Slovenia: Untapped Potential

  • Richard Sendi


Having been ignored by state housing policy throughout the post-Second World War period of communist rule, there were high expectations that the private rented sector (PRS) would finally be recognised as an essential housing tenure after the adoption of a market economy system in the early 1990s. A quarter of a century later, the PRS continues to operate in Slovenia informally, mostly as a ‘black market’ activity. It is argued in this chapter that the sector has the potential to play a significant role in the provision of alternative categories of housing, other than the currently dominant home-ownership tenure. It is stressed that the state needs to urgently recognise the importance of the PRS and implement the necessary reform policies.


  1. Cirman, A. (2006). Housing tenure preferences in the post-privatisation period: The case of Slovenia. Housing Studies, 21(1), 113–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Drofenik, M. (2015). Intra-team comparison report for Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe.
  3. Mandič, S., & Hrast, M. F. (2002). Stanovanjske študije. Ljubljana: Znanstvena knjižnica, Fakulteta za družbene vede.Google Scholar
  4. Marinšek, E., et al. (1983). Financiranje družbeno usmerjene stanovanjske gradnje. Ljubljana: Urbanistični inštitut Republike Slovenije.Google Scholar
  5. Ministry of the Environment and Physical Planning. (2000). The national housing policy. Ljubljana: Government Printers.Google Scholar
  6. Petrović, T. (2014). National report for Slovenia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe.
  7. Sendi, R. (1995). Housing reform and housing conflict: The privatisation and denationalisation of public housing in the Republic of Slovenia in practice. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19, 435–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sendi, R. (1999). Private rented housing in Slovenia: A non-existent housing sector? Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 14(3), 309–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sendi, R. (2003). An emerging private rental market in Ljubljana. In S. Lowe & S. Tsenkova (Eds.), Housing change in East and Central Europe. Integration or fragmentation? (pp. 155–169). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  10. Sendi, R. (2009). Slovenia: Management of privatised housing. In V. Gruis, S. Tsenkova, & N. Nieboer (Eds.), Management of privatised housing: Internal policies and practice (pp. 229–255). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sendi, R., & Černič Mali, B. (2015). Surviving in Limbo: An insight into Slovenia’s informal private rented housing sector. Theoretical and Empirical Research in Urban Management, 10(4), 19–39.Google Scholar
  12. Sendi, R., Mandič, S., Filipovič, M., & Cirman, A. (2007). Stanovanjska reforma: pričakovanja, potrebe, realizacija. Zbirka Urbani izziv. Ljubljana: Urbanistični inštitut Republike Slovenije.Google Scholar
  13. Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia. (2013). People, families dwellings. Registrski popis 2011. Ljubljana.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Sendi
    • 1
  1. 1.Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of SloveniaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations