نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
Introduction
Over time, and in response to shifting socio-economic conditions, new housing typologies have emerged under terms such as affordable housing, minimum housing, and others (Islami, 2013). Affordable housing represents one of the most critical concerns in contemporary urban policy. Housing is considered unaffordable when costs exceed 30% of a household’s total income (Zabetian et al., 2017). The term “affordable housing” has rapidly gained prominence over the past decade in Europe, both in political discourse and academic research. Although it is often used as a near-synonym for “social housing,” it has recently developed its own distinct definition and policy instruments in specific cities and countries. It is generally defined as rental housing offered below market rates and accessible to a broader income spectrum than traditional social housing schemes (Czischke & Van Brotel, 2018) The concept of social housing also referred to as public, governmental, or affordable housing has a relatively long-standing history in Western Europe (Saqaei et al., 2019). In these contexts, it is predominantly tenure-based and provided as rental units (Dadjoo, 2023). Public housing is a tenure model in which state authorities own and operate the facilities, either at the central or local level, and is primarily financed through public budgets to serve low-income households. (Malek Mohammadi, 2015) Low-cost housing typically requires government subsidies (Nasr Isfahani, 2016), targeting socioeconomically disadvantaged groups who lack the financial capacity to purchase or access housing independently (Modiri & Medghalchi, 2021). In general, low-cost housing refers to housing developed for low-income groups to meet their minimum shelter needs. (Zaheri et al., 2017; Abdi, 2022)
Optimal housing is proposed as a solution to the challenge of providing affordable and quality housing for the middle-income population. The term “optimal area” refers to a limited floor space, though this limitation does not imply architectural minimalism (Safar Moghaddam, 2018). Supportive housing provides care and assistance to individuals facing homelessness, unstable housing conditions, long-term disabilities, or families who encounter multiple barriers to securing and maintaining stable housing (Zahir Mottaki et al., 2020). Minimum housing is a response to population growth, inflation, urban migration, and lifestyle changes in recent years (Sami Yousefi, 2017). In developing countries, minimum housing does not necessarily imply a fully constructed unit (Sarlak, 2016).
The proliferation of housing types and their lack of precise definition has made it difficult for executive bodies to select the appropriate typology and supporting mechanisms for each project. This mismatch often leads to project failure. This study aims to identify the various housing types and determine key attributes that can be used to compare and distinguish them.
Materials and Methods
Through a descriptive literature review, economic-oriented housing types and their characteristics were identified. Using comparative analogy, key titles and distinguishing features were categorized. The conceptual framework was then developed using the information gathered in the literature review section. Following this, the proposed framework was presented to seven housing experts considered key informants in the study, using the Delphi technique, in order to assess its validity. After each round, the experts’ feedback regarding both the content and the visual structure was incorporated. This process was repeated three times to reach a consensus among the experts.
Findings
After completing three rounds of expert consultation, the results indicate that affordable housing, optimal housing, and minimum-standard housing are similar in terms of support, location, infrastructure services, implementing body, and ownership, but differ in terms of their target populations. Social housing, public housing, and supportive housing share similarities in terms of location, support, and infrastructure services, while differing in terms of implementing body, target population, and ownership.
Conclusion
In response to the research question regarding which key features define the boundaries between housing typologies, six criteria were identified through comparative analysis: target population, provider, support, location, ownership, and infrastructure. Regarding the differences and similarities among these typologies, the Delphi results revealed the following: minimum housing is a subset of optimal housing, given their shared characteristics across most dimensions. Optimal housing is also a subset of affordable housing, given both their terminological and functional overlaps, particularly the emphasis on adequate space and quality. Finally, public housing is a subcategory of social housing, sharing similarities in support, location, and infrastructure, yet differing in provider (solely governmental for public housing vs. mixed for social housing) and target population (with public housing aimed at a narrower group within the broader social housing target).
کلیدواژهها English
