Evsizlikten Kurtulmada Bir Sosyal Güvenlik Aracı Olarak Konut
Hicran AtatanırEvsizlik sosyal güvencesizliğin mekânsal bir dışa vurumudur. Barınma gereksinimini karşılamanın bir yolu olan konutsa, aynı zamanda, bir sosyal güvenlik aracıdır. Sosyal güvenlik düzenleri iyelik (mülkiyet) hakkının kullanımı ve toplumsal adalet ilişkisindeki çelişkileri yönetmenin yollarından birini, sigortalıları konut edinme konusunda desteklemek biçiminde tanımlamıştır. Evsiz olmak ya da kalmak özünde toplumsal bir risktir ve bu riskin önlemlerle yönetilmesinde konut edindirmek ya da edinilmiş konut hakkını korumak etkili bir stratejidir. Çalışmada öncelikle evsizliğin neden genişleyen toplumsal bir risk oluşturduğu seçili ülkeler ve Türkiye için derlenen güncel veriler ışığında ortaya konulmuştur. Ardından evsizlik riskine karşı geliştirilen sosyal güvenlik uygulamalarına ve konut edindirme yardımlarına yakından bakılarak izlenen politikaların etkililiği tartışmaya açılmıştır. Bu tartışma ışığında Türkiye’de evsizlik riskine karşı sosyal güvenlik düzeninin işlevselliğini ileriye taşımaya yönelik önerilere yer verilmiştir. Sonuç bölümünde evsizlik riskinden kurtulmanın ana patikalarından biri olarak sosyal güvenliğin, iş ilişkilerinin değişen doğası ve yeni toplumsal belirsizlikler çağında daha etkili ve kapsayıcı olmasına ilişkin saptamalara yer verilmiştir. Makale, özünde, evsizliği yalnızca bir insan hakları sorunu olarak değil, aynı zamanda kamu hizmetlerine erişimin ısrarla engellenmesi nedeniyle bir yaşam biçimine dönüşen sosyal güvencesizliğin kritik evresi olarak nitelendiren bir yaklaşım benimsemektedir.
Housing as a Social Security Instrument to Overcome Homelessness
Hicran AtatanırHomelessness is a spatial manifestation of social insecurity. Housing, a means of satisfying the need for shelter, is also an instrument of social security. Social security systems have defined one of the ways of dealing with the contradictions in the relationship between the exercise of the right to property and social justice as assisting the insured to acquire housing. Becoming or remaining homeless is essentially a social risk, and housing or protecting the right to acquired housing is an effective strategy to manage this risk through policies. This study first presents the reasons why homelessness is a growing social risk, based on recent data collected for selected countries and Turkey. It then discusses the effectiveness of the policies pursued by looking closely at the social security practises and housing subsidies developed against the risk of homelessness. In light of this discussion, suggestions are made to improve the functionality of the social security system against the risk of homelessness in Turkey. In the concluding section, it is concluded that social security, as one of the main ways to overcome the risk of homelessness, should be more effective and inclusive in the era of changing nature of labour relations and new social uncertainties. In essence, the article adopts an approach that characterises homelessness not only as a human rights issue but, also as a critical phase of social insecurity that has become a way of life due to the persistent denial of access to public services.
In this study, which aims to define housing as a social security tool to overcome homelessness, homelessness is seen as both a social risk and a human rights violation that limits access to the social security system. At the heart of this approach is the extreme commodification of labour through precarious jobs and housing through high-interest mortgages. This is because extreme commodification has brought with it plans for subsequent dispossession through housing capitalism. This makes society, especially people on fixed incomes who have no other source of livelihood than their labour, vulnerable to the risk of homelessness. In addition, while the right of homeless people to access social security services is the same as that of everyone else, their limited access to job security and regular employment opportunities presents clear difficulties and additional support assistance in accessing these services. Even in the exercise of the right to information, bureaucratic procedures requiring address declaration, submission of documents or the use of e-Government applications from the application process onwards create obstacles for homeless people to access data on their social security rights and obligations. In view of this problem, the functionalization of housing as a public right in the social security system can be considered a prerequisite for adequate housing and the elimination of the risk of homelessness.
If we examine the background of the problem in Türkiye, we see that the planned development movement was initiated with the Republican period, the population in the cities increased with the development moves, and although land planning was attempted to respond to the urbanisation process and the need for housing, this could not be achieved at the targeted level. While the need for new settlement areas has made the construction sector the locomotive of the economy, the subsequent unplanned construction has paved the way for urban inequalities, with slums on one side and luxury residences on the other. In a linear pattern to unplanned construction, a period of permanent inequalities has begun in terms of opportunities to use social security and housing rights between those who have access to full-time and registered employment and those who do not. This picture has deepened poverty and precariousness for those who try covering their living expenses and high rent debts with the minimum wage or pension they earn.
Looking at practises around the world that define housing within the social security system, the ‘housing first’ approach and the ‘treatment first’ approach come to the fore. Examples of good practise where the housing-first approach makes a significant difference in ending homelessness permanently attract attention. Depending on the social, cultural and economic conditions, it can be observed that the strategies adopted by countries to combat homelessness are diverse, including voluntary and civic initiatives, and are aimed at meeting the complex support needs of the homeless people. Policies aimed at overcoming prejudices and discriminatory attitudes towards homeless people seem to focus on social responsibility for sustainable recovery by investing in social awareness and sensitization. In general, it can be seen that governments are trying to address the issue of homelessness through efforts to improve new and existing collaboration between local providers and housing providers.
Although governments in Türkiye have adopted policies and legal arrangements to ensure the functionality of the right to housing in the social security system, it is difficult to say that comprehensive and permanent solutions have been achieved in managing the risk of homelessness. Housing subsidies, public housing and migrant houses have enabled the integration of settlements that can be called social housing in urban areas at affordable prices, but the steps taken have not developed into a stable housing policy. In recent years, it can be seen that housing areas have been renewed within the framework of urban transformation practises, but the new projects built for high-income groups in order to provide capital flow do not contain a solution against the risk of homelessness and deepen the risk with mortgage debt, high rents and fees. For this reason, it is necessary to develop rights-based policies that guarantee everyone’s access to permanent independent housing in urban life within the social security system by prioritising variables such as unemployment, disability, chronic illness, low income and informal employment in managing the risk of homelessness.
The starting point of these policies is that central and local government service units eliminate the risks that can lead to the loss of rights by defining procedural steps that structure the application and follow-up processes for beneficiaries who declare themselves homeless, according to their needs. People living in shelters, temporary accommodation centres and on the streets may be entitled to income, pension or drug treatment services including rights arising from insured relatives or from the period of employment, but which the homeless person is deprived of due to lack of sufficient information. Removing this deprivation (e.g. by activating a widow’s orphan’s pension or health insurance) is a step that can significantly improve the homeless person’s life. In this direction, social security institutions should lead this step by conducting field studies and developing practises that support access to the right to social security. As a practical suggestion, it can also be considered to offer options to homeless people who are below a certain limit in terms of the number of days of premium payment or the amount of premium payment through community benefit work programmes to complete the missing days or pay the premium debt. In this way, serious and lasting improvements can be made in the life of a homeless person who will have a pension and health care. With these concrete action steps and undoubtedly many more, in the Republic of Türkiye, which has entered its second century, housing shouldbe one of the instruments of a settlement order that enables everyone to exercise their right to shelter under conditions befitting human dignity and that subjectivises and liberates human beings. One way to make this order possible is to be able to read and establish the linear relationship between housing and social security policies.
