Search

This article focuses on the predicament of owner-occupiers and small investors presently liable for the removal of combustible cladding on build-to-sell residential high-rise. We argue that while the proliferation of combustible materials has been shaped by cost-cutting and risk-shifting by construction firms, these practices did not on their own transfer the responsibility of remediation to consumers. Examining the attempts of one densifying nation, Australia, to locate responsibility for combustible cladding through two parliamentary inquiries, we analyse witness testimonies to show how public policies encouraged materials substitution, removed on-site inspection and protected corporations from litigation. Moving beyond neoliberalism, these policy reforms leveraged information asymmetries and the material complexity of residential high-rise to create a climate of "imperceptibility" towards unsafe materials. Together, material, financial and policy dimensions intersected to enable capital accumulation through the expansion of consumer harm in high-rise housing markets. We conclude that construction materials and processes are an overlooked, yet critical domain of governance in financialised housing regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The financialisation of housing is seen to undermine tenants' rights, affordable housing and planning controls in order to make housing and homes more amenable to profit extraction. However, the extent to which owner-occupiers themselves seek to influence urban development and planning processes to protect their housing assets has been less well-considered. Through an online survey of 1122 owner-occupiers in Australia, this article redresses this gap. By identifying the financial values participants attach to their home, and their inclinations to join resident action groups, we reveal that those with the strongest investment values are also most inclined to join resident action groups. Expanding conceptualisations of investors beyond institutional investors, the article reveals the agency of financialised owner-occupiers who, as investor-activists, seek to influence planning processes to secure the profitability of their own housing assets. The article thus reconceptualises resident action as a financial strategy to protect long- and short-term housing investments and, in doing so, charts the urban implications of financialised home ownership and investor subjectivities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human encounters with waste can trigger reflections on taken-for-granted assumptions about consumption. Taking this observation as its starting point, this paper explores whether and how the introduction of the kitchen caddy and food waste composting at the municipal scale generates new environmental subjectivities in Australian homes. Using visceral research methods, the paper shows that, other than participation in municipal composting, close encounters with food becoming compost do not trigger more experimental or sustainable relationships with food. Rather, they trigger new configurations of cleanliness, tidiness and storage as participants seek to stabilise their home against the disruptive sight, smell and touch of food becoming compost. In unsettling the boundaries between humans and nonhumans, and cleanliness and chaos, food becoming compost produces visceral disgust among residents who are primed through modern home cultures to maintain cleanliness, control and the prevention of nonhuman intrusions at home. The success of municipal composting thus hinges on households' commitment to 'sustainability work' in placing, storing, cleaning and sealing food to reconfigure the modern home for waste recovery. Reconceptualising municipal composting as a co-production of sensory engagement and household practices, we centre a visceral politics of household sustainability at the heart of municipal composting and resource management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]