Housing policies and development of housing tenures Trends

Housing policies and development of housing tenures Trends in public and private rental sector in transition countries (privatization, new social housing program – constrains and incentives) Tamara Petrović ISBSS, Celje tamara. petrovic@mfdps. si

Purpose of the presentation � Identify key events and documents, which assisted in tailoring the rental sector as it is present today in Slovenia and Serbia � Analyze the situation with the social rental sector � Presentation of the Social Housing in Supportive Environment Programme

Introduction � Socialist order in the SFRY - provision of housing for majority of citizens by the state itself � Pursuant to Article 164 of the 1974 SFRY Constitution, citizens could obtain housing right on a dwelling from the public housing stock � Need for rental sector was concealed with the allocation of housing rights and possibilities for affordable housing loans for housing construction or purchases � Dissolution of the SFRY – Article 78 of the 1991 RS Constitution: “The state shall create opportunities for citizens to obtain proper housing. ” � Serbian Constitution has no provision on housing policy.

New legislative frame for housing policy - Slovenia � 1991 Housing Act (HA) ◦ Privatization and ownership rate � NHP 2000 -2009 ◦ Need for social housing � 2003 Housing Act (HA-1) ◦ 4 rental types (market rentals, non-profit rentals, employment based and purpose rentals) � Rules on renting non-profit apartments � National Housing Saving Scheme Act subsidies -

Today � The actual construction of non-profit units has been cca 450 units annually, instead of 2, 500. � At the beginning of the year 2000, the municipalities owned 21, 260 dwellings. In 2009, the number was merely 15, 728 (restitution, sale). � Around 8, 300 non-profit units needed. � Draft of the new NHP: inadequate occupation of the housing stock and under-development of the rental sector, low affordability of dwellings (especially for young people), energetic inefficiency of the housing stock, low residential mobility of citizens, etc.

Novalties � New categorization of rentals - instead of the non-profit, employment-based and purpose dwellings – the public rental housing. � Other two categories - private rentals and mixed rentals. � New benefit system – the housing allowance (assisting families with the housing costs, promoting rental sector and lawful renting).

For the future… � New regulation of the rental sector (from both legal and political point of view). � Greater financial support for the municipalities with the most prominent need and the lowest financial capabilities. � Conclusion: There is a place for new social rental agencies within the Slovenian housing system (both current and prospective).

Housing policy - Serbia � 1992 Housing Act ◦ Privatization and home-ownership rate � Influx of refugees and IDP’s, embargos, NATO aggression and Kosovo crisis, change in the regime, economic crisis, etc.

Nineties of the twentieth century � Core activities of privatization performed within the period 1992 and 1994 � Similar to other countries � Modest profit � Result: 98% of home-owners, 2% public housing stock � Article 44 of the HA - 1. 3% from the gross salaries for the construction of solidarity apartments

Housing for refugees and internally displaced persons � Beginning through the middle of the nineties refugees from the territories of former Yugoslav republic (especially Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina). � Another wave of internally displaced persons (IDPs) during and after 1999 from the territory of Kosovo and Metohija. � Today around 70, 550 registered refugees from the conflicts in ‘ 90 and 210, 000 IDPs from Kosovo. � A large proportion still in need of durable housing solution � As many as 2, 540 people (around 500 refugees and 2, 000 IDPs) still in 24 collective centres

Solutions � National Strategy for Settling the Issues of Refugees and IDPs from 2002 � Settlement and Integration of Refugees Programme � CARDS programme � UNHCR's Social Housing in Supportive Environment model � Joint Regional Program on Durable Solutions for Refugees and IDPs - governments of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro in 2011

Social Housing in Supportive Environment model Initiation: Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation in 2003 � Integration of housing solution and social assistance � Intended mostly for the refugee, IDPs and local socially endangered households � Construction of a multi-unit building for several households; common area � One of the households is a younger socially endangered family, whose role is to assist the other less capable households with their everyday chores � Organization, technical and financial support, their provision - the responsibility of the municipalities � Centres for social works are in charge of the allocation of the units to the users and the providing psychological help. �

Social Housing in Supportive Environment model � Users are not able to buy out their unit. � Right to use usually allocated for the period of the most severe social hardship. � No rent, only the running costs � There approximately 931 such buildings in 42 municipalities across Serbia. � Around 2, 800 individuals

Recent development � Social Housing Act (2009) ◦ increase the number of rental units and assist the most vulnerable groups of citizens with housing issues � Article 10: Eligible are individuals, who are without a(n) (appropriate) dwelling and whose incomes prevent them from obtaining a dwelling under market conditions � National Housing Agency established in 2012; enacted National Social Housing Strategy (2012) � Non-profit housing organizations on municipal level

Social Housing Act � Social housing is intended for either renting or selling purposes. � Units for renting are not to be sold or subleased. � Up to now, mostly for selling � Programme for Construction of Dwellings for Social Housing - only for renting � The dwellings are to be constructed in the following municipalities: Niš, Kraljevo, Čačak, Kragujevac, Kikinda, Zrenjanin and Pančevo. � A part of the funding from the means of the NHA, while the other part by the municipalities

All in all… � The situation is improving, although there a number of issues to be addressed in the future (legislation especially regarding renting, rental sector in general, finances, etc. ). � Support the successful programmes � Social rental agencies - already certain actions in this direction, BUT… � Financial constrains