydney $460 93% $34.30 65% $248.80

Inner ring $500 100% -$5.30 71% $208.80
Middle ring $450 91% $44.30 63% $258.80
Outer ring $310 63% $184.30 44% $398.80
Poverty line*** $247.58 $403.76

*The median rents are based on figures supplied by NSW Government Rent and Sales Reports for March 2015 (New South Wales Government 2015).
**The income was calculated on the basis that the lone person or couple household was receiving the full pension and maximum rent assistance. Maximum income for a
single person on the age pension in the private rental sector in July 2015 was $494.30 per week and for a couple, $708.80 per week.
***The poverty line was the amount of money required per week in December 2014 after paying for accommodation (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and
Social Research 2015).
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 11

The cost of private rental accommodation is extremely variable. An older private

renter in Sydney would invariably be paying a lot more than an older private renter
in a regional centre, and within Sydney itself, there are enormous variations – med-
ian rents in inner Sydney are a lot higher than median rents in outer Sydney. Table 3
illustrates the median rent for a one bedroom dwelling in Sydney in relation to the
age pension in March 2015. It shows what proportion of their income sole person
households and couple households would be using if they were paying the median
rent in various parts of Sydney, and whether they would be above or below the pov-
erty line.
Table 3 indicates that a person on the age pension who was living by themselves
in inner Sydney and paying the median rent of $500 a week would have had to use
their whole income to pay their rent. A lone person household in the much cheaper
outer ring would have had to use just under two thirds of their income and their
weekly disposable income ($184.30) after paying for accommodation would have
been way below the poverty line of $247.58 a week after housing costs. Couples are
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

in a far better position but even if they were renting in the outer ring of Sydney and
paying the median rent for a one-bedroom dwelling ($310 a week) they would have
had an income ($398.80 a week) that was below the poverty line ($403.76 a week
after housing costs).

The Capacity of Older Private Renters and Homeowners to Live a Decent Life
on the Age Pension
The interviews starkly illustrated the impacts for an older person of living in a con-
text characterized by a dualist rental market and gave substance to Kemeny’s argu-
ment that home ownership is a crucial protection against poverty in retirement in
weak welfare states. The cost and security of tenure of interviewees’ accommodation
fundamentally shaped their capacity to lead a decent life. Although the interviewees
had a range of experiences, the interviews indicated that interviewees dependent
solely or primarily on the government age pension in the same housing tenure usu-
ally had similar concerns and capacities to live a decent life. Thus, most of the older
private renters interviewed, because of the cost of their accommodation relative to
the age pension and the lack of regulation characteristic of a dualist rental market,
generally found it exceptionally difficult to live a decent life. Most told of how they
agonized over the smallest purchase. Fulfilling basic consumption requirements was
challenging and any expenditure beyond necessities was difficult and often not possi-
ble. Besides their limited consumption possibilities, living in a dualist rental market
meant that they were persistently insecure and anxious. They lived in constant fear
of a rent increase or being asked to vacate. In contrast, almost all of the older home-
owners felt that their housing was totally secure and that the age pension gave them
the capacity to lead a decent life.

Security of Tenure
A fundamental difference between the situations of older private renters and home-
owners was security of tenure. All of the homeowners interviewed (they were all
outright homeowners) felt totally secure. At the time of the interview in 2012, Lyn
had been living in the same home for 53 years: “Well, I couldn’t see living anywhere
 12 A. Morris

else. I lived in mum and dad’s home till I was 21 and then I moved in here and we
haven’t gone anywhere else”.
The minimally regulated dualist rental market meant that many of the older private
renters were constantly concerned that they may have to move. Judith was extremely
anxious that the small cottage she was renting would be sold:

These are the last four houses and they’re just waiting for the right price and
they’ll be gone. I mean I won’t be here that long because they are waiting for
the right price … They’ve already been offered. Yes. They’ve already been
offered, but they didn’t accept the offer.

When asked what she would do if she had to move, Judith tearfully responded: “I
don’t know. I don’t know. I really don’t know. I don’t know”.
Even though Bruce had been in his present accommodation for close to eight
years, he was still persistently fearful about the possibility of being asked to vacate.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

Well I think I’ve been reasonably secure here but every time I get a letter from
the landlord’s agents I’m a bit horrified to think they might want to get rid of
me. So there is no sort of security here for an older person.

Being forced to vacate because owners wanted to sell or because of a rent increase
or for another reason, was not uncommon:

I’ve moved about five times in the last six years because people wanted to sell
their house so I got turfed out. Well, when the lease expired I had to go and
that put me at some stages in a very difficult position. (Robert)

Financial Stress
Extreme frugality and self-deprivation were features of many older private renters’
lives. Most had little left after paying for their accommodation. The age pension sim-
ply was not enough to live a decent life especially for those interviewees renting in
Sydney and dependent on the single (rather than couple) age pension. An older pri-
vate renter described the age pension as a “joke”:

It [the pension] is unrealistic. I mean I thank God for it because I’d never make
ends meet otherwise. I really thank God for it, but it’s unrealistic. You cannot
live on that. I mean what would you live on. It’s a joke. I was lucky that I had
the income from working on the side … I couldn’t have lived like that without
working a bit …. (Sarah)

Sarah made some money babysitting. She did not declare this income as she was
concerned that it would impact on her age pension. When I interviewed her, she had
recently moved into social housing and her life had been totally transformed as a
result.

I feel very differently … I only pay $100 a week and that stress is gone. I feel
a different person … I am so happy here … I’ve sort of relaxed here. I’m a
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 13

different person. At least you’ve got a roof over your head and you know that
you’re not going to be thrown out … Yeah, it’s [private rental] a worry all the
time … Yes, I was a nervous wreck before I moved.

In stark contrast to the older private renters, the virtually guaranteed security of
tenure and low accommodation costs of older homeowners meant that the latter were
usually able to live a decent life on the age pension. Most said that they were able to
consume adequately, engage in leisure activity, run a vehicle, go on holiday and look
after their health. This was especially so in the case of older homeowners who drew
the couple rather than single age pension. Most were emphatic that the age pension
was adequate. Henry could not think of an area where they had cut back since he
and his wife had stopped working:

Well if you don’t have a mortgage I think the pension is quite adequate for our
lifestyle anyway. Yeah, well you get other benefits … $2.50 transport, [cheap]
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

prescriptions … I can’t see anywhere we’ve cut back to what we used to do

[when working].

Arnold, who also drew the couple pension, had a similar view:

The pension is adequate provided you live wisely. Now I don’t think you can
go for a world trip every second day of the week cos you’d soon run out of
money … but if we wanted to go overseas say to see family you have to save
up wisely and after 12 or 18 months book for three weeks.

A common sentiment of older homeowners was that if you had some level of finan-
cial literacy and did not spend large amounts on smoking, alcohol or gambling, the
pension was “adequate”. Denise lived by herself and felt that she was able to lead a
decent life:

So I can’t say that I’m rich but I can’t say I’m poor either. I don’t have to think
I can only go and buy a bit of butter and I don’t have to think like that you
know … I absolutely feel that the pension is really adequate if, as I said before,
you don’t gamble, you don’t smoke or drink.

A few of the homeowners who drew the single age pension experienced financial
stress. The cost of insurance was often a significant contributor. Mary’s various
insurance premiums meant that her disposal income after insurance was minimal.
However, she had private medical insurance, lived in a nice home and ran a car:

My house insurance per annum is $2700. My medical insurance is $2100, I

have a car and I don’t know how much I pay for insurance for that. I haven’t
got it off the top of my head. I allow myself $200 a fortnight to live on for
food and incidental expenses.

The few older homeowners interviewed who had constant substantial expenses,
experienced financial stress. A couple who were supporting their unemployed son
who was in the PRS were battling financially. The extra expense (they subsidized
 14 A. Morris

their son’s rent) meant that their age pension was not adequate. When I asked Doug
if they were able to save, he responded:

Very little you know with the position we’re in with our son. We’ve got
enough to get by but not enough to put aside each week for other things …
My wife’s at the table three or four hours a day budgeting … We’ve got to
know where every cent goes and where it’s coming from and if we want some-
thing how long it is going to take for saving for it.

Shopping for Necessities

Most of the interviewees in the PRS had minimal or no capacity to consume beyond
basic necessities.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

You can’t go and splurge on anything and you definitely can’t drink alcohol or
smoke cigarettes, use drugs, gamble,… or use cosmetics or get your hair done.
or buy clothes. I don’t buy clothes … Occasionally I have to go, I’ll go to
Exodus (a charity) and I’ll get free food. (Barbara)

Shopping for food was a systematic and carefully thought through process. Fruit and
vegetables were luxuries as were red meat and fish.

You know, well fruit is a luxury. You don’t get much opportunity to buy fruit
and you know a lot of vegetables … I like tuna, tinned tuna. I sort of get that.
And then there’s noodles and mince and sausages and bread. Perhaps the odd
biscuits if they’re on special … I might have fruit maybe once a month or once
every couple of months, because you can’t … afford to go out and pay 80¢ or
90¢ for an apple. You just can’t because … it’s not only your food you’ve got
to buy. It’s your toiletries, your washing up powder and soap and toothpaste
and all those things that you have to buy as well. (Judith)

Bev told of how she constantly had to make choices: “I have to be very careful and
I have to you know like get an item and turn it three or four times in my hand to see
if I need it or I don’t need it”. Her poor health meant that it was important that she
ate well, but she found it difficult. Her situation was not unusual. Val was also bat-
tling to maintain a healthy diet:

It [her high accommodation costs] means that literally I come down to baked
beans on toast and I have specific dietary needs that I don’t always meet so I
get sicker … and I think I get weaker without even knowing it.

A number of the interviewees in the PRS said that they ran out of money prior to
the pension payout day. Ian lived in a totally inadequate studio apartment in
Sydney’s inner city. He was using about 40% of his income for rent.

You’re always struggling in the last two or three days. Like I’ve got a pay per-
iod coming up this Friday and I’ll just make it to that … There’s always things
that you’ve got to spend money on.
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 15

I interviewed Barbara on a Friday. She had $20 for the next week.

Like I got paid last Friday and don’t get paid till next Friday and I’ve got $20.
Hopefully, I’ve got enough of all the important things that I’ll be all right but
that’s $20 and I only got paid last Friday.

Food shopping was not an issue for the older homeowners. Interviewees said that
they generally bought what they wanted.

I have all my wants here. I can’t think of anything. I think to myself I’m defi-
nitely not going without, and … I don’t skimp on food. I’m not eating cereal
for dinner at night or anything like that. (Dianne)

Henry and his wife were fond of seafood:

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

Like I said, in the food department we buy what we like. We don’t skimp but
we don’t buy excess either. I mean half a kilo of prawns will feed us
adequately whereas for other people it would just be a starter … So yes, we
have prawns, we have oysters, we don’t have caviar … and we have smoked
salmon.

Leisure Activity and Social Ties

Leisure activity was exceptionally difficult for the older private renters as invariably
it involved some expenditure. In Sydney, for $2.50, age pensioners are able to use
any mode of public transport in a 24-h period. Interviewees told of how they found
this small expenditure difficult. Mary commented on how she had to choose between
food or breaking her isolation using public transport: “Well, you sort of think what
you can do with $2.50. That’s a loaf of bread type of thing”. The cost of their
accommodation meant that their capacity to partake in leisure activity was extremely
limited:

Now I don’t go out unless I really have to. When I go down to the local shops
on a Thursday I buy a lunch for myself for $7, Subway. I don’t know if you
have Subway, but I enjoy a Subway and I can get a Subway for about $5. I
always ask for a pensioner discount. Sometimes they say, “No”, but I always
ask, but that’s about the only luxury I afford myself actually. (Christine)

The lack of resources made it difficult to retain social ties. An older renter who had
been forced to move into the PRS due to conflict with her daughter and son-in-law
told of how the move had impacted on her social life:

I’m struggling … I’m trying to survive … I can’t go to the movies. I can’t go

out for dinner and with friends for lunch … My social life is down the drain.
As I said, everything has changed. I have to be very careful with my money. I
can’t go to the places that I used to go. I can’t do things that I used to do …
My situation makes me feel lonely. (Eileen)
 16 A. Morris

Their limited income meant that they often had to live in areas that are not well
served by public transport. Eileen felt that she had to retain her car even though it
was an enormous financial burden:

Well the next biggest expense is the car, but if I sell my car … My back is very
bad and my left leg and my right leg isn’t very good either, so if I sell my car
I won’t be able to get out of the flat to go [anywhere].

Almost all of the older homeowners said that they had the capacity to socialize and
go on holiday. Joan had lost her husband a couple years prior to the interview:

I’m fine cos, like I said, I don’t smoke or drink, I do not lead a boring life. I
go out with my friends. We go to different places. Yes, I go to the … Sports
Club when they have a dinner and show because you’ve only got to pay an
extra $10 and you get a nice main meal something like that or a three course
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

meal. I do go out. I don’t sit around at home.

Paula and her husband lived in a regional town and were very active:

We holiday a lot and it just amazes me when I hear people [say] you can’t
manage on the pension cos we do a lot. We’re off cruising for a month next
week … We bought a new car this year … We have a small nest egg and by
saying a nest egg I’d say we’ve probably got about $55,000 which is all the
money we have but that sort of went down a bit. As I said, we bought a new
car but we can manage to live with our pension and save money to go
overseas.

Capacity to Look after their Health

A major concern of the older private renters was an inability to look after their health
adequately. Besides a lack of capacity to eat healthily and the psychological impacts
of having to deal with the financial stress and insecurity linked to being an older pri-
vate renter, several interviewees spoke of how difficult it was to purchase medication
despite it being heavily subsidized by the Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme (PBS).5
Christine had several chronic health problems and was having to take up to 20
tablets a day. I interviewed her the day she had no money to collect her medication.
She had had to ask St Vincent Du Paul (a charity) for financial assistance and was
mortified.

When it comes to a big batch like here, when I had to buy seven [different
medications] that really knocks the budget up. I can’t even add it up but that’s
seven times $6.10 and that makes it extremely difficult. And there’s other
things in between that aren’t on the chemist thing [PBS] that you still need to
get … I know people that don’t even go to the doctors or when the doctor
gives them something (a script) don’t get the scripts for it. Mine are heart
things. I’ve really got to take them.
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 17

There had been times when Christine had cut down on the number of tablets she
took so as to save money: “Look I wouldn’t say it to anybody else … but sometimes
I was trying to cut down – if I had to take two tablets a day, I was taking one.”
The importance of guaranteed or secure housing for well-being is well-established
(Hiscock et al. 2001; Hulse and Saugeres 2008). The dualist rental market meant that
many of the older private renters were constantly anxious about their security of
tenure. They were worried that their rent would be increased to an untenable level or
that they would be asked to leave. The resultant stress experienced was often debili-
tating.

You don’t go through 24 h without thinking of it. I mean you can’t totally put
it aside … I would say that’s the biggest stress my wife and I have. (Thomas)

I do think a lot about that but there is nothing I can do … There is nothing I
can do about it … You know if the landlord decides to sell the house you
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

know and tells me that I have to get out, I have to get out. (Eileen)

For many of the older homeowners, their home was a source of great pleasure. Frank
forcefully articulated the link between having a comfortable, welcoming home and
good health. He described his home in the following way:

You walk in and you feel comfortable. You just feel at home. Everything’s just
great. It doesn’t matter which room you go into … you’ve got the sun in the
right direction and the wind in the right direction and you’ve got nice views in
all directions and it’s on a corner block and it’s a nice big block. A nice garden
surrounded by roses, flowers, vegetables. Nice veranda on back and front and
it’s just homely and comfortable.

Although older homeowners expressed concern about health costs, they generally
appeared to have the capacity to pay for medical expenses. Their more middle-class
location historically meant that several had had private health insurance for many
years and the low cost of their accommodation meant that they were able to hold on
to it. This relieved much stress around medical expenses.

I’m with this very good [health insurance] company … I [need] glasses. I need
my teeth and … if I have to go to hospital I want private. I don’t want to go in
a ward with a lot of other people. (Denise)

Discussion: Reviewing Kemeny’s Framework Drawing on the Interviews

The interview data give credence to key aspects of Kemeny’s analysis. In Australia,
the high proportion of older homeowners does mean that the pressure on government
to introduce high retirement pensions and to pay heed to the desperate situation of
older private renters is not substantial. As the interviews illustrate, older homeowners
because of their low accommodation costs are generally able to lead a decent life on
a government age pension despite it being equivalent to only 27.5% of Male Total
Average Weekly Earnings. Whether the dualist rental system in place in Australia is
a function of the high level of home ownership is debatable. However, what is
 18 A. Morris

evident is that a dualist rental market does operate and it has dire implications for
older private renters. The interviews indicated that for older private renters in
Australia who were dependent on the age pension, living in a dualist private rental
market meant that their capacity to lead a decent life was usually severely limited.
The minimal regulation of the PRS meant that invariably they had to use a consider-
able proportion of their income (the age pension plus Commonwealth Rent
Assistance) to pay for their accommodation. This was especially so if they were liv-
ing by themselves in a metropolitan area and a tight rental market like Sydney. Older
private renters had difficulty purchasing the most basic necessities and every pur-
chase had to be carefully considered. Leisure activity and maintaining social contact
were difficult as they could hardly afford to venture out. Their social isolation was
often compounded by their emotional distress, and their capacity to maintain their
health was often compromised by their anxiety, inability to eat healthily and failure
to maintain their medication regime due to a lack of finances.
The precarious tenure situation of older private renters often contributed to a great
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

deal of stress. Most of the interviewees were constantly concerned that their rent
would be increased or that they would be asked to vacate. The dominance of the for-
profit rental sector meant that their rights and possibilities were limited. The small
size of the social housing sector and its increasing residualisation mean that older
Australians on the age pension who are not homeowners invariably have to fend for
themselves in the PRS.
The desperation of many older private renters has not caused much of a political
ripple due to older private renters at present representing a small proportion of older
Australian households. However, the data suggest that in the coming decades, an
increasing proportion of older Australians will be dependent on the PRS when they
leave the workforce (Stebbing and Spies-Butcher 2015; Yates and Bradbury 2010).
In 2011–2012, 11.9% of 55–64 year-olds rented from a private landlord as did
19.1% of the 45–54 year-old cohort (ABS 2013). It is likely that a large proportion
of these households will still be in the PRS when they leave the labour force, more
especially the lone person private renter households. In 2009–2010 (latest figures
available), one in five lone person households in the 55–64 year-old cohort were pri-
vate renters (ABS 2011).
It is apparent that an increasing proportion of Australia’s population are being shut
out of home ownership (Stebbing and Spies-Butcher 2015; Wood and Ong 2015).
Housing prices in the metropolitan areas have increased dramatically. In Sydney, the
median house price passed the million-dollar mark in July 2015 and between July
2014 and July 2015, Sydney housing prices increased by 23% (Nicholls 2015). The
increase in house prices is occurring in the context of an increasing proportion of the
population finding themselves in precarious employment, unemployed or not in the
workforce (ABS 2015). These factors, combined with an increasing divorce rate in
the later years (Jones 2015), mean that a growing number of households will never
have the capacity to enter into home ownership or alternatively will fall out of home
ownership. Noteworthy, is that in 1982, 55.5% of 25–34 year-olds were homeowners
and in 2011, 34% were (Wood and Ong 2015).

Concluding Remarks
The Australian situation resonates with an increasing number of advanced econo-
mies. Neolibralization of the housing market has become the norm in many countries
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 19

resulting in a decline in social housing, a growth in home ownership and a deepen-

ing role for the PRS (Christophers 2013; Crook and Kemp 2014). In Europe, the
PRS is increasingly seen as a key part of the housing market and its growth has been
linked to increasing deregulation of the sector (O’Sullivan and De Decker (2007).
This study has indicated that for retirees reliant on the government age pension for
their income, having to depend on the PRS for accommodation will invariably result
in parlous living. Older private renters in other contexts are subject to similar pres-
sures. In the United Kingdom, a study of older private renters concluded “that
affordability is a principal concern for older people” and the transition from reliance
on work income to pension income can be “particularly problematic when the indi-
vidual lives in the private renter sector” (Rugg and Croucher 2010, 17, 18). In the
United States of America, a large proportion of older private renters who have retired
are using over half of their income to pay for accommodation resulting in enormous
stress (Fernald 2013). A recent study of older renters in New Zealand found that the
proportion of older private renter households is increasing, and they are often in a
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

vulnerable situation. It concluded,

The dominant policy position has been premised on the centrality of home
ownership … [and] [t]his dominance may have obscured policy awareness of
the consequences for older people unable to attain or retain home ownership,
who accordingly are subjected to the economic and social costs of the rental
market. (Keeling 2014, 52)

In their analysis of homeowners, renters and poverty in Europe, Doling and Ronald
(2010) conclude that the countries with the highest old age poverty rates had the
highest home ownership rates. Poverty in these countries was alleviated by low
accommodation costs but it meant that older people who were not homeowners were
particularly vulnerable. The increase in the proportion of older households in the
PRS raises the question of whether this shift could over time ease hostility among
voters in Australia and elsewhere to increased welfare spending and intensify the
pressure on governments to increase the age pension benefit. In Australia, the low
government age pension being premised and justified on almost universal outright
home ownership among retirees is becoming more difficult. However, in the current
austerity climate, it is unlikely that this changing reality will result in a shift in the
way the age pension is calculated, a change in the policies governing the PRS or an
increase in social housing. Rather, what is more probable is that in the coming dec-
ades, many more older Australians and their counterparts in other advanced econo-
mies will be dependent on the relatively expensive PRS and will not be able to live
a decent life. Their plight is likely to be presented as one of their own making and
not as a failure of government policy. Research using in-depth interviews in other
contexts will be useful to further assess Kemeny’s framework and the impacts of
being an older private renter in a housing system where home ownership and a dual-
ist rental market are dominant.

Funding
Funding was provided by the Faculty of Arts and Social Science at the University of New South Wales.
 20 A. Morris

Notes
1. In Australia, all citizens 65 and older are entitled to a full or partial age pension funded by the fed-
eral government. However, eligibility for the age pension is means-tested, and the amount received
is dependent on household income.
2. Seniors is a free publication and is distributed through pharmacies, doctors’ surgeries and places
where older people meet. COTA is a peak body that advocates for older Australians.
3. Commonwealth Rent Assistance is an income supplement payable to low-income households in
the PRS. Funded by the federal government, the amount a household is eligible to receive is
dependent on the rent they are paying.
4. For an explanation of how the Melbourne Institute calculates the poverty line, see https://mel
bourneinstitute.com/downloads/publications/Poverty%20Lines/Poverty-lines-Australia-June2012.
pdf.
5. The PBS is a government scheme to cut the price of certain drugs. People dependent on the age
pension who have a Pensioner Concession card only have to pay $6.20 per script.

ORCID
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

Alan Morris http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7652-5370

References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 2011. Housing Occupancy and Costs, Australia 2009–10 (Cat.
No. 4310.0). Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/sub
scriber.nsf/0/7BA06D0612AAABF7CA257949000B9FBE/$File/41300_2009-10.pdf
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 2013. Housing Occupancy and Costs, Australia 2011–12 (Cat
No. 4310.0). Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/
4130.0
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 2015. Labour Force, July 2015, Australia (Cat No. 6202.0).
Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/meisubs.nsf/0/
6C6973F4A487F645CA257E9A0006D188/$File/62020_jul%202015.pdf
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2013a. Australia’s Welfare 2013. Australia’s Welfare Series
No. 11 (Cat. No. AUS 174). Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. http://www.ai
hw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129544075
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2013b. Housing Assistance in Australia 2013b (Cat No.
HOU 271). Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. http://www.aihw.gov.au/Work
Area/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129545051
Australian Government. 2014. National Commission of Audit. Canberra: Australian Government. http://
www.ncoa.gov.au/index.html
Beckett, D. 2014. Trends in the United Kingdom Housing Market. London: Office for National Statis-
tics.
Castles, G. G., and D. Mitchell. 1994. “Designing for the Future: An Institutional View of the Australian
Welfare State”. In Economic Planning Advisory Commission, Perspectives on Shaping our Future
(Commissioned Studies, Report 2 of Shaping Our Future: National Strategies Conference). Can-
berra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Castles, F. G. 1998. “The Really Big Trade-off: Home Ownership and the Welfare State in the New
World and the Old.” Acta Politica 33 (1): 5–19.
Christophers, B. 2013. “A Monstrous Hybrid: The Political Economy of Housing in Early Twenty-First
Century Sweden.” New Political Economy. 18 (6): 885–911.
Crook, A., and P. Kemp. 2014. Private Rental Housing: Comparative Perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar.
De Decker, P., and C. Dewilde. 2010. “Home-Ownership and Asset-Based Welfare: The Case of Bel-
gium.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 25: 243–262.
Delfani, N., J. De Deken, and C. Dewilde. 2015. “Poor because of Low Pensions or Expensive Housing?
The Combined Impact of Pension and Housing Systems on Poverty among the Elderly.” Interna-
tional Journal of Housing Policy 15 (3): 260–284.
 A Qualitative Examination of Jim Kemeny’s Arguments 21

Delfani, N., J. De Deken, and C. Dewilde. 2014. “Home-Ownership and Pensions: Negative Correlation,
but No Trade-off.” Housing Studies 29 (5): 657–676.
Dewilde, C., and P. Raeymaeckers. 2008. “The Trade-off between Home-Ownership and Pensions: Indi-
vidual and Institutional Determinants of Old-Age Poverty.” Ageing and Society 28 (6): 805–830.
Doling, J., and M. Elsinga. 2013. Demographic Change and Housing Wealth: Homeowners, Pensions
and Asset Based Welfare in Europe. Dordrecht: Springer.
Doling, J., J. Ford, and N. Horsewood. 2003. “Globalisation and Home Ownership.” In Globalisation
and Home Ownership: Experiences in Eight Member States of the European Union, edited by J.
Doling and J. Ford, 1–20. Delf: Delft University Press.
Doling, J., and R. Ronald. 2010. “Property-Based Welfare and European Homeowners: How Would
Housing Perform as a Pension?” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. 25 (2): 227–241.
Drèze, J., and A. Sen. 2002. India: Development and Participation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Elsinga, M. 2015. “Changing Housing Systems and Their Potential Impacts on Homelessness.”
European Journal of Homelessness 9 (1): 15–35.
Fahey, T., and B. Maitre. 2004. “Home Ownership and Social Inequality in Ireland:” In Home Owner-
ship and Social Inequality in a Comparative Perspective, edited by K. Kurz and H-P. Blossfeld,
281–303. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Fernald, M. 2013. America’s Rental Markets: Evolving Markets and Needs. Cambridge, MA: Joint Cen-
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

tre for Housing Studies of Harvard University.

Hedin, K., E. Clark, E. Lundholm, and G. Malmberg. 2012. “Neoliberalization of Housing in Sweden:
Gentrification, Filtering and Social Polarization.” Annals of the Association of American Geogra-
phers 102 (2): 443–463.
Hiscock, R., A. Kearns, S. MacIntyre, and A. Ellaway. 2001. “Ontological Security and Psycho-Social
Benefits from the Home: Qualitative Evidence on Issues of Tenure.” Housing Theory and Society
18 (1–2): 50–66.
Hoekstra, J. 2009. “Two Types of Rental System? An Exploratory Empirical Test of Kemeny’s Rental
System Typology.” Urban Studies 46 (1): 45–62.
Hulse, K., M. Reynolds, W. Stone and J. Yates. 2015. Supply Shortages and Affordability Outcomes in
the Private Rental Sector: Short and Longer Term Trends (AHURI Final Report 241). Melbourne:
Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.
Hulse. K., and L. Saugeres. 2008. Housing Insecurity and Precarious Living: An Australian Exploration
(AHURI Final Report 124). Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.
Jones, K. 2015 “Grey Divorce.” The Sun-Herald, May 31.
Keeling, S. 2014. “Later Life in Rental Housing: Current New Zealand Issues.” Policy Quarterly 10 (3):
49–53.
Kemeny, J. 1980. “Home Ownership and Privatization.” International Journal of Urban and Regional
Research 4 (3): 372–388.
Kemeny, J. 1992. Housing and Social Theory. London: Routledge.
Kemeny, J. 2001. “Comparative Housing and Welfare: Theorising the Relationship.” Journal of Housing
and the Built Environment 16: 53–70.
Kemeny, J. 2005. “The Really Big Trade-off between Home Ownership and Welfare: Castles Evaluation
of the 1980 Thesis, and a Reformulation 25 Years on.” Housing, Theory and Society 22 (2): 59–75.
Kemeny, J. 2006. “Corporatism and Housing Regimes.” Housing, Theory and Society 23 (1): 1–18.
Martin, C. 2012. Tenants’ Rights Manual. Sydney: Federation Press.
Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research. 2015. Poverty Lines: Australia, December
Quarter, 2014. Melbourne: University of Melbourne. https://melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/publi
cations/Poverty%20Lines/Poverty-lines-Australia_Dec2014.pdf
Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research. 2012. Poverty Lines: Australia, December
Quarter, 2011. Melbourne: University of Melbourne. https://melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/publi
cations/Poverty%20Lines/Poverty-Lines-Australia-Dec-2011.pdf
Minichiello, V., R. Aroni, E. Timewell, and L. Alexander. 1995. In-Depth Interviewing: Principles,
Techniques, Analysis. Melbourne: Longman.
Morris, A. 2016. “Millers Point Residents Deserve More Compassion.” Sydney Morning Herald, January 15.
Morris, A. 2009. “Living on the Margins: Comparing Older Private Renters and Older Public Housing
Tenants in Sydney.” Australia, Housing Studies 24 (5): 697–711.
New South Wales Government. 2015. Rent and Sales Report, 111, March Quarter. Sydney: Family and
Community Services, NSW Government. http://www.housing.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/
0004/326416/1Rent_SaleReport111.pdf
 22 A. Morris

New South Wales Government. 2008. Housing: Outcome 2. Sydney: Family and Community Services,
NSW Government. http://www.housing.nsw.gov.au/about-us/reports-plans-and-papers/annual-reports/
2007-2008/outcome-2#public%20housing
New South Wales Government. 2006. Housing Assistance for Elderly Clients. Sydney: NSW Department
of Housing. http://www.housing.nsw.gov.au/Forms+Policies+and+Fact+Sheets/Policies/Housing+
Assistance+for+Elderly+Clients+-+ALL0030D.htm.
Nicholls, S. 2015. Sydney Median House Price Now $1million: Domain Group, Sydney Morning
Herald, July 23.
Office for National Statistics. 2013. “A Century of Home Ownership and Renting in England and Wales
(Full Story).” Media Release, April 13. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/
a-century-of-home-ownership-and-renting-in-england-and-wales/short-story-on-housing.html.
Paris, C. 1993. Housing Australia. Melbourne: Longman.
O’Sullivan, E., and P. De Decker. 2007. “Regulating the Private Rental Market in Europe.” European
Journal of Homelessness 1: 95–117.
Rugg, J., and K. Croucher. 2010. Older People’s Experiences of Renting Privately. York: Age Concern
and Help the Aged.
Scanlon, K., C. Whitehead, and M. Fernandez Arrigoitta. 2014. Real Estate Issues: Social Housing in
Europe. London: Wiley.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 12:11 21 June 2016

Ronald, R. 2008. The Ideology of Home Ownership: Homeowner Societies and the Role of Housing.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schwartz, H., and L. Seabrooke. 2008. “Varieties of Residential Capitalism in the International Political
Economy: Old Welfare States and the New Politics of Housing.” Comparative European Politics 6:
237–261.
Stebbing, A., and B. Spies-Butcher. 2016. “The Decline of a Homeowning Society? Asset-Based
Welfare, Retirement and Intergenerational Equity in Australia.” Housing Studies 31 (2): 190–207.
Tenants NSW. 2016. Factsheet04: Rent Increases. Sydney: Tenants NSW. http://www.tenants.org.au/fact
sheet-04-rent-increases
Van der Heijden, H. 2013. West European Housing Systems in a Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam:
IOS Press.
Wood, G., and R. Ong. 2015. “The Facts on Australian Housing Affordability.” The Conversation June 12.
Yates, J., and B. Bradbury. 2010. “Home Ownership as a (Crumbling) Fourth Pillar of Social Insurance
in Australia.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 25 (2): 193–211.