The Political Economy of Public Housing Policy in Taipei City, 1945~2012

• Main Authors: Hsin-Ju Hsueh, 薛莘儒
• Other Authors: Chyuan-Jenq Shiau
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2013
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/86137462949400460632

碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 政治學研究所 === 101 === For the housing provided, rented and owned for specific people by the government, we call it “low-rent public housing’’. To some degree, it’s similar to “social housing”. Low-rent public housing in Taiwan is not plenty, but it is worth mentioning that there are the most low-rent public housing in Taipei City, including renting public housing, parity housing and temporary dwellings. For the most part, this thesis has been divided into three parts: earlier stage of low-rent public housing policy (1945-1968）; the developing stage of low-rent public housing policy (1969-2004）; and the suspension and resurrection stage of low-rent public housing (2005-2012）,It focused on every stage of its international and internal political situations, population, economics, housing-supply, and further, the political and economic analysis. The first stage is based on warfare and re-establishment after World War II, and the government used American-aid fund to provide a loan for building public housing. Therefore, there were no incentives and resources for the government to build low-rent public housing. The second stage is based on the diplomacy crisis and economic downturn. The government began to drive big plans for public-hosing building, but in order to stabilize the political and economic situations, the government still focused on helping people buy their own houses. There was just a little space for developing low-rent public housing. At the third stage, at first, being affected from public housing postponement, there was no low-rent public housing done. Later, because of the social housing policy, low-rent public housing was resuscitated. But for specific political reasons, low-rent public housing was not targeted to the low-income and disadvantaged minority. After analyzing these three stages, it is realized that the housing policy has always varied from the political and economic situations. Low-rent public housing is always insufficient at every stage. Now we begin to develop the social housing policy, and the core value of low-rent public housing should be manifested to protect low-income and disadvantaged minority’s right of abode. Low-income and disadvantaged minority is a top priority, and with the references to other countries’ experiences, there should be more low-rent public housing available.