The Housing Market of the Budapest Urban Region 1949-1983

Abstract

By the late fifties reserves of infrastructure and labour in Budapest were becoming exhausted and it was decided to divert potential Budapest-bound migrants to other centres, developed with government help, outside commuting range of the capital. The urban hinterland was rapidly urbanised, without a plan and lacking basic infrastructure. Some evidence suggests that this urbanisution would have occurred even if the 1958 restrictions on residence in Budapest had not been imposed. In 1971 various housing reforms were instituted to reduce tensions in the housing market. These included rent rises and special treatment for needy cases. Although it has been suggested that these housing market tensions and the effects of housing reforms since 1971 have caused increased social class segregation in the Budapest urban region, Census data shows continuously declining social class segregation. This may be because continuously low housing costs, (never more than 6% of personal income for all social groups), and the fact that environmental and district social class is not reflected in house prices has led to a dilution of pre-existing social class segregation.

Soviet Prefabricated Panel Housing Estates: Areas of Continued Social Mix or Decline? The Case of Tallinn

“…However, it should be noted that single-family homes were selfconstructed because people preferred to live in a house of their own, and the houses took the form of villas towards the end of the Soviet period. It follows that some socio-spatial differentiation also existed in the formerly centrally planned countries, although the received view stresses that urban segregation was less visible than in countries with a market economy (French & Hamilton, 1979;Musil, 1987Musil, , 1993Sillince, 1985;Węcławowicz, 1979). High-rise housing was, in general, heterogeneous, socialist, and middle class (Musterd & van Kempen, 2005;Ruoppila & Kährik, 2003).…”

Urban Housing Markets in Central and Eastern Europe: Convergence, Divergence or Policy 'Collapse'

“…They varied from countr y to countr y and at different time periods. Comparative housing analysis at the end of the 1980s (see Sillince 1990;Telgarsky and Struyk 1990;Turner et al 1992) had also revealed differences in the housing systems of these countries as a consequence of economic constraints in individual countr y, housing policy and institutional development during the socialist period. These studies also highlighted the 'divergence' from the 'East European housing model', especially in the case of Hungar y and the former Yugoslavia with implementation of 'marketization' reforms in these countries from the 1960s onwards.…”

“…Therefore, differences in occupation and income became important factors in distribution of housing (as initially put forward by Szelényi 1983) as well as socio-spatial differentiation in Eastern European cities. (For more details on Budapest see, for example, Hegedüs andTosics 1983, 1991;Sillince 1985;Ladanyi 1989;Kovacs 1990;Kádas 1991;Warsaw: Weclawowicz 1981;Dangschat 1987;Dangschat and Blasius 1987;Prague: Carter 1979;Mateju and Vecernik 1979;Ciechosinska 1987;Musil 1987;Yugoslavia: Mandic ÿ 1990;Gantar and Mandic ÿ 1991. ) 10 According to Turner (1991) and Turner et al (1992) 'marketization' represents a form of housing provision in which individuals or a social group act in their own 'personal' interest while privatization means a change in allocation of resources when individuals or a social group act to generate pro ts.…”

Social and Spatial Disparities in Warsaw in 1978: An Application of Correspondence Analysis to a 'Socialist' City

“…None of the authors has made an attempt to measure the degree of residential segregation, however. Only Musil (1968) for Prague in 1930and 1960and Sillince (1985 for Budapest in 1970 and 1980 undertook a segregation analysis.…”