Advertisement

Private Renting in Social Provision: Initiatives in Transition Countries

  • József Hegedüs
  • Vera Horváth
  • Eszter Somogyi
Chapter

Abstract

Regime changes in Central and Eastern Europe in 1989-90 were quickly followed by the massive privatization of formerly state owned housing. As the expansion of the private rental sector did not pick up for a long period, many transition countries ended up as ‘super home-ownership’ societies, where a significant share of low-income households found themselves excluded from social housing due to its scarcity. As social rental housing stocks have little chance of being significantly expanded in the near future, utilizing privately owned housing in affordable housing provision seems inevitable in the CEE region. The chapter takes a look at initiatives launched by central governments, local authorities and civil society organisations in transition countries to assess the possibility of involving private resources in affordable housing provision.

References

  1. Balchin, P. (1996). Introduction to housing in transition. In P. Balchin (Ed.), Housing policy in Europe (pp. 231–243). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bejan, I., Botonogu, F., & Armasu, I. (2014). National report for Romania. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  3. Buckley, R., & Tsenkova, S. (2003). Housing reforms and market performance. In S. Lowe & S. Tsenkova (Eds.), Housing change in East and Central Europe: Integration or fragmentation? (pp. xii–xix). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  4. Busch-Geertsema, V. (2014). Housing first Europe—Results of a European social experimentation project. European Journal of Homelessness, 8(1), 13–28.Google Scholar
  5. Červeňová, L. (2005). The development of the non-profit housing sector in Slovakia. FGW – Forschungsgesellschaft für Wohnen, Bauen und Planen. Retrieved December 20, 2016, from http://www.fgw.at/publikationen/pdf/05/2005-3_4-cervenova.pdf
  6. Clapham, D., & Kintrea, K. (1996). Analyzing housing privatization. In D. Clapham, J. Hegedüs, K. Kintrea, & I. Tosics, with H. Kay (Eds.), Housing privatization in Eastern Europe (pp. 1–14). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  7. Drofenik, M. (2015): Intra-team comparison report for Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  8. Dübel, H. J., Brzeski, W. J., & Hamilton, E. (2006). Rental choice and housing policy realignment in transition: Post-privatization challenges in the Europe and Central Asia Region. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3884. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  9. Erdősi, S., Hegedüs, J., & Somogyi, E. (2000). Is private rental an option for urban housing provision in Hungary? Journal of Housing and Built Environment, 15(3), 267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. FEANSTA. (2015). The EU needs stable and inclusive housing markets. Policy statement.Google Scholar
  11. Fehér, B., & Balogi, A. (2013). From the forest to housing: Challenges faced by former rough sleepers in the private rental market in Hungary. European Journal of Homelessness, 7(2), 63–83.Google Scholar
  12. Filipovič Hrast, M. (2008). Media representations of homelessness and the link to (effective) policies: The case of Slovenia. European Journal of Homelessness, 2, 115–137.Google Scholar
  13. Filipovič Hrast, M. (2014). Scaling up housing first in Europe. European Journal of Homelessness, 8(2), 255–259.Google Scholar
  14. Filipovič Hrast, M. (2015). Innovative rental solutions in Slovenia. Manuscript.Google Scholar
  15. Hegedüs, J. (2013a). Housing privatization and restitution. In J. Hegedüs, M. Lux, & N. Teller (Eds.), Social housing in transition countries (pp. 33–49). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Hegedüs, J. (2013b). The transformation of the social housing sector in Eastern Europe: A conceptual framework. In J. Hegedüs, M. Lux, & N. Teller (Eds.), Social housing in transition countries (pp. 3–32). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Hegedüs, J. (2013c). Development of social housing in Visegrad4 countries—Options for social rental agencies. Social housing in the context of the rental sector in Visegrad countries, Habitat for Humanity Hungary.Google Scholar
  18. Hegedüs, J., & Horváth, V. (2015). Intra-team comparison report for Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  19. Hegedüs, J., & Teller, N. (2013). Social landlords and social housing management. In J. Hegedüs, M. Lux, & N. Teller (Eds.), Social housing in transition countries (pp. 81–97). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Housing Europe. (2011). Housing Europe Review 2012—The nuts and bolts of European social housing systems. CECODHAS Housing Europe’s Observatory, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
  21. Hussar, A. (2013). Overview of the regulation and the management of housing policies (Opportunities to use private rental stock for social purpose?) Estonia. Presentation held at the conference ‘Emerging Private Rental Sector in Accession and Transition Countries: Is there an Option for Social Rental Agencies?’ Budapest, Hungary, 12–14 September.Google Scholar
  22. Hussar, A. (2014). National report for Estonia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved January 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  23. Hussar, A. (2015). Intra-team comparison report for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  24. Jakopič, A., & Žnidarec, M. (2014). National report for Croatia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  25. Lindovská, E. (2014). Homelessness coping strategies from housing ready and housing first perspectives. European Journal of Homelessness, 1(2008), 97–115.Google Scholar
  26. Lowe, S. (2003). Introduction: Housing in post-communist Europe—Issues and agendas. In S. Lowe & S. Tsenkova (Eds.), Housing change in East and Central Europe: Integration or fragmentation? (pp. 3–20). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Lux, M. (2014). Milestones in the development and implementation of a governmental strategy on homelessness in the Czech Republic. European Journal of Homelessness, 8(2), 95–118.Google Scholar
  28. Lux, M., & Sunega, P. (2013). New social housing strategies in post-socialist states: Effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. In J. Hegedüs, M. Lux, & N. Teller (Eds.), Social housing in transition countries (pp. 307–330). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Ministry of Labour. (2015). Social affairs and the family of the Slovak Republic. State housing policy concept to 2020. Retrieved January 14, 2017, from https://www.employment.gov.sk/files/ksbp_en_final_version.pdf
  30. Muzioł-Węcławowicz, A. (2013a). Social housing in Poland: “Old problems and new dilemmas”. In J. Hegedüs, M. Lux, & N. Teller (Eds.), Social housing in transition countries (pp. 195–2011). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Muzioł-Węcławowicz, A. (2013b). Poland: ‘Regulations in the area of apartment tenancy and perspectives of rental housing development’. Social housing in the context of the rental sector in Visegrad countries, Habitat for Humanity Hungary. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.mri.hu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/V4_booklet_20131018.pdf
  32. OECD. (2013). Coping with emigration in Baltic and East European countries. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264204928-en.Google Scholar
  33. Panek, G. (2014). National report for Poland. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  34. Panek, G. (2015). Intra-team comparison report for Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  35. Petrović, T. (2014a). National report for Slovenia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  36. Petrović, T. (2014b). National report for Serbia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/
  37. Puzanov, A. (2015). Authors’ questionnaire: Private renting under socialism; Risk management in private renting; Innovative housing solutions using PRS for affordable housing provision. Manuscript.Google Scholar
  38. Robert, A. (2003). Privatization and rent deregulation in Eastern Europe. In S. Lowe & S. Tsenkova (Eds.), Housing change in East and Central Europe: Integration or fragmentation? (pp. 45–62). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  39. Šoštarić, M. (2013). Homelessness in the Republic of Croatia: A review of the social welfare system for homeless people. European Journal of Homelessness, 7(2), 287–300.Google Scholar
  40. Štefanko, J. (2014). National report for Slovakia. TENLAW: Tenancy law and housing policy in multi-level Europe. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.tenlaw.uni-bremen.de/

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • József Hegedüs
    • 1
  • Vera Horváth
    • 1
  • Eszter Somogyi
    • 1
  1. 1.Metropolitan Research InstituteBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations