![]()
NINE
Housing pathways of young people leaving care
As discussed in earlier chapters, many of the young people still live in child welfare institutions in their adulthood. The impact of poor housing policy for young people leaving care potentially not only excludes them from housing, but also restricts their other social and economic opportunities, as introduced in Chapter Seven. This chapter uses the social exclusion framework to analyse the housing pathways of young people in state care who were trying to leave care at the time of the research. It considers their exclusion from the market, policy and society, and the interrelationship between these three aspects of exclusion due to their isolated childhood housing experience. It explores how the state manages their right to independent housing during their transition to adulthood and how their housing status affects other aspects of their adult life.
Without independent housing, many of the young people in care face multiple forms of social exclusion (Johnson et al, 2009). It affects not only health, education and overall well-being, but also self-identity and aspirations for social participation. Their expectations for future social relationships, their place in the community and their contribution to it can be stymied by their lack of housing options. Increasingly, too, the local governments in this research were concerned about the impact of its continued responsibility to house these young people into the foreseeable future.
Housing and social inclusion
The importance of the right to adequate housing and its key impact on social inclusion is recognized in international treaties and Chinese policy. The United Nations defines the right to adequate housing as 'each man, woman, youth and child have access to and retain safe house and community in peace and dignity' (UNHCHR, 2010), and calls on all countries to ensure their laws and policies on housing are appropriate for those most in need. The Second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) held in 1996 passed the Habitat Agenda, which reiterated the commitment of states and governments to comprehensively and gradually fulfil the right to adequate housing (UNHCHR, 2010). It prioritizes the needs of people most likely to be excluded from housing:
Some groups or individuals have a particularly hard time exercising their right to adequate housing as a result of who they are, discrimination or stigma, or a combination of these factors. To protect the right to housing effectively, it is necessary to pay attention to the specific situation of individuals and groups, in particular those living in vulnerable situations. These groups include women, children, slum-dwellers, homeless persons, persons with disabilities, displaced persons and migrants, indigenous peoples, etc. (UNHCHR, 2010)
Relevant to children who are orphaned and living with disabilities, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) enshrined four essential rights of children: the right to survival; the right to development; the right to protection; and the right to participation. Children's health, education and development and overall well-being are deeply influenced by the quality of their housing. According to clause 3 of Article 27 of the Convention:
States Parties, in accordance with national conditions and within their means, shall take appropriate measures to assist parents and others responsible for the child to implement this right and shall in case of need provide material assistance and support programmes, particularly with regard to nutrition, clothing and housing. (UNCRC, 1989)
The right to housing security is also critical for people with disabilities. Social exclusion persistently prevents people with disabilities from exercising their right to adequate housing, including exclusion due to institutionalization, the absence of barrier-free environments and social discrimination. Young people with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities often have extremely poor access to housing security (Wiesel et al, 2015). It is a key social right recognized by states:
States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living for themselves and their families, including adequate housing, and shall take appropriate steps to safeguard and promote the realization of this right without discrimination on the basis of disability, e.g. ensuring access by persons with disabilities to public housing programmes. (UNCRPD, 2008: Art 28)
Applying a multidimensional social inclusion framework implies that housing security is an important condition for young people's transition into their community and that the fulfilment of their right to adequate housing affects their realization of other rights, including economic security, social relationships such as intimate family ties and other meaningful social participation. With this framework, this chapter focuses on three topics: the right of young people in state care to independent housing in their communities for their transition to adulthood; the factors that influence access to independent housing, including barriers and facilitators; and the impact of housing conditions on their current and future expectations and social integration.
The qualitative research reviewed the data from the welfare institutions, interviewing young people in care, staff at the welfare institutions and social workers (see Chapter One). The chapter compares the outcomes of four different housing types of young people in care, with or without disabilities, in the four sites of Beijing, Taiyuan, Urumqi and Nanning. At each site, the researchers: spoke to young people in care, with or without disabilities, aged 19-25 years who no longer received state care; conducted in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with 48 young people in care, with or without disabilities, aged 16-40 years; and interviewed officials and professional workers closely associated with the support for children and young people in state care and foster care families. In addition to data from these four cities, the small-scale research in Datong City, Shanxi Province, which has a long history of foster care, was added to the analysis where relevant.
Housing systems and housing security for young people
The policy context of housing security for young people in care involves three systems: household-centred housing security (informal); the orphan basic living protection system; and the urban housing security system. Traditionally, Chinese housing security relies on family responsibility. Conventionally, when young people marry, the groom's parents are expected to offer a house to the couple. With urbanization and the commercialization of housing, such practices have adapted in various ways, such as parents purchasing apartments for children or paying the first instalment for the purchase. In the context of soaring house prices, this practice has become increasingly unsustainable. Parents often have to use all their savings to help their children secure housing. Young people who are orphaned and in state care do not have parents to fulfil this role, do not know their extended family and so do not have access to this housing security from a family. The social convention makes it difficult for young men in state care without access to housing to find a wife.
When the Chinese orphan basic living protection system was established in 2010 (see Chapter Two), the issue of the transition of young people in care to adulthood also became a concern (see Chapter Four). Various locations formulated general provisions about housing security for young people in state care. Young people in care mainly rely on the urban housing security system because the urban institution is their registered residence and they do not have access to family security. Yet, in the context of rapid urbanization and housing marketization, the welfare housing security system is undeveloped and provides inadequate support to groups with middle or low income.
The development of the urban housing system in China can be broken down into three phases: a welfare-based housing allocation system; the commercialization of housing; and the emergence of market economy-oriented housing security policies. Prior to 1979, housing was allocated by a state welfare-based housing system in urban areas, while household-based housing security persisted in rural areas.
During the welfare-based housing allocation phase (1950-79), state housing provision was based on decisions by the work units or institutions of employees. This system resulted in a serious housing shortage, poor-quality houses, inadequate maintenance and corruption in the allocation of houses. In addition to the state-owned housing, the family security system persisted, though the security was compromised. Although residents retained their privately owned property, they were no longer entitled to the land that the house was on.
In the reform phase of the housing allocation system (1979-98), the basis of the welfare-based housing system was gradually abandoned. In 1998, housing monetary reform marked the end of the welfare-based housing system and the establishment of the market-oriented housing allocation system. The development of the housing market began. From 1998 to 2007, the new housing security system witnessed full scale-up. At the beginning, a housing provision system focused on affordable housing was developed. Subsequently, along with soaring urban house prices, the policies gradually shifted their focus to low rental housing as the new priority for housing security. The state tried to promote the dynamic management of financially affordable housing and the limited acquisition of property rights. Housing security was incorporated into the scope of the government performance review (Li, 2008; Zhu, 2008). Inequalities in rural housing also changed, including safety, allocation and security of tenure (Wang et al, 2012).
Following 2007, investment in real estate became overheated and house prices rose to an unreachable level for average citizens. Inequality in housing grew (Fu et al, 2015). Unaffordable empty housing at market price sat alongside an insufficient supply of affordable housing in urban areas (Zhu, 2008) as the country shifted to a higher rate of urban than rural residents (Liu et al, 2015). A growing number of urban residents sought to return to welfare housing security. The emergent welfare housing security system now includes three approaches: affordable housing (commercial housing with government subsidization); low rental housing; and a rental allowance for housing. The government is most recently beginning to invest in public housing, contrary to international trends, perhaps because of the gap in provision in recent decades (Chen et al, 2014). The first two approaches to address the supply of affordable housing and low rental housing are insufficient to meet demand.
Young people leaving care struggle to find housing in this changing context. China is in transition from welfare to the commercialization of housing, yet the housing security system is still underdeveloped to protect people like young people leaving state care, who lack the personal or social resources to enter a commercial housing market. In major cities, market-based housing excludes most wage-earning young people unless their parents can support them to purchase a house. Young people leaving care can usually only rely on welfare support to enter the housing market.
Housing policies for young people leaving care
Young people leaving state care need independent housing in order to detach from welfare institutions and achieve independent living. This includes independent registered permanent residence, a place to live in the community close to their workplace and a residential space that supports independent social interactions and protects their personal privacy. Leaving care policies, including housing, were introduced in Chapter Four, and some of the young people and their housing experiences were initially discussed in Chapter Seven. The policies and experiences are further explored in this chapter.
In China, policymaking is largely delegated to government departments that formulate regulations as the basis for governance and administration. Government departments responsible for allocating affordable housing follow their own affordable housing allocation policies or those formulated by authorities at higher levels in the same sector. Not all welfare benefits articulated in official documents are actually provided in a particular location. Basic living protections and housing security policies for young people in care are not likely to be implemented unless they are also articulated in the local official documents on affordable housing allocations. In China, housing policies are highly decentralized, being formulated by local governments. The housing policies in Beijing, Taiyuan, Urumqi and Nanning are described here to illustrate the direction of housing policy change to support young people leaving care. They use the terms 'low rental housing' to mean government public housing and 'affordable housing' to mean government housing available to purchase for home-ownership.
Beijing housing policy
Housing security for young people in state care is incorporated into the policy documents of the Beijing Municipal Commission of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, which is the government authority responsible for housing allocation, the Measures of Beijing on Management of Application, Review and Rental of Public Rental Houses 2011. This means that state wards and other orphans are prioritized when they apply for affordable housing.
Opinions of Beijing People's Government General Office on Further Strengthening the Security for Orphans in the City (J.Z.B.F. (2011) Number 13)
A target group for housing security is any orphaned young person in Beijing. For orphans with housing property, the guardians are obliged to help them protect their property rights and maintain the property. Urban adult orphans without housing who do not live in a welfare institution are prioritized by the local government as the key target group of housing security if they meet the criteria for entitlement to urban low rental housing or other affordable housing. Rural adult orphans without housing who do not live in a welfare institution are included in rural dilapidated building renovation plans and prioritized in funding. Township or town governments and villagers' committees are to mobilize social resources and local villagers to help them build houses. Local governments are to include young adults in state care who are eligible for housing security into the urban housing security system and prioritize them while rationing public rental housing. Additionally they grant rent allowances to those who are entitled to low rental housing, or support them to obtain other affordable housing, in order to help meet their need for housing following their placement in the community.
Measures of Beijing for Management of Affordable Housing (Trial) 2007
The target group for housing security with this policy is households, meaning that young people leaving care are usually not covered. The applicant must hold urban registered permanent residence in Beijing for at least three years and must be at least 18 years old. In households with one family member only, the applicant must be at least 30 years old. The applicant's household average per capita housing area and household income and assets must conform to the policies and criteria defined by the government. Priority targets for allocation are: households subject to housing demolition and relocation when land is acquired for building affordable housing or other key projects; households reallocated due to the reconstruction of old urban areas or the conservation of historic areas; and households with poor access to housing, as well as older people over 60 years old, people with severe disabilities or major diseases, key entitled group members, and ex-servicemen, but not other young people in state care.
Measures of Beijing for Management of Price-Capped Commercial Housing (Trial) (J.Z.F (2008) Number 8)
Again, the target group for housing security with this policy is urban households, meaning that young people leaving care are not included. Urban residents' households with medium income and poor access to housing, rural households affected by housing demolition and relocation, and other households specified by the municipal government in Beijing are included.
Measures of Beijing on Management of Urban Low Rental Housing 2007
Although the target group for housing security in this policy is households, this can include young people leaving care if the household has an average per capita income, the household gross assets and household per capita usable floor area conform to the specifications, and they meet one of the following circumstances: the household is subject to housing demolition and relocation; has family members with specific diseases or severe disabilities; has family members over 60 years old; is residing in houses defined as hazardous housing by the municipal government; and has at least two family members.
Measures of Haidian District on Placement of Adult Orphans
According to the policy in the inner-city district of Haidian, orphans of at least 18 years old are entitled to low rental housing and a lumpsum placement allowance of RMB150,000. The applicant must have a registered permanent residence of Beijing or have been raised by the welfare i...
