In Canada, owning our own home is still very much a part of the Canadian dream. I think that’s true in most countries of the developed world. If we didn’t place such a high value on homeownership, surely we wouldn’t burden ourselves with 25 or 30 years of debt. Sure, there are lots of benefits to owning a home – building up equity, security of tenure, no pesky landlords, freedom to renovate and make changes to our homes, income tax savings, not "wasting" money on rent, etc. From an individual perspective, those could all be valid reasons for choosing homeownerhsip - at least in the short run. But, taking a longer view and a broader societal perspective, private ownership creates many problems, exacerbating the gap between rich and poor and between current and future generations.
A big part of the problem is that housing is treated as a commodity and its value is determined by the market. As we have seen, over and over, house prices can be driven upward by speculation and can crash dramatically when an industry closes down. House prices can rise due to increases in land value from social influences such as population growth or improvements to public infrastructure or other services provided by the state. American political economist Henry George was the first to argue that increases in land value due to aptly named “fortuitous factors” such as location or public expenditures on road infrastructure are not fully legitimate and should not accrue to owners. However, as long as housing is viewed as a commodity or an investment good, any increases in house price do accrue to owners and do not benefit society or future generations.
Some self-organized housing communities, such as cohousing, equity co-ops or intentional communities have attempted to preserve affordable housing by imposing re-sale conditions on the selling price of houses in their communities. Others have created community land trusts in an attempt to retain any increases in land value for the benefit of the community, not individual owners. These groups are on to something. Trusteeship, not ownership, is the only form of tenure that can guarantee benefits are retained for future generations.
In the United States, the first community land trust was formed in Georgia in 1967 and, since then, over 200 have been formed throughout the country, resulting in the creation of over 5,000 affordable homes (http://www.cltnetwork.org/index.php?fuseaction=Blog.dspBlogPost&postID=1396) These trusts are democratically governed non-profit corporations representing the interest of the community as a whole. Residents own the buildings or other improvements they make to the land but they do not own the land itself which is held in trust for the community. Land trusts can be very effective in preserving affordable housing because they ensure any increases in land value remain with the trust and not with homeowners when they sell their homes.
Although the concept of housing trusts has not taken hold to the same extent as land trusts, there are some in existence, particularly in the United Kingdom. Several communities established community housing trusts based on the Community Gateway Model (http://www.cch.coop/gateway/easyguide.html), a new model of housing organization designed to “put residents at the heart of decision-making”. This model builds on the belief that greater levels of dweller control can result in better housing management, better value for money and more sustainable communities. The model gives residents maximum involvement in the strategic and operational management of their housing. The Board of Trustees is made up of a mix of residents, councillors and independent stakeholders from the community.
Although these community housing trusts do not refer to their communities as housing commons, they do describe themselves as “tenant democracies to steward their homes”, a phrase that echoes the language of the commons.
Changing our national dream from a dream of homeownership to a dream of trusteeship might sound like a big step, and it’s true it is a huge step - but it is not an impossible step. And the thing is, if we don’t change our current view of housing from that of a commodity to a commons, the housing conditions of much of the population are likely to become more like a nightmare than a dream. We are already seeing that in the huge numbers of families who have lost their homes due to foreclosures, the growing number of people who are homeless and growing numbers of families living in inadequate housing. The market-based economy has not lived up to its promise that “a rising tide will lift all boats”. We need to move to a system where we are all in the same boat and then a rising tide will indeed lift us all.
In his groundbreaking book, Capitalism 3.0, Peter Barnes (http://www.plancanada.com/capitalism3.pdf ) presents a powerful argument for replacing our current out-dated “operating system” which he calls “Capitalism 2.0” with an updated operating system, “Capitalism 3.0”, based on the commons. An integral part of Capitalism 3.0 is the creation of common property trusts to protect, preserve and replenish the commons. As “centuries-old institutions” created to hold and manage property for beneficiaries, trusts are well suited to protect the commons for future generations.
We can’t expect the market to lead the way in this transition. And we can’t count on government either. Only groups of citizens self-organizing to reclaim the commons will transform our society in this way. Are we ready and willing?
No comments:
Post a Comment