Next Article in Journal
The Proportionality and Solidarity Principles and Their Impact on Privacy Laws in German Jurisprudence
Next Article in Special Issue
Strengthening the Voice of Persons with Mental Health Problems in Legal Capacity Proceedings
Previous Article in Journal
The Death Penalty and Human Dignity: An Existential Fallacy
Previous Article in Special Issue
Are Cutbacks to Personal Assistance Violating Sweden’s Obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities?
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

Uneasy Bedfellows: Social Justice and Neo-Liberal Practice in the Housing Market

Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, University of Melbourne, Melbourne VIC 3010, Australia
Academic Editor: Frank Pasquale
Received: 19 April 2016 / Revised: 1 June 2016 / Accepted: 7 June 2016 / Published: 13 June 2016
(This article belongs to the Collection Disability Human Rights Law)
Full-Text   |   PDF [173 KB, uploaded 13 June 2016]


The Australian state has ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which emphasizes a social justice-based, personalized service delivery model. The upcoming National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) reflects this model and aims to facilitate people living with a disability being able to access services while housed within the private residential market, a move away from a state-based combined residential/service care model. However, in Australia’s neo-liberal housing market government intervention tends to shy away from policies that overtly impose restrictions on private firms. Therefore, in the absence of a subsidy from the state, the CRPD is of limited use in encouraging private developers to improve the appropriateness of its new built stock for people with a disability. A more persuasive approach is to highlight the size, diversity, and economic power of the disability-friendly housing consumer market when housing provision is separated from disability care delivery. This paper examines the feasibility of sustaining innovation in the volume builder housing market by aligning accessibility promoting changes to the existing innovation channels within Australian firms, suggesting that the NDIS concentrate on assisting the housing industry transition to a make-to-order model from the current make-to-forecast one. View Full-Text
Keywords: housing; NDIS; innovation; disability housing; NDIS; innovation; disability
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Martel, A. Uneasy Bedfellows: Social Justice and Neo-Liberal Practice in the Housing Market. Laws 2016, 5, 26.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Laws EISSN 2075-471X Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top