What are examples of housing policy programmes that have worked effectively and have significantly increased the availability of housing for citizens, including young people starting families?
In many countries, specific housing programmes have been designed and implemented or attempted to be implemented with varying results, which consisted of activating and subsidising, within the framework of government financial support programmes, investments in the construction of flats, housing estates, houses, etc. The aim of such programmes is primarily to reduce the scale of the housing gap in society by increasing the number of flats and residential houses in the country, increasing to a large extent the availability of housing for citizens, including young people starting families. Besides, in connection with the fact that the construction sector is one of the key cyclical sectors in the economy, so among the key objectives of introducing such programmes within the framework of the government's housing policy is also the activation of economic processes through the creation of an additional economic growth activator, which can also be an important anti-crisis factor in the economy during the forecasted and ongoing economic downturn caused, for example, by international factors, the global economic crisis affecting the open economy. Unfortunately, not all such housing policies have worked effectively. For example, in the country where I operate such a housing policy programme, whose official strategic goal was to counteract the high housing deficit in the country in the face of social needs, was to be the Housing Plus Programme, the implementation of which was started by the PIS government from 2016, i.e. immediately after winning the parliamentary elections. This programme, alongside the social programme Family 500 Plus, was one of the key election slogans before the parliamentary elections held in autumn 2015, which the organised PIS political group won and thanks to which the PIS government, which has been in power for almost 8 years, was formed. Unfortunately, despite the passage of two parliamentary terms and the governments in power, the housing programme announced in the 2015 election campaign has not been implemented on the announced scale. In view of the above, the social and housing current goals of the Housing Plus Programme have only been realised by a few per cent relative to the original plan, the strategic goal of significantly reducing the housing deficit gap has not been realised. In fact, only the political objective of this housing policy programme, i.e. winning the parliamentary elections in 2015 and the local elections held in the following years, has been fully realised.
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:
What are some examples of housing policy programmes that have worked effectively and have significantly increased the availability of housing for citizens, including young people starting families?
And what is your opinion on this?
What is your opinion on this subject?
Please respond,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Best regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
I don't think that there are any that have increased the availability on net. There are some that increase availability in some corner of the market, but then there is crowding out in other corners of the market.
Let me share with you in terms of Malaysia's effort to help its citizen to own a house. There have been several housing policy programs in Malaysia that have proven to be effective in increasing the availability of housing for citizens, particularly young people starting families. Here are some examples:
These housing policy programs have helped to address the issue of affordable housing in Malaysia and have significantly increased the availability of housing for citizens, including young people starting families.
Dariusz,
Housing policy programs have been implemented worldwide to increase housing availability for citizens. These programs have been developed to address various issues related to housing, including affordability, quality, and accessibility. Examples of programs that have significantly impacted housing availability include public housing initiatives, rent control regulations, and housing vouchers. Public housing initiatives are government-funded programs designed to increase the availability of affordable housing for citizens. These initiatives provide subsidies to low-income households and can take the form of public housing projects, low-income housing tax credits, and other rent subsidies. Public housing initiatives have successfully increased availability for those in need, particularly in areas with high housing costs. For example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in the United States has implemented public housing initiatives that have provided more than 1 million low-income households with affordable housing (HUD, 2021). Rent control regulations are another example of a housing policy program that has significantly impacted the availability of accommodation. Rent control regulations limit how much rent landlords can charge their tenants. These laws protect tenants from high rental prices and increase affordable housing availability. Rent control regulations have been implemented in many countries, including the United States, and have increased housing availability in high-rent areas. For example, in the United States, rent control regulations have been credited with increasing the availability of affordable housing in many regions (Rent Control, 2021). Housing vouchers are another housing policy program that has significantly impacted housing availability. Housing vouchers are subsidies provided to low-income households that enable them to pay for housing in the private market. These vouchers are offered by government agencies and can be used to offset the cost of rent or mortgage payments. Housing vouchers have successfully increased housing availability for lower-income households and have been credited with reducing housing costs in many areas (Housing Vouchers, 2021). Housing policy programs have successfully increased the availability of housing for citizens. Examples of programs that have significantly impacted housing availability include public housing initiatives, rent control regulations, and housing vouchers. These programs have successfully increased the availability of affordable housing and reduced housing costs in many areas.
References:
Housing Vouchers. (2021). U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Retrieved from https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv HUD. (2021). Public housing. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Retrieved from https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph Rent Control. (2021). National Multifamily Housing Council. Retrieved from https://www.nmhc.org/rental-housing-basics/regulation/rent-control/
Dear Dariusz Prokopowicz
Very pertinent and relevant your research and your questions. Firstly, I do not believe that the question is about effectiveness, since, when something exists in the real world, it already produces effects, therefore it is effective. I believe that we should focus on the efficiency and effectiveness of the programs, that is, do they actually produce the expected effects?
To give an example of this, see the Brazilian case, in Brazil each year thousands of popular houses are delivered from a program called “Minha Casa, Minha Vida (My home, my life)” is the largest Brazilian housing policy program, and in fact, reduces the housing decifit, however , other decifits are produced, such as spatial segregation, environmental issues, distance between urban centers among other issues, so you can ask, is there efficiency? Under what point?
From the point of view of housing, yes, but from the point of view of location, security, social welfare, then it would have to be something more focal.
I also suggest a very important work, by a Brazilian author who was UN-habitat rapporteur on housing programs, the name of the work is Guerra dos Lugares (war of places), Raquel Rolnik.
Hope this helps!
Sincerely, Felipe Dias.
The first issue is WHY housing in a particular place is "unavailable." Every market is different.
In some cases, there might be sufficient housing supply, but some people might lack "effective demand." In other words, they lack the income to pay housing costs. For example, in Rust Belt cities in the United States, housing prices are often very low. Large homes can be purchased more cheaply than one-bedroom condos in New York City. BUT, if you're unemployed in a Rust Belt city (as many are), even a cheap home can be unaffordable.
In other cases, there might not be sufficient supply. For example, in Silicon Valley in California, many households are affluent (making six-figure incomes). Yet, many of these households have difficulty finding decent affordable housing.
Policies that might be effective in increasing effective demand (housing vouchers or other subsidies to households) might be ineffective if the problem is constrained supply. In such a case, housing subsidies would simply exacerbate inflation in housing prices. On the other hand, increasing housing supply in a place that has ample supply (including many vacant homes) might be ineffective if the problem is unemployment and a lack of income.
One policy has proven effective in addressing both demand-side and supply-side problems is transforming the traditional property tax into an infrastructure access fee. This is accomplished by reducing the tax rate applied to privately-created building values while increasing the tax rate applied to publicly-created land values. The lower rate on buildings makes them cheaper to construct, improve and maintain. This lowers space costs for residents and businesses alike. Surprisingly, the higher rate applied to land values helps keep land prices more affordable by reducing profits from land speculation. As a bonus, the higher rate on land encourages development of high-value sites -- typically infill sites near existing urban infrastructure amenities. Increassing infill development reduces development pressure at the urban fringe, reducing sprawl.
This policy, combining lower rates of tax on building values with higher rates of tax on land values, increases housing supply. And, by reducing space costs and encouraging construction, improvement and maintenance activities, it stimulates employment, increasing incomes as well. Thus, without new spending or any loss of revenue, this TAX SHIFT can make both buildings and land more affordable while reducing urban sprawl and increasing employment.
For more info, see https://www.shareable.net/land-value-return-and-building-a-more-equitable-economy/ .
Afterall ,There are some that increase availability in some corner of the market, but then there is crowding out in other corners of the market.
In some cases, there might be sufficient housing supply, but some people might lack "effective demand." In other words, they lack the income to pay housing costs. For example, in Rust Belt cities in the United States, housing prices are often very low. Large homes can be purchased more cheaply than one-bedroom condos in New York City. BUT, if you're unemployed in a Rust Belt city (as many are), even a cheap home can be unaffordable.
In other cases, there might not be sufficient supply. For example, in Silicon Valley in California, many households are affluent (making six-figure incomes). Yet, many of these households have difficulty finding decent affordable housing.
Policies that might be effective in increasing effective demand (housing vouchers or other subsidies to households) might be ineffective if the problem is constrained supply. In such a case, housing subsidies would simply exacerbate inflation in housing prices. On the other hand, increasing housing supply in a place that has ample supply (including many vacant homes) might be ineffective if the problem is unemployment and a lack of income.
The problem with increasing supply is that, in many if not most cities, codes, building and housing codes, prevent the provision of housing at the right scale. So, what crops up is illegal tent cities or worse. Drug addicts and the insane do not want to go into shelters for obvious reasons. Shelters are dangerous places. The configuration of shelters needs to be rethought. The cost of legal housing must be brought down by rethinking codes.
These initiatives provide subsidies to low-income households and can take the form of public housing projects, low-income housing tax credits, and other rent subsidies. Public housing initiatives have successfully increased availability for those in need, particularly in areas with high housing costs. For example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in the United States has implemented public housing initiatives that have provided more than 1 million low-income households with affordable housing (HUD, 2021). Rent control regulations are another example of a housing policy program that has significantly impacted the availability of accommodation
There are many housing policy programs that have significantly increased the availability of housing for citizens. One example is social housing. Social housing is an important dimension of social welfare policy and affordable housing provision, representing more than 28 million dwellings and about 6% of the total housing stock in OECD and non-OECD EU countries.
There are many housing policy programs that have significantly increased the availability of housing for citizens. One example is social housing. Social housing is an important dimension of social welfare policy and affordable housing provision, representing more than 28 million dwellings and about 6% of the total housing stock in OECD and non-OECD EU countries.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Esthetics
- Interpretation