120 likes | 239 Views
Public, Private and Social Housing in Post-crisis East Asia. Richard Ronald r.ronald@uva.nl Urban Studies University of Amsterdam. Different Housing Pathways. European social housing problematised , stigmatized and residualised since 1980s
E N D
Public, Private and Social Housing in Post-crisis East Asia Richard Ronald r.ronald@uva.nl Urban Studies University of Amsterdam
Different Housing Pathways • European social housing problematised, stigmatized and residualised since 1980s • Transformation of housing associations into self financing, market facing social enterprises • Public housing provision (of a more social nature) revitalized in East Asia since 1998 (especially after 2008) • But why is policy socializing and how manifesting differently in each country?
The Origins of Housing Policy • Colonial legacies, the presence of China and the desire to ‘catch up’ • Policy goals under ‘Developmental’ States • shaped public housing policy: house workers, extend urban infrastructure, realise potential land values, sustain employment & rapid growth • Housing policy in ‘Productivist’ regimes • welfare state expansion either sacrificed or focused on economic objectives (Holliday 2000; Kwon, 2005) • Deep Interventions: Public housing rather than Social housing: • commodified (Private) rather than de-commodifying (Doling 1999, Groves et al 2007)
Examples: Singapore & Hong Kong • Singapore (HDB) • Owner-occupied 29% to 92% (1970-2002) • Public sector 83%+ of all housing • CPF circuits of capital • Regulated second hand market • Hong Kong (HKHA) • Public rental build & slum clearance 1970s • Keeping wages low and welfare state small through public housing (Castells et al,1990) • Shift to HOS policies in 1980s and 90s • In 2009 29% Public rental, 16% public HOS • Public Housing policy as main Pillar of Welfare, Urban & Economic Policy • Comparable approaches: Japan (1950s & 60s) Taiwan (70s-90s), China (90s-2000s)
Asian Financial Crisis! • Watershed moment in East Asian socioeconomic pathway • End of rapid growth, high/full employment era • Undermined asset and real estate values • Tested security and adequacy of welfare measures
The New Policy Landscape • New role of developmental state in slower growth era (Kharas & Gill 2009) • Ongoing processes of neoliberalization • Socioeconomic polarization (kakusa shakai) • Democratization and intensified political contestation • Era of in-affordability & house price volatility • The state as competent housing provider
Taiwan – new social housing • Long term promotion of home ownership (67% to 82%,1976-2000) • Less than 0.8% public rental housing • Two major periods of house price inflation in 1987-1990 and 2005+ • Snails without Shells - The Social Housing Promotion Alliance • Late-2010 New luxury tax on quick sales of 2nd homes (Chen 2011) • 5 new social rental housing projects
South Korea’s Hybrid social housing sector • Supply focus: 10.7 million housing units constructed 1989-2007 • 1970s short term lets; Permanent public housing program (1989) Fixed-tenure rental (5-, 10-, 30- & 50-year) 1990 and 2000s • 1998-2008 (Kim & Roh) Market reforms and one million new social housing program - shortage over but rising housing market inequalities • 2008 Bogeumjari program: 1.5 million units - 53% rental 47% subsidized purchase • Public rental housing <7.5% of housing 2000; 9.7% 2008, expected 12%+ by 2018
Social and Affordable Housing in China • Post-1980 economic reform led by housing market reform (urban H.O. grows 18%-82% 1980-2004) • Work Unit Housing abolished (1998) for commercial housing; affordable housing; government assisted rental • Uneven public measures & house price inflation = housing market polarisation & economic instability • The ‘comfortable society’ making access to quality dwelling a universal ‘basic housing right’ • New housing policy implementation framework; spending 1% GDP on affordable housing by 2020
New DirectionsThe end of an era and the beginning of the next • Changes in Singapore, Hong Kong and Japan? • Demographic and family change; New political, democratic and socioeconomic context • Capacity and demand to expand public provision • Building new social housing models or adapting the market to serve emerging developmentalism • Lessons for Europe? tapping housing wealth; failed Asset based welfare (Doling and Ronald 2010, 2011, Ronald and Doling 2010, 2012)