In this issue of Khat-e-Solh, we talked with Dr. Shahreh Ghamar-Fallah about the social dimensions of housing, especially rental housing. She sees the concept of government in providing public services such as health, water, electricity, housing, and basic services to the people and believes that these services should not be left to the market. She considers current and past plans and policies to be ineffective and presents “social housing” as a way to escape the current housing situation in Iran. She defines rental housing as a product of urbanization and the commodification of housing, and sees the decrease in people’s economic power, especially for renters, as a factor in the marginalization of urban households and one of the current factors in the expansion of marginalization. The conversation continues as follows:

Is it believed that with urbanization, renting increases? Is this an inherent rule of urbanization?

Usually, when urbanization grows, rental housing also increases. The reason for this is that in a small and closed community like a village, the economy has a framework of self-sufficiency. For example, in the past, a rice farmer would grow and eat his own rice, sell some of it, and use it as a source of nutrition. Buying and selling and the commodification of everything becomes meaningful with urbanization, and housing also becomes a commodity. In the village, housing was not a commodity, but a shelter. Housing in the “Mazlou classification” is considered a need, after food and before shelter, for the safety and security of the household. But in the city, where the economy is a market economy and everything becomes a commodity, housing also becomes a commodity, and when it becomes a commodity, its production is taken out of the hands of the household. In a closed society, the person who builds is the same person who uses it; in other

You mentioned that in a historical process, housing has transformed from a shelter that individuals produced themselves into a commodity. Is housing like all other commodities, or should there be special oversight over it considering the principle of the right to shelter for everyone?

If the government claims to address inequality, it is not only necessary to have proper supervision, but it should also include social housing production in its plans, with a focus on the poor. However, if the government is market-oriented and does not interfere in the market, it will neglect this issue. In fact, it depends on the nature and approach of the government. The concept of government for me as a sociologist is that it should provide public services such as health, water, electricity, and housing, and provide basic services to the people. These should not be left to the market. When basic needs are left to the market, demand increases and supply decreases, causing prices to rise. In this process, cities first attract individuals with income, and then a group is attracted for work. This group consists of the poor who end up living on the outskirts. As housing prices increase, the urban population spills over from the city to the outskirts and surrounding areas. Currently, one-third of our population

“One of the slogans of the early days of the revolution was empowering the oppressed by providing housing! In these four decades, what progress has been made in the issue of housing for the general public (as a human right)?”

The idea of producing housing for the poor is a good idea. From a sociological perspective, there should be the existence of “social housing”; meaning housing that requires a comprehensive plan, not just building houses. Humans are not objects to be taken and placed in a location that has been built. They should have a sense of belonging to the place and have something of themselves in it. Then it is not just housing, but also includes the home and its surrounding environment. For example, consider the Navaab project. They built housing and also attracted a group of people, but these houses have become a place for various social problems or have high suicide rates. We do not learn from other countries. France did this in the 1960s, but then bulldozed all the buildings because they saw an increase in suicide and crime rates. This is despite the fact that they had put more thought into it. For example, they created neighborhoods and built parks for young people. Housing should maintain

Apparently, these actions and methods of location finding have been done to reduce construction costs.

We should not look at this issue from an economic perspective in the short term, because in this case the long-term economic costs will increase. The price of land may have been more suitable in those areas, but what will we do about its future social, economic, and environmental costs? Piping water and electricity has a high cost, and human traffic also increases pollution, traffic, accidents, and financial costs. Housing production, like any other social issue, should be community-oriented and consider all its dimensions. When we talk about housing, we are not just talking about housing; we are also talking about the dimensions of a home, which is a place for sleep and rest. Housing also requires placement in a neighborhood; a neighborhood that needs a library and a sports club; like old neighborhoods where people felt safe and comfortable. They felt supported. In a plan like Mehr housing, such situations do not exist. The government should focus on comprehensive social housing plans. For example, when new cities were carefully

Where will this process go?

One of its consequences is that a group of people who live in informal settlements, in addition to the increase in social issues and crime, also experience social inequality leading to physical inequality, as well as social hatred and segregation. I used to work in Malashiye, Ahvaz. Families in the city of Ahvaz did not want their children to be friends with the children of Malashiye or go there. The children of Malashiye would also come to Ahvaz to have fun and cause trouble (for example, puncturing the tires of the latest model cars). This created a social segregation and physical separation in the city. The future of both informal and formal settlements within the city is a social, economic, and physical segregation that intensifies and creates a wave of hatred between the resident and non-resident population groups. Now, some people have always lived in informal settlements, while others have moved from the city and formal settlements to informal ones. They always feel a sense of

You mentioned about being attached to a neighborhood and place. Are the members of renting families, who may live in different neighborhoods and places every year, at risk of psychological disorders and pressures? Are renters vulnerable to social harm?

See, this has a greater impact on the social psychology of humans. The individual psychology that you consider, when people do not understand the neighborhood, they do not feel the support of the neighborhood. For example, for me, there have always been patterns of reference groups in my mind that have emerged from that neighborhood. People who were famous and were role models for us with their social behaviors. In the school where our principal was our manager for years and the love that was established between the children, teachers, principal, and the school over the years. Love is not just a feeling, it is a process that takes shape over time. This creates a healthy mind for me that can understand the meaning of trust and confidence. Socially, these are people without role models, nomadic and indifferent. They are groups that interpret love in a different way. Love for them is only here and now, and they do not look to the future; like children now! Look at the love and marriages now

If necessary, please mention any points at the end.

Our audience is the government, not the people. The people cannot do anything and it is not possible to advise investors to think about the people. Contrary to the theory of neoliberals who say do not intervene in the market, if the government does not intervene in the market, it should not leave the disadvantaged classes to their own fate. The Mehr housing plan only made the middle class homeowners, not the poor and the penniless. Because to become a homeowner, they had to have money. A comprehensive plan is needed that identifies target groups and considers a process and method for each group. However, the main principle that must govern all of this is the principle of participation. We should not build houses for these groups, we should build houses with them and see what they want. Although they do not have social and capital credit, they have needs and desires. They know how many rooms they need and whether they want a balcony or not. They know that even if they do not have

Thank you for the opportunity you have given us to use the peace line.