Transformation in Russian housing: the new key roles of local authorities

Abstract

Democratically elected municipal government had no housing role in the Soviet era in Russia, as all housing belonged to the central state and was administered by its local agents. After 1990, a massive privatization of housing was achieved first through the transfer of stock from industrial companies to municipalities and then through no-cost transfer of ownership to the tenants. Despite privatization, a large amount of housing stock has since been unloaded back onto municipalities who now find themselves owners of 11% of all housing in Russia (much more in some regions). The poor quality of stock and the inability of the new owners to meet maintenance costs have led to a growing housing role for local authorities, who have many new responsibilities and expectations from residents, but few resources. Although the situation has parallels in other post-socialist countries, the scale in Russia is greater, and there is no EU aid, nor any tradition either of ownership or collective responsibility. Economic crisis in Europe and a slow down in housing construction in Russia mean that new policies for rental housing are needed. This review considers historic and recent changes in housing policy in the Russian Federation in light of the emerging housing role of municipal governments. In the review, we draw on national data as well a case study of the city of Perm to illustrate the impact of this transformation. Following a national meeting of housing experts in 2011, a new Government Strategy for 2020 has been established and is also discussed.

Keywords:

• local authorities
• municipalities
• municipal duties
• housing policy
• rental housing stock
• privatization

Acknowledgements

The data and insights drawn upon in this paper are derived from a project led by Elena Shomina, since 2009, tracing, recording and assessing the role of municipal housing. This work draws on interviews with Russian housing experts and heads of municipal departments of housing policy in different cities. In this article, we make particular use of data from the typical large Russian city Perm (about one million population) and participant-observation in the work of the group of housing experts involved in a project known as ‘Strategy 2020’. The authors would also like to acknowledge the support of Gabriel Chanan and Martti Lujanen.

Notes

¹Moscow and St. Petersburg, because they are ‘subjects of Federation’ in their own right and have very limited local self-government, are not included as municipalities in this study.

²Interview with the head of Perm Department of Housing Policy, Faina Minkh, 18/02/2011.

³Interview with the head of Perm Department of Housing Policy, Faina Minkh, 18/02/2011.

⁴Including housing experts Nadezda Kosareva, Alexander Puzanov and Elena Shomina.