Housing

Indicators
Introduction
1. Tenure
2. Affordability
3. Temporary housing
4. Crowding
5. Housing amenity
6. Discussion
Data sources
References

Return to Mapping inequalities menu

Indicators

Back to top

Introduction

Unmet housing needs and poor housing quality are two important issues in relation to housing. Unmet housing need arises from mismatches between the supply of affordable housing and the housing requirements of an increasingly diverse population. For some people, unmet housing need can mean unaffordable housing, because households pay so much of their incomes on housing that they cannot meet their other day-to-day expenses. For others, lack of access to affordable and appropriate housing means living in temporary dwellings that were never designed for permanent living. Others live in crowded dwellings or in dwellings that have few of the amenities normally available to the rest of the population. Some people have to confront all of these problems simultaneously.

Establishing the nature and extent of unmet housing need among Māori, and Māori women and girls in particular, has been hampered by a lack of housing monitoring, research and analysis, particularly since 1991. Nevertheless, the Census of Population and Dwellings combined with the Household Economic Survey (HES) provide data sets that allow a baseline analysis of housing indicators for tenure, affordability, temporary housing, housing amenities and degree of crowding. The population for the data on tenure is all those aged 15 and over. The population for the data on other indicators is the total population.

Back to top

1. Tenure

1.1 Rental accommodation or owner-occupied dwellings

Position of Māori women: In 1996, 43.8% of Māori women aged 15 years and over living in private dwellings were in rented accommodation, and 56.2% were in owned dwellings (with or without a mortgage).

Figure E1. Tenure of private dwellings, women aged 15+, 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings.

As Figure E1 shows, there are distinct differences in tenure between Māori women and non-Māori women. Only 56.2% of Māori women aged 15 years and over lived in owned dwellings in 1996, compared with 78.3% of non-Māori women. Māori women's dependence on the rental market increased between 1991 and 1996, a period in which public rental costs increased and the stock of public rentals diminished. (Statistics New Zealand (1998a): 16, 70-71.)

Home ownership is seen as a form of investment saving, an expression of independence and a mechanism for achieving security and self-determination. By international standards, New Zealanders have high levels of home ownership. However, between 1991 and 1996, the proportion of Māori households (A Māori household is defined in this chapter as a household where either the reference person or the reference person's spouse/partner is of Māori ethnicity. This is customised 1996 Census data from Statistics NZ.) living in owned dwellings fell from 59.0% to 51.6% - an absolute drop in the number of Maori living in owned dwellings of 5,799. Among Māori adults aged 15 years or more, only 58.1% lived in owned dwellings in 1996, compared with 78.3% of non-Māori adults. Proportionately more Māori men (60.2%) than Māori women (56.2%) lived in owned dwellings in 1996 (Figure E2).

Māori are less likely to live in owned dwellings than non-Māori partly because of the younger age structure of the Māori population. Another factor is that Māori women are more likely to live in households with household income below $20,000 (see Income). This affects their ability to take on a mortgage.

Figure E2. Percentages in owned and rental dwellings, aged 15+, 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings.

Back to top

2. Affordability

Affordability measures indicate the stress placed on individuals through maintaining their housing consumption. These measures have traditionally been used as one of the indicators of housing need and as a trigger for the delivery of Government housing assistance.

The underlying principle of an affordability indicator is that expenditure on housing should leave enough residual income to cover other basic daily living costs, as well as allowing households to save for irregular but unavoidable costs such as medical and dental care.

Affordability is usually measured as a ratio of housing outgoings to gross or net income. Some measures of affordability are constructed in highly complex ways that attemptcapture all aspects of housing, particularly home ownership expenses such as rates, insurance and house maintenance. Such complexity is not warranted here. Instead, the affordability indicator focuses on rent outgoings of 25% or more of net income.

The affordability level of 25% or more of net income is used because it links with the current configuration of the Accommodation Supplement (AS) and Income Related Rent (IRR) around an affordability level of 25% for people paying rents. (There is little agreement internationally as to where the affordability ratio should lie, even for low income households. In Europe, North America and Australasia, it varies from less than 7% of income to around 30%. See McCrone and Stephens (1995) for commentary on affordability measures internationally, Landt and Bray (1997) for commentary on Australian measures, and Statistics NZ (1998a) for the use of several affordability measures. ) The data for this indicator is drawn from the HES.

Back to top

2.1 Paying more than 25% of net household income in rent

(Note that in relation to household income, the extent of income sharing among household members is not known (see Income chapter).)
Position of Māori women and girls: In 1997/98, 62% of all Māori females living in accommodation for which rent was paid were in households spending 25% or more of net household income on rent.

The New Zealand rental market is relatively lightly regulated compared to other developed countries. There have been significant changes in rental affordability over the last decade. In 1988/89, two-thirds (66.8%) of those paying rent paid less than 25% of net income. In 1997/8, a similar proportion (64.1%) of households paying rent paid more than 25% of net income. This reduction in rental affordability is apparent even in households paying 50% or more of income on rent. In 1990/91, only 10.2% of households paying rent paid 50% or more of their incomes in rent. By 1997/98, 20.8% of households paying rent were doing so.

Figure E3. Proportions of those living in rented households paying 25% or more of net income in rent, 1988-1998

Source: Household Economic Survey

As Figure E3 shows, in terms of ethnicity, Pacific people living in rented dwellings are most likely to live in households paying 25% or more of net household income on rent, with 72% doing so in 1997/98, followed by 64.5% of Others (i.e. non-Māori and non-Pacific). The Māori proportion in that situation is lower, but still high: in 1997/98, 60.1% of Māori people living in rented dwellings were in households paying 25% or more of net household income in rent.

For Māori females, the proportion was 62%, and for Māori males the proportion was 58% living in households paying 25% or more of net household income. (Sample Error = 8% (95% Confidence Interval). Large sample errors mean that apparent differences between the exposure of the Māori male and Māori female populations in relation to unaffordable rents may not exist.)

In the period from 1998/89 to 1997/98 all groups experienced an increase in the proportion living in rental dwellings and paying 25% or more of net income in rent. However, for Māori and Pacific the increases were comparatively higher than for the 'Other' group. For Māori the proportion increased by 33.0% over that time.

The impact of reduced affordability falls most heavily on the Māori and Pacific populations because a higher proportion are in rented accommodation and incomes are lower than those of the Other ethnic groups (see the Income Chapter for further detail on Māori women's incomes in comparison to those of non-Māori).

Back to top

The increasing cost of rentals at the lower end of the market is one of the major factors behind the increase in the proportion of households spending 25% or more of net income on rent. Between 1986 and 1996, the largest average rental expenditure increases were recorded in areas with a high state rental stock.

For example, the largest percentage increase in median weekly rent levels in a main urban area was recorded in Porirua, where Housing New Zealand owned over two thirds of the rental stock in 1996. (Statistics NZ (1998a), p.78.) An increasing proportion of households spending 25% or more of net income on rent reflects the move to market rents and the use of the Accommodation Supplement as the major form of housing assistance.

The impact of those state rental increases fell heavily on Māori, who were over-represented among state housing tenants before the reforms. In response to rental increases, Māori have progressively moved out of the state rental sector. The proportion of Māori living in rented dwellings with a state sector landlord fell by 16.3 percentage points between 1991 and 1996, compared to an average fall of 10 percentage points. Despite this fall, the proportion of Māori with a state sector landlord remained above average at 42.4% in 1996. (Statistics NZ (1998a), pp. 71-3.)

The implications and impacts of a particular affordability ratio vary considerably according to household income. For a high-income household, 25% of income may purchase luxurious housing, while for a low-income household it may not purchase even adequate housing. Similarly, a high-income household may spend much more than 25% of income on housing without going short of income for other expenses. A low-income household spending a similar proportion of income on housing may find their residual income entirely inadequate.

Internationally, it has been found that low-income households attempt to reduce their housing consumption when housing costs become unaffordable,

• moving into lower quality housing, including dwellings not designed for permanent use
• sharing housing by cohabiting with other households.
  

An additional response for Māori seeking to reduce their housing costs has been to move to locations such as rural areas where the housing cost structure is lower. The last fifteen years has seen significant movement of the Māori population to rural areas. (Scott and Kearns (2000).)

Back to top

3. Temporary housing

3.1 Proportions living in temporary dwellings
(The temporary dwellings category consists of: (a) bach, crib or other holiday home; (b) caravan, cabin, or tent in a motor camp; (c) mobile or temporary dwelling (not in a motor camp). The data includes only that population that usually live at the address, to ensure the exclusion of holidaymakers.)
Position of Māori women and girls: In 1996, 3.9 Māori females per 1,000 were living in dwellings not intended for permanent residence.

Table E1. Proportions living in temporary dwellings, per 1,000 population, 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings

Only 4 in every 1,000, of New Zealand's population live in dwellings not intended for permanent residence. Māori females made up 9.4% of all those living in temporary dwellings in 1996. Males rather than females tend to be over-represented among those living in this type of dwelling. Of the population in temporary dwellings, 73.8% were male in 1996. Māori males made up 12.7% of all those living in such dwellings, although they are only 7.1% of New Zealand's total population.

However, Māori females are more likely than non-Māori females to live in temporary dwellings. While non-Māori females made up 37.8% of the non-Māori population in temporary dwellings in 1996, Māori females made up 42.6% of the Māori population in temporary dwellings. Just under half (46.7%) of these Māori females were living in mobile or temporary dwellings not in motor camps, over a third (38.7%) were in motor camps, and the remainder were living in baches, cribs, or other holiday homes.

Some commentators regard the use of temporary forms of housing for long-term residence as a proxy for homelessness. New Zealand and international research suggest that long-term residence in temporary dwellings is associated with health and safety risks such as respiratory problems, infectious diseases, infestations of pests and physical hazards. (National Health Committee (1998) pp.30-2; Public Health Commission (1993) pp.44-7.)

Back to top

3.2 Average length of stay in refuges

(Calculated by dividing total 'bed nights' by number of clients.)
Position of Māori women: In 1999/2000, the average duration of stay by women in Māori women's refuges was 19 days.

Differences in length of stays between Māori and other women in refuge housing can indicate barriers to Māori women's access to stable and secure alternative housing that is safe from violence or intimidation. Māori women's difficulties in finding safe and stable housing are indicated by their comparatively long stays in safe houses provided by Māori women's refuges affiliated to the National Collective of Independent Women's Refuges (NCIWR).

NCIWR is able to produce data on average duration of stay in different refuge types by dividing number of clients by bed nights to produce a measure of average duration of stay. These averages can of course, be influenced by a few families staying for long periods. However, NCIWR does not currently collect information on individual clients and therefore does not have median data available.

In 1999/2000, Māori women made up 47% of all the women receiving NCIWR services. The average stay in Māori women's refuges in 1999/2000 was 19 days. This was almost twice as long as the average stay in general refuges of 11 days, but only half as long as the average stay of Pacific women in Pacific refuges. (Figure E4). (General refuges provide safe houses for all women including Māori. Māori women's refuges provide for Māori women only.) NCIWR believe that Māori women stay for longer periods because of problems affording accommodation and difficulties finding appropriately sized housing.

Figure E4. Average stay duration in women's refuges by refuge type, 1996/7-1999/00
(NCIWR collect data on average duration of stay by refuge type. They do not currently collect this information by ethnicity of clients.)

Source: National Collective of Independent Women's Refuges administrative data

Back to top

4. Crowding

Crowding has been selected as an indicator because both internationally and in New Zealand, crowding is associated with negative outcomes, particularly in relation to physical and mental health. There is an association between crowding and infectious diseases. (National Health Committee (1998); Gray (2001).) Crowding also places stress on the physical performance of housing stock. Currently, New Zealand has no official measure of household crowding.

4.1 Living in dwellings defined as crowded

This indicator consists of the proportion of the Māori female population living in households with a high Crowding Index (CI). (Morrison (1994).) Unlike some other methods used to measure crowding, the CI has the ability to capture the situation of small families and households in crowded conditions, such as sole parents living with one or two children in a single bedroom.

The CI is calculated as follows:

CI=[1/2(number of children under 10 years)+(number of couples) + (all other people aged 10 years and over]/number of bedrooms]

In the 1996 Census, a bedroom was defined as any room furnished as a bedroom, or sleepout or caravan used as a bedroom. For this indicator, the point at which a dwelling is defined as crowded has been set at CI = 1.25 or more. This is almost twice the CI prevailing for New Zealand households. In 1996, the CI for New Zealand households was CI = 0.64.

Back to top

Position of Māori women and girls: In 1996, almost a quarter (23.6%) of all Māori females were living in households with a CI = 1.25 or more. In 1996 Māori females made up 16.1% of all those living in households with a CI = 1.25 or more.

Table E2. Number and proportions of population living in crowded households (CI = 1.25 or more), 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings.

The percentage of Māori females living in CI = 1.25 or more households is lower than the percentage of Pacific people, both males and females, living in such households, but it is similar to the percentage of Māori males and higher than the percentage of Other ethnic groups (including European/Pakeha) (Table E3). Nevertheless, with 62,613 living in households with a CI of 1.25 or more, Māori women and girls constitute a large group of people living in crowded conditions.

The exposure of Māori women and girls to crowded households is even more apparent when looking at densely crowded households - those with a CI of 1.5 or more (Figure E5). Māori females are numerically the largest single group living in these densely crowded households, at 38,196.

Household crowding is a rural as well as an urban phenomenon, and extends well beyond the Auckland region (Figure E6). Larger households are clearly vulnerable to overcrowding partly because there is limited housing stock of the size they need, and more Māori and Pacific households come into this category. However, overcrowding can also affect smaller households, such as sole parent families with only one child where there is only one bedroom or no separate bedroom in a dwelling. (Saville-Smith & Amey (1999).)

Both in Auckland and elsewhere, there was a decline in crowding for all ethnic groups between 1986 and 1996 (Figure E6). This was probably due to a decline in the average household size (occupancy rate) between 1986 and 1996, from 2.89 to 2.77 people per dwelling. (Statistics NZ (1998a), p.64.)

Figure E5. Numbers living in densely crowded households (CI = 1.5 or more), 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings

Figure E6. Auckland and non-Auckland Crowding Index for Māori, Pacific, and Other households, 1986, 1991, 1996

Source: 1986-1996 Census of Population and Dwellings.

Back to top

5. Housing amenity

5.1 No heating and heating water by burning wood only

Housing amenity refers to the facilities contained in a dwelling such as cooking, ablutions, water supply, heating and lighting facilities. Housing amenity is distinguished from dwelling condition. Dwelling condition refers to the structural integrity and/or state of repair or dilapidation of a dwelling. Two indicators of housing amenity are presented here: no heating used in dwelling and heating water by wood burning only.

Position of Māori women and girls: In 1996, 30.9 in every 1,000 Māori females were living in dwellings where no heating was used, and 11.5 in every 1,000 Māori females were living in dwellings where burning wood was the only means of heating water.

Table E3. Numbers and proportions living in dwellings where no heating is used, per 1,000 population, 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings

Back to top

Table E4. Numbers and proportions living in dwellings where water is heated by wood burning only, per 1,000 population, 1996

Source: 1996 Census of Population and Dwellings

Only a small proportion of New Zealand's population lives in dwellings in which no heating is used (18 in every 1,000) or in which water can only be heated by burning wood (8 in every 1,000). These two indicators of housing amenity provide an insight into the extent to which Māori women and girls are exposed to housing with extremely marginal amenities. Lack of heating and limited access to hot water have also been selected because there is an association between poor health and cold, damp housing and lack of hot water for washing.

Māori females made up 12.4% (compared with Māori males at 11.7%) of all those living in dwellings that use no heating although 1996 Census figures indicate they made up 7.3% of the usually resident population. Māori females made up 10.7% (compared with Māori males at 11.1%) of all those living in dwellings reliant on wood burning to heat their water. The over-representation of Māori among those in these situations partly reflects the higher proportion of Māori, compared with non-Māori, in rural areas. (Statistics New Zealand (1998b), p.28.) Some research shows the limited amenities in rural dwellings experienced by Māori (Scott and Kearns (2000), p.35; Saville-Smith (1999), pp.5-6.) . The over-representation of Māori among those in dwellings with few amenities also reflects the higher proportions of Māori in temporary dwellings not intended for permanent residence, compared to non-Māori (see section 3 above).

Back to top

6. Discussion

The indicators for tenure, affordability, crowding, temporary housing and housing amenity show that Māori women's housing status is frequently very different from that of non-Māori women and non-Māori men. Overall, Māori women have similar housing experiences to those of Māori men. However, they are less likely than Māori men to live in owned dwellings and are slightly more likely to live in crowded households.

While the Accommodation Supplement (AS) was meant to provide assistance with affordability, it appears to have reached predominantly those household types in which Māori

women are least likely to be found. In June 1998, 48% of AS recipients were living in one person households, yet the 1996 census found that only 4% of Māori live in such households. Only 23% of AS recipients at June 1998 were sole parents, despite the very low median incomes of this group. Māori are more likely than any other ethnic group to live in one-parent households. (Statistics NZ (1998a) pp.36-8.)

Understanding the reasons for the differences in housing status between Māori and non-Māori that the indicators portray is limited, because of the limited research and analysis in the nature and extent of housing need over the last decade. But some general observations can be made:

Qualitative analyses of Māori women's experiences in relation to housing issues suggest that their housing problems are long-standing, serious and persistent. (Scott and Kearns (2000); Māori Women's Housing Research Project (1991); Watson (1988).)
Māori women are strongly represented among the household types that have traditionally found accessing appropriate and affordable housing difficult - low income households, sole parent families, large households, multi-family households, and extended family households.
Māori women appear to be reliant on rental accommodation. Scant research on discrimination in the rental market indicates that Māori women in rental housing feel vulnerable to discrimination as well as sexual harassment and intimidation by landlords. (Watson (1988).)
For Māori women who are actively involved in their whānau, the needs of the whānau can take priority over the financial needs of the household in certain situations. Available money can be used for koha at hui and tangihanga, financial assistance to relatives, and so on. (Taiapa (1994).) These financial responsibilities may affect the money available to spend on housing, and the consequent housing choices able to be made.
The values of aroha and manaakitanga (hospitality) mean that whānau members may be accommodated for varying periods of time without question. While this practice can help to address some housing needs, it can create crowding, and generate a need for housing design to take account of larger families.
Recent trends see some movement of Māori back to rural areas. (Scott and Kearns (2000); Statistics New Zealand (1998b) p.30.) Rural housing can be of variable quality. Māori women may experience a number of problems in accessing adequate housing in rural areas including under-supply of housing stock, and an under-developed rental housing market with little or no public rental accommodation. (Māori Women's Research Housing Project (1991).) 25 There are also higher costs associated with building in rural areas. Māori women and men wishing to build on multiple-owned Māori land face particular difficulties associated with securing finance on multiple-owned land. In addition those without access to freehold or collectively owned land via Papakainga Schemes may also face difficulties.
Māori women have a higher likelihood of experiencing domestic violence than non-Māori women (see Justice Chapter). Domestic violence can impact on Māori women's housing situation, by making accommodation unsafe for a woman and her children, by precipitating a move to housing that is safe from violence, but may be unsatisfactory in other ways (such as being expensive or crowded), and by rendering a woman and her children homeless.

Back to top

Data sources

The Household Expenditure Survey (HES) conducted by Statistics New Zealand provided the affordability data. This is a sample survey of approximately 3,000 households, which was conducted annually until 1997/98, and is now conducted every three years. Information on tenure, housing amenity, temporary housing and crowding data came from the 1996 Population Census. Refuge data came from the National Collective of Independent Women's Refuges.

Statistics New Zealand advise that while the HES collects information on both income and expenditure, there is no direct link between the two concepts within the survey, as respondents are asked to provide income information for the year, whereas expenditure information is provided for a two week period.

HES data is subject to both sample and non-sample error. Caution should be exercised when considering point-in-time estimates for the affordability indicators in particular, as the data is volatile. Census data is subject to non-sampling error and undercount.

It should be noted that there is no official classification for the ethnicity of households. In this section, household ethnicity is based on the ethnicity of the occupier and/or their spouse/partner.

Note that NCIWR only have data on average duration by refuge type. Currently they do not collect unit record data (i.e. data on individuals).

Back to top

References

Colmar Brunton Research (1993). Discrimination Awareness Study.

Douglas, E. (1986). Fading Expectations: The Crisis in Māori Housing. A report for the Board of Māori Affairs.

Gray, A. (2001). Definitions of Crowding and the Effects of Crowding on Health: A Literature Review. Wellington: Ministry of Social Policy.

Landt, J. and Bray, R. (1997). Alternative Approaches to Measuring Rental Housing Affordability in Australia. Discussion Paper No. 16. National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling Faculty of Management, University of Canberra

Lee, P. and Murie, A. (1997) Poverty, Housing Tenure and Social Exclusion. York: The Policy Press/Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

McCrone, G. and Stephens M. (1995). Housing Policy in Britain and Europe. UCL Press Ltd, London.

Māori Women's Housing Research Project Report (1991). '…For the Sake of Decent Shelter…', Māori Women's Housing Research Project, Wellington.

Morrison, P. (1994). Housing Occupancy and the Changing Size of Households and Dwellings in New Zealand 1951 - 1991. New Zealand Population Review 20 (1 & 2).

Murphy, L. (1999). 'Housing Policy' pp 218 - 237 in Boston, J., Dalziel, P. and St John, S. (eds). Redesigning the Welfare State in New Zealand: Problems, Policies and Prospects, Oxford University Press, Auckland.

National Health Committee (1998). The Social, Cultural and Economic Determinants of Health in New Zealand: Action to Improve Health, National Advisory Committee on Health and Disability, National Health Committee, Wellington.

National Housing Commission (1988). Housing New Zealand. Provision and Policy at the Crossroads, National Housing Commission, Wellington.

Otara Housing and Health Local Solutions Project (1999). Action on Housing and Health in Otara. Report submitted by the Otara Housing and Health Local Solutions Project to the National Health Committee.

Public Health Commission (1993). Our Health Our Future Hauora Pakari, Koiora Ora. Public Health Commission, Wellington.

Roberts, C. 1988 'Housing' pp 119 - 194 in The April Report, Vol IV, Report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy, Wellington.

Saville-Smith, K. (1999). The Condition of Opotiki's Rural Housing Stock. A Survey of Three Communities, Centre for Research, Evaluation and Social Assessment, Wellington.

Saville-Smith, K., & Amey, B., (1999). Overcrowded Families in New Zealand - Regional Patterns, Centre for Research, Evaluation and Social Assessment, Wellington.

Scott, R. and Kearns, R. (2000). 'Coming Home: Return Migration by Māori to the Mangakahia Valley, Northland.' NZ Population Review 26, 21-44.

Statistics New Zealand (1997). Census 96 Housing, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.

Statistics New Zealand (1998a). New Zealand Now Housing, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.

Statistics New Zealand (1998b). New Zealand Now Māori, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.

Taiapa, J. (1994). Ta Te Whānau Ohanga: The Economics of the Whānau. Massey University, Palmerston North.

Te Puni Kōkiri (1998). Regional Housing Issues Feedback from Māori, Te Puni Kōkiri, Wellington.

Thorns, D. (1998). 'Housing Issues', pp 3 - 25 in The April Report, Vol III Pt 2, Report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy, Wellington.

Waldegrave, C. and Stuart, S. (1996a). Māori Responses to Changes in State Housing: A Survey of the Issues, Choices and Experiences, The Family Centre, Lower Hutt.

Waldegrave, C. and Stuart, S. (1996b). Housing Disadvantage and Māori in Aotearoa/New Zealand. A Review of Literature Since 1980, The Family Centre, Lower Hutt.

Watson, S. 1998 'The State or the Market. The Impact of Housing Policy on Women pp. 27 - 106 in The April Report, Vol III Pt 2, Report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy, Wellington.

Back to top

[ Previous | Contents | Next ]