CC BY
24
UDC 332.8:364.22:621.31
P. Lis,
PhD (Economics),
J. Mazurkiewicz,
PhD (Economics), Poznan University of Economics, Poland
COMBATING ENERGY POVERTY IN THE SOCIAL HOUSING STOCK
1. Introduction
A full-scale development strategy of the European Union, known as "Europe 2020", has become a contemporary framework of the Polish economic policy, including the energy and housing policy. The bases for this policy are: 1) investments in education, scientific research and innovations, 2) balanced development conducted in accordance with the low-carbon economy, as well as 3) social integration (the so-called social inclusion), with a particular emphasis put on reducing poverty and creating new workplaces.
The social housing stock is an important instrument in the state's fight against poverty and social exclusion. The investments realised in the social housing construction support the development and attractiveness of certain urban areas or entire cities. Social housing construction serves as a stabiliser of tensions which appear on local housing markets and it depreciates (softens) the course of housing cycles [Cf. Lis 2008, 2012]. Improving living standards is, at the same time, an important element of achieving the aims of the energy policy in terms of increasing energy efficiency and reducing the level of the emissivity of the economy. The potential of housing construction as regards improving energy efficiency has been estimated to be 30 MtCO2 until 2030, which makes up 13% of the total potential of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases in the economy of Poland [McKinsey 2010].
In the face of the growing prices of energy, heat and gas in relation to the households' income and low energy efficiency of residential (and public) buildings, there occurs an issue of energy poverty. A fundamental definition of energy poverty indicates that it is a phenomenon which consists in experiencing hardships with maintaining adequate heating in residential buildings [Li et al. 2014]. With the course of time, this phenomenon began to be considered from a more comprehensive viewpoint, encompassing the necessity to provide households with an access to electric and gas energy used for realising essential needs [IEA 2010] as well as to conduct proper modernisation of dwellings, purchase heating systems and devices [Cf. St^pniak, To-maszewska 2014, pp. 6-7]. It shall be highlighted that energy poverty in well-developed countries is considered from the viewpoint of economic (and not physical) access to energy. The energy poverty-stricken households are considered to be those in which the amount of expenditures on energy and fuel exceed 10% of income [Boardman 2012].
The authors have put forward a thesis that the social housing stock and social housing construction could serve as a crucial instrument in the state's fight against energy poverty, simultaneously realising the essential aims of the social housing policy and being in harmony with the EU law, especially in terms of providing services in general economic interest.
The main aim of this work is to assess the possibilities (conditions) for including social housing construction in the fight against energy poverty among low-income households or other sensitive groups. In order to fulfil this aim, the following research tasks have been assumed. To begin with, the first part of the work identifies the right to housing as the basis for conducting an active housing policy. Next, the authors identify the aims, instruments and models of the social housing policy. In this context, the main housing problems in the European Union member states are identified, with particular attention paid to energy poverty. Finally, the authors suggest a range of instruments which can be used for combating energy poverty within the social housing policy.
The authors use the statistical data of the Eurostat and the International Energy Agency. Furthermore, specialist studies concerning the issues of social housing construction and energy poverty are used in this work. However, the main inspiration for writing this work are two opinions of the European Economic and Social Committee: 1) "In the case of the issues with defining social housing as a service of general economic interest" and "For coordinated European measures to prevent and combat energy poverty" [EKES 2013a, 2013b].
2. The right to housing as the basis for conducting an active housing policy
The right to housing, being the basis for conducting the housing policy, has been recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which says that "everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services". Furthermore, the right to housing may also be found in the European Social Charter: "With a view to ensuring the effective exercise of the right to housing, the Parties undertake to take measures designed: to promote access to housing of an adequate standard; to prevent and reduce homelessness with a view to its gradual elimination; to make the price of housing accessible to those without adequate re-
sources". The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union also claims as follows: "In order to combat social exclusion and poverty, the Union recognises and respects the right to social and housing assistance so as to ensure a decent existence for all those who lack sufficient resources, in accordance with the rules laid down by Community law and national laws and practices". Finally, the right to housing has been laid down in the constitution of a number of member states or is subject to special legal acts which aim at its effective implementation.
The right to housing is fulfilled in the majority of member states through the services provided in general economic interest. According to Article 36 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which says that "the Union recognises and respects access to services of general economic interest as provided for in national laws and practices, in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community, in order to promote the social and territorial cohesion of the Union". Under Article 106 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and under the assumption that common access to housing is considered as a service provided in general economic interest, undertakings obliged to manage the services provided in general economic interest are subject to the norms contained in the Treaties, including the rules on competition and the principles concerning the ban on and control of the state's support, within the limits in which their application does not constitute a legal or actual obstacle to the performance of particular tasks given to them by the national, regional or local authorities.
The decision of the European Commission concerning the services provided in general economic interest of 20 December 2011 reduces the access to subsidised social dwellings for the disadvantaged and for less privileged social groups which are unable to find housing at market conditions due to their solvency constraints. In accordance with Protocol no. 26 of the Treaty of Lisbon, the main responsibility for provision, finance and organisation of services of general economic interest shall be vested in the member states and their national, regional and local authorities which have a vast scope of discretional capacities in these areas and a democratic freedom of choice [EKES 2013, p. 53].
In sum, the right to housing encompasses both the issues of the availability, capacity to purchase or rent dwellings and maintain them, as well as the standard of the housing stock. Energy poverty is closely connected with the right to housing in a sense that it determines the standard of the stock as well as the households' capacity to maintain the stock. An active role of the state in the European Union member states, supporting the right to housing, has become greatly limited and controlled more closely by the European Commission. On the other hand, the state's instruments aiming at reducing energy poverty through the social housing stock or social housing construction are not subject to such restrictions from the European Commission.
3. Social housing policy goals
The housing policy is one of the sector policies conducted both by the central authorities as well as the local authorities, engaging public entities, social organisations, private entities, in order to achieve the main, long-term goals which are: a) creating favourable conditions for purchasing and renting the housing stock by all citizens as well as creating the possibilities to maintain this stock, b) ensuring the availability of housing and c) guaranteeing an adequate housing standard [Lis 2008]. The detailed specification of the main housing policy goals should refer to the citizens' housing needs and the demand for housing reported at a given time and place, and the manner of realising the "right to housing (reside)" will influence the social model functioning in a given country [Lis 2005]. The principle of determining a mutual system of rights and obligations of households, enterprises and the state in terms of ensuring fundamental housing conditions should be based on the "right to reside". This right does not, however, give citizens consent to take a demanding attitude towards the state in order to fulfil their housing needs, not supported by their individual effort to fulfil these needs. The right to reside also encompasses such components as: a right to choose the form of housing ownership, a right to reside in standards which are not beneath human dignity, a right to change the place of residence [Andrzejewski 1987]. The interpretation and realisation of the right to reside is becoming one of the main factors delineating the shape (model) of the housing policy.
The realisation of the above goals of the state's policy requires special instruments used with reference to persons with a low economic status or with reference to specific, sensitive social groups such as: the disabled, the unemployed who have not been working for a long time, the elderly who are left to themselves, families with many children, single parents, emigrants and refugees, ethnic minorities, persons facing eviction, persons who live in dangerous areas, as well as young married couples or students. It shall be highlighted, however, that the criteria which enable identification of these sensitive groups are quite diverse in particular European Union member states; moreover, they tend to change with time. They include above all the criterion of income, social risk, a number of persons in a household, age, marital status, health condition, class and race. Specific instruments applied with respect to persons with a low economic status or sensitive groups have contributed to the fact that the so-called social housing policy has been specified. Besides determining the manners of allocating and accessing the social housing stock (conditions for entering and leaving - even obligatorily - the social housing stock), among the tasks of the social housing policy should be assessing the capacity of households to rent (or in certain cases to purchase) housing in the social housing stock and to maintain this housing, as well as determining the scope of legal protection for the tenants and owners of the stock [Lis 2008, 2012].
Thus, the social housing policy makes up for an important area in the fight against energy poverty due to its focus on low-income households and sensitive groups.
4. Social housing policy models
Taking into consideration the goals and instruments applied, two major models of the social housing policy may be indicated - a universal model and a selective model. The latter may be further divided into two variants: general and residual [See more in Lis 2008, 2013; Ghekiere 2009].
The prevailing aspects of the universal model are the ideas of solidary payment and reception of benefits by all citizens, while there exists differentiation concerning the degree of public strains and benefits depending on the households' financial possibilities. The capital-redistribution function of the financial system is a crucial element of the universal policy. In this approach the housing policy uses the instruments of regulation and support in relation to the entire housing market, creating the so-called vast area of influence [Bengtsson 2001, 2004]. In the universal model the state aims at providing housing to every citizen, regardless of their income. As a result, additional demand for social housing is created, which supplements the housing market. Significant changes in the conditions of functioning of the housing market occur in this model, including dwelling prices and rent rates. The replacement value and not the market value becomes a priority investment criterion. On the other hand, the security of renting dwellings increases, which cannot be guaranteed by the private sector. The universal model has been predominant in Denmark and the Netherlands, and it has occurred also in Sweden [EKES 2013a, pp. 54-56] 1
In Denmark, the universal conception is deeply rooted in the model of a welfare state. The notion of dis-advantaged, weak and excluded groups or persons is not
limited by a given level of income. The aim is to ensure affordable and available dwellings to persons who need them. A traditional real estate market is enriched thanks to lifting legal social obligations and ensuring social equality and diversification in terms of ethnic origin, sex, income, age, disability or mental and physical needs. The pricing policy is regulated and based on actual costs, which eliminates the possibility of excessive compensation [EKES 2013a, p. 56].
The European Commission is against the functioning of the universal model in the housing sphere due to the lack of concentration on a specific social demand. According to the European Commission, it does not reflect the EU definition of a service provided in general economic interest in connection with housing. The objects at issue are the principles of financing private enterprises operating within social housing construction. The basis for the objection against the universal model is the European Commission Decision of 2005 on the application of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty2 to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest3. A necessity to control the compensation granted to private entrepreneurs was introduced with reference to social housing. Furthermore, the member states were obliged to prepare detailed reports within a three-year-time period which would become the basis for the assessment by the European Commission4. The Directorate-General for Competition launched explanatory procedures concerning the conformity of the state's support given in the Netherlands and Sweden with the laws and principles of the uniform market. The case of the Netherlands concerned the definition of social construction, which - according to the EU institution - encompassed an excessive number of persons, some of whom did not belong to sensi-
1 Sweden opted out from providing a clear specification of the service provided in general economic interest with respect to social housing.
2 The Treaty of Amsterdam, which was signed on 2 October 1997 and came into force on 1 May 1999, introduced changes and new numeration of the articles contained in the Treaty on the European Community and the Treaty on the European Union. It also contains attached, consolidated versions of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community. In accordance with Article 86 (2), "Undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest or having the character of a revenue-producing monopoly shall be subject to the rules contained in this Treaty, in particular to the rules on competition, insofar as the application of such rules does not obstruct the performance, in law or in fact, of the particular tasks assigned to them. The development of trade must not be affected to such an extent as would be contrary to the interests of the Community."
3 Under Article 5 of Commission Decision of 28 November 2005 on the application of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (notified under document number C(2005) 2673) "The amount of compensation shall not exceed what is necessary to cover the costs incurred in discharging the public service obligations, taking into account the relevant receipts and a reasonable profit on any own capital necessary for discharging those obligations. The compensation must be actually used for the operation of the service of general economic interest concerned, without prejudice to the undertaking's ability to enjoy a reasonable profit."
4 The Member States conduct regular inspections or commission such inspections in the sector of social housing in order to ensure that a given undertaking does not take compensation exceeding the amount specified under Article 5. Each compensation surplus up to 20% of the annual compensation may be transferred to the following accounting period, on condition that a given undertaking runs its activities solely within the scope of services provided in general economic interest. The results of the assessment of the influence are submitted to the European Parliament, European Committee of the Regions, European Economic and Social Committee and the member. Source: Commission Decision of 28 November 2005 on the application of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty.
tive groups. It was postulated that the Dutch social construction organisations should sell the housing stock in order to suit EU regulations. The case of Sweden regarded the conformity with the law of the support given by the local authorities to the entities which provided services within the scope of social housing in which the authorities acted as shareholders [Cecodhas 2007].
In the general variant of the selective model the beneficiaries of the state's support in the housing sphere are the persons who have found themselves in a difficult economic situation or those who have been excluded (alike the residual model discussed further in this work), as well as the persons with a meagre income and difficult access to adequate housing due to their uncertain income. The access to housing is most frequently conditioned by the level of income and the composition of the household. Rents are regulated and remain affordable. This conception has in most cases a limited influence on the general level of supply of dwellings and on their prices, and it does not cause any conflicts with the private real estate market, since the profits remain very limited. This conception encompasses wider categories of people and complies with the community requirements with respect to concentrating on social demand. It is applied in the following countries: Germany, Austria, Belgium, Spain (access to ownership), France, Finland, Italy, Luxemburg, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovenia [Cf. EESK 2013, pp. 54-56].
In the residual variant of the selective model the social housing subsidised by the public authorities is reserved to the persons in a difficult economic situation or those who have been excluded, and clearly defined as such. In the case of such housing, there are very rigorous principles of allocation used. The rent is almost entirely paid through the system of social assistance. This conception does not create any competition to the private real estate sector and is fully compatible with the EU definition of a service provided in general economic interest with respect to social housing, formulated in the European Commission Decision of 20 December 2011 renewing the exemption from the prior notification obligation to report the compensation for the costs of public services as regards making social housing available to the "disadvantaged or those who are in a worse social situation, without adequate means, in order to obtain housing on market principles". This category includes: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Malta, Portugal, Romania, the United Kingdom, Slovenia and - partly - Spain (social rental sector) [Cf. EKES 2013, pp. 54-56].
In brief, there are two models of social housing policy in the European Union member states - the universal
model and the selective model. The activities of the European Commission aim at gradual elimination of the universal model in favour of the selective model. As a result, the fight against energy poverty in the social housing stock will concentrate either on sensitive groups or on households with low income or no income at all.
5. The issue of Energy poverty in the background of other housing problems
All member states except for Greece have their own social housing stock, yet the size of the stock varies to a large extent both among the countries (e.g. the countries of the "old" and "new" European Union, i.e. EU-15 and EU-13), and inside these countries (i.e. urban versus rural areas, city centres versus outskirts). According to the Eurostat data at the end of 2013, an average of 11% of the Europeans lived in the housing stock for rent, with non-market rent. In Poland, this number amounted to 12%, which is slightly higher than the average in the Community.
The main aim in the area of housing for the majority of public authorities of the EU member states is to provide the inhabitants with common access to decent (with a minimum standard), affordable housing and the activities for the rationalisation of the costs housing maintenance. Despite varied activities of the member states, 5.2% of Europeans (according to the Eurostat data at the end of 2013) faced a threat of serious housing deprivation, i.e. they lived in overpopulated dwellings1 with at least one of the following problems: a lack of toilet or bathroom, leaky roof or lack of adequate lighting. According to the Eurostat data, 17.4% of Europeans lived in overpopulated dwellings, whereas 11% of households spent at least 40% of their equivalent disposable income on housing needs. Housing deprivation, including the issue of overpopulated dwellings inhabited by persons facing poverty, constitutes the main challenge for the social housing policy. High housing deprivation, including a high overpopulation ratio, reduces young people's chances to get suitable education, which consequently may be a limitation in finding proper employment.
Participation of housing expenditures2 in the households' disposable income amounted to an average of 22% in the European Union member states. On the other hand, the proportion of persons whose housing expenditures exceeded 40% of the equivalent disposable income averaged 11%. In Poland the results in this area ran at the level of the EU average (22.7% and 10.3%
1 The overpopulation ratio means a failure to meet whichever of the following criteria: one room per household, one room per every adult, one room per two children of the same sex aged 12-17, one room per every child between 12 and 17 - different sexes, one room per a couple of children aged below 12 years old.
2 Housing expenditures refer to monthly costs of housing maintenance. They include payments for utility bills, including the cost of water and sewage, electricity, gas and heating, mortgage interest, insurance, repair and renovation fund, fees for the real estate administration, rent - in the case of lessees, real estate taxes.
25 20 15 10 5
MMim
EHIilnnnnnn
rj n i-i »-1
0 3>u
^ Zn
l-OOyNI-yyDCinTlllLJ Q-(NL0(-J<Q3LJ-LJJ_,ql0
>|-LU U CÛ
Fig. 1. Serious housing deprivation in European Union member states in 2013
Source: based on the European research on living conditions, EU-SILC, Eurostat [ilc_mdho06a].
0
44
33
22
11
Li
m in ~
Q Participation of housing expenditures in households' disposable income in % in 2013
B Percentage of persons whose housing expenditures exceeded 40% of the equivalent disposable income in 2013
Fig. 2. Housing expenditures in the European Union member states in 2013
Source: based on the European research on living conditions, EU-SILC, Eurostat, EU-SILC, Eurostat, [ilc_mded01, ilc_lvho07a].
respectively). It shall be mentioned at this point that one-third of the inhabitants of Greece, almost one-fifth of the Dutch citizens and one-sixth of the inhabitants of Germany, Romania and the Netherlands spent over 40% of their equivalent disposable income.In the light of the above housing problems, the EU member states may be divided into a few groups characterised by the scale of occurrence of serious housing deprivations and high costs of housing maintenance (Cf. fig. 3). Two housing issues occur simultaneously in such countries as: Romania, Hungary, Latvia, Poland and Greece, i.e. in the countries with relatively (compared to the EU-28 average) lower economic development, especially in the countries which have undergone the political and economic transformation. Excessive housing expenditures, with a relatively good condition of the housing stock appear in particular in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands, thus in the countries with a high level of economic development.
In the light of the above presented housing problems, there occurs an additional phenomenon of energy poverty. Among the main, direct factors shaping this phenomenon, there are: the amount of energy con-
sumption by households and the types of energy used, the level of energy efficiency of households (in relation to energy efficiency of occupied buildings, energy consumption of the appliances used as well as consumers' behaviour), the level of the household's income and the level of energy prices. The factors which influence the level of energy poverty indirectly include among all: 1) the size and structure of a household, which shape specific energy needs, 2) the legal title to the real estate, conditioning the scope of decisions taken in order to improve energy efficiency and 3) the type of the heating system and possibilities to substitute the sources of energy in order to lower the costs of fuel.
Nowadays, both in social sciences and in economic practice, there is no complex and universal index allowing for monitoring the level of energy poverty. The most frequently used evaluation, due to the lack of other measures, is an answer to the question concerning the occurrence of hardships with maintaining an adequate level of heating in the place of residence, asked to households under the EU-SILC research survey conducted by the Eurostat. It seems, however, that for the purpose of making international comparisons, these
0
estimates should be complemented at least with the data reflecting the differences in energy-related strains (both electricity and heating) on the households' budgets. Consequently, energy poverty is reflected in the following part of this work as an index which contains infor-
mation concerning: 1) hardships with maintaining adequate temperature in a dwelling, 2) the occurrence of delays in housing payments, 3) the participation of the costs of housing maintenance in households' budgets [Cf. Healy 2004, Bouzarovski 2011].
Percentage of persons whose housing expenditures exceeded 40%o of the equivalent disposable income in 20135
Fig. 3. Relation between excessive expenditures and serious housing deprivation in the EU member states in 2013
Explanations: two bold lines mean a median of assumed indexes for the EU-28 member states. Source: based on the European research on living conditions, EU-SILC, Eurostat.
Based on the analysis conducted by the authors, it may be concluded that among the EU member states that highest level of energy poverty is found in the economies of Greece and Bulgaria (Cf. fig. 4). The values of all the features under analysis place these economies in the forefront of the EU. The problem with maintaining a comfortable temperature in dwellings in Bulgaria and Greece was present in 45% and 30% of the population of these countries respectively. Interestingly, the majority of countries with energy poverty above the average are the countries of southern Europe, situated on the Balkans and in the Mediterranean Sea basin as well as the countries of central and eastern Europe. This phenomenon may be explained by the differences in the degree of energy efficiency of residential buildings (including adequate thermal insulation), the level of wealth and ecological awareness of the society (Cf. fig. 5). This interrelation makes us maintain the conclusion that in spite of aiming the energy policy at the growth in the efficiency of energy consumption, alongside a growing level of prosperity, there occurs a quantitative increase in the consumption of energy by households.
For the majority of the EU member states, a prevailing carrier of energy in households in 2013 was natural gas, which covered 37.4% of the entire consumption of energy in households in the EU-28 group.
The above-presented set of conditions leads to a conclusion that although the households which are poor in economic categories are also stricken by energy poverty, the two categories of poverty may not necessarily appear simultaneously. In fact, there might occur a situation in which a household whose income exceeds the poverty income criterion is located in a building with low energy efficiency or uses devices with high energy consumption. As a result, the level of energy-related expenditures connected with housing maintenance increases above the average values. Another example may be a household which earns an average income, residing in an energy efficient building in which consumers behaviours lead to improper (excessive) consumption of energy.
The identification of the main reasons for the occurrence of energy poverty is essential to create solutions which would diminish the scale and scope of the phenomenon. In the case of households which are poor in the categories of income and energy, reducing economic poverty is a necessary condition in order to decrease energy poverty. If, however, energy poverty strikes households with an average income, yet belonging to sensitive groups, the role, character, scope and efficiency of the state's intervention changes.
120 100 80 60 40 20 0
□ High costs of housing maintenance
□ Delays in payments for utility bills
□ Inability to maintain adequate temperature
8 i
gliill
ttttl B numn
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
ñ
I— I— ¡Z !3ô 3
15 ai 2 u
Fig. 4. Level of energy poverty in the EU member states in 2013
Source: based on the European research on living conditions, EU-SILC, Eurostat, [ilc_lvho07a, ilc_mdes07, ilc_mdes01, ilc_mdho01].
1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0
/ P
UJLUÛ^^ QLJJU_Z
=3 =5
LU M
— u
— LO Q- —I
Fig. 5. Final energy consumption in households in the EU member states in 2013 per capita
Source: based on the Eurostat data, [t2020_rk200].
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
I— oo > (j i— cc
^ ^ LU U GQ D- (J
CCL CCL CC ^ LI- U — 3
00 —'
ÍN 00
I— ^ M <QU
^ LU LU 00 O CO
fc=>i-;0>
□ Electricity BGas □ Heating □ Renewable energy sources dOil □ Fossil fuels
Fig. 6. Structure of the sources of energy used in households in EU member states
Source: based on the Eurostat data, [t2020_rk210].
6. Suggestions for combating energy poverty within the social housing policy
Taking into consideration the factors which shape energy poverty, three directions of actions aiming at diminishing the scope of this phenomenon may be determined [Cf. Wçglarz, Kubalski, Owczarek 2014]. The first group of solutions encompasses technical actions, directed primarily at modernising and improving energy efficiency. These solutions include among all thermomodernisation of residential buildings, modernisation of heating installations and systems, replacement of energy
consuming devices. The second group of solutions is composed of economic instruments, among which there are instruments of direct support of income, instruments supporting investments in energy efficient solutions and instruments of securing claims. The third group is made up of the solutions which aim at educating and shaping consumer models, among all improving the knowledge in the area of an efficient use of energy or abilities to choose, modernisation and attendance of energy efficient devices. An important element in this group of solutions is monitoring the level of energy poverty.
Taking into account the shape of the social housing stock and social housing construction, it may be highlighted that the instruments applied will be more selective than universal in their character. They will be directed at low-income households or sensitive groups. It serves more as an advantage of the solutions rather than a drawback. It has been postulated that in the case of the instruments directed at low-income or no-income households, the state's activity should be channelled to institutional support: gminas, non-profit organisations or investors participating in social undertakings. An important group of instruments will include the activities which are more technical in their character. As regards the group of sensitive households, with an average income, the state's instruments may be targeted directly at these households, yet based on the principle of their participation (also financial) in improving energy efficiency and reducing energy poverty. An important role in this target group may be played by the economic instruments.
7. Summary
The social housing stock and social housing construction may constitute one of the areas for combating energy poverty in the European Union member states. Including the activities within this scope into the housing sphere requires taking into consideration the conditions for conducting the social housing policy. One has to bear in mind, however, that the housing problems in the countries of the Community have a twofold character: first, there is serious housing deprivation, and second, there are excessive costs of housing maintenance. These issues concern to a large extent the countries which have undergone economic and political transformations, and are becoming more and more troublesome for the countries of the so-called western Europe, especially in the area of housing expenditures. Supporting the housing sphere with structural funds from the European Union in the years 2014 - 2020 thus seems fully justified, especially with respect to thermomodernisation and promoting renewable sources of energy and integrated activities concerning the fight against energy poverty.
The instruments of the state's policy directed at combating energy poverty within the social housing stock and housing construction will be targeted at households with low income or no income at all as well as sensitive groups with an average income. As regards the instruments directed at the former group of households, the priority is given to technical activities. In the case of the latter group, of key importance here are the economic instruments whose role is to support the realisation of energy investments together with financial resources coming from this group of households.
References
1. Andrzejewski A., 1987, Polityka mieszka-niowa, Wydanie 3 zmienione, Warszawa. 2. Andrzejewski, A., 1977, Sytuacja mieszkaniowa w Polsce w latach 1919-1974, Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Ekono-miczne, Warszawa. 3. Bengtsson Bo, 2001, Housing as a Social Right: Implications for Welfare State Theory, "Scandinavian Political Studies", Nr 24. 4. Bengtsson Bo, 2004, The right to housing in universal and selective housing regimes, ENHR Conference, Cambridge, United Kingdom.5. Boardman, B., 2012, Fuel poverty synthesis: Lesson learnt, actions needed, Energy Policy 49 (2012). 6. Cecodhas, 2007, Housing and the European Union Policy, Exchange, Current Issues and Future Challenges, Special Edition, No 7. 7. Commission Decision of 20 December 2011 on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (notified under document C(2011) 9380), 2012/21/EU. 8. EKES 2013a, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on "Issues with defining social housing as a service of general economic interest", 2013/C 44/09. 9. EKES 2013b, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on "For coordinated European measures to prevent and combat energy poverty", 2013/C 341/05. 10. European Parliament resolution of 11 June 2013 on social housing in the European Union, 2012/2293(INI). 11. European Social Charter (Revised) of 3 May 1996, Strasburg. 12. FE-ANTSA, 2007, Policy Statement, How to allocate social housing The urgency of the housing need of applicants should prevail. 13. Forys I., 2011, Spoleczno-gospodarcze determinanty rozwoju rynku mieszka-niowego w Polsce, Wydawnictwo WNUS, Szczecin. 14. Ghekiere L., 2009, Institutional mechanism and social housing finance: a European comparative perspective in: Financing social housing. After the economic crisis, CECODHAS Seminar, Brussels. 15. IEA (International Energy Agency), 2010, Energy Poverty: How to Make Modern Energy Access Universal?, in: World Energy Outlook 2010, IEA, Paris. 16. Charter of Fundamental Rights of 30 March 2010, 2010/C 83/02. 17. European Commission, Commission Decision of 28 November 2005 on the application of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest notified under document number C (2005) 2673. 18. Li K., Lloyd B., Liang X., Wei Y., 2014, Energy poor or fuel poor: What are the differences?, Energy Policy 68 (2014), s. 476-481. 19. Lis P., 2005, Koncepcje polityki mieszkaniowej, Zeszyt naukowy nr 31, Katedra Polityki Gospodarczej i Planowania Rozwoju, Akademia Ekonomiczna w Poznaniu, Poznan. 20. Lis P., 2008, Polityka panstwa w zakresie finansowania inwestycji
mieszkaniowych, Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck, Warszawa. 21. Lis P., 2011, Cele i instrumenty spolecznej polityki mieszkaniowej, w: Dzieciuchowicz J., Wspolczesne przemiany srodowiska mieszkaniowego - wybrane problemy, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego, Lodz. 22. Lis P., 2012, Housing cycles. Theoretical and practical aspects, Wydawnictwo Adam Marszalek, Torun. 23. Lis P., 2013, Skala potrzeb mieszkaniowych w Polsce, Mieszkalnictwo w Roku Rodziny, Raport CBOS oraz ekspertyzy i opinie w sprawie sytuacji mieszkaniowej Polakow, Kongres Budownictwa, Habitat for Humanity, Fundacja Bezdomnych, listopad 2013, s. 22-25. 24. McKinsey, 2010, Ocena potencjalu redukcji gazow cieplarnianych w Polsce do roku 2030, Warszawa 2010. 25. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN Resolution of 10 December 1948, 217/III A, Paris. 26. St^pniak, A., Tomaszewska, A., 2014, Ubostwo energetyczne a efektywnosc energetyczna. Analiza problemu i rekomendacje, Fundacja Instytut na rzecz Ekorozwoju, Warszawa. 27. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union of 30 March 2010, 2010/C 83/01. 28. W^glarz, A., Kubalski, G., Owczarek, D., 2014, Propozycje mechanizmow wsparcia procesu przeciwdzialania zjawisku ubostwa energetycznego w Polsce, Fundacja Instytut na rzecz Ekorozwoju, Warszawa 2014.
Лис П., Maзуркевич I. Посилення енерге-тичнот складовоТ в побутовiй сфер1
Автори ще! публiкацii вказують, що в другому десятилггп XXI столiття шститути СС нацiленi на енергетичну политику в побут i ii вплив на загаль-ний клiмат. Показана виправданють громадсько! пiдтримки iнвестицiй в економто енерги в побут як спроба нейтралiзувати 3MiRK клiмату, скоротити бвднють серед сiмей з низьким рiвнем доходу i, щоб просувати мiсцевi робочi мiсця i економiчний розви-ток в цiй области Сдина полiтика Свросоюзу активно сприяе змiцненню його динамiки i гарантуе ефект важеля, який у свою чергу призводитиме до викори-стання iнших, додаткових джерел фшансування. Вiдповiдно до директив Сврокомiсii, житлова сфера була квалiфiкована, як така що тдлягае пiдтримцi вiд структурних фондiв в новiй фiнансовiй перспек-тивi до 2020 р., особливо в термшах термомодерш-зацл i просування поновлюваних джерел енерги. Але вш доки не об'еднав дп, що нацiлюють розвиток мiст на боротьбу за економто енергоресурав, забез-печення доступу до житла маргiналiзованим суст-льствам i пропозицiю сощальних послуг високо! якостi.
Ключовi слова: сощальне житлове будiвництво, бiднiсть, енерпя, клiмат.
Лис П., Мазуркевич И. Усиление энергетической составляющей в бытовой сфере
Авторы этой публикации указывают, что во втором десятилетии XXI столетия институты ЕС нацелены на энергетическую политику в быту и ее влияние на общий климат. Показана оправданность общественной поддержки инвестиций в экономию энергии в быту как попытка нейтрализовать изменения климата, сократить бедность среди семей с низким уровнем дохода и, чтобы продвигать местные рабочие места и экономическое развитие в данной области. Единая политика Евросоюза активно содействует укреплению его динамики и гарантирует эффект рычага, который будет в свою очередь приводить к использованию других, дополнительных источников финансирования. В соответствии с директивами Еврокомиссии, жилищная сфера была квалифицирована, как подлежащая поддержке от структурных фондов в новой финансовой перспективе до 2020 г., особенно в терминах термомодернизации и продвижения возобновляемых источников энергии. Но он пока не объединил действия, нацеливающие развитие городов на борьбу за экономию энергоресурсов, обеспечение доступа к жилью мар-гинализированным обществам и предложение социальных услуг высокого качества.
Ключевые слова: социальное жилищное строительство, бедность, энергия, климат.
Lis P., Mazurkiewicz J. Combating Energy Poverty in the Social Housing Stock
The authors of this publication indicate that in the second decade of the 21st century European Union institutions have been aiming at encompassing social housing construction into a common climate and energy policy. It has been shown that the justification of public support for energy investments in the social housing stock is an attempt to counteract climate changes, reduce energy poverty among low-income households as well as to promote local workplaces and economic development in a given area. The cohesion policy of the European Union may actively contribute to strengthening its dynamics and ensure a leverage effect which in turn will lead to the use of other, additional sources of finance. In accordance with the guidelines of the European Commission, the housing stock has been qualified to be subject to support from structural funds in the new financial perspective until 2020, especially in terms of thermomodernisation and promotion of renewable sources of energy, integrated actions aiming at developing urban areas and combating exclusion by providing access to dwellings to marginalised communities and offering high quality, affordable social services.
Keywords: social housing construction, energy poverty.
Received by the editors: 07.04.2015
and final form 28.12.2015
