Build-to-rent (BTR) is an important pathway for rental housing supply across the cities of Australia. The discourse has become more prevalent as stakeholders seek government support to expand the sector to provide, amongst other reform measures, affordable rental accommodation. This paper examines the effectiveness of BTR as a pathway to affordable housing supply in Australia and identifies the additional reforms needed to increase that supply further. Interviews with key stakeholders were used to assess the success of the asset class to date and how it is likely to perform in increasing affordable rental housing supply, as well as what additional reforms may be required to expedite supply. The paper found that while BTR aims to scale up rental housing supply, its limitations in its present form demonstrate the need for additional reforms. At present, unfavorable taxes, inner-city locational attributes, and ultramodern services make the asset class a high-end housing model. Experts posit that BTR rental prices are justified given the quality amenities and the 24/7 onsite professional management. While it is a premium product, several BTR projects in Australia have included portions of those projects for affordable housing. The study concluded that BTR can generate affordable housing outcomes in Australia. As more developments take place across the private sector, several regulatory reforms in land release and taxes are needed to produce a sizable portfolio of affordable BTR. Without government support and regulation through additional supply-side incentives, development and recurrent holding costs will remain high, making BTR unaffordable to many urban residents.

Amid Australia’s surging house prices, rental housing has become the safety net for young adults experiencing housing stress. The attention of policymakers is drawn towards the build-to-rent (BTR) housing model, a growing housing option for many young Australian adults. Although BTR’s integration into Australia’s housing and planning landscape is unfolding, the perception of young adults is lacking in policy reforms for this growing industry. This study examines the perspectives of young adults aged 18 to 34 years on the critical success factors (CSFs) of the BTR housing provision in Australia. The responses are analysed using an explanatory factor analysis, relative importance index, and ANOVA. Our findings show a critically low awareness of BTR among young adults in Australia. Respondents, between 18 and 24 years, are most concerned with public awareness, an indication of their desire for transparency and engagement in decision making at the policy level. Young adults rank regulation and government policy interventions as the most important CSF of BTR housing. This shows that they are more concerned about the affordability of BTR houses. This study concludes that young adults’ viewpoints on BTR are important in ongoing policy reforms. There is a need to ensure that this asset class is accessible and affordable to this target group.

Housing practitioners and policy experts are advocating for an expansion in rental housing supply in contemporary cities around the world. The objective is to convince institutional investors to include rental housing investment in their investment portfolio to contribute to boosting housing supply. Unfortunately, the rental sector is characterized by numerous uncertainties and challenges, making it unattractive to institutional investors. With the growing attention to institutional investors in various housing market contexts, an understanding of the market risks (also known as barriers), is useful to inform future research and policymaking. Using a systematic literature review methodology, this paper synthesizes the extant literature on the market risks inhibiting institutional investment in rental housing. Findings reveal the following barriers: low profitability, non-progressive rent control policies, unclear target group for rented projects, poor landlord-tenant relations, inadequate property management and unreliable property market information. Among all the barriers identified, low profitability and inadequate property management had great influence on their investment decision. Firstly, institutional investors perceive rental housing investment as less profitable and unattractive in terms of project performance. Secondly, the lack of supporting structures for the property management sector contributes to derailing rental yields. The review also finds that the target group for rental projects are often vague especially for projects under government assistance. The rental sectors in many countries are confronted with numerous problems, some of which greatly inhibit institutional investors from investing in the rental asset. This paper concludes that, although the idea of expanding rental housing supply seems laudable, ignoring these problems may be detrimental to housing markets in the long run. Rental markets in many countries are volatile, and thus not ready to receive institutional investors fully into the sector. An expanded rental sector could be advanced if policy makers take the appropriate steps to resolve the identified challenges. Adequate structural preparations must also be made for large scale rental housing supply.

There is growing recognition that build-to-rent (BTR), a novel institutional asset class, could improve rental affordability and housing choice in Australia. Despite favourable market conditions and increasing demand, Australia’s BTR sector remains underdeveloped compared to the US and UK. Although the asset class has attracted significant foreign institutional capital, there is little interest from domestic institutional funds. This contrasting investment behaviour between foreign and domestic funds has brought a new dimension to the debates on BTR in Australia. The study uses qualitative research design to examine institutional investor behaviour towards BTR in Australia. Interviews were conducted with experienced BTR investors across three countries—Australia, the US, and the UK—to understand the barriers and investment behaviour towards BTR. The study finds that the key barriers hindering BTR growth in Australia include unfavourable tax treatment, complex planning processes, and insufficient affordable housing incentives. Institutional investors’ decisions are influenced by firm characteristics, operational capabilities, and risk attitudes. Due to risk considerations, Australian superfunds prefer stabilised assets over new developments. Also, sustainability and ESG factors are increasingly important considerations in BTR investment decisions. The research highlights the need for a supportive regulatory environment, efficient property management, and innovative financing solutions to boost BTR investments. To accelerate BTR growth in Australia, policymakers should address tax disparities, streamline planning processes, and enhance affordable housing incentives. Developing BTR-responsive financial instruments could reduce financing costs and attract more institutional capital to the sector.