9
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES :
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
Abstract Slovenia has experienced signifi cant immigration flows within the last few
decades. The high rate of urban growth which we experienced in the 60s has never-
theless decreased, which led to the development ofa polycentric urban network dur-
ing the 70s. Smaller urban centres have grown, together with a strong trend towards
suburbanization. Absolute housing shortages were overcome in the late 80s, but struc-
tural shortages persist. The controversial effects of private (as opposed to social)
housing policies enabled the application of a specific housing practice, mostly ori-
ented to the construction of one-family houses in the countryside and in suburbs .
The consequences of social development and urban planning on both traditional
and modern mobility and housing policy are discussed in the retrospecitve analyses
of the specific urbanization patterns in Slovenia.
urbanization, polycentric development, immigration, housing shortage
Introduction - A Short Historical Overview of Migration Flows
in Slovenia
Changes in migration flows between and after the two world wars have been significant in
Slovenia. Before 1950 Slovenia was a typical emigration country, where many people were
headed towards the USA, Australia and other countries. A few small urban centres were
populated by landlords, local administrators and intellectuals, and the first rudiments of the
national bourgeoisie. A dispersed agrarian population in a relatively poor country produced
emigrants rather than industrial workers for the few urban centres . The high rates of emi-
gration for political reasons after 1945 significantly reorganized the population within the
country, especially along the coast on the border with Italy (Koper, Piran, Gorica, see Figure
3) and near the Austrian border (Maribor) . Great expropriation and nationalization of
housing and building stock fostered such a redistribution .
Only after the 1960s was the migration trend reversed - immigration flows were greater than
emigration (Figure 2) . The first of these immigrants were mostly unskilled single young
men. According to the latest census in 1991, the educational structure of the Slovenian popu-
lation improved during the previous ten years (from an average of 8 .6 years of school up to
9.6 in 1991) ; furthermore, the education of immigrants in the same period was even higher
than the average for the Slovenian population (Jakoš, 1992) .
DRUZBOSLOVNE RAZPRAVE, 1994. No. 15-16
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
The emphasis in the first period after the Second World War was an jndustrial development and
urban growth, which had quite different effects in each of the republics of the former Yugoslavia
(Dekleva, VB., 1992) . In Slovenia, deagrarianization reduced the proportion of farmers from
49 .0% in 1948 to only 7 .6% in 1991, enabling the rapid acceleration of urbanization (Statistical
Yearbook RS, 1993 : 57) . The differences between the levels of development among the republics
of the former Yugoslavia have remained unresolved, provoking increasing social and political
problems (Dekleva, V.B ., 1992) .
Slovenia became for the next three decades an immigrant country, mostly for people from
former Yugoslav republics (Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia), as illustrated in Figures 1 and 3 .
These immigrants (270,000 in 1991 or 13 .8% of the population according to Kuhar, 1993),
together with internal migrations, promoted the growth of different types of settlements, as
shown below (Table 1 and see Figure 2) :
Table I DEMOGRAPHIC DEVELOPMENT OF SETTLEMENTS IN SLOVENIA 1971 -
1981-1986
Type
	
Year Density % of Average annual growth rate
inh./km2 population 1971/81 1981/86
Town 1971 1 .094 .4 36 .3
centres 1981 1 .370 .2 38 .5 2 .3 1 .3
1986 1 .458 .2 39 .0
Urban 1971 390 .8 8 .3
peripheries 1981 563 .9 10 .4 3 .2 2 .6
1986 609 .0 11 .2
suburbs 1971 203 .7 25 .9
(pert-urban 1981 238 .7 27 .0 1 .2 1 .8
areas) 1986 260 .9 30 .3
Other 1971 35 .0 29 .5
(rural 1981 28 .7 24 .1 -2 .0 -3 .2
areas) 1986 24 .5 19 .5
Totals 1986 98 .0 100 .0 1 .1 1 .0
Source: selected data from Ravbar, Klemenčič, 1993 : 12 .
118
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
According to estimates from the 1991 census, 14% of the population was non-Slovenian (this
may have dropped in 1991/2 to 10%) . Although lower in absolute terms, Slovenian emigration
remained constant (each year approximately 0 .01% of the population left the country), but more
selective (the so-called "brain-drain"), oriented mainly toward European countries (esp . Ger-
many) up to the 1980s . In addition, there were many Slovenes working as temporary workers
outside the country (Kuhar, 1993) :
1971 - 48 .086
	
1981 - 41 .826 1991 - 40 .327
Between 1982 and 1990, 76,000 immigrants arrived in Slovenia ; of those, 43,000 have
moved out of the country, while 33,000 have settled in Slovenia . The average number of
immigrants for that period was 3,700 annually, which represents 37% of the population
growth per year in Slovenia (Jakoš, 1992) . Since not all emigration is registered (because of
non-permanent jobs and status), statistics do not reveal the extent of this flow . It remains
greatly underestimated, as shown in research results (Jakoš, 1992 ; Ravbar, Klemenčič, 1993)
and statistical evidence .'
Consequences of Migrations for Urbanization in Slovenia
Within Slovenia, industrialization and urbanization provoked the rapid growth of the few
(8-12) regional urban and industrial centres (Ljubljana, Maribor, Gorica, Koper, Velenje
etc.) on account of the deagrarianization of the hinterland up to the late 19 .0s .
Table 2 PROPORTION OF URBAN POPULATION IN SLOVENIA from 1961 to 1991
1961 - 36% 1981 - 48 .9%
1971 - 44 .6% 1991 - 50 .2%
Sources : Statistical Yearbook, 1993;'Ravbar, Klemenčič, 1993 .
Consequently, the already modest levels of housing provision turned into severe housing short-
ages in these urban areas. Slovenia at present, as one of the most developed republics of the
former Yugoslavia, still has some of the controversial features of socialist development, those of
modern and traditional patterns. This has had an impact on the creation of the specific forms of
re-urbanization, started in the 1980s .
Such forms, where compound traditional and "modern" migration flows persist, along with the
structural housing shortages, have created a very peculiar "modern" suburbanization process in
119
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
Slovenia during the last decade . The result is stagnating urban growth, so that fully one half of the
population was still living in the countryside in 1991 .
Suburbanization has been defined as a process whereby distinctive migration flows are
directed to small settlements or villages outside urban centres and beyond their peripheral
areas . Such locations attract inhabitants from the cities as well as those moving in from less
developed regions . One third of the Slovenian population presently lives in such suburban
settlements (Ravbar, 1992: 127) .
Table 3 THE EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT STRUCTURE OF INHABITANTS AC CORDING TO TYPE OF SETTLEMENT (in %)
YEAR
	
1984 1991
URBAN COUNTRYSIDE ALL URBAN COUNTRYSIDE ALL
EDUCATION
less than 8 yrs . 30.8 69 .2 18 .9 34 .2 65 .8 2 .7
elementary school 35 .3 64 .7 27 .4 37 .7 62 .3 34 .3
technical school 50 .4 49 .6 27 .4 44 .6 55 .4 27 .6
secondary school 55 .8 44 .2 17 .6 61 .5 38.5 23 .4
university 7 3 2 7 8 .8 68 .5 31 .5 11 .9
all 45 .55 54 .5 100 48 .8 51 .2 100
ECONOMIC SECTOR
of employment:
primary sector 31 .1 68 .9 5 20 .3 79 .7 7 .8
secondary sector 45 .9 54 .1 53 .3 47 .9 52 .1 47 .5
commercial services 56 .6 43 .4 28 .1 56 .6 43 .4 30 .3
public services 6 6 3 4 13 .6 75 .4 24 .6 14 .4
Source : Quality os Lise Research : Dekleva, V.B., 1991, national sample os population, Institute os Social
Sciences .
The intensity of daily mobility (commuting) among the urban centres and the growth of
living/housing environments is used as the first criterion in determining the suburbanization
process . To illustrate : in 1991, there were 599,000 commuters (1/3 of the population, Kuhar,
1993) . The criterion is the changing structure of jobs and employment sectors in each loca-
tion, urban and suburban (Ravbar, 1992) . Generally, there is a slow increase in the service
and public sectors in suburban areas, while the rate of employment and structural change in-
creases in urban centres .
120
URBAN MOBILITYAND HOUSING SHORTAGES
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Table 4 RATIO OF NUMBER OF WORKING PLACES TO POPULATION (1988)
CITY
	
PERIPHERY URBAN region SUBURBAN settl . total
number of
working places
for each 100 62 .5 23 .1 52 .6 32 .3 43 .2
inhabitants
% of working 35 .5 7 .0 33 .2 . . . . 2 6
places in tertiary
and service sectors
% of all working 77 .6 17 .6 95 .1 4 .9 100
places
Source: selected from Ravbar, 1992 : 211 1
Because of increasing economic problems, previously overrating housing construction began to
decrease in the early 80s, with a significant drop after 1986. During the same period, mainte-
nance and reconstruction of housing is slowed, each year maintaining the same number of re-
newed units (approximately 4,000) . Both have been falling even faster in the 90s .
Table 5 FINISHED NEW HOUSING UNITS for each 1000 inhabitants during the
years 1970 to 1989
Apartments
1970 - 5 .4 1976 - 7 .9 1982 - 6 1988 - 4 .9
1971 - 5 .9 1977 - 8 .2 1983 - 6 . 1989 - 4 .3
1972 - 5 .8 1978 - 7 .5 1984 - 5 .8 1990 - 3 .9
1973 - 5 .9 1979 - 7 .3 1985 - 5 .7 1991 - 3 .0
1974 - 7 .7 1980 - 7 .2 1986 - 6 .5 1992 - 3 .3
1975 - 8 .8 1981 - 7 .6 1987 - 5 .1
Source : Statistical Research no .556/1992, p.12, Ljubljana (the last two figures are not definitive').
121
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
The private building sector might recover again in 1993, but presently it deals mainly with private
business and not yet with housing.] The rate of construction is slow (especially in cities), since
out of each four units started, only one is finished within two years .
The structural housing shortages due to social production and a narrow rental sector in cities
have led to an abundance of do-it-yourself construction in suburban areas and we are faced with
expanding urbanization within limited land resources . To illustrate the production of housing in
the private sector compared to the public sector, the following chart shows the trends in each
over the last three decades (Dekleva, V.B ., 1993) .
Both sectors reduced the absolute housing shortage in Slovenia in the late 80s (1987/1988),
but exacerbated ecological and transport problems . Urban land-use is "poorly exploited,"
while the countryside lacks infrastructure.
Suburbanization in Slovenia promotes the individual construction of one-family housing
within the existing, modest infrastructure of these small settlements . It provokes ecological
and ethnological changes and extensive building/infrastructure construction within the very
limited land resources in Slovenia . And it certainly promotes traffic problems due to the
daily mobility of workers and students . Suburbanization is thus a controversial process,
which solves some social and housing problems but at the same time creates others, as we
shall discuss later.
Suburbanization and the urban growth of very small settlements are present mainly in the
developed (post-industrial) countries of Europe, rather than in industrialized or developing
societies . Such a process in Europe is connected with structural economic changes and quali-
tative social development, like collective welfare policy and modernization of infrastruc-
ture . It is promoted by middle and high social groups, who are able to afford it on account of
the new organization of production and services . The availability and accessibility of tech-
nological innovations (infrastructure and communication) foster this process .
In Slovenia, traditional and modern forms of mobility along with housing shortages have
produced high rates of suburbanlzation (Figure 4) . The suburban alternative is promoted
by the values and preferences of the population to live "in a family house near the city",
where a certain life style encounters the cost of daily mobility (Public Opinion Research
1978/1991 ; Ravbar, 1992) . The socialist monopoly of housing construction firms caused
housing production in cities to be low (with the exception of the early 70s), expensive and
lacking in quality. Do-it-yourself construction has been the only alternative for investment
as well as for an adequate and cheaper solution to the housing problem of moving families .
122
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Structural Housing Shortages
In Slovenia, suburbanization is the outcome of resolving the absolute and structural housing
shortages during the last two decades . Among the reasons for changing domicile, housing is the
most common (Table 6) .
Very different social groups are involved in suburbanization, from those quite well off to
those who could be considered socially and financially deprived . Illegal construction also
occurred, although some such neighbourhoods were subsequently legalized (Dekleva, V.B .,
1992 ; Ravbar, 1992) .
Table 6 REASONS FOR MOVING during 1982 - 1986 (%)
first
	
change marriage change of moved other
type of migration employment of job housing with family reasons 100°A
Total Slovenia 3 .0 11 .6 8 .5 32 .4 22 .1 22 .3
inter Communal 1 .34 7 .5 9 .5 37 .3 23 .0 21 .3
from SFRJ republ. 7 .50 22 .3 6 .1 20 -.0 19 .5 24 .5
elsewhere 0 .12 3 .9 2 .4 22 .6 29 .3 41 .5
During 1987 and 1991, housing change was the reason for 36 .6% of moves ; in 1988 it accounted for
41 .2% (Statistical Research no.562, 1992) .
There have been specific reasons for the increase in suburbanization . First, small settle-
ments have offered lower prices for land, since farmers could not expect adequate compen-
sation from the state in cases of expropriation . The protection of highest-quality land from
construction produced shortages of available land resources for urban planning at the pe-
ripheries of cities (after the extensive industrial construction in the 70s!) . At the same time
industrial housing construction had priority in urban centres and their peripheries (Dekleva,
J., 1993 ; Ravbar, 1992 ; Dekleva, VB., 1991b, 1992) .
Smaller settlements outside urban areas have thus hardly been regulated or planned at all,
leaning more scope for "free market" private initiatives . Living in a relatively isolated green
area, with a garden and some essential services, still offers a style of life that the average
Slovenian family favours the most .
The early 70s were a golden age for new housing construction . Absolute housing shortages in
Slovenia were greatly reduced by the end of the 80s, since there were slightly more units than
households (l .02 - Statistical Yearbook, 1993 ; Census 1991 ; Dekleva, V .B ., 1992) .
123
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
Absolute shortages relate the number of housing units to the number of households in Slovenia .
Structural housing shortages might persist due to regjonal disparities between the location of the
housing and the direction of social mobility. And there are shortages of types of housing, con-
nected with the housing status . For example, already in 1981 there were approximately 18,000
uninhabited housing units.
In 1991 that number had increased to 26,374 units (calculations from Statistical report
no.562 and Stat .Inf .188, 1992 ; SNP, Dekleva, J ., 1993) . Statistically, there was a surplus of
47,000 housing units in 1991 (Census), but 30,715 of them were secondary homes ; addi-
tionally, some housing has been used for business purposes . Thus, housing exists which is
inaccessible or unavailable to families in need . Considering the present lack of housing
supply, one could argue that both absolute and structural shortages are growing .
Generally, Slovenia is short of larger housing units in cities and there has been a persistent
gap in rental sectors (Blejec, 1984 ; Dekleva, V.B ., 1991b) . The shortage within rental sector
was increased by limited (state) housing production in the last decade, and by privatiza-
tion . Moreover, there are shortages of accessible, cheaper housing, due to the ever limited
resources of young families and deprived social groups .
Consequently, in spite the statistically balanced ratio of housing units to the number of
households, access to the private or social rental sector in urban regions has been neither
adequate nor sufficient, according to the needs of families . Private rental sector has been
expensive and social rental sector has long waiting lists and usually a family is given too
small flat . Both rental sectors have unsufficient offer of housing . Furthermore, the lower
mobility in social rental sectors compared to the "private housing" sectors increased the
structural shortages even when the production of housing was relatively high (1969 - 1980,
Figure 5) .
At present, structural housing shortages are increasing even faster, exacerbated by the present
economic crisis (lower investments in housing), increasing poverty (cost of housing com-
pared to income), the privatization of the social rental sector and the lowest level of new
housing construction since 1960 .
Table 7 INCREASING STRUCTURAL HOUSING IMBALANCES 4
% of population living in :
	
1981 1991
1 . adequate housing -54% 12 .6%
2 . too small unit -27% 32 .9%
3 . too large (above -19% 54%
standards)
Sources: Blejec, 1984 (Census) . Selected and compiled from Kraigher, Mandič, SNP I991 . .
124
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES-
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Additionally, the lack of available land and urban planning (Dekleva, J ., 1993) foster the inability
of municipalities to take initiatives for new housing construction, organization (social and rental
sector) and renovation . One source of optimism amid the present chaos are the possibilities
offered by the new legislation (promoting non-profit housing), for starting afresh on a "tabula
rasa" by overcoming the socialist controversy after the transitional period in"1993 .
The structural housing shortages are due to the ever higher intensity of social needs and
mobility, in relation to changes in the structure of housing stock . More simply, housing
demands are oriented towards quick changes, while housing supply lags behind . When such
imbalances increase and accumulate, the entropy of housing resources reduces access to
adequate housing . In Slovenia, it is ever harder to sell or rent housing in small countryside
settlements in declining agrarian regions, while there are structural shortages in urban
regions .
Types of Migrations in Slovenia
There have been two types of migration flows in Slovenia, traditional and modern . Each of
them has produced its own alternatives in housing policy orientation .
For the sake of clarification, it should be said that available data on migrations in Slovenia
do not cover every aspect of the usual analysis of migration flows . Our statistics record only
applicants for permanent residence and their provenance . In the last 25 years, 924,693
inhabitants (almost 1/2 of the population in 1991) have changed their residence or have
applied for resident status (Kuhar, 1993) . The Census includes some further data, but both
sources are deficient . They do not include those who live and work in Slovenia, even for
many years, but maintain permanent residence outside the country. Moreover, the mobility
of individuals changing their temporary residence, e .g . for education and part time jobs, is
not recorded .
It is generally believed that mobility in Slovenia is low, even though 50% to 80% of the
inhabitants of individual settlements have moved in from elsewhere (Ravbar, 1992) . This
possibly concerns mainly one in a life move, coinciding with first employment and (or)
permanent housing status . Most of this mobility in Slovenia during the 50s and 60s used to
be connected with deagrarianization - which later on provided migration from the former
Yugoslav republics .
Most data on mobility in this regard thus relate to traditional mobility, which includes per-
manent residence and employment in the period of deagrarianization within or outside the
country. Therefore, the traditional mobility fosters the flows from rural to urban regions .
This is greater in Yugoslavia, while in Slovenia it has stabilized during the last decade, resulting in
a relatively low rate of urbanization growth (Figure 2, Tables 1 and 3) . Only 7 .6% of the popula-
tion are farmers, but 29 .6% of households keep up farming as a second occupation in addition to
125
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
employment in industry, which accounts for 24% of the whole population (Statistical Yearbook,
1993; Dekleva, VB., 1992) .
Other forms of (modern) mobility have been developing on account of specific obstacles to
urban growth, including suburbanization, intensive daily commuting and the "urbanization" of
rural areas and small countryside settlements (Figure 4) . These phenomena are defined as mod-
em forms of mobility, due to the different locations of the working and living environments or
simple preference of life style. They are connected to increasing employment in the service and
public sectors, rather than in secondary activities .
Furthermore, both forms of mobility increase the dynamic of changes in the building envi-
ronment. They create demands for intensive infrastructural development . Along with the
ever increasing complexity of economic and social relations within the connected settle-
ments in each area, such processes require more and better communication in order to
enable such (metropolitan) regions to function .
The lack of modernized, reorganized systems of coordination might create obstacles to quali-
tative and structural changes, consequently provoking social/political conflicts and eco-
nomic recession . Many previous family and local investments would not be activated, and
their entrepreneurial potential would instead be lost . During the present process of transi-
tion, Slovenia is confronted with such a situation (Dekleva, VB ., 1992) .
Effects of Development and Mobility on Housing Provision
Production of housing and other urban facilities in the country, where such metropolitan
regions have been in formation (Dekleva, J ., 1993; Ravbar, 1992), are thus resulting in the
phenomenon of a "smoothly" dispersed, unusually complex urban network in Slovenia .
Almost 60% of Slovenian households (or 2/3 of the entire population) are living in one-
family houses of differing quality (barely renovated farms or newly-built suburban and
countryside units) .
Half of the entire population is settled in 68 regional and community urban centres . The
other half is dispersed over more than 5900 small settlements and villages throughout the
countryside (Dekleva, VB., 1991 ; Jakoš, 1992) .
Private housing ownership has currently regained as much as 88% of the entire housing
stock Social rental housing never reached more than 33% (in 1991) of the housing stock in
Slovenia and is presently being reduced by the conversion of status (privatization by the
tenants "Right to Buy") . Although various different forms of housing "privatization" have
existed in Slovenia during the last few decades, enabling the private sector to grow, most of
the financing has involved the public (social) sector (Figure 5) .
The greater the socialist inefficiency in housing, the larger the tacit tolerance has been of the
pragmatic solutions which the private sector and local population have devised in their distress .
126
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Public finance housing funds have been individually redistributed through loans to firms, by
commercial credits from banks or by various subsidies to cooperatives, firms, individual do-it-
yourself constructions and buyers of apartments . Most of these privatization forms have been
directed towards new construction, while mobility within the existing stock has faced normative
obstacles and financial constraints (taxes) .
Overestimation of housing demand has been the effect, while renovation and mobility have
been delayed . Most the public, industrialy built housing has been built in urban centres, but
part of it has been sold to private owners on a "free market" basis . In addition, housing
nationalized in the 50s is in the process of restitution into private hands .
Here we must consider the consequences for the housing policies which have been applied to
resolve the shortages of adequate or available housing . The main problem of younger Slovenian
families is overcrowded housing and unsettled housing status (living with parents or in the
non-registered private rental sector) . Access to adequate housing (defined by standards or
preferences) has been the greatest reason for stagnating rates of urban growth and for the
prevalence of suburbanization during the last decade .
First, a lack of units in rental sector in cities has increased prices, while normative obstacles
have decreased social mobility. Private initiatives have been oriented mainly towards self-
provision of housing, for own use rather than for renting (there exists a short-term private
rental sector, barely registered) . Inefficient social production of housing has left families
with little if any alternative. The building of a family house in a suburban area has been the
most rational, inexpensive and satisfactory solution .
While the elderly population today faces financial constraints and increasing housing costs,
very limited interventions have been applied to increase mobility within the existing stock
(Dekleva, V.B ., 1988, 1992) . Previously strong tenant rights and high taxes on sales in com-
bination with low rents for public housing restricted mobility . Now that restraints have been
loosened, it is almost impossible for elderly households to find adequate (smaller) housing
in the same environment .
A retrospective analysis of the significant periods, where certain types of housing produc-
tion prevailed over others in connection with different forms of social mobility, might reveal
the complexity of the present situation in Slovenia .
1 . The period between the end of the Second World War and the late 60s was characterised by
what could be called a "redistribution of poverty' . This included housing as well as other
kinds of property such as land, businesses and means of production . Modest new invest-
ments in housing by firms aid cooperatives only filled the greatest gaps in scarce available
housing stock for growing industries. Increasing population growth and the number of house-
holds made the situation worse for the ambitious development plans of the socialist state .
Shortages increased at the end of the 70s, when major immigration flows began to surge into
Slovenia from eastern and southern Yugoslavia, due to deficiencies in economic development .
127
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
Political measures to decrease housing shortages were stimulated, influenced by different fac-
tors .
The first socialist economic reform (in fact a crisis) in 1964 revealed some basic deficien-
cies of previous central planning . At first, unable to provide full employment for workers
and lacking new capital for investments, increased overall migration within Yugoslavia and
emigration to European countries . Slovenia became increasingly an immigrant republic .
Second, housing shortages were ever greater, while investments were needed in production
and infrastructure (roads, railways, communications) . Waves of immigrants into a few
urban centres increased social costs, overburdenning the local budgets . Insufficient urban
infrastructure made life miserable for inhabitants ; at the same time, not all members of
families previously fully engaged in farming could find adequate employment in cities (Bolčić,
1977) . This was especially true for women, since services for child care and other family
needs were insufficient .
Third, deagrarianization has not been replaced by efficient social production of food by
cooperatives; thus redistribution of capital due to unequal exchange and differences in
prices of food related to industrial products has failed to accumulate needed resources .
Shortages softened (politically) "the socialist agrarian revolution", leading to the toleration
of numerous, but small-scale private farming concerns alongside social production .
Yugoslavia opened its borders, introducing tourism as an alternative to industrial economic
growth (and bringing in hard currency!) . This decision also enabled the unemployment
problem to be "exported" by allowing emigration . Selective inclusion within world markets
began, accentuating and increasing both internal and external migration flows . Neverthe-
less, the heroic times of rapid industrial and urban growth were over .
2. The second period, in the 70s, therefore redefined the strategies of industrial develop-
ment, with different effects within each republic of the former Yugoslavia (Dekleva, V.B .,
1992) . This stage and increasing differentiation among national political mainstreams ac-
count for the later discords of the 90s. The strong need for change (redirection towards a
more market-oriented economy, rather then social redistribution) was more marked in
Slovenia and Croatia than elsewhere in the former Yugoslavia (Bolčić, 1977 ; Dekleva, V.B .,
1992) .
Industrial and other production investments were allocated to areas where people were al-
ready housed - small countryside settlements . Only a few industrial sectors occupied larger
areas, accumulating higher concentrations of immigrants . So-called "socialist cities" (Velenje,
Nova Gorica) were built, where employment, social services and urban facilities were pro-
vided as "packages," regardless of the production results . Political and economic manage-
ment functions after decentralization of the central government in 1974 inside the local
centres increased the number of such urban units, developing significant social standards for the
inhabitants of rather small settlements (Dekleva, V.B., 1992) .
128
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
TIE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Regional structural imbalances have been the result, having arisen in smaller towns of the
polycentric urban network (Dekleva, VB., 1992) . These towns have had the highest levels of
immigration flows during the last two decades and the greatest share of public housing .
When political and administrative decentralization began, the process at first provoked a
"national technocratic revolution" in Croatia and Slovenia; the orthodox establishment had
politically suppressed reform during the early 70s, prolonging its powerful social position .
After removing the initiators of the reform from the political scene, the communist party
paradoxically promoted the idea itself under the guise of legislative reform in 1974 (a new
Constitution) . The result was relative independence of the republics, including urban plan-
ning, housing and immigration policies . Consequently, restrictions on migration arose, lead-
ing to more selective and controlled immigration flows in Slovenia .
The territory of Slovenia was at that time divided into 68 municipalities, which in tine
gained substantial power to control their own resources . In municipal centres strong ad-
ministration, self-management and economic groups promoted urban development, changing
the social structure by selective immigration, investing in infrastructure, and raising social
standards (Dekleva VB., 1986/91, Table 3) . Most internal migrations in the mid-'Os were
towards the small municipal centres, while larger regional centres grew only moderately .
Urban development of this kind is described by the polycentric model (Figure 3) .
The social structure of immigration changed significantly in the late 70s . Immigrants had a
higher level of education (even higher than the Slovenian average), since previous immi-
grants had been predominantly unskilled young workers. The new immigrants more fre-
quently had families and had a greater tendency to integrate .
The last decade has therefore been marked by an overall decline in economic development,
demonstrating the need for structural and political change. Increasing unemployment (14.8%
in 1994) has slowed migrations and increased political turmoil . Slovenia has nevertheless
offered better prospects to immigrants from the former Yugoslav republics . Further stagna-
tion in the late 80s, economic decline and the declaration of independence reversed the
migrations trend in 1991 . Due to the war and the removal of the federal army, more than
9500 people left the country in '91 . The present turmoil has put an end to the "internal"
mobility from the former Yugoslavian republics . Nevertheless, the refugees opened new mi-
gration phenomena.
Some Social Consequences of Urban Decentralization and Prospects
Criticism of socialism usuaI neglects some positive aspects to urban development in Slovenia
since the 70s. The measure to disperse production facilitated lower costs of urban growth and
somewhat improved control of public expenditure : it enabled wages to be kept down because of
the lower cost of living in the countryside . The resourcefulness of families and traditional accu-
129
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
mulcted resources made cheaper and slightly less dramatic changes in industrial development in
Slovenia possible .
At the same time, family farming remained a secondary activity of countryside population,
most often in combination with employment in industry . This development from the late
60s through to the 80s opened up advantages and possibilities for better-quality growth in
both urban centres and countryside settlements. During the early 80s, differences in social
standards between urban and countryside settlements decreased, but the process of "de-
elitization" has been curtailed by the market reorientation in the 90s (Dekleva, V.B ., 1991,
1992) .
In cities, absolute housing shortages have been reduced by intensive industrial construction
of high-rise apartment buildings . The period from 1969 to the 80s was a golden age in terms
of the rate of growth of new housing. The construction industry, previously engaged in infra-
structure, used the same technology for housing, while communities provided the land . New
taxes (to finance housing expenditure) were introduced to reduce the housing shortages
and infrastructural deficiences .
The power of state institutions had been at its peak at the moment of the allocation of these
resources to the "workers", companies and to the tenants . The legislation protected this
allocation so strongly (like tenantship e.g.) that further redistribution was difficult if not
impossible. A later process of "decentralization" of political power and self-management
decreased the state's relative power over certain local resources, reducing the impact of state
planning .
However, the controversy over tenants' rights, which were stronger because of the limited
functions of private ownership, increased the inefficiency of the public housing system .
Social injustice, entropy of resources and imbalances in urban development resulted . Mo-
bility within the existing housing stock remained negligible and the private housing market
was blocked, suppressing housing entreprise . In fact, these socialist inventions prevented
realization of the profits from investment in goods like housing, buildings, land and enter-
prises, by assigning only the "use value" to those who had (sometimes privileged) access to
it. Such limitations were used in order to prevent market performance and property "specu-
lations" .
Paradoxically, after the first redistribution of goods, the state almost lost control over these
resources, which created investment stagnation, a lack of maintenance and low mobility in
the public housing stock. The inability to increase housing rents, for example, was due to the
political and social power of "tenants", who benefited .
At present, these controversial features still represent an obstacle to the "new owners" and state
in controling and planning the building environment . The "privatization or conversion" of hous-
ing during the transitional period (1991-1993) thus means a second "redistribution of wealth"
in relation to the nacionalization of the 50s as a redistribution of poverty. Or better, second
130
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES :
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
privatization is housing tenure conversion by simple changing their tenant status into
homeownership in exchange for a modest compensation : from social tenants in the rental sector
to private ownership for the occupiers of the housing unit (The Right to Buy) . In the case of land
and company property, it started with the "privatization" law of the last Yugoslav prime minister
Marković in 1989 . The first instances had taken place in Slovenia as early as 1978 with no at all
cost for company to convert "social property" into private .
For housing, it started only in 1991 with the change in housing legislation ; the government
made provisions for the "purchase" by tenants of social housing for a more than modest
price (cf. Dekleva, V.B ., "Housing policy in the post-socialist State" from EMIR Oslo Confer-
ence and CIB Proceedings no.158 from the Lisbon Conference) . The market price of these
housing units would be five to ten times greater . In spite of this, only quality housing stock,
mainly in urban areas, has been "sold", while 35% of social housing units remain in "col-
lective" ownership, e .g . municipalities, firms and other associations . Negligible shares of
housing stock have been sold in regions in economic decline (Stanovnik, 1992) .
The rental housing sector is thus decreasing (from 33% to 12%), while private (individual)
ownership has increased from 66% to almost 88% . It is expected that most of the rental
sector will be organized on a non-profit basis . Nevertheless, we are facing new structural
housing shortages : growing social problems will increase demand in the social rental sector,
which is presently almost non-existent . In 1991, some of the social housing stock defined as
a solidarity fund (3 .5%), was mostly converted into a private as well .
The consequences and results of these conversions, together with the denationalization process
are causing and managing some social conflicts of the transitional period in Slovenia at
present (Dekleva, V.B., 1991 ; Bajt, 1992 ; Stanovnik, 1992 ; Mandič, 1992) .
Bacause of the economic recession and the lack of available land, the private rental sector is
not developing either. There is very little interest among munlcipalities in expanding social
rental housing, in spite of the growing number of applications . Rather, the city council in
Ljubljana, for example, decided to build luxury housing for necessary personnel and trained
specialists and rented it for non-profit rents (which yet do not cover the cost of mainte-
nance) . While Ljubljana doubled its population between 1945 and 1991, urbanized land
increased by a factor of seven . This was due to inadequate planning and provision of hous-
ing. In the future, the market economy may increase property values and intensify housing
construction in cities by virtue of the available infrastructure .
Social conflicts, the upheaval functions of the state, and a lack of control over resources will all
make the transitional period difficult and longer than expected . If nothing else, we have ex-
changed the previous "socialist" problems for some of those confronting western Europe . And
that is the direction in which we are heading, whether or not this is a reason for optimism .
131
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
NOTES
1 . In order to sill in this gap in evidence, Quality of Life research promoted the mobility issue : mobility is to
be analyzed by the life History Events method (Institute for Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana) .
2 . There are difserent desinitions of urban regions, urban-countryside or rural settlements within the
research analyses used in this paper . Numbers and proportions in the figures theresore do not always
correspond .
3. Economists estimate that during the last sour years production has decreased to the level os the 70s and
the standard os living even surther, while housing production has sallen to the level of the 60s ("Ekonomska
gibanja", 1992/3, Ljubljana) .
4 . Although there are some methodological problems in this comparison, it nevertheless reveals the persist-
ence os imbalances despite increasing housing construction .
REFERENCES
Bajt, A. (1992), "Gospodarski vidiki zasebljenja stanovanj" (Economic Aspects of Housing Privatiza-
tion), Ekonomska gibanja, no.224
Blejec, M. (1984), Metode ocenjevanja stanovanjskih potreb in pomanjkanj v letu 2001 (Methods
sor Evaluation os Housing Needs and Shortages in the Year 2001), Urban Institute os RS, Ljubljana
Bolčić, S. (1977), "Sociologija i problemi nerazvijenosti Jugoslavije" (Sociology and Problems of Underde-
velopment in Yugoslavia), Sociologija, no .4
Dekleva, V.B . (1991), "Neznosna lahkost nove stanovanjske perspektive" (The Unbearableness of the
Carefree New Housing Perspective), Teorija in Praksa, vol.28, no .8-9
Dekleva, V.B. (1991), SNP - Redistribucijski stanovanjski potenciali (National Housing Programme:
Redistributive Housing Potentials), Ministry os Environment and Planning, Ljubljana
Dekleva, V.B . (1992a), "Challenges os Urban Development in Slovenia', Netherlands Journal of Hous-
ing and Built Environment, vol .7, no .4
Dekleva, V.B. (1992b), "Strukturna stanovanjska neskladja" (Structural Housing Shortages),
Informativni Bilten, no.3-4
Dekleva, J . (1993), Razvojna strategija Ljubljane (Developmental Strategy os Ljubljana), Urban Insti-
tute os RS, research report, Ljubljana
Mandič, Srna (1992), "Stališča o prodaji stanovanj - slovenska konverzijska kontroverza" (Attitudes To-
ward Housing Sale - Slovenian Conversion Controversy), Informativni Bitten, no.6-'
Ravbar, M. (1992), Suburbanizacija v Sloveniji (Suburbanization in Slovenia), Ph .D . thesis, University
of Ljubljana, Department of Geography
132
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
Ravbar. Klemenčič (I993), Današnji problemi regionalnega razvoja Slovenije (Current Problems of
Regional Development in Slovenia), Institute of Geography, Ljubljana
Stanovnik, T. (1992), "Obletnica stanovanjskega zakona : kaj se je zgodilo in zakaj?" (Housing Lam
Anniversary : What Has Happened and Why?), Informativni Bilten, no .6-'
Jakoš, A., Lavrač, I., Mandič, S., Kraigher, T., Dekleva, V.B. et at. (199I), SNP - 1991 (National Housing
Programme), Ministry of Environment and Planning, Ljubljana
Kuhar de Domizzio, A. (1992), Statistična raziskava št.562 I ., II ., (Statistical Research no .562),
Central Statistical Office of RS, Ljubljana
Kuhar de Domizzio, A. (1993), Mobilnost v Sloveniji (Mobility in Slovenia), Central Statistical Office
of RS, Ljubljana
Statistični letopis Slovenije (Statistical Yearbook os Slovenia) (1993), Statistical Information no, 118,
Ljubljana
133
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
00 N ''mil 7 -l M C in u ~o M 4-, C -1 N N K: cC 14 N N
N ON tf\ cY; V• N N G', - 'n 1 - - O o V\ tf1 K; ~" `^
--~ O 00 to .--i V\ r O V~ O ~n C V'+ N ~" Vr O M --~^
	
V' 00 M to C 00 1--
X	
cc co`^r .~~rrc~oN~l~lK .- oC cC cccccr``,~~n
a C o 0'm 1.0 110 Im `,I'D r r r r r r r r r r 0c 00 00 0o cc 00 0o ao 00 0o c G'
01
$
0
$
$
o
W
-- w
w
n
bD 8.wr
rr °~$
a
~ N N O1 O Pl Ow
134
URBAN MOBILlTY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
FIGURE 2 Migrations in Slovenia between 1964 and 1991
15r-
12
0 1
6
S
0 ~~+r
6l 65 86 67 66 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 63 84 85 66 87 88 69 90 91
1 - immigratjons from former Yugoslav republics
2 - emigrations to Yugoslavia
3 - emigrations to foreign countries
4 - immigrations from foreign countries
source: Statistical yearbook, 1993
135
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
•
	
; R d
C b
CE -
~ ~ v 4'J. a w isV > >O ~. ~ gi ~ 7 O n
. F
~ UV
O ) )~ `° E
eV1 ) > '= R o
C
; a
O
~J
as J
V U
o ~ A
a
wo ` z -~7C
eA
136
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
FIGURE 4 An example of structurl social changes of the population in
urbanised region
t
number of
inhabitants
w
1000-
suburban We
750-
	
immigrants
500- emigrants L-
~.,
~-	employed		traditional
i	
-rrrv_
life We
farmers
live is	
194r! 1963 1061 1ST1 1981 Years
I37
Barbara Verlič Dekleva
FIGURE 5A Estimated housing production flows
NUMBER OF FIATS ON
1000 INHABITANTS
15
10
5
/ / /
~
years 1960
	
70 80 1990/92
138
URBAN MOBILITY AND HOUSING SHORTAGES:
THE CASE OF SLOVENIA
FIGURE 5B Private and social production of housing
NUMBER OF FLATS ON
1000 INHABITANTS
10
5
Private
Social
years 1960
	
70 80 1990
Sources: Statlstics, Research data, (with the risk of overimplification - Dekleva V .B . )
139