Land Pooling for The Multi-Child Families in Russia
The Russian variant of land readjustment deals with vacant lands inside or just beyond the city border. In 2011, federal law allowed municipal authorities to provide multi-child families with free land plots. The definite size of land plots (between 0.04 – 0.15 hectares/ 0.09 -0.5 acres [5, 7]), their location, and level of infrastructure provision were under the jurisdiction of the local administration. The first implementation experience of the law showed that the land plots provided to the families were poorly located and needed an enormous amount of additional investment into infrastructure, construction of housing, etc. Moreover, the lack of financial resources pushed the families to sell their land plots at low prices; therefore, the objective of the law was not fulfilled. Because of this setback, the Federal Agency of Housing Construction Financing (AHCF) created the program of multi-child cooperatives.
This article is devoted to the rent regulation problems and housing allowances in post-socialist states. Government regulations during the socialism period created a segment of mass public rental housing which could not meet the challenges of modernity after the collapses of socialism. The attempts to implement market-friendly system were not successful enough and nowadays rental housing market in these states faces many challenges. The authors analyze the scope and form of rent control in post-socialist states, make a comparison of rent control regimes in selected states and also pay attention to housing allowances in reviewed countries. In the conclusions authors emphasize the main problems of public rental housing and forecast the situation in housing system’s orientation.
This Action Plan provides a framework for the member States of the region to raise energy efficiency in the housing sector and thus enable them to more effectively address environmental and economic challenges and meet social needs. The Action Plan lists a range of measures aimed at removing barriers to energy efficiency and progressively moving towards a low-energy and ultimately zero-energy and carbon neutral housing sector.
Democratically elected municipal government had no housing role in the Soviet era in Russia, as all housing belonged to the central state and was administered by its local agents. After 1990, a massive privatization of housing was achieved first through the transfer of stock from industrial companies to municipalities and then through no-cost transfer of ownership to the tenants. But the municipalities who lost this briefly-held housing stock to privatization now find themselves owners of 11% of all the housing in Russia: much more in some regions. Poor condition stock and the inability of the new owners to meet maintenance costs have led to a growing housing role for local authorities, who have many new responsibilities and expectations from local residents, but few resources. Although the situation has parallels in other post-socialist countries, the scale in Russia is greater, and there is no EU aid, nor any tradition either of ownership or of collective responsibility. Economic crisis in Europe and a slow down in housing construction in Russia mean that new policies for rental housing are needed. This review considers historic and recent changes in housing policy in the Russian Federation in the light of the emerging housing rôle of municipal governments. In the review we draw on national data as well an in-depth case study of the city of Perm to illustrate the impact of this transformation. Following a national meeting of housing experts in 2011, a new Government Strategy for 2020 has been established and is also discussed.
In Soviet period absence of market prices led to extremely inefficient land use and spatial development of cities. Centralized planning system was not flexible and responsive to changing demand, preoccupied with minimization of construction costs and characterized by very low density of land use. In 20 years after the beginning of market economic reforms and mass privatization of real property the situation in land use and spatial development of Russian cities didn’t change much. Main reasons of this are: unclear, non-specified and often not registered property rights; quasi-monopoly of the state on urban lands; absence of clear distinction between federal, regional and municipal lands; high transaction costs and administrative barriers for developers; still very much administrative approach to planning and land use regulation, absence of real dialog with community development groups and NGOs. In this legal and institutional environment regional and/or local authorities often act in interests of big and influential investors and developers, scarifying interests of community as well as of small private owners and tenants. As a result we can see a further worsening of the urban environment, decreasing of green areas, disappearance of historical character of whole parts of city centers, sprawl developments in suburbia etc.
To measure transaction costs and administrative risks in urban development and construction, a survey of developers, builders and real estate agents was undertaken in St Petersburg and Leningrad region, the results of which are presented in the paper.
This volume intends to fill the gap in the range of publications about the post-transition social housing policy developments in Central and Eastern Europe by delivering critical evaluations about the past two decades of developments in selected countries’ social housing sectors, and showing what conditions have decisively impacted these processes.
Contributors depict the different paths the countries have taken by reviewing the policy changes, the conditions institutions work within, and the solutions that were selected to answer the housing needs of vulnerable households. They discuss whether the differences among the countries have emerged due to the time lag caused by belated reforms in selected countries, or whether any of the disparities can be attributed to differences inherited from Soviet times. Since some of the countries have recently become member states of the European Union, the volume also explores whether there were any convergence trends in the policy approaches to social housing that can be attributed to the general changes brought about by the EU accession.
The concept of housing requires a new understanding to effectively address the pressing issues of slums, the urban divide, economic and human development, and climate change. No longer regarded as simply a roof over one's head, housing today plays a crucial role in achieving sustainable development. Sustainable Housing for Sustainable Cities outlines key concepts and considerations underpinning the idea of sustainable housing and provides a comprehensive framework for designing sustainable housing policies and practical actions. Although sustainable housing is often considered from a predominantly green perspective this book advocates a more holistic approach, which recognises the multiple functions of housing as both a physical and socio-cultural system and which seeks to enhance and harmonise the environmental, social, cultural, and economic dimensions of housing sustainability to ensure prosperous residential neighbourhoods and equitable cities.
This paper describes the current state of tenant-ownership developments in Russia, with the stress on municipal housing stock and the role of municipalities as owners of it. The paper is written on the basis of the latest official Russian housing statistics and interviews with Russian housing experts, heads of municipal departments of housing policy in Perm, Dzerzinsky and Tula, as well as observation of the work of the group of housing experts involved in a network known as ‘State Strategy 2020’. The paper is illustrated with examples from large industrial municipalities such as Perm, which has a population of almost 1m.