APN Research Report: The Australian Property Market: Economic Driver or Diversification Drag?

Executive Summary

The Australian property market exerts a profound influence on the national economy, acting as a major engine for growth and employment while simultaneously presenting potential structural impediments to long-term diversification and resilience. This report analyses the multifaceted role of the property market, considering its interaction with prevailing macroeconomic conditions, including inflation and interest rates, and its relationship with Australia’s concerningly low level of economic complexity.

Key findings indicate that the construction sector, intrinsically linked to property, is a significant contributor to GDP and employment, though potentially constrained by structural inefficiencies. The ‘wealth effect’ stemming from rising property values provides a stimulus to household consumption, yet its impact is unevenly distributed and potentially masks underlying economic weaknesses if not supported by income growth. The Australian financial system exhibits a deep symbiosis with the housing market, with residential mortgages dominating bank loan books. While this provides a degree of stability and a potent channel for monetary policy transmission, it raises concerns about systemic risk and the potential ‘crowding out’ of capital from other productive sectors, particularly small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

The interplay between housing costs, inflation, and interest rates creates a complex policy challenge. Rising housing costs contribute significantly to inflation, prompting interest rate hikes by the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA). These hikes, however, exacerbate housing affordability pressures and mortgage stress, potentially dampening the very construction activity needed to alleviate supply shortages.

Australia’s low and declining ranking on the Economic Complexity Index (ECI), driven by a lack of export diversification and continued reliance on resource extraction, stands in stark contrast to its high-income status. Evidence suggests that the substantial flow of capital and skilled labour into the property and resources sectors may divert these critical inputs from industries capable of enhancing economic complexity, such as advanced manufacturing and technology. Skills mismatches and labour market inefficiencies further compound this challenge.

Overall, this report concludes that while the property market is a vital component of the Australian economy, its current dynamics – particularly its scale, deep financial integration, sensitivity to policy levers, and potential to absorb disproportionate capital and policy attention – act as a significant structural hindrance to necessary economic diversification and the development of greater economic complexity. This reinforces a path dependency that challenges Australia’s long-term economic resilience and adaptability in a changing global landscape.

I. Introduction

The Australian property market occupies a central position in the nation’s economic discourse and reality. It is a primary source of wealth for many households, a major driver of construction activity and employment, and a cornerstone of the financial system. Fluctuations in house prices and construction activity reverberate throughout the economy, influencing consumer spending, investment decisions, and monetary policy effectiveness. Simultaneously, Australia faces a persistent challenge in diversifying its economic base. Despite decades of prosperity, much of it fuelled by resource booms, the economy remains heavily reliant on the export of raw materials.¹ This reliance is reflected in Australia’s low and declining ranking on international measures of economic complexity, raising concerns about long-term growth prospects and resilience to global economic shifts.³

This report addresses a critical question arising from these intersecting themes: To what extent does the structure and behaviour of the Australian property market, particularly under current macroeconomic conditions of elevated inflation and fluctuating interest rates, and in light of its economic complexity profile, influence other economic sectors and potentially act as a structural impediment to necessary diversification?

To answer this, the report will first examine the direct economic footprint of the property market through construction, wealth effects, and financial linkages. It will then analyse the complex interplay between the property market, inflation, housing affordability, and interest rate policy. Subsequently, the report defines and assesses Australia’s economic complexity, exploring the dynamics of resource allocation between property, resources, and potentially complexity-enhancing sectors. Finally, it synthesises these findings to evaluate the hypothesis that the property market acts as a significant constraint on Australia’s economic diversification and complexity development.

II. The Property Market’s Economic Footprint

The Australian property market’s influence extends far beyond simply providing shelter; it is deeply embedded in the nation’s economic structure through construction activity, household wealth dynamics, and the financial system.

A. Direct Economic Contribution: The Construction Engine

The building and construction industry, encompassing both residential and non-residential activity, represents one of Australia’s largest economic sectors. In the year ending June 2023, the total value of building and construction work done amounted to $269.72 billion, equivalent to 10.5 per cent of Australia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).⁵ Other estimates place its annual contribution around 10% of GDP historically.⁶ Data for the 2022-23 financial year indicates the industry generated $568 billion in total income and contributed $163 billion in industry value added, ranking it as the third largest industry by this measure.⁷ Its cyclical importance is notable; during the housing boom of the early 2000s, for instance, dwelling investment contributed approximately one percentage point to annual GDP growth for two consecutive years.⁸

Beyond its direct GDP contribution, the construction sector is a vital source of employment. As of November 2023, 1.35 million people were employed in the industry, accounting for 9.4 per cent of all jobs across the economy.⁵ The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) identified it as the fourth largest employing industry in 2022-23.⁷ A significant feature is the high proportion of full-time employment, with 85.3 per cent of construction jobs being full-time in November 2023, making it a consistently large provider of full-time work over decades.⁵ Earlier data from the early 2000s indicated around 390,000 people directly employed in residential construction, with a further 130,000 indirectly employed in related professions like real estate and architecture.⁸

The sector’s activity generates substantial demand for inputs from other parts of the economy, including materials from manufacturing, logistics services, and professional services such as engineering and design, creating significant spillover effects.⁸ Structurally, the industry is characterised by a large number of small businesses – 98.7 per cent had fewer than 20 employees as of June 2022.⁵ However, major domestic and international engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) firms also operate within the sector, particularly on large-scale projects.⁶

Despite its economic significance, the construction sector faces notable challenges that can constrain its ability to respond effectively to market signals and policy objectives. The industry exhibits relatively low rates of innovation and technology adoption compared to the broader economy; one study indicated an innovation take-up rate of just 31.9% in 2020/21, compared to 45.4% across all industries, with much of this being incremental rather than transformative.¹⁰ Furthermore, the sector has faced significant input price pressures and labour shortages in recent years ⁷, which can limit its capacity to increase housing supply rapidly in response to demand pressures or government targets, such as the ambitious goal of building 1.2 million new homes over five years.¹² Research suggests housing supply responsiveness to price signals in Australia may be limited, potentially hindering the market’s ability to keep pace with demand.¹³

This combination of factors – the sector’s large scale but potential inflexibility due to structural characteristics like fragmentation, slow technology adoption, and susceptibility to labour and cost constraints – means that while construction is a vital economic engine, its own limitations can act as a bottleneck. This inflexibility may inadvertently exacerbate housing shortages and affordability problems, complicating policy efforts aimed at increasing supply.¹⁰

B. The Wealth Effect Channel: Property Prices and Household Spending

Changes in property values significantly influence household behaviour through the ‘wealth effect’. The core concept posits that as the value of assets, particularly housing, increases, homeowners feel wealthier and consequently increase their consumption spending, even if their incomes remain unchanged.¹⁴ This can occur because households feel they need to save less for the future, or because rising house prices increase their perceived lifetime resources.¹⁷ An alternative, or complementary, mechanism is the ‘collateral effect’, where higher property values increase homeowners’ borrowing capacity, allowing previously credit-constrained households to access finance for consumption.¹⁷

Research conducted by the RBA and academic institutions confirms the existence of a positive relationship between housing wealth and household consumption in Australia, although the magnitude of this effect is debated and appears context-dependent.¹⁶ One study using state-level panel data estimated that a 1 per cent increase in housing wealth leads to approximately a 0.16 per cent increase in consumption in the long run, with half the adjustment occurring within six months.²⁰ Other estimates suggest a marginal propensity to consume out of housing wealth of around 3 cents for every dollar increase ¹⁸, or that a $100,000 rise in house values was associated with an annual consumption increase ranging from $600 to $1,700, depending on age cohort and whether it was before or after the Global Financial Crisis (GFC).²¹ Spending on durable goods, particularly motor vehicles, appears especially sensitive to changes in housing wealth.¹⁶

The strength of the wealth effect is not uniform across the population or over time. Evidence suggests the effect may be more pronounced for middle-aged or younger homeowners compared to older cohorts.¹⁸ Furthermore, the broader economic climate plays a role; increases in household wealth supported consumption between 2013 and 2017 when disposable income growth was weak ¹⁶, while the relationship between house prices and consumption appeared weaker in the aftermath of the GFC.²¹

Crucially, the wealth effect is a double-edged sword with significant distributional consequences. While rising property prices benefit existing homeowners, they simultaneously erode affordability for renters and prospective first-home buyers, contributing to widening wealth inequality.²² The gap in net wealth between owner-occupiers (whose wealth is concentrated in housing) and renters has demonstrably increased over the past two decades.²³ This highlights that relying on asset price inflation, rather than broad-based income growth, to drive consumption can exacerbate social divisions and may not reflect sustainable economic progress.¹⁶ While the wealth effect can provide a short-term boost to aggregate demand and GDP ¹⁷, its variable nature, potential to overstate underlying economic strength, and negative distributional impacts make it a potentially precarious foundation for sustained and equitable growth.

C. Linkages with the Financial System: Banking on Housing

The Australian banking system is exceptionally intertwined with the property market. Housing lending constitutes the largest single asset class for Australian banks, accounting for around 40 per cent of total banking industry assets and just under two-thirds of the aggregate loan portfolio.²⁴ For the major banks, which collectively hold around 72 per cent of banking system assets, residential mortgage debt represents over 60 per cent of their loan books.¹⁵ While the major banks remain dominant, recent years have seen some market share gains in housing lending by medium and smaller banks, although recent acquisitions like ANZ’s purchase of Suncorp Bank have partially reversed this trend.²⁵

This high concentration makes the health of the banking sector, and indeed overall financial system stability, profoundly dependent on the performance of the housing market.¹⁵ A downturn in property prices or a significant rise in mortgage defaults could pose systemic risks. Consequently, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) dedicates substantial supervisory effort to monitoring and regulating residential mortgage lending standards, implementing measures such as benchmarks for investor and interest-only lending, and scrutinising loans with high loan-to-valuation ratios (LVRs) or debt-to-income ratios.²⁶

The perceived safety and profitability of mortgage lending, particularly when secured against appreciating property assets, influences bank behaviour and lending priorities.¹⁵ This raises the critical question, explored further in Section V, of whether this focus crowds out lending to other sectors of the economy. There is concern that capital may be disproportionately channelled towards housing at the expense of business investment, particularly for SMEs that often lack the real estate collateral favoured by banks.³⁰ The difficulty for businesses in securing unsecured loans above relatively modest amounts (e.g., $100,000) points to this potential bias.³¹ While the growth of non-bank lenders and the securitisation market provides alternative funding sources, potentially filling some of this gap, this segment may also entail higher risks.²⁵

Adding another layer of complexity is the interdependence between the property market, the financial system, and government policy. Implicit government support for the housing market (through tax settings or the perceived guarantee offered by the ‘four pillars’ policy for major banks ¹⁵) and the RBA’s reliance on the housing sector as a key channel for monetary policy transmission ³³ create a tightly woven system.

This deep integration between finance and property offers certain advantages, such as historically stable and profitable assets for banks ²⁴ and a responsive channel for monetary policy.³³ However, it also creates significant vulnerabilities, primarily the systemic risk associated with a housing downturn.²⁶ Furthermore, this symbiosis may foster a conservative lending culture biased towards collateralised housing debt, potentially hindering the flow of capital to riskier, but potentially more innovative and dynamic, business ventures.³⁰ This suggests a potential trade-off where the structures ensuring short-term financial stability might inadvertently constrain long-term economic dynamism and diversification.

Table 1: Composition of Australian Bank Lending – Housing vs. Business (Illustrative)

Note: Specific percentages can fluctuate and vary slightly between sources. This table provides an indicative overview based on available snippets.

The data clearly illustrates the overwhelming dominance of residential mortgages within the Australian banking system, particularly for the major institutions. While providing a substantial base of lending activity, this concentration underscores the potential for business lending, especially to SMEs lacking property collateral, to be relatively under-resourced, lending credence to the crowding-out hypothesis discussed later.

III. Interplay with Macroeconomic Conditions

The property market does not operate in isolation; it is deeply affected by, and in turn influences, broader macroeconomic conditions, particularly inflation and interest rates, with significant consequences for housing affordability.

A. Inflation, Housing Costs, and Affordability

Housing costs represent a substantial component of household expenditure and are therefore a key factor in overall inflation dynamics. Recent data underscores this connection, with housing inflation running well above the general rate of inflation. For the year to June, overall housing inflation was 5.2%, driven by a 7.3% rise in rents and a 5.1% increase in the price of newly built homes purchased by owner-occupiers, significantly exceeding the headline CPI rise of 3.8% over the same period.¹² Rents paid across Australia increased by 7.8% in the year to Q1 2024 ²², following strong growth in advertised rents, particularly in cities like Perth and Melbourne.²² While headline inflation moderated to 2.4% by December 2024 ³⁴, underlying inflation remained stickier (3.2% trimmed mean ³⁴), and services inflation, which includes rents, remained elevated at 4.3%.³⁵ Other essential costs like insurance, education, and food also saw significant price increases, adding to household budget pressures.³⁶

General inflation also impacts the property market. It erodes household purchasing power, potentially dampening demand for housing. However, during inflationary periods, tangible assets like property can be perceived as a hedge against inflation, potentially increasing investment demand. Furthermore, high inflation in construction inputs (materials, labour) directly translates into higher prices for new dwellings, exacerbating affordability issues.⁷

These price pressures have contributed to a severe housing affordability crisis in Australia. Median house prices have surged, particularly in capital cities; Sydney’s median reached approximately $1.3 million by the end of 2023, more than double its level a decade earlier.²² Other capitals like Canberra, Melbourne, and Brisbane also recorded substantial price increases.²² Rental costs have likewise escalated significantly, especially post-pandemic.²² This affordability decline is driven by a confluence of factors, including strong population growth and migration ²², shifts in household preferences towards smaller average household sizes (increasing the number of households needing accommodation) ²³, persistent undersupply of new housing relative to demand ¹², increased investor activity during certain periods ⁸, and potentially restrictive zoning regulations or high land development costs.⁸

The consequence is rising housing stress, typically defined as lower-income households spending over 30% of their gross income on housing costs.²² In 2019–20, over one million low-income households were experiencing housing stress. The burden falls disproportionately on private renters, with 58% of low-income renters in housing stress, compared to 37.4% of low-income homeowners with a mortgage.²² While rising interest rates since 2021 have increased the cost burden more rapidly for mortgagors recently ²², renters consistently face the highest underlying rates of housing stress.

Table 3: Housing Affordability & Stress Indicators (Selected Data)

Note: Data points are indicative of trends and specific values reported in sources.

The data in Table 3 paints a stark picture of the affordability challenge. This situation creates a difficult feedback loop: high housing costs fuel inflation ¹², necessitating monetary tightening by the RBA. However, the primary tool for this – raising interest rates – directly increases mortgage repayments, worsening affordability stress for homeowners.²² Furthermore, higher interest rates can discourage new residential construction ³³, thereby hindering efforts to address the underlying supply shortages ¹² that contribute significantly to rental inflation.¹² This creates a policy bind where actions taken to control inflation can exacerbate the housing affordability crisis and potentially impede long-term solutions related to supply.

B. Interest Rates and Market Behaviour

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) manages monetary policy with the dual objectives of maintaining consumer price inflation between 2 and 3 per cent and achieving sustained full employment.³⁹ Its primary instrument is the target for the cash rate – the rate at which banks lend to each other overnight – which influences interest rates throughout the economy.³⁹ Australia has recently experienced a significant monetary policy cycle, with the RBA raising the cash rate aggressively from a record low of 0.10% starting in May 2022 to a peak of 4.35% by November 2023, in an effort to combat high inflation.⁴⁰ Subsequently, as inflation showed signs of moderating, the RBA commenced an easing cycle, cutting the rate by 0.25% in February 2025 to 4.1% ³⁶, although it maintained a cautious stance, citing remaining uncertainties.³⁴ Financial markets have priced in expectations of further rate cuts through 2025 and 2026.³⁴

The housing market is a critical channel through which these interest rate changes transmit to the broader economy. RBA research highlights the strong and clear response of residential construction and housing prices to interest rate movements.³³ Lower interest rates reduce the cost of servicing a mortgage and the ‘user cost’ of owning property, boosting demand and enabling households to service higher debt levels, which pushes prices up.⁸ Higher prices, in turn, increase the incentive to build new dwellings.³³ Conversely, higher interest rates increase borrowing costs, reduce affordability and borrowing capacity, dampen demand, and tend to slow price growth and construction activity.⁸ This housing channel is considered a major, perhaps the most potent, mechanism through which monetary policy influences aggregate demand and GDP in Australia.³³

Changes in the cash rate directly impact mortgage affordability. A 0.25% cut, for example, translates to a noticeable reduction in monthly repayments for variable-rate mortgage holders (estimated at $77 per month on a $500,000 loan).⁴⁰ Such changes influence household financial stress levels; the February 2025 rate cut led to a reported decrease in the proportion of mortgage holders considered ‘at risk’.³⁸ Rate cuts typically stimulate housing demand by boosting buyer confidence and increasing borrowing power, often leading to an uptick in loan applications and potentially renewed price growth.³⁸

Interest rates also influence investment decisions, affecting the relative attractiveness of property compared to other assets. Lower rates make borrowing for property investment cheaper and simultaneously reduce the returns available on safer assets like savings accounts and term deposits.⁴⁴ This can encourage a shift of capital towards property, particularly if alternative investments like equities are perceived as riskier or are underperforming.⁸ Higher interest rates reverse this dynamic, increasing the opportunity cost of investing in property and making savings vehicles more appealing.

The RBA’s own forecasts condition the outlook. As of early 2025, the RBA projected underlying inflation to return to the 2-3% target range during the year but settle slightly above the midpoint (~2.7%) through 2025 and 2026, assuming the market-implied path of further rate cuts materialises.³⁴ Headline inflation was forecast to rise temporarily above 3% in the latter half of 2025 before also returning towards the target range.⁴² However, the RBA consistently emphasises the uncertainty surrounding these forecasts, pointing to global geopolitical risks, ongoing labour market tightness, and elevated unit labour costs as potential upside risks to inflation.³⁴

Table 2: RBA Inflation and Interest Rate Forecasts Summary (February 2025 SMP)

Note: Forecasts are conditional on market expectations for the cash rate as of Feb 2025.

The pronounced sensitivity of Australia’s housing market makes it an effective conduit for monetary policy actions aimed at managing the overall economy.³³ However, this sensitivity also means that policy adjustments required for macroeconomic stability can induce substantial volatility in housing activity, prices, and affordability.⁸ These impacts are felt unevenly across the population, affecting homeowners differently from renters, and those on variable mortgage rates differently from those on fixed rates.⁴⁴ This underscores the challenge of using the blunt instrument of the cash rate to address broad economic conditions when a significant part of its transmission mechanism operates through a single, highly sensitive, and socially critical sector like housing.

IV. Economic Complexity and the Diversification Imperative

Beyond the immediate cycles of construction and consumption, the property market’s influence potentially extends to the deeper structure of the Australian economy, particularly concerning its level of sophistication and diversification.

A. Understanding Economic Complexity: Australia’s Profile

The Economic Complexity Index (ECI), developed by researchers at Harvard’s Growth Lab and others, provides a measure of the productive knowledge and capabilities embedded within a country’s economy, as revealed by the diversity and sophistication of its export basket.⁴⁵ A country with a high ECI demonstrates the capacity to produce a wide range of complex goods and services that few other nations can replicate.⁴⁶ It moves beyond simple measures of output like GDP to capture the underlying technological and organisational capabilities that drive sustainable economic development and resilience.⁴⁷

According to the Harvard Atlas of Economic Complexity, Australia’s ECI ranking is strikingly low for a high-income nation. In the 2023 rankings (based on 2023 data), Australia placed 99th out of 145 countries studied.³ This represents a worsening trend; the ranking declined by 8 positions compared to a decade prior.³ Data from the ABS using the same index methodology shows Australia ranked 93rd out of 133 countries in 2021, having fluctuated between 66th and 93rd from 2004 to 2021.⁵⁰ Other sources note a fall from 55th place in 1995 and a decline of 12 positions in the decade leading up to 2021.⁴ This places Australia consistently as the lowest-ranked OECD country for economic complexity, sometimes by a considerable margin.⁴ Its ranking puts it alongside developing nations like Uganda and Pakistan, despite having vastly higher GDP per capita.⁴

The primary driver cited for this poor and deteriorating performance is a persistent lack of export diversification.³ Australia’s export growth has been concentrated in low and moderate complexity products, overwhelmingly dominated by minerals (ores, slag, ash, coal, gas) and some agricultural products.¹ The country has added very few new, complex products to its export basket over the past 15 years.⁵² This creates the anomaly where Australia is significantly “less complex than expected for its income level”.³ Its high national income is largely derived from the export of natural resources rather than the sophisticated productive capabilities characteristic of other advanced economies.²

This low complexity has implications for future growth. The Harvard Growth Lab’s projections, based on ECI analysis, forecast slow growth for Australia over the coming decade (1.0% annually to 2033), ranking it in the bottom half of countries globally.³ This economic structure, heavily reliant on resource extraction, echoes concerns related to the ‘resource curse’ or ‘Dutch disease’ – phenomena where abundant natural resources can paradoxically hinder broader industrial development and diversification by drawing resources away from other sectors and potentially inflating the exchange rate, making other exports less competitive.⁵³ While fostering economic complexity is seen as a potential way to mitigate these adverse effects ⁵⁵, Australia appears to be struggling to achieve this transition.⁵¹ It is worth noting that alternative complexity measures focusing on technological inputs or research output sometimes rank Australia higher.¹ However, the trade-based ECI reflects the complexity actually embodied in globally traded goods and services, which is central to the diversification challenge.

Table 4: Australia’s Economic Complexity Index (ECI) Ranking and Trends (Harvard Atlas Data)

Note: Rankings depend on the specific year’s dataset and number of countries included. The trend of decline and low OECD ranking is consistent across sources.

The data presented in Table 4 starkly illustrates Australia’s predicament. The nation appears caught in a high-income, low-complexity trap. Wealth generated from finite natural resources ² and potentially amplified by cycles in the large property sector may be masking underlying weaknesses in the economy’s productive structure and adaptability. The consistent decline in the ECI ranking suggests this vulnerability is increasing, posing significant risks to long-term prosperity, particularly as the global economy transitions away from fossil fuels and demands more sophisticated goods and services.⁵⁴

B. Resource Allocation Dynamics: Property, Resources vs. Complexity

Achieving greater economic complexity requires directing national resources – both financial capital and human capital – towards developing and scaling industries that produce sophisticated goods and services. There are indications that Australia’s current resource allocation patterns may not be conducive to this goal.

Significant capital investment flows into Australia’s established strengths: mining and property. The mining sector has seen massive investment, particularly during the boom peaking around 2012, much of it foreign direct investment.⁹ While the investment phase has passed, sustaining current production levels still requires substantial ongoing capital expenditure, estimated at around $20 billion per annum.⁶⁰ The mining industry remains highly profitable, with strong growth in earnings and value-added reported in 2022-23.⁶¹ Simultaneously, the sheer size of the property market and the banking system’s focus on mortgage lending (as detailed in Section II.C) imply vast amounts of capital are directed towards residential real estate. While precise figures are difficult to isolate, the dominance of housing loans in bank portfolios points to property as a primary destination for domestic credit. This contrasts with the perceived need for greater investment in complexity-enhancing sectors like advanced manufacturing, technology, and value-adding in areas like battery production, where government initiatives exist but may be insufficient relative to the scale of the established sectors.⁵⁶

On the human capital side, Australia possesses a well-educated population ⁶², a crucial input for complex industries. However, the labour market exhibits signs of friction and potential misallocation. Studies reveal significant skills mismatch, where qualified workers, including skilled migrants, are often employed in roles below their qualification or skill level.⁶³ This underutilisation represents a substantial loss of potential productivity; one estimate suggests that better matching the skills of permanent migrants alone could unlock $9 billion annually for the economy.⁶⁴ Wage penalties for individuals working in occupations mismatched to their university majors can be considerable, reaching up to 28% in some fields.⁶³ Concurrently, persistent skills shortages exist across various occupations, notably in trades but also extending to professionals in health and other fields.⁶⁵ These shortages act as bottlenecks, hindering growth in existing industries and potentially preventing the emergence of new ones. Shortages are often more acute in regional areas.⁶⁵ Furthermore, analysis indicates that the efficiency with which the labour market matches job seekers to vacancies experienced a prolonged slump between the GFC and the recent post-COVID recovery, suggesting underlying structural issues in labour allocation.⁶⁶

This context fuels the argument that the gravitational pull of the large, established property and resource sectors may divert both capital and skilled labour away from activities that could build economic complexity.² The demand for engineers, project managers, financiers, and skilled trades in mining and construction is substantial. While these are valuable jobs, an over-concentration may limit the talent pool available for nascent high-tech manufacturing, software development, or renewable energy value chains.⁵⁶ Similarly, the flow of finance towards tangible assets like property and resource projects might leave less capital available, or available only at higher cost, for innovative ventures with less conventional collateral.

This suggests a potential misalignment between the nation’s available resources and their deployment for long-term structural transformation. Despite possessing significant human capital and national wealth, inefficiencies in the labour market (mismatches, shortages, matching friction) ⁶³ coexist with a concentration of financial capital in lower-complexity sectors like mining and property.⁹ This points towards structural inertia or misaligned incentives preventing the optimal channelling of resources towards building a more complex, diversified, and resilient economy.

V. Synthesis: Evaluating the Constraint on Diversification

Having examined the property market’s economic role, its macroeconomic interactions, and Australia’s complexity profile, this section synthesises the findings to evaluate whether the property market acts as a significant hindrance to economic diversification.

A. The Crowding-Out Hypothesis Revisited: Property’s Gravitational Pull

The evidence suggests a plausible, though complex, mechanism through which the dominance of the property market, particularly its nexus with the financial system, can crowd out investment in other sectors. As established (Section II.C, Table 1), residential mortgages dominate bank balance sheets.²⁴ Research focusing on Australian banks, particularly the Big Four, provides evidence that during periods of strong housing market activity, growth in housing loans is negatively associated with growth in business loans.³⁰ This suggests that banks may shift their lending portfolios towards housing when opportunities arise, potentially at the expense of business credit. This effect appears linked to reduced business investment.³⁰

Several factors likely drive this behaviour. Banks may be motivated by the perceived safety and profitability of mortgage lending, especially when secured by appreciating property collateral.²⁴ Regulatory frameworks, while aimed at stability, might implicitly favour well-understood mortgage products over more heterogeneous business loans.²⁶ Crucially, the common practice of requiring real estate as collateral for business loans disadvantages many SMEs and entrepreneurs who may lack such assets, particularly younger cohorts with lower rates of home ownership.³¹ This suggests that SMEs are likely the group most affected by any crowding-out effect.

While the expansion of non-bank lending and securitisation markets provides alternative funding channels ³², potentially mitigating the crowding-out effect from traditional banks, this funding may come with higher risks or target specific niches, and may not fully compensate for reduced bank lending to the broader SME sector.²⁷ Furthermore, monetary policy easing, designed to stimulate the overall economy, could inadvertently exacerbate the crowding out if its primary effect is to boost housing demand and prices ³³, leading banks to further prioritise mortgage lending. However, it’s important to note that other RBA research indicates that monetary policy does influence firm-level investment directly, particularly for financially constrained firms, suggesting that bank lending channels are not the only factor at play.⁶⁷

Taking these factors together, while the extent of crowding out is difficult to quantify precisely and may be partially offset by alternative finance, a compelling case exists. The financial system’s structural orientation towards property lending, driven by incentives related to profit, risk perception, and collateral preferences, likely creates a relative disadvantage for non-property-related business investment, especially for SMEs.³⁰ This represents a direct channel through which the property market’s dominance can act as a brake on diversification into new and potentially more complex business activities.

B. Interconnected Vulnerabilities: Complexity, Property, and Shocks

The Australian economy’s structure – characterised by low complexity, heavy reliance on resource exports ¹, and a dominant property sector deeply integrated with finance and highly sensitive to interest rates – creates a web of interconnected vulnerabilities. This structure makes the economy susceptible to various shocks, and the linkages can amplify their impact.

Reliance on commodity exports exposes the economy to the inherent volatility of global resource markets.² A sharp fall in commodity prices can significantly impact national income, government revenues, and investment sentiment, with potential knock-on effects for housing demand and prices. Conversely, the high levels of household debt associated with high property values create vulnerability to domestic shocks, such as sharp interest rate increases or an economic downturn leading to unemployment.²⁴ A significant housing market correction could trigger a negative wealth effect, curtailing consumption, increasing mortgage defaults, and potentially straining the financial system.¹⁷ Geopolitical risks are heightened by the concentration of exports, particularly resources, to a small number of key markets like China.¹ Furthermore, the economy’s lack of complexity makes it harder to adapt to major global transitions, such as the shift away from fossil fuels (directly impacting Australia’s major coal and gas exports) or rapid technological change that favours economies with sophisticated manufacturing and service capabilities.⁵⁴

These vulnerabilities are intertwined. A shock originating in the resources sector could weaken the broader economy, impacting households’ ability to service mortgages and potentially triggering stress in the property market. Conversely, a domestic shock leading to a housing downturn could severely curtail consumption and construction, dragging down overall economic activity. The lack of well-developed, complex alternative industries means there are fewer buffers to absorb these shocks or drive recovery.⁵⁴

This structure also imposes policy constraints. As discussed (Insight 5), the potent housing channel for monetary policy means the RBA faces difficulties in setting interest rates optimally for both inflation control and housing market stability. Fiscal policy may also be constrained; significant public resources can be implicitly or explicitly tied to supporting housing market stability or addressing affordability issues, potentially limiting funds available for long-term investments in diversification and complexity-building initiatives.¹⁵ Persistent structural budget deficits further limit fiscal capacity.⁶⁸

The combination of low economic complexity and property market dominance thus creates a system where vulnerabilities are interconnected and shocks can be amplified. The economy’s resilience may be lower than its high-income status suggests, as adverse events in one key sector can readily spill over and destabilise others, with limited alternative growth engines to compensate.

C. Overall Assessment: Is the Property Market a Hindrance?

Evaluating whether the Australian property market hinders economic diversification requires weighing its undeniable contributions against the structural issues identified. The property and construction sectors are major sources of GDP, employment, and investment.⁵ The wealth effect associated with housing provides a mechanism, albeit flawed, for stimulating consumption.¹⁶

However, the evidence presented in this report points towards the property market also acting as a significant structural impediment. The potential crowding out of capital from other sectors, particularly innovative SMEs, due to the financial system’s bias towards mortgage lending, represents a direct hindrance.³⁰ The sheer scale of the property market likely draws a disproportionate share of skilled labour and entrepreneurial focus, resources that could otherwise be directed towards developing higher-complexity industries. The market’s sensitivity to interest rates complicates monetary policy, and the political and economic focus on housing prices and affordability can divert policy attention and resources from longer-term structural transformation goals.¹⁵ The inequality exacerbated by housing market dynamics may also limit the potential for broad-based, inclusive growth.

Therefore, the synthesised conclusion is that while the property market provides essential economic functions, its current scale, deep financial integration, policy sensitivity, and potential to misallocate resources mean it likely does act as a significant structural hindrance to Australia’s economic diversification and complexity development. It is not the sole cause of Australia’s low complexity – resource dependence plays a critical role ² – but the property market is a major contributing factor that reinforces the existing low-complexity, resource-reliant economic model.

This suggests a form of path dependency. Australia’s historical economic success, built significantly on resource booms and property wealth ⁸, has shaped its institutions, financial system, regulatory environment, and even skill base in ways that favour these sectors.¹⁵ This creates powerful feedback loops – rising property prices encourage more investment in property, bank lending practices favour mortgages, policy debates centre on housing affordability. Overcoming this structural inertia to pivot towards new, complex industries requires challenging established norms, incentives, and potentially vested interests. The property market, given its size, economic weight, and deep societal penetration, stands as a central node within this structure of inertia, making the necessary transition towards a more complex and diversified economy considerably more difficult.

VI. Conclusion and Outlook

This report has analysed the pervasive influence of the Australian property market, demonstrating its role as a key economic driver through construction and wealth effects, yet also highlighting its potential to constrain long-term economic diversification. The market’s deep integration with the financial system creates both stability benefits and systemic risks, while its sensitivity to interest rates makes it a primary, yet potentially problematic, channel for monetary policy. The complex interplay with inflation and affordability presents ongoing policy dilemmas.

Critically, Australia’s low and declining economic complexity, stemming from a lack of export diversification and continued reliance on resources, poses a significant challenge to future prosperity. The analysis suggests that the property market contributes to this challenge by potentially crowding out capital from more complex sectors, absorbing significant skilled labour and policy attention, and reinforcing a path dependency that favours established, lower-complexity activities.

Therefore, the overall assessment is that the Australian property market, in its current form and scale, acts as a significant structural hindrance to the development of a more complex, resilient, and diversified economy. While not the only factor, its influence is pervasive and reinforces the inertia challenging structural transformation.

The outlook, based on current trends and complexity analysis, suggests continued slow economic growth relative to potential ³ and persistent housing affordability challenges.¹² Addressing these interconnected issues requires a nuanced policy approach that looks beyond short-term cyclical management. While specific policy prescriptions are beyond the scope of this report, the findings point towards several areas for consideration:

• Rebalancing Incentives: Evaluating tax and regulatory settings that may disproportionately favour investment in property over other productive assets.
• Improving Capital Allocation: Exploring mechanisms to enhance the flow of finance to innovative SMEs and complexity-enhancing sectors, potentially addressing the limitations of property-based collateral requirements.³¹
• Addressing Labour Market Frictions: Implementing policies to reduce skills mismatches, address critical shortages through training and migration, and improve the efficiency of labour allocation to support emerging industries.⁶²
• Coordinated Housing Policy: Developing integrated strategies that address housing supply constraints through planning reform and infrastructure investment, alongside measures to manage demand and support affordability.
• Systemic Risk Monitoring: Maintaining vigilant oversight of the interconnected risks between the property market, household debt, and the financial system.²⁶

Ultimately, fostering a more diversified and complex Australian economy requires a conscious effort to shift resources and policy focus, acknowledging and mitigating the structural constraints imposed by the current dominance of the property market. Failure to do so risks leaving Australia vulnerable to future economic shocks and unable to fully capitalise on the opportunities of a changing global economy.

Works cited

1. Australia (AUS) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners | The Observatory of Economic Complexity, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://oec.world/en/profile/country/aus
2. Economic Diversity in Australia: Why the Lucky Country Is Headed for Trouble, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://darkhorsefinancial.com.au/economic-diversity-in-australia-why-the-lucky-country-is-headed-for-trouble/
3. Australia – The Atlas of Economic Complexity, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/36
4. Harvard’s Economic Complexity ranking shows Australia’s luck is running out, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.amgc.org.au/media-releases/harvards-economic-complexity-ranking-shows-australias-luck-is-running-out/
5. Our Industry – Master Builders Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://masterbuilders.com.au/about-us/our-industry/
6. Australia – Building & Construction – International Trade Administration, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/australia-building-construction
7. Tradies continue to lead the way in $568b Construction industry, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/tradies-continue-lead-way-568b-construction-industry
8. Recent developments in the Australian housing market | Treasury.gov.au, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://treasury.gov.au/publication/economic-roundup-summer-2003-04/recent-developments-in-the-australian-housing-market
9. Mining and METS: engines of economic growth and prosperity for Australians – Minerals Council of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://minerals.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Mining-and-METS-engines-of-economic-growth-and-prosperity-for-Australians.pdf
10. (PDF) Challenges Facing the Construction Industry in Australia – ResearchGate, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388179344_Challenges_Facing_the_Construction_Industry_in_Australia
11. Underneath the headlines: understanding price change in the Australian economy, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.abs.gov.au/about/consultation-and-conferences/conferences/underneath-headlines-understanding-price-change-australian-economy
12. Is Australia’s housing shortage keeping inflation higher for longer? – realestate.com.au, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.realestate.com.au/news/is-australias-housing-shortage-keeping-inflation-higher-for-longer/
13. Housing supply responsiveness in Australia: distribution, drivers and institutional settings, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/migration/documents/AHURI-Final-Report-281-Housing-supply-responsiveness-in-Australia-distribution-drivers-and-institutional-settings.pdf
14. Economic Growth | Explainer | Education – Reserve Bank of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/education/resources/explainers/economic-growth.html
15. Why the Australian Government Secretly Cheers on Soaring Property Prices – Kitty & Miles Buyers Agents – 100% Success Rate, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://kittyandmiles.com.au/why-the-australian-government-secretly-cheers-on-soaring-property-prices/
16. Wealth and Consumption | Bulletin – March 2019 | RBA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2019/mar/wealth-and-consumption.html
17. Housing affordability and the economy: a review of macroeconomic impacts and policy issues, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/migration/documents/NRV3_Research_Paper_4.pdf
18. Home Prices and Household Spending – Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/assets/documents/hilda-bibliography/working-discussion-research-papers/2013/Windsor_etal_Home_prices_and_household_spending.pdf
19. Housing Wealth Effects: Evidence from New Vehicle Registrations | Bulletin – September 2015 – Reserve Bank of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2015/sep/2.html
20. Wealth and Consumption in Australia – IDEAS/RePEc, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ausecr/v53y2020i1p105-117.html
21. Housing prices, household debt and household consumption, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/migration/documents/AHURI-Final-Report-282-Housing-prices-household-debt-and-household-consumption.pdf
22. Housing affordability – Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/housing-affordability
23. Renters, Rent Inflation and Renter Stress | Bulletin – March 2023 …, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/mar/renters-rent-inflation-and-renter-stress.html
24. Banking on housing – APRA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.apra.gov.au/news-and-publications/banking-on-housing
25. Review into Small and Medium-sized Banks – Council of Financial Regulators, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.cfr.gov.au/publications/consultations/2024/review-into-small-and-medium-sized-banks/review-into-small-and-medium-sized-banks.html
26. Countercyclical capital buffer – APRA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.apra.gov.au/sites/default/files/Countercycical%20counter%20buffer%20Information%20Paper.PDF
27. How the RBA Uses the Securitisation Dataset to Assess Financial Stability Risks from Mortgage Lending | Bulletin – July 2024, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2024/jul/how-the-rba-uses-the-securitisation-dataset-to-assess-financial-stability-risks-from-mortgage-lending.html
28. Assessing the effects of housing policy measures on new lending in Australia – Bank for International Settlements, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap110c.pdf
29. Assessing the Effects of Housing Lending Policy Measures – Reserve Bank of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/fsr/2018/oct/pdf/05-effects-of-housing-lending-policy-measures.pdf
30. Bank Lending Behavior and Housing Market Booms: The Australian Evidence – Faculty of Business and Economics, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://fbe.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3225092/2045_Banklending_submission1.pdf
31. Regulation impact statement – Australian Business Securitisation Fund, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://oia.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2019/02/2_ris_in_pdf.pdf
32. A Stocktake of Securitisation in Australia | Speeches | RBA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2024/sp-so-2024-12-02.html
33. RDP 2019-01: A Model of the Australian Housing Market | RBA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2019/2019-01/full.html
34. Overview | Statement on Monetary Policy – February 2025 | RBA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/smp/2025/feb/overview.html
35. Factsheet: Inflation in Australia – Australian Industry Group, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.aigroup.com.au/resourcecentre/research-economics/factsheets/factsheet-inflation-in-australia/
36. Australian Inflation Rate: Will It Reach 2.5% In 2025? – Arielle Executive, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://arielle.com.au/inflation-rate-australia/
37. The Australian Rental Crisis Explained: Causes and Potential Solutions – HomeMove, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://homemove.com.au/blog/unravelling-the-australian-rental-crisis-causes-and-potential-solutions/
38. RBA rate cut reduces mortgage stress, spurs increase in loan applications, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.brokernews.com.au/news/breaking-news/rba-rate-cut-reduces-mortgage-stress-spurs-increase-in-loan-applications-286855.aspx
39. Cash rate target – the key monetary policy decision – Reserve Bank of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/cash-rate-target-overview.html
40. Property market set for take-off after RBA cuts rates, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://australianpropertyupdate.com.au/apu/property-market-set-for-take-off-after-rba-cuts-rates
41. Interest Rate News: RBA Holds Rates At 4.1% – Forbes, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/au/personal-finance/interest-rate-news/
42. Outlook | Statement on Monetary Policy – February 2025 | RBA, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/smp/2025/feb/outlook.html
43. Australia CPI expected to show inflation eased further in Q1, backing case for more rate cuts, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.fxstreet.com/news/australia-cpi-expected-to-show-inflation-eased-further-in-q1-backing-case-for-more-rate-cuts-202504292130
44. How the RBA’s rate cut is a ‘double-edged sword’ for Australians | SBS News, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/the-effects-of-the-reserve-banks-rate-cut/01jc38ody
45. Economic Complexity Briefing | The Growth Lab, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://growthlab.hks.harvard.edu/files/growthlab/files/economic_complexity_briefing.pdf
46. Glossary – The Atlas of Economic Complexity, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/glossary
47. The Ultimate Guide to the Econ Complexity Index – Number Analytics, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-econ-complexity-index-guide
48. A Structural Ranking of Economic Complexity – The Growth Lab, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://growthlab.hks.harvard.edu/files/growthlab/files/2019-11-cid-fellows-wp-119-structural-rank-ec.pdf
49. Atlas of Economic Complexity 10.0 brings new data and Product Space design, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://growthlab.hks.harvard.edu/news/atlas-economic-complexity-100-brings-new-data-and-product-space-design
50. Economic resilience | Australian Bureau of Statistics, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/measuring-what-matters/measuring-what-matters-themes-and-indicators/sustainable/economic-resilience
51. Australia’s economic complexity ranking now behind Uganda – Reddit, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/17jbdpd/australias_economic_complexity_ranking_now_behind/
52. Australia – The Atlas of Economic Complexity, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/36/export-basket
53. Australia’s abysmal economic diversity has flow on effects for national security, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/geopolitics-and-policy/5076-australia-s-abysmal-economic-diversity-has-flow-on-effects-for-national-security
54. Australia’s Lack of Economic Complexity Is a Problem – The Diplomat, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://thediplomat.com/2022/03/australias-lack-of-economic-complexity-is-a-problem/
55. Full article: Resource curse or blessing? The role of economic complexity in low- and middle-income countries’ industrialization – Taylor & Francis Online, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23322039.2025.2492200?src=
56. A Future Made in Australia: Deepening Australia’s Economic Complexity | Ministers for the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/husic/speeches/future-made-australia-deepening-australias-economic-complexity
57. Economic growth – Grattan Institute, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://grattan.edu.au/economic-growth/
58. Understanding Productivity Australia’s Choice – The McKell Institute, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://mckellinstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/The-McKell-Institute-Understanding-Productivity-Australias-Choice-November-2012.pdf
59. Australian Capital Flows | Bulletin – June 2017 – Reserve Bank of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2017/jun/3.html
60. Trade and Investment – Minerals Council of Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://minerals.org.au/policies/trade-and-investment/
61. Australian Industry, 2022-23 financial year – Australian Bureau of Statistics, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/industry/industry-overview/australian-industry/latest-release
62. Job Mismatches and Labour Market Outcomes: Panel Evidence on University Graduates, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/assets/documents/hilda-bibliography/hilda-conference-papers/2011/Zhang,_Wei_4A_final_paper.pdf
63. College Majors and Skill Mismatch in Labour Markets – School of Economics – University of Queensland, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://economics.uq.edu.au/files/52016/4924.pdf
64. Billion Dollar Benefit: The economic impact of unlocking the skills potential of migrants in Australia – SSI, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.ssi.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/DAE_SSI_Skills_Mismatch_Report_19062024_WEB.pdf
65. Current skills shortages | Jobs and Skills Australia, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://www.jobsandskills.gov.au/publications/towards-national-jobs-and-skills-roadmap-summary/current-skills-shortages
66. Labour market matching across skills and regions in Australia – Treasury.gov.au, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-03/p2024-495252-01-labour-market.pdf
67. Does Monetary Policy Affect Non-mining Business Investment in Australia? Evidence from BLADE – IDEAS/RePEc, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://ideas.repec.org/p/rba/rbardp/rdp2023-09.html
68. Back in black? A menu of measures to repair the budget – Grattan Institute, accessed on April 30, 2025, https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Grattan-Back-in-Black-1.pdf