OF the many insecurities that Filipino households experience -including economic, food, and political-housing insecurity is surely near the top of the list.
Owning a comfortably sized home, preferably in safe, clean, easily accessible communities, with the necessary amenities is one of the main aspirations of Filipino households, according to the survey underpinning the Ambisyon Natin 2040 vision document.
In fact, many Filipino households still live in homes or lots that they do not own. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority’s 2021 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES), for instance, only 71 percent of Filipino households live in homes that they own or for which they have owner-like possession of the house and lot. The other 29 percent report less secure tenure status and could be renting the house/room and lot (8 percent), own the house but not the lot (15 percent), or live rent free with or without the consent of owner (6 percent).
The household surveys like the FIES do not clearly identify informal settlers, but they likely fall not just among those who live rent free, but also among those who report they own the house but not the lot and even those who report they rent a room or a house and lot. The latter is particularly the case for recent internal migrants to dense urban areas.
There is a noticeable urban-rural dimension in housing tenure status, with more households renting and less owning houses and lots in urban areas.
In rural areas, 73 percent own or have owner-like possession of house and lot, only 1 percent rent house/room and lot, 22 percent own the house but not the lot, and the rest live rent free with or without the consent of owner.
In urban areas, 69 percent own or have owner-like possession of house and lot, 14 percent rent a house/room and lot, and 11 percent own the house but not the lot, and the rest live rent free with or without the consent of owner.
Metro Manila is the starkest case, where only 64 percent own or have owner-like possession of house and lot, 26 percent rent, only 4 percent own the house but not the lot, and the other 6 percent living rent free with or without the consent of owner.
Housing insecurity manifests itself not just in terms of tenure status but in the size of the living space. For most local building codes, the standard size for a single-family dwelling is about 30 square meters. This is to accommodate a family with four members, providing it 7.5 square meters per member.
But based on the 2021 FIES, of the 26.4 million households in the country, 8 percent were actually living in homes where the floor area was less than 15 square meters, and another 25 percent in homes where the floor area was less than 30 square meters. In area size per person, 18 percent of households lived in homes where the floor area was less than 5 square meters, and another 10 percent in homes where the floor area was less than 7 square meters.
Taken together, this means about 30 percent to about a third of households in the country did not live in homes that have enough comfortable living space, just based on minimum standards.
These are likely to take a toll on family members, including the development of children. There are studies showing that children from overcrowded homes are more likely to perform worse academically and to be developmentally delayed. It can also take a mental and emotional toll on adult members of the household.
Unfortunately, home ownership, especially in urban areas, is a pipe dream for many Filipino households who do not yet own a house or who want to move to a bigger house.
The Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) sets official housing price ceilings for eligibility for government housing programs. For socialized subdivision units, the maximum price ceiling is set at P850,000 for a unit with a minimum floor area of 28 square meters. For socialized condominium units with the minimum acceptable size, the DHSUD price ceiling is set at about P1 million. These ceilings will reportedly be increased this month to increase private sector participation in housing projects.
In reality, these prices serve more as a floor as market prices are typically higher.
According to the 2021 FIES, about 12 percent of Philippine households actually spent more than they earned in total income for the year. Such households certainly cannot afford to buy a house or qualify for a loan to buy a house. Of the households who managed to save, 10 percent saved less than P8,000 for the year and 25 percent saved less than P20,000 for the year. Again, such households are unlikely to be able to afford to purchase a house.
In Singapore, which faced mass housing shortages in the 1950s, the housing problem was addressed in large part by a program of subsidized rent for extremely low-income households and subsidized sale for low and middle income households. Singapore’s Central Provident Fund played a role in supporting the government’s housing program.
Can a similar program be implemented in the Philippines? It is certainly worth looking at. It will be financially costly, for sure, but it will also likely be economically profitable, especially in the long run. Imagine if the money wasted on ghost flood control projects went into real housing projects instead.