The Yes in My Backyard (YIMBY) movement has gained prominence in recent years, with branches in several cities, including Naarm/Melbourne.
YIMBYs present themselves as having a solution to the housing crisis. They slam any community wanting some controls over development as being NIMBYs (“not in my backyard”) who are trying to prevent the construction of new housing to deal with the housing crisis.
But the YIMBY movement does not identify the real causes, let alone offer real solutions to the crisis.
It has nothing new to offer, only repackaging tired old arguments of supply and demand and market-based solutions.
YIMBYs characterize NIMBYs as older property owners who oppose toll-ways or high-rise apartment blocks because of the adverse affect on property values in their neighbourhood, while not opposing such developments in other neighbourhoods.
While NIMBYism exists, the term is more often used as a slur by governments, developers and YIMBYs against local communities who have legitimate concerns about development in their neighbourhoods.
The NIMBY slur is used to stop people seriously considering the genuine concerns raised by local communities.
The Docklands is one area of Naarm where the developers were given free rein to do what they wanted: it has led to a wind-swept, soulless landscape.
Only after people moved in, and clamoured for change, was some effort made to create a more people-friendly environment. But it is difficult to retrofit after a development: much better to plan for green space and sunlight before construction begins.
Democracy should mean that people have a genuine say over their neighbourhoods.
It is rare for local campaigns to be NIMBY focused, although some individuals may have that NIMBY outlook.
Essentially, the YIMBY movement aims to counter those seeking to rein in profit-driven developers. Some YIMBY networks are established, or supported, by property developers, consultancy firms and the planning industry, opportunistically using calls for affordable housing to serve developers’ interests.
YIMBY Melbourne describes itself as a “people-led” and “grassroots” organisation. However, it is aligned with United States-based think tank Center for New Liberalism, which supports a “capitalist, market-based economy that promotes economic growth and nurtures innovation”.
YIMBY Qld’s links with developers are more obvious. The co-founder of YIMBY Qld is Nathalie Rayment who is the executive director of the Wolter Consulting Group, the Queensland-based urban planning and development consultancy. Rayment is also a member of the Property Council of Australia.
YIMBYs claim that the key to affordable housing is unbridled development, primarily in inner-city locations.
The housing crisis has been caused by many factors, with supply of housing stock being just one.
The YIMBY movement’s narrow focus on councils just needing to pass development applications in the inner city is striking. They do not oppose Victorian Labor’s plan to demolish the 44 high-rise public housing estates in central Naarm. Nor do they oppose land-banking, the privatisation of land release or short-term rentals, such as Airbnb.
It is because YIMBYs are not genuinely interested in accessible housing for all — the only real solution to the housing crisis.
The YIMBY movement’s greenwashing of wealthy development corporations and NIMBY alarmism harms communities, especially working-class people and renters.
What’s causing the crisis?
YIMBYs explain the astronomical rise in housing costs as being caused by restrictions on developers preference for a particular height and density, or if a particular development has been rejected.
Housing justice advocates offer a better explanation for the housing crisis — chiefly the demolition of public housing by state governments and their refusal to build new public housing.
The decimation of public housing, including departments devoted to planning it, has had a major impact on the cost of housing.
YIMBYs also avoid talking about the privatisation of land release. When land is released, land speculators often trickle it out to the market to artificially inflate its cost.
Worse, developers often apply for permits without intending to build but, rather, to sell the land with a permit for an inflated price. Developers can sit on vacant blocks of land for many years, waiting for the price to go up before they sell: this is “land banking”.
Even after apartments are built, investors often leave them empty. Prosper Australia found that in Naarm, more than 27,000 homes, 1.5% of all dwellings, were left totally empty for the whole of 2023, with a further 70,000 dwellings barely used.
In total, nearly 100,000 homes sat empty or under-used last year. This is enough vacant housing to give every single person on the Victorian public housing wait list a home.
The YIMBY’s argument that empty homes is a “minor issue” for housing affordability is a major weakness. Their narrow focus on supply means they miss the idea of a just distribution.
YIMBYs versus council
The Victorian government, outrageously, does not allow councils to set mandatory height limits, mandate environmental sustainability measures, accessibility standards or set a minimum affordable housing quota.
Councils routinely grant permits to developers. If the YIMBYs thought the open-slather granting of permits to developers was the route to cheap housing, there would already be heaps of apartments available for modest rents.
Developers should not be able to dictate the terms under which developments occur must be opposed.
YIMBY Melbourne will stand in the council elections. In inner-city councils, such as Merri-bek, they already regularly attend meetings to oppose conditions on permits, such as height limits.
After widespread community consultation, Merri-bek council adopted a “preferred height limit” for three major shopping centres.
Despite this, most planning applications exceed the preferred height limit and Merri-bek routinely allows this, setting a precedent for other developers to do the same. It means developers are setting height limits, rather than the community.
Real solutions
Today’s housing crisis derives from policies which deem housing to be a commodity, not a right. Governments must create inclusionary zoning that forces developers to include a minimum of 30% public housing in every new development and mandate environmentally sustainable infrastructure and disability access: none should be discretionary.
New developments are needed to meet the needs of a growing population. But working-class people must be able to have a say over what development happens in their communities.
Creating liveable cities means preserving green space, maintaining the adequate separation of buildings, protecting heritage and the history of working-class struggles.
YIMBYs offer false hope to people who, desperate to buy, think that unrestricted development will lead to cheap housing: this is just not the case in a capitalist market.
It offers false hope and false solutions to the housing crisis: it attributes the lack of affordable housing to council regulations on developments, channelling housing anguish into outrage against NIMBYs.
Public housing offers a genuine alternative. We need to fight for genuinely affordable and public housing and housing justice for all, and that means electing councillors who will do this.
[Sue Bolton is a Socialist Alliance councillor in Merri-bek. She is seeking a fourth term at the Victorian council elections in October.]