The pursuit of home ownership across the lifecycle: new insights from the census
New data offers fresh insight into the reasons why getting into the Australian housing market is tougher in some cities than in others.
It is one of the most pressing issues of our time; it is the dilemma of home ownership and especially for the young. But how best to measure this matter? Is it really as simple as tracking house prices? Or is there something else we should consider?
I think there’s a way of using census data to shed new light on access to the housing market across Australia’s largest cities.
In this analysis, I present new data offering fresh insight into the reasons why getting into the housing market is tougher in some cities than in others. Yes, the cost of housing is a determining factor, but so too are other (often demographic) forces that vary between cities.
The proportion of all dwellings that is owned (either outright or with a mortgage) as opposed to tenanted has been captured by Australian censuses since 1911. What has not been captured (or published) prior to 2021 is data showing home ownership by single year of age.
All this changed when data concerning housing tenure was published for the 2021 Census on the ABS’s Table Builder platform; this included data for a unique cohort known as the primary reference person in Australian households.
The primary reference person is a modern term for what previous censuses called the head of the household.
It is now possible to correlate housing tenure (ie mostly “own” versus “rent”) by single year of age for Australia’s primary-reference-person population.
Bear in mind that the 2021 Census captured data for 9.1 million households containing 9.1 million primary reference persons (aged 15+) out of a total population (including kids) of 25 million.
That’s a pretty good sample base to show home ownership rates across the lifecycle.
Interestingly, the census shows that there were 258 primary reference persons aged 15 living in a dwelling that was owned. These teenagers might have had wealthy parents or, more likely, they had a better command of the English language than their parents, so they filled out the census form.
What is more interesting, I think, is the gender split by single year of age across the lifecycle for the primary-reference-person population.
Young women are far more likely than young men to assume and/or to command the role of primary reference person. This trend especially applies across the de facto relationship years (say, 21-28) and remains largely intact through the marriage-and-kids years until the age of 57 (in 2021).
It is evident that females born after 1964 (Gen Xers and Millennials) are more comfortable than males at “liaising with the government” via the census. In one sense, this is an indication of who is most likely to speak for the household in Australia.
But the real value of this dataset is the ability to help correlate housing tenure to single year of age.
Based on the primary reference person dataset, it is evident that renting outguns home ownership in the early years of adulthood, peaking at 82 per cent (renting, mostly) at age 20.
Home ownership (outright or with a mortgage) across Australia doesn’t reach 50 per cent of the primary reference person population until age 32. Clearly it would be ideal to track this proportion over time by referring to previous censuses, but sadly that data isn’t available. It’s certainly a figure to watch at the next census.
Thereafter, the proportion of primary reference persons owning their own home rises across the lifecycle to reach a peak of 82 per cent within the 71-77 age group. Australians spend their working lives pursuing and, for the most part, achieving the ideal of home ownership.
But we can take this dataset one step further.
If around half of Australian households own their own home by the age of 32 (based on the primary reference person sample) then how does this proportion rise and fall across the urban hierarchy?
Are 32-year-olds more “up against it” in some cities (eg Sydney) than in others? And if so, what insights might an age-based home-tenure analysis deliver?
We have extracted housing tenure data for the 163,000 primary reference persons aged 32 at the last census. This represents 48 per cent of all 32-year-olds in Australia at that time.
We know that nationally, the home ownership rate for this cohort was 50 per cent.
And as expected, this proportion for Sydney was (a low) 41 per cent.
Indeed, the raw numbers show that 13,512 out of 33,354 primary reference persons aged 32 living in Sydney reported owning their own home in 2021.
But the Sydney home ownership rate for this cohort wasn’t the lowest across Australia’s largest cities.
The home ownership rate for 32-year-olds is tougher in Darwin, where this proportion drops to 36 per cent.
However, the Darwin figure is skewed by the presence of the Robertson (military) barracks and by the fact that it is used as a base for the resources industry. Darwin’s substantial transient population explains this city’s low home ownership rates for 32-year-olds.
The three Australian towns (of 10,000-or-more population) with the lowest home ownership rates are also transient towns for the young – namely Byron Bay at 29 per cent, Broome at 25 per cent and Port Hedland at 22 per cent.
A 32-year-old is (almost) twice as likely to own their own home in Sydney than in Port Hedland.
At the other end of the scale are towns where more than half the 32-year-old population (as sampled by the census) do in fact own their own home.
These towns include Warragul-Drouin at 69 per cent, Bacchus Marsh at 73 per cent and the most affordable (largish) town in Australia (for 32-year-olds), Gisborne at 78 per cent. But of course there are caveats to this analysis. The limited number of datapoints in smaller towns (ie the number of 32-year-olds acting as primary reference persons) diminishes the reliability of the key proportions.
Nevertheless, I argue that the value of this analysis isn’t so much the key proportions but rather the ranking of and the relativity between cities and towns on this measure.
If Sydney is so expensive, why isn’t it ranked last? And why are towns like Port Hedland, Broome and Byron Bay so difficult for 32-year-olds to break into the housing market?
And why is it that treechange towns located just beyond the (Melbourne) urban fringe (eg Warragul-Drouin, Bacchus Marsh, Gisborne) are so successful at attracting 32-year-old home buyers?
The conclusion I have come to is that access to the housing market by young people – say 32-year-olds – is clearly a function of the cost of housing. But it is also the product of other factors, including demand for the kind of housing that requires a long-term commitment to a town by a 32-year-old.
Despite Byron Bay and Port Hedland being very different cities/towns, they are both transitory places, and especially for young people.
Byron is a place to visit and perhaps to stay awhile for lifestyle reasons.
Port Hedland is a resources town, requiring a high turnover of youth and energy to drive and enable the local economy.
Warragul-Drouin, Bacchus Marsh and Gisborne offer the Australian dream at a relatively low cost, together with (commuting) access to a metropolitan job market. In short, they’re places where 32-year-olds seem confident to make the kind of long-term commitment necessary to raise a family.
The insights raised by this analysis suggest a number of cultural truths about home ownership in Australia.
*Young women are most likely to assume the role of interlocutor between household and “the government” and are also therefore most likely to drive home purchase decisions.
*The cost of housing clearly diminishes the ability of young people (say 32-year-olds) to buy a home in Sydney (and in other capitals) and drives up home ownership rates in towns like Gisborne.
Places just beyond the urban fringe are in many respects the new (post-suburban) Australian dream, offering relatively accessible house and land packages as well as the security of long-term access to a capital city job market.
The objective of improving access to the housing market for young Australians must start, of course, with reducing the cost of housing.
However, this issue is highly complex. The ability to buy a house involves the triangulation of house prices and value for money, perceived job security and/or job options and the cost of commuting and/or of enduring the effects of separation from family and friends.
In either case, it is worthwhile knowing that we can now track home ownership rates by single year of age via primary reference persons across 102 towns and cities in Australia.
Comparative figures for the 2026 Census, available in late 2027 will show how successful each market has been in delivering on the promise of affordable housing for all Australians.
Bernard Salt is founder of The Demographics Group; data and graphics by Hari Hara Priya Kannan
More Coverage
