Closing the Gap targets: key findings and implications

Target

The target associated with Outcome 9 of 2020 National Agreement is to increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized (not crowded) housing to 88% by 2031, from a 2016 baseline of 79%. 

Background

A wide range of international and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) literature has found that crowding not only is stressful to health and wellbeing across cultures and countries with different income levels but also is:

• directly linked with long-term health and higher rates of preventable and infectious diseases
• associated with poorer school attendance, disrupted sleep, established conditions for inappropriate and abusive relationships, and increased wear and tear of facilities and structures.

Current status

Between 2016 and 2021, the proportion of First Nations people (79% to 81%) and First Nations households (89% to 90%) living in appropriately sized housing increased. However, the number of First Nations people living in crowded dwellings (based on the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ [ABS’s] Census of Population and Housing [Census] count) also increased – from 114,000 to around 130,000 – as did the number of First Nations households living in crowded dwellings (from 26,400 to 31,300).

If the results for this target continue to improve at the current rate, the national target is likely to be met, or very close to being met, by 2031. Almost half (49%) of First Nations people living in crowded conditions in 2011 were living in appropriately sized housing 5 years later (in 2016), indicating some degree of persistence, but also improvements for many. Further, 89% of First Nations people living in appropriately sized housing in 2011 were still doing so 5 years later.

The proportion of First Nations people living in appropriately sized housing in 2021 were at or above the 2031 national target of 88% in 3 jurisdictions (Victoria, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory) but the Northern Territory proportion (43%) was considerably lower.

Of the First Nations people living in crowded conditions, 29% were in Queensland, 23% in New South Wales and 23% in the Northern Territory.

The proportion of First Nations people living in appropriately sized housing in 2021 was close to the 2031 national target in:

• Major cities (87.8%)
• Inner regional areas (86.8%)
• Outer regional areas (82.0%).

In Remote (68.0%) and Very remote areas (45.0%), the proportion of First Nations people living in appropriately sized housing was lower. In 2021, about 15% of First Nations people lived in Remote and very remote areas.

The 2021 Census data show a higher level of crowding in social housing dwellings, with 37% of First Nations people in public housing and 43% of First Nations people in community housing living in crowded conditions, compared with less than 12% of First Nations home owners. Based on the AIHW National Housing Assistance Data Repository, the number of social housing dwellings (public housing, state owned and managed Indigenous housing (SOMIH), community housing and Indigenous community housing) allocated to First Nations households has increased steadily, from around 58,200 households in 2009 to 79,500 in 2022 (an increase of 37%).

In social housing, almost three-quarters (73%) of First Nations households with 2 families were crowded, compared with 45% in private rental and 24% in owner-occupied dwellings. The pattern was similar for households with 3 or more families, with 97% crowded in social housing, 82% in private rental and 49% in owner-occupied dwellings.

Key findings

While First Nations people living in social housing face higher levels of crowding than they do in other tenure types, many are not able to obtain social housing, as the waiting period is years. This is indicative of the supply shortage for social housing; it creates major issues with liveability, due to the scale and form of housing provision. This is true especially among remote communities where there is no or very limited access to private rental or home ownership, and public and community housing is the only option.

As existing housing stock is insufficient for the population, families often remain on a housing waiting list for years. Most young families have no access to independent housing and therefore rely on extended family to provide accommodation.

Some families will choose to live in large, multi-generational households, despite other houses being available in the community. Even if these families do not necessarily consider their house to be crowded, they could, nonetheless, suffer the same health effects of crowding, such as infectious diseases, poor hygiene and poor mental health. Crowding can also cause structural damage to housing infrastructure.

Renting costs that grow higher than growth in income can lead to higher levels of crowding and homelessness.

The results of the regression modelling suggest:

• high income and higher IRSD deciles were associated with reduced odds of crowding 
• unemployment was associated with increased odds of crowding. 

 The most important drivers of crowding were:

• the number of dependants in the household
• having previously lived in a crowded household
• remoteness.

Strategies for improvement

Efforts to improve access to appropriately sized housing could focus on areas where crowding is highest, in particular the Northern Territory. Although the target was close to being met in New South Wales and Queensland, because of their large populations, the number of First Nations people living in crowded dwellings in these 2 states was still high: 30,500 and 38,200, respectively.

Efforts to improve access to appropriately sized housing could also focus on continuing to increase the number of social housing dwellings available to First Nations people.

Programs such as Housing for Health (which makes safety and ‘health hardware’ repairs) reduce the negative impact of crowding and ensure existing dwellings are still tenantable, therefore reducing crowding by maintaining the existing social housing stock.

It is also important that the social housing stock includes dwellings that are the appropriate size for multi-family households and households with several dependent children.

Cultural obligations to help kinfolk in time of need is deeply rooted in the structures of First Nations society. First Nations people also have high rates of temporary mobility, and therefore housing for First Nations people needs to be appropriately designed to facilitate the observance of cultural practices.

Culturally designed housing needs to be an appropriate size, where families and visitors can live comfortably together; it should incorporate safe outdoor spaces for sleeping, cooking and gathering; additional bathrooms; and planned entryways, circulation and bedroom placements. However, there is limited availability of such housing, as most social housing dwellings have only 3 bedrooms, one main living area and a bathroom.

The policy response to crowding in First Nations households may vary depending on remoteness: in urban areas, better access to existing housing stock through improving household income or providing assistance that is specific for First Nations people is important; in regional and remote areas, additional housing stock is required.

Planning is required to ensure that adequate land and infrastructure are available in remote areas to support new dwellings.