MAIN FACTORS AND FORMS OF THE GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT OF HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION IN THE WORLD
Doctor of economic science,
Associate Professor at the Department of management in Public Health and
Pharmacy http://management.kaznmu.kz/
Various experiences of
the developed countries without affordable housing problem, the main features
which characterize the formed housing sphere should be noted. The private
(collective) property constitutes the main part of housing stock. The municipal
housing stock makes up only about 10%-15%. Housing owners compose the biggest
part of citizens. The smallest part of citizens rent flats in private fund
(municipal fund) for short or long terms. Housing owners are responsible for
all expenses on contents, repair, reorganization of housing and they are also
obliged to pay all taxes and insurance of the real estate.
Rent payment in private
fund compensates all expenses and profit of the housing owner. In municipal
fund the rent payment covers only municipality expenses without profit. Rent rates
for all property types in various countries are regulated by municipality that
uses indirect economic and legal levers for these purposes. Subsidy payment for
the contents and repair of housing is carried out by state only for tenants
with low income. Most often the citizens buy housing accommodation by long term credit
for 10-25 years using different crediting forms, also including mortgage
credits where the pledge is the acquired real estate.
In the countries with
highly developed market economy the housing industry is under constant
attention of the government. The high level of housing provision of citizens and successful solution of
many social problems in these countries are confirmed by efficiency of the
chosen market economic and administrative regulators. In such countries the
models of credits granting and housing and savings systems are constantly being
advanced for the purpose of attracting citizens money for construction of their
own housing accommodation.
The experience of foreign countries shows that the
mortgage crediting where various housing savings systems are used is more
advanced and it is more frequently used in the state policy of housing
granting.
The mortgage crediting conditions, such as credit
volumes, repayment period, annual interest rates and subsidizing provision
forms in various countries differ from each other, but nevertheless, the
similar moments found.
1. The systems of individual grants are actively
developing together with the systems of general grants where the sum of borrowed
funds is closely connected with the family income. In this case the conditions
of granting subsidies are connected with living conditions, quantity, age of
family members and their total income.
2. The loan shares needed for construction or acquisition of
ready accommodation are growing. Most
often this share makes up about 80% and it comes up about 20% under initial
contribution.
At the same time, the grants for citizens with low
income can reach by 93%-95%. There are cases when it is possible to grant 100%
of loan for citizens who cannot pay an initial contribution. The credit term
and an interest rate size have a principal value in the credit granting
procedure. As a rule, the mortgage credit term takes about 30 years and the
interest rate size amounts to 5%-6%.
As the world practice shows, the choice of specific
systems and tools of investment process stimulation in housing construction is
defined by a number of factors.
Firstly, it is the solution degree of housing issue.
For instance, in Germany, during the most critical post-war period only the
state support methods were applied but since 1971 there was a transition to the
social and liberal housing policy directed on protection of the flat tenants’
rights [1]
Secondly,
the choice of the state support instruments is defined by economic
opportunities of the state: GDP volume per capita, growth rates of national
economy, income level and so on.
Table 1 - GDP per capita
in world countries for 2012 (USD)
|
Country |
Place |
GDP per
capita, USD |
|
Singapore |
6 |
60 900 |
|
Norway |
9 |
55 300 |
|
USA |
12 |
49 800 |
|
Switzerland |
14 |
45 300 |
|
Austria |
19 |
42 500 |
|
Netherlands |
21 |
42 300 |
|
Germany |
26 |
39 100 |
|
Finland |
34 |
36 500 |
|
Japan |
36 |
36 200 |
|
France |
37 |
35 500 |
|
South Korea |
40 |
32 400 |
|
Slovakia |
57 |
24 300 |
|
Russia |
71 |
17 700 |
|
Kazakhstan |
93 |
13 900 |
|
Source: [2]. |
||
It
should be noted that in recent years the essential value revision of
"starting", resource conditions as a choice factor of definite state
support model is observed among scientists and experts. On the contrary, the
belief that namely the chosen model of
housing policy can stimulate economic growth is getting stronger and it can be
confirmed by successful practice of many countries [3]. A number of American
experts give such assessment of housing construction growth function [4].
Thus,
it is impossible to unambiguously claim that only the economic state
opportunities existing at this or that country "for today" define
rates and volumes of housing construction.
As
we can see from the world experiment, the state support measure has the basic
value in realization of not only social but also growth function of housing
construction. While determining the state support measure of housing
construction in market conditions there can be two extremes [5].
1.
The state takes the full responsibility of the social housing construction
expenses (Sweden, France - concerning social housing construction).
2.
The state provides insufficient support directing the population on the
independent solution of housing problem (Azerbaijan). In this option the growth function of housing construction is
partially realized.
3.
The state pursues the balanced support policy of housing construction (Germany,
Singapore, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Belarus and other
countries). Because of its
implementation, the full realization of both growth and social functions of
housing construction is provided.
In
addition, as practice shows, the last option of the state support for housing
construction provides anti-recessionary protection mechanisms of national
economies. Namely, the balanced support policy of housing construction allowed
a number of countries to minimize financial crash impacts on American mortgage
system, on their housing construction and real estate market.
As
it was testified by the conducted practice analysis of the developed countries
on mobilization of financial resources necessary for the housing problem
solution the state support measure of housing construction, in our opinion, is
defined by the following major factors.
Firstly,
it is the housing problem acuteness in the country. Proceeding from importance
of the housing problem solution, the authorities of mentioned countries
(Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Germany, etc.) developed such financial
mechanisms of high rates of affordable housing construction that allowed to
mobilize internal investment resources of natural and legal entities for
increase of national competitiveness. In these countries the solution of
housing problem was considered as a priority national task.
In
other words, the state support measure of housing construction is defined not
only by budgetary opportunities of the countries but also by the chosen
strategy of social and economic development and designed model of housing
construction.
Secondly,
there are economic opportunities of the state. But, again, this dependence of
state support volume from the state financial opportunities is very relative.
For example, in Netherlands, in due time the country government legislatively
obliged the housing corporations to reinvest all received profit in housing
construction. Thereby, the additional non-budgetary source of housing
construction was created [6].
List of used literature
1.
Experts predict to the housing market of the
USA growth by 5%// 2012 (online
resource): http://www.kn.kz/ru/news/view/id/40968/
2.
GDP// 2012 (online resource):
http://mostinfo.su/217-vvp-na-dushu-naseleniya-v-stranah-mira-na-2012-god.html
3.
Materials of meeting of the Government of RK.
2013// (online resource):
www.zakon.kz/kazakhstan/4556346-onlajjn-transljacija-zasedanija.html
4.
Rating of availability of housing. 2012
//(online resource): http://infogr.am/include/php/embedded.php?graphicID
5.
Why profitability of the national companies
falls? 2012 // (online resource): http://kapital.kz/details/22404/
6.
Performance of Nazarbayev N. A. at the
Euroasian forum of emerging markets. 2012 //(online
resource):http://kiwi.kz/watch/8i14j7mwfofx/