تفاوت نظام مسکن در کشورهای درحال توسعه با تجارب اروپایی، با تأکید بر بازتعریف مفهوم و نقش مسکن اجتماعی در برآوردن نیاز مسکن اقشار کم درآمد
Distinctiveness of Housing Systems in the Global South: Relevance of a Social Housing Approach to Meet Housing Needs
اشتراک گذاری
اشتراک در شبکه های اجتماعی :
گزارش خطا
این مقاله وجوه نظری تفاوت‌های ساختاری در مفهوم مسکن اجتماعی بین کشورهای اروپایی و کشورهای در حال توسعه را بررسی می‌کند. به‌عبارت دیگر تمرکز مقاله بر این موضوع است که برای بازتعریف مسکن اجتماعی در کشورهای درحال توسعه از جمله ایران باید به نکات مهمی توجه کرد که ریشه در تمایزات اساسی موجود بین نظام‌های مسکن این کشورها و کشورهای اروپایی دارد. مسکن اجتماعی در کشورهای در حال توسعه در مقایسه با تجارب اروپایی نتوانسته به‌عنوان یکی از روش‌های مؤثر در تأمین مسکن ایفای نقش نماید. در دهه‌های اخیر اگرچه تفاوت‌های بین نظام‌های مسکن کشورهای مختلف دنیا از بین رفته، با این وجود مقاله حاضر ادعا می‌کند که پنج اختلاف اساسی را شناسایی کرده است که در مقایسه و تطبیق تجارب مسکن اجتماعی کشورهای اروپایی با کشوری مثل ایران باید مورد نظر قرار گیرد. این نکات عبارت‌اند از: 1) تضاد در مفهوم جهانی‌شدن، 2) وجود دولت‌های توسعه‌طلب، 3) نقش کلیدی مسکن غیررسمی، 4) نقش کلیدی خانواده، 5) نظام نابسامان تأمین اجتماعی و تفاوت اساسی در بازار نیروی کار. در نهایت این مقاله با واسازی مفهوم مسکن اجتماعی چنین نتیجه می‌گیرد که تطبیق مفهوم مسکن اجتماعی در سازوکار مسکن کشوری چون ایران نیازمند مداقه جدی و توجه به نکات خاصی است و نمی‌توان مفاهیم شکل گرفته در کشورهای اروپایی را مستقیماً در نظام مسکن این کشور اجرا کرد.
This theoretical paper defines the distinctiveness of housing systems in the Global South. It argues that one should be careful when applying the ‘Social Housing’ approach to the Global South and that this is attributable to the significant divergences in housing systems between the Global South and Europe. Subsequent to paying attention to such distinctiveness, the paper examines how the notion of ‘social housing’, as realized in Europe, has been applicable to the Global South to meet the housing needs for disadvantaged households. Therefore, the main question of this paper is how the notion of ‘social housing’, as realized in Europe, has been relevant to the Global South. To study various housing systems, the paper finds its inspiration in both the convergence approach, to look at unitary similarities between the housing systems in the Global south, and the divergence approach, to focus on distinctiveness as the dominant feature of housing systems in the Global South, in comparison with European countries. Looking at different housing systems around the world, the paper attends to the long-established debate about the notion and purpose of social housing, that is, conventionally, direct intervention of the state in housing provision targeting at particular group(s) of society; whether social housing is primarily a safety net to accommodate the least well off in society; or a system to provide massive subsidized homes for the rather better off people in a unitary housing market. The history of social housing in the Global South is rather short compared to the European praxis. In most countries in the Global South, social housing schemes initiated in the second half of the 20th century. Nonetheless, social housing has been just complementary to other types of housing provision. Although there are generic similarities between housing systems in all countries, especially so in the post-modernism period, this paper recognizes five distinctive facts (characteristics) of the housing systems in the Global South. It is argued that if it is supposed to apply ‘social housing’ approach in the housing system of those countries, it is necessary that these facts to be considered in depth. Those are: (a) the contradiction of globalization; (b) the notion of the developmentalist state; (c) the importance of informality; (d) the decisive role of family in societal structure; and (e) the rudimentary welfare systems and the dissimilarity of the labor markets. By making a link between each of these characteristics and the notion of social housing, as it evolved in industrialized European countries, this paper concludes that it is not possible to apply the approach of social housing to the housing systems in the Global South in a straightforward way. There is a new wave of attention to the provision of social housing around the Global South, to meet the overall accelerating housing needs that stem from fast growing urbanization, demographic change and unaffordability of housing market. The paper concludes that collaborative and innovative social housing schemes that are rooted in the indigenous social-political context can still play a decisive role in increasing affordability to meet unmet needs of housing.
(407.4 کیلوبایت)
دانلود مقاله
مشخصات مقاله
- اطهاری، ک. (1387). «گونه شناسی مسکن اجتماعی، سیاست‌های توسعه مسکن درایران»، توسعه مسکن در ایران (سیزدهمین همایش). وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی.
- حبیبی، م. (1384) از شار تا شهر: تحلیلی تاریخی از مفهوم شهر و سیمای کالبدی آن. دانشگاه تهران، موسسه انتشارات و چاپ، تهران.
- خاتم، ا. (1384) طرح جامع مسکن: خلاصه گزارش طرح مطالعاتی مسکن اجتماعی.
- Aalbers, M. B. (2015). ‘The Great Moderation, the Great Excess and the global housing crisis’, International Journal of Housing Policy, 15(1): 43–60.
- Aalbers, M. B., & Christophers, B. (2014). ‘Centering Housing in Political Economy’, Housing, theory and society, 31(May 2015): 1–22.
- Allen, J. (2004). Housing and welfare regimes in southern Europe. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
- Babb, S. (2006). ‘A Brief History of Neoliberalism’, Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 35(5): 529–530.
- Barlow, J., & Duncan, S. (1994). Success and failure in housing provision: European systems compared, Oxford Pergamon.
- Buckley, R. M., & Kalarickal, J. (2005). ‘Housing Policy in Developing Countries: Conjectures and Refutations’, The World Bank Research Observer, 20(2): 233–257.
- Burnett, J. (1980). A social history of housing, 1815-1970. London: Methuen Publication.
- Cameron, S. (2006). ‘Demologos Working Paper Thematic Synthesis; Housing System’, DEMOLOGOS D1.2 Discussion Papers: 1–32.
- Drakakis-Smith, D. (1981). Housing and the urban development process. London: Croom Helm. Duncan.
- Davis, M. (2007). Planet of slums. London: Verso.
- Decker, P. De (2002). ‘On the Genesis of Social Rental Agencies in Belgium’, Urban Studies, 39(2): 279–326.
- Delladetsima, P. M. (2006). ‘The Emerging Property Development Pattern in Greece and its Impact on Spatial Development’, European Urban and Regional Studies, 13(3): 245–278.
- Desai, V., & Loftus, A. (2013). ‘Speculating on slums: Infrastructural fixes in informal housing in the global South’, Antipode, 45(4): 789–808.
- Doling, J. (1999). ‘De-commodification and Welfare: Evaluating Housing Systems’, Housing, Theory and Society, 16(4): 156–164.
- Edgar, B., Doherty, J., & Meert, H. (2002). Access to housing: homelessness and vulnerability in Europe. Bristol Policy Press.
- Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Forrest, R., & Lee, J. (2003). Housing and Social Change: East-West Perspective. Edited by R. Forrest. London and New York: Routledge.
- Harloe, M. (1994). ‘Social housing—past, present and future’, Housing Studies, 9(3): 407–416.
- Harloe, M. (1995). The people’s home, City. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
- Holliday, I. (2000). ‘Productivist Social Policy in East Asia’, Political Studies, 48: 706–23.
- Keivani, R., & Mattingly, M. (2007). ‘The Interface of Globalization and Peripheral Land in the Cities of the South: Implications for Urban Governance and Local Economic Development’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(2): 459–474.
- Keivani, R., & Werna, E. (2001). ‘Modes of housing provision in developing countries’, Progress in Planning, 55(2): 65–118.
- Kemeny, J. (1981). The Myth of Home Ownership: Public Versus Private Choices in Housing. London: Routledge.
- Kemeny, J. (1992). Housing and Social Theory. London and New York: Routledge.
- Kemeny, J., & Lowe, S. (1998). ‘Schools of comparative housing research: From convergence to divergence’, Housing Studies, 13(2): 161–176.
- Kesteloot, C. (1998). ‘The geography of deprivation in Brussels and local development strategies’, in Musterd, Sako Ostendorf, W. (Editor) (ed.) Urban Segregation and the Welfare State, Inequality and exclusion in western cities. London and New York: Routledge.
- Khan, M. (2004). ‘State Failure in Developing Countries and Institutional Reform Strategies’, in Tungodden, B., Stern, N., and Kolstad, I. (eds) Toward Pro-Poor Policies. Aid, Institutions, and Globalization. Oxford University Press and World Bank: 165–195.
- Kwon, H. J. (2013). ‘Global social policy as public policy: Implementation matters!’, Global Social Policy, 13(1): 89–94.
- Lemanski, C. (2009). ‘Augmented informality: South Africa’s backyard dwellings as a by-product of formal housing policies’, Habitat International. Elsevier Ltd, 33(4): 472–484.
- Levy-Vroelant, C. (2009) ‘A Review of “The Future of Social Housing”’, European Journal of Housing Policy, 9(4): 477–479.
- Loopmans, M. P. J. J., de Decker, P., Kesteloot, C., de Decker, Chris Kesteloot, de Decker, P., & Kesteloot, C. (2010). ‘Social Mix and Passive Revolution. A Neo-Gramscian Analysis of the Social Mix Rhetoric in Flanders, Belgium’, Housing Studies, 25(2): 181–200.
- Lund, B. (2011). Understanding Housing Policy. 2nd Editio. Bristol: The Policy Press.
- Maclennan, D., & More, A. (1997). ‘The future of social housing: Key economic questions’, Housing Studies, 12(4): 531–547.
- Malpass, P. (2008a). ‘Histories of social housing: a comparative approach’, in Scanlon, K., & Whitehead, C. (eds.) Social Housing in Europe II: A review of policies. London: London school of economics and political science: 15–30.
- Malpass, P. (2008b). ‘Housing and the New Welfare State: Wobbly Pillar or Cornerstone?’, Housing Studies, 23(1): 1–19.
- Midheme, E., & Moulaert, F. (2013). ‘Pushing back the frontiers of property: Community land trusts and low-income housing in urban Kenya’, Land Use Policy. Elsevier Ltd, 35: 73–84.
- Miraftab, F. (2009). ‘Insurgent Planning: Situating Radical Planning in the Global South’, Planning Theory, 8(1): 32–50.
- Moulaert, F. (Editor) et al. (2014) The International Handbook on Social Innovation: Collective Action, Social Learning and Transdisciplinary Research. Cheltenham: UK Edward Elgar.
- Moulaert, F., & Jessop, B. (2006). Demologos Working Paper Thematic Synthesis Paper; Agency , Structure , Institutions , Discourse (ASID). Available at: demologos.ncl.ac.uk/wp/wp2/ papers/TSP1.pdf.
- Moulaert, F. (Editor), Rodriguez, A. (Editor) and Swyngedouw, E. (Editor) (2004). The globalized city: economic restructuring and social polarization in European cities. Oxford: Oxford Oxford university.
- Nasr, J., & Volait, M. (eds) (2003). Urbanism : imported or exported? Chichester: Wiley-Academy.
- Oxley, M. (2000). The Future of Social Housing Learning from Europe, Institute for Public Policy Research.
- Pinch, S. (1997). Worlds of Welfare: Understanding the Changing Geography of Social Welfare Provision. London: LRoutledge.
- Pugh, C. (1997). ‘Poverty and Progress? Reflections on Housing and Urban Policies in Developing Countries, 1976–96’, Urban Studies, 34(10): 1547–1595.
- Pugh, C. (2001). ‘The Theory and Practice of Housing Sector Development for Developing Countries’, Housing Studies, 16(4): 399–423.
- Regan, S. (1999). ‘A future for social housing’, New Economy: 215–217.
- Reinprecht, C., Levy-Vroelant, C., & Wassenberg, F. (2008). ‘Learning from histories: changes and path dependency in the social housing sector in Austria, France and the Netherlands (1889 - 2008)’, in Scanlon, K., & Whitehead, C. (eds) Social Housing in Europe II: A review of policies. London: London school of economics and political science: 31–46.
- Renaud, B. (1999). ‘The Financing of Social Housing in Integrating Financial Markets: A View from Developing Countries’, Urban Studies, 36(4): 755–773.
- Robinson, R. (1979). Housing Economics and Public Policy. London: Macmillan Basingstoke.
- Rolnik, R. (2013). ‘Late Neoliberalism: The Financialization of Homeownership and Housing Rights’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3): 1058–1066.
- Ronald, R. (2007). ‘Comparing Homeowner Societies: Can we Construct an East-West Model?’, Housing Studies, 22(4): 473–493.
- Ronald, R., & Kyung, S. (2013). ‘Housing System Transformations in Japan and South Korea: Divergent Responses to Neo-liberal Forces’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 43(3): 1–23.
- Ronald, R., & Lee, H. (2012). ‘Housing policy socialization and de-commodification in South Korea’, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 27(2): 111–131.
- Scanlon, K., & Whitehead, C. (2008). Social Housing in Europe II: A review of policies. Edited by K. Scanlon and C. Whitehead. London: London school of economics and political science.
- Un-Habitat (2009). Financing affordable Social Housing in Europe, Europe. Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/23186292/Financing-Affordable-Housing-in-Europe.
- Un-Habitat (2011). Affordable land and housing in Asia, UNON, Publishing Services Section. Nairobi: UNON, Publishing Services Section.
- Whitehead, C., Scanlon, K., & Hills, J. (2007). Social Housing in Europe. Edited by C. Whitehead, K. Scanlon, and J. Hills.
مسابقات
جوایز
نشریات
