“夹心层”群体住房问题研究
|
摘要
1998年国务院发布《关于进一步深化城镇住房制度改革加快住房建设的通知》,标志着我国福利分房时代的结束,以市场为特征的住房新体制逐步建立起来。在房改初期,为鼓励房地产业发展,中央政府提供了很多优惠政策。伴随着房地产市场的过热发展,房价一路攀升,为城市居民带来沉重的住房负担。与此同时,高校扩招和大批农民工涌入城市,城市在内外部共同作用下,住房需求日益增长,而不断上涨的房价导致居民“住房难”问题越来越突出。
从2010年开始,国家加大住房调控力度,大力兴建保障性住房,保障城市低收入群体的基本住房需求。然而,一部分收入高于保障性住房申请标准,又无力承担高昂房价的群体陷入尴尬局面,他们的住房需求被忽视,沦为“夹心层"群体。
文章从住房方式、租房或购房支出、人均住房使用面积及通勤时间对“夹心层”群体的住房现状进行调查,结果显示53.5%的人都是租房住,只有14.2%的人自己买房,他们的供房开支多占自己收入的45%以上,承担着较大的还款压力。“夹心层”群体多和他人合租,72.4%的受访者住房使用面积在20平方米以内,低于当地城镇平均水平,“夹心层”群体的住房现状较为艰难。
对“夹心层”群体的住房需求调查发现,77.1%的人有购房打算,但由于收入与高房价存在较大差距,很多人都没有明确的住房购买计划。88.1%的受访者能接受10000／平方米以下的房子,远低于北京、上海、深圳等大城市的最低房价。即使一部分“夹心层"群体收入状况有所改善,他们也无法在商品房市场中买到房子。总之,“夹心层”群体不满足于住房现状,有购房需求又无力承担高房价,住房需求短时期内无法得到满足。
转型期社会矛盾错综复杂,“夹心层”群体出现的原因主要有：一、国家一社会关系弱化导致资源分配不公,民间精英左右改革,弱势群体丧失话语权；二、对中低收入群体的认识不足导致住房保障缺位,中低收入群体的利益诉求被误读,他们的住房需求被忽视；三、城市住房供应体系的不当调整导致住房供给出现漏洞,诱发“夹心层”群体出现；.四、我国住房制度的不完善导致保障空白区,没有合理的设计和健全的系统,更缺乏法律的规定和适用的统计方法,导致住房保障政策在上传下达中走样,保障效果大打折扣。
通过分析欧美及亚洲主要发达国家和地区的公共住房政策发现,完善的法律制度,系统的规划,专门的管理机构,规范的收入统计标准和随着经济社会发展不断演变、调整的住房政策,成为这些国家公共住房政策取得成功的有利保证。
大城市对受过较高教育,拥有稳定工作的“夹心层"群体来说意味着更多的工作机会和广阔的发展前景,他们离不开城市,也回不去故乡,他们的住房需求不容忽视。文章在最后提出解决我国“夹心层”群体住房困难的相关建议：加快立法建设,完善住房供给及管理制度；完善住房供应体系,提供多层次的保障；逐步放宽申请条件,确保住房保障公平,尤其是要打破户籍制度的限制；完善住房租赁市场,推行先租后售和产权共享的做法,保障“夹心层"群体的住房基本需求,帮助一些有能力改善住房条件的人们通过租售结合的方式逐步拥有属于自己的房子。
In1998, the State Council of the People's Republic of China handed down a document,"The circular on further developing the reform of urban housing system and speed up the housing construction", marking the end of the era of welfare housing distribution, establishes a new housing system which take the market as the characteristic. From2010, the central government intensified housing regulation and control, and made great efforts to build indemnificatory housing so as to ensure the basic housing demand of the low-income groups. But for people who earn more money than the threshold of security housing application, but still unable to afford the commodity housing find themselves in an awkward position of so-called "sandwich class". Their housing demand is overlooked.
From a survey of the "sandwich class" people's housing condition, like whether their house is bought or rented, how much do they spend on renting or buying, per capita housing area and the commute time, we get the results that53.5%of the people are living in rental houses, and only14.2%of the people have bought their own houses. The latter shoulder a great pressure, since their housing repayment accounted for more than45%their own income. Most of the "sandwich class" shares the rental houses with others, and72.4%of the interviewees'housing area is20square meters or less, less than the average level of local town's residents. Their housing condition is tougher.
The survey shows that77.1%of the people are willing to buy a house, but their income greatly lag behind the high housing prices, so they do not have a specific housing purchase plan.88.1%of the interviewees are willing to buy a house with per square meter price lower than10000Yuan. That figure is far below the lowest prices in large cities, like Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen. Even if some of the "sandwich class" people's income has increased, they still cannot afford the commodity housing. In short, the "sandwich class" people are unsatisfied with their current housing condition, and they have the demand to buy a house but cannot afford the cost. Their housing demand will not be met in short terms.
The social contradictions in the transitional era are very complex, and the birth of the "sandwich class" people attributes to four reasons:One, the function of the central government and the society weakened and civil elites dominated the reform, resulting in unequal distribution of resources. Two, the inadequate understanding of the low-and-middle income groups lead to the incompletion of indemnificatory housing. Their interest appeal is misunderstood, and their demand is overlooked. Three, the improper adjustment gives rise to the loophole in the urban housing supply system, which brings out the "sandwich class" groups; Four, the incompletion of our housing system leads to the blank area in indemnificatory housing. There is no reasonable design and sound system, let alone legal provisions and statistical methods, resulting in distortion of the housing policy in transmission, thus the effect of the policy greatly reduced.
From the analysis of the public housing policy in the developed countries in Europe, America and Asia, we find out that safeguard of the national public housing policy includes:a intact legal system, the system of planning, specialized agencies, income statistics standards, the constant economic and social development are, and the adjustment of the housing policy.
For the educated sandwich class people, metropolis means more job opportunities and broad prospects for development. They cannot leave the city, nor can they go back home, so their housing demand should not be ignored. In the end, the author brings forward some suggestions to tackle the problem of "sandwich class" people's housing condition:Accelerating the legislation, and improving housing supply and management system; improving housing supply system to provide multi-level security; relaxing the criteria, especially breaking down household registration system, to ensure that fairness of indemnificatory housing; perfecting housing rental market by introduction of buying after renting and shared ownership to ensure the basic housing demand of sandwich people, help those who are capable of improving their living condition to buy their own house by a combination of renting and buying.
从2010年开始,国家加大住房调控力度,大力兴建保障性住房,保障城市低收入群体的基本住房需求。然而,一部分收入高于保障性住房申请标准,又无力承担高昂房价的群体陷入尴尬局面,他们的住房需求被忽视,沦为“夹心层"群体。
文章从住房方式、租房或购房支出、人均住房使用面积及通勤时间对“夹心层”群体的住房现状进行调查,结果显示53.5%的人都是租房住,只有14.2%的人自己买房,他们的供房开支多占自己收入的45%以上,承担着较大的还款压力。“夹心层”群体多和他人合租,72.4%的受访者住房使用面积在20平方米以内,低于当地城镇平均水平,“夹心层”群体的住房现状较为艰难。
对“夹心层”群体的住房需求调查发现,77.1%的人有购房打算,但由于收入与高房价存在较大差距,很多人都没有明确的住房购买计划。88.1%的受访者能接受10000／平方米以下的房子,远低于北京、上海、深圳等大城市的最低房价。即使一部分“夹心层"群体收入状况有所改善,他们也无法在商品房市场中买到房子。总之,“夹心层”群体不满足于住房现状,有购房需求又无力承担高房价,住房需求短时期内无法得到满足。
转型期社会矛盾错综复杂,“夹心层”群体出现的原因主要有：一、国家一社会关系弱化导致资源分配不公,民间精英左右改革,弱势群体丧失话语权；二、对中低收入群体的认识不足导致住房保障缺位,中低收入群体的利益诉求被误读,他们的住房需求被忽视；三、城市住房供应体系的不当调整导致住房供给出现漏洞,诱发“夹心层”群体出现；.四、我国住房制度的不完善导致保障空白区,没有合理的设计和健全的系统,更缺乏法律的规定和适用的统计方法,导致住房保障政策在上传下达中走样,保障效果大打折扣。
通过分析欧美及亚洲主要发达国家和地区的公共住房政策发现,完善的法律制度,系统的规划,专门的管理机构,规范的收入统计标准和随着经济社会发展不断演变、调整的住房政策,成为这些国家公共住房政策取得成功的有利保证。
大城市对受过较高教育,拥有稳定工作的“夹心层"群体来说意味着更多的工作机会和广阔的发展前景,他们离不开城市,也回不去故乡,他们的住房需求不容忽视。文章在最后提出解决我国“夹心层”群体住房困难的相关建议：加快立法建设,完善住房供给及管理制度；完善住房供应体系,提供多层次的保障；逐步放宽申请条件,确保住房保障公平,尤其是要打破户籍制度的限制；完善住房租赁市场,推行先租后售和产权共享的做法,保障“夹心层"群体的住房基本需求,帮助一些有能力改善住房条件的人们通过租售结合的方式逐步拥有属于自己的房子。
In1998, the State Council of the People's Republic of China handed down a document,"The circular on further developing the reform of urban housing system and speed up the housing construction", marking the end of the era of welfare housing distribution, establishes a new housing system which take the market as the characteristic. From2010, the central government intensified housing regulation and control, and made great efforts to build indemnificatory housing so as to ensure the basic housing demand of the low-income groups. But for people who earn more money than the threshold of security housing application, but still unable to afford the commodity housing find themselves in an awkward position of so-called "sandwich class". Their housing demand is overlooked.
From a survey of the "sandwich class" people's housing condition, like whether their house is bought or rented, how much do they spend on renting or buying, per capita housing area and the commute time, we get the results that53.5%of the people are living in rental houses, and only14.2%of the people have bought their own houses. The latter shoulder a great pressure, since their housing repayment accounted for more than45%their own income. Most of the "sandwich class" shares the rental houses with others, and72.4%of the interviewees'housing area is20square meters or less, less than the average level of local town's residents. Their housing condition is tougher.
The survey shows that77.1%of the people are willing to buy a house, but their income greatly lag behind the high housing prices, so they do not have a specific housing purchase plan.88.1%of the interviewees are willing to buy a house with per square meter price lower than10000Yuan. That figure is far below the lowest prices in large cities, like Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen. Even if some of the "sandwich class" people's income has increased, they still cannot afford the commodity housing. In short, the "sandwich class" people are unsatisfied with their current housing condition, and they have the demand to buy a house but cannot afford the cost. Their housing demand will not be met in short terms.
The social contradictions in the transitional era are very complex, and the birth of the "sandwich class" people attributes to four reasons:One, the function of the central government and the society weakened and civil elites dominated the reform, resulting in unequal distribution of resources. Two, the inadequate understanding of the low-and-middle income groups lead to the incompletion of indemnificatory housing. Their interest appeal is misunderstood, and their demand is overlooked. Three, the improper adjustment gives rise to the loophole in the urban housing supply system, which brings out the "sandwich class" groups; Four, the incompletion of our housing system leads to the blank area in indemnificatory housing. There is no reasonable design and sound system, let alone legal provisions and statistical methods, resulting in distortion of the housing policy in transmission, thus the effect of the policy greatly reduced.
From the analysis of the public housing policy in the developed countries in Europe, America and Asia, we find out that safeguard of the national public housing policy includes:a intact legal system, the system of planning, specialized agencies, income statistics standards, the constant economic and social development are, and the adjustment of the housing policy.
For the educated sandwich class people, metropolis means more job opportunities and broad prospects for development. They cannot leave the city, nor can they go back home, so their housing demand should not be ignored. In the end, the author brings forward some suggestions to tackle the problem of "sandwich class" people's housing condition:Accelerating the legislation, and improving housing supply and management system; improving housing supply system to provide multi-level security; relaxing the criteria, especially breaking down household registration system, to ensure that fairness of indemnificatory housing; perfecting housing rental market by introduction of buying after renting and shared ownership to ensure the basic housing demand of sandwich people, help those who are capable of improving their living condition to buy their own house by a combination of renting and buying.
引文
[1]包宗华.中国房改30年[J].住宅产业,2010(02-03)
[2]道格·桑德斯著,陈信宏译.落脚城市——最后的人类大迁移与我们的未来[M].上海：上海译文出版社,2012.
[3]Ali Madanipour, Goran Cars and Judith Allen. Social Exclusion in European Cities: Processes, Experiences, and Responses [M]. London and New York Rout ledge,2003.
[4]Gong Yanwei. Tian Jinxin. Advice on How to Solve the Housing Problem of Low-income Group, International Research Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate[C].2007.12.
[5](加拿大)简·雅各布斯著,金衡星译.美国大城市的死与生[M].南京：译林出版社,2006.
[6]Alterman, Rachelle, ed. Private Supply of Public Services:Evaluation of Real Estate Exactions, Linkage, and Alternative Land Policies. New York:New York Univ. Press,2000.
[7]姚玲珍.中国公共住房政策模式研究(修订版)[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009.
[8]孟晓苏.住房政策的国际经验与启示[J]中国软科学,1998.7.
[9]刘彦昆.保障房的海外经验与中国夹心层的困境[J].小康,2010(6).
[10]褚超孚.住房保障政策与模式的国际经验对我国的启示[J].中国房地产,2005(6).
[11]杜文.发达国家住房保障制度建设的基本经验[J].经济体制改革,2005(3).
[12]叶锦明.政府加大投入解决住房问题——新加坡中低收入者住房融资经验.中国住宅设施,2003(8).
[13]徐霞,程吉昕.城市中低收入家庭住房保障问题的思考[J].江苏商论2004(12).
[14]朱亚鹏.住房制度改革：政策创新与住房公平[M].广州：中山大学出版社,2007.
[15]成思危.中国城镇住房制度改革：目标模式与实施难点[M],北京：民主与建设出版社.1999.
[16]易宪容.重构住房保障体系势在必行[J].人民论坛,2006(8).
[17]陈劲松.公共住房浪潮——国际模式与中国安居工程的对比研究[M].北京：机械工业出版社,2005(10).
[18]清华大学社会学系课题组.城市低收入群体住房保障,2007(3).
[19]赵路兴,浦洪.低收入家庭住房保障收入线划分研究[J].城市开发,2003(11).
[20]赵路兴,浦湛.“夹心层”住房保障问题制度创新[J].城市开发,2003(12).[21]陈琳,谭建辉,吴开泽.城中村改造问题实证研究——以广州为例[J].中国房地产研究,2009(5).
[22]顾纪瑞,中等收入者：扩大比重和消费热点[J].消费经济,2007(12).
[23]王二红.夹心层与我国城镇住房体系的调整思考[J].中国房地产金融,2009(5).
[24]刘开瑞,余靖.城市化中的公共住房问题与政策建议[J].开放导报,2011(2).
[25]方琴.基于“夹心层”住房支付能力的公共租赁住房租金定价研究[D].重庆：重庆大学建设管理与房地产学院,2012.
[26]黄英.高房价与新移民青年的城市融合[J].中国青年研究,2008(4).
[27]季雪.北京中低收入阶层住房问题研究[M].北京：清华大学出版社,2010.
[28]姜吉坤,张贵华.解决限价房实施过程中存在问题的建议[J].科技情报开发与经济,2008(15).
[29]李宇中.浅谈利用REITS发展公租房建设——促进我国保障性住房体系进一步完善[J].现代商业,2010(11).
[30]孙立平.利益关系的失衡是我们面对的一个严峻问题[EB／OL].http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_48b9137201011zvs.html,2012-02-23.
[31]毛琪.基于利益冲突视角的中国住房政策研究[J].住宅与房地产,2012(1).
[32]边燕杰、刘勇利.社会分层、住房产权与居住质量一对中国“五普”数据的分析[J].社会学研究,2005(3).
[33]唐钧.区分房地产政策与住房社会政策[EB／OL].http://finance.sina.com.cn/review/20070412/10393495611.shtml,2007-4-12.
[34]中国房地产动态政策设计研究组.中国保障性住房建设模式研究(简版)[R].北京：中国指数研究院,2011.
[35][36]中国房地产动态政策设计设计研究组.专题研究：国外公共住房发展政策及启示[R].北京：中国指数研究院,2011.
[37]王坤,王泽森.香港公务制度的借鉴价值[N].经济导报,2012-5-28.
[38]杨红旭.要看到房产税的现实作用[N].新闻晨报,2012-8-23.
[39]郝悦.北京市“夹心层”群体住房保障问题研究[D].北京：首都经济贸易大学劳动经济学院,2011.
[40]新浪地产.德国：房租3年内涨幅超50%可判入狱三年[EB／OL].http://news.dichan.sina.com.cn/2013/05/03/716711.html,2013-5-3.
[41]赵燕菁.保障房须广覆盖[EB／OL].http://finance.sina.com.cn/review/hgds/20111114/093910808458.shtml,2011-11-14.
[2]道格·桑德斯著,陈信宏译.落脚城市——最后的人类大迁移与我们的未来[M].上海：上海译文出版社,2012.
[3]Ali Madanipour, Goran Cars and Judith Allen. Social Exclusion in European Cities: Processes, Experiences, and Responses [M]. London and New York Rout ledge,2003.
[4]Gong Yanwei. Tian Jinxin. Advice on How to Solve the Housing Problem of Low-income Group, International Research Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate[C].2007.12.
[5](加拿大)简·雅各布斯著,金衡星译.美国大城市的死与生[M].南京：译林出版社,2006.
[6]Alterman, Rachelle, ed. Private Supply of Public Services:Evaluation of Real Estate Exactions, Linkage, and Alternative Land Policies. New York:New York Univ. Press,2000.
[7]姚玲珍.中国公共住房政策模式研究(修订版)[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009.
[8]孟晓苏.住房政策的国际经验与启示[J]中国软科学,1998.7.
[9]刘彦昆.保障房的海外经验与中国夹心层的困境[J].小康,2010(6).
[10]褚超孚.住房保障政策与模式的国际经验对我国的启示[J].中国房地产,2005(6).
[11]杜文.发达国家住房保障制度建设的基本经验[J].经济体制改革,2005(3).
[12]叶锦明.政府加大投入解决住房问题——新加坡中低收入者住房融资经验.中国住宅设施,2003(8).
[13]徐霞,程吉昕.城市中低收入家庭住房保障问题的思考[J].江苏商论2004(12).
[14]朱亚鹏.住房制度改革：政策创新与住房公平[M].广州：中山大学出版社,2007.
[15]成思危.中国城镇住房制度改革：目标模式与实施难点[M],北京：民主与建设出版社.1999.
[16]易宪容.重构住房保障体系势在必行[J].人民论坛,2006(8).
[17]陈劲松.公共住房浪潮——国际模式与中国安居工程的对比研究[M].北京：机械工业出版社,2005(10).
[18]清华大学社会学系课题组.城市低收入群体住房保障,2007(3).
[19]赵路兴,浦洪.低收入家庭住房保障收入线划分研究[J].城市开发,2003(11).
[20]赵路兴,浦湛.“夹心层”住房保障问题制度创新[J].城市开发,2003(12).[21]陈琳,谭建辉,吴开泽.城中村改造问题实证研究——以广州为例[J].中国房地产研究,2009(5).
[22]顾纪瑞,中等收入者：扩大比重和消费热点[J].消费经济,2007(12).
[23]王二红.夹心层与我国城镇住房体系的调整思考[J].中国房地产金融,2009(5).
[24]刘开瑞,余靖.城市化中的公共住房问题与政策建议[J].开放导报,2011(2).
[25]方琴.基于“夹心层”住房支付能力的公共租赁住房租金定价研究[D].重庆：重庆大学建设管理与房地产学院,2012.
[26]黄英.高房价与新移民青年的城市融合[J].中国青年研究,2008(4).
[27]季雪.北京中低收入阶层住房问题研究[M].北京：清华大学出版社,2010.
[28]姜吉坤,张贵华.解决限价房实施过程中存在问题的建议[J].科技情报开发与经济,2008(15).
[29]李宇中.浅谈利用REITS发展公租房建设——促进我国保障性住房体系进一步完善[J].现代商业,2010(11).
[30]孙立平.利益关系的失衡是我们面对的一个严峻问题[EB／OL].http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_48b9137201011zvs.html,2012-02-23.
[31]毛琪.基于利益冲突视角的中国住房政策研究[J].住宅与房地产,2012(1).
[32]边燕杰、刘勇利.社会分层、住房产权与居住质量一对中国“五普”数据的分析[J].社会学研究,2005(3).
[33]唐钧.区分房地产政策与住房社会政策[EB／OL].http://finance.sina.com.cn/review/20070412/10393495611.shtml,2007-4-12.
[34]中国房地产动态政策设计研究组.中国保障性住房建设模式研究(简版)[R].北京：中国指数研究院,2011.
[35][36]中国房地产动态政策设计设计研究组.专题研究：国外公共住房发展政策及启示[R].北京：中国指数研究院,2011.
[37]王坤,王泽森.香港公务制度的借鉴价值[N].经济导报,2012-5-28.
[38]杨红旭.要看到房产税的现实作用[N].新闻晨报,2012-8-23.
[39]郝悦.北京市“夹心层”群体住房保障问题研究[D].北京：首都经济贸易大学劳动经济学院,2011.
[40]新浪地产.德国：房租3年内涨幅超50%可判入狱三年[EB／OL].http://news.dichan.sina.com.cn/2013/05/03/716711.html,2013-5-3.
[41]赵燕菁.保障房须广覆盖[EB／OL].http://finance.sina.com.cn/review/hgds/20111114/093910808458.shtml,2011-11-14.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |