Definition

In legal language, the right of ownership is divided into three “real rights”: the frustes meaning the right to receive the fruit of property, the usus meaning the right to use property and the abusus which is the right to dispose of property (i.e. to be able to transform, transfer and destroy it). Owning real rights at the land or real estate level can therefore cover one or more of these real rights. (source: N. Bernard & P. Thys in “La terre est à nous” AITEC – publication RITIMO.)

The “problem” of private property

The absolutist conception of property rights, which had been developed during the French Revolution in reaction to the Old Regime (which had, it is true, multiplied the subjugation of land to the benefit of the Church and the lords in particular), requires to be reviewed in the light of current social requirements. Private property is less targeted here than private property, that negative property which, by its non-use, prevents any effective use of the property (and incidentally deprives others of a dwelling). It seems necessary today to limit the owner’s discretionary power. And why not, in this context, decide to take ownership for an instrument submitted for certain purposes rather than strictly selfish prerogatives? This is why property must not be absolute and must be limited by its “social function“. (Source: N. Bernard & P. Thys – idem)

According to the social movements committed to the right to housing worldwide, and even if the right to housing is enshrined in a national constitution, this right is often undermined by another right that is also enshrined in national constitutions: the right to property. Hence the global pressure movement for the recognition of the social function of property.

From “all to ownership” policies

Source: “The land is ours” – For the social function of housing and land, alternative resistances – Passerelle collection – AITEC – FPH – RITIMO – 2014

Olivier de Schutter and Raquel Rolnik (United Nations Special Rapporteurs in 2013) thus explain the situation, linking it to the problem of the financialization of housing.

(…) The main mechanisms for allocating housing solutions are now the financial sector and the private real estate market, combined with subsidies to households for access to credit. Foreign assistance from international organizations has had a significant impact on the development of a housing financial market and has stimulated housing market activity in developing countries. Although there is some diversity in the policies implemented, most countries have chosen to support housing markets and encourage access to individual housing ownership, with the privatization of social housing programmes and the deregulation of financial markets linked to housing. Countries that previously had planned economies are a perfect illustration of this, since in the 1990s they carried out massive privatization of social housing, leading to radical changes in the structure of occupation. Today, in some of these countries, owner-occupied dwellings represent more than 90% of the housing stock.

See on this subject some country sheets: Romania (96%) – Lithuania (92%) – Slovakia (91%) – Hungary (90%) – Croatia (88%) – Bulgaria (86%) – Poland (84%) for a European average of 70% in 2017.

In developing countries, governments have been encouraged to implement programmes of individual access to property titles, not only to better guarantee security of tenure, but also to encourage access to formal credit and reduce poverty. The assumption was security of tenure – that is, having title to property – would lead to increased investment in housing. The idea of a direct link between home ownership and Western prosperity, as well as their absence in developing countries, has also played a major role. As a result, global home ownership rates have increased overall since 1950.

See on this subject some country sheets: Peru – Bolivia – Dominican Republic – Cameroon – Senegal…

The World Bank’s impetus has been particularly focused on this development of home ownership in recent decades. The results of these policies are also the phenomenon of the housing financialization.

Immigrants and foreigners

This article will not go into the whole issue, but it is important to stress that the issue of access to property for foreigners and immigrants is increasingly being raised around the world. There are two areas of interest in the literature:

• Either the existence of discrimination in access to housing for people of immigrant origin and what are their rights for access to property. Several countries also show that immigrants quickly become homeowners where they settle when they can.
• Either the implementation of national regulations to limit access to foreigners’ property in order to preserve real estate and land ownership in the hands of nationals. This is the case, for example, of the Republic of Benin, which has a land and domain code that limits access to property for foreigners.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator