美国的住房状况与住房政策

通过整理2009和2011年美国住房调查数据,本文分析了美国的住房状况和住房政策,指出美国住房发展的核心问题不是总量缺乏,而是社会支付能力不足。本文在全面分析美国各项住房政策的基础上,描述了美国联邦和地方政府运用税收减免、公共住房建设、租房券资助、财政补贴和包容性区划等多种手段,体现出政策设计的组合与互补。最后,本文提出为了有针对性地制定住房政策,我国应当开展详尽的大规模住房状况调查,并根据实际情况组合运用各项住房发展政策。     

构建军人住房和军人家庭住房新模式

通过研究我国军人住房从传统模式到新趋势的演化过程,针对军人家庭住房特点,结合解决军人住房和军人家庭住房的主要方法,从而探索出军人住房新模式。     

完善保障性租赁住房政策的必要性研究

将改革开放至今的我国住房政策划分为三个发展阶段,并通过政策分析指出造成现阶段我国"福利性"、"保障性"、"政策性"租赁住房供应不足,国民购房需求过剩的政策性原因。其次介绍和比较美国、日本以及我国在政策性住房供应方面所表现出的不同决策过程和决策手段,指出我国现有政策性住房供应方式选择的不足和问题点。最后立足于我国特有的住房问题,提出完善保障性租赁住房供应政策的具体建议和方法。     

保障性住房建设的理论探讨

纵观国内外研究文献和各国住房建设理论及政策,西方国家实行住房保障制度的时间历经一个多世纪,远远超过我国;相对而言,其对住房保障理论的研究也更加深入,范围广阔,成果丰富,在理论指导基础上的住房政策也相应地更为完善,对我国而言有着积极的借鉴和指导意义。1.1住房相关定义住是人类的基本生存需求,住房则是满足居民生活的基本消费资料,是房地产的重要构成部分,也是社会稳定的关键所在。居民消费支付能力不足成为住房问题的核心,在美国住房政策中,怎样帮助低收入者解决住     

本期聚焦：保障性住房——我国保障性住房政策演变及思考

试图从理论上澄清住房保障的基本概念保障的对象和政策目标,并对我国保障性住房政策演变与实践进行了回顾与反思．在此基础上,提出了深化土地制度改革、完善融资机制推进保障性住房建设的政策建议。     

国外住房保障制度对我国的启示

住房保障制度是国家通过行政手段对低收入家庭提供适当住房的一项制度。建立住房保障制度 ,是对市场化住房分配机制的必要补充 ,也是国家社会政策与社会保障制度的重要组成部分。随着住房制度改革攻坚阶段的来临 ,建立、完善我国住房保障制度已迫在眉睫。因此 ,学习和借鉴国外住房保障制度的成功经验 ,无疑对构建、完善我国的住房保障体系有着重大的启迪意义。一、国外的住房保障制度（一）美国的住房保障制度美国是一个居住水平很高的国家 ,实行商品化的住房保障形式 ,住房商品化程度较高 ,私人拥有住房比例较大 ,其住房政策方面有许多成功…     

比较住房政策与供需模式——我国保障性住房公共政策思考

目前我国保障性住房问题的根源在于保障性住房公共政策目标及其定位下的公共住房政策模式。研究从比较住房政策及供需模式角度出发,通过对其他国家公共住房模式实践经验的梳理与剖析,结合我国保障性住房现况,反思我国保障性住房目标政策模式,并借鉴国外的成功经验,提出完善我国保障性住房公共政策模式的相关建议,希望能引起更多学者对保障性住房建设的关注与研究。     

妥协的立法——20世纪美国公共住房的三部基本法规评析

作为20世纪美国解决城市低收入阶层住房问题的国家政策,公共住房的建设与发展始终曲折艰难。剖析美国《1937年住房法》、《1949年住房法》与《1974年住房法》三部公共住房基本法规,可以发现,美国公共住房政策实施阶段的困境实际源自立法上的不断妥协。妥协的立法长期制约着公共住房政策,致使该政策在美国始终惠及面不大,应急特色明显,社会评价毁誉参半。这从深层次上反映出公共住房政策与美国对个人主义的崇尚、对市场优势的推崇、对地方自治的维护等传统政治文化之间存在矛盾。     

我国保障性住房政策演变及思考

试图从理论上澄清住房保障的基本概念,保障的对象和政策目标,并对我国保障性住房政策演变与实践进行了回顾与反思,在此基础上,提出了深化土地制度改革,完善融资机制推进保障性住房建设的政策建议.     

美国包容性区划对我国保障性住房建设的启示

通过对现阶段我国保障性住房建设主要特征与问题的认识,提出保障性住房建设应转变传统的供给方式。转变方式的一个重要方面是,借鉴美国包容性区划实践经验,在城市中心区普通商品房开发项目中配建一定比例的保障性住房。通过对美国包容性区划经验的学习以及中美相关背景的比较,认为我国目前采用与包容性区划性质相似的保障性住房"配建政策"不仅具有重要的现实意义,同时具有较强的政策执行优势。最后,论文提出当前采用保障性住房"配建政策"尚需解决的主要问题和解决建议。     

欧美公共住房制度比较研究及对我国的启示

采取历史研究和比较研究的方法,对欧美国家为保障中低收入群体住房权利实行多年的公共住房制度的异同进行了比较：战后欧美均不约而同实行相当程度的公共住房制度,不同之处是欧洲国家对住房市场的干预较为直接、全面和深入,而美国则采用税收、信贷的形式间接影响房地产市场,实践证明均行之有效。对我国现阶段住区规划与政策的启示是：住房是关系民生的大事,政府不应完全放任市场调节;我国应建立具自己的公共住房制度,改变目前过于依赖市场解决住房供应现状;土地供应模式和开发商为主体的住房生产模式必须改变;采取包括政府直接投资、鼓励社会     

Energy Cost Burdens for Low-Income and Minority Households

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Of the three primary components of housing affordability measures—rent, transportation, and utilities—utility costs are the least understood yet are the one area where the cost burden can be reduced without household relocation. Existing data sources to estimate energy costs are limited to surveys with small samples and low spatial and temporal resolution, such as the American Housing Survey and the Residential Energy Consumption Survey. In this study, we present a new method for small-area estimates of household energy cost burdens (ECBs) that leverages actual building energy use data for approximately 13,000 multifamily properties across five U.S. cities and links energy costs to savings opportunities by analyzing 3,000 energy audit reports. We examine differentials in cost burdens across household demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and analyze spatial, regional, and building-level variations in energy use and expenditures. Our results show the average low-income household has an ECB of 7%, whereas higher income households have an average burden of 2%. Notably, even within defined income bands, minority households experience higher ECBs than non-Hispanic White households. For lower income households, low-cost energy improvements could reduce energy costs by as much as $1,500 per year.

Takeaway for practice: In this study we attempt to shift the focus of energy efficiency investments to their impact on household cost burdens and overall housing affordability. Our analysis explores new and unique data generated from measurement-driven urban energy policies and shows low-income households disproportionately bear the burden of poor-quality and energy-inefficient housing. Cities can use these new data resources and methods to develop equity-based energy policies that treat energy efficiency and climate mitigation as issues of environmental justice and that apply data-driven, targeted policies to improve quality of life for the most vulnerable urban residents.     

The Link Between Local Comprehensive Plans and Housing Affordability: A Comparative Study of the Atlanta and Detroit Metropolitan Areas

Problem, research strategy, and findings: I question whether the strength of affordable housing policies in local comprehensive plans is associated with better affordable housing outcomes, which I measure as a decrease in the share of low-income households who spend more than 30% of their income for housing, otherwise known as cost-burdened households. I first assess the strength of affordable housing policies in 58 local comprehensive plans, counting the number of—and degree of coercion in—those affordable housing policies. I then analyze the relationship between the strength of affordable housing policies and changes in the share of low-income households with cost burden. I find that the strength of affordable housing policies is higher in the Atlanta (GA) metropolitan area than in the Detroit (MI) metropolitan area. I also find that the strength of affordable housing policies is positively associated with a decrease in the share of low-income households paying more than 30% of their income for housing in the Atlanta metropolitan area. I do not find a comparable relationship between plan strength and housing outcomes in the Detroit metropolitan area. I also find that the state role matters: Georgia provides more support and guidance for local comprehensive planning, and for affordable housing policies in those plans, than does Michigan.

Takeaway for practice: Planners should continually promote local comprehensive plans that include more and stronger affordable housing policies and advocate for greater state support for comprehensive planning and affordable housing policies because these appear to lead to a greater likelihood of implementing stronger plans.     

混合式住区对中国大都市住房建设的启示

鉴于中国大都市中日益显著的居住隔离现象,对于住房选择的干预越来越依赖市场,而现有住房政策、土地政策和城市规划忽视了住房和社区的社会意义,应当在住房发展中让不同收入阶层、不同类型家庭在社区和邻里层面混合居住,享有同等的社会资源,使社会各阶层在城市空间层面上处于相对平衡的状态,减轻由于居住空间分异所引发的社会问题。这一理想的实现必须依靠适度正确的制度干预。通过介绍美国、香港等国家和城市混合式住区发展的经验,引发更多从政策和实践等各个层面对中国大都市住房建设的探索。     

The Limits and Potentials of the Housing Market Enabling Paradigm: An Evaluation of China's Housing Policies from 1998 to 2011

This paper examines the housing policies in China in the last 14 years in the context of the international debate on the World Bank's housing market enabling strategy to improve low-income housing provision in developing countries. A review of China's urban housing outcomes reveals housing price inflation and shortage of affordable housing in the fast expanding housing market. The paper analyzes policies to increase both demand for and supply of housing and argues that these policies have contributed to worsening affordability. This situation has been exacerbated by problems in the institutional framework managing the housing sector. The paper concludes that market enabling alone is not sufficient to achieve a satisfactory housing outcome for low- and middle-income groups in Chinese cities. It advocates more effective and direct public intervention for enhancing social housing provision and tightening market regulation to address both market and government failures to improve housing conditions for lower income groups.     

Impacts of contrasting housing policies on low-income households in Australia and the Netherlands

This paper aims to contribute to the debate in comparative housing studies about the significance of national housing policies by considering what can be learnt from analysing the consequences of different policy paths. In particular, the paper looks at the evidence of the long-run impacts of different housing strategies adopted to assist lower-income households in Australia and the Netherlands, using housing affordability as a measure of their impact. Australia is an example of a country that has promoted mass home ownership across the income distribution supplemented by a very small public housing system. In contrast, the Netherlands has relied more on a large and diversified social housing sector. The comparative analysis shows that there are many similarities in the patterns of affordability among low-income households in the two countries despite the use of different policy means. In the past, both countries had good success providing secure and affordable housing for poorer households. Now, lower-income households are experiencing greater affordability problems that are linked to societal changes and the retrenchment of government housing assistance in both cases. However, the study also finds that affordability problems among lower-income households are worse in Australia because of the greater reliance on private housing in that country.     

从供需角度分析美国住房保障

文章介绍了美国从20世纪30年代至今针对中低收入阶层的住房保障政策,并通过供给和需求两个角度来分析美国在不同阶段采取不同住房保障模式的历史原因。结合中国现状指出美国住房保障对中国的借鉴意义。     

我国中低收入家庭住房政策改革诌见

通过文献分析法、比较研究法,总结和分析了具有代表性的欧美国家的中低收入家庭住房保障体系,其主要形式为:供给补贴、需求补贴、控租金、建立租赁市场、建立金融支撑体系。我国当前应通过租赁市场、税收杠杆、贷款保险及中介服务体系的建立和公积金改革来加快中低收入人群住房保障体制的建设和发展。     

Affordable Housing Plans in London and New York: Between Marketplace and Social Mix

The article reviews and critically analyzes contemporary housing policies and plans in London and New York in the context of neoliberal urban governance. In both cities, we find severe housing affordability problems, an increasing dependence on market provision of affordable housing, and a gradual shift from supporting low- and moderate-income residents to promoting housing for households around and above the median income. Affordable housing plans in both cities also link their “marketplace” orientation to “social mix” objectives. The article addresses some socio-spatial implications of these plans and raises concerns regarding the implementation and unintended consequences of mixed-income housing. The conclusion discusses ideas and tools for more equitable affordable housing policies. Finally, we suggest that our analysis of the policy trends in London and New York and the implications we draw may be relevant to other global and globalizing cities, which face similar affordability concerns and rely on the marketplace to address housing needs.     

Publications Received

Problem: Most housing programs in the United States do not focus on the most pressing housing needs. In 2003 more than 13 million households spent at least half their incomes on rent or the costs of homeownership, an increase of more than 35% since 1993. The vast majority of these households were poor. Yet housing policy has shifted away from deep-subsidy programs targeted to the poorest households toward providing shallow subsidies to higher-income households.

Purpose: This article considers whether, given that the federal government is unlikely to increase funding for low-income housing, state and local governments are likely to increase housing assistance to the lowest-income households in the future, how such assistance could be structured, and how states and localities might be persuaded or compelled to provide this assistance.

Methods: We examine the income distribution of households supported by major programs administered by state and local governments and the extent to which these programs target the poor and provide them with sufficient levels of subsidy. We reviewed program data reported to funding agencies and trade associations, census data on housing problems compiled by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and data from surveys of policies and practices conducted by academic researchers and policy organizations.

Results and conclusions: We find that the shift to state and local administration of federal funds has not significantly shifted priorities. We provide evidence that states are not using their discretion go beyond federal requirements, and are not serving income groups below those they are required to serve. Locally funded programs are less likely to target the poor than state or federal programs.

Takeaway for practice: Rather than hoping for substantial local housing assistance targeted to the poor, we recommend making more effective use of existing federal resources.

Research support: None.