Steve Pomeroy Senior Research Fellow University of Ottawa Centre on Governance
description
Transcript of Steve Pomeroy Senior Research Fellow University of Ottawa Centre on Governance
Transferring Social Housing Assets to the Community Sector: Non-Profit Housing
in Canada and Lessons for Australia
Steve PomeroySenior Research Fellow University of
Ottawa Centre on Governance
Outline
• Canada & Australia compared• Some context - Characteristics of Canadian
non-profit community sector• Proposed benefits of NP sector• Evaluating outcomes in Canada• Lessons for Australia re stock transfer
11/23/09 2Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
Canada – Australia Comparable
• British colonies;Resource based economies, similar parliamentary and federation structure; large geography and dispersed urban systems.
• Very similar tenure mix 69% Ownership; 26% Private Rental; 5% social - but subtle differences (Harloe)
• Similar initial evolution – post war public housing (supply response)
• But early 70’s divergence– Australia persisted with state owned public housing – Canada shifted to community based Non-profit– (various funding and subsidy arrangements – most F/P cost
shared, increasing decentralization)– Important variations in and across the NP sector: PNP, MNP,
Coops11/23/09 Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance 3
Research Question
11/23/09 4Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
Australia seeking to adopt/adapt UK model of loan stock transfer. What are the inherent benefits of a non-profit community based model over state owned managed public housing?What does the Canadian experience with 35 years of Non-Profit housing suggest for Australia?
Theoretical Underpinnings
• Concepts of Managerialism and New Public Management (Clarke and Newman 1997; Walker 2001)• Decentralization, competition, private business
models, efficiency, customer responsiveness and measuring results
• Grass roots reformist movement and role of Third Sector (Van Til 2009)
11/23/09 Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance 5
Suggested benefits of Non Profit – community sector
• Ability to access financing – leverage existing assets (vs. restriction on public sector borrowing)
• Cost effective (access charitable funding, voluntary professionals on boards)
• Community based providers – smaller scale developments, community support, avoids stereotypes of PH (less NIMBY)
• More responsive to residents (satisfaction)• Important role in policy advocacy
11/23/09 6Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
What is outcome in Canada?
• Small community based PNP/Co-ops still confront NIMBY;
• Excessive number of small providers = fragmented inefficient sector;
• Notion of choice is a myth – sector too small• Access to financing not generally an issue Access
is similar for Public or community NP – and both equally constrained in refinancing/levering due to CMHC regs and insurance policy.
11/23/09 7Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
What is outcome in Canada?
Efficiency • Small scale PNPs tend to have lower
“manageable costs” but more often in financial difficulty and issues of governance (board burnout).
• MNPs higher cost but wider range of service and expertise. Benefits of both alignment and separation (arms length) from municipality.
11/23/09 8Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
What is outcome in Canada?
Responsiveness • Public Housing – large bureaucratic – least
responsive, moderate accountability• PNP – small community based but not
necessarily more accountable or responsive (boards not publicly accountable)
• MNP – small to mid size, very responsive (access to councillor), most accountable
11/23/09 9Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
Conclusions• Who owns and manages less critical than scale
and regulatory regime (permissive vs constraining) which underpins culture of provider.
• Separation (arms length and specific focus can help if balanced with right regulatory regime
11/23/09 10Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance
Conclusions• Among Canadian models MNPs may be best
option (but larger PNPs also effective)– Local knowledge– Accountable– Access to financial resources and expertise
• Critical to support capacity and expertise of sector beyond new build (leadership role in of NP associations – comes mainly from larger professional MNP/PNPs)
11/23/09 11Steve Pomeroy, U Ottawa Centre on Governance