Administrative burden, administrative harms, and other realities in housing and homelessness policy

Source abstract

In Global North welfare states such as Australia, social security, health, disability, and housing systems are highly complex and fragmented. People seeking housing support are often required to navigate multiple resource-constrained systems with overlapping, onerous administrative requirements. Drawing on the concepts of administrative burden and administrative harm, this paper examines how these systems are experienced and negotiated in Australian housing and homelessness service delivery, with particular attention to the role of specialist homelessness services (SHS). Administrative burden and administrative harm have been used to study welfare and employment services in relation to the experiences of service users. This paper extends these insights into analysis of homelessness and housing systems, and of the perspectives of frontline workers. It draws on qualitative analysis of interviews and focus groups with 17 staff from six SHS organisations across three Australian jurisdictions. Findings show that SHS casework is increasingly dominated by managing administrative burden across multiple service systems, most of which are tightly rationed. This is compounded by the emotional and embodied dimensions of housing insecurity. We argue that policy decisions, which are known to cause harm, are responsible for the inequitable burdens placed on people seeking housing support, and on service providers.