Australia’s Multi-provider Social Housing System: contest or growth?

Published by AHURI in January 2026 this research examined Australia’s multi-provider social housing system and analysed changes to social housing delivery over time. The system includes public housing managed by state and territory government agencies, community housing managed by not-for-profit providers, and some housing provided through the NDIS and National Rental Affordability Scheme.

While currently Australia lacks long-term, sustainable social housing growth models, this research offers policymakers options to reverse the decline. It involved five phases of research involving data and document analysis, interviews, and international and cross-sector case studies, all informed by an expert working group.

The initial intention of our current system was for public housing stock to sit alongside an expanding stock of community housing. However, researchers confirmed that this system has generated very little overall growth, and social housing stock has declined. Further, the growth in community housing has been concentrated among the largest providers, with over two-thirds of the stock managed by only 36 organisations. 

The harsh reality is that Australia has no sustainable long-term social housing growth models. Current social housing provision models don’t cater for the needs of people in low to moderate-income households, who are increasingly finding themselves in rental stress. Rents collected from social housing tenants don’t even cover the full costs of delivery, development and capital.

Our approach to funding social housing fundamentally differs from European needs-based systems that have built up, protected and reinvested equity over generations. Their more sustainable approach accumulates equity towards a self-sustaining and growing social housing system and is based on a commitment to continuous improvement in supply, management and maintenance.

Recommended policy actions

• Strategic planning for growth. New mission-focused policies with long-term investment strategies could reverse Australia’s decline in social housing by focusing on achieving area-based growth targets, addressing existing needs and addressing the backlog in social housing.
• Funding multi-provider social housing. Australia’s social housing multi-provider system would improve by developing frameworks for cost efficiency, equity and effectiveness. These frameworks would consider land, finance, construction, maintenance and management costs, and should reference international best practice.
• Better regulation. An integral part of an effective social housing multi-provider system, good regulation can provide a rent-setting framework that is based on cost-recovery principles. This allows for more inclusive allocation policies that work for communities and the financial health of providers. It can also set and require decent housing standards across all providers—and ensure that they reinvest operating surpluses and receipts from the sales of assets into continuous improvement and growth.

Sean’s thoughts

This is surely the holy grail for housing! A well integrated and functioning system that considers the impacts of policy decisions across all areas and all operating models, is one that will continue to grow into the future. While we will continue to juggle priorities across areas, a consistent approach to housing is needed to make sure that we are delivering the right services to our tenants and service users. This may mean that more flexible funding models may be required, or indeed stronger enforcement on standards across the board. What is clear is that by operating in different ways across the public and community sectors, we’re reinforcing negative perceptions of the other. If the system that we are operating is working as efficiently as it can, and there are still significant issues, then it’s perhaps time to change the paradigm and design a new one.

To find out more about this research project and read the full report go to https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/452.