Melbourne: Embedding Human Rights in Housing and Climate Action

SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 1 EMBEDDING HUMAN RIGHTS IN HOUSING AND CLIMATE ACTION PATHWAYS FOR A JUST TRANSITION IN MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT Part of the global project: Building for Today and the Future: Advancing a Just Transition in the Built Environment SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 2 The report intends to inform policy-makers, investors, and businesses involved in shaping the built environment in Melbourne, as well as civil society actors working to expand the space for socially inclusive climate action. THE BUILDING FOR TODAY AND THE FUTURE PROJECT This report is one of eight city research summaries as part of the global IHRB project “Building for Today and the Future: Advancing a Just Transition in the Built Environment” Buildings and construction contribute 37% of global energy-related carbon emissions. At the same time, cities are often where people experience the impacts of climate change, rising living costs, and socio-economic inequalities. The project examines green transition processes in the built environment of eight cities globally, aiming to (1) strengthen the understanding of social justice and human rights issues in each context and globally, and (2) open up pathways for local and international action to improve the social sustainability of these processes. The results of this project will help stakeholders make informed decisions in urban and sustainability policies, and take steps towards implementation (in various contexts and at various levels of governance). The project is structured in four research cycles, each undertaking parallel research in two cities to maximise comparative insights. The pairs of cities are: Prague and Lagos, Lisbon and Melbourne, Copenhagen and Jakarta, Athens and Valparaíso. TERMINOLOGY Built environment: The tangible urban environment, i.e. buildings, infrastructure and the spaces that connect them. Built environment decarbonisation: Measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the built environment by improving the energy efficiency of new and existing buildings, switching to renewable energy supplies, and reducing the climate footprint of construction materials. Built environment resilience: Measures to strengthen the resilience of buildings and infrastructure to the impact of climate-related events such as flooding, extreme heat, and sea level rise. Just transition: While pioneered by the labour movement and the ILO, the wider concept today involves a series of aligned and coherent climate actions that effectively fulfil both environmental and social purposes: 1. A transition to an ecologically-conscious model that allows societal development within planetary boundaries, and 2. Ensure the benefits of that shift are equitably spread and enjoyed throughout the population, and that its costs are not borne by traditionally excluded or marginalised groups. Social housing: Encompasses the long-term rental housing options that are run/owned by either the State Government of Victoria or community housing providers. Public housing: Long term housing options that are exclusively owned/managed by the State Government of Victoria. The project focuses particularly on four thematic areas of the built environment: the right to housing, construction workers’ rights on site and through supply chains, non-discrimination and spatial justice, and meaningful participation. The project recognises that “just transitions” are context specific, and that the overall concept continues to evolve. The project therefore aims to engage with local language, narrative and perspectives while also building international momentum for positive change. The local research is accompanied by visioning workshops that bring stakeholders together to envision pathways towards a more inclusive, sustainable and just city. SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary 4 Research process 5 Context: Population growth, CO2 emissions, and how the government 6 is addressing it Human rights risks and opportunities 7 Risks to the right to adequate and affordable housing 7 Risks to the right to energy efficient homes 8 Five opportunities to embed human rights 9 Conclusions 11 Recommendations 12 Appendix: List of interviewees 15 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND PARTNERSHIPS The Building for Today and the Future project benefits from guidance and insights from its thematic partners including ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability, Building and Woodworkers International, and the International Union of Tenants. The Building for Today and the Future project is made possible with support from Laudes Foundation and Ove Arup Foundation. 2 SUMMARY REPORT LAGOS BUILT ENVIRONMENT The Building for Today and the Future project benefits from guidance and insights from its thematic partners including ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability, Building and Woodworkers International, and the International Union of Tenants. The Building for Today and the Future project is made possible with support from Laudes Foundation and Ove Arup Foundation. TERMINOLOGY: Built environment: Buildings, infrastructure and the spaces that connect them. Built environment decarbonisation: Measures to reduce GHG emissions from the built environment by improving the energy efficiency of new and existing buildings, switching to renewable energy supplies, and reducing the climate footprint of construction materials. Built environment resilience: Measures to strengthen the resilience of buildings and infrastructure to the impact of climate-related events such as flooding, extreme heat, and sea level rise. Just transition: Involves a series of aligned and coherent climate actions that effectively fulfil both environmental and social purposes: 1. a transition to an ecological-conscious model that allows societal development within planetary boundaries, and 2. ensure the benefits of that shift are equally spread and enjoyed throughout the population, and that its costs are not borne by workers or traditionally excluded or marginalised groups. The project focuses particularly on four thematic areas: the right to housing; workers’ rights on site and through supply chains; non-discrimination and spatial justice; and meaningful participation. The project recognises that the phrase “just transition” is context specific, and frequently not recognised or understood. It therefore aims to engage with local language, narrative and perspectives while also building international momentum for positive change. The local research is accompanied by visioning sessions that bring stakeholders together to envision pathways towards a more inclusive, sustainable and just city. This is one of eight city research summaries as part of the global project “Building for Today and the Future: Advancing a Just Transition in the Built Environment” Buildings and construction contribute 37% of global energyrelated carbon emissions. At the same time, cities are often where people experience the impacts of climate change, raising living costs, and socio-economic inequalities. The project examines ecological transition processes in the built environment of 8 cities globally with the goals to (1) strengthen the understanding of social justice and human rights issues in each context and globally, and (2) open up pathways for local and international action to improve the social sustainability of these processes. The results of this project help stakeholders make informed decisions in urban and sustainability policies, and their implementation steps (in various contexts and at various levels of governance). The project is structured in four research cycles, each undertaking parallel research in two cities to maximise comparative insights. The pairs of cities are: Lagos and Prague, Lisbon and Melbourne, Copenhagen and Jakarta, Athens and Valparaiso. ABOUT THE BUILDING FOR TODAY AND THE FUTURE PROJECT The intended audience is policy-makers, investors, and business involved in shaping the built environment in Prague, as well as civil society actors working to expand the space for socially inclusive climate action. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND PARTNERSHIPS MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENTSUMMARY REPORT SUMMARY Greater Melbourne is projected to reach a population of 8 million by 2050: a growth which will considerably add to the existing demand for affordable housing. Notwithstanding this significant population increase, Australia’s national government has committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. This study examines how the built environment stakeholders, including the capital municipality of Melbourne, are responding to the challenge of growing urbanisation, affordable housing demand, and the need to advance the city’s transition towards (social and environmental) sustainability. The research investigated to what degree current climate actions in the built environment are socially equitable, and analysed various risks and opportunities with respect to the right to affordable and adequate housing. This report summarises the results of the 3-month research and visioning process that IHRB and the University of Melbourne conducted in Greater Melbourne in 2023. Findings revealed that while housing is being delivered via various avenues, these are generally not aligned with climate action and often exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities. Built environment climate action lacks regulation, standards and codes, and tends to focus on new housing builds, overlooking existing and rental properties, and mostly benefitting high-income earners. The response to meeting housing needs must intersect with climate action in order to achieve Australia’s net zero carbon emission targets in a just way. The emergence of inclusive social procurement practices, frameworks grounded in both environmental and social outcomes and energy rating systems are encouraging, but these must be formalised, regulated and scaled. This report addresses this challenge, in the following structure: an outline of the research process and methodology, a brief section on the local context in Melbourne, touching on population growth and CO2 emissions, including how the government is addressing these. Then, the body of the report summarises the human rights risks found in two areas: (1) the right to adequate, affordable, and appropriate housing; and (2) the right to energy efficient homes. Then, it proposes how to embed human rights into five strategies for climate action: refurbishing, retrofitting, densifying, diversifying, and human resourcing. The last section provides concrete recommendations - from tenure diversification to inclusive recruitment and reskilling of construction workers - on how Melbourne’s built environment could advance its transition to be more sustainable and just for all its inhabitants. INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 4 We are not really taking a human rights perspective on housing [in Australia]. It’s not historically what we’ve done. In relation to climate action, the same story applies really. “ “ Research participant SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 5 RESEARCH PROCESS A literature review was conducted across Federal, State and Local Government housing and climate action policies, as well as grey and academic literature, investigating whether housing is treated as a human right. The desktop research also included local architectural and planning initiatives (e.g., Victorian State Government’s Built Environment Climate Adaptation Plan, Homes for Victoria Housing Strategy and Big Build Plan; City of Melbourne’s Copyright: Ayush Jain / Unsplash Zero Carbon Buildings strategy), media articles, and political commentaries. A total of 13 semi-structured interviews were conducted between March and May 2023, and a visioning workshop was held on 29 May 2023, bringing together representatives from local and state governments, academia, the private sector (developers, architects, urban planning and engineering firms), non-governmental organisations (NGO’s), financial institutions, and civil society. SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 6 CONTEXT: POPULATION GROWTH, CO2 EMISSIONS, AND HOW THE GOVERNMENT IS ADDRESSING IT While home ownership in Australia was once termed ‘the great Australian dream,’ it has never been treated as a human right. Housing in Australia is in short supply, unaffordable, and not energy or resource efficient. In line with trends across high-income nations, housing in Australia is viewed as a commodity that is financialised. Those who are unable to afford a home rely on the private rental market or social housing.1 Rental controls do not support permanent or longer-term tenure, disadvantaging renters who find rent increasingly unaffordable. Greater Melbourne has 32 local government councils covering an area of 10,000km2. It has 5.2 million residents2 and is projected to have between 5.9m and 6.2m residents by 2027.3 Population growth drives rapid urbanisation, increasing housing demand (especially in the rental sector) and housing prices, impacting housing affordability.4 Melbourne has the 8th most unaffordable housing in the world5 and the highest homelessness rate in the State of Victoria.6 Other major factors driving housing unaffordability include the financialisation of the housing market and real estate speculation, and a complex landscape of land-use and taxation policies. The residential sector is responsible for 30% of CO2 emissions in the State of Victoria, ahead of commercial services (17%) and manufacturing (17%).7 This comes from the use of electricity, predominantly coal-fired and gas, but also vehicle use. Two thirds of people in Greater Melbourne live in detached houses, usually in planned suburbs (urban sprawl). At approximately 500 people/sq. km, Greater Melbourne’s average density is low compared to most similar-sized cities around the world8, resulting in 46.5% of people having to drive to work9, which exemplifies the link between urban planning and emissions. However, housing typologies and carbon footprint of central Melbourne are different to the Melbourne average. In Central Melbourne, 85% of people live in multi-storey apartment buildings, where total energy use, including embodied carbon, can be less than twothirds of that of a suburban house.10 Furthermore, due to its mix of land uses, higher density (33,500 people/sq. km in the CBD) and centrality, only 14.5% of residents drive to work.11 When Australia committed to the Paris Agreement in 2016, it was required to reduce its carbon emissions by 26-28% by 2030. Since the change of government in 2022, it has increased its original pledge to a 43% reduction by 2030, to be on track for its target of net zero emissions by 2050.12 The Victorian State Government aims to better these targets by working towards net zero emissions by 2045.13 With this aim in mind, the Victorian State Government has passed the Climate Change Act 201714, made several emissions reduction pledges,15 and has implemented a range of climate action policies, including Victoria’s 2035 Emissions Reduction Target16, Victoria’s Climate Change Strategy17, and the Built Environment Climate Change Adaptation Action Plan 2022-202618. Climate action policies for Greater Melbourne are part of a multilevel governance structure that stems from the national response to climate change. In 2020, the Victorian State Government committed AUD $5.3 billion to social and affordable housing under the ‘Victoria’s Big Housing Build’ Programme19, proposing to build 12,000 homes by 2024. This programme funds large-scale projects aligned with the emissions target agenda (by funding new homes that meet 7-star energy efficiency standards), although it also involves demolishing a proportion of social housing blocks. Climate action is a thread that has been woven into various social, cultural, and economic plans at the local government level (e.g. the City of Melbourne’s Economic Development Strategy 203120, Zero Carbon Merri-Bek Climate Emergency Action Plan21, and the City of Darebin’s Walking Strategy 2018-202822). However, each of Greater Melbourne’s 32 municipalities has its own planning scheme – a guide of design and standards for new builds. This creates a patchwork of approaches to planning regulations, difficult to navigate for developers and builders who work across municipalities. To partially address this issue, some local governments have formed the Council Alliance for Sustainable Built Environment, which provides a forum for information exchange on planning innovation and examines proposals for more sustainable planning.23 SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 7 HUMAN RIGHTS RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES The following section positions housing delivery mechanisms and climate action across Greater Melbourne in the context of human rights risks and opportunities. It includes a high-level analysis of key issues with current approaches to housing delivery and energy efficiency, and proposes five ways to embed human rights into existing climate actions to maximise social justice in Melbourne’s built environment. RISKS TO THE RIGHT TO ADEQUATE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING Australia does not have a Bill of Rights, relying only on the Constitution and legislations by the Commonwealth Parliament or State/Territory Parliaments. This results in a patchy and disjointed commitment to the right to adequate and affordable housing. So, while home ownership has been the Australian Tradition, it has not been treated by government as a human right. There are approximately 1,725 people experiencing homelessness across the Melbourne municipality, and Victoria has a deficit of 57,000 social housing units.24 Furthermore, the prices of houses available in the market are increasing at a higher pace than wages, making them increasingly unaffordable. On average, 25.6% (2022) of household income goes to rent, or 41.7% (2022) to mortgage for new homeowners, who have to save for 11 years to afford their first home deposit, 20% of a property’s value.25 Consequently, home ownership in Australia has decreased consistently over the last 30 years, and low-income residents, in particular, are spending more on housing than ever before. All these trends, in combination, clearly point to increasing socio-economic inequality. One of the key solutions, social housing, for which demand is increasing26, is widely stigmatised as a resource drain rather than a mechanism to guarantee the human right to housing.27 The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) has developed a strong research and evidence base on housing and homelessness. However, housing policy and government actions such as the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement, which has been deemed “ineffective”28, seem to be disconnected from this research. AHURI research found new housing often replaces low-priced stock, which does not improve the situation for low-income households.29 For example, the ‘Big Housing Build’ programme which incentivises the construction of social housing on public land, also demolishes a small percentage of ageing public housing stock, often replacing it with privately-sold apartments. This means a percentage of public land is privatised, with the government prioritising commercial, over social, outcomes.30 By using incentives, the government is behaving like a market actor playing within the rules, rather than like the regulatory and policy-making body that it is. Another issue is the politicisation of housing and infrastructure. Private benefit sought in election cycles, pork barrelling31, and development lobbies with political and financial influence, all act to maintain the status quo. An affordable housing developer who was interviewed summarised the issue saying: “The development lobby is incredibly small, but well organised and powerful. The community sector is incredibly large, disorganised, fragmented and not very powerful.” Nonetheless, there are some signs for optimism. For example, the Victoria government has improved the environmental design standards and updated its social procurement practices to be more inclusive. These now provide opportunities for Victorian Aboriginal people, Victorians with disability, social housing residents or people on waiting lists for social housing, and consider women’s equity and safety.32 Australia doesn’t have a bill of rights. There is no legal right to housing [in Australia]. — Research participant “ The delivery of most housing in this country is conceptualised as a business. — Research participant “ SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 8 RISKS TO THE RIGHT TO ENERGY EFFICIENT HOMES Energy efficiency has become crucial both to meet environmental targets at local, national, and global levels, and to decrease a portion of the operational costs of already-expensive housing. Therefore, the savings from energy efficient homes should be accessible to all, and not limited to the segment of the population who can afford to pay for them. While local and state climate action policies have considered housing33, federal climate action policies have largely overlooked it or addressed it in isolation. The focus of climate action policy has generally been on new builds rather than on all housing stock. This has resulted in the benefits of energy efficient homes mainly being for new, not existing buildings; for homeowners, not renters; and for high-income, not lowincome residents. There are certainly exceptions and variances, but the general trend is that climate action policies on housing largely perpetuate the inequalities of the housing market. Incentives rather than regulation – ‘carrots’ rather than ‘sticks’ – have been the mechanism policy makers have used to drive energy efficiency in housing, except for the National Construction Code (below). The lack of regulation across the building lifecycle – on financiers, including private equity, real estate investment trusts (REITs), developers, builders and the supply chain – is a key factor in slowing the transition towards energy efficient homes, justly distributed across the territory. “Regulation is critical… [but it] needs to be focused on energy markets and construction, rather than planning” (Affordable Housing Developer). “Currently, the built environment will not change without a stick (policy regulations and frameworks e.g. emissions caps, planning policy, public disclosure, etc.); incentives e.g. tax cuts, are important and might work for the top tier but not for the bulk [of the city]” (representative of Melbourne Local Government interviewed) The main roadblock seems to be the debate about who bears the cost of energy efficiency improvements. As a representative from an affordable housing developer observed, “We’re in a really awkward, kind of adolescent phase where the regulation sucks…the finance sector is driving the innovation with these kind of blunt performance targets and a lot of developers are kind of grappling with what this means on a day-to-day basis” … and the question remains. While this tension exists, adoption and scale of energy efficient housing, innovation in materials and construction methods and upskilling of workers all lag. For interviewees, the National Construction Code (NCC) is the central mechanism to drive energy efficiency in new builds. It is Australia’s primary set of technical design and construction provisions for buildings, setting minimum standards for their safety, health, amenity, accessibility and sustainability.34 However, interviewees said the NCC is slow to introduce mandatory requirements for environmental performance in buildings and lags behind global standards, so it needs to be constantly updated. The Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme (NatHERS) is an energy rating tool originally aimed at new dwellings (1993)35, but it is encouraging that the 2023-2024 federal budget allocated AUD $36.7 million for it to apply to existing houses.36 As of October 2023, developments that exceed a 50% alteration to the building itself must work to a minimum 7-star NatHERS37. Green Star – founded by the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) – is a voluntary national energy rating for buildings that assesses building performance in environmental and social categories38,39. Also, in terms of finance, the introduction and development of ESG criteria40 have pushed various financial institutions The winners [of the housing market] have been the land developers and landholders. — Research participant “ Most climate focus policy isn’t housing specific. It looks at emission reduction and environmental protection at a state and local level. It doesn’t engage with housing at all. — Research participant “ SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 9 to align their sustainability policies with their lending practices. For example, ‘Green home loans’ provide access to low interest rates if the home meets NatHERs and/or Green Star criteria41,42. While these are positive steps, their application remains limited to a voluntary nature in the case of Green Star, and to certain sectors of the market (i.e. privileged population groups), because new builds often result in homes for mid-tohigh income owners, overlooking affordable and lowincome households or rental properties. FIVE OPPORTUNITIES TO EMBED HUMAN RIGHTS IN BUILT ENVIRONMENT CLIMATE ACTIONS 1. Refurbishing for energy efficiency Small-scale improvements such as solar panels, efficient hot water systems, sealing doors and windows, insulation and ceiling fans43 should not be underestimated in the impact they can make towards sustainable living. Government rebates are available through the Victorian Energy Upgrades for Households programme which supports the purchase of energy efficiency appliances and other products such as clothes driers.44 However, there is concern that the costs of retrofitting can contribute to socio-economic disparities, as the main beneficiaries of energy improvements to date have been the typically more advantaged population cohorts such as homeowners. Renters often have little control over installing solar panels or other energy improvements, and are therefore more likely to pay more for their electricity use. Furthermore, in the residential sector, there is no mandatory disclosure of building efficiency when purchasing or moving into a property. This lack of information can lead to surprisingly high energy bills for the tenant, while landlords also have little incentive to make homes energy efficient. The Retain, Repair, Reinvest (RRR) Framework by Office Architects45 is a framework for assessing the refurbishment potential of existing public housing, seeking to reduce carbon emissions from building processes and recognising housing as a basic human right. This framework addresses both environmental and social goals given its three objectives: • Retain existing communities by not relocating residents • Repair existing buildings to reduce environmental impacts of construction • Reinvest savings to improve comfort and upgrade public housing The strategy of the RRR Framework challenges the “demolition, relocation and rebuild approach” of the Victorian Government which requires the relocation of residents, some of whom have lived in the same housing unit for many years and are forced to lose their connection to place and community. Two principles of Office Architects’ RRR proposal are seeing the community as the client and repairing existing buildings to reduce carbon emissions, excellent foundations for a potential just transition. 2. Incorporating retrofitting into local government policy The City of Melbourne has previously implemented innovative retrofit programs such as Postcode 300046, which included the conversion of unoccupied lowergrade office buildings to housing, and the 1200 Buildings Program47, whereby 541 commercial office buildings were retrofitted (although significantly under-delivering on the commitment to retrofit 1,200). These two programmes are great examples of a circular approach to buildings and the optimisation of space in cities. The need for retrofitting is constant. Today, the City of Melbourne has recognised that 77 buildings need to be retrofitted each year to meet its CO2 reduction targets. Estimates suggest that, in 2040, 90% of the housing stock will be made up of buildings existing today.48 Retrofitting in an inclusive way is an imperative for built environment policies and action. Housing programmes that could be devised today, following the examples of the Postcode 3000 and the 1200 Buildings Program, should ensure that retrofits are prioritised in homes of low-income households, and that the housing units that become available are either integrated into the social housing stock to be delivered to people experiencing homelessness or on waiting lists, or are rented at below-average prices with fixed rental caps. 3. Densifying within existing infrastructure Melbourne’s flat topography facilitates sprawling growth, with most new dwellings constructed in peri-urban areas at low densities. Increasing density in Greater Melbourne, especially along public transport corridors, can ensure SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 16 ENDNOTES 1 Social housing is provided by non-profit social housing associations and public housing provided by the government. 2 https://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/melbourne-population 3 https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/population-projections-australia/latest-release 4 https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/sitecollectiondocuments/affordable-housing-strategy.pdf pg.22 5 Demographia International Housing Affordability Report 2023 at: http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf 6 https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/sitecollectiondocuments/affordable-housing-strategy.pdf 7 https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/victorias-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-targets 8 (ABS, 2022) Melbourne and Sydney have amongst the lowest average densities of major cities, globally. 9 https://www.abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/quickstats/2021/2GMEL; https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/australias-journey-work 10 https://theconversation.com/why-energy-saving-homes-often-use-more-energy-20589 11 https://www.abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/quickstats/2021/LGA24600 12 https://www.aofm.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-11-28/Aust%20Govt%20CC%20Actions%20Update%20November%202022_1.pdf 13 https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/climate-action-targets 14 https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/legislation/climate-change-act-2017 15 https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/victorian-government-action-on-climate-change 16 https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/635590/Victorias-2035-Climate-Target_Driving-Real-Climate-Action.pdf 17 https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026/521297/Victorian-Climate-Change-Strategy.pdf 18 https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0037/557389/Built-Environment-Climate-Change-Adaptation-Action-Plan-2022-2026.pdf 19 https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/permits-and-applications/big-housing-build 20 https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/economic-development-strategy-2031.pdf 21 https://www.merri-bek.vic.gov.au/globalassets/key-docs/policy-strategy-plan/zero-carbon-merri-bek---climate-emergency-action-plan-202021---2024-25---updated-october-2022.pdf 22 https://www.darebin.vic.gov.au/-/media/Council/Files/Parking-and-transport/Sustainable-transport/Walking/Walking-Strategy-2018-2028.ashx 23 https://www.casbe.org.au/ 24 https://www.homes.vic.gov.au/applications-victorian-housing-register-vhr 25 https://news.anz.com/content/dam/news/articles/2022/May/ANZ_Housing%20Affordibility%20report%20May_2022_web.pdf 26 Gurran, N., Hulse, K., Dodson, J., Pill, M., Dowling, R., Reynolds, M., & Maalsen, S. (2021). Urban productivity and affordable rental housing supply in Australian cities and regions. AHURI Final Report. 27 https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/migration/documents/AHURI_RAP_Issue_151_Addressing-the-stigmatisation-of-social-housing.pdf 28 The Productivity Commission is the Australian Government’s independent research and advice to the Australian Government on economic, social and environmental issues affecting the welfare of Australians. Page 2 29 https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022-12/AHURI-Prof-Services-Housing-economics-analysis.pdf 30 https://theconversation.com/victorias-5-4bn-big-housing-build-it-is-big-but-the-social-housing-challenge-is-even-bigger-150161 31 “Pork barrelling” is a metaphor used in the Australian context for the appropriation of government spending for localised projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative’s district. 32 https://www.homes.vic.gov.au/social-procurement 33 https://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/energy-efficiency-and-reducing-emissions and www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-and-strategy/builtenvironment-climate-change-adaptation-action-plan 34 https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/ 35 https://www.nathers.gov.au/ 36 https://theconversation.com/budgets-energy-bill-relief-and-home-retrofit-funding-is-a-good-start-but-dwarfed-by-the-scale-of-the-task-205380 SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 17 37 https://www.vba.vic.gov.au/consumers/home-renovation-essentials/energy-efficient-requirements#:~:text=From%201%20October%20 2023%2C%20homes,watch%20the%20NatHERS%20explanation%20video. 38 https://www.gbca.org.au/uploads/91/2139/Introducing_Green_Star.pdf 39 https://new.gbca.org.au/green-star/exploring-green-star/#:~:text=What%20is%20Green%20Star%3F,resilient%2C%20positive%20 buildings%20and%20places 40 ESG “Environmental, Social, and Governance” criteria for sustainable and impactful investment were first introduced by UNEP-FI in 2004 in the report “Who Cares Wines” at: https://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/events/2004/stocks/who_cares_wins_global_compact_2004.pdf 41 https://www.commbank.com.au/articles/newsroom/2022/04/CBA-Green-Home-Offer.html 42 https://www.commbank.com.au/content/dam/commbank/about-us/download-printed-forms/environment-and-social-framework.pdf 43 https://www.urban.com.au/news/a-greener-future-green-building-council-australia-discuss-climate-change 44 https://www.energy.vic.gov.au/for-households/victorian-energy-upgrades-for-households/about-the-veu-program 45 https://office.org.au/api/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/OFFICE_RRR_Barak-Beacon_Report.pdf 46 https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/arts-and-culture/city-gallery/exhibition-archive/Pages/Postcode-3000---A-city-transformed.aspx 47 https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/about-council/committees-meetings/meeting-archive/MeetingAgendaItemAttachments/997/17712/ OCT22%20FMC1%20AGENDA%20ITEM%206.2.pdf 48 https://www.unimelb.edu.au/retrofit/blog/retrofitting-cities-roundtable-discussion#:~:text=The%20City%20of%20Melbourne%20 currently,must%20reach%2077%20per%20year. 49 https://www.transformingaustraliancities.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Transforming-Australian-Cities-Report.pdf 50 https://www.architectureanddesign.com.au/news/the-missing-middle-medium-density-housing 51 https://assemblepapers.com.au/2019/02/21/redesigning-the-housing-market/ 52 https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/Infrastructure%20Market%20Capacity%20Report%20211013_0.pdf. 53 https://www.respectatwork.gov.au/new-positive-duty-employers-prevent-workplace-sexual-harassment-sex-discrimination-andvictimisation 54 https://www.hinfra.health.nsw.gov.au/WWW_Hinfra/media/SiteImages/Content/Project5_Executive-Summary.pdf 55 https://www.etunational.asn.au/nowhere-to-go/ 56 https://www.ihrb.org/focus-areas/builtenvironment/report-dignity-by-design-human-rights-and-the-built-environment-lifecycle 57 www.dignitybydesign.org 58 Filtering is a market-based process whereby the supply of new, higher quality dwellings for high-mid-income households leads to an additional supply of dwellings for lower income households as higher income households vacate their former home 59 https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022-09/AHURI-Final-Report-387-Filtering-as-a-source-of-low-income-housing-inAustralia-conceptualisation-and-testing.pdf 60 https://theconversation.com/the-market-has-failed-to-give-australians-affordable-housing-so-dont-expect-it-to-solve-the-crisis-192177 61 “Housing impact fees are imposed by jurisdictions on new development to provide new or expanded public facilities or services, such as roads, transit, parks, schools, and public safety facilities. As housing prices continue to rise and funding sources for affordable housing decline (most notably through the elimination of redevelopment funding), jurisdictions are increasingly looking to impact fees as a way to fund affordable housing.”https://homeforallsmc.org/toolkits/impact-fees 62 https://www.acoss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Consultation-Paper-Empowering-Vulnerable-Households-and-Decarbonisation.pdf 63 https://www.acoss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/ACOSS_BSL_TCI_Empowering-households.pdf 64 https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/sitecollectiondocuments/climate-change-mitigation-strategy-2050.pdf SUMMARY REPORT MELBOURNE’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS IHRB.ORG 18 Cite as: Institute for Human Rights and Business, “Embedding human rights in housing and climate action. Pathways for a just transition in Melbourne’s built environment.” (August 2023), available at https://www.ihrb.org Attribution: This report was researched and written by Joanna Tidy*, Lucy Lyon*, Natalie Galea, Judy Bush, and Dan Hill, University of Melbourne, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning in partnership with IHRB. Alejandra Rivera, IHRB Built Environment Global Programme Manager, edited and supervised its production. Comments on the draft were provided by Charis Hoffman, ICLEI Circular Development Officer; YingChih Deng-Sommer, ICLEI Sustainable Built Environment Officer, Circular Development; and Giulio Ferrini, IHRB Head of Built Environment Programme. *Equal contribution provided Copyright: ©All rights reserved. IHRB permits free reproduction of extracts from any of its publications provided due acknowledgment is given. Requests for permission to reproduce or translate our publications should be addressed to [email protected] Making respect for human rights part of everyday business