1. bookVolume 26 (2022): Edizione 4 (October 2022)
Dettagli della rivista
License
Formato
Rivista
eISSN
2084-6118
Prima pubblicazione
01 Jan 1984
Frequenza di pubblicazione
4 volte all'anno
Lingue
Inglese
Accesso libero

The Iranian Housing System under the Islamic Republic Government (1990–2021)

Pubblicato online: 31 Oct 2022
Volume & Edizione: Volume 26 (2022) - Edizione 4 (October 2022)
Pagine: 185 - 197
Ricevuto: 01 Apr 2021
Accettato: 12 Sep 2022
Dettagli della rivista
License
Formato
Rivista
eISSN
2084-6118
Prima pubblicazione
01 Jan 1984
Frequenza di pubblicazione
4 volte all'anno
Lingue
Inglese
Introduction

Urbanization is a geographical phenomenon that leads to a change in the structure of human settlements (Pilehvar 2021). Urbanization is usually a demographic process in which populations move from rural to urban areas, which become out of balance (Molaei Qelichi et al. 2017). One of the main problems created in societies as a result of this population increase has been the housing supply issue (Farjad 1998). After food and clothing, housing is the most basic human need and is vital for the survival of both the individual and society. The housing status in Iran has been affected by changes in population during recent decades, caused by the natural increase in population and the mass migration of rural people to cities. As a result, demand for housing has increased in urban areas (Ahari & Aminijadid 1997). In every country, having proper shelter or housing is the fundamental right of citizens. Such a right has been recognized in the constitutions of nations, including Iran, and governments should provide reasonable housing conditions for families. Despite the acceptance of this right, the problem of shelter in Iran has remained one of its severest and most complex social issues. In Iran, housing planning is divided into two periods: before the Islamic revolution and after the Islamic revolution. During the first period, housing was not seriously followed in development programs provided before the Islamic revolution. These development programs were mainly cross-sectional. After the Islamic revolution, due to events such as Iran's entry into global relations, the scale of the assembly industry, land reforms, and the collapse of traditional city-village relations, the migration of villagers to the cities greatly increased, leading to the growth of metropolises. Consequently, serious issues and problems have emerged in terms of housing (Rajaei & Mansourian 2016). Iran prepared six development programs from 1990 to 2022, and the housing sector was a priority in these six programs. Despite all the attention paid to the housing sector, most of the population still does not have access to adequate housing. Today, providing housing in Iran has become a concerning challenge that is out of the control of the government. Thus, it is of great importance to study the current trends in the housing sector to gain experience for the coming years. From this point of view, the present article seeks to review and evaluate the position of housing in development programs in Iran. This article pursues the main aim of examining the Iranian housing system and analyses the consequences of housing policies in development programs.

Literature Review
Housing Policies Review around the World

Housing is one of the most important human needs. Governments often put policies on the agenda to provide housing. Housing policy-making and planning varies from country to country, with each country following a specific approach based on its social, economic, and political structure. The initial response of the government in England to the considerable shortage of housing after World War II was to establish a strong housing program using the public budget, and when Margaret Thatcher came to power, the role of the market in housing policy increased (Harloe 1981; Ungerson 1994; Priemus & Kemp 2004). Programs such as the Housing Benefit were proposed, which aimed at constructing affordable houses for low-income families; however, this program was later revised and the Local Housing Allowance was included in it (Hamnett 2009; Colburn 2019). In Italy, housing policy regarding renting or owning property has been discussed (Caruso 2017), and there has been a great change, with the national government delegating authority to local government (Iommi 2011). In France, the main elements of low-income housing policy have included the construction of public housing, the payment of direct rent subsidies to households, and help for low-income residents. The private sector has become responsible for providing the main part of housing construction (Laferrère & Le Blanc 2000; Blanc 2004). In Germany, low-income housing policies have included direct subsidies to low-income households and social housing (Egner 2011). The government of the Netherlands introduced the Housing Allowances scheme in 1970 and many low-income households were supported under this program (Priemus & Elsinga 2007). The rent subsidy, in 1984, and the Housing Allowances program, in 2006, were both rolled into the Rent Rebate Program (Colburn 2019).

In the US, the federal government first executed public housing policy to support low-income households; then, in 1970, they started Demand-Side Subsidies (Colburn 2019). However, it still supports housing production using Supply-Side Subsidy programs such as Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) (Eriksen & Lang 2018). In Australia, most low-income households (two-thirds) live in their own houses (Martin et al. 2016). In China, since 1979, consecutive modifications in housing and macroeconomic policies have caused the marketization of housing, plus market-oriented modifications in housing policy (Wang & Murie 1999; Zhao & Bourassa 2003; Fang 2006; Cao & Keivani 2013). Over recent decades, Financial and Fiscal Policy, the Land Supply Policy, and Structure of Housing Supply have been included in their program (Ye et al. 2010). In South Korea, the following policies are among the most important: Clearance (1950), Site-Service (1960), Re-Location and Demolition (1970), Building High-Density (1975), and the Housing Regeneration projects (1980). Since the 1980s up to the present time, the construction of public and social housing for the poor was included in the program (Ha 2007). In Japan, the development of house ownership has been one of the crucial elements of housing and low-income housing policy (Hirayama 2003; Arku 2006). In Singapore, the Home Ownership for the People scheme was proposed in 1964 in order to encourage the democratization of property-ownership and to support house ownership in the low-income and middle-income classes (Goh 1989; Arku 2006). While, in New Zealand, during the 1990s, a collection of fundamental housing modifications were carried out (Thorns 1986; Murphy 2004). Thus, using housing subsidies, under most democratic capitalist governments, is an indication of the commodification of housing policy.

Up to the early 1970s, housing programs in developing countries contained innovations that were supported by their governments to design, construct, and sell houses using loans with subsidized interest rates. These policies were generally carried out on a limited scale, and, according to families, they were not affordable or centralized, and in some cases were inefficient (Mayo 1999). Housing policies in developing countries have undergone considerable changes within the past three or four decades; so during the 1990s and 2000s, they emphasized the empowerment approach. Governments focused on five special market elements, i.e., land, financial affairs, infrastructure, industrial construction, and construction materials (Arku 2020). In Egypt, mass housing and service-location programs were proposed for low-income groups (Abdelkader 1989), while Nigeria proposed an empowerment approach in housing policy (Daniel & Hunt 2014). After 1994, the government of South Africa executed the Capital Subsidy Scheme (Pillay & Naudé 2006); however, after this housing scheme, the low-income class could not afford to possess any houses. In Ghana, due to a lack of public interest in the Rent-Free Compound Housing System, Family Compound Housing gradually became the predominant policy – currently, Rented Compound Housing is being proposed instead (Danso-Wiredu 2018). Taiwan's government initiated a collection of Pro-Ownership policies, such as the Mortgage Loan Subsidies policy, in the 1970s (Radzimski 2014). In Jordan, house ownership is a priority (Al-Homoud et al. 2009) while, in contrast, no particular housing policy exists in Yemen (Alaghbari et al. 2009). Up to the 1990s, in Bangladesh, service-location programs, displacement, infill development, and upgrading were included in low-income housing policies (Choguill 1988). India first started displacement (Mehta et al. 1989) and cooperatives programs. However, mass housing and low-cost housing emphasized the achievement of sustainable housing (Srivastava & Kumar 2018). Indonesia executed crucial national policy for self-help housing (World Bank 1975), and two policies for public housing development and balancing the housing market (Tunas & Peresthu 2010). In Brazil, programs under the low-income public housing policy were initiated in the 1930s. From 2009 to 2011, the Minha Casa Minha Vida (MCMV) program was introduced to improve the living quality of the poor, reduce the housing shortage, and strengthen the economy (Sampaio 2020). In 2015, in Argentina, the government took measures to improve private investment for the vulnerable classes through the Pro.Cre.Ar framework (Murray & Clapham 2020). In Chile, up to the 1990s, support was merely composed of programs for public supply, direct housing construction, or supporting supply. In 2014, the D.S.49 subsidy program was carried out to improve the possibility of house ownership for low-income households (Ross, & Pelletiere 2014; Pero 2016).

A Review of Housing Policies in Iran

The Iranian constitution was first drafted after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, and in Article 31 refers to the provision of housing. In this regard, six development programs were prepared, which can be categorized as social, economic, and cultural programs. The first development program (1990–1994), was prepared after the Iran-Iraq war in 1990. Given the problems in the housing market during those years, the first development plan for the housing sector aimed to prevent the growth of large cities, supply urban land at preferential prices, create new cities, reduce land acquisition, provide facilities for rental housing, strengthen housing cooperatives, and increase the quality of housing construction (Derakhsh 2016; Abdi 2017). But the government's priority was to provide housing in war-torn areas (Ghanbari & Zaheri 2011). During the second program for housing provision (1995–2000), strategies such as providing bank facilities and land transfer, discounts on land prices, and tax exemptions for units less than 120 meters, were put back on the agenda (Hezarjaribi & Emamighafari, 2019). Therefore, mass production and downsizing was the predominant method used for housing provision (Zarghamfard et al. 2019). But the government could not solve the housing problem because urbanization was increasing, and migration to large cities such as Tehran, Isfahan, Mashhad, and Tabriz had intensified (Molaei Qelichi et al. 2017). Thus, in the third program (2001–2005), the government prioritized housing provision for low-income groups, and strategies such as liberalizing the housing market, reducing government intervention, and creating a secondary mortgage market were considered (Baradaran et al. 2019; Ghaedrahmati & Zarghamfard 2021). In this third development program, the following measures were taken to address Article 31 of the constitution (Hezarjaribi & Emamighafari 2019; Baradaran et al. 2019): the provision of banking facilities, the gradual payment of loan instalments, the complete liberalization of the land market, the establishment of housing funds for specific groups, the reform of housing construction and production regulations, an increase in housing construction in the form of government leased units (with the help of cooperatives and mass builders), and the creation of a building and housing database. In the fourth development program (2006–2010), the compilation of a comprehensive housing plan, the passing of a law on organizing and supporting the production and supply of housing, and the construction of Mehr housing, were the most important measures taken to balance the housing market (Abdi 2017). The fourth program pursued policies in the housing sector such as establishing social justice, reducing regional inequalities, curbing housing inflation, and producing housing commensurate with household finances (Mohammadi Dehcheshemh 2018). The fifth program (2012–2016), similar to the previous ones, paid attention to the provision of low-income housing, trying to achieve the outputs of the comprehensive housing plan. The program also addressed significant policies such as reducing regional inequality in accessing adequate housing, improving and renovating urban structures that were crumbling, and supporting low-income young couples (Zarghamfard et al. 2019). The sixth program (2018–2022) addressed the most crucial problem in the housing sector, worn-out buildings and urban regeneration. Other housing strategies reduced the vulnerability of rural settlements, providing housing for low-income urban populations, providing financial resources and low-cost facilities, and providing the land needed (Tavakolnia & Zarghami 2018). Despite the policies and strategies adopted by the government in the housing sector, housing affordability is still challenging, as middle-class households have increased since the mid-1990s. But low-income households continue to struggle, and are unable to afford adequate housing in the market (Alaedini 2021). Housing prices rose after the early 2000s, but policies such as Mehr Housing were able to halt these rising housing prices; however, since about 2008 house prices have again risen following international sanctions. With the election of Rouhani as president (2014), housing prices experienced an unprecedented rise. During this period, the market was abandoned, and there was no control over prices (Zarghamfard et al. 2019). On the other hand, land policy in Iran has always been imperfect, and integrated urban land management has never been achieved. Often the public sector did not sell its land on the open market (Meshkini et al. 2019); therefore, only the private sector managed the housing market. Since expectations of inflation prevail in the land sector, agents pursued a policy of increasing housing prices. The result of these processes was an increase in land and house hoarding. According to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, housing prices increased by 100% in 2020. Ebrahim Ra’isi was elected president of Iran in 2021 under the promise of building 4 million housing units per year. After six months, however, land and housing prices have continued to rise, and no new housing units have been built. In such a situation, housing affordability is an issue, so that middle-and low-income households cannot access adequate housing. Given the current situation, it is evident that having a house has become a dream. Overall, with the prevailing economic conditions, access to affordable housing seems unreachable, and the government needs to develop more research into this area.

Research Methodology

Content analyses were used in this study. Content analysis is a method of putting together data related to a particular topic and helps the researcher understand the circumstances of the topic and answer his/her questions. To achieve the stated goals, documents from the years 1990–2021 related to the Iranian housing system were evaluated. The methodological steps for the present research were as follows: 1) Specify the purpose. This research, done for those in charge of the Iranian housing system, evaluated the Iranian housing system and identified its strengths and weaknesses; 2) Questions. What was the condition of the housing sector in Iran between 1990 and 2021? 3) Selection of the research unit. In this research, documents related to Iran's social, economic, and cultural development programs were evaluated; 4) Specifying the statistical sample. The statistical sample included all documents related to the housing sector; and 5) Analysis. The analysis is based on information received from the relevant documents and the results are stated in the results section.

Results
Housing Performance during the First Development Program (1990–1994)

The first development program was approved by the Islamic Consultative Assembly in 1990, and the most important goals of this program were as follows: reconstruction and strengthening of national defence capacities, reconstruction of production centres and population numbers damaged during the imposed war, creating economic growth with an emphasis on the self-sufficiency of agricultural products, controlling inflation, meeting the basic needs of the people, ensuring Islamic social justice, reform of consumption patterns, and reform of the executive and judicial management of the country (Pourdanesh & Mojahedzadeh 2020). The first development plan achieved an average annual economic growth of 52.7% per year (Mustafavi 2018). Due to the recession prevailing in the housing sector, a set of policies were adopted in this program to strengthen the supply side of the housing. However, because of problems with adjustment policies and economic stabilization, the recession in the housing sector did not settle (Ghanbari & Zaheri 2011). Increasing bank interest, the rapidly increasing prices of building materials, and severe inflation reduced the financial power of households and had a destructive impact on housing. In the early years of the program, capital inflows caused a rapid increase in land prices. Inconsistencies in policies related to credit and land preparation led to a failure to achieve program objectives and increased household density in residential units (Saremi 1999). In the first development program, the production of 2,285,000 residential units was at the top of the objectives. Due to a lack of capacity for building within the country and the weak participation of the private sector in funding, this objective was not achievable (Program and Budget Organization, 1994). However, the construction of durable buildings was one of the positive points in the first program. Reducing the average floor areas and aiming towards the construction of small buildings for the low-income class were other objectives of the development program. In general, the above purposes were not fulfilled (Khodabakhsh 2001). Broadly, the shortcomings and successes of the first program can be categorized in the following table.

The construction of housing units and changes in apartment sizes constituted the different aspects of the program (Noruzi 2003). In general, the above goals were not fulfilled. The low number of rental housing units, increasing the share of land in the cost of housing, and the low contribution of bank loans in the housing sector explain the crucial role of the first program.

In general, we can say that during the first development program, supply policies were put on the agenda. Reconstruction was the main policy because it came after the Iran-Iraq war. To address this issue, on the one hand, the government was forced to offer free materials (Taheribabersad 2004), while on the other, they needed to take into consideration suitable land for this. As a result, the government handed over land at different prices in each region. Housing policies and its results during the first development program are shown in the following figure.

Overall, during the first and second development programs, land supply in big cities such as Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, Mashhad, and Ahvaz increased and, consequently, building density went up. As a result, an excessive increase in land prices occurred in such cities.

Housing Performance During the Second Development Program (1995–2000)

The second development program was approved in 1995, one year after the end of the first program, and pursued the following major goals: 1) the realization of social justice and the promotion of the society's public culture; 2) increasing productivity; 3) economic growth centred on agriculture; 4) the development of a non-oil administration; 5) environmental protection and optimal use of the country's natural resources; and 6) law enforcement and the strengthening of public participation (Shirzadi 2011). The economic goal of this program was to achieve an annual growth of 5.1% over four years (Mustafavi 2018). An evaluation of the program indicates that 1,017,000 housing units with a total floor area of 145 million square meters had been constructed. During this period, the focus was on the free market, and supply-side policies were on the agenda (Javad 2000). The policy exacerbated low-income people's difficulty in accessing the housing market. The existing deficiencies of the first program were not considered in the second program. Hence, the second program failed to reduce the gap between housing supply and demand. Both the first and second programs reduced the size of apartments, and it was decided that the apartment's size should be reduced to 100m2 (Lahutifar 2003). In general, the policies formulated during the second program could not stimulate the housing market's building industry. Individual and personal housing production was more appropriate for households (Mahmudiany & Hosseini 2015). In this program, low credit was an obstacle to achieving these goals. The following table indicates the shortcomings and successes of the program.

Figure 1

Policies and their results for the housing sector during the first program

Source: authors own elaboration

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.

Source: authors own elaboration

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.

Source: Adapted from Rafie 2009

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.

Source: authors own elaboration

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.

Source: authors own elaboration

Social and protected housing were at the centre of the second program, and focused attention on low-income groups. Of course, low-income groups participated in this process and were involved in the process as labour. To reduce costs, the government used the low-income groups themselves in the construction process. The mass production of housing was prioritized in this program (Javadiashlak 1998) and facilities were granted to housing developers. This prevented low-income groups from accessing affordable housing.

Figure 2

Policies and their results for the housing sector during the second development program

Source: authors own elaboration

It can be concluded that the policy governing the housing sector was ‘savings, downsizing and mass production’, and the target groups were identified based on the axes of this policy. Most of the plans in the housing sector had been relatively successful. For the first time, special objectives were developed in the housing sector.

Housing Performance during the Third Development Program (2001–2005)

The third development program was aimed at ‘structural reforms’. The main objective of which was to reduce government ownership, and to expand the private sector and public participation in economic activities, social justice, decentralization, public access to information, environmental protection, export development strategy, attention to community cultural developments, and providing free health services (Shirzadi 2011; Pourdanesh & Mojahedzadeh 2020). In this program, the annual economic growth was 6%, and the average investment growth was 7.18% (Mustafavi 2018). Also, the average size of residential units was reduced from 123m2 in 2001 to 119m2 in 2004. In 2001, 2002, and 2003, there was an increase in the construction of rental units by approximately 31%, 35%, and 37%, respectively (Economic Report 2004 and monitoring the performance of the first four years of the third development program 2005). This program proposed monetary policies and economic liberalization to resolve the housing problems, but it did not achieve the predefined goals. Generally, the share of housing has always been more than 10% of national production. In other years, except for 1998 and 1999, the housing sector's share has been a growing trend (Riazi 2003).

From 1992 to 1995, due to the implementation of economic adjustment policies, few investments were absorbed by the housing sector (Document of the third program in housing sector 2000). After 1996, the housing sector's share in total investments increased. But in 1998, thanks to a fall in oil revenues, the housing sector experienced a recession. Between 1999 and 2010, due to a rise in oil prices, there was an issue in the housing sector (Abdi et al. 2012). The problems with the implementation of housing plans rose dramatically, some of which were related to production, supply, and demand, while others were connected to regional and urban planning constraints (Table 5).

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.

Source: 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.

Source: authors own elaboration

Some of the problems stated above were related to the requirements of the period. The third development program was successful in some cases, the most important of which were reinforcing the mass production policy and the construction of rent-ownership housing. Rental housing construction and supply is a relatively new strategy. Through this strategy, the government can provide low-income housing. Since 1992, this strategy has become common in Iran, the first example of which was implemented in Rasht (1999) (Heydarichapaneh & Rezatb 2011). However, due to a lack of rental institutions in Iran, this policy did not achieve its goal. Another reason for the failure of this project was the unwillingness of both government and investors to build rental housing.

In this program, there was no significant relationship between administrative goals and private goals. The shortcomings of the program included a lack of proper analysis of indicators, and the discontinuity of these indicators. Paying attention to low-income housing was the main point of the third development program. There were specific policies for the housing sector, the most important of which was the ‘regulation of the housing market’. As a result, housing lending and housing production credit increased, while mass production and downsizing were also encouraged and strengthened. When the housing market regulation policy was implemented, housing and land prices soared and because of this, low-income groups could not enter the housing market. There was virtually no effective demand from these groups.

During the third development program, the average annual housing production increased to 9%. Generally, during the first three programs (1990–2005), more than 95% of housing sector plans were privatized and the government only had a guidance and supervisory role (Abdi & Ghobadi 2006).

Housing Performance during the Fourth Development Program (2006–2010)

Iran's fourth program completed the third development plan, with some of the third plan's themes being repeated. The program pursued the following goals: interaction with the global economy; expanding privatization and economic competitiveness; equalizing educational opportunities; protecting the environment; achieving food security and public health; providing public access to health services; establishing justice and reducing social inequalities; promoting social capital, human rights, and citizenship; detente in international relations; improvement in women's affairs, increased national security, development of judicial affairs, and the modernization of government (Shirzadi 2011). The annual economic growth for this program was considered to be 8% (Mustafavi 2018). Under the fourth program, it was anticipated that a total of 3,108,000 housing units would be built in urban areas. Studies showed that 86% of these housing units were constructed, and 91% of housing units had building licenses (Fourth economic, social and cultural development program law of Iran 2005). In 2007, the construction of about 75,000 housing units was completed in rural areas, and their costs were funded by the facilities of rural housing improvement. In addition, also in 2007, roughly 350 million dollars were paid to banks as subsidies for rural housing improvement projects (Economic Report 2009). In small and medium-sized cities, some grants were considered for those who constructed affordable rental housing. During this period, the assignment of building permits had an ascending trend. Downsizing was not successfully achieved under this development program. A housing master plan was developed during this development program, which was a premier achievement in the housing sector. From another point of view, improvement, renovation, and revival of old textures were the landmark in the fourth development program. It can be said that worn-out fabrics, providing low-income housing, and meeting the housing concerns of young people were the key priorities of the fourth development program. The fourth development program is summarized in the following figure.

Figure 3

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 program

Source: authors own elaboration

During this development program, the Mehr housing project (99 years) was proposed and carried out. The government sought to reduce fluctuations in the housing sector.

Housing Performance during the Fifth Development Program (2012–2016)

The fifth development program pursued goals such as social justice, the foundation of an Islamic-Iranian development model, increased production and social welfare, and the rehabilitation of the administrative system (Seifuri & Taqwa 2019). An economic growth of 8% was expected at the end of the program (Shaghaghi 2018). Studies (e.g. Souri 2014) suggest that the housing sector recession in 2009 continued until 2010. During this period, recession led to a fall in actual housing prices, and relative stability prevailed in the housing market. From late 2011, housing prices experienced a rising trend. Although housing construction is currently in recession, during the last two years the Department of Housing and Urban Development has still been reviewing the housing master plan approved in 2006 (Pourmohammadi & Asadi 2015). A revision of the housing master plan started in January 2014. Economic experts believed that a delay in closing the housing master plan would be detrimental to the housing market. Granting facilities to builders of affordable housing units in small and medium-sized cities and all villages included in this program was not predicted. Credit and technical assistance was not considered for improving and renovating rural housing. Supporting the establishment of factories that produced building materials and technical service providers, which was emphasized in the fourth development program, was removed. Ignoring and removing such factors can cause harmful effects for the disadvantaged groups (Analytical report about housing master plan criticism, 2015a). In the housing master plan, rental housing became the dominant tool for providing low-income housing. This approach was in stark contrast to the principles of the ‘resistance economy’1 (Analytical report about housing master plan criticism 2015b). The pros and cons of the fifth development program for the housing sector is summarized in the following table.

In the economic plan, there were no specific targets concerning the housing market for the next five years. Problems such as a lack of residential units, rental properties, or land price increases were neglected., The Mehr housing project continued during this program. Over the previous seven years, the Mehr housing project had been implemented in suburban areas and transferred to applicants in the form of a 99-year ownership (Pourmohammadi et al. 2013), and was faced with financial crises and other problems such as a lack of urban planning and social amenities. This was owing to the financial issues that burdened the national economy. Table 8 presents the detailed number of planned units in each city and the project type.

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.

Source: authors own elaboration

‘Dutch Disease’ is a negative consequence arising from steep increases in a country's income. It is primarily associated with natural resource discovery; however, it can result from any significant increase in foreign currency, including foreign direct investment, foreign aid, or a substantial increase in natural resource prices (Ebrahimzadeh 2020).

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

Source: Tajrishy & Vesal 2021

Table 8 shows the division of Mehr housing units by the type of project and type of city. There exists three type of cities: cities with more than 25 thousand population, which were managed by the Ministry of Housing; cities with less than 25 thousand population, which were managed by National Land and Housing Organization; and new cities which were under control of the New Towns development CO. Three streams of Mehr construction projects were in practice. The owner-developer stream was for individuals who had their own land and had a small-scale construction. The other two streams were the ‘Tripartite Agreements’ and ‘cooperative projects’, which were concentrated projects in selected city localities.

By government decision, within the fifth development program the Mehr housing project was stopped, but unfinished units would be completed and delivered to the applicants. Housing officials have raised other programs such as social housing projects, but their details and conditions have not been disclosed. Although social housing in Iran started from the second development plan, it is still one of the most ambiguous concepts in Iran. In Iran, social housing is often referred to as housing that is built by the government for certain groups, namely, low-income groups and young couples. Social housing policy seeks to control the growing demand for housing, stabilize the market, mobilize the national economy, and reduce the unemployment rate. Under the social housing policy, the government pays the bulk of the cost, but applicants must also be involved.

Housing Performance during the Sixth Development Program (2018–2022)

The most important objectives of the sixth program include improving business, providing employment, financing, social justice and eliminating discrimination, empowering the deprived and the poor (with the priority being female-headed households), improving social insurance, and reducing social harm (Seifuri & Taqwa 2019). The program has targeted an average annual economic growth of 8%, and a Gini coefficient of 34% in the final year of the program (Mustafavi 2018). The Mehr housing policy has again been continued in the sixth development program, and by 2020, 1,578,000 Mehr housing units (82%) were scheduled to be delivered to applicants (Khora Sun News 2020). In addition, the construction of 400,000 housing units was on the agenda, and in some areas, supplying land has been the policy of the government. In addition, it was decided that 200,000 units would be built by developers in new cities, 100,000 units in cities with less than 50,000 people, and 100,000 units in dilapidated textures (Bazafarinishahri 2017). The focus has been on providing housing for low-income groups. So, the construction of 570,000 housing units is intended to support low-income groups (Eghtesad News 1975). Given that the sixth development program is not yet complete and no documentation concerning the results has been published, it is not possible to evaluate the performance of the housing sector.

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.

Source: authors own elaboration

Discussion and Conclusion

The ambiguity in the housing program goals is the most crucial deficiency of housing planning in Iran. For years, providing housing for poor and low-income groups of people has been the predominant policy in the housing sector, but there are no tools to achieve this goal (Mir Saeed Ghazi 2001). In other words, existing tools are holistic and are not dedicated to a specific group. On the other hand, the land has always belonged to the government, and the government sought housing planning. The government considers itself the owner of uncultivated land, and has the right to occupy this barren land. As a result, housing policies were strongly influenced by land policies. Therefore, the government has always used land as a lever for market regulation. Although the performance of development programs had many ups and downs, the overall performance showed improvement. The trend in changes in key indicators (especially household density) reflects the same tendency (Motamedi 2004). From another viewpoint, despite considerable experience in planning, adopting policies that sometimes conflicted with others and with macroeconomic policies caused optimal utilization of housing production factors. During the first economic, social, and cultural development program, the issue of affordable residential units was neglected, thus low-income housing was not on the agenda (Shajari 2010). The fundamental housing strategies during the first development program were counteracting the housing dilemma, providing non-agricultural land for the construction of affordable housing, taking advantage of potential capacities in production, improving subsidy payments, and adopting supportive policies in the housing sector in the form of cheap materials for the supply and construction of affordable housing. During the second development program, strategies such as land preparation, affordable housing supply for low-income groups, and support from mass housing production were on the agenda. Due to the inadequate participation of the private sector in housing planning, these strategies did not succeed.

During the third development program, a market liberalization approach was considered. The government concluded that since government intervention distorts the housing market, excessive intervention in the housing sector should move towards minimum intervention. Hence, the predominant policies during the third development program were the supply of land at market prices and a decrease in government intervention in the housing market. During the fourth and fifth development programs, the housing sector flourished. The government paid special attention to this sector, focusing on sustainable development, empowerment of low-income groups, retrofitting and standardization, renovation of old textures, and considering vernacular architecture. The fourth program policies were continued in the fifth development program. A Iranian-Islamic pattern of housing design was developed, organizing of informal settlements was on the agenda, and unfinished housing plans from the fourth program were transferred to the fifth development program. In the sixth plan, the Mehr housing policy continued, and the renovation of dilapidated textures was pursued seriously all across the country. Developed strategies for the housing sector have still not achieved acceptable results, and homeownership for poor and middle-income groups is still an unattainable dream. The following table shows the housing sector during development programs.

Finally, to balance the housing sector and provide decent housing, the government can pursue the following policies. A) Establish a system for transparency in residential and property information: the government should prepare and make available information related to property, construction, taxes, and vacant houses. In this way, it can prevent hoarding of, and speculation on, housing to some extent. B) Designing tax policies: taxes on land appreciation, capital gains, taxes on vacant homes, taxes on the sale and purchase of luxury homes, etc., are among the tax policies that prevent land and housing speculation and pave the way for equitable housing allocation. C) Accurate and scientific determination of required housing units based on demographic variables: the government should provide accurate planning and policy-making in the housing sector, determine the needs for cities and provinces accurately, and take the necessary measures to provide housing. D) Provincializing the housing policy: the government can delegate housing planning and policy-making to the provinces. In this way, the government allocates the necessary funds. However, housing programs are prepared based on the different social, economic, cultural, and geographical conditions in each province.

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

Abdelkader, N 1989, ‘Mass housing versus sites and services schemes for low income groups’, in Innovative Housing Practices: proceedings of the IAHS World Congress on Housing, eds. V Abranets & O Ural, Porto, pp. 75–80. AbdelkaderN 1989 ‘Mass housing versus sites and services schemes for low income groups’ in Innovative Housing Practices: proceedings of the IAHS World Congress on Housing eds. AbranetsV UralO Porto 75 80 10.1016/B978-0-08-037884-8.50017-2 Search in Google Scholar

Abdi, K 2017, ‘Examining the experiences of housing policies in Iran and the world’, Semnan police knowledge quarterly, vol. 7, no. 25, pp. 9–39. AbdiK 2017 ‘Examining the experiences of housing policies in Iran and the world’ Semnan police knowledge quarterly 7 25 9 39 Search in Google Scholar

Abdi, MA & Ghobadi, F 2006, ‘During the third development program, the average of annual housing production has increased to 9 percent’, Journal of Program, vol. 155. AbdiMA GhobadiF 2006 ‘During the third development program, the average of annual housing production has increased to 9 percent’ Journal of Program 155 Search in Google Scholar

Abdi, M., Mehdizadegan, S & Kurdi, F 2012, ‘Six decades of housing planning in Iran (1990–2009)’, Research Institute of Building and Housing, Ministry of Roads and Urban Development. Publication, no: K–616. AbdiM. MehdizadeganS KurdiF 2012 ‘Six decades of housing planning in Iran (1990–2009)’ Research Institute of Building and Housing, Ministry of Roads and Urban Development Publication, no: K–616. Search in Google Scholar

Ahari, Z & Aminijadid, Sh 1997, ‘The experiences of various countries in the provision of housing’, National Land and Housing Organization, Tehran. AhariZ AminijadidSh 1997 ‘The experiences of various countries in the provision of housing’ National Land and Housing Organization Tehran Search in Google Scholar

Alaedini, P 2021, ‘Iran's housing policy challenges’, The Iranian Studies Unit. Available from: <https://www.dohainstitute.org/en/PoliticalStudies/Pages/Iran-Housing-Policy-Challenges.aspx>. [5 March 2022]. AlaediniP 2021 ‘Iran's housing policy challenges’ The Iranian Studies Unit Available from: <https://www.dohainstitute.org/en/PoliticalStudies/Pages/Iran-Housing-Policy-Challenges.aspx>. [5 March 2022]. Search in Google Scholar

Alaghbari, W, Salim, A, Dola, K & Abdullah Abang Ali, A 2009, ‘Housing shortage for low-income in Yemen: causes and suggestions’, International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 363–372. AlaghbariW SalimA DolaK Abdullah Abang AliA 2009 ‘Housing shortage for low-income in Yemen: causes and suggestions’ International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis 2 4 363 372 10.1108/17538270910992809 Search in Google Scholar

Al-Homoud, M, Al-Oun, S & Al-Hindawi, A 2009, ‘The low-income housing market in Jordan’, International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 233–252. Al-HomoudM Al-OunS Al-HindawiA 2009 ‘The low-income housing market in Jordan’ International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis 2 3 233 252 10.1108/17538270910977536 Search in Google Scholar

Analytical report about housing master plan criticism (A) (2015–2026) 2015, Chapter One: Master plan overviews from the perspective of compliance with national documents, theoretical foundations, macro targeting and overall approach, Center for Technology Studies, University of Science and Technology. Analytical report about housing master plan criticism (A) (2015–2026) 2015 Chapter One: Master plan overviews from the perspective of compliance with national documents, theoretical foundations, macro targeting and overall approach Center for Technology Studies, University of Science and Technology Search in Google Scholar

Analytical report about housing master plan criticism (B) (2015–2026) 2015, Chapter third: Reviewing the content of housing master plan, Center for Technology Studies, University of Science and Technology. Analytical report about housing master plan criticism (B) (2015–2026) 2015 Chapter third: Reviewing the content of housing master plan Center for Technology Studies, University of Science and Technology Search in Google Scholar

Arku, G 2006. ‘The housing and economic development debate revisited: economic significance of housing in developing countries’, Journal of Housing Built Environment, vol. 21, pp. 377–395. ArkuG 2006 ‘The housing and economic development debate revisited: economic significance of housing in developing countries’ Journal of Housing Built Environment 21 377 395 10.1007/s10901-006-9056-3 Search in Google Scholar

Arku, G 2020, Housing policy in Developing Countries, International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, pp. 79–82. ArkuG 2020 Housing policy in Developing Countries International Encyclopedia of Human Geography 79 82 10.1016/B978-0-08-102295-5.10395-6 Search in Google Scholar

Baradaran, M, Ghaffari, G & Rabiee, AZM 2019, ‘Government and housing policy making in Iran after the Islamic Revolution’, Social Development & Welfare Planning, vol. 11, no. 38, pp. 179–218. BaradaranM GhaffariG RabieeAZM 2019 ‘Government and housing policy making in Iran after the Islamic Revolution’ Social Development & Welfare Planning 11 38 179 218 Search in Google Scholar

Bazafarinishahri 2017, Available from: <http://bazafarinishahri.ir/fa/113122>. [20 February 2020]. Bazafarinishahri 2017 Available from: <http://bazafarinishahri.ir/fa/113122>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Blanc, M 2004, ‘The changing role of the State in French housing policies: A roll-out without roll-back?’, European Journal of Housing Policy, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 283–302. BlancM 2004 ‘The changing role of the State in French housing policies: A roll-out without roll-back?’ European Journal of Housing Policy 4 3 283 302 10.1080/1461671042000307260 Search in Google Scholar

Cao, JA & Keivani, R 2013, ‘The limits and potentials of the housing market enabling paradigm: An evaluation of China's housing policies from 1998 to 2011’, Housing Studies, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 44–68. CaoJA KeivaniR 2013 ‘The limits and potentials of the housing market enabling paradigm: An evaluation of China's housing policies from 1998 to 2011’ Housing Studies 29 1 44 68 10.1080/02673037.2013.818619 Search in Google Scholar

Caruso, N 2017, ‘Housing policies in Italy: From social housing to neo-liberalism’, in Policies and Practices in Italian Welfare Housing, Springer Briefs in Geography, Springer, Cham. CarusoN 2017 ‘Housing policies in Italy: From social housing to neo-liberalism’ in Policies and Practices in Italian Welfare Housing, Springer Briefs in Geography Springer Cham 10.1007/978-3-319-41890-2_2 Search in Google Scholar

Choguill, CL 1988, ‘Problems in providing low-income urban housing in Bangladesh’, Habitat International, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 29–39. ChoguillCL 1988 ‘Problems in providing low-income urban housing in Bangladesh’ Habitat International 12 3 29 39 10.1016/0197-3975(88)90059-8 Search in Google Scholar

Colburn, G 2019, ‘The use of markets in housing policy: a comparative analysis of housing subsidy programs’, Housing Studies, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 1–34. ColburnG 2019 ‘The use of markets in housing policy: a comparative analysis of housing subsidy programs’ Housing Studies 36 1 1 34 10.1080/02673037.2019.1686129 Search in Google Scholar

Daniel, MM & Hunt, RJ 2014, ‘Changing housing policies and housing provision in Jos, Nigeria’, Habitat International, vol. 42, pp. 203–213. DanielMM HuntRJ 2014 ‘Changing housing policies and housing provision in Jos, Nigeria’ Habitat International 42 203 213 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.11.004 Search in Google Scholar

Danso-Wiredu, EY 2018, ‘Housing strategies in low income urban communities in Accra, Ghana’, GeoJournal, vol. 83, pp. 663–677. Danso-WireduEY 2018 ‘Housing strategies in low income urban communities in Accra, Ghana’ GeoJournal 83 663 677 10.1007/s10708-017-9792-9 Search in Google Scholar

Derakhsh, A 2016, ‘Housing policy review in Iran, International Conference on Architecture’, Urban Planning, Civil Engineering, Art and Environment; Future Horizons, Looking to the Past, Tehran. DerakhshA 2016 ‘Housing policy review in Iran, International Conference on Architecture’ Urban Planning, Civil Engineering, Art and Environment; Future Horizons, Looking to the Past Tehran Search in Google Scholar

Document of second economic, social, a cultural development (1996–2000) 2000. Document of second economic, social, a cultural development (1996–2000) 2000 Search in Google Scholar

Document of third program in housing sector 2000, Management and Planning Organization. Document of third program in housing sector 2000 Management and Planning Organization Search in Google Scholar

Ebrahimzadeh, Ch 2020, ‘Dutch disease: Wealth managed unwisely’, International Monetary Fund. Available from: <https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/dutch.htm>. [24 February 2020]. EbrahimzadehCh 2020 ‘Dutch disease: Wealth managed unwisely’ International Monetary Fund Available from: <https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/dutch.htm>. [24 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Economic report 2009, Performance of the first two years of the fourth development program. Economic report 2009 Performance of the first two years of the fourth development program Search in Google Scholar

Economic Report and monitoring the performance of the first four years of the third development program 2005. Economic Report and monitoring the performance of the first four years of the third development program 2005 Search in Google Scholar

Eghtesad News 1975. Available from: <https://tinyurl.com/2335w3hj>. [20 February 2020]. Eghtesad News 1975 Available from: <https://tinyurl.com/2335w3hj>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Egner, B 2011, ‘Housing policy in Germany - A best practice model?’, Briefing Paper, no. 4, pp. 1–8. EgnerB 2011 ‘Housing policy in Germany - A best practice model?’ Briefing Paper 4 1 8 Search in Google Scholar

Eriksen, MD & Lang, BJ 2018, ‘Overview and proposed reforms of the low-income housing tax credit program’, Regional Science and Urban Economics. EriksenMD LangBJ 2018 ‘Overview and proposed reforms of the low-income housing tax credit program’ Regional Science and Urban Economics 10.2139/ssrn.3132493 Search in Google Scholar

Fang, Y 2006, ‘Residential satisfaction, moving intention and moving behaviour: A study of redeveloped neighbourhoods in inner-city Beijing’, Housing Studies, vol. 21, pp. 671–694. FangY 2006 ‘Residential satisfaction, moving intention and moving behaviour: A study of redeveloped neighbourhoods in inner-city Beijing’ Housing Studies 21 671 694 10.1080/02673030600807217 Search in Google Scholar

Farjadi, Gh 1998, ‘Reviewing the role of housing sector in job creation’, Housing economics bulletin, no. 19. FarjadiGh 1998 ‘Reviewing the role of housing sector in job creation’ Housing economics bulletin 19 Search in Google Scholar

Fourth economic, social and cultural development program law of Iran 2005, Research and Development Department of Legislation and Regulations. Fourth economic, social and cultural development program law of Iran 2005 Research and Development Department of Legislation and Regulations Search in Google Scholar

Ghaedrahmati, S & Zarghamfard, M 2020, ‘Housing policy and demographic changes: the case of Iran’, International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–13. GhaedrahmatiS ZarghamfardM 2020 ‘Housing policy and demographic changes: the case of Iran’ International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis 14 1 1 13 10.1108/IJHMA-06-2019-0064 Search in Google Scholar

Ghanbari, and Zaheri, M 2011, ‘Evaluation of macro-housing policies in the programs before and after the Islamic Revolution of Iran’, Housing and Rural Environment, vo. 29(132), pp. 77–90. Ghanbari ZaheriM 2011 ‘Evaluation of macro-housing policies in the programs before and after the Islamic Revolution of Iran’ Housing and Rural Environment 29 132 77 90 Search in Google Scholar

Ha, SK 2007, ‘Housing regeneration and building sustainable low-income communities in Korea’, Habitat International, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 116–129. HaSK 2007 ‘Housing regeneration and building sustainable low-income communities in Korea’ Habitat International 31 1 116 129 10.1016/j.habitatint.2006.08.002 Search in Google Scholar

Hamnett, C 2009, ‘Spatial divisions of welfare: The geography of welfare benefit expenditure and of housing benefit in Britain’, Regional Studies, 43, pp. 1015–1033. HamnettC 2009 ‘Spatial divisions of welfare: The geography of welfare benefit expenditure and of housing benefit in Britain’ Regional Studies 43 1015 1033 10.1080/00343400802093813 Search in Google Scholar

Harloe, M 1981, ‘The recommodification of housing’ in City, Class and Capital: New Developments in the Political Economy of Cities and Regions, eds. M Harloe & E Lebas, Edward Arnold, London. HarloeM 1981 ‘The recommodification of housing’ in City, Class and Capital: New Developments in the Political Economy of Cities and Regions eds. HarloeM LebasE Edward Arnold London Search in Google Scholar

Heidarichapne, R & Rzatab Azgam, Kh 2010, ‘City development strategy (CDS) in provision of urban housing low-income groups Case study: the city of Rasht’, Human Geography Research Quarterly, vol. 73, pp. 59–82. HeidarichapneR Rzatab AzgamKh 2010 ‘City development strategy (CDS) in provision of urban housing low-income groups Case study: the city of Rasht’ Human Geography Research Quarterly 73 59 82 Search in Google Scholar

Hezarjaribi, J & Emamighafari, Z 2019, ‘A study of Changing house welfare policies in Iran (1979–2013)’, Social Development & Welfare Planning, vol. 11, no. 38, pp. 76–120. HezarjaribiJ EmamighafariZ 2019 ‘A study of Changing house welfare policies in Iran (1979–2013)’ Social Development & Welfare Planning 11 38 76 120 Search in Google Scholar

Hirayama, Y 2003, ‘Home-ownership in an unstable world’ in Housing and social change, eds. R Forrest & J Lee, Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, London, NY. HirayamaY 2003 ‘Home-ownership in an unstable world’ in Housing and social change eds. ForrestR LeeJ Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group London, NY Search in Google Scholar

Iommi, S 2011, The target efficiency problem in Italy's housing policy. The case of Tuscany’, Housing Studies, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 41–67. IommiS 2011 The target efficiency problem in Italy's housing policy. The case of Tuscany’ Housing Studies 26 1 41 67 10.1080/02673037.2010.512785 Search in Google Scholar

Javad, A 2000, ‘Examine the experience of housing planning in Iran with the dual purpose’, Journal of Geography and Planning, vol. 7. JavadA 2000 ‘Examine the experience of housing planning in Iran with the dual purpose’ Journal of Geography and Planning 7 Search in Google Scholar

Javadiashlak, A 1998, Study the feasibility of spatial housing developing in central areas of cities. Case Study: Tabriz, MSc thesis in University of Shahid Beheshti, Iran. JavadiashlakA 1998 Study the feasibility of spatial housing developing in central areas of cities. Case Study: Tabriz MSc thesis in University of Shahid Beheshti Iran Search in Google Scholar

Khodabakhsh, F 2001, ‘Factors affecting the quality of housing and housing quality objectives in developmental programs before and after Islamic revolution’, Conference Proceedings of housing development policies in Iran (technology in the construction of housing industry), Ministry of Housing and Urban. Tehran, Iran. KhodabakhshF 2001 ‘Factors affecting the quality of housing and housing quality objectives in developmental programs before and after Islamic revolution’ Conference Proceedings of housing development policies in Iran (technology in the construction of housing industry) Ministry of Housing and Urban. Tehran, Iran Search in Google Scholar

Khora San News 2020. Available from: <http://www.khorasannews.com/>. [20 February 2020]. Khora San News 2020 Available from: <http://www.khorasannews.com/>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Laferrère, A & Le Blanc, D 2000, ‘Housing policy: Low-income households in France’, A Companion to Urban Economics, pp. 159–178. LaferrèreA Le BlancD 2000 ‘Housing policy: Low-income households in France’ A Companion to Urban Economics 159 178 10.1002/9780470996225.ch10 Search in Google Scholar

Lahutifar, R 2003, Housing planning in towns with extensive expansion. MSc thesis in University of Tarbiat Modares, Iran. LahutifarR 2003 Housing planning in towns with extensive expansion MSc thesis in University of Tarbiat Modares Iran Search in Google Scholar

Mahmudiani, S & Hosseini, H 2015, ‘Qualitative and quantitative indicators of housing: the experience of Iran after the Islamic Revolution’, Iran's official statistical surveys journal, vol. 1. Tehran, Iran. MahmudianiS HosseiniH 2015 ‘Qualitative and quantitative indicators of housing: the experience of Iran after the Islamic Revolution’ Iran's official statistical surveys journal 1 Tehran, Iran Search in Google Scholar

Martin, Ch, Pawson, H & Nouwelant, R 2016, Housing policy and the housing system in Australia: an overview, Report for the Shaping Housing Futures Project. Australia. MartinCh PawsonH NouwelantR 2016 Housing policy and the housing system in Australia: an overview Report for the Shaping Housing Futures Project. Australia Search in Google Scholar

Mayo, S 1999, Subsidies in housing, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. MayoS 1999 Subsidies in housing Inter-American Development Bank Washington, DC Search in Google Scholar

Mehta, B, Mitra, BC & Nientied, P 1989, ‘Building regulation and low-income housing’, Cities, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 50–58. MehtaB MitraBC NientiedP 1989 ‘Building regulation and low-income housing’ Cities 6 1 50 58 10.1016/0264-2751(89)90006-1 Search in Google Scholar

Meshkini, A, Normohamadi, M & Zarghamfard, M 2019, ‘Developing an optimal pattern for state intervention in urban land management: case of Iran, Tehran city’, Spatial Information Research, vol. 27, pp. 695–708. MeshkiniA NormohamadiM ZarghamfardM 2019 ‘Developing an optimal pattern for state intervention in urban land management: case of Iran, Tehran city’ Spatial Information Research 27 695 708 10.1007/s41324-019-00272-2 Search in Google Scholar

Mir Saeed Ghazi, ME 2001, ‘Reviewing the housing situation’, Trends Journal, no. 28–29. Mir Saeed GhaziME 2001 ‘Reviewing the housing situation’ Trends Journal 28–29 Search in Google Scholar

Mohammadi Dehcheshemh, P 2018, ‘Assess of housing supply public policies about urban low-income groups (Case Study: Saman district)’, Geography (Regional Planning), vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 281–295. Mohammadi DehcheshemhP 2018 ‘Assess of housing supply public policies about urban low-income groups (Case Study: Saman district)’ Geography (Regional Planning) 8 2 281 295 Search in Google Scholar

Molaei Qelichi, M, Murgante, B, Yousefi Feshki, M & Zarghamfard, M 2017, ‘Urbanization patterns in Iran visualized through spatial auto-correlation analysis’, Spatial Information Research, vol. 25, pp. 627–633. Molaei QelichiM MurganteB Yousefi FeshkiM ZarghamfardM 2017 ‘Urbanization patterns in Iran visualized through spatial auto-correlation analysis’ Spatial Information Research 25 627 633 10.1007/s41324-017-0128-0 Search in Google Scholar

Motamedi, M 2004, Housing master plan and development programs, National Organization of Land and Housing. Tehran, Iran. MotamediM 2004 Housing master plan and development programs National Organization of Land and Housing Tehran, Iran Search in Google Scholar

Mujtahidzade, Gh 2005, ‘Reviewing the local housing policies in Iran and Britain’, Journal of Fine Arts, no. 17. MujtahidzadeGh 2005 ‘Reviewing the local housing policies in Iran and Britain’ Journal of Fine Arts 17 Search in Google Scholar

Murphy, L 2004, ‘To the market and back: Housing policy and state housing in New Zealand’, GeoJournal, vol. 59, pp. 119–126. MurphyL 2004 ‘To the market and back: Housing policy and state housing in New Zealand’ GeoJournal 59 119 126 10.1023/B:GEJO.0000019970.40488.d5 Search in Google Scholar

Murray, C & Clapham, D 2020, ‘Housing policies in Argentina under President Macri (2015–2019): a divided nation perpetuating path dependency’, International Journal of Housing Policy, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 491–512. MurrayC ClaphamD 2020 ‘Housing policies in Argentina under President Macri (2015–2019): a divided nation perpetuating path dependency’ International Journal of Housing Policy 20 4 491 512 10.1080/19491247.2020.1775929 Search in Google Scholar

Mustafavi, SMH 2018, ‘A review of the country's development plans with emphasis on the Sixth Plan and comparing them with the criteria of some indicators related to the Islamic economy’, Scientific Quarterly of Islamic Economics and Banking, no. 18, pp. 83–103. MustafaviSMH 2018 ‘A review of the country's development plans with emphasis on the Sixth Plan and comparing them with the criteria of some indicators related to the Islamic economy’ Scientific Quarterly of Islamic Economics and Banking 18 83 103 Search in Google Scholar

Noruzi, A 2003, Review and evaluation of rental and affordable housing (case study: Shiraz). MSc thesis in Tehran Azad University. NoruziA 2003 Review and evaluation of rental and affordable housing (case study: Shiraz) MSc thesis in Tehran Azad University Search in Google Scholar

Pawson, H, Milligan, V & Yates, J 2020, Housing policy in Australia: A Case for system reform, Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. PawsonH MilliganV YatesJ 2020 Housing policy in Australia: A Case for system reform Palgrave Macmillan Singapore 10.1007/978-981-15-0780-9 Search in Google Scholar

Pero, ASD 2016, ‘Housing policy in Chile: A case study on two housing programmes for lowincome households’, Oecd Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, no. 173. PeroASD 2016 ‘Housing policy in Chile: A case study on two housing programmes for lowincome households’ Oecd Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers no. 173. Search in Google Scholar

Pilehvar, A 2021, ‘Spatial-geographical analysis of urbanization in Iran’, Humanities and Social Sciences Communication, vol. 8, no. 63. PilehvarA 2021 ‘Spatial-geographical analysis of urbanization in Iran’ Humanities and Social Sciences Communication 8 63 10.1057/s41599-021-00741-w Search in Google Scholar

Pillay, A & Naudé, WA 2006, ‘Financing low-income housing in South Africa: Borrower experiences and perceptions of banks’, Habitat International, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 872–885. PillayA NaudéWA 2006 ‘Financing low-income housing in South Africa: Borrower experiences and perceptions of banks’ Habitat International 30 4 872 885 10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.03.001 Search in Google Scholar

Pourdanesh, SS & Mojahedzadeh, M 2020, ‘Review and critique of Iran's development plans (After the Revolution)’, The Second National Conference on Management and Engineering of Progress, Tehran. Available from: <https://civilica.com/doc/1024622>. [20 February 2020]. PourdaneshSS MojahedzadehM 2020 ‘Review and critique of Iran's development plans (After the Revolution)’ The Second National Conference on Management and Engineering of Progress Tehran Available from: <https://civilica.com/doc/1024622>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Pourmohammadi, A & Asadi, A 2015, ‘Evaluation of Mehr housing projects: Zanjan city’, Applied research in geographical science, no. 33. PourmohammadiA AsadiA 2015 ‘Evaluation of Mehr housing projects: Zanjan city’ Applied research in geographical science 33 Search in Google Scholar

Pourmohammadi, MR, Sadr Mousavi, M & Abedini, A 2013, ‘Analysis of the government housing policy with emphasis on economic, social and cultural development program’, PourmohammadiMR Sadr MousaviM AbediniA 2013 ‘Analysis of the government housing policy with emphasis on economic, social and cultural development program’ Search in Google Scholar

Priemus, H & Elsinga, M 2007, ‘Housing allowances in the Netherlands: The struggle for budgetary controllability’ in Housing Allowances in Comparative Perspective, ed. PA Kemp, The Policy Press, Bristol, UK, pp. 193–214. PriemusH ElsingaM 2007 ‘Housing allowances in the Netherlands: The struggle for budgetary controllability’ in Housing Allowances in Comparative Perspective ed. KempPA The Policy Press Bristol, UK 193 214 10.2307/j.ctt9qgn9n.14 Search in Google Scholar

Priemus, H & Kemp, P.A 2004, ‘The present and future of income-related housing support: Debates in Britain and the Netherlands’, Housing Studies, vol. 19, pp. 653–668. PriemusH KempP.A 2004 ‘The present and future of income-related housing support: Debates in Britain and the Netherlands’ Housing Studies 19 653 668 10.1080/0267303042000222016 Search in Google Scholar

Program and Budget Organization 1994, ‘Examining the economic issues and factors affecting the supply and demand of housing’. Program and Budget Organization 1994 ‘Examining the economic issues and factors affecting the supply and demand of housing’ Search in Google Scholar

Radzimski, A 2014, ‘Subsidized mortgage loans and housing affordability in Poland’, GeoJournal, vol. 79, pp. 467–494. RadzimskiA 2014 ‘Subsidized mortgage loans and housing affordability in Poland’ GeoJournal 79 467 494 10.1007/s10708-014-9533-2 Search in Google Scholar

Rafie, M 2009, ‘Housing policy (1963–1989)’, Building and Housing Research Center. Tehran, Iran. RafieM 2009 ‘Housing policy (1963–1989)’ Building and Housing Research Center Tehran, Iran Search in Google Scholar

Rajaei, SA & Mansourian, H 2016, ‘Urban growth and housing quality in Iran’, Social Indicators Research vol. 131, no. 2, pp. 587–605. RajaeiSA MansourianH 2016 ‘Urban growth and housing quality in Iran’ Social Indicators Research 131 2 587 605 10.1007/s11205-016-1260-2 Search in Google Scholar

Riazi, S.A 2003, ‘The government's role in housing planning; an overview of the housing situation in Iran 1986–1997’, Journal of Political-Economic Information, no. 175–176. RiaziS.A 2003 ‘The government's role in housing planning; an overview of the housing situation in Iran 1986–1997’ Journal of Political-Economic Information 175–176 Search in Google Scholar

Ross, LM & Pelletiere, D 2014, ‘Chile's new rental housing subsidy and its relevance to U.S. housing choice voucher program reform’, A Journal of Policy Development and Research, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 179–192. RossLM PelletiereD 2014 ‘Chile's new rental housing subsidy and its relevance to U.S. housing choice voucher program reform’ A Journal of Policy Development and Research 16 2 179 192 Search in Google Scholar

Sampaio, RSR 2020, ‘Affordable housing policies in Brazil’, Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 427–455. Available from: <https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/jculp/vol4/iss1/26>. [20 February 2020]. SampaioRSR 2020 ‘Affordable housing policies in Brazil’ Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy 4 1 427 455 Available from: <https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/jculp/vol4/iss1/26>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Saremi, H 1999, ‘Providing housing for urban low-incomes through cooperative companies’, Journal of Geographical Research, no. 84. SaremiH 1999 ‘Providing housing for urban low-incomes through cooperative companies’ Journal of Geographical Research 84 Search in Google Scholar

Seifuri, B &Taqwa, R 2019, ‘Pathology of Iran's development plans before and after the revolution and presentation of pivotal strategies’, Afagh Journal of Humanities, vol. 22, pp. 1–24. SeifuriB TaqwaR 2019 ‘Pathology of Iran's development plans before and after the revolution and presentation of pivotal strategies’ Afagh Journal of Humanities 22 1 24 Search in Google Scholar

Shaghaghi, V 2018, ‘Evaluation of Iranian 20-year outlook's economic objectives in five-year development Plans’, Majlis and Rahbord, vol. 25, no. 94, pp. 209–238. ShaghaghiV 2018 ‘Evaluation of Iranian 20-year outlook's economic objectives in five-year development Plans’ Majlis and Rahbord 25 94 209 238 Search in Google Scholar

Shajari, P 2010, ‘The fifth development program: market development, investment in the oil sector, taxation, agriculture and housing’, Journal of the New Economy, no. 128. ShajariP 2010 ‘The fifth development program: market development, investment in the oil sector, taxation, agriculture and housing’ Journal of the New Economy 128 Search in Google Scholar

Shirzadi, R 2011, ‘Development programs in Iran after the Islamic Revolution’, Political Science, vol. 11, pp. 29–43. Available from: <https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=184167>. [20 February 2020]. ShirzadiR 2011 ‘Development programs in Iran after the Islamic Revolution’ Political Science 11 29 43 Available from: <https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=184167>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Souri, A 2014, ‘Overcoming the recession and the role of housing sector’, Journal of Housing Economics. SouriA 2014 ‘Overcoming the recession and the role of housing sector’ Journal of Housing Economics Search in Google Scholar

Taheribabersad, Kh 2004, Reviewing the development policies for urban low-incomes: study and evaluation of social housing in city of Shiraz, MSc thesis in University of Shiraz. TaheribabersadKh 2004 Reviewing the development policies for urban low-incomes: study and evaluation of social housing in city of Shiraz MSc thesis in University of Shiraz Search in Google Scholar

Tajrishy, S & Vesal, M 2021, The externality of public housing projects: The case of Mehr housing project in Iran. Available from: <file:///C:/Users/data/Downloads/1620154208_843_2224978_139saeedtajrishyupdated.pdf>. [20 February 2020]. TajrishyS VesalM 2021 The externality of public housing projects: The case of Mehr housing project in Iran Available from: <file:///C:/Users/data/Downloads/1620154208_843_2224978_139saeedtajrishyupdated.pdf>. [20 February 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Tavakolnia, J & Zarghami, S 2018, ‘Pathology of fifth and sixth plans of economic, social and cultural development of the country in the field of housing supply urban low income groups’, Journal of Geography and Environmental Studies, vol. 7, no. 27, pp. 107–122. TavakolniaJ ZarghamiS 2018 ‘Pathology of fifth and sixth plans of economic, social and cultural development of the country in the field of housing supply urban low income groups’ Journal of Geography and Environmental Studies 7 27 107 122 Search in Google Scholar

Thorns, DC 1986, ‘New Zealand housing policy: Continuities and changes’, Housing Studies, vol. 1(3), pp. 182–191. ThornsDC 1986 ‘New Zealand housing policy: Continuities and changes’ Housing Studies 1 3 182 191 10.1080/02673038608720575 Search in Google Scholar

Tunas, D & Peresthu, A 2010, ‘The self-help housing in Indonesia: The only option for the poor?, Habitat International, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 315–322. TunasD PeresthuA 2010 ‘The self-help housing in Indonesia: The only option for the poor? Habitat International 34 3 315 322 10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.11.007 Search in Google Scholar

Ungerson, C 1994, ‘Housing: Need, equity, ownership and the economy’ in Social Policy Towards 2000: Squaring the Welfare Circle, eds. V George & S Miller, Routledge, London, pp. 190–214. UngersonC 1994 ‘Housing: Need, equity, ownership and the economy’ in Social Policy Towards 2000: Squaring the Welfare Circle eds. GeorgeV MillerS Routledge London 190 214 Search in Google Scholar

Wang, YP & Murie, A 1999, ‘Commercial housing development in urban China’, Urban Studies, vol. 36, pp. 1475–1494. WangYP MurieA 1999 ‘Commercial housing development in urban China’ Urban Studies 36 1475 1494 10.1080/004209899288122550670 Search in Google Scholar

World Bank 1975, Housing sector policy paper, World Bank, Washington D.C. World Bank 1975 Housing sector policy paper, World Bank Washington D.C. Search in Google Scholar

Ye, JP, Song, JN & Tian, CG 2010, ‘An analysis of housing policy during economic transition in China’, International Journal of Housing Policy, vol. 10(3), pp. 273–300. YeJP SongJN TianCG 2010 ‘An analysis of housing policy during economic transition in China’ International Journal of Housing Policy 10 3 273 300 10.1080/14616718.2010.506744 Search in Google Scholar

Zarghamfard, M, Meshkini, A, Pourahmad, A & Murgante, B 2019, ‘The pathology of housing policies in Iran: a criterion-based analysis’, International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, vol. 13 no. 3, pp. 453–473. ZarghamfardM MeshkiniA PourahmadA MurganteB 2019 ‘The pathology of housing policies in Iran: a criterion-based analysis’ International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis 13 3 453 473 10.1108/IJHMA-06-2019-0066 Search in Google Scholar

Zarghamfard, M & Meshkini, A 2021, ‘Analysis of factors affecting the realization of right to adequate housing in Iran: developing an interpretive-structural model’, International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 411–428. ZarghamfardM MeshkiniA 2021 ‘Analysis of factors affecting the realization of right to adequate housing in Iran: developing an interpretive-structural model’ International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis 15 2 411 428 10.1108/IJHMA-02-2021-0021 Search in Google Scholar

Zhao, Y & Bourassa, SC 2003, ‘China's urban housing reform: Recent achievements and new inequalities’, Housing Studies, vol. 18, pp. 721–744. ZhaoY BourassaSC 2003 ‘China's urban housing reform: Recent achievements and new inequalities’ Housing Studies 18 721 744 10.1080/02673030304254 Search in Google Scholar

Articoli consigliati da Trend MD

Pianifica la tua conferenza remota con Sciendo