Dear Anja: 

In this link http://www.pmhb.org/repdoc/66993-20161216104937.pdf you will find the study “Compared housing policies” made by the Barcelona city Council in their series Qüestions d’Habitatge. Unfortunatelly is in Spanish, but if you have the possibility to translate it, you will find very interesting the chapter Housing policies in the EU: the latest developments (page 25) and, overall chapter Models of municipal housing policy in Europe and America (page 31) that compares the cases of Paris (France), Bogotá (Colombia), Amsterdam (Netherlands), Berlin (Germany), United Kingdom and New York (USA).

In addition, in our Master's degree in Urban Management and Valuation website; http://www.upc.edu/cpsv/tesisMaster.htm you will find some master theses related to the subject that interests you, for example La vivienda social en el Perú. Evaluación de las políticas y programas sobre vivienda de interés social. Caso de estudio: Programa “Techo Propio” (http://hdl.handle.net/2117/87782), Análisis y diagnóstico de nuevas políticas de vivienda social en Ecuador. Contraste con la experiencia de Ámsterdam (Paises Bajos) (http://hdl.handle.net/2117/77823), Una aproximación a las políticas de vivienda y la mixtura social en Barcelona. Hacia el desarrollo de una metodología de evaluación de la vivienda social (http://hdl.handle.net/2099.1/17739) and Avaluació de les polítiques de promoció pública d'habitatge protegit segons règim de tinença al municipi de Barcelona, 2007-2012 (http://hdl.handle.net/2099.1/19972), between others.

I hope help you with the information.

Best regards.

Rolando.

Dear Anja:

I didn’t remember, but you could try to read this article: Mayo, S. K. (1995), The housing indicators program: A model for evaluation research and policy analysis? In New Directions for Evaluation, 1995: 119-131. doi:10.1002/ev.1010

Best regards.

Rolando.

Dear Rolando, thank you very much for your recommendations, this helps a lot! (and is a good reason to learn Spanish).

Best,

Anja

It might help if you were to sharpen your question a bit. I do not know what financialization of housing means. Does it refer to securitization of mortgages. How about new mortgage instruments? Maybe it refers to public sector finance or insurance or guarantees. Maybe I am barking up the wrong tree. Could it refer to equity finance?

Dear Peter, thank you for you answer! 

My paper builds on the definition by Epstein (2005), whereas financialization refers to: “the increasing dominance of financial actors, markets, practices, measurements and narratives, at various scales, resulting in a structural transformation of economies, firms (including financial institutions), states and households” (Aalbers, 2017). It focuses on credit scoring and securitization, broader access to mortgage loans and private equity funds buying up subsidized rental housing or social landlords (Fernandez, 2017,p.2). It efers to the specific mechanisms through which otherwise opaque, place-based commodities have been transformed increasingly into financial assets tradable in the global market and also considers the role of the state as a key agent (Izar, 2014).

My interpretation of this is that securitization is the issue. I would recommend that you study the US experience. Most analysts think that securitization was the solution to the S&L crisis. However, there are differing views of the role of securitization in the 2008 disaster. In my view, securitization was not at the heart of the disaster. However, there are others who strongly disagree. Instead, I believe that the role of government agencies and quasi-government institutions were at fault for creating instruments that were not, let's say, robust. High loan to value ratios are subject to extreme default risk. At the same time, you will have no trouble in finding others with opposing views.