The institutional trap in the Czech rental sector: Nested circuits of power, space, and inequality

Economic Geography

Volumn 81, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 381-405

  Buzar, Stefan ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GDA SK   (Poland)

Author keywords

Czech Republic; Households; Housing; Inequality; Institutional trap; Poverty; Power geometry

Indexed keywords

HOUSING POLICY; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; WELFARE PROVISION;

CENTRAL EUROPE; CZECH REPUBLIC; EURASIA; EUROPE;

EID: 30444450890     PISSN: 00130095     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2005.tb00280.x     Document Type: Review

References (122)

1. Adam, J. 1999. Social costs of transformation to a market economy in post-socialist countries: The case of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan.
2. Amin, A., and Hausner, J. 1997. Interactive governance and social complexity. In Beyond market and, hierarchy: Interactive governance and social complexity, ed. A. Amin and J. Hausner, 1-31. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
3. Aoki, M. 2001. Toward a comparative institutional analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
4. Arthur, W. B. 1988. Self-reinforcing mechanisms in economics. In The economy as an evolving complex system, ed. P. W. Anderson, K. Arrow, and D. Pines, 9-28. Redwood City, Calif.: Addison-Wesley.
5. Arthur, W. B. 1990. Positive feedbacks in the economy. Scientific American 262:92-99.
6. Arthur, W. B. 1994. Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7. Asheim, B. 1996. Industrial districts as "learning regions": A condition for prosperity? European Planning Studies 4:379-400.
8. Barlow, J. 1993, Reforming the housing system in Eastern Europe. Policy Studies 14:53-62.
9. Benešová, V. 2000. Životní úroveň domácností [Living standards of households], Data a fakta 2000:9.
10. Bodnár, J. 1996. "He that hath to him shall be given": Housing privatization in Budapest after state socialism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 20:616-36.
11. Bradshaw, M. J., and Stenning, A. 2000. The progress of transition in East Central Europe. In Transition, cohesion and regional policy in Central and Eastern Europe, ed. J. Bachtler, R. Downes, and G. Gorzelak, 11-32. Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate.
12. Brenner, N., and Theodore, N. 2002. From the new localism to the spaces of neoliberalism. Antipode 33:341-47.
13. Bridger, S., and Pine, F., eds. 1998. Surviving post-socialism: Local strategies and regional responses in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. London: Routledge.
14. Burawoy, M., and Verdery, K., eds. 1999. Uncertain transition: Ethnographies of change in the postsocialist world. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.
15. Chavance, B., and Magnin, E. 1997. Emergence of path-dependent mixed economies in Central Europe. In Beyond market and hierarchy: Interactive governance and social complexity, ed. A. Amin and J. Hausner, 196-232. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
16. Clapham, D., and Kintrea, K. 1996. The patterns of housing privatisation in Eastern Europe. In Housing privatization in Eastern Europe, ed. D. Clapham, J. Hegedüs, K. Kintrea, and J. Tosics, 169-89. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood.
17. Czech Statistical Office (CSO). 2001. Sčítání lidu, domů a bitů 2001 [Census of population, homes and dwellings 2001]. Prague: CSO.
18. Czech Statistical Office (CSO). 2003. Příjmy, vydání a spotřeba domácnosti statistiky rodinných učtů za rok 2002 [Income, expenditure and consumption of the households in the family budget survey in 2002]. Prague: CSO.
19. de Deken, J. J. 1994. Social policy in postwar Czechoslovakia: The development of old-age pensions and housing policies during the period 1945-1989. Florence: European University Institute.
20. Eatwell, J.; Ellman, M.; Karlsson, M.; Nuti, M.; and Shapiro, J., eds. 2000. Hard budgets, soft states: Economics of social policy choices in Central and Eastern Europe. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
21. Eskinasi, M. 1995. Changing housing policy and its consequences: The Prague case. Housing Studies 10:533-48.
22. Götting, U. 1996. A new social contract? In defence of welfare: Social protection and social reform in Eastern Europe. Florence: European University Institute.
23. Government of the Czech Republic (GCR). 2001. Energy policy. Prague: GCR.
24. Grabher, G., and Stark, D. 1997. Organizing diversity: Evolutionary theory, network analysis, and post-socialism. In Restructuring networks in post-socialism: Legacies, linkages and localities, ed. G. Grabher and D. Stark, 1-32. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
25. Grabmüllerová, D. 2000. Country paper of the Czech Republic. Paper presented at the OECD Workshop on Housing Finance in Transition Economies, Paris, June.
26. Graham, S., and Healey, P. 1999. Relational concepts of space and place: Issues for planning theory and practice. European Planning Studies 7:623-46.
27. Graham, S., and Marvin, S. 1994. Cherry picking and social dumping: Utilities in the 1990s. Utilities Policy 4:113-19.
28. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91:481-510.
29. Gregory, D., and Urry, J. 1985. Introduction. In Social relations and spatial structures, ed. D. Gregory and J. Urry, 1-8. London: Macmillan.
30. Hanspach, D., and Vajdová, Z. 1996. Český Krumlov: Housing policy, privatization and local government. In Transformation from below, ed. J. Gibson and P. Hanson, 163-78. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
31. Havelková, E., and Valentová, B. 1998. Komparatívna analýza bytovej politiky v Slovenskej a Českej Republike v rokoch 1990-1996 [Comparative analysis of housing policy in the Slovak and Czech Republics in the years 1990-1996]. In Sociální politika v Čechách a na Slovensku po roce 1989 [Social policy in the Czech Republic and Slovakia after 1989], ed. M. Potůček and I. Rodičová, 231-88. Prague: Karolinum.
32. Hegedüs, J., and Tosics, I. 1994. The poor, the rich and the transformation of urban space: Editors' introduction to the special issue. Urban Studies 31:989-93.
33. Hegedüs, J., 1998a. Towards new models of the housing system. In Social change and urban restructuring in Central Europe, ed. G. Enyedi, 137-67. Budapest: Akadémiai.
34. Hegedüs, J., 1998b. Rent reform-Issues for the countries of Eastern Europe and the newly independent states. Housing Studies 13:657-78.
35. Heřmanová, E., and Kostelecký, T. 2000. Regionální diferenciace na trhu bydlení a její příčiny [Regional differentiation in the housing market and its causes]. Sociologický časopis 36:41-56.
36. Holánová, E. 2001. Vývoj peněžnich přijmů domácností v roce 2000 [Changes in household monetary income during 2000]. Sociální Politika 8:8-12.
37. Horaková, P. 2002. Rent-dodgers owe millions to Prague counci. Radio Prague, 27 March.
38. Kabele, J., and Potůček, M. 1995. The formation and implementation of social policy in the Czech Republic as a political process. Project Paper No. 23. Vienna: Institute for Human Sciences.
39. Kingsley, T. G., and Mikelsons, M. 1996. The Czech and Slovak Republics. In Economic restructuring of the former Soviet bloc, ed. R. J. Struyk, 205-10. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press.
40. Klimentová, J. 1999. Sociálne ekonomická situace starých źen [The socioeconomic situation of elderly women]. Sociální Politika 11:6-8.
41. Kostelecký, J. 1997a. Bytova situace novomanželů [The housing circumstances of newlyweds]. Data a Fakta 1997:7.
42. Kostelecky, T. 1997b. Regionální rozdíly na trhu bydlení [Regional differences in the housing market]. Data a Fakta 1997: 9.
43. Kostelecky, T. 2000. Housing and its influence on the development of social inequalities in the postcommunist Czech Republic. Czech Sociological Review 8:177-93.
44. Kostelecký, T.; Nedomová, A.; and Vajdová, Z. 1997. The housing market and its impact on social inequality: A study of Prague and Brno (Czech Republic). SOCO Project Paper No. 54. Vienna: Institute for Human Sciences.
45. Kreidl, M. 2000. Změny v percepci chudoby, bohatství a životního úspěchu. [Changes in the perception of poverty, wealth and success]. In Nerovnost, spravedlnost, politika [Inequality, justice, politics], ed. P. Matějů and K. Vlachová, 191-225. Prague: Slon.
46. Kuchynová, Z. 2004. Sociální demokraté prekvapive ustoupili v otázce regulovaného nájemného [Social Democrats unexpectedly give in on issue of regulated rents]. Radio Prague, 14 January.
47. Larner, W. 2000. Theorising neo-liberalism: Policy, ideology, governmentality. Studies in Political Economy 63:5-26.
48. Leyshon, A. 1995. Missing words: Whatever happened to the geography of poverty? Environment and Planning A 27:1021-25.
49. Liebowitz, S. J., and Margolis S. E. 1995. Path dependence, lock-in, and history. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 11:205-26.
50. Liebowitz, S. J., 2000. Path dependence. In Encyclopedia of law and economics, ed. B. Bouckaert and G. De Geest, 981-99. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
51. Lux, M. 2000a. The housing policy changes and housing expenditures in the Czech Republic. Prague: Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
52. Lux, M. 2000b. History and challenges of social rental housing in the Czech Republic. In Social housing in Europe, ed. M. Lux, 22-48. Prague: Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
53. Lux, M. 2000c. Changes in the consumption of households during 1990-1997. Czech Sociological Review 82:211-32.
54. Lux, M. 2001. Social housing in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia. European Journal of Housing Policy 12:189-209.
55. Lux, M.; Sunega, P.; Kostelecký, T.; and Čermák, D. 2003. Standardy bydlení 2002/03: Finanční dostupnost a postoje občanů [Housing standards 2002/03: Financial accessibility and views of the citizens]. Prague: Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
56. Mácha, M., and Woleková, H. 1998. Komparace vývoje státní sociální odpory v ČR a SR [Comparison of the development of state social support in the Czech and Slovak Republics]. In Sociální politika v Čechách a na Slovensku po roce 1989 [Social policy in the Czech Republic and Slovakia after 1989], ed. M. Potůček and I. Rodičová, 133-51. Prague: Karolinum.
57. Machonin, P. 2000. Sociálni struktura a stratifikace [Social structure and stratification]. Data a Fakta 2000:2.
58. Mandič, S. 2000. Trends in Central East European rented sectors. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 15:217-32.
59. Massey, D. 1993. Power-geometry and a progressive sense of place. In Mapping the futures: Local cultures, global change, ed. J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, G. Robertson, and L. Tickner, 59-69. London: Routledge.
60. Massey, D. 1999. Power-geometries and the politics of space-time. Heidelberg, Germany: Department of Geography, University of Heidelberg.
61. Masuch, M. 1985. Vicious circles in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 30:14-33.
62. Matějů, P. 2000. Subjektivní mobilita - Rekostrukee souvislostí mezi objektivním a subjektivním sociálním statusem. [Subjective mobility - A reconstruction of the dependence between objective and subjective social status]. In Nerovnost, spravedlnost, politika [Inequality, justice, politics], ed. P. Matějů and K. Vlachová, 38-71. Prague: Slon.
63. Matějů P., and Kreidl, M. 2000. Obnova vnitřní konzistence sociálně-ekonomického statusu [Renewing the internal consistency of socioeconomic status]. In Nerovnost, spravedlnost, politika [Inequality, justice, politics], ed. P. Matějů and K. Vlachová, 18-37. Prague: Slon.
64. McCormick, P., and Philo, C. 1995. Where is poverty? The hidden geography of poverty in the United Kingdom. In Off the map: The social geography of poverty in the UK, ed. C. Philo, 1-22. London: Child Poverty Action Group.
65. McDermott, G. A. 1997. Renegotiating the ties that bind: The limits of privatization in the Czech Republic. In Restructuring networks in post-socialism. Legacies, linkages and localities, ed. G. Grabher and D. Stark, 70-134. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
66. McDowell, L. 2003: Redundant masculinities? Employment change and white working class youth. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
67. McMaster, I. 2001. Privatisation in Central and Eastern Europe: What made the Czech Republic so distinctive? Glasgow: European Policies Research Centre, University of Strathclyde.
68. Mlčoch, L. 2000. Restrukturalizace vlastnických vztachů: Institucionální pohled [The restructuring of property relations: An institutionalist view]. In Ekonomické a společenské změny v české společnosti po roce 1989: Alternativní pohled [Economic and social changes in Czech society after 1989: An alternative view], ed. L. Mlčoch, P. Machonin, and M. Sojka, 21-93. Prague: Karolinum.
69. Mohan, J. 2003. Geography and social policy: Spatial divisions of welfare. Progress in Human Geography 27:363-74.
70. Musil, J. 1992. Recent changes in the housing system and policy in Czechoslovakia: An institutional approach. In The reform of housing in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, ed. B. Turner, J. Hegedüs, and I. Tosics, 61-69. London: Routledge.
71. Musil, J. 1995. The Czech housing system in the middle of transition. Urban Studies 32:1679-84.
72. Nee, V. 1992. Organizational dynamics of market transition: Hybrid forms, property rights, and mixed economy in China. Administrative Science Quarterly 37:1-27.
73. Nelson, R. R. 1995. Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change. Journal of Economic Literature 33:48-90.
74. Nielsen, K.; Jessop, B.; and Hausner, J. 1995. Institutional change in post-socialism. In Strategic choice and path-dependency in postsocialism, ed. J. Hausner, B. Jessop, and K. Nielsen, 3-44. Brookfield, Vt.: Edward Elgar.
75. North, D. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
76. Obadalová, M. 2000. K výdajům na bydlení v 90 letech [Housing expenditure during the 1990s]. Sociální Politika 12:10-12.
77. Obadalová, M., and Vavrečková, V. 2000. Nádklady na bydlení českých domácnosti [Housing costs of Czech households]. Prague: Research Institute for Labour and Social Affairs.
78. Peck, J., and Tickell, A. 2002. Neoliberalizing space. Antipode 34:380-404.
79. Perrons, D. 2004. Understanding social and spatial divisions in the new economy: New media clusters and the digital divide. Economic Geography 80:45-61.
80. Pichler-Milanovich, N. 1994. The role of housing policy in the transformation process of Central-East European cities. Urban Studies 317:1097-115.
81. Pierson, C. 1999. Continuity and discontinuity in the emergence of the post-welfare state. In The economic geography reader: Producing and consuming global capitalism, ed. J. Bryson, N. Henry, D. Keeble, and R. Martin, 421-26. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
82. Polterovich, V. M. 1999. Institutsionalnye lovushki i ekonomicheskie reformy [Institutional traps and economic reforms]. Ekonomika i Matematicheskie Metody 352:12-21.
83. Potůček, M. 1999. Kǐžovatky české sociální reformy [Czech social reforms at a crossroads]. Prague: Slon.
84. Potůček, M. 2004. Accession and social policy: The case of the Czech Republic. Journal of European Social Policy 14:253-66.
85. Potůček, M., and Rodičová, I. 1998. Porovnanie vývoja českej a slovenskej sociálnej politiky po roku 1989 [Comparison of the development of Czech and Slovak social policy after 1989]. In Sociálni politika v Čhách a na Slovensku po roce 1989 [Social policy in the Czech Republic and Slovakia after 1989], ed. M. Potůček and I. Rodičová, 1-81. Prague: Karolinum.
86. Prùša, L. 2002. Analýza vyvoje systému sociálni pomoci v 90 letech [Analysis of the development of the social assistance system during the 1990s]. Práce a mzda 2002:29-37.
87. Sailer-Fliege, U. 1999. Characteristics of post-socialist urban transformation in East Central Europe. Geojournal 49:7-16.
88. Schoenberger, E. 2000. The management of time and space. In The Oxford handbook of economic geography, ed. G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, and M. S. Gertler, 317-32. New York: Oxford University Press.
89. Sik, E., and Redmond, G. 2000. Coping strategies in Central European countries. In Poverty in transition, ed. S. Hutton, 266-85. London: Routledge.
90. Sirovátka, T. 2000. Adequacy of social security system in transition: The Czech case. Paper presented at the NISPA conference, Budapest, 13-15 April.
91. Sirovátka, T., and Rabušic, L. 1998. The Czech welfare state and its Legitimacy. SOCO Project Paper No. 62b. Vienna: Institute for Human Sciences.
92. Smith, A., and Swain, A. 1998. Regulating and institutionalising capitalisms: The micro-foundations of transformation in Eastern and Central Europe. In Theorising transition, ed. J. Pickles and A. Smith, 25-53, London: Routledge.
93. Sojka, M. 2000. Deset let transformace po česku: Transformace, nerovnost, a integrace [Ten years of Czech transformation: Transformation, inequality, and integration]. In Ekonomické a společenské změny v české společnosti po roce 1989: Alternativní pohled [Economic and social changes in Czech society after 1989: An alternative view], ed. L. Mlčoch, P. Machonin, and M. Sojka, 219-70. Prague: Karolinum.
94. Stark, D. 1989. Coexisting organizational forms in Hungary's emerging mixed economy. In Remaking the economic institutions of socialism. China and Eastern Europe, ed. V. Nee and D. Stark, 137-68. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
95. Stark, D. 1992. The great transformation? Social change in Eastern Europe. Contemporary Sociology 213:299-304.
96. Stark, D. 1994. Path dependency and privatization strategies in East Central Europe. In Changing political economies: Privatization in post-communist and reforming communist states, ed. V. Milor, 115-46. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner.
97. Stark, D., and Nee, V. 1989. Toward an institutional analysis of state socialism. In Remaking the economic institutions of socialism: China and Eastern Europe, ed. V. Nee and D. Stark, 1-3. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
98. Steinführer, A. 2004. Privatisierung auf Umwegen. Wohnungspolitik, Eigentumsstrukturen und Segmentation der Wohnungsmärkte in der Tschechischen Republik [Roundabout privatization: Housing policy, ownership structures and segmentation of the housing market in the Czech Republic]. Unpublished paper, Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle, Leipzig.
99. Stenning, A. 2004. Post-socialism. In Encyclopedia of international development, ed. T. Forsyth, 551-53. London: Routledge.
100. Struyk, R. J. 1996. Housing privatization in the former Soviet bloc to 1995. In Cities after socialism: Urban and regional change and conflict in post-socialist societies, ed. G. Andrusz, M. Harloe, and I. Szelényi, 192-213. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
101. Sunega, P. 2001. Adresný příspěvek na nájemné v prostrředí České Republiky: Komparace vybraných modelů [Rent subsidies in the Czech Republic: A comparison of selected models]. Prague: Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
102. Sunega, P. 2002. Housing in the Czech Republic - Ideas and economic reality. In Contemporary Czech Society, ed. Z. Mansfeldová and M. Tuček, 88-106. Prague: Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
103. Swain, A., and Hardy, J. 1998. Globalisation, institutions, foreign investment and the reintegration of East and Central Europe and the former Soviet Union with the world economy. Regional Studies 32:587-90.
104. Sýkora, L. 2003. Between the state and the market: Local government and housing in the Czech Republic. In Housing policy: An end or a new beginning? ed. M. Lux, 51-116. Budapest: Open Society Institute.
105. Sýkora, L., 2004. Housing system, housing policy and housebuilding in the Czech Republic and Prague. Available online: http:// www.natur.cuni.cz/~sykora
106. Telgarsky, J. P., and Strayk, R. J. 1990. Toward a market-oriented housing sector in Eastern Europe. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press.
107. The Energy Efficiency Center (SEVEn). 2001. Bulletin energetýckich a ekonomýckich informací za Ceskou Republiku [Energy and economic bulletin for the Czech Republic]. Prague: SEVEn.
108. Tomášek, M. 2001. Transitory order and premature consolidation tendencies in the Czech Republic on the background of CEE countries access to the EU. Available online: http://www.essex.ac.uk/ ECPR/standinggroups/Yen/paper_archive/1st_yen_meet_papers/tomasek2001.pdf
109. Tušek, M. 2000. Sociální a structura a stratifikace mušů a žen [Social structure and stratification of men and women]. Data a Fakta 2000:5.
110. Uhlíř, D. 1998. Internationalization, institutional and regional change: Restructuring the postcommunist networks in the region of Lanškroun, Czech Republic. Regional Studies 32:673-85.
111. Vajdová, Z. 2000. Dráhy bydlení realizované prostřednictvím trhu [Housing paths accomplished through the market]. Sociologický časopis 36:57-66.
112. Vajdová, Z., and Buštiková, L. 1997. Lidé na trhu s bydlením [People on the housing market]. Data a fakta 1997:8.
113. Večerník, J. 1995. Changing earnings distribution in the Czech Republic: Survey evidence from 1988-1994. Economics of Transition 3:355-57.
114. Večerník, J. 2001a. Chudoba u nás a ve světě [Poverty in our country and in the world]. Sociální Politika 4:7-9.
115. Večerník, J. 2001b. Social policies and structures: Institutional frictions and traps in the Czech Republic after 1989. William Davidson Working Paper No. 404. Available online: http:// ideas.repec.org/p/wdi/papers/20004-04.html
116. Von Hirschhausen, C., and Wälde, T. W. 2001. The end of transition: An institutional interpretation of energy sector reform in Eastern Europe and the CIS. Moct-Most 11:93-110.
117. Wacquant, L. 1996. The rise of advanced marginality: Notes on its nature and implications. Acta Sociologica 39:121-39.
118. Wacquant, L. 1999. Urban marginality in the coming Urban Studies 36:1639-47.
119. Wicks, M., Hutton, S. 1986. Electricity use by families with children. London: Electricity Consumers Council.
120. Wills, J., and Lee, R. 1997. Introduction. In Geographies of economies, ed. R. Lee and J. Wills, xv-xviii. London: Arnold.
121. Yavlinsky, G., and Braguinsky, S. 1994. The inefficiency of laissez-faire in Russia: Hysteresis effects and the need for policy-led transformation. Journal of Comparative Economics 19:88-116.
122. Zoon, I. 2001. On the margins: Roma and public services in Romania, Bulgaria, and Macedonia, with a supplement on housing in the Czech Republic. New York: Open Society Institute.