Housing
Tenure
Housing tenure shows whether households own their dwelling outright, are purchasing it, rent privately, rent from a social landlord, or occupy it under another arrangement. It describes how households hold or access housing, not the type of dwelling itself.
About this topic
Housing tenure shows whether households own their dwelling outright, are purchasing it, rent privately, rent from a social landlord, or occupy it under another arrangement. It describes how households hold or access housing, not the type of dwelling itself.
This topic is useful for analysing housing markets, affordability, stability, and the mix of owners and renters. It works best alongside dwelling type, household composition, and housing cost topics such as mortgage repayments and rent.
Interpretation notes
- Tenure type describes how the dwelling is occupied, including ownership, mortgage, rental, or other arrangements.
- It applies to occupied private dwellings and should not be confused with dwelling structure or housing cost measures.
Key insight
In 2021, 81.3% of households in Eaglehawk Neck were purchasing or had fully paid off their home, while 13.6% were renting. The mortgage share was higher than Tasman (M) (21.7%).
Section overview
Housing tenure
Eaglehawk Neck - Households (Enumerated)
This table summarises tenure for Eaglehawk Neck in 2021 for persons, with comparison against Tasman (M) and change since 2016.
Chart view
Housing tenure snapshot
2021 distribution by category for Eaglehawk Neck, with comparison markers for Tasman (M).
Fully owned
Mortgage
Renting - Total
Renting - Social housing
Renting - Private
Renting - Not stated
Other tenure type
Not stated
Housing tenure change
Absolute change in category counts between 2016 and 2021.
Fully owned
+23
+4.1pp
Mortgage
+12
+2.9pp
Renting - Total
+4
+0.2pp
Renting - Social housing
0
0.0pp
Renting - Private
-1
-2.0pp
Renting - Not stated
-3
-1.6pp
Other tenure type
+5
+2.3pp
Not stated
-14
-7.9pp
Data table
Tenure for Eaglehawk Neck. Housing tenure. 2021 and 2016 counts, percentages, and change compared with Tasman (M).
| Category | 2021 | 2016 | Change | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count | % | Tasman (M)% | Count | % | Tasman (M)% | Count | pp | |
| Fully owned | 121 | 56.5% | 52.2% | 98 | 52.4% | 48.0% | +23 | +4.1pp |
| Mortgage | 53 | 24.8% | 21.7% | 41 | 21.9% | 24.4% | +12 | +2.9pp |
| Renting - Total | 29 | 13.6% | 14.9% | 25 | 13.4% | 15.9% | +4 | +0.2pp |
| Renting - Social housing | 0 | 0.0% | 1.5% | 0 | 0.0% | 1.0% | 0 | 0.0pp |
| Renting - Private | 22 | 10.3% | 13.5% | 23 | 12.3% | 14.4% | -1 | -2.0pp |
| Renting - Not stated | 0 | 0.0% | 0.3% | 3 | 1.6% | 1.0% | -3 | -1.6pp |
| Other tenure type | 5 | 2.3% | 2.5% | 0 | 0.0% | 0.7% | +5 | +2.3pp |
| Not stated | 7 | 3.3% | 8.6% | 21 | 11.2% | 11.3% | -14 | -7.9pp |
| Total households | 214 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 187 | 100.0% | 100.0% | +27 | 0.0pp |