IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i8p3129-d345096.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Affordable Housing vs. Urban Land Rent in Widespread Settlement Areas

Author

Listed:
  • Raul Berto

    (Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy)

  • Giovanni Cechet

    (Fablab S.R.L., 34139 Trieste, Italy)

  • Carlo Antonio Stival

    (Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy)

  • Paolo Rosato

    (Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy)

Abstract

Social housing constitutes a partial response to the demand for affordable housing. In Europe, there are different forms of social housing, which are distinguishable based on whether they employ a universal or residual approach. The latter is employed by Italian initiatives for social residential construction, the financial instrument of which is the Investment Fund for Housing, a closed-end fund managed by CDP (Cassa Depositi e Prestiti) Investment, which provides public–private partnerships. The main obstacle to the supply of low-cost houses is the high cost of building areas or, in other words, the high urban land rent. The value of building areas is particularly high in urban areas and in widespread settlement areas, for instance, in Northeastern Italy. The main objective of this paper is to identify the trade-off between urban land rent and housing affordability in a social housing intervention in Pordenone (Northeastern Italy). Four different scenarios are developed, the variables of which are: Cost of the area (urban rent), cost of construction works (quality of the buildings), and household income distribution. The results show that achieving the economic and social objectives of a social housing investment simultaneously is not possible in any of the scenarios evaluated. To allow the social groups most in need to access affordable housing would require a reduction of approximately 30% of the estimated cost of a building area.

Suggested Citation

  • Raul Berto & Giovanni Cechet & Carlo Antonio Stival & Paolo Rosato, 2020. "Affordable Housing vs. Urban Land Rent in Widespread Settlement Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3129-:d:345096
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3129/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3129/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholls, Alex, 2009. "'We do good things, don't we?': 'Blended Value Accounting' in social entrepreneurship," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 755-769, August.
    2. Morano, Pierluigi & Tajani, Francesco, 2018. "Saving soil and financial feasibility. A model to support public-private partnerships in the regeneration of abandoned areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 40-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Mazáček, 2023. "Concepts of Housing Affordability Measurements," FFA Working Papers 5.008, Prague University of Economics and Business, revised 13 Sep 2023.
    2. Grazia Napoli & Maria Rosa Trovato & Simona Barbaro, 2022. "Social Housing and Affordable Rent: The Effectiveness of Legal Thresholds of Rents in Two Italian Metropolitan Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-32, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Murphy Patrick J. & Pollack Jeff & Nagy Brian & Rutherford Matthew & Coombes Susan, 2019. "Risk Tolerance, Legitimacy, and Perspective: Navigating Biases in Social Enterprise Evaluations," Entrepreneurship Research Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Luigi Corvo & Lavinia Pastore & Arianna Manti & Daniel Iannaci, 2021. "Mapping Social Impact Assessment Models: A Literature Overview for a Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Raimund Bleischwitz, 2020. "Business models for environmental sustainability: Contemporary shortcomings and some perspectives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3352-3369, December.
    4. Shaker A. Zahra & Lance R. Newey & Yong Li, 2014. "On the Frontiers: The Implications of Social Entrepreneurship for International Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 38(1), pages 137-158, January.
    5. Marta Solórzano-García & Julio Navío-Marco & Luis Manuel Ruiz-Gómez, 2019. "Ambiguity in the Attribution of Social Impact: A Study of the Difficulties of Calculating Filter Coefficients in the SROI Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Aidin Salamzadeh & Zahra Arasti & Ghanbar Mohamadi Elyasi, 2017. "Creation of ICT-Based Social Start-Ups in Iran: A Multiple Case Study," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 25(01), pages 97-122, March.
    7. Lopez-Cozar, C. & Priede, T. & Rodríguez-Lopez, A., 2015. "Evaluating The Legal Environment For Social Entrepreneurship In America And Europe," Revista Galega de Economía, University of Santiago de Compostela. Faculty of Economics and Business., vol. 24(1), pages 101-110.
    8. Gibbon, Jane, 2012. "Understandings of accountability: an autoethnographic account using metaphor," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 201-212.
    9. Nesticò, Antonio & Elia, Cristina & Naddeo, Vincenzo, 2020. "Sustainability of urban regeneration projects: Novel selection model based on analytic network process and zero-one goal programming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    10. Diego Ponte & Caterina Pesci, 2022. "Institutional logics and organizational change: the role of place and time," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 26(3), pages 891-924, September.
    11. Claudia Cosentino & Federico Amato & Beniamino Murgante, 2018. "Population-Based Simulation of Urban Growth: The Italian Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    12. Baumuller, Heike & Husmann, Christine Ladenburger & von Braun, Joachim, 2011. "Innovative business approaches for the reduction of extreme poverty and marginality?," Working Papers 147921, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    13. Othmar Manfred Lehner & Alex Nicholls & Sarah Beatrice Kapplmüller, 2022. "Arenas of Contestation: A Senian Social Justice Perspective on the Nature of Materiality in Impact Measurement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 971-989, September.
    14. Saskia Crucke & Adelien Decramer, 2016. "The Development of a Measurement Instrument for the Organizational Performance of Social Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-30, February.
    15. Molecke, Greg & Pinkse, Jonatan, 2017. "Accountability for social impact: A bricolage perspective on impact measurement in social enterprises," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 550-568.
    16. Julien Kleszczowski, 2016. "La place des parties prenantes dans l’évaluation de l’impact social des organisations non lucratives: étude empirique au sein d’une organisation française," Post-Print hal-01901230, HAL.
    17. Matthias Staessens & Pieter Jan Kerstens & Johan Bruneel & Laurens Cherchye, 2019. "Data Envelopment Analysis and Social Enterprises: Analysing Performance, Strategic Orientation and Mission Drift," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 325-341, October.
    18. André, Kévin & Cho, Charles H. & Laine, Matias, 2018. "Reference points for measuring social performance: Case study of a social business venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 660-678.
    19. Castillo Elizabeth A., 2018. "Qualities before Quantities: A Framework to Develop Dynamic Assessment of the Nonprofit Sector," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 9(3), pages 1-14, October.
    20. Hall, Matthew & O'Dwyer, Brendan, 2017. "Accounting, non-governmental organizations and civil society: The importance of nonprofit organizations to understanding accounting, organizations and society," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-5.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3129-:d:345096. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.