Guide to Giving
MEDIA, JOBS & RESOURCES FOR THE COMMON GOOD
NEWS  | 

Govt & Media Blamed for Social Housing Stigma


Thursday, 28th April 2011 at 12:35 pm
Staff Reporter
Social housing neighbourhoods are stigmatised because government policies have worked to congregate socially disadvantaged people in social housing neighbourhoods while under-investing in the tenure, according to a new report.

Thursday, 28th April 2011
at 12:35 pm
Staff Reporter


0 Comments


FREE SOCIAL
SECTOR NEWS

 Print
Govt & Media Blamed for Social Housing Stigma
Thursday, 28th April 2011 at 12:35 pm

Social housing neighbourhoods are stigmatised because government policies have worked to congregate socially disadvantaged people in social housing neighbourhoods while under-investing in the tenure, according to a new report.

The reports found at the same time, that the media has portrayed these neighbourhoods as a haven for criminals and the welfare dependent.

The report, called The Stigmatisation of Social Housing: findings from a panel investigation, is by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI)

The authors (Keith Jacobs, Kathy Arthurson, Natasha Cica, Anna Greenwood and Annette Hastings) argue that social housing organisations need to better employ the media to highlight the good effects of social housing, and educate the public about inequities in the housing system.

They say there are complex reasons as to why social housing neighbourhoods are subject to popular vilification. These neighbourhoods are usually seen, not as a symptom of social inequity, but as a contributory factor that heightens social disadvantage, commonly viewed as havens for crime and sites for policy interventions that reinforce cultures of welfare dependency.

From this perspective, the authors say the primary reason for why social housing has become so stigmatised can be traced to government policies that have limited access to those households with acute needs.

As a consequence, the vast majority of tenants now residing in social housing are there because they have no other options.

The authors say this ‘reality’ informs the wider public’s understanding of social housing and acts as a brake on attempts by state housing authorities, tenants’ groups and welfare lobbyists to highlight the positive contribution made by social housing.

The report says there are practical steps that social housing agencies can undertake to mitigate the effects of stigmatisation, particularly in relation to media reporting. For example, they might seek to establish professional contacts with senior journalists with a view to ensuring more positive accounts of social housing.

Also, the report says new virtual media provides an opportunity for tenants’ organisations and lobbyists to counteract negative stories of social housing.

The report says there are gaps in knowledge relating to the understanding of social housing and its problematic reputation.

It says there is a need for research that makes explicit the wider ‘politics’ of housing and how, in particular, the subsidy and taxation arrangements reinforce the divide between well-off home owners and rental investors on the one hand and low income social housing and private rental tenants on the other.

The authors say attempts by state housing authorities to address the problems that arise in disadvantaged social housing neighbourhoods can only have a limited impact so long as this divide remains in place.

Finally, the report says there is a conundrum that all welfare and social housing agencies face when taking steps to mitigate the effects of stigma.

It says campaigns that draw attention to the problems of social housing can inadvertently reinforce prejudice and stigma. On the other hand, positive stories are less likely to attract the attention of policy-makers and entice the release of new revenue streams.

Consequently, the report says campaigners seeking to improve social housing need to remain vigilant to the way information is interpreted by policy-makers and the public at large.

The report can be download at http://www.apo.org.au/research/stigmatisation-social-housing-findings-panel-investigation



Guide to Giving

FEATURED SUPPLIERS


HLB Mann Judd is a specialist Accounting and Advisory firm t...

HLB Mann Judd

Brennan IT helps not-for-profit (NFP) organisations drive gr...

Brennan IT

NGO Recruitment is Australia’s not-for-profit sector recru...

NGO Recruitment

Yes we’re lawyers, but we do a lot more....

Moores

More Suppliers

Get more stories like this

FREE SOCIAL
SECTOR NEWS

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Thinkers Look to Melbourne to Grow SA Purpose Economy

Wendy Williams

Thursday, 21st September 2017 at 4:44 pm

$2 Million Grant Helps Give Australians in Need A Fair Go

Wendy Williams

Thursday, 21st September 2017 at 8:35 am

NFPs Need Social Media More Than They Know

Alecia Hancock

Thursday, 21st September 2017 at 8:33 am

POPULAR

Moves to Stop Volunteering at Overseas Orphanages

Luke Michael

Wednesday, 13th September 2017 at 1:54 pm

Future Uncertain for Disability Organisations Following Funding Cuts

Wendy Williams

Tuesday, 19th September 2017 at 8:29 am

Majority of NFPs Are Not Believed to be Well-Run, According to New Survey

Luke Michael

Tuesday, 12th September 2017 at 4:14 pm

More Australians Are Giving Time Not Money

Wendy Williams

Monday, 11th September 2017 at 5:07 pm

Write a Reply or Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Guide to Giving
pba inverse logo
Subscribe Twitter Facebook

Get the social sector's most essential news coverage. Delivered free to your inbox every Tuesday and Thursday morning.

You have Successfully Subscribed!