Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Figures
Introduction
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Sociology
Urban Sociology

Romanian Housing Problems. Past and Present

Profile image of Gyongyi PasztorGyongyi PasztorProfile image of Peter LaszloPeter Laszlo
visibility

…

description

22 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

The Romanian housing question is different from other East Central Euro-pean reality (see Enyedi, 1988; Szelényi, 1996). Due to the specific urbanization and modernization process (Ronas, 1984) that took place in the socialist era and the rapid privatisation of the housing stock after the turn of the regime (Tosics-Hegedüs, 2003), Romania faces an interesting situation. More than 70 percent of the urban population lives in so called block of flats, in large and sometimes overcrowded neighbourhoods. 95 percent of these blocks of flat are privately owned (Pásztor, 2003), while the possibility to ac-quire one is low due to the high prices. In these circumstances the housing is-sue is one of the most disturbing structural and functional social problem, with certain cultural aspects – the social pressure upon the young generation to acquire their own houses is very powerful while renting is a strong social stigma (Zamfir, 2001). The present article not only brings out the Romanian general process on the early post-socialist practices (as structural causes and larger social context) but also describes the housing issue along the following aspects: the socialist legacy, the appearance of housing market after 1989, as a regulatory institution; the lack of available and/or affordable housing. Briefly, the social problem (Macionis, 2004; Castells, 2000) of housing is described and presented with empirical examples in conflictual perspective embedded in the larger process of the Romanian transition; the narrative is based on statistics. All these could be an instrument not only for social scientists but also for social policy makers and real estate developers.

Figures (10)
Index of urbanization in Romania between 1910 and 2002 Source: 1930, 1941, 1992 and 2002 National Census; * Romania formed by Moldavia and Walachia.
Index of urbanization in Romania between 1910 and 2002 Source: 1930, 1941, 1992 and 2002 National Census; * Romania formed by Moldavia and Walachia.
Housing consumption in 11 countries in transition, 1994 Source: Hegediis et al. (1996).
Housing consumption in 11 countries in transition, 1994 Source: Hegediis et al. (1996).
Source: National Censuses from 1966, 1977, 1992.
Source: National Censuses from 1966, 1977, 1992.
Source: Statistical Yearbook 1990.
Source: Statistical Yearbook 1990.
As a conclusion it can be stated that the real estate built from state founds were solely block of flats, and that by the 1990’s the significant part of urban real estate was represented by block of flats in state properties. Source: Statistical Yearbook, 1990.
As a conclusion it can be stated that the real estate built from state founds were solely block of flats, and that by the 1990’s the significant part of urban real estate was represented by block of flats in state properties. Source: Statistical Yearbook, 1990.
Occupied dwellings by household size and number of rooms, 1992
Occupied dwellings by household size and number of rooms, 1992
No matter how positive were the common feelings caused by privati- sation, the owners of these block of flats should consider that the privatisation of flats can generate important and serious problems in the future, too. The high rate of housing ownership can result some unexpected problem.
No matter how positive were the common feelings caused by privati- sation, the owners of these block of flats should consider that the privatisation of flats can generate important and serious problems in the future, too. The high rate of housing ownership can result some unexpected problem.

Related papers

Housing struggles in Romania and in Central Eastern Europe (CEE)
Erin M B McElroy, George Iulian Zamfir, Eniko Vincze, veda popovici, Ioana Florea

Radical Housing Journal, 2020

In this conversation we reflect on the struggle for housing in the country and in Central Eastern Europe (CEE), on the Western economic and State power on the East, on grassroot organising and more.

View PDFchevron_right
Housing Policy in Romania in Transition: between State Withdrawal and Market Collapse
Adrian N Dan
View PDFchevron_right
The Mixed housing Regime in Romanian State Socialism 2
Eniko Vincze

Money, Markets, Forms of Socialism, 2022

Preoccupied with legitimizing the country's turn toward capitalism, anti-communist discourses in Romania are based, among others, on the assumption that state socialism eradicated all forms of private property while promoting central planning and state ownership. However, as my paper demonstrates, the development of the housing regime suggests the opposite. In my study I analyze the state socialist mixed housing system, using legislation and statistical data. As a first step, I take a critical position to transitology studies for their preoccupation with how an unregulated housing market was enabled and how the former housing system was dismantled. Then I clarify the central concepts used in my analysis. In the third section of my article, I discuss the constitutive role of housing in socialist and capitalist political economy and the transformation of state socialism into neoliberal capitalism. In the fourth part, I provide a detailed overview of the state socialist mixed housing system with the help of statistical data, contrasting it with the current, market-oriented housing regime. The paper concludes with the analysis of the state socialist mixed housing regime from two aspects: firstly, I discuss the connection between the state socialist mixed housing and property regime and the way the right to personal property and related policies outweighed the right to housing. Secondly, I am going to highlight the functioning of the state/ market mix through the distribution of homes. to the possibilities of a housing regime that may offer an alternative to the mechanisms of contemporary capitalism. The paper calls attention to the possibilities of a housing regime that may offer an alternative to the mechanisms of contemporary capitalism. By highlighting the pitfalls of the state socialist housing system, this analysis and its conclusions offer a few reference points that such an endeavor can use.

View PDFchevron_right
Housing deprivation and hidden urban poverty in Romania
Roxana Negoita

In the period inbetween the first and the second world wars and also even more strongly during socialism, Romania confronted with a massive increase of inhabitants in the urban areas. Both the consequence of a state policy regarding territorial systematization and result of the seductive force that the city emanated for all who were seeking a better life and better opportunities, the increase in population put pressure on the need for an enlarged housing stock. If before 89 the state was holding with both hands the housing sector, monitoring the allocation and distribution of dwellings, after the fall of the regime, in a very short amount of time more than 95% of the housing stock became private property. As a consequence, the Romanian state has a very poor reserve to allocate as social houses for people which pertain to marginalized social groups or special individual cases. This paper analyses housing policies that the Romanian state has had in the last decades, by pointing out how the low involvement of the state maintains a degree of poverty which reproduces itself and which threatens human security and human capabilities as well as any concept of human development. A close look is given to an area in the outskirts of the city of Cluj Napoca, where four rroma communities inhabit under very poor conditions.

View PDFchevron_right
The Many (Still) Functional Housing Estates of Bucharest, Romania: A Viable Housing Provider in Europe's Densest Capital City
Vera Marin

Housing Estates in Europe Poverty, Ethnic Segregation and Policy Challenges, 2018

Housing estates built during the post-World War II decades in many countries have followed diverging trajectories. These include maintenance and repair, demolition, 'doing nothing,' and demolition with mixed-usage replacements. Drawing on empirical and historical material from Bucharest, Romania, a city in which 80% of the housing stock consists of socialist era housing estates, we argue that such housing continues to be viable and is even enjoying a minor renaissance, mainly through the financial efforts of residents and, occasionally, through the allocation of a certain amount of public funds. The empirical analysis illustrates that it is neither the mass character of such housing, nor its high-rise nature that creates the problems and negative image often associated with housing estates elsewhere in the world. Rather, we outline seven challenges faced by such estates: ageing of their structure and resident population, networked connectivity, energy efficiency, den-sification, urban planning that favours real estate agents, neglect of housing policies and housing rights, and condominium governance. The housing estates and their problems are so much a part of everyday normality in Bucharest that the local administration tends to take them for granted and has not placed them on the public agenda despite the inevitability of their structural decay at some time in the future. More than anything else, the state and the owners need to gather data in order to preempt future emergencies or continuing physical decay of this valuable housing stock.

View PDFchevron_right
Tracing the Housing Frontline: The Post-Socialist Legacy of Housing Policies in Bucharest during the 1970s–1980s
Cosmina Bouaru

2024

View PDFchevron_right
Housing Contention in Bucharest
Ioana Florea

Springer eBooks, 2022

View PDFchevron_right
Dynamics of housing stock in Romania – between politics and policies
daniel Virdol

HUMAN GEOGRAPHIES – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, 2015

The dynamics of the housing stock is one of the indicators used to express the state of the economy. In post-Communist Romania, the dynamics of housing construction sector reected the changing of the markets estate, economic and housing policies of the country. As well, new housing characteristics (type, size, location, construction materials etc.) translate a paradigm shift of housing and/or social transformations of the meanings of housing, living environments, and residential areas. In this respect, the analysis of the dynamics of the housing stock in various morphological categories, legal or living environments at different territorial scales allows assessment of economic development disparities in Romania. Constructive practices of the past 25 years have evolved and diversied. The framework of the building sector, the categories of actors involved in the production or nancing of housing multiplied, housing needs of the population have changed as well. The dynamic of real estate markets was strongly inuenced by the dynamics of the housing stock. A geographical approach to the dynamics of housing stock in urban and rural areas of Romania will be drawn using regionalised statistics methods, correlated with institutional context analysis. The study aims to identify and analyse the main features of the dynamics of the housing stock in Romania, being privileged perspective and spatial components analysis regionally different types of housing. Also, analysis of the dynamics of the housing stock is correlated with the dynamics of the legal, urban planning and lending. The results of this study can be used to base the futures housing policy in Romania.

View PDFchevron_right
Antagonisms and solidarities in housing movements in Bucharest and Budapest (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Kerstin Jacobsson, Ioana Florea

Urban Ethics Conflicts Over the Good and Proper Life in Cities, 2021

View PDFchevron_right
Chapter 11 Antagonisms and solidarities in housing movements in Bucharest and Budapest
Kerstin Jacobsson

Taylor & Francis eBooks, 2020

View PDFchevron_right

References (55)

  1. Arias, E. G. (1993). The Meaning and Use of Housing. USA -Hongkong -Singapore. Sidney: Aldershot -Broomfield.
  2. Bodnár, J. (1998). Assembling the square: Social transformation in public space and the broken mirage of the second economy in postsocialist Budapest. Slavic Review, 57(3): 489-515.
  3. Cucu, V. (1977). Sistematizarea teritoriului şi localităţilor din România. Bucureşti: Ed. Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică.
  4. Csedő, K., Ercsei, K., Geambaşu, R., Pásztor, Gy. (2004). A rurális bevándorlók. Cluj: Scientia.
  5. Csizmady, A. (2003). A lakótelep. Budapest: Gondolat.
  6. Benedek, J. (2006). A romániai urbanizáció jellegzetességei az utolsó évszázad során. In Hajdú, Z., Győri, R. (eds.): Kárpát-medence: települések, tájak, régiók, térstruktúrák. Budapest -Pécs: Dialóg Campus, pp. 77-101.
  7. Budisteanu, I. (2000). The long-lasting impacts of earlier policies on housing finance in Romania. In J. Hegedüs and R. J. Struyk (eds.): Housing Finance. New and Old Models in Central Europe Russia and Kazahstan. Budapest: Open Society Institute.
  8. Ferge, Zs. (1997). The changed welfare paradigm: The individualization of the social. Social Policy & Administration, 31 (1): 20-44.
  9. French, R. A., Hamilton, F. E. I. (eds.). (1979). The Socialist City: Spatial Structure and Urban Policy. Chichester NY: Wiley and Sons.
  10. Harloe, M. (1996). Cities in Transition. In G. Andrusz, M. Harloe, I. Szelényi (eds.): Cities After Socialism. Urban and Regional Change and Conflict in Post-Socialist Societies. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  11. Hegedüs, J., Mayo, S., Tosics, I. (1996). Transition of the Housing Sector in the East-Central European Countries. Budapest: MRI.
  12. Hegedüs, J., Tosics I. (1993). A lakásrendszer szociológiai és közgazdasági megközelitések, manuscript.
  13. Hegedüs, J., Tosics, I. (1998). A közép-kelet-európai lakásrendszerek átalakulása. Szociológiai Szemle, 2: 5-32.
  14. Henderson, W. L., Ledebur, L.C. (1972). Urban Economics: Processes and Problems. New York: John Wiley&Sons.
  15. Hellman, J. (1998). Winners take it all: The politics of partial reform in Post-Communist transition. World Politics, 50 (2): 203-234.
  16. Kligman, G. (1998). The Politics of Duplicity: Controlling Reproduction in Ceausescu's Romania. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  17. Kostinskiy, G. (2001). Post-Socialist cities in flux. In R. Paddison (ed.), Handbook of Urban Studies. London: Sage Publication.
  18. Kapitány, Á., Kapitány, G. (2000): Beszélő házak. Budapest: Kossuth.
  19. Ladányi, J. (2002). Residential segregation among social and ethnic groups in Budapest during the post-communist transition. In P. Marcuse and R. van Kempen (eds.): Of States and Cities: the Partitioning of Urban Space. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  20. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  21. Lowe, S. and Tsenkova, S. (2003). Housing Change in East and Central Europe: Integration or Fragmentation? Aldershot: Ashgate.
  22. Meton, R. K. (2002). Tarsadalomelmélet es társadalmi struktúra. Budapest: Osiris.
  23. Mihăilescu, V., Nicolau, V., Gheorghiu, M., Olaru, C. (1994). Blocul între loc şi locuire. Cercetări Sociale, 1.
  24. Myers, D. (1990). Housing Demography: Linking Demographic Structure and Housing Markets. University of Wisconsin Press.
  25. Nagy, E. (2001). Winners and losers in the transformation of the city centre retailing in East Central Europe. European Urban and Regional Research, 8 (4): 340-348.
  26. Neculau, A. (ed.), (2004). Viata cotidiana in communism. Iasi: Polirom.
  27. Noica, N.S. (2003). Între istorie şi actualitate. Politici de locuire in România. Bucureşti: Editura Maşina de Scris.
  28. Pásztor, Gy. (2003). Slumosodási és elszegényedési folyamatok Kolozsváron. Erdélyi Társadalom, 1.
  29. Pásztor, Gy. (2004). Monostor(ok)-kep(ei) monosto(ok)-tudat(ai). Kolozsvár egyik lakótelepének mentális térképérol. Web. Települések vátozó társadalami terek, 13: 17-25.
  30. Pásztor, Gy. (2006). Városszociológia. Elméletek és problémák. Cluj: Cluj University Press.
  31. Pásztor, Gy., Péter L. (2006). Kolozsvár mint márka -útban egy posztmodern város felé? Szociológiai tanulmány egy erdélyi város jellegének és arculatának a változásáról. Erdélyi Társadalom, 2: 41-58.
  32. Pásztor, Gy., Péter, L. (2007). Inegalităţi de locuire. In C. Zamfir, C. Stănescu (eds.), Enciclo- pedia dezvoltării sociale. Iaşi: Polirom.
  33. Péter, L. (2007). Impoverishment and the rise of new urban poor in Romania: Coping with poverty. Studia Sociologica, 52(1): 79-107.
  34. Petrovic, N. (2001). Post-socialist housing policy transformation in Yugoslavia and Belgrade. European Journal of Housing Policy, 1(2): 211-232.
  35. Petrovici, N. (2006). Socialist urbanization in the Ceausescu era. Power and economic relations in the production of haabitational space in Cluj. Studia Sociologica, 51(1): 97-111.
  36. Pickvance, C. (1996). Environmental and housing movements in cities after socialism: the Case of Budapest and Moscow. In G. Andrusz, M. Harloe and I. Szelényi (eds.): Cities After Socialism. Urban and Regional Change and Conflict in Post-Socialist So- cieties. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  37. Poledna, R., Petrovici N., Totelecan S. (2006). Inegalităţi de locuire în oraşele post-socialiste. Research Report CNCSIS.
  38. Remmert, M., Hegedüs, J., Tosics I. (2001). Housing in Southeastern Europe: Between state and market. SEER South-East Europe Review for Labour and Social Affairs, 4: 123-149.
  39. Ronnås, P. (1984). Urbanization in Romania: A Geography of Social and Economic Change Since Independence. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics.
  40. Rotariu, T., Mezei, E. (1999). Asupra unor aspecte ale migraţiei interne recente din România. Sociologie Romaneasca, 3.
  41. Short, J. R. (1984). An Introduction to Human Geography. United Kingdom: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  42. Szelényi, I. (1996). Cities under Socialism -and after" In G. Andrusz, M. Harloe and I. Szelényi (eds.): Cities After Socialism. Urban and Regional Change and Conflict in Post-Socialist Societies. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  43. Szelényi, I. (1990). Városi társadalmi egyenlőtlenségek. Budapest: Akadémiai.
  44. Szelényi, I., Konrád, Gy. (1969). Az új lakótelepek szociológiai problémái. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
  45. Stanilov, K. (2007). Housing trend in Central and Eastern European cities during and after the period of transition. The Post-Socialist City. Urban Form and Space Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe after Socialism, Series: GeoJournal Library Vol. 92.
  46. S. Nagy, K. (2003). A lakáskultúra története. Budapest: Balassi.
  47. Taylor, L. (ed.) (1990). Housing. Symbol Structure Site. New York: Cooper Hewitt Museum.
  48. Tosics, I. (2003). City development in Central and Eastern Europe since 1990: The impacts of internal and external factors. In K. Dimitrowska-Andrews (ed.), Globalizations and Transformation in Eastern and Central European Cities. New York: The United Nations University.
  49. Tsenkova, S. (2000): Housing in Transition and Transition in Housing: The Experience of Central and Eastern Europe. Sofia: Kapital Reclama.
  50. Troc, G. (2003). A tömbházak mögött, avagy a munkásnegyedek jelenlegi állapotáról. WEB, 11: 9-13.
  51. Weclawowitcz, G. (1998). Social polarization in post-socialist cities: Budapest Prague and Warsaw. In Gy. Enyedi (ed.): Social Change and Urban Restructuring in Central Europe. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
  52. Zamfir, C. (2001). Situaţia sărăciei în România: dimensiuni surse grupuri de risc. România socială, 2.
  53. Verdery, K. (1996). What Was Socialism, and What Comes Next? Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOCUMENTS OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND OTHER SOURCES Ministry of Regional Development and Housing (2008): Press Release. Acceptance of first thermically rehabilitated block of flats in Bucharest, http://www.mdlpl.ro/stiri_en.php?s=529&lang=en (January, 2009).
  54. Ministry of Regional Development and Housing (2006): List of the blocks of flats included in the program in 2006 by Minister Order 1772/2006, http://www.mdlpl.ro/index.php?p=1034 (January, 2009).
  55. Ministry of Regional Development and Housing (2005): List of the blocks of flats included in the program in 2005 by Government Decision 805/2005, http://www.mdlpl.ro/index.php?p=1034 (January, 2009).

Related papers

Housing and class (trans)formation in Romania
Simona Ciotlaus, Eniko Vincze

The article provides an overview on the political economy of housing in Romania as a key driver of the formation of capitalism after the dismantlement of socialist industries and related residential urban systems. It discusses statistical data and information on legislation at national and local level, in particular in the city of Cluj-Napoca, by addressing some central features of these transformations (such as privatisation and restitution, minimal social state, financialisation and class inequalities) in the tradition of critical urban theory's understanding of the " urban question " and " housing question ". Privatisation and restitution: the dire dwindling of the public housing stock According to EUROSTAT data of 2010[1], Romania had the highest percentage of homeowners (97.5%) amongst EU member states. In the same year, the country's overcrowded housing rate was also the highest in the EU (54.9%, compared to 17.6% in EU27, with an even higher percentage within the population at risk of poverty, 65%). Further, Romania's population confronted the highest level of severe housing deprivation in the EU: compared to the 5.7% average in the EU27, 26.9% of Romanian citizens were faced with this problem.

View PDFchevron_right
Housing Situation in Romania in the European Context
Cristina Iacoboaea

2016

In this paper the authors perform an exten-sive analysis of the housing situation in Romania in relation to other EU countries. The following indicators, and others, are examined: the number of dwellings per 1000 inhabitants, the average number of rooms per dwelling, overcrowding, the degradation rate of housing, the rate of util-ities. The type of ownership of the buildings is also analyzed. The implications of the fact that Romania has one of the highest percentages of private homes in Europe are also discussed. In order to highlight these issues and others (which have been the subject of the authors ’ previous studies), in the present work, the dynamics of housing construction in Romania are studied over a long period – namely the period between 1950-2011 – with the aim of highlighting the pres-ent position of Romania compared to other EU countries in terms of housing. The analysis leads to the conclusion that on most housing indicators Romania occupies lower ranks compared to ot...

View PDFchevron_right
Analysis of the Current Housing Situation in Romania in the European Context
Cristina Iacoboaea

In this paper the authors perform an extensive analysis of the housing situation in Romania in relation to other EU countries. The following indicators, and others, are examined: the number of dwellings per 1000 inhabitants, the average number of rooms per dwelling, overcrowding, the degradation rate of housing, the rate of utilities. The type of ownership of the buildings is also analyzed. The implications of the fact that Romania has one of the highest percentages of private homes in Europe are also discussed. In order to highlight these issues and others (which have been the subject of the authors' previous studies), in the present work, the dynamics of housing construction in Romania are studied over a long period -namely the period between 1950-2011 -with the aim of highlighting the present position of Romania compared to other EU countries in terms of housing. The analysis leads to the conclusion that on most housing indicators Romania occupies lower ranks compared to other EU countries.

View PDFchevron_right
The Housing Question at the Juncture of Spatial Planning and Housing Policies. A View on Romania's Political Economy Regime Changes
Eniko Vincze

European Journal of Spatial Development, 2024

In international housing studies literature, housing policies and urban planning are rarely discussed concurrently, and such an approach is absent from the analysis of housing regimes in Central and Eastern Europe. My article, therefore, contributes to this field of study in both senses. It examines the changing relationship between planning and housing as a key pillar of the transformation of state socialism to neoliberal capitalism, concentrating on the role of the state in supporting housing regimes through its (de)planning practices. Two research projects compiled the analysed statistics, legislation, development strategies, and interviews with representatives of city halls and real estate agencies. Following a discussion of the article's contribution to the existing literature on housing studies, I describe the alteration of planning and housing policies in Romania as part of political economy transformations. The third section discusses these changes at the local level, in a regional magnet and competitive city. The theoretical contribution of the article is finetuned in the section discussing three aspects of the housing question and its inbuilt inequalities in capitalism. The conclusion provides a synthetic description of the changing relationship between urban planning and housing policies in the context of regime change in Romania.

View PDFchevron_right
THE IDEOLOGY OF ECONOMIC LIBERALISM AND THE POLITICS OF HOUSING IN ROMANIA
Eniko Vincze

The privatization of housing (linked to the privatization of means of production), respectively the creation of a new private housing fund, have been crucial for the emergence of capitalist property regime and market economy in Romania. The state withdrew from its position as a developer (of housing stock, but not only), however it did not remain passive, contrary, it assumed a central role in the creation of the (housing) market through modifying legislation and creating new institutions that administered this process. The article is addressing how the ideology of economic liberalism is working through housing politics as a core medium of the transformation of really existing socialism into neoliberal capitalism. In particular, it describes how – through privatization – this ideology creates material effects in the housing sector, i.e. accumulation on the one side and dispossession on the other side of the class structure. Moreover, the article insists that the housing stock's privatization after 1990 happened in relation with the housing politics of state socialism, which allowed the existence of three types of property on housing.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Urban Sociology
  • Urban Problems
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved