Homeowners' Associations in Russia after the 2005 Housing Reform

The thesis examines homeowners associations as a part of the large-scale housing reform, implemented in Russia since 2005. The reform transferred housing management from the public sector to the private sector and to the citizens responsibility. The reform is a continuation to the privatisation of the housing stock that was started in Russia in the beginning of the 1990s, aiming to build a market-oriented housing sector in the country. The reform makes a fundamental change to the Soviet system, in which ownership along with management and maintenance of housing were monopolised by the state. Homeowners are now responsible for the management of the common areas in privatised houses, which is often realised by establishing a homeowners association. Homeowners associations are examined by using the so-called common-pool resource regime approach, with the main question being the ways in which taking care of common property collectively succeeds in practice. The study is based on interview data of St. Petersburg s homeowners associations. Using the common-pool resource theory the study demonstrates why implementation of the housing reform has not succeeded as expected. Certain elements that characterise a successful common-pool resource regime do not fulfill sufficiently in St. Petersburg s homeowners associations. Firstly, free-riding, that is, withdrawal from the association s joint decision-making and not making the housing payments is common, as effective sanctions to prevent it are missing in the legislation. That is, eviction or expelling a non-paying member from the association is not possible. Secondly, ownership of the land plot and common areas of the house, such as basements and attics, are often disputed between the associations and authorities. In the Soviet era, these common areas were public property along with the apartments, but in privatised houses they should, according to the legislation, belong to the associations property. Thirdly, solution of disputes between the associations and authorities and within the associations is difficult, as the court system tends to be bureaucratic and inefficient. In addition to the common-pool resource approach, the study also examines how social capital contributes to the associations effectiveness and democratic governance. The study finds that although homeowners associations have increased cooperation and tightened social relations between neighbours, social capital has not been able to prevent free-riding. The study shows that unlike it is often claimed, the so-called Soviet mentality , that is, residents passiveness and unwillingness to participate, is not the most important obstacle to the reform. Instead, the reform is impeded most of all by imperfect institutional arrangements and local authorities that prevent the associations from working as independent, self-governing associations.