Ten years of social housing movement: Re-understanding the particularity of social housing in Taiwan

This year marks the tenth year of the Taiwan Social Housing Initiative, and we have invited experts from different fields to jointly write a series of articles. This article is the first in a series of articles that I co-authored with my boss.

Since the establishment of the "Social Housing Promotion Alliance" in 2010, Taiwan's social housing movement has entered its tenth year. As a result, the national housing policy has changed from questioning and accepting it to setting a specific target of "200,000 households in eight years"; the initiative agenda has also shifted from "do not do it" to the practical level of "how to do it".

As for the question of "How to do it", because it involves various topics, such as financial mechanism, planning and design, property management, welfare delivery, etc., it is related to the overall situation and has its own challenges. It is planned to take stock of the "Ten Years of Social Housing" series of special articles one by one. to clarify.

As the first introduction, this article attempts to extend the focus, start from the development experience of various countries from a macro perspective, outline the background of its social and meridian context, review the evolution of its paradigm (Paradigm), and identify Taiwan as a society in the 21st century. The particularity of the residence. The author believes that only on the basis of this understanding can we grasp the current situation and opportunities faced by the promotion of social housing, which will be helpful for subsequent discussions and dialogues on various issues and countermeasures.

Social housing originates from the crisis of urban externalities

It is well known that the institutional construction of social housing originated in Europe at the end of the 19th century. The background is that after the Industrial Revolution, a large number of people poured into cities, and slums appeared in large numbers due to the shortage of housing. Although there were social reformers calling for improvement at that time, or some social groups also tried to provide suitable housing ¹ , but the results were extremely limited.

The key to real change is the "public health crisis". Take the United Kingdom as an example. There were four cholera epidemics in London from 1832 to 1886, and the death toll reached 14,000 in 1849 alone. The impact of the epidemic is not limited to the bottom slum dwellers. There are also risks to the ruling class and the bourgeoisie, so the state must intervene. This is the contemporary city. The origin of planning and housing policy is not the goodness of the state, but the crisis of urban externalities.

In this context, together with slum clearance and improvement plans for public health purposes, European countries have successively proposed laws related to housing supply, such as the Working Class Housing Act of 1890 in the United Kingdom, the Housing Act of the Netherlands in 1901, and the Housing Act of 1912. The French "Bonnevay Act" (la loi Bonnevay), etc., both authorize the government and the private sector to build low-cost housing (the predecessor of social housing), and build organizational, land, financial and other supporting mechanisms accordingly.

After World War II, it entered the peak period of "mass construction" of social housing

Affected by the two world wars, the construction of social housing entered a period of stagnation, and the "mass construction" began again, which was the reconstruction after World War II. Subsequently, housing demand increased with the Post-World War II baby boom, and benefited from the nearly 30-year economic growth and prosperity of the Keynesian welfare state (Welfare state), European and American countries such as the Netherlands, the United Kingdom , France, the United States, etc., all invested a lot of money to subsidize the construction of social housing. Overall, most of the current social housing stock in Europe and the United States is based on this period.

This period of "mass construction" was synchronized with the urban planning and architectural trends of the time, and it was often combined with development models such as urban expansion, new towns, and bulldozer-style reconstruction. The planning and design of residential buildings reflected the greatness of "modernism" Large-scale production, uniform standard style, high-rise residential complexes with thousands of people and ten thousand people stand in the urban landscape and become the widely recognized appearance of social housing at that time.

The "Transformation Adjustment" of Social Housing Since the 1990s

The economic "stagflation" triggered by the two oil crises in the 1970s ended the golden age of the welfare state. As far as social housing is concerned, under the trend of neoliberal governance brought about by the United Kingdom and the United States, the government no longer has the will and conditions to provide substantial subsidies financially. In addition, a certain amount of stock has been accumulated, and it has gradually entered the stage of "transformation and adjustment".

The basic logic of "transformation adjustment" is to slow down the construction of social housing, or even sell existing social housing ² , significantly reduce subsidies, and instead require the introduction of market capacity and improve the negative labelling problems that occurred in large-scale construction in the previous stage.

Reflected in the specific approach, the establishment of social housing began to emphasize "introducing the benefits of urban development", returning to the inner city center from the suburban periphery in terms of location, and actively combining "urban renewal" to create a "social mix of social housing and market housing". (social mix)” ³ to break down barriers, and to further provide diversified types of social housing in response to the needs of different groups in society, such as students, young people, and the elderly.

The United States, on the other side of the ocean, has embarked on a different path. In the 1970s, the civil rights movement conflict and the failure of bulldozer-style urban renewal combined with each other, starting with the demolition of "Pruitt-Igoe" public housing in 1972 as a symbolic starting point, the policy shifted from "building social housing" to "building social housing". Issue "rent subsidy (rental voucher)" ⁴ . Continuing to this day, the United States has become one of the few western developed countries that mainly rely ^on rent subsidies, supplemented by social housing (built stock plus a small amount of new additions).

The catch-up experience of Asian countries

Social housing in Asian countries basically follows the above process, but the time is more compressed. In response to the housing shortage and population growth after the war, Japan passed the "Public Housing Law" in 1951. The construction was promoted by the central and local public corporations, and reached its peak in the 1970s. After the 1990s, the supply has been slowed down under the real estate bubble and changes in the population structure. Achieve the effect of maintaining urban vitality and diversified housing supply.

The social housing policy in South Korea was launched later in 1990 due to the housing rights protests caused by the large ^- scale demolition of the Olympic Games. Initially, it targeted low-income households (permanent rental housing), and then expanded to higher-income groups as the stock gradually increased (national rental housing, long-term rental housing, etc.). In terms of development methods, from the early stage of large-scale construction of residential communities in new towns, we have successively carried out such as acquisition of redevelopment projects (urban renewal feedback), rental and purchase of vacant houses in the market, revitalization of public land buildings, combined with TOD (mass transportation-oriented development) and other multiple modes.

Clarify the particularity of Taiwan's promotion of social housing

Due to the deviation of housing policy for many years, Taiwan did not start to promote social housing until after 2010. This "time lag" phenomenon, which is far behind Europe, the United States, Japan, and South Korea, will anchor the particularity of Taiwan's promotion of social housing. ,include:

• The particularity of the urbanization process: Compared with foreign countries, the development of social housing was synchronized with the urbanization expansion stage, and then turned to the process of combining urban redevelopment; the urbanization of Taiwan's social housing had reached a critical point at the beginning, and land acquisition was expensive and difficult, and it was even difficult to obtain land. Facing a Shrinking Situation.
• The particularity of housing stock: Unlike foreign countries, the large increase in social housing coincides with the peak of population growth and plays a role in the supply of housing stock; Taiwan begins to build when the population is about to reverse and shrink and there are a large number of vacant houses.
• The particularity of the development model: Compared with the huge investment in social housing in foreign countries, it was the golden period of economic growth of the welfare state after the war. The government has the will and the corresponding financial capacity; as soon as social housing is promoted in Taiwan, it faces the governance thinking of "small government, big market" , and the limitations of the state's financial and organizational capacity.

To put it simply, the particularity of social housing in Taiwan is that it does not have the subjective and objective conditions that made it possible to build a large number of foreign housing back then, and in the situation where there is almost no social housing stock, it is also faced with issues such as urban revitalization, social integration, Serious challenges such as financial sustainability and demand diversification.

Get rid of the myth of quantity and give full play to the advantage of backwardness

The peculiarity of starting too late does not mean that Taiwan does not need social housing. As far as housing policy is concerned, social housing is part of Taiwan's "affordable housing" system, that is, outside of the housing purchase and rental markets, the state must have a certain number of housing that meets the living quality and is affordable. Provide socioeconomically disadvantaged and youth households as the basis for a residential safety net.

Therefore, the question is not "whether to cover it", but "how to cover it". The most important thing is: how to clearly recognize the limitations and challenges of the policy time lag and convert it into a "late-mover advantage".

First of all, it is necessary to fully understand the subjective and objective historical conditions of the massive construction of social housing abroad in those years, and the huge number is the continuous accumulation of "one stick after another" over decades or even centuries, rather than "mass construction in a few years". Short sprint results. As far as Taiwan is concerned, it may be politically necessary to announce the number target at the initial stage of social housing, but even if it reaches the target of 200,000 households, it only accounts for 2% of the housing stock, which is still far behind the advanced countries in Europe and the United States, and even Japan and South Korea.

Therefore, it is advisable to get rid of the myth of quantity and focus on the policy mechanism and social consensus building on how to continuously promote social housing, so as to ensure that it is not interrupted by the change of the president and mayor. Just as South Korea has undergone many political party rotations since the launch of social housing in 1990, the construction policy has continued.

Second, because sustainable policy mechanisms and social consensus are the keys, we should not repeat the shortcomings of large-scale, standardized, and lacking supporting social programs in Europe and the United States in the past, but instead give priority to "quality". The advantage of being a latecomer is that by learning from the experience of foreign social housing location, scale, planning and design, operation management, etc., Taiwan, even if it started late and the number is relatively small, can still highlight the unprecedented progress and innovation on the international scale and become a blessing. Another dazzling business card from Hermosa.

For example, Taiwan's social housing places relative emphasis on the accessibility of surrounding transportation and facilities services. The architectural planning and design requires the combination of new technologies such as intelligence and energy saving, and actively use low-floor space to combine various social welfare and public facilities to improve regional services. Some The unique 1% public art system creates diverse possibilities for "art-house symbiosis", and begins to introduce the "community building" mechanism as a positive vector for operation and management, and will even try to open up NGO leasing to deepen welfare services and cultivate the disadvantaged.

Don't use social housing as a panacea

A final reminder: social housing is indeed necessary, but it is by no means a panacea for housing problems. In the face of Taiwan's housing problems of "can't afford to buy, rent, and live", the corresponding strategy is to improve the housing market, develop the rental market, and build social housing (including rent subsidies), as if three legs can support one side ,Indispensable.

The social housing policy originates from the urban externality crisis, and is primarily positioned as a social safety net for housing. Even if it reaches a certain amount of stock, it should be regarded as a supplementary scheme for housing policy adjustment, rather than a replacement scheme. Hong Kong is the most revealing case. Due to its relatively inaction in the housing purchase market and the rental housing market, Hong Kong is still internationally recognized as the most unaffordable "housing hell" even though the proportion of social housing exceeds ³⁰ %. In addition, Amsterdam, a world-recognized model city of social housing, has a social housing ratio of more than 40%. In recent years, it is still under severe pressure from rising house prices and ^rents8 . It is urgent to seek other policy measures to deal with it.

In other words, in the face of the current housing problem in Taiwan, social housing is a necessary act of housing policy, but not the only means. That is to say, the government's active construction of social housing should be affirmed, but neither the official nor the private sector should exaggerate the possibility of suppressing high housing prices, nor be overly optimistic about its effect on the improvement of the black market of rental housing, and then become a vague housing problem. , an analgesic that avoids institutional reforms.

Just like "Caesar's to Caesar", please let social housing policy return to the role that social housing should play!

[1]: In the 1850s, there were groups in London to improve housing, such as "The Capital Improvement of Hardworking Class Housing Association" and "The Improvement of Workers' Housing Corporation", etc., dedicated to building low-cost housing for workers. In the 1860s, there was even a "model housing" movement (rental housing) initiated by builders, but the improvement of the housing problem at that time was still only a drop in the bucket.

[2]: A representative case of the sale of social housing. The “Right to Buy” plan launched by British Prime Minister Thatcher in 1980 was the first to advocate selling social housing to tenants, fulfilling their dream of buying property and reducing government subsidies and management. maintenance burden. The policy has slashed the stock of social housing in the UK by about a third, leading to a sharp drop in the chances of tenants with expanding families moving to larger flats, and significantly longer wait times to move into social housing.

[3]: For the introduction of the social housing combination Ducheng, you can also refer to " Why Ducheng? How are all more? Experience and Inspiration from Amsterdam " and " French Society: The Model of Social Housing You Can't Imagine ".

[4]: The debate on the transition of public housing in the United States is quite complicated. In the 1970s, based on the experience of Pruitt-Igoe's decay case, a "high-rise public housing failure theory" was formed, and the construction of high-rise public housing was suspended in the Housing Act of 1974. In the 1980s, it expanded to the denial of the entire public housing policy, that is, the "public housing failure theory", and then in the 1990s, the "HOPE VI" plan was promoted, and large-scale public housing communities in serious decline were demolished nationwide. After 2000, due to the loss of public housing, a large number of urban low-income people became homeless, and the "public housing failure theory" was questioned and refuted. Act, proposing that the preservation and replenishment of public housing across the United States will become the focus of future U.S. federal policy.

[5]: Mainly rent subsidies, supplemented by social housing, refers to the overall description. In fact, not all places/cities in the United States have adopted the practice of demolishing public housing, and the most typical counterexample is New York City. As the largest public housing management agency in the United States, the New York Housing Authority has 10% of the total public housing in the United States, with 180,000 households and 2,600 high-rise public houses that are "deemed as failures and should be demolished", and since the 1980s. Since then, developers have been guided to build more than 70,000 affordable housing units of various types (residences with rents not exceeding 30% of income) through rent tax, inclusive zoning and other means.

[6]: South Korea set a target of 12% (the average proportion of social housing in OECD countries), and still invests heavily in the construction of social housing.

[7]: The number of waiting households for public housing in Hong Kong has been synchronized with the soaring housing prices. That is, the more expensive the housing price, the more people apply for public housing, and the group with the largest increase is young people.

[8]: Amsterdam’s housing price-to-income ratio (the average transaction price of houses/median household disposable income) has soared from 8 times in 2014 to 12 times in 2018, hitting a record high.