soac banner
news

Rental discrimination exacerbated by technology and informal tenancies

Informal tenancies and digital technologies increasing the risk of discrimination

02 Sep 2021


Although there are laws across Australia to prevent discrimination, experiences of biased and subjective behaviour by landlords, real estate agents and fellow tenants occur across Australia’s private rental sector, according to new AHURI research.

The research, ‘Understanding discrimination effects in private rental housing’, undertaken for AHURI by researchers from the University of Sydney examines discrimination and existing policy, law and practice in Australia’s private rental sector. In particular the research looks at the impact of informal tenancies and the increasing role of digital technologies in increasing the risk of discrimination for people.

‘We saw that discrimination can take various forms and may be subtle’, says lead researcher Dr Sophia Maalsen...‘For example, ethnic minorities may be required to provide more information when applying for a property including employment, relationship status and family size, or be given misinformation about available properties.’

The study, which examined existing Australian and international research found that judgements may be based on negative stereotypes, ideology or generalising of experiences and are inextricable from structural and institutional drivers of discrimination.

‘We saw that discrimination can take various forms and may be subtle’, says lead researcher Dr Sophia Maalsen, from the University of Sydney. ‘For example, ethnic minorities may be required to provide more information when applying for a property including employment, relationship status and family size, or be given misinformation about available properties.’

‘Real estate agents may invest less time in assisting an applicant from a particular background, use less positive language and be less courteous. These experiences of discrimination are not always overt and, as such, it is difficult to identify and respond to discrimination effectively.’

Discrimination in the private rental sector has also been intensified by the growth of the informal housing sector, which includes many secondary dwellings (‘granny flats’), some forms of homelessness—such as improvised dwellings—and some boarding houses. The growth of the informal sector means more people are living with very limited security of tenure and other rights, and as a result this often translates into poorer—and often illegal—housing conditions.

‘Since discrimination in the private rental sector reflects, and reproduces, wider structures of economic and cultural disadvantage, it is critical to address these issues both within and beyond the sector,’ says Dr Maalsen.

These informal tenancies often advertise on un- or under-regulated digital platforms that provide further opportunities for discrimination, including biased screening of tenants whereby online housing platform advertisements can specify tenant characteristics about gender, race, age, and sexuality that are not permissible in the formal rental sector. Previous studies have shown that real estate agents are less likely to discriminate than private landlords, which has implications for the use of different technologies in the rental system.

The research highlights several critical policy areas that demand immediate action including removing ‘no-grounds’ justification for evictions; increasing the supply of public and social housing and low-cost private rental options; developing and enforcing specific and minimum standards for all Australian rental accommodations; and developing professional standards for all real estate agents and property managers.

‘Since discrimination in the private rental sector reflects, and reproduces, wider structures of economic and cultural disadvantage, it is critical to address these issues both within and beyond the sector,’ says Dr Maalsen.