Free Movement and Affordable Housing Public Preferences for Reform in Uzbekistan
This paper investigates the complex issues of internal migration and housing affordability in Uzbekistan, utilising data from the Listening to the Citizens of Uzbekistan (L2CU) study. It explores how restrictive propiska registration policies and the exorbitant cost of urban housing impede domestic mobility and contribute to economic imbalances. Furthermore, the paper examines public attitudes towards reform and the effect of involuntary demolitions on the population’s support for government policies.
Introduction
Uzbekistan’s rate of internal migration is remarkably low; indeed, more people emigrate from the country than move within it. This is in contrast to global trends, where domestic migration is far more common than international movement. This limited mobility poses a significant obstacle to the country’s economic development. The paper pinpoints two major factors hindering internal migration: the restrictive propiska system and the prohibitively high cost of urban housing.
The Propiska System for Affordable Housing
The propiska system, a legacy of the Soviet era, mandates that citizens register their place of residence, effectively limiting migration to urban areas. These regulations make it difficult for rural inhabitants to move to cities for work and other opportunities. After independence, Uzbekistan tightened the propiska system, with Tashkent becoming a “closed city” in 19996. This meant that only previously registered families and certain government officials were permitted to move there6. Property purchases in Tashkent were also prohibited for those without a permanent propiska7. Similar restrictions were later expanded to the region surrounding Tashkent. Although temporary registration has become more accessible since 2017, it does not confer the same rights as permanent registration. Those without a local propiska face significant restrictions, including being unable to apply for identification documents, register marriages, obtain social benefits, enrol children in public schools, secure legal employment, or register businesses. These limitations inhibit business registration in urban areas and reduce the mobility of both physical and financial capital.
Housing Costs and Affordability
The cost of housing presents another substantial impediment to urbanisation. Imputed rent in urban areas is, on average, 2.5 times higher than in rural areas. In Tashkent, rent can account for as much as 47% of total consumption, rendering housing unaffordable for many potential migrants. The slow pace of housing construction, particularly in Tashkent, further exacerbates this problem by restricting supply and driving up prices. The paper uses simulations to model the cost of moving from rural to urban areas and this reveals that the incomes in rural areas are generally insufficient to afford urban housing. The study finds that the elasticity of housing demand to income in Uzbekistan is relatively low.
Public Preferences for Affordable Housing Reform
The research also explores public preferences for reforms in Uzbekistan1. A significant majority of respondents expressed their support for removing propiska limitations and increasing the pace of urban housing construction. A survey experiment showed that support for the removal of propiska limitations increased when participants were made aware of the difficulties associated with registration, as well as the slow pace of housing construction. These findings demonstrate that the public is largely in favour of government action to address these problems.
Impact of Involuntary Demolitions
Involuntary demolitions have had a negative impact on public support for reforms. The research demonstrates a correlation between the perception that urban development policies are unfair and a negative view of the country’s overall direction. This highlights the importance of public perceptions of fairness when implementing reforms and policies. The study showed that public sentiment on the fairness of reform directly influences broader support for the government’s agenda.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the paper contends that Uzbekistan must address both the restrictive propiska system and the issue of high housing costs to encourage internal migration and achieve its economic objectives. The study underlines how high housing costs in urban centres make them inaccessible to most people from rural areas. While there is considerable demand for reform, the public also expects such reforms to be implemented fairly.
The study’s key findings include:
- Uzbekistan’s internal migration rate is one of the lowest in the world, posing a challenge for the country’s economic progress.
- The propiska system and high urban housing costs are the main obstacles to internal migration.
- The propiska system restricts access to employment, social benefits, and housing, thus contributing to spatial economic disparities.
- Housing costs in Tashkent are excessively high, making urban living unaffordable for a large segment of the rural population.
- There is substantial public backing for reforms aimed at removing propiska restrictions and accelerating housing construction.
- Involuntary demolitions and the perception of unfair urban development policies negatively impact public support for reform.
For further reading:
Public Preferences for Reform in Uzbekistan – World Bank
Free Movement and Affordable Housing: Public Preferences for …