Cite

Figure 1

Policies and their results for the housing sector during the first programSource: authors own elaboration
Policies and their results for the housing sector during the first programSource: authors own elaboration

Figure 2

Policies and their results for the housing sector during the second development programSource: authors own elaboration
Policies and their results for the housing sector during the second development programSource: authors own elaboration

Figure 3

Policies and their results for the housing sector during the third development program.Source: authors own elaboration
Policies and their results for the housing sector during the third development program.Source: authors own elaboration

Figure 4

Policies and their results for the housing sector during the fourth development programSource: authors own elaboration
Policies and their results for the housing sector during the fourth development programSource: authors own elaboration

Shortcomings and successes of the housing sector during the third development program

Shortcomings Successes

the imbalance between household income on housing prices;

a lack of coordination between housing policy, and urban and regional development policies;

lack of optimum use of land;

absence of specialized companies in the field of land, housing, and building;

inadequate participation of the private sector;

failure to achieve desired goals on issues related to the ‘gradual payment of bank loans’;

lack of separation between cooperative enterprises in the field of housing production;

failure to achieve the objectives of rural housing improvement plans;

lack of sufficient information about the housing and construction sector.

encouraging participation in worn out and problematic urban fabric's gentrification processes;

replacement of local organs with government agencies for providing land;

reducing government interference in the direct supply of land;

coordination in the field of planning and policymaking;

setting administrative regulations for constructing residential and non-residential units;

issuing land transfer instructions to builders for renting residential units;

creation of a secondary market;

permission granted to establish private credit;

reinforcing mass production;

implementing rental housing policy.

Shortcomings and successes of the first development program

Shortcomings Successes

ignoring short-term measures;

lack of proper infrastructure for mass building in the housing sector;

increasing housing prices and a lack of interest in buying a home;

high inflation;

rising materials costs;

low number of rental housing units;

reduction in the share of total housing credit;

a lack of rules and regulations concerning rental housing;

a lack of credit assistance;

a lack of organizations and specialized agencies in the field of housing;

a lack of necessary infrastructure facilities to develop new cities;

a lack of criteria for the renewal and modernization of worn-out fabrics;

the absence of a housing database;

the lack of a proper tax system.

increasing the proportion of durable residential buildings compared to entire buildings;

reducing the average size of apartments in urban areas;

increasing the number of floors in urban areas to increase building density;

continuously building new cities;

creating a platform for private sector investment in the form of participation;

construction of small houses;

increase in the supply of urban land by an urban land organization;

creating employment through the building sector.

Shortcomings and successes of the housing sector during the second development program

Shortcomings Successes

government reducing the controls of land prices;

increasing wages and the amount of required construction materials;

the confusion and ambiguity of dealing laws;

ambiguity in landlord-tenant contracts;

low access to banking facilities compared to international standards;

lack of support for small rental units;

increase in the rent for rental units;

low level of government participation in the production of housing units;

inconsistencies in policies and programs adopted in the housing sector;

lack of transparency and uncertainty in tax rules.

average reduction in the size of apartments from 154m2 to 122m2;

government financial support;

coherent explanation about supporting patterns of demand;

construction of social housing for vulnerable groups;

construction of rental and rent-ownership housing;

making decisions for capacity building;

use of new tools and methods;

trend to produce mass housing;

financial rotation in the housing sector.

Housing problems during the third development program

Production, supply, and demand problems Planning constraint problems

Periodic fluctuations in the housing sector.

Failure to promote the use of pre-built industry practices.

Increase in the production costs of residential units.

Insufficient government support for investment.

Inconsistency of laws and policies.

Low level of banking amenities.

Incompatibility between housing patterns and the needs of applicants.

Lack of personal and social rental units.

Lack of institutional participation.

Lack of a rural housing database.

Lack of detailed statistical data.

Lack of effective policy for providing housing for low and middle-income groups.

Lack of regional and national spatial plans.

Lack of foresight in the housing sector.

Lack of coordination between the housing sector and master plans.

Construction of high-rise apartments with small areas.

Lack of land use plans.

Low construction density.

Problems in construction standards, laws, and regulations.

Insufficient studies related to the location, design, and implementation of preparedness plans.

Lack of coordination between development projects and economic conditions.

Lack of a detailed plan for housing.

General characteristics of the housing sector during six development programs

Program Policies Strategies Objectives Performance
First program Supportive land Direct government intervention in the land market.Modification of land use patterns and housing.Land preparation. Provision of low-cost land.Provision of low-cost materials.Supply and construction of affordable housing. Due to the high share of land in the production costs and the complexity of rules, housing plans failed to achieve their objectives.
Second program Supportive land Supporting housing production. Savings, downsizing, and mass production.Encouraging the private sector. Direct construction by government. Land preparation.Supply of affordable housing for low-income groups.Supporting mass producers (mass). Due to the lack of investment in housing, the lack of incentive mechanisms, and the reluctance of private investors, this program failed to achieve its goals.
Third program Supportive housing Establishing associations and local institutions to provide low-income housing.Optimal use of urban land for downsizing and mass production. Production of residential units was in line with quantitative targets, and it was successful between 2001 and 2004.
Fourth program Supportive housing Provision of housing master plan. The Mehr housing policy.Ratification of the organizing law and related regulations. Preparation of housing master plan document.Establishing lease-purchase schemes.Providing loans to purchase and construct a house. In fact, the Mehr housing program was temporarily removed from the government's agenda. However, due to increasing demand in the housing sector, it once again became important, and the government allocated special financial resources to complete the Mehr housing project.
Fifth program Revision of previous policies Housing provision for low-income groups.Improving the qualitative and quantitative production of housing.Supporting investment in production. Mehr housing projects continued, but a significant portion of the housing was not delivered.
Sixth program Urban regeneration Completion of Mehr housing projects.Start of regeneration projects. 10% annual regeneration in worn textures. About 40% of dilapidated textures were regenerated.

Problems and consequences of the first development program

Problems Consequences
Mismatch between housing policy and urban development policies The supplying of land around small and medium cities.The supply of land should be have been increased around the megacities because megacities were in trouble.Lack of coordination between the urban land organization and mass producers concerning the policy of handing over land.There was no coordination between sectoral programs and the master plans.
Lack of production factors Due to the increase in building construction, prices of construction materials rose sharply. The price increase was a deterrent because the middle and low-income classes could not afford to build houses.The share of the housing sector and its share of credit decreased compared to other sectors.Public sector investment in the housing sector decreased.There were no adequate facilities for the preparation of urban land and no new cities were adequately developed.
Population planning at the national level Despite population control policies being in place during the years 1987–1992, the population growth rate was not reduced.The rise in urban population from 35.4% in 1987 to 57% in 1992, led to the housing crisis.The population increased due to rural-urban migration, and cities were faced with population accumulation. With the accumulation of populations in large cities, the need for housing also increased.
Laws, regulations, and standards There were many shortcomings in the landlord and tenant act.There is no appropriate tax system for the housing sector.Construction standards were not inclusive.

Reasons for the failure of housing sector objectives in the second program

Problems Reasons
Governmental Inappropriate participation of institutions related to the housing sector, especially at the municipality level.A mismatch between housing construction patterns and needs, and economic problems.Lack of incentive mechanisms for the mass production of housing.
Private Reduction in effective demand due to lower per capita income.The reluctance of private investors to invest in the housing sector.Lack of housing investment institutions.

Shortcomings and successes of the housing sector during the fifth development program

Shortcomings Successes

problems created by the bank-based housing finance system;

lack of market capacity to absorb the micro resources available in the economy;

inadequacy of banking resources payable from private sector bank deposits;

creation of the ‘Dutch disease’* in Iran's economy;

limited supply of land for housing construction;

lack of unified rules governing urban land policy;

lack of large-scale and sustainable mass production.

improvement and renovation of dilapidated urban textures;

optimal distribution of subsidies;

support for target groups;

enabling households to build appropriate houses in urban and rural areas;

optimal use of monetary and financial markets to regulate and balance the housing market;

developing the quality of the construction industry;

increasing housing production;

support for low-income groups and young couples;

development of the real estate market information system.

Number of Mehr units by city type and project type

City type Owner-developer units Tripartite Agreement units Cooperative units Total
Share (percentage) Units Share (percentage) Units Share (percentage) Units
More than 25k 67% 608,875 44% 239,798 65% 390,199 1,238,872
Less than 25k 29% 267,941 0% 20 23% 134732 402,693
New cities 4% 33,797 56% 305,189 12% 74297 413,283
Total 100% 910,613 100% 545,007 100% 599228 2,054,848
eISSN:
2084-6118
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Geosciences, Geography, other