Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1959.3/240065

Title

Australian Planner December 2007: Housing, place or social networks: what's more important for relocating tenants?

Author(s)

Baker, Emma;  Arthurson, Kathy

Abstract

Urban regeneration is increasingly used by Australian governments as a means of physically upgrading ageing public dwelling stock, but little is known about the social implications of regeneration projects. For public tenants involuntarily relocated for urban regeneration, relocation risks added stress and disruption for an already disadvantaged population. However, it also has the potential to improve residential satisfaction. Moving may provide an opportunity to improve the quality of housing in terms of room size, space and other physical characteristics, the opportunity to live in a better or safer neighbourhood, access to better services and a broadening of social networks. This paper reports on the findings of a research project investigating the comparative influences - quality of housing, residential environment, and social networks - on residential satisfaction after relocation. Tenants were interviewed before and after relocation from Ferryden Park in South Australia as part of The Parks Urban Regeneration Project, to date Australia's largest regeneration project. The study found that in determining the self perceived success of relocation, at least for this group of tenants, the quality of the post relocation housing was the most important factor. The implication for planners is that although familial and friendship networks are still important, the quality of post relocation housing is likely to have a greater influence on whether or not tenants are satisfied with moving as part of urban regeneration projects.

Publication type

Journal article

Research centre

Swinburne University of Technology. Faculty of Life and Social Sciences. The Swinburne Institute for Social Research

Source

Australian Planner, Vol. 49, no. 4 (Dec 2012), pp. 315-326

Publication year

2012

FOR Code(s)

0502 Environmental Science and Management;  1205 Urban and Regional Planning

Keyword(s)

Adelaide;  Australia;  Buildings;  Housing;  Parks Urban Regeneration Project;  Public housing;  Public tenants;  Relocation;  Town planning;  Urban generation;  Urban renewal;  Urban sociology

Publisher

Routledge

ISSN

0729-3682

Publisher URL

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2012.732007

Copyright

Copyright © 2012 Planning Institute Australia.

Peer reviewed