Despite the political battle lines crisscrossing America, candidates and most voters can agree at least on what demands the most urgent attention: affordable housing.

Partisan divides exist in a range of market- versus government- driven solutions to the problem. But this is one case in which the correct reaction is to say, “Let’s try all these ideas.” A multipronged approach is what a state like Hawaii, where the extremes of high costs and low inventory converge, will need to make real progress.

A 2019 state housing study put the total combined need for additional units at 50,156, 2020 through 2025. More than 3,000 units will be needed for those earning between 60% and 80% of area median income.

Of course, Hawaii candidates have been happy to talk about general housing policy. The job of voters is to get them to spell out what concrete actions they would pursue to move homes from concepts on paper to real units on the ground.

The candidates in the race for governor have placed housing front and center, and the party standard bearers use the proposed redevelopment of the Aloha Stadium property to illustrate their basic policies.

The Democratic nominee, Lt. Gov. Josh Green, sees an active role for government in the proposed entertainment-housing mix envisioned for the state-owned 98-acre site. He is right about that: Left to their own devices, developers are not going curb their profit motive to hit the state’s housing targets.

The stadium offers the opportunity “to build both something that’s entertaining but can give us the capacity for X amount of housing,” Green told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser editorial board.

His Republican competitor, former Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona, wants broadly to see better alignment of state and county regulations, eliminating the Land Use Commission (LUC) for starters, and would avoid adding new regulations.

Where Aloha Stadium is concerned, Aiona said he is not wedded to the siting of a new stadium in Halawa and believes the private sector is the key partner in any housing development.

Aiona certainly has a point, although regulatory alignment should not require a radical solution. The LUC, for example, does have a part to play in guiding development to balance interests in housing, agriculture, business and open space.

Like-minded individuals and groups are amplifying the discussion. In its recent policy brief, the libertarian think tank Grassroot Institute of Hawaii cited the state’s regulatory burdens for discouraging new development and exacerbating the housing shortage.

The paper, “The ‘Outsider’ Theory of Hawaii’s Housing Crisis,” tracked home purchases between 2010 and 2020, noting that local residents purchased the vast majority of units, with prices rising while sales to out-of-state buyers steadily decreased. The study essentially dismissed the theory that out-of-state buyers cause high prices as a “popular belief” not supported by the research.

The more likely causes of the housing shortage are the state’s extensive land-use, zoning and building regulations, according to the report. Examining those impediments would be worthwhile; the current mayor, Rick Blangiardi, in fact, agrees that backlogs caused by Honolulu’s permitting bureaucracy must be addressed. That should be a priority.

But it doesn’t follow that external forces have no impact. Investors do buy local properties at a premium, often taking them out of the market for Hawaii residents.

Some have been used as their own vacation homes or as vacation rentals to visitors, along with the units converted to B&Bs by local residents themselves.

Oahu’s short-term rental policy has changed to counter the trend. Also, there have been worthy proposals to help finance affordable projects through an added tax on investment properties left vacant.

Both arguments have merit.

Additionally, the development of properties that should have yielded more units for local buyers often haven’t delivered what was hoped.

The “transit-oriented development” in Kakaako near the planned rail terminus, for which builders received incentives, offered only modest advances toward Honolulu’s affordable-housing goal. The city should do better, as the rail guideway is built through the Dillingham Boulevard corridor.

The study does acknowledge that “any additional bidder on a product that is in short supply is likely to have an effect on the price,” but asserted that in Hawaii, like other states, the investor effect is limited.

Fair enough. But the islands’ status as a destination is a strong investment lure, and geographic constraints make much of its land difficult or costly to develop as housing.

Hawaii is not like other states. That’s why an all-of-the-above strategy is critical. And those who want leadership posts in this state must spell out their housing plans, in plain terms to which they can be held accountable.