Single-family detached Housing: a branch of paradise or a problem? Part II (original) (raw)
Related papers
European Journal of Housing Policy, 2011
Many scholars interpret the contraction in social housing and the expansion of home ownership as reflections of a reduced role for the state and an increase in the marketisation of housing. This paper challenges this interpretation by pointing to two weaknesses in its conceptual underpinnings. One is its failure to distinguish between housing as capital (traded in the purchase market for dwellings) and housing as a service (traded in the rental market for accommodation), leading to an underestimate of the extent and diversity of continuing state intervention in housing. The other problem is a narrow focus on the balance between market and state which neglects the role of self-provisioning in the household as a form of production. The alternative view proposed here is, first, that forms of state intervention in the markets for housing capital and services are so diverse and complex that a more comprehensive analysis is needed before conclusions on trends in the state's overall role can be reached, and, second, that while home ownership reflects a dominant role for the market in the distribution of housing capital, it reflects a familialisation of housing services -it enables households to self-provision themselves with accommodation and thereby remove this service from the realm of both market exchange and state provision. The paper also suggests that the welfare benefit of home ownership lies not only in its widely recognised social insurance effect but also in the efficiency and cost-reduction effects which self-provisioning of housing provides.
Post-Socialist Housing Systems in Europe: Housing Welfare Regimes by Default?
Housing Studies, 2015
This article develops a conceptual framework derived from welfare regime and concomitant literatures to interpret housing reform in post-socialist European countries. In it, settled power structures and collective ideologies are necessary prerequisites for the creation of distinctive housing welfare regimes with clear roles for the state, market and households. Although the defining feature of post-socialist housing has been mass-privatization to create superhomeownership societies, the emphatic retreat of the state that this represents has not been replaced by the creation of the institutions or cultures required to create fully financialized housing markets. There is, instead, a form of state legacy welfare in the form of debt free home-ownership, which creates a gap in housing welfare that has been partially filled by households in the form of intergenerational assistance (familiailism) and self-build housing. Both of these mark continuities with the previous regime. The latter is especially common in southeast Europe where its frequent illegality represents a form of anti-state housing. The lack of settled ideologies and power structures suggest that these housing welfare regimes by default will persist as part of a process that resembles a path dependent "transformation" rather than "transition."
Housing policy in Sweden - still a success story?
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 1990
Housing policy in Swedenstill a success story? by Lennart J. Lundqvist, Ingemar Elander and Berth Danermark I Background 1 The image of 'success' Swedish housing policy has aroused international attention. In his three-nation comparison, Bruce Headey refers to it as a 'success story' without parallel anywhere in the world (Headey, 1978: 16), and evidence that a Social Democratic government can pursue a socialisf policy without doing away with private ownership of the means of production. Sweden is the only example of a country where a 'socialist housing market' has developed (Headey, 1978: 66). As politically responsible for this 'phenomenally successful' policy, the Social Democratic party has headed a coalition including the tenants' movement, construction workers, housing cooperatives and other organizations close to the party (Headey, 1978: 44). Headey sees the essence of the Swedish housing achievement as: The supply of a sufficient stock of good quality, well equipped dwellings at a cost which everyone can afford. Lower income groups and groups with special needspensioners, the handicapped, students, unmarried parentsare well catered for. A wide range of housing opportunities is now available. Thus most people have a genuine choice over where and what sort of neighbourhood to live in and, increasingly, whether or not to become owneroccupiers. The quality of neighbourhoods and land use planningamenities, services, access to city centres and rural beauty areasare excellent (Headey, 1978: 92-93). * To eliminate the housing shortage * To raise space and equipment standard * To keep down rent levels * To encourage public housing * To integrate local authorities in housing activities, and * To discourage speculative building. (Cf., Headey, 1978: 77). By the end of the Million Dwellings Programme 1965-74 these goals had, by and large, been successfully implemented. However, there were still differences between different tenures and segregation began to make itself felt as a policy
Special Issue: Social Policy and Housing: Insights from Europe and Greece
Social Policy, 2021
The academic journal Social Policy (Koinoniki Politiki), published since 2013 by the Hellenic Social Policy Association (EEKP) with the support of Topos Publications, seeks to contribute to the promotion of scholarly study and research into social inequalities and the ways in which they can be tackled. This effort is carried out entirely on a voluntary basis, underlining the commitment of EEKP to serving the above purposes. In this 14th issue, the Board of Directors of EEKP, on the initiative of its President, Associate Professor Costas Dimoulas, invited me to be the guest editor of a special issue on social policy and housing. As part of our effort to strengthen the outward-looking character and the international presence of Koinoniki Politiki, we have invited some of the most important scholars on housing studies in Europe and Greece to contribute to this issue. It is a great honor and a joy for our Journal that such internationally renowned academics have accepted our invitation to contribute to this special issue. Housing and Social Policy The theme of this special issue is social policy and housing inequalities in the European and Greek experience. Housing is an important field of social intervention. It is no coincidence that since the birth of social policy as an academic subject, housing has been one of its five main areas along with social security, health, education and personal care services (Hall, 1952). Access to decent housing is a non-negotiable condition for ensuring social participation and welfare. It is the springboard for meeting a number of important human needs, such as protection from natural and social hazards, health, the storage and use of basic material goods, personal hygiene, work, and the enjoyment of privacy and social relationships. (Clapham et al., 1990). The importance of the home as a good for people's dignified living is of great significance (O'Sullivan, 2020). However, housing stock in modern capitalist societies is produced and distributed primarily through market mechanisms (Harloe, 1995). It is this contradiction that makes housing a wobbly pillar under the welfare state (Torgensen, 1987). Other scholars comment
The solution or part of the problem?: Social housing in transition. The Danish case
2007
The position of social housing is currently changing in many European countries. In this connection this paper describes Denmark's social housing provision, and analyses recent developments in Danish social and affordable housing. Social housing has retained its formal position in the housing system, despite remarkable changes in who is served and its current inability to deliver affordable housing in pressure areas. The paper discusses how political and other stakeholders are approaching the housing issue, and how commentators are thinking about the future. It evaluates recent developments in the plan to build 5000 new affordable housing units in Copenhagen (in fulfilment of the mayor's electoral promise). Questions: • Why has housing become a 'no-go' area for politicians? • Who lives in social housing now, compared to ten (?) years ago? • Why is (new?) social housing unavailable in pressure areas like Copenhagen? • What is Danish tenant democracy, and is it worth protecting? • Why can't housing associations provide the cheap homes that politicians want? • What is the argument for new affordable homes in Copenhagen?