Life on the Margins of the Housing Market

Insert your logo here

Life on the Margins of the
Housing Market
GYŐRI, Pé ter and FEHÉ R, Boró ka
BMSZKI (www.bmszki.hu)
Budapest Methodological Centre of Social Policy and Its
Services
Budapest, Hungary

European Research Conference, Budapest, 17th September 2010
UNDERSTANDING HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING EXCLUSION IN THE
ENHR
NEW EUROPEAN CONTEXT

Life on the Margins of the Housing Market

Conceptual Operational Category Generic Definition
What is homelessness? Category
ROOFLESS 1 People Living Rough 1.1 Rough Sleeping (no access to 24-
ETHOS 2006 hour accommodation) / No abode
2 People staying in a night 2.1 Overnight shelter
shelter
HOUSELESS 3 People in accommodation for 3.1 Homeless hostel
the homeless 3.2 Temporary Accommodation
4 People in Women’s Shelter 4.1 W omen’s shelter accommodation
5 People in accommodation for 5.1 Temporary accommodation /
immigrants reception centres (asylum)
5.2 Migrant workers accommodation
6 People due to be released from 6.1 Penal institutions
institutions 6.2 Medical institutions
7 People receiving support (due 7.1 Residential care for homeless
to homelessness) 7.2 people
7.3 Supported accommodation
7.4 Transitional accommodation with
support
Accommodation with support
INSECURE 8 People living in insecure 8.1 Temporarily with family/friends
accommodation 8.2 No legal (sub)tenancy
8.3 Illegal occupation of building
8.4 Illegal occupation of land
9 People living under threat of 9.1 Legal orders enforced (rented)
eviction 9.2 Re-possession orders (owned)
10 People living under threat of 10. Police recorded incident of
s
violence 1 domestic violence
INADEQUATE 11 People living in temporary / 11. Mobile home / caravan
non-standard structures 1 Non-standard building
11. Temporary structure
2
11.
3
12 People living in unfit housing 12. Unfit for habitation (under national
1 legislation; occupied)
13 People living in extreme 13. Highest national norm of
overcrowding 1 overcrowding

UNDERSTANDING HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING EXCLUSION IN ENHR
THE NEW EUROPEAN CONTEXT


What is homelessness? Hungarian definition
Social Law of 1993

 Article 6 and Sections II and III of this Act a person not
possessing a registered abode is homeless except for those
whose registered abode is the homeless shelter.
 Articles 7, 78, 84 and 89 of this Act people who spend their
nights in public areas or in premises not built for
residential purposes are homeless



Homeless people within the meaning of the Hungarian Social Act
1 People living rough 1.1 Public spaces or external space
2 People living in emergency 2.1 Night shelter
accommodation
3 People living in accommodation for 3.1 Homeless hostel
the homeless 3.2 Temporary accommodation
3.3 Transitional supported
accommodation

4 People living in Women’s shelter 4.1 Women’s shelter
accommodation
7 People receiving long-term 7.1 Residential care for older
(housing) support (due to their homeless people
being homeless)

11 People living in temporary/non- 11.1 Mobile homes
conventional structures 11.2 Non-conventional building
11.3 Temporary structures

12 P 12.1 Occupied dwellings unfit for
habitation


Conceptual Operational Category Generic Definition
What is homelessness? Category
ROOFLESS 1 People Living Rough 1.1 Rough Sleeping (no access to 24-
ETHOS in Hungarian perspective hour accommodation) / No abode
(according to the second definition) 2 People staying in a night 2.1 Overnight shelter
shelter
HOUSELESS 3 People in accommodation for 3.1 Homeless hostel
the homeless 3.2 Temporary Accommodation
4 People in Women’s Shelter 4.1 W omen’s shelter accommodation
5 People in accommodation for 5.1 Temporary accommodation /
immigrants reception centres (asylum)
5.2 Migrant w orkers accommodation
6 People due to be released from 6.1 Penal institutions
institutions 6.2 Medical institutions
7 People receiving support (due 7.1 Residential care for homeless
to homelessness) people
7.2 Supported accommodation
7.3 Transitional accommodation with
7.4 support
Accommodation with support
INSECURE 8 People living in insecure 8.1 Temporarily with family/friends
accommodation No legal (sub)tenancy
8.2 Illegal occupation of building
8.3 Illegal occupation of land
8.4
9 People living under threat of 9.1 Legal orders enforced (rented)
eviction 9.2 Re-possession orders (owned)
10 People living under threat of 10.1 Police recorded incidents of
violence domestic violence
INADEQUATE 11 People living in temporary / 11.1 Mobile home / caravan
non-standard structures 11.2 Non-standard building
11.3 Temporary st ructure
12 People living in unfit housing 12.1 Unfit for habitation (under
national legislation; occupied)
13 People living in extreme 13.1 Highest national norm of
overcrowding overcrowding



Who are we thinking about?

International
Home-less people definition of
homelessness
People without flat
Homeless
Effective homeless definition before
people 1945 in Hungary
Rough
sleepers
Recent
homeless
definition in
Hungary


Data Collection

To understand the scope and depth of the problem...
Who should collect data?  state?
(should we count at all?)

 service-providers?
How? Whom? Where?
 researchers?


Data collection: Hungary 1

Since 1999 annual survey in Budapest services (mostly hostels and shelters):

February 3rd working group (service provider initiative)

In 2005 headcount as well

Since 2005, other service-providers in other cities joined

What is it good for?
●
Comparison of (concrete) service users from year-to-year – helps to plan the running of
the service
●
Comparison of services

We can find answers to concrete questions, and be surprised

We can compare data with other groups of the population

We can lobby for policy change based on evidence



Surprises
●
¾ of the homeless move between various forms of accommodation, ¼stable
on the street or in the service – the role of services can be to minimize the
time spent between flats
●
60% have some kind of a work income – it is growing – the working poor
●
20-25% are from Roma background (3x as much as national average)
●
Health: growth in people with serious health problems, over 60 population
not so different from rest of Hun population of that age group – importance
of access to health care



Comparisons
●
2002 – health issues
●
2007 – drug use (international)
●
2007 – What do people think of Budapest? - similar
questions regarding attitudes towards the homeless
●
2009-2010 employment, finances

http://www.bmszki.hu/english



Findings of three research projects:

1. National census of 2001
2. February 3rd annual survey (national)
3. In-depth look at life of rough sleepers
(Budapest and Debrecen)


National Census 2001 1
People without homes on the basis of the census data [1]
Total number of people not living in housing units 260,653 persons
Of this: persons living in other inhabited housing units[2] 12,267 persons
People living in institutional households [3] 248,386 persons

of which:

in social institutions providing temporary accommodation 5,851 persons
•of which: in homeless accommodation 3,934 persons
•in workers’ hostels, mobile structures (barracks),
accommodation for employees, etc. 10 ,000 pers.

•in stations admitting refugees 1,697 persons
•in healthcare children’s homes, hospitals 3,657 persons
•in infant and children’s homes, corrective institutions,
establishments for homeless children 128,000 persons

in social homes, hospices, etc. 62,000 persons
•in detention facilities 17,000 persons
•in military accommodation 13,000 persons
[1]
The housing and life situations described in the summary may overlap each other.
[2]
Other inhabited housing unit: Those non-housing units (shops, offices, workshops, warehouses, laundries, garages, press houses, etc.)
that are used by at least one person for residing without any conversion, as well as temporary, mobile and other facilities (caravans, barges,
railway cars, caves, huts, booths, wagons, bus bodies, circus cars, etc.).
[3]
Institutional households is the group of those living in institutions, and there are provided with community accommodation or accommodation
and services, and at the theoretical time of the census they actually stayed at the place of registration, lived there permanently, the persons registered
at the given addresses could be regularly contacted, and the most frequently spent their nights there, went to work or study from there. The place of
the census can be the registered (permanent) address of the person concerned, the registered (temporary) place of residence, and even non-
registered address.


3,723,509
Total number of inhabited apartments
apartments

341,144
Total number of uninhabited apartments
apartments

3,862,702
Total number of households
households

9,944,832
Total number of people living in households
persons



Dwellers of apartments

People living in uncertain legal statuses [1]

privately owned rented apartment 99,445 apartments

106,833
households renting privately owned apartment households

Members of households renting privately owned apartment 243,581 persons
persons using households under any service title 77,846 persons
households under the legal title of sub-lease or bed lease 20,648 households
member of a household under the legal title of sub-lease 30,607 persons
member of a household under the legal title of bed lease 571 persons

26,790
apartment under s. c. “other” legal title
apartments

34,271
household under s. c. “other” legal title households

[1]
The uncertain legal statusofis household true for people living in privately owned, rented apartments, and some of those using
Member a obviously under any „other” legal title[2] 57,217 persons
apartments on favour, which mean actual housing uncertainties.
[2]
Other legal title: not owned, rented or received on service. E.g. the use of the entire apartment without paying any rental fee, the so-
called dweller on favour (sofa surfer), or unauthorized dweller in the given apartment.


People living under the minimum housing circumstances

six or more people live in a single-room apartment 6,697 persons

two or more families or households live in a single apartment

of which: the apartment has two rooms at the maximum 91,160 apartments
living in such apartments 394,424 persons
family household with an ancestor[1] 192,212 households
living in a household of any “other” composition[2] 103,279 persons
apartment in a socially inappropriate environment[3] 5,759 apartments

apartment with walls from loam, wood or other materials 699,082 apartments
living in apartment with walls from loam, wood or other materials 1,730,578 persons
of which: apartments without proper foundations 189,941 apartments
living in such apartments 462,664 persons
water supply from outside the building plot 95,782 persons
toilet outside the apartment 113,477 persons
no bathroom or shower 806,962 persons
no bathroom and kitchen 89,667 persons

no bathroom and premises for cooking 58,110 persons
(in other words living in emergency or other apartments)

no heating facilities 11,756 persons
[1]
Multi-generation families cannot obviously be regarded as automatically excluded.
[2]
Household of other composition: where only such persons live who do not form a family, such as a) co-dwelling relatives forming a family (e.g.
sisters and brother, single father or mother living only with the married and/or formerly married child, single grandparent living together with a grandchild of
any family status), b) households of not related persons (e.g. friends), c) households consisting of relatives not forming a family and co-dwelling persons not
being relatives (e.g. brother and sister with friends).
[3]
Socially inappropriate residential zone: the residential zones of residential buildings of deteriorated conditions, temporarily built sites, shacks,
Gipsy streets, cave houses and similar units.


living in single-room apartments without conveniences 243,235 persons
“living“ in apartments of 19 sq m at the maximum 337,754 persons

apartments with partial or without conveniences, emergency and other 674,803 apartments
apartments

of which: single-room 189,405 apartments

living in apartments with partial or without conveniences, emergency
1,662,515 persons
and other apartments

of which: living in single-room 377,714 persons



10–12% of all the apartments are of substandard
quality, without or just partly equipped with conveniences, or
emergency apartments. In addition, more than 100
thousand people live at segregated colonies that are
hardly suitable for housing. Furthermore, serious structural
problems are faced: housing estates, old and deteriorating
districts, housing units in depopulating villages with
disadvantageous infrastructure, or block-type enclosures being
hardly suitable for housing call for different solutions.



The affordability of housing costs represents serious
problems for low-income groups, which is not solely associated
with low incomes (unemployment, individual disadvantaged
situations), but the differing costs of the various housing units
(e.g. large costs carried by apartments in housing estates with
district heating). In more than 20% of Hungarian
households, the proportion of housing costs exceeds 30% of
the volume of incomes. In 2003, cc. 500 thousand
households had arrears threatening the security of housing,
while only 180–200 thousand households received housing
support.



The proportion of lease apartments owned by local
governments dropped from 22% to 4% due to the
privatization of apartments in the 1990s and the conditions
of support–taxation–incentives, while the proportion of
privately owned lease apartments was cc. 4%. (Meaning
that the proportion of privately owned apartments is
outstandingly large within the European Union, i.e. 92%.)
Thus, the traditional housing base of social housing policy
narrowed (lease apartments of local governments), and on
the other hand there emerged no comprehensive system to
guarantee the security of housing, and manage social and
housing policy elements in a standard manner.


February 3rd Annual Survey 1

• Since 1999 In cooperation with the
• survey Menhely Foundation
• 03 February and the Oliver Twist
• annually Foundation

In 1999, 2,539 homeless people responded to the questions,
67 among them rough sleepers.
2009, 7,270 homeless people (2,913 rough sleepers)
In 2010, we reached 8,075 homeless individuals (3,090 rough
sleepers)



„ Where did you sleep on February 3rd one year ago?”

Egy évvel korábban (teljes, fő)
One year ago (individuals)

4500
4000
3500
egyéb lakás
other
3000
hajléktalanszállás
homeless
2500
serv.
intézmény
2000
önálló lakás
institution
1500
közterület
own
1000 apartment
500 outdoors
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006


„Where did you sleep on February 3rd one year ago?”
Egy évvel korábban (szállók, % )
Shelters/hostels (%)
100
90
80
other
egyéb lakás
70
60 homeless
hajléktalanszállás
50 serv.
intézmény
40 institution
önálló lakás
30 közterület
own
20 apartment
Egy évvel korábban (közterület, % )
10
outdoors Rough sleepers (%)
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006



„Where did you spend the 52 weeks of last year?”
an average person spent

 29 weeks in homeless services 23%
 8 weeks on streets 65 %
 7 weeks in normal housing 70% Not at all
 4 weeks in hospital 76%
 1 week in prison 96%



„Where did you sleep one year ago?”

Egyéb Együtt Saját
9% lakás
Más
• other 9% Közterül.
5%
lakhatás
20% 18%
• rough sleeping 20%
• own housing 5%
• shelter 25%
• other housing (usually
Átmeneti sofa surfing) 18%
Éjjeli szálló
menhely 23% • homeless hostel 23%
25%



„Where did you sleep one year ago?” (according to sleeping place this year)

Most éjjeli menhelyen
Now sleeping in shelter Now sleeping in hostel
Egyéb
Most átmeneti szállón
Saját Egyéb Saját
5% lakás Más Közterül. 5% lakás
Közterül. 5% lakhatás 5% Más
Éjjeli 4%
9% 18% lakhatás
menhely 14%
10%
Átmeneti
szálló
8%

Éjjeli Átmeneti
menhely szálló
Now sleeping rough
Most közterületen
55% 62%
Egyéb Saját
• saját lakás = own housing 14% lakás
12%
• más lakhatás = other housing (usu
sofa surfing) Más
lakhatás
• átmeneti szálló = hostel
21%
• éjjeli menhely = shelter
Átmeneti
• közterület = rough sleeping szálló
Éjjeli
Közterül. 5%
• egyéb = other 46%
menhely
2%


„Where will you live one year from now?”
Last year
Együtt Saját
Egyéb
Együtt
Next year 9% lakás
Egyéb Saját 5% Más
21% lakásban Közterül. lakhatás
14% 20% 18%

Más
Közterül. lakhatás
10% 21%
Átmeneti
Éjjeli Átmeneti Éjjeli szálló
menhely szálló menhely 23%
15% 19% 25%
• saját lakás = own housing
• más lakhatás = other housing (usu
sofa surfing)
• átmeneti szálló = hostel
• éjjeli menhely = shelter
• közterület = rough sleeping
• egyéb = other

„Where will you live one year from now?”
(according to sleeping place this year)
Now sleeping inszállón
Átmeneti hostel Saját
Now sleeping in shelter
Éjjeli menhelyen • saját lakás = own housing
Saját lakásban
Egyéb Egyéb
Közterület 12% lakásban • más lakhatás = other housing (usu 25%
16%
en 15% sofa surfing)
1%
• átmeneti szálló = hostel Közterül. Más
1% lakhatás
Más • éjjeli menhely = shelter
16%
lakhatás Éjjeli
Éjjeli • közterület = rough sleeping menhely
23%
menhely 2% Átmeneti
• egyéb = other
36% Átmeneti szálló
szálló 40%
13% Közterületen
Now sleeping rough Saját
Egyéb lakásban
14% 12%

Más
lakhatás
21%

Átmeneti
Közterül. szálló
Éjjeli 5%
46%
menhely
2%


Intentions and optimism?

WRIGHT, BRADLEY R. (1998): Behavioral Intentions and
Opportunities Among Homeless Individuals: A Reinterpretation
of the Theory of Reasoned Action. IN: Social Psychology Quarterly,
Vol. 61, No. 4 (dec.) 271-286.


In-Depth Study of Rough Sleepers 1

Why have you become homeless? (N=155)
 Research leaders: Péter Győri + Péter
Breitner + Zoltán Gurály Pers. %


Family problems 35 22,6
161 individuals in two cities (Budapest
and Debrecen) Divorce (ex-spouse stayed in shared 32 20,6
housing)
 Structured interviews Was forced to leave housing 17 11,0
 More detailed description of previous Could not keep paying rent 10 6,5
housing situation Was evicted 15 9,7
 Although focus more one life history Sold own housing 11 7,0
and current lifestyle
Housing had been provided by 3 1,9
workplace, became unemployed

27,1

Released from state care/prison/hospital 15 9,7


In-Depth Study of Rough Sleepers 2

„What was your last housing like (before you became
homeless)?” (N=155)

 7 % never had own housing (whether  35% lived in a one-room apartment
owned or rented) (15% National Census)
 25 % was staying where growing up  13% lived in a one-room apartment
(mostly with family) before turning 18.
 50% owned or rented own housing  People tended to move down the
housing ladder as approaching
homelessness
 They did not start from very high,
either


The „modell” of social protection – before 1989

Threat of loosing livelyhood and home

Puffer1 Puffer2
„sublet or bed-let”
„workers’ hostels”

Puffer3 Puffer4
„prison” „informal nets„

Puffers prevent becoming homeless, no contact with social
services

Continuity: those living on the margins may shift to the edges, and then back
Change: who shifts from living on the margins to the edges of the margins

home-less people

People without flat

Effective homeless p.

Rough sleepers


The „modell” of social protection – after
1989

Threat of loosing livelyhood and home

Homeless services

Those who have lost livelyhood and home
Attempt to catch people falling, with use of social services



Thank you for your attention.
feher.boroka@bmszki.hu
gyori_peter@yahoo.com


Life on the Margins of the Housing Market

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from FEANTSA

More from FEANTSA (20)

Life on the Margins of the Housing Market

Editor's Notes