复制成功
  • 图案背景
  • 纯色背景
  •   |  注册
  • /
  • 网上书库

    上传于:2014-07-20

    粉丝量:669

    上传资料均来自于互联网,若有侵权,立刻通知删除。

    

    Management of Privatised Social Housing International Policies and Practice (rep.

    下载积分:1500

    内容提示: Gruis_C000.indd ii1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM Management of Privatised HousingGruis_C000.indd i1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM Gruis_C000.indd ii1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM Management of Privatised HousingInternational Policies & PracticeEdited byVincent GruisDepartment of Real Estate and HousingDelft University of TechnologyThe NetherlandsSasha TsenkovaFaculty of Environmental DesignUniversity of CalgaryCanadaNico NieboerOTB Research Institute for Housing Urban and Mobility StudiesDelft University of TechnologyTh...

    威廉希尔app下载格式:PDF| 浏览次数:1| 上传日期:2014-07-20 11:28:45| 威廉希尔app下载星级:
    Gruis_C000.indd ii1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM Management of Privatised HousingGruis_C000.indd i1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM Gruis_C000.indd ii1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM Management of Privatised HousingInternational Policies & PracticeEdited byVincent GruisDepartment of Real Estate and HousingDelft University of TechnologyThe NetherlandsSasha TsenkovaFaculty of Environmental DesignUniversity of CalgaryCanadaNico NieboerOTB Research Institute for Housing Urban and Mobility StudiesDelft University of TechnologyThe NetherlandsGruis_C000.indd iii1/28/2009 8:59:45 AM This edition fi rst published 2009© 2009 by Blackwell Publishing LtdBlackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing programme has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientifi c, Technical, and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell.Registered offi ceJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United KingdomEditorial offi ces9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, United Kingdom2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USAFor details of our global editorial offi ces, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.The right of the author to be identifi ed as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataManagement of privatised housing: international policies & practice / edited by Vincent Gruis, Sasha Tsenkova, Nico Nieboer. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4051-8188-4 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Public housing. 2. Privatization. 3. Housing management. 4. Housing policy. I. Gruis, Vincent. II. Tsenkova, S. III. Nieboer, Nico. HD7288.77.M35 2009 363.5068—dc22 2008039853A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.Set in 10/13pt TrumpMediaeval by Newgen Imaging Systems (P) Ltd, ChennaiPrinted in Malaysia1 2009Gruis_C000.indd iv1/28/2009 8:59:46 AM Gruis_C000.indd v1/28/2009 8:59:46 AM Books in the seriesGreenfi elds, Brownfi elds & Housing DevelopmentAdams & Watkins978 0 632 0063871Planning, Public Policy & Property MarketsEdited by Adams, Watkins & White9781405124300Housing & Welfare in Southern EuropeAllen, Barlow, Léal, Maloutas & Padovani9781405103077Markets and Institutions in Real Estate & ConstructionBall978140510990Neighbourhood Renewal and Housing MarketsEdited by Beider9781405134101Mortgage Markets WorldwideBen-Shahar, Leung & Ong9781405132107The Cost of Land Use DecisionsBuitelaar9781405151238Urban Regeneration in EuropeCouch, Fraser & Percy9780632058412Urban SprawlCouch, Leontidou & Petschel-Held9781405151238Real Estate & the New EconomyDixon, McAllister, Marston & Snow9781405117784Economics & Land Use PlanningEvans9781405118613Economics, Real Estate & the Supply of LandEvans9781405118620Development & DevelopersGuy & Henneberry9780632058426The Right to BuyJones & Murie9781405131971Economics of the Mortgage MarketLeece9781405114615Housing Economics & Public PolicyO’Sullivan & Gibb9780632064618Mortgage Markets WorldwideBen-Shahar, Ong & Leung9781405132107International Real EstateSeabrooke, Kent & How9781405103084British HousebuildersWellings9781405149181ForthcomingBuilding Cycles & Urban DevelopmentBarras9781405130011Transforming the Private LandlordCrook & Kemp9781405184151Housing Markets & Planning PolicyJones & Watkins9781405175203Towers of Capital: offi ce markets & International fi nancial servicesLizieri9781405156721Affordable Housing & the Property MarketMonk & Whitehead9781405147149Property Investment & FinanceNewell & Sieracki9781405151283Housing Stock TransferTaylor9781405170321Real Estate Finance in the New Economic WorldTiwari & White9781405158718Gruis_C000.indd vi1/28/2009 8:59:46 AM ContentsPreface Contributors xixiiiIntroduction Vincent Gruis, Sasha Tsenkova and Nico NieboerScope and aim of the book Developments and challenges in former communist countries Developments and challenges in Western Europe and Australia Approach of the book Notes References 1 1138131616Australia Vivienne Milligan and Bill RandolphThe Australian housing context Privatisation of housing in Australia Case study Conclusion Notes References 1 2 9192529384041France Frédéric BougrainThe French housing context Privatisation of housing in France Case study Conclusion Notes References 4 3 4444852555758The Netherlands Jos Smeets, Patrick Dogge, Rob Soeterboek and Sasha TsenkovaThe Dutch housing context Privatisation of housing in The Netherlands Case study Conclusion Acknowledgement Notes References 6 4 060646878808080Gruis_C000.indd vii1/28/2009 8:59:46 AM viii Contents United Kingdom Alan Murie and David OusbyThe UK housing context Privatisation of housing in the UK Case study Conclusion Notes References 8 5 3838698103105106Switzerland Joris E. van WezemaelThe Swiss housing context Privatisation of housing in Switzerland Case study Conclusion Acknowledgement Notes References 10 6 7107111117124126127127China Chen LimeiThe Chinese housing context Privatisation of housing in China Case study Conclusion Notes References 13 7 0130132138143146146The Czech Republic Martin LuxThe Czech housing context Privatisation of housing in the Czech Republic Case study Conclusion References 14 8 9149157164169172MoldovaSasha TsenkovaThe Moldovan housing context Privatization of housing in Moldova Case study Conclusion Notes References 9 173173178182187191191Gruis_C000.indd viii1/28/2009 8:59:46 AM Contents ixRussia Maria PlotnikovaThe Russian housing context Privatisation of housing in Russia Case study Conclusion Suggestions to improve management by HOAs References 1910 3193195205206207209Serbia Djordje MojovicThe Serbian housing context Privatisation of housing in Serbia Case study Conclusion Acknowledgement Notes References 2111 1211215220224226226227Slovenia Richard SendiThe Slovenian housing context Privatisation of housing in Slovenia Case study Conclusion Notes References 2212 9229236240251255255Conclusion Vincent Gruis, Nico Nieboer and Sasha TsenkovaIntroduction Housing contexts and privatisation policies Approaches and challenges for the management of privatised housing Implications for policy Concluding remarks Note References 2513 7257258260278282283283Index 285Gruis_C000.indd ix1/28/2009 8:59:46 AM Gruis_C000.indd x1/28/2009 8:59:47 AM PrefaceSale of public and social housing has been a major aspect of housing policies in the past decades. The number of sold dwellings has risen enormously due to privatisation tendencies and governmental retreat from the housing area. This kind of privatisation has occurred most radically within Eastern European countries and China, but has also taken place within some Western European countries and Australia. In all countries, sale of (formerly) social dwellings has lead to new problems for housing management. As a result of the privatisation, many estates are now in a state of mixed public and pri-vate ownership, which raises questions about the division of between respective owners. Adequate legislation to deal with this is lacking. The public managers are sometimes hampered by the (still) bureaucratic mechanisms within their organisations, while the new are not used to being responsible for the maintenance of their dwellings. Furthermore, there are limited fi nancial resources for maintenance and renewal among public and private owners. At the same time, the need for investments is pressing, particularly within the massive housing estates dating from the Communist era. Thus, the management of privatised hous-ing is an important topic of international concern, which could benefi t from an international exchange of knowledge. Therefore, we decided to initi-ate an international comparative research project. Following our positive experience with the book Asset Management in the Social Rented Sector (Gruis and Nieboer, eds, 2004) we invited researchers within the European Network of Housing Research (ENHR) to contribute to the book experi-ences within their own countries. We formed a group of researchers within the ENHR working group ‘Housing Regeneration and Maintenance’ and we invited some other people through our personal networks to participate as well. The project was launched at the ENHR conference 2005. At the ENHR conference in 2006, we held a workshop during which the majority of the authors presented and discussed the draft chapters. Now, after several rounds of editing, the fi nal result is before you. We believe the book is a contribution to the international literature on this topic. We hope it is use-ful to all who are in some way involved in the management of privatised housing, that it provides a good basis for further research and that it helps to increase the attention of policy-makers for this diffi cult, but important matter of social concern. We gratefully acknowledge the fi nancial support of the University of Calgary Research Grant and the Delft University of Technology Research Center Sustainable Urban Areas for the preparation of the manuscript. Furthermore, we are very grateful to Blackwell for granting responsibilities situation owners signifi cant Gruis_C000.indd xi1/28/2009 8:59:47 AM xii Preface us the opportunity to publish the book in their series on Real Estate Issues and in particular to Lucy Alexander, Madeleine Metcalfe and the team at Newgen Imaging Systems (P) Ltd for guiding us through the publication process. We would also like to mention Jet Derksen who has done a lot of work on preparing the manuscript for publication. Finally, and foremost, we thank the authors for their contributions and for their patient willingness to react to our queries.Vincent Gruis, Sasha Tsenkova andNico NieboerGruis_C000.indd xii1/28/2009 8:59:47 AM ContributorsFrédéric BougrainCentre Scientifi que et Technique du Bâtiment, FrancePatrick DoggeTrudo Housing Association, The NetherlandsVincent GruisDelft University of Technology, The NetherlandsChen LimeiCity University of Hong Kong, ChinaMartin LuxInstitute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences, Czech RepublicVivienne MilliganUniversity of New South Wales, AustraliaAlan MurieUniversity of Birmingham, UKDjordje MojovicUN Habitat, SerbiaNico NieboerDelft University of Technology, The NetherlandsDavid OusbyProspect Row LLP, UKMaria PlotnikovaCentre for Public Policy for Regions, University of Reading, UKBill RandolphUniversity of New South Wales, AustraliaRichard SendiUrban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia, SloveniaJos SmeetsUniversity of Eindhoven, The NetherlandsRob SoeterbroekUniversity of Eindhoven, The NetherlandsSasha TsenkovaUniversity of Calgary, CanadaJoris E. van WezemaelUniversity of Zurich, SwitzerlandGruis_C000.indd xiii1/28/2009 8:59:47 AM Gruis_C000.indd xiv1/28/2009 8:59:47 AM 1IntroductionVincent Gruis, Sasha Tsenkova and Nico NieboerScope and aim of the bookThe later part of the twentieth century marks a turning point in both Eastern and Western European housing policies as well as in other continents. As, for example, Forrest and Lee (2003, p. 264) point out ‘Europe, Australasia and the USA were characterized by a receding involvement in public hous-ing and a general instability within different housing systems in the 1980s and this trend has continued through the 1990s and into the new century’.In former communist countries the transition to markets and democracy rapidly introduced market-based housing systems. The main instrument used to achieve this transformation was the massive privatisation of the public housing stock. Many of the public dwellings were sold (or in some cases almost given away) to the tenants, resulting in a rapid increase of hom-eownership in Eastern Europe (Tsenkova, 2000). This privatisation, how-ever, entailed new management problems. As a result of the privatisation, many estates are now in a state of mixed (public and private) ownership, which poses legal and fi nancial challenges with respect to the division of responsibilities between public and private owners (Lux, 2003). Both the public managers and the new owners often lack the fi nancial resources for maintenance and renewal (Tsenkova, 2005), while many socialist housing estates are of relatively poor quality and ageing rapidly.In Western European countries and in Australia, housing systems have been reformed due to neo-liberal developments characterised by deregula-tion, decentralisation and privatisation tendencies. Within the housing sec-tor, this has resulted in, among other things, the sale of public and social rented dwellings (Uitermark, 2003). Sale to households occurred most radi-cally in England where a large part of the local authorities’ housing stock Gruis_C001.indd 11/21/2009 12:55:33 PM 2 Management of Privatised Housing was sold to the tenants under the ‘Right to Buy’ (Jones and Murie, 1999). Sale of social rented dwellings has also occurred in The Netherlands and France, among other places, as a result of government policies to encourage hom-eownership. In Australia, the State Housing Authorities sell public rented dwellings in order to cope with overall fi nancial shortages, among other reasons (Larkin, 2000). Although the Western European institutional, legal, economic and cultural context for the management of privatised housing is much more favourable than in Eastern Europe, the management of privatised housing is not without problems (Bouwcentrum International, 2005). These challenges are often concerned with the fi nancial problems of former tenants of social rented housing and new owners; social confl icts between homeown-ers and tenants in partly privatised estates, and a lack of clarity and mutual understanding between landlords and homeowners about the management and maintenance of the estates (Murie, 1999; Jones and Murie, 2006).In summary, a signifi cant share of social rental housing has been priva-tised (sold to tenants) in many countries during the past decades (Forrest and Lee, 2003; Jones and Murie, 2006). The management of privatised estates with mixed ownership can pose various problems regarding property rights and the quality, organisation and fi nancing of maintenance and renewal (Jones and Murie, 1999, 2006). Thus, the management of privatised housing is an important topic of international concern, which could benefi t from an international exchange of knowledge. However, studies concerning pri-vatisation, and in particular its consequences for housing management, are scarce. Some books have been published that deal with the theme of housing privatisation, mostly in England and in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe (Forrest and Murie, 1984; Clapham et al., 1996; Struyk, 1996; Forrest and Lee, 2003; Lowe and Tsenkova, 2003; Jones and Murie, 2006). Publications on the transformation of the social rental housing sector and its effect on housing management in a comparative perspective usually focus on a particular country and address other aspects of housing policy reforms, such as privatisation and subsidies. Several recent publications from major presses have begun to fi ll this gap, including Gruis and Nieboer (2004) on housing management in the social rented sector and Turkington et al. (2004) focusing on problems within high-rise housing estates. However, none of these studies have an approach that explicitly explores housing management issues in estates with mixed ownership. This book aims to fi ll this gap and contribute to knowledge exchange about management of privatised housing. It focuses on the following central questions:Which sale/privatisation policies have been pursued by governments, and • public and private landlords?What approaches have been developed to deal with management in such • estates?Gruis_C001.indd 21/21/2009 12:55:34 PM Introduction 3Which management problems occur in (partly) privatised estates?• What differences and similarities can be found in approaches and prob-• lems between countries?The main part of this book consists of a number of country monographs about these problems and challenges, written by a group of researchers from Europe, Australia and China, each from the perspective of their own country. These monographs are preceded in this introduction by a general overview of the international developments and challenges in relation to the above questions, and an explanation of the approach to the research underlying the book. Naturally, comparative conclusions are drawn in the last chapter.Developments and challenges in former communist countriesIn Eastern Europe, the 1990s marked a departure from a ‘command system’ of housing provision, with deregulation of housing markets and privatisa-tion of public housing being the fl agship of the reform process. Privatisation of public housing has fuelled the expansion of homeownership, creating ‘nations of homeowners’ with levels of homeownership higher than 80% (Clapham et al., 1996; Tsenkova, 2000). In China, following Deng’s launch of the Four Modernisations in December 1978, there has been a process of ‘recommodifi cation’ of the housing market, including substantial privatisa-tion of the (urban) housing stock (e.g. Davis, 2003; Jones and Murie, 2006).In the context of the shift away from direct state intervention to market-based provision of housing services, new owners were expected to assume major responsibilities for housing maintenance and management. In recent years, East European countries have chosen different strategies to address major issues related to the management of privatised housing. Whereas these strategies have not been explored in a systematic manner, there seems to be a consensus that most countries face multiple challenges (Lux, 2003; Dubel et al., 2005; Tsenkova, 2005). First, a signifi cant share of the housing stock in the region is in the form of multi-apartment housing with sub-stantial needs for investment in technical improvements of engineering sys-tems and building envelopes (Bouwcentrum International, 2005)1. Second, the absence of effi cient intermediaries (condominiums and homeowners associations), along with the uncertain legal framework, makes it diffi cult to mobilise funds for routine investment in maintenance and renovation, leading to further deterioration of the stock. Third, affordability constraints faced by households and their strategies to cope with the escalating price of utilities reduce their ability to invest in maintenance and renovation Gruis_C001.indd 31/21/2009 12:55:34 PM 4 Management of Privatised Housing (Tsenkova, 2005). The cumulative impact has been a signifi cant decline in the quality of multi-family housing, particularly in the housing estates across the region.Housing privatisation strategies mainly differ with respect to the price at which dwellings were sold to existing tenants. They can be grouped into the following categories: voucher privatisation (Bosnia-Herzegovina), pri-vatisation free of charge (Albania, Moldova)2, and low-price privatisation (Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro). The extent of sales has varied considerably both within and between countries. The low-price strategy, typically at less than 15% of the real market value of the dwelling unit, has created a fl ood of sales. Privatisation progressed rapidly in Albania, Bulgaria, Moldova and Romania. Despite its late start in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Latvia, more than half of the socially-owned housing has been priva-tised. With regards to the size of ownership transformation since 1990, the ‘fore-runners’ are Albania, Croatia and Romania (see Figure 1.1). Out of 3.5 million public housing units in South East Europe, 2.8 million were pri-vatised to sitting tenants; most of these were in multi-apartment housing (Hegedüs and Teller, 2003).Pace of housing privatisationMass privatisation policies of public/state owned housing, mostly through transfer to sitting tenants (free of charge, through vouchers or sale at nomi-nal fee) have reduced the size of the sector signifi cantly (see Struyk, 1996). These policies were pursued at different paces across the region creating two Figure 1.1 The privatisation of public housing in South East Europe, 1990–2002. Source: Adapted from Tsenkova, copyright 2005, with kind permission of Taylor & Francis. http://www.informaworld.com207262110180.298.752.22.135212.060.640510152025303540AlbaniaBiHBulgariaCroatia Moldava Romania FYROMSerbiaShare of total housing stock19902000Gruis_C001.indd 41/21/2009 12:55:34 PM Introduction 5groups of countries (see Figure 1.2)3. The fi rst group (e.g. Albania, Estonia, Hungary) has a small residual public housing sector (<5%), which targets low-income households. At the other extreme, there is a group of countries where the sector is of considerable size (e.g. The Czech Republic, Russian Federation, and Latvia).The evolving legal framework for housing managementLegal reforms introduced in the mid-1990s have provided the legal frame-work for the organisation of owners, as well as procedures for the enforce-ment of rules and obligations. The new laws have defi ned with various degrees of detail rights and responsibilities of ownership, and the proce-dures of sharing common costs. Several barriers to the implementation of these laws exist. First, individual owners have been reluctant to establish new organisations and to assume a wide range of responsibilities with-out the appropriate legislation. Second, the administrative procedure of establishing a condominium as a legal entity has proved to be quite com-plicated and costly. Third, the laws have typically provided largely inad-equate guidelines regarding cost-sharing mechanisms and enforcement possibilities (Tsenkova, 2004).Most countries in the region have introduced condominium ownership, or its equivalent, based on historical interpretation of multi-apartment ownership in existing property legislation. The new legislation has typically defi ned Homeowners’ Associations (HOAs) or Condominiums as the insti-tutional entity which manages multi-apartment housing, meets fi nancial obligations and initiates contracts and renewal projects. Most HOAs are not registered as legal entities, thus, behind every contract there are individual Figure 1.2 Public rental housing in Eastern Europe in 2001. Source: Tsenkova and Turner (2004).504540353025201510Total (%)AlbanlaLlthuanlaMacedonla, FYRRomanlaMoldova, R.Czech RepublicRussian FederationLatvlaPolandUkraineSlovaklaHungaryEstoniaBulgaria50Gruis_C001.indd 51/21/2009 12:55:34 PM 6 Management of Privatised Housing owners. Although the new condominium legislation in Albania, Moldova and Romania stipulates mandatory HOAs, only 20% of the condominiums in Romania and 15% of those in Moldova have established such associations (UNECE, 2001). In Albania, Latvia and Lithuania, for example, progress has been very limited in this regard.The triple challenge for housing managementHousing reforms in the last decade have created new conditions for hous-ing management. A series of legal, institutional and fi nancial reforms has been carried out, but the transformation process has failed to defi ne a system that is effi cient. Essentially the transition from a centralised and excessively subsidised system to one based on market competition, pri-vate ownership and cost recovery for housing services has been particu-larly diffi cult.Technical challengesThe collective form of housing provision in Eastern Europe in the past has had an important effect on housing management, not only in terms of institutions and legal challenges, but more importantly in relation to the technical conditions of multi-apartment housing. Some estimates for eight countries in South East Europe, based on aggregated data from 2000, suggest that close to 6 million dwellings, mostly privately owned, are located in multi-apartment housing (Hegedüs and Teller, 2003). Although most urban multi-apartment housing is less than 30 years old now, its initial quality was not very high4. Panel technologies featured prominently in Bulgaria, Moldova and Romania, while former Yugoslavia experimented with indus-trialised methods of high rise construction. In Albania panel housing com-prises one third of the stock, while in Bulgaria and Romania, panel housing makes up close to one fi fth. Reportedly, half this stock is in urgent need of repair and energy effi ciency improvements (Council of Europe, 2004)5.Most observers in the region have concluded that the deterioration pro-cess in parts of the urban stock has reached a critical stage. Subsequently, inadequate investment in maintenance as well as deferred capital repairs have aggravated the technical problems with leaking roofs, obsolete instal-lations, elevators and poor wall insulation (Bouwcentrum International, 2005). Anecdotal evidence reports cases of falling walls, balconies, chimneys, and so on. In some cases buildings are unsafe and in hazardous condition and clearly do not meet the Building Code requirements. The function of inspecting and initiating action is usually vested with central inspectorates (Romania, Macedonia, and Albania); however in practice little is done to enforce these rules.Gruis_C001.indd 61/21/2009 12:55:35 PM Introduction 7Social challengesIn most cases, multi-apartment buildings have a social mix, which is inherited from the previous system of housing allocation (UNECE, 2000, 2001; Lux, 2003). Income and labour market inequalities in recent years have dramatically changed the socio-economic profi le of these egalitariansocieties. Differences in income and social status have become more pronounced and poverty has increased (Tsenkova and Nedovic-Budic, 2006). A characteristic feature of the ‘nations of homeowners’ in Eastern Europe is the lack of debt related to their housing assets. A survey of housing costs for 2003 in selected countries in the region shows a distorted pattern. First, housing costs consume less than 8% of the household budget, which is much lower than the EU average (see Dubel et al., 2005; Tsenkova, 2005). Second, expenditure on utilities is much higher than spending on maintenance and other housing related costs. The consequences, no doubt, are further dete-rioration in the quality of housing and a failure to mobilise resources to maintain signifi cant household assets.One of the reasons for the poor maintenance of multi-apartment buildings lies with the diffi cult fi nancial situation of owners. The prices of housing-related services increased at a period of economic decline, which, due to the lack of any system for social support, resulted in accumulated arrears. In the absence of support for housing and utility services, more affl uent owners have continued to subsidise their neighbours and to fi nance urgent repairs. Others have just cut back on individual consumption, such as central heat-ing (nearly half of the households in Sofi a have opted out of district heating for fi nancial reasons). Despite different coping mechanisms, arrears are wide spread and a lack of payment discipline common. Studies have reported a lack of respect for the law as well as refusal to pay regular contributions for the maintenance and modernisation of common areas in privatised residen-tial buildings (UNECE, 2002).Financial constraintsLack of adequate fi nancing is considered a major constraint for housing man-agement in multi-apartment housing6. For example, investment required for the renovation of multi-family housing across Europe is estimated at EUR 350 billion, and 65% of that is needed in Central and Eastern Europe alone. The refurbishment and regeneration of high-rise housing estates in Europe is the single most important housing issue facing the European Union today (Bouwcentrum International, 2005). In most cases multi-apartment build-ings have reached a critical stage in the life-cycle assessment where a major infusion of capital will be needed to bring them back to standard. The build-ings are poor quality and the current stream of revenues does not ensure suf-fi cient funds for renovation and improvement of both installations and the Gruis_C001.indd 71/21/2009 12:55:35 PM 8 Management of Privatised Housing building envelope (roof, foundations, elevation, etc.). Renovation planning is also problematic within the context of unclear fi nancial and management responsibilities. Furthermore, in addition to the technical and social chal-lenges, it is diffi cult to borrow funds for major improvements, which requires audited fi nancial statements of the condominium and collateral (Merrill et al., 2003; Butler et al., 2004). Banks often request individual owners to sign on a mortgage or a loan contract, which makes the process extremely cumbersome and costly. Lending institutions have not developed any prod-ucts for renovation of multi-apartment housing and the high interest rates (over 10% in 2004) certainly discourage borrowing.The fi nancing of rehabilitation requires specially designed credit lines and some incentives (tax exemptions, rebates, etc.) to facilitate the process. The key issue is mobilisation of funds, savings (including intergenerational sav-ings), loans and mortgages to pay for rehabilitation and renewal. Various mechanisms can be used to encourage fi nancial institutions to develop competitive products (state guarantees, shallow subsidies, insurance). This needs to be complemented by targeted subsidies and reversed mortgages for low income owners to allow renovation measures to proceed on a large scale for the whole building.These developments sketched in broad strokes refl ect very general aspects of the transformation process in the post-privatisation stage and the chal-lenges for housing management in different national housing systems. A series of legal, institutional and fi nancial reforms have been carried out, but the transformation process has yet to defi ne a system that is effi cient. Essentially the transition from a centralised and excessively subsidised sys-tem of housing management, to one based on market competition, private ownership and cost recovery for housing services, has been particularly diffi cult.Developments and challenges in Western Europe and AustraliaPublic or social housing has not developed in Western Europe and Australia to the extent it has in Eastern Europe and (consequently) privatisation has not taken place at the same pace either. Furthermore, privatisation in ‘Western’ policies is not necessarily associated with the sale of social rented dwellings as it is in countries with former communist regimes. Rather, pri-vatisation is associated with neo-liberal policies of government deregula-tion, decentralisation, cut-backs in expenditure for (semi) public services and an overall increase in market-orientation in the public sector. In this broader context, privatisation stands for the withdrawal of direct govern-ment control by transferring government-owned and operated institutions Gruis_C001.indd 81/21/2009 12:55:35 PM Introduction 9to the private (shareholder-owned) market and not (specifi cally) for the transfer of dwellings to individual households. Nevertheless, primarily in this study, privatisation refers to the sale of social or public rental dwellings to private pers...

    关注我们

  • 新浪微博
  • 关注微信公众号

  • 打印威廉希尔app下载
  • 复制文本
  • 免费下载Management of Privatised Social Housing International Policies and Practice (repost).XDF