Private Housing

affordable housing development in India: a real deal for low-income people? affordable housing has been the latest addition in the lexicon of Indian policy circles. as neoliberalism started gathering political and policy momentum, the discourse around low-income housing has shifted towards the government of India's agenda of 'affordable housing for all'. a stated goal of the policy is to increase housing supply, including the low-income category. today, however, the manifesting goals of affordable housing design seem to be a 'walk in two worlds', with inherent contradictions and paradoxes in the housing 'dream' currently being repackaged as affordable homes for low-income people. this paper investigates this aphorism. It argues that both affordability and housing design have several different meanings and identities. transplanting standard housing design across the board suggests a rather elementary confluence of priorities and policies that is capable of producing a range of alternative scenarios, which may not necessarily align with the goal of 'affordable housing for all'.

During the 2018 and 2019 campaigns in Porsuk – Zeyve Höyük, an inventory and computerization work of the excavation depot was begun, in parallel with a work of digitalisation
of the excavation archives. During the geophysical survey conducted over the entire site,
radial structures (from the Hittite period?) and linear structures (from the Hellenistic and
Roman periods?) were uncovered. Consolidation and preservation works of the archaeological remains were realized by means of the making of mud-bricks. The upper levels of Zone
5, corresponding to a private housing zone from the Hellenistic and Roman periods, were
excavated and the ceramics uncovered in these levels studied.
Keywords: Bronze Age, Iron Age, Hellenistic period, Roman period, fortifications, private
housing, ceramics, mud bricks, consolidation, archives, geophysics

Close to the ground - private house construction between housing shortage and land conflict in soviet Samarkand in the 1950s and 1960s

The work examines private house building as a special and conflict-laden form of urbanisation in Soviet Central Asia after World War II, using the example of Samarkand. It opens up the so far hardly considered role of private initiative and agency in Soviet urban planning that was a tension-filled realm of conflicting interests, urban development tasks, and constraints of housing policy.

Full version available at: https://www.degruyter.tools/document/doi/10.1515/9783110669367/html

This Master’s Thesis examines Finnish suburb development in a setting where a private
actor initiates and coordinates a Public-Private-People Partnership (4P) in a housing company-
dominated suburb. The examined 4P model interprets People as the shareholders of housing companies and is a new approach to suburb development. The municipality represents the Public and a company with a suburb development service represents the Private. The purpose of the study was to define the limitations for the 4P and suggest a partnership model.

The study was performed as a constructive case study with Härkämäki suburb in the City of Turku as the subject. The material consisted of twelve interviews and various documents related to the focal organizations. Because the study was an example of action research, it was also possible to use non-published documentation produced during the private company’s earlier projects in the case suburb. The research process was iterative;
a preliminary 4P model was developed based on expert interviews and on theoretical studies of related to suburbs. Thereafter, the case method was used to simulate and develop this preliminary model further. The theoretical framework for the study was stakeholder theory and the stakeholders were analyzed with the power/interest matrix with the focus on key stakeholders. The stakeholders of the Private were excluded from the study.

The study indicates that a partnership where the Public and the People share the costs of the suburb development project is not possible. Both organizations’ key stakeholders were interested in developing the entire suburb as a 4P, but were prepared to pay only for specific projects. The housing company board members and shareholders were mainly interested in matters related to cost savings and maintaining their individual properties. The city officers preferred to place their resources in implementing specific projects rather than in a more general suburb development project. The city also operates on major district level where a suburb is a relatively small entity, whereas the housing companies focus on individual properties.

The preliminary 4P model was also challenging because of the unusual role of the Private. Suburb development is traditionally dominated by public actors. The
preliminary 4P approach would have required delegating power and money to the private actor. The content of the preliminary 4P model was also too unclear because it was not defined which suburb development themes the partnership would focus on. As a result, the suggested suburb development model is project-based. It is also not a 4P, but a service model aimed for housing companies. The idea of the service is to offer cooperation with the municipality as an extra component to projects which the company performs in
suburbs.