Report No. 13-TUN FILEo Tunisia HousingSector Review Public Disclosure Authorized
August1, 1983 Urban Projects Division Europe,Middle Eastand North Africa Region FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized
FILECOPY Public Disclosure Authorized
Document of the World Bank
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties Its contents may not otherwise be disclosedwithout World Bank authorization CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Official Rate
1 Tunisian Dinar (TD) US$ 2.00 1 US Dollar = TD 0.500
MEASURES AND EQUIVALENTS
1 meter (m) = 39.37 inches (in) 1 square meter (m2) = 10.8 square feet (sq ft) 1 kilometer (km) = 0.62 mile (mi) 1 hectare (ha) = 10,000 m2 or 2.471 acres 1 acre = 4,047 m2 or 0.405 ha 1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lbs) 1 pound (lb) = 0.454 kg 1 tonne (metric) = 2,205 lbs or 1,000 kgs
FISCAL YEAR
January 1 - December 31
This report is the result of a joint effort by a Tunisian team coordinated by the Ministry of Housing and a Bank sector review mission in June 1981. Mr. lain Christie (EMPUR) led the Bank mission consisting of Messrs. Spyros Margetis, Francois Vigier (Consultant) and Francois Amiot (Consultant). The report was edited by Mr. Richard Herbert and Mrs. Chau Duong was responsible for typing and production. FOR OFFICIALUSE ONLY
TUNISIA
HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW
Table of Contents Page No.
LIST OF ACRONYMS
SUMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS (i)-(xv)
I. EVOLVING URBAN SETTLEMENTS ...... 1 A. Macroeconomic Context .I...... 1 B. Institutional Context ...... 3 C. Recent Urbanization ...... 3 D. Population Growth in the Medium Term ...... 8
II. THE HOUSING STOCK, 1975-80 ...... 10 A. Overview ...... 10 B. General Characteristics of the Housing Stock ...... 11 C. Rural and Urban Trends ...... 14
III. THE PRODUCTION OF HOUSING ...... 16 A. Public Sector Housing ...... 16 B. Privately Financed Housing ...... 21 C. Achievements and Constraints, 1975-80 ...... 23
IV. HOUSING DEMANDAND SUPPLY TO THE END OF THE VITH PLAN .... . 31 A. Overview ...... 31 B. Housing Demand ...... 32 C. Housing Supply ...... 35 D. Housing Investment, 1980-86 ...... 39
V. POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 41 A. Policy Issues ...... 41 B. Recommendations ...... 44
ANNEX ONE: HOUSING SECTOR INSTITUTIONS ...... 51
APPENDIX A: STATISTICAL TABLES .64
APPENDIX B: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING STOCK, 1975-80 .99
This documenthas a restricteddistribution and may be used by recipientsonly in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. TEXT TABLES Page No.
Table 1.1 VIth Plan Investments, by Sector ...... 2 Table 1.2 Evolution of the Tunisian Population ...... 5 Table 1.3 Population at End of 1986...... 9
Table 2.1 Housing Characteristics, 1975-80 ...... 13
Table 3.1 Characteristics of Government Assisted Housing Programs...... 18 Table 3.2 Building Permits Issued, 1975-80 ...... 22 Table 3.3 Housing Goals of the Vth Plan ...... 24 Table 3.4 Housing Investment, by Type of Producer, mid-1975 to mid-1980 .25 Table 3.5 Housing Financing, 1975-80 ...... 26 Table 3.6 Monthly Expenditures of Urban Households by Quintile .28 Table 3.6 Housing Expenditures of Urban Households as a Percent of Total Expenditures ...... 29 Table 3.7 Value of Savings Accounts...... 29
Table 4.1 Projection of Incremental Housing Demand, mid-1980 to end 1986 ...... 33 Table 4.2 Percentage Allocation of Urban Housing Demand by Region .33 Table 4.3 Income Distribution of Urban Families, 1980, and Alternative Projections to 1986...... 34 Table 4.4 Housing Production, Public and Private Sectors Alternative Projections, mid-1980 to end 1986. . . . . 36 Table 4.5 Regional Allocation of Public Programs ...... 38
TEXT FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Institutional Framework . . . . .4
Figure 5.1 Summary of Findings and Recommendations...... 42
MAP
Map IBRD No. 16578 LIST OF ACRONYMS
AFH - Agence Fonci&re d'Habitation (Land Development Agency) AFI - Agence Fonciare Industrielle ARRU - Agence pour la Rehabilitation et la Renovation Urbaine (Urban Upgrading and Renewal Agency) ASM - Association pour la Sauvegarde de la Medina (Association for Conservation of Medina) BCT - Banque Centrale de Tunisie (Central Bank of Tunisia) BDET - Banque de Developpement Economique de Tunisie (Economic Development Bank) CAVIS - Caisse d'Assurance, Vieillesse, Invaliditg et Survivants (Social Security Agency) CNEL - Caisse Nationale d'Epargne - Logement (National Housing and Savings Fund) CNRPS - Caisse Nationale de Retraite et de Prevoyance Sociale (Social Security Fund) CPU - Central Project Unit CPSCL - Caisse de Pr&ts et de Soutien des Collectivites Locales (Local Communities Support Fund) DAT - Direction de l'Amgnagement du Territoire (Regional Planning Directorate) EEC - European Economic Community FNAH - Fonds National d'Amelioration de l'Habitat FOPROLOS - Fonds Social pour la Promotion du Logement des Salarigs (Worker's Housing Fund) INS - Institut National de la Statistique (National Statistics Institute) MOA - Ministare de l'Agriculture (Ministry of Agriculture) MNE - Ministare de l'Economie Nationale (Ministry of National Economy) MOE Ministare de l'Equipement (Ministry of Equipment) MOH - Ministare de l'Habitat (Ministry of Housing) MOINT - Ministere de l'Intdrieur (Ministry of Interior) MOPF I/ - Ministare du Plan et des Finances (Ministry of Planning and Fina..ce) MOSA - Ministare des Affaires Sociales (Ministry of Social Affairs) ONAS - Office National d'Assainissement (National Sewerage Authority) OTTEE't - Office des Travailleurs Tunisiens a l'Etranger, de l'Emploi et de la Formation Professionnelle PDR - Programme de Ddveloppement Rural (Rural Development Program) PTT - Postes, Telephones et Telegraphes SNIT - Socidtd Nationale Immobiliare de Tunisie (National Real Estate Company) SNT - Societd Nationale des Transports (National Transport Company) SONEDE - Socidtd Nationale d'Exploitation et de Distribution des Eaux (National Water Production and Distribution Company) SPROLS - Societe de Promotion des Logements Sociaux (Social Housing Company) STB - Soci6te Tunisienne de Banque (Tunisian Society of Banks) STEG - Societd Tunisienne d'Electricitg et de Gaz (Public Power Generation and Distribution Company USAID - US Agency for International Development
1/ On June 18, 1983, it was announced that the MOPF had been split into two separate Ministries of Planning and Finance.
HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. BACKGROUND
1. This sector review was undertaken at the request of the Ministry of Housing (MOH), which was created in November 1980. The review has the twin objectives of assisting MOH (i) to evaluate the effectiveness of current housing assistance programs and (ii) to define policies to address present and future needs.
2. The review was begun in June 1981 by a joint Tunisian and Bank team. Most statistical information was gathered at that time and field visits were conducted to a number of cities to assess the range of local problems. By design, the study focuses heavily on (i) estimating and planning for housing demand and supply, especially in the urban sector and; (ii) on policy and institutional recommendations in the areas of housing and urban development which MOH may use in formulating its strategy under the VIth Development Plan (1982-86).
B. NATIONAL CONTEXT
1. Urbanization
3. Tunisia is highly urbanized (55% of the national 1980 population of 6.4 million) with the annual rate of urban growth approaching 4% over the 1970s. This background of rapidly evolving urban settlement is associated with (i) macroeconomic processes of rapid structural transition; (ii) a duality between the traditional rural sector and the modernity of the growing hydrocarbon and tourist sectors; and (iii) continued strong growth in real household incomes, including those of lower income groups.
4. Rapid urbanization and rates of population growth over the last two decades resulted from both demographic pressures and the concentration of employment-generating investment in selected areas. Accelerated urbanization, fueled by in-migration, has strained the ability of the authorities to provide an adequate level of community and urban services, especially in informal settlements on the urban fringe. Although Tunis continues to be preeminent, other cities are now also attracting rural migrants. Estimates put the 1986 urban population at 4.9 million, or 64% of the national total of 7.6 million.
2. Agencies Managing Housing
5. Responsibility for managing urban growth by the government is mainly divided among the new Ministry of Housing, and the Ministries of Planning and Finance (MOPF), Equipment (MOE), Agriculture (MOA), National Economy (MNE), and Interior (MOINT). Urban planning goals are established after extensive consultation between the public and semi-public organizations directly involved. In practice, however, the intricate division of responsibility between the above ministries and the lack of coordination among them have often led to confusion in the programming and implementation of urban development schemes. - II -
6. MOH was created as a split-off from MOE to deal exclusively with shelter and related issues through those agencies under its tutelage; (i) Societe Nationale Immobiliare de Tunisie (SNIT), transferred from MOE, (ii) Agence Fonciere d'Habitation (AFH), and (iii) Agence pour la Rehabilitation et la Renovation Urbaine (ARRU) created on August 1, 1981 to execute upgrading and urban renewal projects. MOH also has technical tutelage of the Caisse Nationale d'Epargne-Logement (CNEL), a financial institution under the MOPF; CNEL also manages the Fonds Social pour la Promotion du Logement des Salaries (FOPROLOS), a fund set up to finance housing for lower income wage earners. Physical planning is carried out by MOE through the Direction de l'Amenagement du Territoire (DAT) which prepares regional and urban master plans. Design, construction, operation, and maintenance of main infrastructure systems (water, sewerage and electricity) are the responsibilities of the national utility companies. -/ Road maintenance, and solid waste collection and disposal are funded by the MOINT and carried out by governorates and the municipalities.
C. FINDINGS
7. The review presents findings about the Tunisian housing stock as a whole over the 1975-80 period, and housing demand and supply projections from mid-1980 to the end of 1986. These, in turn, lead to findings concerning land and services and overall housing investment patterns. Together, these findings identify the factors -- population growth, migration, urbanization, continued growth in real household income, and regional imbalance -- that shape the challenge to which the Tunisian housing sector must respond over the next few years.
1. Housing Stock, 1975-80
8. In 1980, the housing stock was 1.1 million units, of which 54% (605,500) were urban. From 1975-80, a general improvement in the quality of tlhe national housing stock took place, explained in part by strong growth in real household income. The percentage of standard rural units rose from 42% to 63% of the total and standard urban units from 74% to 93%. About 63% of new construction took place in urban areas (where there was a 36% increase in the housing stock), with Tunis and the Northwest alone accounting for over a third of new urban construction. Nonetheless, the heavy urban demand resulting from the association of increased household income with high rates of family formation and significant migration put great pressure on private and, especially, public sector supply and urban occupancy rates rose signi- ficantly. The provision of urban infrastructure and particularly of sewering lagged, especially to informal housing areas.
1/ ONAS - Office National d'Assainissement SONEDE - Societe Nationale d'Exploitation et de Distribution des Eaux STEG - Societ6 Tunisienne d'Electricite et de Gaz. - iii -
9. Between 1975 and 1980, 314,000 dwellings (of which 115,000 by the public sector), representing a total investment of TD 805 million (in 1980 TDs), were constructed or upgraded. Highlights are that: First, the total exceeded the targets by about 25%, but nevertheless, housing investment in Tunisia has tended to account for a relatively low proportion of GDP (4.3%), and is tending to decline relative to the mid-1970s. The annual growth of 11.9% of housing investment was lower than the 14.7% annual growth rate of gross fixed capital formation (GFCF), indicating a substantial relative drop in housing investment at a time when total investments were growing rapidly. Second, the public sector controlled 42% of housing investment, produced 26% of the units constructed, and provided financing equivalent to 8.7% of total housing investments, its direct subsidies being equal to an additional 5.3%. Third, the ability of the private sector to finance housing construction is substantial - privately financed construction accounted for 75% of all housing starts. In publicly-assisted programs, it averages 28% of housing costs and 88% in non-assisted housing. It should be noted that 96% of the TD 517 million in housing finance provided by the private sector was the direct contribution of households acquiring their own home; as a group, they were responsible for 65% of total housing financing between 1975 and 1980, or about 3% of GDP.
10. The ability of current public programs to address the housing needs of lower income households is difficult to assess in the absence of accurate specific household income data and information on the propensity to save at various income levels but it appears that they are unable to reach such fami- lies in a significant way. Considering that median household incomes in urban areas are on the order of TD 1,450 per annum and that most housing programs require a TD 1,000 equity, 75% of state-aided housing constructed between 1975 and 1980 was not intended for low-income households. There has been a reduc- tion in the percentage of urban households living below the absolute poverty level; nonetheless, the ability of the two lowest quintiles to acquire housing is sharply limited by both their ability to save the equity required as well as by their limited residual resources, once basic nutritional, clothing, and transportation needs have been met.
11. The environmental deterioration of Tunisian cities is due, in part at least, to the repercussions of public housing programs. On the one hand, the low density at which such housing is developed preempts most serviced sites available; on the other, their high quality and cost puts them beyond the means of rural migrants, the major generators of incremental urban housing demand. Although the Government has managed to marshall the savings of moderate income households successfully towards the production of housing, it has been less successful in addressing the more difficult problem of providing mass housing at acceptable sanitary standards.
12. This has been due, to a considerable extent, to structural and institutional problems: - iv -
(i) The lack of coordination between the state monopolies responsible for urban infrastructure and for the provision of housing sites: STEG, SONEDE, ONAS, SNIT and AFH. At the local level, there has also been a persistent inability of physical plans to anticipate the rate and localization of development.
(ii) The ambiguous responsibilities of municipal governments which have prevented them from controlling the growth of informal settlements or taking an active role in providing serviced sites and upgrading substandard areas.
13. Indeed, the mission concludes that the underlying housing problem in Tunisia is the lack of serviced residential sites in urban areas rather than the inability of a significant portion of the population to house itself. This is clearly demonstrated by the magnitude of private housing investment that occurred between 1975 and 1980. Had affordable, small, serviced lots been available to the private sector, there would have been an impressive improvement in the quality as well as quantity of the urban housing stock.
2. Housing Demand, 1980-86
14. Two projections of housing demand were made for the period 1980-86, based on Institut National de la Statistique (INS) and mission estimates of demographic growth and continued increases in real household incomes. The estimates are 492,000 additional units under INS assumptions and 552,000 under mission assumptions; about a third of the incremental demand is attributable to households whose total income is below the minimum guaranteed wage. The key difference between the projections is the treatment of migration. The first is a continuation of past trends, while the second, which produces somewhat higher estimates of housing demand, takes into account rural outmigration and the spatial distribution of investments under the VIth Plan (1982-86).
3. Housing Supply, 1980-86
15. Given this range of anticipated housing demand, estimates of urban housing production for the period 1980-86 were based on. (i) operations started before 1982; (ii) CNEL savings contracts reaching maturity; (iii) the growing pool of FOPROLOS funds; and (iv) SNIT operations following the same growth pattern as 1975-80. On the basis of these assumptions, the mission estimated that about 121,000 units would be constructed (excluding slum clearance) by the public sector. Inasmuch as those moving into publicly-financed housing vacate units (and are therefore not part of the incremental demand), there is an assumed substitution effect as the vacated housing becomes available to other families (about 110,000 units being so freed).
16. The review also concludes that significant regional variations exist in the percentage of total urban housing demand met by government programs, and that the lack of congruence between housing location and government investment programs will grow in the future. There are also regional variations in the ability of current and project programs to meet the housing needs of particular income groups. 17. The ability of the private sector with respect to housing activities is more difficult to ascertain. While private developers will provide housing to upper income households, low- and middle-income households are likely to continue to rely on the spontaneous activities of the informal sector. At present, two-thirds of the housing construction effort theoretically demanded of the private sector is incumbent upon the lowest third of the family income distribution curve. The magnitude of its future activities, as well as the income groups it can reach, have been estimated from the characteristics of one of the sites selected for the Third Urban Project in Tunisia, Ettadhamen, which has a profile typical of such settlements. Applying the Ettadhamen income distribution to the informal private sector and assigning the balance to either the legal construction sector or to an "unmet need" pool, depending on income, it is possible to depict a probable scenario of urban private sector activity which results in a range from 261,700 to 321,900 units.
18. The unmet need of 118,000-135,000 units - that is, the housing required by very-low income urban families in the two projections - will be satisfied in a variety of ways. The incidence of multi-family households may continue to increase, as it did between 1975 and 1980; a larger proportion of households with incomes in the TD 30-60 range may build in informal settlements, thereby reducing the quality of structures in these areas. Since their income is barely sufficient to construct a minimum shelter of concrete blocks, there may be a resurgence in the building of rudimentary shelters occupying land illegally on the urban fringe. In any event, it is reasonable to assume that self-housing solutions will gain in importance over the coming years.
4. Land and Services
19. The large number of dwellings to be constructed by the private sector between 1980 and 1986 (up to 321,900, or 58% of total housing construction over the period under the second projection) raises the issue of the availability of an adequate supply of serviced land. The principal provider of serviced lots is AFH, which caters both to CNEL financed housing and to private developers. AFH is planning to provide 2,500 hectares of serviced land by the end of the VIth Plan. With the exception of 46,400 dwelling units, most of which will be constructed by SNIT on its own serviced plots, all public programs will have to be accommodated on AFH sites. The balance will be available for private development but the level of coverage will vary depending on the region and there are likely to be some disparities between national programs and the spatial manifestation of demand.
5. Housing Investment
20. Taken as a whole, housing investments to 1986 are expected to be about TD 1.6 billion, or 21% of GFCF if demand is to be fully met. This is a substantially higher rate than the 16% that prevailed in 1975-80 and the 12.5% - vi -
(TD 1 billion) programmed under the VIth Plan. It should also be noted that publicly sponsored housing investment would account for about 50% of total housing investment, up from 42% over the 1975-80 period. Yet, the public sector would be unable to assist the housing needs of about two-thirds of the 1980-86 incremental demand in spite of being by far the single largest contributor to the share of housing in the country's GFCF.
D. POLICY ISSUES
21. On the demand side, the key issues are;
-- rising urban housing demand resulting from migration, new household formation, rapid growth in real household income, the high proportion of upper income expenditures going to housing, and the special needs of low income groups (the 60% of urban households whose income is lower than TD 100 accounted for 52% of the 1980 urban population and will continue to grow through in-migration), especially those in urban fringe settlements;
- evolving regional housing demand patterns that are not congruent with government spatial investment policies, specifically with respect to the anticipated substantial concentration of low-quality spontaneous housing in the more rapidly urbanizing governorates of the South, the Northwest, and the Center-West;
-- together with rising urban housing demand, there remains a current backlog of service provision especially to informal settlements on the urban fringe; and
-- demand for housing will overextend institutional and other capacities of both public and private sectors.
22. On the supply side, key issues are:
-- supply of serviced land is the main constraint in the face of the expected rapid growth of housing demand;
-- financial issues include the need for savings mobilization, the need for equal treatment of nonsalaried households as well as civil servants and salaried workers, the need for more financing for low-income households and the middle class, and a general confrontation of the issue of high and hence costly standards; - vii -
institutional issues include the need to assure the supply of new units for home ownership, and to strengthen institutional capacity generally, and to enhance the capacity for field intervention in particular, without adding to institutional proliferation; and
technical and other issues include the need for strengthened data collection and policy monitoring by MOH, the need to facilitate the supply of rental housing, and the need to review housing subsidy and rental policies.
E. RECOMMENDATIONS
23. The creation of the new Ministry of Housing offers a unique opportunity to undertake a number of organizational and institutional changes over the short to medium term that will strengthen interagency coordination and unplug organizational bottlenecks that have hampered the effectiveness of some programs. Programmatic recommendations may also be made, although the magnitude of committed public housing construction programs is such that such interventions cannot probably realistically take place until towards the end of the VIth Plan.
24. The fifteen recommendations that follow are therefore set out for consideration by the Tunisian authorities and some are being tested in the framework of the Third Urban Project. 1! The recommendations are clustered ir.to four groups to address the main supply constraints and issues identified by the review with respect to land, financing, institutions and management, and technical and other areas. They are summarized in the accompanying figure.
1. The Land Issue
25. Recommendation 1; To resolve the bottleneck in delivery of serviced land. (i) AFH's procedures and programs should be reevaluated; (ii) municipalities should play a greater role in land assembly and delivery of sites. (i) Evaluation of AFH programs. In the past, AFH has offered sites ranging from 200 - 400m2 and with very high levels of infrastructure. Consideration should be given to reducing plot sizes and infrastructure standards with a view to making plots more affordable to a broader range of target markets and also speeding up AFH's ability to construct its projects. Individuals must pay for plots in advance and then wait for long periods (in the past, up to 4 years) for delivery of their plot. This policy should be reviewed with a view to introducing a loan mechanism for acquisition of a serviced site (see Recommendation 4) together with a loan for construction materials (see Recommendation 7). This latter point implies a concomitant evaluation of AFH's overall financial policy to permit it to finance the acquisition of land on the basis of its approved 5 year program through funds additional to those of beneficiaries.
1/ Staff Appraisal Report 3917-TUN, November 15, 1982. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
| SUMMARY OF FINDINGS | DEMAND CONSIDERATIONS I SUYPLY CONSIDERATIONS I R E C 0 M M E N D A T I 0 N S
I * rising urban housing | LAND | 1. To resolve the bottleneck in delivery of serviced land (i) AFH's procedures and programs | demand resulting froms I sshould be reevaluated (ii) municipalities should play a greater role in land assembly | -- migration -- supply of serviced and delivery of sites. - new household | land a main problem i | formation | in face of expected | 2. Priority should be given to formulating a land policy that will be based on the government's I - rapid growth in I rapid growth of I facilitating and capitalizing on the private sector's housing construction capability for | real household housing demand I the orderly development of sites. income l 3. Encourage municipalities to lay out sites and services areas before significant l| l settlement occurs.
| FINANCIAL | 4. Examinie potential for diversifying CNEL's operations and making it into a comprehensive | -- need for savings | housing bank handling a variety of related issues. l mobilization I * evolving regional | -- need for financing | 5. Review interest rates in the housing sector, as part of a general review of interest I housing demoand various phases of rate policy. I not congruent | urban development I with government | -- need equal treatment of I 6. Encourage potential home owners to take a construction loan, with the proceeds of which they spatial investment civil servants, salaried| would construct their own dwellings or subcontract to a small contractor instead of buying I policies I workers, and non- I a turnkey project. I salaried households I * rising demand for | -- need for separate and | 7. Strengthen loan programs for non-salaried households. Ii housing will in turn I specialized financing c I generate incremental for low-income house- | 8. Continue to review FOPROLOS program with a view to (i) planning for use of its increasing as-I | demand for adequate holds and middle-class sets and (ii) containing costs so that it can continue to serve the market it was created for. supply of serviced l l_l land while there is j 1 | current backlog of J INSTITUTIONAL | 9. Clarify the role of agencies concerned with physical planning. | urban service I I provision especially I -- need to assure supply 110. Review interrelationships between CNEL, AFH, and SNIT to (i) give SNIT a more realistic I to informal urban I of new units for home | (reduced) role (ii) give AFH means to accomplish its share of VIth Plan (iii) encourage use fringe settlements ownership | of CNEL's resources for financing more private sector development. Also, review role of | -- need to strengthen | national infrastructure companies with reference to housing sector institutions. * demand for housing | institutional capacity l wwill overextend I generally 11l. Reinforce structure for carrying out upgrading projects and identify a specific program | institutional and I for action.
| other capacities of l l | both private and | TECHNICAL/OTHER 112. Standardized information-gathering format should be developed in the MOll to monitor I public sectors I construction /housing data. 1 -- need for data collectionl I and policy monitoring 113. Establish Planning, Analytical, Technical Units in MOH to assist policy formulation l by MOH I by providing data base.
114. Review housing subsidy policies in terms of (i) government's willingness to defray the l| rising coats of such subsidies and (ii) equity of current policies (see also 15).
l15. Review current policy for rental housing in terms of (i) levels of service lII| (ii) rent control (iii) target markets. l _ _ _ _ _ l __ Il______l______- ix -
(ii) Municipalities. To assist municipalities in undertaking the technical studies required to prepare serviced residential plots, it is proposed that;
(a) CPSCL assist local governments to prepare applications to ensure technical consistency and compatability with bureaucratic procedures; and
(b) public works should be undertaken locally. In the absence of qualified municipal personnel, supervision would be subcontracted to AFH or ARRU for shelter projects and to MOE for public works.
26. Recommendation 2: Priority should be given to formulating a land policy that will be based on the government's facilitating and capitalizing on the private sector's housing construction capability for the orderly development of cities. The following approach is suggested:
(a) concentrate public investment on the acquisition, improvement, and disposal of land;
(b) regularize the ownership status of existing settlements in order to encourage housing investment;
(c) formulate realistic development regulations that recognize the ability of lower-income households to construct a minimal shelter (at least initially), that encourage the enlargement and improvement of the shelter as household incomes grow, and that accommodate mixes of housing types in order to increase the supply of privately developed rental units as well as employment generating uses;
(d) regionalize land development and construction standards to account for local variations in housing demand, income, climate, and life style; and
(e) review the procedures for approving developers which may act as a disincentive to participation.
27. Recommendation 3; Encourage municipalities to lay out sites and services areas before significant settlement occurs. Given the pressure on communities for serviced areas, there is a need to demarcate areas for development before spontaneous development takes place. AFH should be encouraged to help municipalities to better plan these rudimentary sites and services projects. Such an approach consists only of demarcating roads and plot boundaries in a first phase of development. This approach would help guide the development of subdivisions and facilitates the provision of services at a later stage based on residents' financial ability and willingness to pay for infrastructural improvements. 2. Financial Issues
28. Recommendation 4: Examine the potential for diversifying CNEL's operations and making it into a comprehensive housing bank handling a variety of related issues. This would require a study in itself to examine resource mobilization, lending programs and financing arrangements. At present, CNEL and FOPROLOS account for two-thirds of public investments in housing and for 80% of publicly subsidized investment in urban areas. In particular, CNEL is the main instrument used by the Government to implement its financial policies pertaining to urban housing, the manipulation of the interest rate charged by individual programs allowing considerable flexibility. A new range of activities would give CNEL much greater flexibility and might include:
- housing loans for a greater number of non-salaried wage earners and lower-income savers;
- loans for the purchase of serviced lots (already under consideration);
- prefinancing of AFH activities (already under consideration);
- financing a large portion of turnkey projects through private developers with construction loans to be converted to permanent finance for home buyers; and
- encouraging savers to take construction mortgages rather than financing for "turnkey" houses.
29. Recommendation 5: Review interest rates in the housing sector, as part of a general review of interest rate policy. Interest rates in other sectors of the economy are much higher, in the range of 10-12%; these latter rates appear reasonable given estimates of inflation which range from 8-10%. Thus, there appears to be a case for an increase of interest rates in the housing sector. This should, of course, be carried out in the context of the subsidization program and an evaluation of overall equity issues.
30. Recommendation 6: Encourage potential home owners to take a construction loan (with the proceeds of which they would construct their own dwelling, or subcontract to a small contractor) instead of buying a turnkey project. Given that the annual rate of production of public housing programs is likely to grow from 10,000 units in 1980 to 37,000 in 1986, it is neither probable nor, for the reasons stated above, desirable that SNIT be saddled with this 25% annual rate of construction growth. It would therefore be advisable to - xi - capitalize upon the growing capacity of AFH to provide serviced sites, particularly in the Tunis region, and encourage CNEL and FOPROLOS beneficiaries to take a construction mortgage rather than buy a turn-key unit. This policy would be beneficial in two ways: the lower construction costs of the small-scale private sector would result in larger units; and the shorter construction period would allow the construction of a larger number of units, SNIT normally requiring four to five years to complete a project.
31. Recommendation 7: Stengthen loan programs for non-salaried households. In view of the large pool of families (over 200,000) with incomes whose median income is of the order of TD 75 and the fact that current public programs focus heavily on middle and upper income state functionaries, it is proposed to create a loan program which would finance (i) acquisition of a serviced plot, and (ii) provide funds for the acquisition of construction materials.
32. Recommendation 8: Continue to review the FOPROLOS program with a view to (i) planning for use of its increasing assets and (ii) containing costs so that it can continue to service the market it was created for. FOPROLOS is funded by a 2% levy on wages and thus over time a large pool of funds can be anticipated. As of the end of 1980, only 30% of FOPROLOS resources had been committed while only 12 loans were granted for the construction of a house as opposed to 4,316 for the purchase of a turnkey dwelling. The reliance on turnkey projects (97% of which are undertaken by SNIT) has resulted in rapidly rising production costs as well as long delays in delivery times. As is the case with CNEL, ways must be found to encourage beneficiaries to take mortgage loans rather than buy turnkey units. This would have the advantages of significantly speeding up construction, reducing costs and hence a better utilization of FOPROLOS funds. As much lower income housing is now constructed by individuals and small scale construction, this would have the added advantage of stimulating this subsector. Originally budgeted at TD 3,600 in 1978, the average cost of a FOPROLOS dwelling is now about TD 4,200. Given this increase, the outreach of the program is shrinking significantly. Whereas it was conceived for households with monthly incomes between TD 64 and 96, the new cost schedule will restrict the program to households earning more than TD 150 (assuming housing costs at 20% of the household budget), that is, 2.3 times the 1980 value of the SMIG. If this program is to respond to the market it was created for, there should be a reduction in standards to affordable levels.
3. Institutional and Management Issues
33. Recommendation 9: The roles of agencies concerned with physical planning should be clarified. MOH must also address the physical planning aspects of housing programs in order to improve coordination among housing development, infrastructure construction and the provision of educational, health, and social services. - xii -
With the exception of the District of Tunis, the planning function is currently divided among several public agencies and lacks coordination. The framework suggested below provides a reasonable framework for the various aspects of physical planning. Large Scale Planning. The Ministry of Equipment should concentrate its technical resources on the preparation of large scale development plans at the regional and governorate scale. I/ The Ministry's Direction de l'Amenagement du Territoire is currently studying the possibility of a national physical planning approach and their effort should be encouraged. Urban Planning. Consideration should be given to charging the Ministry of Housing with the responsibility for the preparation and supervision of municipal physical plans; it would then be a Ministry of Urbanism and Housing, a move which appears justified. Its role would be to delineate planning areas consistent with urban expansion trends, define the content of physical plans, and either review or approve the plans prepared by or for the municipalities. Creation of Special Planning Districts. The experience of the last decade has shown that a substantial portion of informal housing construction occurs on the urban fringe, outside municipal jurisdictions. MOE or MOH should be empowered to propose special planning districts in areas where development trends clearly transcend jurisdictional boundaries. The Ministry would be responsible for the preparation of comprehensive land development plans to be administered by the principal local government in the special district.
34. Recommendation 10: Review the interrelationships between CNEL, AFH and SNIT with a view to; (i) giving SNIT a more realistic role; (ii) giving AFH the means to accomplish its share of the VIth Plan; and (iii) encouraging the use of CNEL's resources for financing more private sector developers. There has been an underutilization of CNEL resources - for example, at the end of 1980, it had TD 86 million medium-term funds lent to promoters (most of it SNIT) as opposed to TD 55 million outstanding in mortgages, ostensibly its main line of business. CNEL prefinances about two-thirds of SNIT's activities, a major consequence of which is that practically all CNEL's savers have no option but SNIT's turnkey projects. As SNIT's program for the VIth Plan covers 60% of public sector housing construction, the same structure is being perpetuated. This may be inefficient inasmuch as CNEL's A and B savings programs had to be abandoned as a result of the high cost of SNIT's turnkey programs, not an inordinate rise in construction costs or an inadequate financing formula. While recognizing the invaluable contribution of SNIT, we believe that private sector developers should also be encouraged by having access to the same facilities as SNIT; success in this would ease SNIT's task considerably under the VIth Plan. As proposed above, it is time to consolidate AFH's role of land assembler and perhaps to facilitate that task by permitting CNEL to prefinance AFH operations. Certainly, AFH has an ambitious program under the VIth Plan. Increasing its responsibility (together with the proposed emphasis on mortgage loans below) would make attainment of the objectives of the VIth Plan that much easier.
1/ This recommendation should be modified in the light of the role of the new Commissariat Regional au Developpement as it develops. - xiii -
35. Recommendation 11; Reinforce the structure for carrying out upgrading projects and identify a specific program for action. As a result of efforts made through the Bank's second urban project and USAID supported projects, the Government has accepted the concept of upgrading and recently created ARRU to carry out upgrading works. The VIth Plan does not adequately cake into account the effort needed to make this a national effort. A study by SOTUETEC inventorying upgrading needs should be completed in the near future and will serve as a basis for identifying a program for existing communities requiring upgrading. This could be financed in part at least on the budget line degourbification which, although ostensibly a rural program, is concerned with settlements in the urban fringe.
4. Technical and Other issues
36. Recommendation 12; A standardized information-gathering format should be developed in the MOH to ascertain with some accuracy shifts in demand, construction activity, transformation of the housing stock, and levels of occupancy throughout the country. The format of INS published data does not lend itself to this type of analysis as it ranges from overly detailed cross-tabulations of peripheral information (the number of fixtures in bathrooms and kitchens, for example) to being overly cryptic in its description of such important interrelated indicators as structure types, sizes of units, and construction materials. In spite of its breadth and generally high quality, the utilization of the statistical data generated by INS presents technical difficulties. Although information may contain the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the housing stock, the analyst cannot prepare correlations between the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the population and the spatial and physical characteristics of the stock. Extracting the information is difficult as it requires elaborate special runs which in fact are technically cumbersome. It will be necessary to create a data bank and undertake frequent sampling of small urban areas, compatible with the decennial census, and be mutually interactive to allow trend analyses as well as formalize a continuous updating of census tracts.
37. Recommendation 13; The Ministry of Housing should be charged with the development, monitoring, and utilization of data and indicators pertinent to housing for use in policy formulation for both the public and private sectors. The activities should be allocated to three specialized units; a Planning Unit responsible for the programming of public housing activities and their spatial allocation; an Analytical Unit responsible for the collection and analysis of the necessary statistical information; and a Technical Unit charged with studying construction methods and following execution of projects. Planning Unit. The Planning Unit would furnish the Minister of Housing with the information necessary to choose among policy options and prepare the Ministry's annual investment and operational budgets. It would prepare all public housing programs by specific target groups, by region and municipality, and would be responsible for monitoring effectiveness. It would be responsible for - xiv - orchestrating the planning activities of agencies dependent upon the Ministry cif Housing (ARRU, SNIT, AFH) and CNEL as well as coordination of planning with other government agencies whose activities affect housing (for example, MOE, ONAS, SONEDE, STEG), and regional and municipal physical planning activities. Analytical Unit. The responsibilities of the analytical unit can be divided into (i) longer- range forecasts intended to alert the Ministry to ch'anges in the structural and spatial characteristics of demand, and (ii) the documentation of existing conditions leading to the development of programs and projects. It would work closely with MOPF to monitor the macro impact of housing policy. Technical Unit. The technical unit should actively seek innovative solutions to improve the housing of low-income households. To this end, special attention should be paid to undertaking experimental projects where new technical and financing approaches can be tried out and, if successful, incorp,--,-ed in national programs. Of equal importance, is the evaluation of planning norms and technical standards used in housing and infrastructural z-^-vices and their effect on development costs and affordability.
38. Recommendation 14: Review the housing subsidy policy in terms of (i) tine Government's willingness to defray the rising costs of such subsidies and Cii) the equity of the current policy (see also rental policy below). The Qovernment partially subsidizes CNEL's programs. The interest paid to savers is supplemented by an additional 2% provided by the state while the agency's mortgages benefit from a 1% reduction in the interest rate. This amounts to an indirect interest subsidy of TD 250 for a suburban dwelling and TD 415 for a moderate cost unit. Until 1980, the relatively small number of mortgages issued by CNEL had kept the total cost of this public subsidy to about TD 500,000; given CNEL's forecasted increased activity, public subsidies will amount to nearly TD 10 millions by 1986. Although little can be done about current contractual arrangements, MOH should review (with MOPF) the potential impact of maintaining the present policy which favors higher income households. In light of the diversity of CNEL savings contracts, which range from TD 2,000 to TD 14,000, a modulated approach, favoring smaller contracts subscribed by households with low incomes would be more equitable and advantageous, particularly if they opt for a construction mortgage. MOPF and MOH may want therefore to examine the impact of a sliding scale of interest subsidies on the rate of production of different housing types.
39. Recommendation 15; Review current policy for rental housing in terms of (i) levels of subsidy, (ii) rent control, and (iii) target markets. For projects financed by both SPROLS and CNRPS, there is a substantial gap between the quality and cost of the dwelling and the asking rent. It is estimated that current rents should be inflated three to four times in order to meet the real costs of financing, operating, and maintaining the buildings. There is thus an important hidden subsidy underlying public sector rental programs. The rent control law may also result in distortions although its impact does seem to be limited; however, it may hamper reformulating rental policy, for example in encouraging private sector construction of rental housing for low income families. MOPF and MOH should undertake a review of this subsector in liaison with the financing institutions. I. EVOLVING URBAN SETTLEMENTS
A. MACROECONOMIC CONTEXT I'
1. Overview
1.01 Tunisia entered the 1980s with a favorable national economic performance, but with a growth pattern in striking contrast with that experienced during the period of fast economic growth in the early 1970s; GDP in constant prices increased at an annual rate of 6.5% from 1976-79, less than the 8.6% achieved for 1969-76. The policy emphasis on industrial development and increased export orientation, and on the promotion of foreign and national private enterprises, has been beneficial. The rise in crude oil prices brought sizeable windfalls and helped keep the domestic and foreign financial situation manageable. This favorable situation is, however, likely to be short lived with an anticipated decline in domestic oil production over the next ten years. Household income is nevertheless expected to continue to grow strongly in real terms (over 6% per annum in constant 1980 prices for urban families) over the period to 1986, with significant implications for housing demand.
1.02 Output in agriculture has stagnated since 1976, partially as a result of bad weather; tourism earnings levelled off from 1976 to 1978; and textile production decreased in 1978 because of the recession in EEC markets. As a result, recent high economic growth has increasingly become dependent upon a few export-oriented sectors. petroleum revenues and, to a lesser extent, phosphate processing have expanded, making these two sectors the main engine of economic growth. Strong demand for housing, hotels and public works triggered rapid growth in the construction sector and construction materials industries.
1.03 The public sector plays a major role in mobilizing, redistributing, and investing domestic resources. Budgetary revenues have been maintained at about one-third of GDP since 1977, one of the highest ratios among middle-income countries. Over one-fourth of these revenues were saved, financing close to two-thirds of total government capital expenditures. This comfortable budget situation has allowed a fast increase in subsidy payments for private consumption and to public enterprises which may be difficult to maintain over the period of the VIth Plan (1982-86).
2. Objectives of the VIth Plan
1.04 The fundamental objectives of the VIth Plan are to. (1) establish social justice by reducing social and regional income disparities; (2) resolve the crucial problem of unemployment; and (3) balance the foreign accounts and reduce the country's dependence on foreign financing. The VIth Plan is accordingly placing a strong emphasis on regional development, increasing exports, and firming up productive sectors, notably industry.
1/ This section draws on Tunisia; Country Economic Memorandum (Report 3399-TUN; April 21, 1981). -2-
1.05 To these ends, investments have been oriented towards labor intensive activities which account for 32.5% of the total (20.0% under the Vth Plan (1977-81): Table 1.1). The agricultural production rate is planned to increase at 5% p.a. (1.6% under the Vth Plan), while consumption is reduced to 6.7% (7.9% under the Vth Plan), thereby allowing investment to remain at the same relative level as under the Vth Plan (27.2% of GDP). Also relevant characteristics are: (1) an average annual GDP increase in real terms by 6.8% (o.o% auring tne Vtn Plan); k2) tne creation of 260,000 jobs covering 80% of the additional demand (212,000 and 76%, respectively, under the Vth Plan); (3) a national savings level of TD 6,450 million (22% of GNP as in the Vth Plan); (4) reliance on foreign financing of TD 3 billion which, in net terms, corresponds to 21.9% of total investment under the VIth Plan versus TD 1.5 billion and 22.2% under the Vth Plan; and (5) a debt-service ratio of 17.5% in 1986 (14.9% in 1981).
Table 1.1: VITH PLAN INVESTMENTS, BY SECTOR, 1982-86 (IN MILLIONS OF CONSTANT 1982 TD)
Labor Capital Total Total Sector Intensive Intensive Intermediate VIth Plan Vth Plan
Agriculture 830 -- 530 1,360 573 Mining -- 240 -- 240 160 Electricity -- 350 -- 350 205 Hydrocarbons -- 800 50 850 423 Water -- 225 -- 225 150 Industry and Manufacturing 1,250 500 -- 1,750 751 Transport 85 485 480 1,050 789 Tourism 415 -- 35 450 96 Housing -- -- 1,000 1,000 628 Public Facilites and Services -- -- 670 670 422 Other 35 -- 20 55 25
Total 2,615 2,600 2,785 8,000 4,222 (% Allocation, VIth Plan) (32.5) (32.5) (35.0) (100) - (% Allocation, Vth Plan) (20.0) (42.0) (38.0) - (100)
Source: Ministry of Planning and Finance. VIth Plan figures are subject to change.
1.06 In summary, the Tunisian economy is in a state of transition which reflects the considerable structural changes of the last decade, and those that will take place during the decade ahead. This transitional status has resulted in significant developments in patterns of settlement and of urbanization (and hence of the housing sector), and in the evolution of the agencies managing urban growth.
B. INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
1.07 The burgeoning Tunisian economy has affected the institutional context, shown in Figure 1.1, within which urban growth is managed. This responsibility is mainly divided among the Ministries of Housing, Equipment, Agriculture, National Economy, Planning and Finance, and Interior. The Ministry of Housing was created in November 1980 as a split-off from the Ministry of Equipment to deal exclusively with shelter and related issues through the following agencies under its tutelage; AFH and SNIT, as well as CNEL which is linked because of its role as a housing finance institution. Urban investment goals are established after extensive consultation between the public and semi-public organizations directly involved. The intricate division of responsibility between the above ministries, their proliferation, and the lack of coordination among them, have often led in practice to confusion in the programming and implementation of urban development schemes. Whereas a full analysis of the efficiency of these agencies, their tariffs and infrastructural standards, is beyond the terms of reference of this report, it is believed that coordination amongst the agencies is a task which MOH could well undertake, if the sector is to become more efficient without encouraging further institutional proliferation.
C. RECENT URBANIZATION
1. Magnitude and Growth Rates
1.08 In 1980, Tunisia's urban population of 3.3 million accounted for 55% of the estimated national total of 6.3 million people, and it is one of the most urbanized developing countries in the Mediterranean basin. The population was already one-third urbanized by 1956, and the subsequent exodus of non-Tunisians created a vacuum which attracted rural migrants to the urban centers. At the same time, the Tunisian authorities directed large amounts of social and productive investments toward the cities, thereby enhancing their attractiveness and their employment generation. The subsequent acceleration in urban growth is shown in Table 1.2; it has strained the ability of local governments to provide adequate service levels.
2. Spatial Patterns 1/
1.09 The primacy of Greater Tunis is overwhelming; its estimated 1980 population of more than 1.2 million, increasing at 6.9% annually, represents
1/ See Appendix A, Table A-1. Estimates for Greater Tunis are World Bank estimates which include adjustments to official data to reflect realities in population movements at the urban fringe. Urban therefore includes components defined elsewhere as rural; estimates for other cities are from INS. - 4 -
Figpe 1.1; Institutional Fraiework
Category of Agenicies FRnction Cammnt
1. INFRASTRUCTURE - Ministr of EquipEnt (ME) . Direction de 1 Ami&agement Regicnal and urban physical du Territoire (DAT) planning . Office National d'Assai- nissement (ONAS) Sewage collection and treatment National mxiopoly.
- Ministry of Agriculture (MCAo . Socidte Nationale d'Ex- ploitation des Eaux (SONEDE) Supply and distributimon of water National mnnopoly.
- Ministry of National Ecronomy(MRE) . Societe Tunisienne d'Electri- cite et de Gaz (STEG) Pow-r production and distribution National monopoly.
2. HDUSING - Ministry of Hbusing (M1H1 . Socidtg Nationale Imobili&re Housing construction Public sector Tunisienne (SRIT) (also land developnent) development. Agencepour la R&habilitation Upgrading of infrastructure and Executing second Bank et la Rknovation Urbaine (ARRU) old towns project. . Fonds National d'Am6lioration Upgrading of houses Managed by MLi1 de l'Habitat (FNAH) * AgenceFonciere d'Habitation Land assembly and development (AFH)
- Ministry of Social Affairs (MWA) . Socidte de Prointion des Rental housing agency Limited to social Iogements Sociaux (SPROLS) security subscribers.
3. FINANCE - Ministry of Planning and Finance (14PF) . Caisse Nationale d'Epargne Finances housing construction Logennt (CNEL) (also under (builders and buyers) Ministry of Housing) . Fonds pour la Prootion du Finances housing for low-income Managed by CNEL. Logementdes Salarids (FOPROSLL) families. . Programme de TWveloppement Finances rural housing Managed by SNIT. Rural (PHR) GCaisse Nationale de Retraite Finances housing for its mEmbers et de Preoyance Sociale (aws)
4. MUN1CIPALSERVICES (via mniicipalities) - Finistry of Interior (MOINT) . Direction des Collectivites Relations with local government; Locales solid waste collection, street maintenance GCaisse des Pretset de Soutien Finances minicipal projects des Collectivites Locales (CPSCL) (also controlled by MOPF) Table 1.2; EVOLUTION OF THE TUNISIAN POPULATION
Item 1956 /a 1966 /b 1975 /c 1980 /d
Total Population 3,783.2 4,533.4 5,600.1 6,369.1 (Annual Rate of Increase) 1.8% 2.4% 2.7% Urban Population /e 1,236.2 1,819.7 2,665.2 3,325.1 (Annual Rate of Increase) 3.9% 4.3% 3.7% Rural Population 2,547.0 2,713.6 2,934.9 3,044.0 (Annual Rate of Increase) 0.6% 0.9% 0.9% Urbanization Level 32.7% 40.1% 47.6% 54.6%
/a Source: Les Villes en Tunisie. /b Census, 1966. /c Census 1975; numbers vary marginally probably due to rounding in overall population which is reported variously between 5,577.3 and 5,600.1 thousand. Differences in urban population are due to definitional problems regarding "urban". Care should therefore be used in the interpretation of these data. /d INS Population/Employment Survey. /e Population living in agglomerations designated as "communes" by the Government according to the Municipal Law of March 14, 1957. At the time of the 1975 census there were 155 such communes. Except for 13, all others had populations of more than 2,000. about 34% of the total urban population and over half of the population of Tunisia's twenty largest cities; its annual consumption per capita is 80% higher than the national average; it has been the focus of about 32% of all industrial investments since 1973; and it provides more than a quarter of the country's 1980 industrial and service jobs. Metropolitan Sfax, the second city, had an estimated 1980 population of 292,000 and (224,000 in the city itself) with a dynamic tertiary sector (services and trades) being the principal source of employment. Sousse, the third city (estimated 1980 population 90,800), is an important tourist center and industrial port, and an increasingly significant university town. The most urbanized governorates other than Tunis are Monastir (82%), Sousse (74%), Gafsa (60%), and Sfax (59%).
3. Demographic Factors
1.10 Natural increase rates, slightly higher in urban areas (estimated at 3.1% p.a. over the 1975-80 period compared with 2.7% p.a. nationally), reflect the greater availability of health services in the former as well as the changing composition of the population attributable to age-selective migratory trends. Rural to urban migration accounts for almost half of the population increase between 1975 and 1980 and migratory trends continue to reflect economic inequalities among the country's regions (Appendix A, Table A.2). 1.11 While past migration is estimated as having been directed principally towards Tunis (33.6% of its 1975 population: see Appendix A, Table A.2), it now affects other cities: Sousse, Zaghouan and Nabeul had 1975 immigrant populations of 10.3%, 11.5%, and 7.0%. Some variations, however, have occurred which suggest an evolution of migratory patterns, the most important of which was the development of tourism along the eastern coastline and mining and extractive industries in the South. The disaggregation of migratory flows (Appendix A, Table A-3) shows a high turnover rate, affecting about 8% of the country's population. The pattern probably consists of several moves from smaller to larger cities as employment opportunities change. This dynamic obviously has complex repercussions on the provision of urban services and housing.
1.12 The areas which, until 1975, experienced the highest overall emigration relative to their size, are the northwestern governorates and Zaghouan with the vast majority of their emigrants settling in Tunis (Appendix A, Table A-3). In the absence of other reliable data, net 1975-80 migration rates for the urban and rural population were estimated as a residual between gross and natural increases (Appendix A, Tables A-2 and A-3). The Center-West and Northwest regions showed high positive urban migration rates and negative rural migration rates, indicating a rural to urban movement within, as well as emigration from, the regions. The positive total and urban flows in the governorates of Monastir, Kasserine, Sidi Bouzid, Gafsa and Medenine confirm their emergence as important destinations. Sfax and Bizerte are the only governorates which experienced a net urban out-migration: all others had positive net urban migration with annual rates ranging from 1.1% for Sousse to 13.1% for Kasserine. Tunis has again been the recipient of the largest number of urban immigrants although its net urban migration rate was considerably lower than that of the rapidly urbanizing Center-West and Northwest governorates.
4. Employment Factors
1.13 The percentage of the total population in the labor force has remained stable, at 49.7% in 1975 and 49.0% in 1980 (Appendix A, Table A-4). In the most urbanized governorates and regions, however, the share of the active age population increased from 1975 to 1980, reflecting the migratory flow of young adults towards the main urban centers. Sfax, experiencing a net out-migration of 2,000 from 1975 to 1980, thus shows a corresponding reduction of the economically active from 45% to 41.2% while Kasserine and Sidi Bouzid, both of which experienced rapid urban growth, demonstrate a rapid rise in the economically active population from 54.5% and 51.1% in 1975 to 67.4% and 67.3% in 1980, respectively. In 1975, rural unemployment was considerably higher than urban unemployment nationwide (19.5% versus 13.3%). The Northwest remains still the region with the highest unemployment rate (and the largest source of migrants), while unemployment in the governorates of the Center-West (the prime destination of urban migrants after Tunis) has decreased sharply to the lowest level in Tunisia. The structure of employment by type of economic activity is shown in Appendix A, Table A-5. - 7 -
1.14 A review of the registered demand for, and supply of employment, and of actual placements (Appendix A, Table A-6) reveals a disturbing downward trend and a scarcity of jobs relative to the large number of yearly entrants into the labor force generated by a youthful population (42% under 14 years of age). Thus, of the 40-45,000 jobs sought by young people entering the labor force, only 10% are supplied within a year. The rising discrepancy between employment demand and supply statistics is symptomatic of the informal activities that have traditionally provided low-level employment to the urban poor. About one in ten members of the urban labor force work in marginal occupations.
5. Community Facilities 1/
1.15 Wide inequalities in public service provision are still evident among governorates in spite of heavy investment and, in education as in health, availability is better in urban areas and particularly the large cities. In education (where investment doubled from TD 86.6 million in 1975 to TD 179.7 million in 1980), enrollment ratios for ages 6-14 remained at 66%. In health, capital investment rose from TD 6.5 million in 1975 to TD 16.9 million in 1980, and operating costs from TD 26.2 million to TD 60.7 million. Although population growth resulted in a small increase in the number of persons per bed, the number of inhabitants per health center dropped in urban areas from 4,651 in 1975 to 3,963 in 1980, while the number of doctors increased markedly. But in predominantly urban governorates, about 25-30% of 6 to 14 year olds are still not attending school, and almost 50% in rural governorates. Low rural enrollment ratios may reflect poor accessibility in an environment with dispersed settlements and the lower motivation of a largely illiterate population . But the small increase in urban enrollment ratios is more bothersome, particularly in light of rapid urbanization. It is probably explained by the growth of informal settlements on the urban periphery, which generally lack public services.
1.16 The provision of public services has thus been characterized by the concentration of health and education facilities in selected urban areas with an overwhelming concentration in Tunis. While this strategy may have been appropriate at a time when the country lacked an adequate social infrastructure, the increasing rate of population movement, not only from rural to urban areas but among the country's major cities as well, underlines the need for a coordinated approach to the delivery of social services that recognizes not only existing conditions but the probable future distribution of the population. Although the Tunis region continues to attract about a
1/ See Appendix A, Tables A-7 to A-10. 2/ 1980 illiteracy rates for the population ten years and older were 62% in rural and 35% in urban areas. INS, Enquete Population-Emploi. - 8 - quarter of urban migrants, it is no longer the prime destination of migratory flows and urban areas in other regions are attracting substantial numbers of migrants. It is therefore imperative to ensure that adequate level of social services are made available to them. Conversely, and since it is the government's objective to attempt to slow down rural outmigration, the rural development program's social service component needs to be strengthened, particularly its primary educational and rural health care referral system.
D. POPULATION GROWTH IN THE MEDIUM TERM
1. Official Projections
1.17 For the period of the VIth Plan (1982-86), the MOPF population projections assume a decline in crude fertility rates and a slow decrease in mortality rates. The Ministry's regional projections were apportioned among urban and rural areas on the basis of 1975-80 governorate urbanization trends. Net migratory flows were estimated by applying natural increase rates to the urban and rural populations and comparing them to the 1986 projection. As a result, the country's urban population in 1986 is estimated at 4.5 million or 60% of the 7.5 million inhabitants estimated for the country as a wlhole (Table 1.3, Projection A).
1.18 A closer examination of the recent evolution of migratory flows as well as of the investments proposed by the VIth Plan indicates the need for an alternative projection reflecting different assumptions for both vital statistics and migration. In particular, it can be anticipated that rural outmigration will continue to rise as a result of the age structure of the rural population and the current inability of the agricultural sector to absorb a substantial number of additional workers. While the 1985 population and distribution will still be responding largely to Vth Plan policies, migratory movements from the mid-1980s onwards will be influenced by the VIth Plan's regional investments (see Appendix A, Table C-3).
2. An Alternative Projection
1.19 The alternative projection (Table 1.3, Projection B) reflects a more realistic assessment of Tunisia's vital statistics and attempts to relate migratory flows to the regionalization of permanent employment investments proposed by the VIth Plan (Appendix A, Table C-3). Although death rates are taken to decline according to the Ministry's assumptions, the decrease in fertility is assumed to take place at a less dramatic pace, particularly in rural areas. As a result, a constant rate of natural increase of 21.4 per thousand (corresponding to current urban birth rates) is taken for urban areas while rural rates decline from 33.8 per thousand in 1980 to 30.6 by 1987. Total rural outmigration was estimated by comparing the number of agricultural jobs created by the VIth Plan with rates of entry into the rural labor force, on a regional basis. - 9 -
Table 1.3: POPULATION AT END 1986
Projection A Projection B Distri- Average Distri- Average bution Annual bution Annual of 1980-86 of 1980-86 Popu- Popu- Growth Popu- Popu- Growth lation lation Rate lation lation Rate (x 1,000) (%) (%) (x 1,000) (%) (%)
TUNIS 1,381.0 18.5 2.0 1,669.5 21.8 5.9
NORTHEAST 1,191.0 16.0 2.3 1,152.1 15.1 1.7
Urban 625.1 52.5 3.6 663.7 57.6 4.9 Rural 565.9 47.5 1.0 489.4 42.4 (1.4)
NORTHWEST 1,171.8 15.7 1.3 1,168.9 15.3 1.2
Urban 428.9 36.6 8.0 432.2 37.0 8.2 Rural 742.9 63.4 (1.2) 736.7 63.0 (1.3)
CENTER-EAST 946.5 12.7 3.1 927.6 12.1 2.7
Urban 666.5 70.4 4.6 675.3 72.8 4.9 Rural 280.0 29.6 0.3 252.3 27.2 (1.4)
CENTER-WEST 1,073.4 14.4 2.2 1,045.1 13.7 1.7
Urban 377.9 35.2 10.6 376.5 36.0 10.5 Rural 695.5 64.8 (0.5) 668.6 64.0 (1.2)
SFAX 620.8 8.3 2.3 561.0 7.3 0.5
Urban 367.8 59.2 2.3 361.7 64.5 2.0 Rural 253.0 40.8 2.3 199.3 35.5 (1.7)
SOUTH 1,079.0 14.5 3.1 1,123.8 14.7 3.9
Urban 688.1 63.8 7.0 722.1 64.3 8.2 Rural 390.9 36.2 (1.3) 401.7 35.7 (0.9)
COUNTRY TOTAL 7,463.5 100.0 2.3 7,649.0 100.0 2.7
Urban 4,535.3 60.8 4.4 4,901.0 64.1 6.1 Rural 2,928.2 39.2 (0.2) 2,748.0 35.9 (1.3)
Source: Mission estimates. - 10 -
1.20 A migratory pool was thus created, consisting of unemployed 18-25 year old males and the agricultural underemployed amounting to 29% of the 1980 male rural labor force. Half of the 18-25 year old males were taken to be migrants, as were 10% of the underemployed annually. The families of the underemployed males over 25 were assumed to join them rapidly while younger males followed the classical pattern of migrating alone and, once they had secured a job, either bringing their family to the city or going home to marry and bring their wife back to the city. The resulting dependency ratios are 4.71 for males over 25 and 1.0 for younger males.
1.21 The rural migrant pool was assigned to urban areas proportionately to the regional distribution of industrial investment proposed by the VIth Plan for the post-1984 period; 1975-80 migration patterns were followed before that date. Within regions, the relative attractiveness of urban areas was assumed to remain constant in the absence of more accurate localization information on VIth Plan investment and job creation. Once settled in a particular urban area, the migrants were included in the rate of natural increase calculations.
3. Conclusions and Policy Implications
1.22 Although the total populations yielded by the two projections are similar (variations in vital statistics having but marginal effects in the short run), there are important differences in the localization of the population. Projection A results in a level of urbanization of just under 61% while the higher rural outmigration presumed by Projection B results in an urbanization level of 64% by the end of 1986. Of greater significance from the point of view of housing policy are the variations in regional rates of growth as well as among urban and rural areas within regions. The marked drop in Tunis' rate of growth proposed by Projection A is unrealistic; projection B shows a relative slight drop in its rate of growth and in that of the Northeast, while the concentration of almost 30% of VIth Plan investments in these two regions is clearly going to sustain their traditional attraction of rural migrants. Similarly, it can be anticipated that allocating 26% of VIth Plan investments to the South will strengthen its emergence as a migratory pole in the 1980s. Overall, these evolving patterns of urbanization (and of rural settlement) provide the context within which housing policies will of necessity operate.
II - THE HOUSING STOCK 1975-80
A. OVERVIEW
2.01 The main findings of this chapter are: (i) that a general improvement in the quality of the national housing stock took place over the 1975-80 period (standard rural units rose from 42% to 55% of the total; standard urban from 74% to 93%); (ii) that substantial construction activity took place, with 60% of new construction taking place in urban areas (where there was a dramatic 30% increase in the housing stock), with Tunis and the Northwest alone accounting for over a third of new urban construction; (iii) that while this achievement was most commendable, the heavy urban demand resulting from - 11 - high rates of family formation and significant migration put great pressure on private and, especially, public sector supply and urban housing occupancy rates rose significantly; (iv) that privately financed construction accounted for 76% of all housing starts; (v) that urban infrastructural provision lagged, especially to informal housing areas; and (vi) that in the rural sector, the combination of an essentially stable population (through out-migration) and a vigorous campaign to eliminate shanties (gourbis) and construct modern housing permitted a substantial upgrading of housing quality.
B. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING STOCK
1. Aggregate Trends
2.02 The 1980 housing stock is estimated to number 1,120,500 units. The urban component of this total (605,500, or 54%) represented a 30% increase over the corresponding figure for 1975; the rural component (514,900) a 5% decrease over the 1975 figure, reflecting both population shifts and the demolition of abandoned or substandard units. Some 82,700 dwellings are vacant, under construction, or occupied sporadically as second homes. There are 535,000 urban dwelling units that are principal residences, and 502,600 in rural areas. These are occupied by 623,500 urban and 520,800 rural families (respectively 1.16 and 1.04 families per dwelling unit). 1/
2.03 Over the 1975-80 period, there were significant improvements in the physical quality of the housing stock, with the percentage of standard units 21 rising from 42% to 63% in rural areas, and 74% to 93% in cities. These qualitative improvements were achieved by a triple thrust; (i) a rural slum clearance program which relocated 42,000 shanty (gourbi) dwellers; (ii) the construction of 38,000 publicly-developed dwellings in urban areas, most of which were intended for participants in government-sponsored housing savings programs; and (iii) the construction of 237,000 privately-financed dwellings (67% of which are located in the country's cities) consisting mainly of one- and two-room units.
1/ A distinction is made throughout this report between "household" (all persons residing in a separate dwelling unit), "family" (all persons related by blood ties living together as a social unit) and "nuclear family" (husband, wife or wives, and children). In 1980, the 502,600 rural households consisted of 520,800 extended families and 650,600 nuclear families. 2/ i.e. Type I.D; components of the housing stock are defined in the notes to text Table 2.1. More detailed information and analysis is presented in Appendix A, Tables B-l to B-2, C-1 to C-9, and in Appendix B. - 12 -
2.04 Although, over the 1975-80 period, there was a net loss of some 24,500 dwelling units in rural areas, while the urban housing stock grew by just over 129,000 units, both figures are balances of complex activities consisting of new construction, demolition, and conversions. When disaggregated, these figures highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the Tunisian housing sector. An analysis of the evaluation of building types by construction material used reveals that no less than 314,000 dwellings and extensions were constructed between 1975 and 1980, of which 193,000 were located in urban areas and 121,000 in rural areas, a significant increase in the rate of production of housing over the 1966-75 period when only 132,000 units were added to the national housing stock. Meanwhile, 202,000 units were demolished, 95% of which were substandard or constructed of impermanent materials. In addition, considerable transformation occurred within the housing stock as it existed in 1975. An analysis of the size of dwellings indicates that some 42,000 units were enlarged by adding one or more room while some 94,000 additional units were created by subdividing existing, larger units.
2.05 A key fact is that about 52% of urban housing built between 1975 and 1980 bypassed municipal development regulations as the demand for shelter outpaced the ability of the public sector to control urbanization. Most of the construction undertaken by this "informal" private sector is nevertheless of relatively good quality: even though the majority of new informal housing originally consists of only one room, it is constructed of permanent materials and is enlarged by its occupants at a later date. Its main fault lies in the absence of an appropriate infrastructure (see para. 2.11 below) and, often, of educational and health facilities.
2. Housing Characteristics
2.06 Summary data on housing characteristics, 1975-80, are presented in Table 2.1, which clearly shows the general improvement in housing quality, represented by the increase in the number of permanent units from 74% to 93% of the urban housing stock. In rural areas, new construction is estimated to have accounted for 97% of additions to the permanent stock, the balance resulting from the upgrading of 3,100 semi-permanent units. In addition, over 22,1000 semi-permanent units were constructed, while 38,000 permanent units were demolished. In urban areas, new construction amounted to 80% of the 216,000 permanent units added to the housing stock, while 42,000 semi-permanent units were demolished. Upgrading of semi-permanent units amounted to 21,000 units, while conversions from larger (4 + rooms) to smaller units added approximately 22,000 units to the urban housing stock.
3. Regional Differences
2.07 Regional differences in the evolution of the housing stock over the 1975-80 period (see Appendix A, Tables C-5, C-6, C-7) might be expected to reflect the importance of the inter-regional and intra-regional population movements, and regional variations in the level of economic development. All regions except Tunis and the Northwest experienced a relative decline in population, while the most urbanized regions generally had the highest - 13 -
Table 2.1; HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS, 1975-80 (Number of Units, by Category)
Standard (Type I) /a All Perm- Year anent Con- Permanent Substandard Total and struction Walls Only Impermanent (Types II Dwelling Category (Type I.D) (Type I.SD) (Type I.R) Total & III) /b Units 1975
Urban 345,180 41,205 37,965 424,350 42,050 466,400 Rural 225,790 8,315 87,545 321,650 217,800 539,450 Total 570,970 49,520 125,510 746,000 259,850 1,005,850
1980
Urban 561,200 9,900 6,400 577,500 28,000 605,500 Rural 323,300 27,800 49,900 401,000 113,900 514,900 Total 884,500 37,700 56,300 978,500 141,900 1,120,400
Notes; a. Type I. A standard dwelling unit consisting either of a traditional (dar, b houch, or other Arab house) or a modern shelter (villa, apartment). These dwellings are further subdivided according to building materials used for their walls and roofs: type I-D has walls constructed of stones, bricks, or cementatious materials and a roof of concrete or tiles; Type I-SD has walls constructed of permanent materials but a roof made of various materials; Type I-R is built of impermanent materials. The distinction between Types I-SD and I-R is that the former is structurally capable of being upgraded to category I-D, while the latter is not.
b. Type II. A dwelling unit created from subdividing older urban structures (oukala) or other types of structures. Although mainly constructed of permanent materials, Type II dwellings are deemed generally unsatisfactory as a result of lack of sanitary facilities, and overcrowding. Type III. All other dwellings, including shanties (gourbi), shacks, tents, caves, and structures not designed for human habitation.
Source; World Bank estimates based on 1975 census definitions with minor changes to assure comparability of 1980 data; for detailed data, see Appendix A, Tables B-1 and B-2. - 14 - proportion of standard housing in both 1975 and 1980. The general improvement in the quality of the housing stock nevertheless occurred throughout the country, with only the predominantly rural Northwest and Center-West regions lagging behind national norms. In the cities, an increase in overcrowding occurred in spite of the general improvement in structural quality (see para. 2.10).
4. Evolution of Tenure Patterns 11
2.08 Over 175,000 families became property owners between 1975 and 1980, raising the percentage of owners from 73% to 79% of families. The major portion (74%) of this increase in owners occurred in urban areas, particularly in the Tunis region (where the number of property owners increased from 44% to 59% of families) and in the cities of the South and Center-East regions (which showed increases from 76% to 82% and from 80% to 86%, respectively). These are aggregate figures, including not only owner-occupants but also multiple-ownership and occupancy patterns as well. In 1975, for example, 14% of owner-occupied dwelling units were lived in by more than one family, either under a multiple ownership status, as tenants of the principal occupant-owner, or under some other arrangement. Although comparable figures are not available for 1980, there is little reason to believe that this situation has changed. Furthermore, ownership is reported as the predominant form of tenure (81%) by occupants of shanties who, as a group, account for 11% of property-owning families. Ownership therefore covers a broad band of socioeconomic characteristics and refers to "walls" but not always to land on which houses are built. Regularisation of land tenure can be expected to stimulate improvements in the housing stock, as witnessed under both Bank and USAID financed projects.
C. RURAL AND URBAN TRENDS
1. Rural Trends
2.09 In rural areas, where the population remained essentially stable between 1975 and 1980 as a result of a high rate of out-migration, the construction of 117,000 units, mainly as replacement housing, has allowed a substantial qualitative upgrading of the stock. Although occupancy rates remain high, with an average of 1.04 families and 5.9 persons per dwelling, the percentage of families living in one-room dwellings has fallen from 56% in 1975 to 46% in 1980. Yet, in spite of these improvements, one-third of the rural housing is still of marginal quality while 85% of rural families do not have electrical services. When combined with the paucity of educational and health services outside the major urban centers, it is clear from these indicators that the efforts undertaken by the government to improve rural living standards are only beginning to have an impact.
1/ Tunisia has both the traditional form of Arab/Islamic tenure and a more modern cadastral system. Outside the major cities, the former system is prevalent. Title can be registered in the modern system by request of the owner through the municipality or governorate, and is effected reasonably quickly. - 15 -
2. Urban Trends
2.10 In urban areas, in a macroeconomic context of rising real household income, the demand generated by new families, migrant households, and the need to rehouse nearly 60,000 households whose dwellings were demolished between 1965 and 1970 has stretched the capacity of both public and private sectors to provide a sufficient supply of new housing. In spite of the construction of 200,000 units, occupancy rates have increased markedly; the number of families per dwelling rose from 1.09 in 1975 to 1.16 in 1980, yielding an average 6.7 persons per unit or 2.4 per habitable room. Over 40% of new housing consisted of one-room dwellings built by the private sector, resulting in an increase in the number of urban families living in one-room units from 17% in 1975 to 26% in 1980. Yet, the good quality of these constructions, as well as the fact that they are expanded and improved over time, accounts for the significant reduction in the number of substandard dwellings. Substantial dwellings built of impermanent materials numbered 34,400 in 1980 (or 5.7% of the urban housing stock) as opposed to nearly 80,000 (or 17.1% of the stock) in 1975.
2.11 Substantial improvements have also been achieved in the level of basic urban services; 84% of families are connected to the electrical network and 71% to the public water supply as opposed to 71% and 56%, respectively, in 1975 (Appendix A, Tables B-li, B-12). Moreover, the utility companies have adopted fairly uniform standards nationally. More progress could be achieved if standards were adapted to conditions by region and if intermediate solutions were adopted based on customers' ability to pay. The rapid expansion of the urban housing stock has outpaced the ability of ONAS to keep up with the necessary sewerage extensions. The percentage connected to both the water and sewer systems fell from 80% in 1975 to 72% in 1980, precipitating a deterioration in urban sanitary conditions. A rise in the annual rate of sewerage connections can be expected as the extensive primary network extensions currently undertaken by ONAS are completed, although the question again arises as to whether the standards involved are excessively high. In any event, the difficulty inherent in controlling the location and expansion of the informal settlements that currently account for over 50% of urban housing construction presents challenging planning problems.
2.12 Finally, the shifting patterns of urbanization that have recently altered the uncontested dominance of the Tunis Region as the prime destination of rural migrants are becoming evident in the quality of the housing stock. Although Tunis and the Northeast still accounted for over a third of urban housing construction in 1975-80, other regions are experiencing substantial additions to their housing stock. Public services provided by SONEDE and ONAS have had difficulties in either anticipating or reacting to these locational shifts in demand, resulting in local deficiencies (in Sfax, Kairouan and Gafsa, in particular) while a spurt of construction activity generated by recent migrants has resulted in a high percentage of substandard dwellings in Jendouba, Siliana, Kairouan, Gafsa and Gabes. These trends underline the consequences of an evolution of housing that is due primarily to the uncontrolled activities of an informal sector that responds quickly to shifts in demand and escapes the spatial planning indispensible to the timely provision of public facilities and services. - 16 -
III - THE PRODUCTION OF HOUSING
A. PUBLIC SECTOR HOUSING
1. Evolution of Public Sector Activities
3.01 Until the mid-1970s, SNIT administered most government housing assistance programs, combining the responsibilities of financing, land development, housing design and construction. Its activities were concentrated in the Tunis region and included heavily subsidized housing projects (Ibn Khaldoun, El Khadra, Kabaria, etc.) which were originally irLtended to relocate households displaced by slum clearance projects. The financial and social costs of this policy induced the Government to reformulate its housing policy particularly for land development and housing finance.
3.02 In 1974, there was a reorganization of the sector and two public sector agencies were established: AFH, which has the responsibility for acquiring and improving land for residential development, and CNEL, whose role is to channel domestic savings towards the production of housing and which grew within a few years to be one of the largest deposit banks in the country and the principal financier of SNIT. Simultaneously, SNIT was reorganized to allow it to extend its activities outside Tunis and to become the main developer for housing prefinanced by CNEL. In 1977, FOPROLOS was created for wage earners whose wages were around the minimum wage to reinforce the effectiveness of public housing loans. This would allow the lower income participants in CNEL programs to acquire dwellings whose costs had risen faster than their ability to save. Concurrently, the Government attempted in 1976-77 to intervene in the rental market although the program was largely limited to middle- and upper-income housing for government officials developed by the pension fund, the Caisse Nationale de Retraite et de Prevoyance Sociale (CNRPS) and the Societ4 de Promotion de Logements Sociaux (SPROLS) on behalf of salaried employees belonging to the social security agencies.
3.03 The upgrading of the squatter housing developments which were proliferatirg on the periphery of the larger cities was also a key component of housing policy. Although such upgrading has been a lasting concern of both the central Government and municipal authorities, financial and technical difficulties have limited this type of project to those financed by the World Bank and USAID, to which can be added a small number of limited local undertakings. The creation of ARRU (August 1981) should provide a fresh impetus to this important aspect of housing policy within the context of the VIth Plan. Only the Fonds National d'Amelioration de l'Habitat (FNAH), a fund managed by MOH, had previously concerned itself, on a limited basis, with efforts of this kind.
3.04 Other measures were also taken to improve the efficiency of urban services and complement the government intervention in the housing sector. The role of existing independent local utilities was preempted by the creation of the three public utility monopolies (ONAS, SONEDE and STEG), which were - 17 -
given the task of expanding services. An attempt has also been made to reform local government by creating new municipalities, or communes, which now number 167 and account for half the population and a third of the country's area. At the same time CPSCL was strengthened in 1975 to assist local governments in financing capital costs as well as improve such public services as refuse collection, public lighting and road maintenance.
3.05 Physical planning policy also affects housing. The MOE is responsible for preparation of regional plans, urban master plans and also detailed master plans; it is also supposed to enforce development regulations. MOE either undertakes master plans itself on behalf of local governments or approves municipal plans and supervises the enforcement of development regulations. Since master plans concentrate on zoning issues, designating development areas at various densities within the municipal limits, they are unable to forestall or control the construction of spontaneous housing, most of which occurs in peripheral areas. Although municipal governments are responsible for enforcing development regulations within a 5 kilometer zone beyond their boundaries (the governorate taking charge of rural areas), a lack of personnel as well as the difficulties of monitoring private land sales and preventing illegal construction have resulted in ineffectual enforcement.
3.06 The role of the state has thus been pervasive - managing savings, providing building sites, and developing projects. This approach, according to the authorities, ensures that all families have access to a safe and sanitary dwelling meeting clearly defined standards. Slum dwellers of large cities are a prime target of this policy.
2. Housing Subsidy Programs
3.07 Varying amounts of direct or indirect subsidization occur at every step of the process described above. Government housing assistance programs consist of.
- direct subsidies taking the form of a construction bonus or a grant;
- indirect subsidies consisting of below market interest rates or long-term, low equity loans.
Table 3.1 summarizes the various types of subsidies available in 1980. Performance under the Vth Plan indicates that all government subsidies to housing are on the order of 11% of the total value of construction (estimated at TD 912 million), direct subsidies amounting to about 5%. According to past Bank estimates, direct subsidies have accounted for only 3% of the value of new housing investments while indirect subsidies represent 13% to 26% of all investment, depending on the assumptions made regarding interest rates on the domestic market (then estimated at 6%) or the opportunity cost of capital (then estimated at 10%). Table 3.1: CHARACTERISTICS OF GOVERNMENT-ASSISTED HOUSING PROGRAMS
Average Direct Interest Duration Minimum Income Group Program Cost/D.U. Subsidy Loan Rate of Loan Bonus Equity Targeted
Rural Housing 1,500 420 640 0% 15 years -- 440 Beneficiary must not own a standard dwelling, be employed, and have ability to repay loan.
Suburban SNIT 4,200 270 2,260 0% 15 years -- 1,260 Below 120 - Discontinued in mid-1970s.
Suburban FOPROLOS 4,200 270 2,800 3% 15 years -- 1,140 64-128/month.
Suburban CNEL 4,200 270 2,800 3% 15 years 130 1,260 90-120/month.
Low-Cost SNIT 7,000 4,900 2,100 Above 120 - Discontinued in mid-1970s. H
Low-Cost FOPROLOS 7,000 4,690 4.5% 15 years 210 2,100 128-192/month. 0
Low-Cost CNEL 7,000 4,690 4.5% 10-15 years 210 2,100 120-210/month.
Low-Cost CNRPS Varies -- 70% 3-6% 15 years -- 30% Member of the retirement fund.
All values in 1980 TDs, except as indicated. D.U. = dwelling unit - 19 -
3. The Institutional Context 1/
3.08 Tunisia's housing policy has been complex, due in no small part to the myriad agencies programming in the field. The Government sought to rationalize this situation in 1980 with the creation of the Ministry of Housing and by giving it control of three of the principal agencies for implementing housing projects (SNIT, CNEL and AFH), which are clearly interdependent.
3.09 SNIT is essentially a developer of housing projects. It has a current annual production of about 17,000 dwellings of which, the rural housing program for MOPF (13% of its activity); slum clearance projects (12%); CNEL and FOPROLOS related programs (67%); and a limited number of higher income and special projects (8%). Clearly its major function is as contractor for projects financed by CNEL. SNIT also was a land developer before AFH was created and still maintains a sizeable inventory of land for its projects; its land development role can be expected to diminish as AFH reaches a higher level of activity.
3.10 SNIT is a powerful institution - it is capable of building about 50% of all legally built housing and two-thirds of its activity is financed by CNEL or FOPROLOS. Its projects are still mostly "turnkey" (recently it started building expandable units) and costs are high by comparison with those of small contractors and those for houses built through self-help. SNIT has been growing relatively slowly, perhaps suggesting that it is reaching an operational plateau; it was reorganized in 1981 but results of that reorganization are not yet evident.
3.11 AFH, created in 1973, is the public sector land developer, acquiring, improving and disposing of housing sites. It has accumulated some 3,000 ha of land, over 80% of it in Tunis. It has serviced about 400 ha since its creation. Under the VIth Plan, it is expected to play a major role and to replace SNIT as the only public sector land developer for housing.
3.12 AFH's performance is improving but, in spite of its innovative approach, its financing formula (cash in advance) seems to have rapidly reached a ceiling. On the one hand, the pre-financing requirement of its activities by beneficiaries has resulted in a protracted period before the improved site can be delivered as a result of both of lengthy construction periods and time-consuming title clearing procedures. On the other, AFH's limited capital resources have not allowed it to constitute sufficient land reserves to respond to the demands of either the public or private sector. Furthermore, the necessity of paying cash in advance for a relatively large lot drains the resources of moderate income purchasers; as a result, they have often been forced to delay home construction on their serviced site for several years.
1/ Summarized from Annex One. - 20 -
3.13 CNEL is a public autonomous housing savings and loan agency created in 1974 to channel domestic savings into the production of housing. It is a well managed institution which has consistently shown a profit. It has been very effective on mobilizing resources - savings contracts having increased from zero to TD 80 million at the end of 1981. CNEL also manages FOPROLOS which is financed by a 2% wage tax destined to finance housing for those with salaries of up to one and a half times the SMIG.
3.14 Whereas CNEL has been effective in mobilizing resources, it has been less successful in channeling them into housing production,because of bottlenecks in the availability of serviced land (CNEL cannot finance land acquisition). This problem is likely to be exacerbated over the next few years as the rhythm of maturing savings contracts is going to accelerate precipitously from 4,000 in 1980 to over 20,000 in 1983. Moreover, CNEL's savings plans have not kept up with inflation (in spite of the introduction of FOPROLOS) and many subscribers, having completed their savings plans, find themselves unable to cover the costs of a turnkey house with the proceeds of their savings plan and available loan funds from CNEL.
3.15 Two other agencies are involved in the production of housing, the Soci6t6 de Promotion des Logements Sociaux (SPROLS), which develops rental housing and the Caisse Nationale de Retraite et de Prevoyance Sociale (CNRPS), which makes housing loans to its affiliated members. Both the rentals of SPROLS and the loans of CNRPS are subsidized but together, these agencies account for no more than 10% of housing production in Tunisia.
4. Land Acquisition and Project Development
3.16 The reorganization of the housing sector in 1974 (para. 3.02) was expected, amongst other things, to lead to an expansion and diversification of private sector activities and a general opening up of the housing sector. However, the interdependency between public agencies responsible for separate facets of housing programs perhaps prevented that from happening and also reinforced their inflexibility. Only a small portion of government aid to housing is channeled to private developers and individuals eligible for a loan, or for the purchase of an improved AFH lot.
3.17 As far as land development in the public sector is concerned, SNIT still has an important role to play and AFH has not yet reached a level of operations to replace SNIT. Private land developers are relatively inactive (the main reason cited is the highly competitive price of AFH lots) and therefore tend to concentrate on smaller scale operations, many of which consist of partially serviced and usually unsewered lots.
3.18 Finally, municipal governments have the power to develop land for public housing projects. With the exception of a limited number of slum clearance projects and improvements to older neighborhoods, that they carried out on their own, the municipalities generally rely on the national government and its specialized agencies. - 21 -
3.19 SNIT is still preeminent as a developer of housing. It owes this to its monopoly position in the field and its access to financial resources on favorable terms. Operationally, it is able to undertake projects equivalent to 50% of the housing plan's objectives. One of the perplexities of the sector in Tunisia is that private sector housing developers have remained small, accounting for a very reduced percentage of overall production and always in very modest projects (no more than 6 to 10 lots). Reasons may be unavailability of finance on reasonable terms and overly restrictive regulation by MOR.
3.20 The MOH licenses private developers to construct both private and public housing. Prior to 1975, there were only a dozen licensed developers; at present there are over 70. Their role is marginal, however, as they built only 3,700 dwellings whose value was less than 4% of housing investments. In most cases privately developed subsidized projects are undertaken on AFH land on behalf of either CNEL savers or the employees of such large public or semi-public agencies as SONEDE, STEG, the Societ4 Tunisienne de Banque, Tunis Air, etc.
3.21 The allocation of housing tasks among the various public and semi-public agencies as well as the coordination of activities and the monitoring of performance are, theoretically, the responsibility of the technical ministries, in liaison with MOPF. In actuality, programming and coordination is limited to the activities of the housing agencies proper (CNEL, AFH, SNIT, etc.) and there is only sporadic consultation between them and other line agencies (water, sanitation, health, education, transportation) or the local governments entrusted with the implementation of urban master plans. One of the main tasks of the new MOH will be to ensure better coordination among all those who contribute toward the initiation and execution of housing programs.
B. PRIVATELY FINANCED HOUSING
3.22 Between 1975 and 1980, the private sector constructed over 75% of new dwellings accounting for about 60% of total housing investment. This impressive performance is the result of the activities of small scale developers, of private firms that provide housing for their employees, and of individuals building their own home. This last group includes the informal sector which is building housing, without land subdivision or building permits, on the periphery of cities. The following analysis distinguishes between the private sector operating legally and squatter developments.
1. The "Legal" Private Sector
3.23 The delivery of building permits (Table 3.2) has been increasing at an annual rate of over 20% since 1975, peaking in 1979 when 18,600 permits were granted for the construction of 32,000 dwellings representing approximately 35% of total housing investment. In urban areas and in the coastal regions, the average area of dwellings in this category is relatively high (over 100m2), while small dwellings of 60-80m2 are built in the western - 22 - part of the country, the average size elsewhere varying between 80m2 and 100m2. Most housing developed by the "legal" private sector is of relatively low density (15-30 dwelling units per hectare) with a resulting high infrastructure development cost. This sector is largely self-financed and is, therefore, highly sensitive to the evolution of incomes and the propensity to save of various segments of the population. Assuming a 1980 cost of dwelling to be on the order of TD 4,600 and financing to be a 15 year loan at 10% interest resulting in a monthly shelter cost of TD 50, it would seem that only about 20% of the urban population I/ would be able to acquire housing through this sector.
Table 3.2; BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED, 1975-80 TOTAL AND PERCENT REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION
1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
Country Total 8,237 10,428 13,407 15,545 18,595 16,580
Regional Distribution (per cent) Northeast 30 26 30 32 32 35 Northwest 6 7 9 10 12 8 Center West 6 4 4 8 7 9 Center East 33 37 34 26 29 26 South 25 26 23 24 20 22
Total (%) 100 100 100 100 100 100
Source; MOPF.
2. The "Informal" Sector
3.24 Although illegal, insofar as it does not adhere to existing development standards and bureaucratic procedures and is often on land either owned by the Government or whose title is unknown, this sector is far from disorganized. In contrast to the shanty towns of the early 1970s, it develops large residential areas of good quality which are well maintained. These de facto residential zones are developed at high densities and without infrastructure or community facilities. The quality of construction is improving continually, in part because of the work of small builders who are motivated enough to take on jobs of any scale.
3.25 This type of housing is generally incremental: initially, a single room is built and the plot fenced in; at an estimated cost of TD 850, this minimum development is still on the order of 1.3 times the average annual income of these households. As resources become available or employment of the household head more stable, building materials are stockpiled in the courtyard. Finally, a permanent compound wall is built and the dwelling enlarged over a period of three to five years.
1/ See INS; Enquete Depenses Menageres, 1980. - 23 -
C. ACHIEVEMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS, 1975-80
1. Housing Targets of the Vth Plan
3.26 The housing targets of the Vth Plan (1977-81) provide a backdrop against which to measure the successes and failures of housing in the period 1975-80. Under the Vth Plan, national housing targets consisted of 125,000 dwelling units representing an investment of TD 600 million, 11 36% of which was to be financed by private savings. Levels of investment proposed by the Plan (Table 3.3) relate chiefly to macroeconomic indicators; 16% of the gross fixed capital formation (GFCF) of the country, in this case. National housing goals are therefore a frame of reference indicating the allocation of public and private investment for specific types of housing and uses rather than a specific prediction of an implementable program taking into account the supply and demand of both subsidized and unsubsidized housing.
2. Performance to 1980
3.27 According to mission findings, 314,000 dwellings and extensions, representing a total investment of TD 805 million, 2/ were constructed between 1975 and 1980. A breakdown, by type of producer, is given in Table 3.4. Five main comments are in order.
3.28 First, in spite of the fact that it exceeded targets by about 25%, housing investment in Tunisia has tended to be relatively low, averaging 4.3% of GDP, and has tended to fall in recent years relative to the mid-1970s. It is generally on the order of 5% of GDP in countries whose economy is comparable to that of Tunisia. Furthermore, the share of housing as a percentage of GFCF fluctuates considerably, from a high of 17.7% in 1975 to a low of 13.8% in 1978. The annual growth of 11.9% of housing investment was lower than the 14.7% annual growth rate of GFCF, indicating a substantial fall off in housing investment at a time when total investments were growing rapidly.
3.29 Second, the effectiveness of the public sector's participation in the production of housing is obscured by its triple role of developer, lender, and subsidizer. As a developer, it controlled 42% of housing investment and produced 26% of new housing (Table 3.4). As a lender, it provided financing equivalent to 8.7% of total housing investments, its direct subsidies being equal to an additional 5.2% (See Table 3.5).
3.30 Third, the ability of the private sector to finance housing construction is substantial. In publicly assisted programs, it averages 28% of housing costs and 89% in non-assisted housing. Over 90% of the TD 517 million financed by the private sector was the direct contribution of households acquiring their own home; as a group, they were responsible for 64%
1/ In current TD. 2/ In constant 1980 TD. - 24 -
Table 3.3; HOUSING GOALS OF THE VTH PLAN (1977-81)
Investments in Item Number % Millions of current TD % I. Dwelling Units
Rural housing 40,000 32 52.0 9 Suburban housing 25,000 20 90.0 15 Low-cost housing 55,900 45 379.0 63 Luxury housing 4,100 3 79.0 13 TOTAL 125,000 100 600.0 100
Millions of current TD % II. Sources of Financing
-- Self-financing (individual savings and other services) 213.8 36 -- Contribution by government 66.6 11 -- FOPROLOS special fund 49.2 8 -- Contributions by social security organizations 72.7 12 -- CNEL assistance 174.2 29 -- Foreign credit 8.5 1 -- Bank credit 15.0 3 600.0 100
Source; MOPF. of total housing finance between 1975 and 1980. This represents an annual propensity to invest domestic savings in housing equal to 3% of GDP; Conversely, private banks are essentially inactive in housing finance, their loans, primarily to developers, being equal to only 1.6% of housing investment between 1975 and 1980.
3.31 Fourth, no less than 50% of urban dwellings and 60% of rural dwellings were built in the informal sector between 1975 and 1980. Yet, this sector accounted for only 25% of total housing investment between 1975 and 1980. This is due not only to low construction costs but also to the fact that additional housing investments are delayed for extensive periods due to insecurity of tenure as well as economic reasons. Although information on household incomes in informal housing is scanty, it appears to be on the order of TD 53 per month, -/ just above the twentieth percentile of the income
1/ Median monthly household incomes in selected informal settlements were estimated as follows in 1981; Tunis (Ettadhamen) - TD 67; Jendouba - TD 54; Le Kef - TD 28; Kairouan - TD 41; Sidi Bouzid - TD 45; Gafsa - TD 53; Gabes - TD 54; Medenine - TD 53. (SOTUETEC Survey and World Bank Third Urban Development Project. Preappraisal Mission Report) - 25 -
Table 3.4; HOUSING INVESTMENT, BY TYPE OF PRODUCER, MID-1975 TO MID-1980
Total Relative Share Average Investment (%) Number Unit (Millions of of Producer Housing of Cost of Construc- Invest- Category Type Dwellings (TD) 1980 TDs) tion ment
Public Sector 1. (a) SNIT Rural 42,120 1,500 63.18 13.4 7.8 (b) Suburban 14,310 4,200 60.10 4.6 7.5 (c) Low Cost 15,860 7,000 111.02 5.0 13.8 (d) Luxury 2,440 16,000 39.04 0.8 4.9 Subtotal /a 74,730 3,657 273.34 23.8 34.0
2. CNRPS Rental 1,050 13,000 13.65 0.3 1.7
3. SPROLS Rental 2,100 7,500 15.83 0.7 1.9
4. Li- censed Devel- Miscel- opers laneous 3,577 10,000 35.77 1.2 4.4
5. Total Public Urban /b 39,337 6,910 275.41 12.2 34.2 Sector Rural /c 42,120 1,500 63.18 13.4 7.8 Subtotal Public: 81,457 4,208 338.59 25.6 42.0
Private Sector 6. Legal Private Urban 58,265 4,600 268.02 18.6 33.4 Sector Rural 6,135 700 4.29 1.9 0.1
7. In- formal Private Urban 95,418 1,500 143.13 30.4 17.8 Sector Rural 72,740 700 50.92 23.2 6.3 Subtotal Private: 232,558 2,005 466.36 74.1 58.0
GRAND TOTALS; Country Total 314,015 2,560 804.95 100.0 100.0 of which: Total Urban 193,020 3,557 686.56 61.5 85.3 Total Rural 120,995 980 118.39 38.5 14.7
/a 1980 data estimated; actual data are 85,325 dwellings for a total investment of TD 279.27 million, but since no breakdown was available, original data are left. Principal result is that average cost of each unit is somewhat lower. Overall orders of magnitude remain unchanged. /b From lines 1 (b) (c) (d); 2, 3, 4. /c From line 1 (a).
Source: Bank estimates. Table 3.5: HOUSINGFlNANCINE, 1975-80 (IN MIILIONS(F 1980 TD)
Social Security Private Organi- Private Sector Producer Public Public Public FOPRO(DS CNEL zation Bank Foreign Self- Total Number of Category Loans Subsidies Bonuses Loans Loans Financing Loans Loans Financing Invesbtent Dwellings
Public Sector - Hcme Ownership
- Rural SNIT 33.48 23.38 ------6.32 63.18 42,120 - Slun Relocation .50 .30 - - .60 - - - -. 40 1.80 420 - Suburban SNIT 8.79 3.61 1.13 5.01 17.37 - - 5.00 /a 17.39 58.30 13,890 - Low-cost MIT 27.24 - 2.17 .97 47.34 - - - 33.30 111.02 15,860
- Lbxry NT - - - - 9.74 - - 9.00 /b 20.30 39.04 2,440
Subtotal: 70.01 27.29 3.30 5.98 75.05 /c - - 14.00 77.71 273.34 74,730
Public Sector - Rental Program
- CNRPS & SPRlLS - - - - - 29.48 - - - 29.48 3,150
Private Sector - Licensed
Developers - - - - 6.60 - - 6.90 22.27 35.77 3,577
- Other Private - 11.40 /d - - 3.20 21.10 13.00 - 417.66 466.36 232,558
TCTAL 70.01 38.69 3.30 5.98 84.85 50.58 13.00 20.90 517.64 804.95 314,015
% of Distribution 8.7 4.8 0.4 0.7 10.5 6.3 1.6 2.6 64.4 100.0
/a USALIDLoan. /b Abu Dhabi Loan. /c Includes TD 7.5 million of unallocated investment. /d Estimated. Note; Subcategories of producer differ slightly from those shown in Table 3.4. - 27 - distribution of urban households estimated by the INS. With construction costs rising at about 13% per annum, it is understandable that investments generated by this sector have been small.
3.32 Fifth, unit costs vary widely with the informal, unregulated sector constructing dwelling units at an average cost of TD 850 (excluding land) and suburban housing costing an average of TD 7,000 (including infrastructure and land). Self-help construction is generally half as expensive as the cheapest types built by large contracting firms and about 40% cheaper than that of small firms. The cost of housing construction (materials and labor) have increased from an index of 100 in 1973 to 246 at the beginning of 1981 for Tunisia, or an annual growth rate of 13.7%. Complete series of data are not available but analysis of costs in building permits confirms this trend. Costs of construction in TD per m2 grew at a rate of 10.5% for Tunisia and 15.3% for Tunis between 1975-80:
1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 Tunisia 47.0 54.0 61.0 69.9 76.5 77.4 Tunis 49.0 70.0 70.0 79.3 100.0 100.0
These growth rates decline starting in 1976 except for 1978 when there were severe shortages of cement. The recent price stability is due to surplus capacity in the construction sector resulting from the decrease in public building and hotel projects.
3. Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects
3.33 The achievements of Tunisia's housing sector must be measured in qualitative as well as quantitative terms. Quantitatively, although surpassing Vth Plan targets by 25%, housing programs still failed to meet the incremental demand. As stated above, the net housing increment in urban areas has been smaller than the combination of demolition, new family formation and net migration, resulting in a short-fall that is clearly reflected the growing percentage of families living in one-room units or having to share a dwelling. While the situation in rural areas has been improving, largely as a result of continued out-migration, neither the public nor the private sector has been capable of supplying an adequate number of urban units in spite of the concentration of 85% of housing investment in cities.
4. Equity Issues
3.34 The ability of current public programs to address the housing needs of lower income households is difficult to assess in the absence of accurate disaggregated household income data and information on the propensity to save at various income levels. However, it is possible to reconstruct indicators of need that can be compared with the various levels of subsidization proposed by public programs. Population groups targeted by programs vary considerably; yet, all programs, except those intended for rural or slum relocation housing, anticipate an equity of over TD 1,000. Median household incomes in urban areas are on the order of TD 1,450 per annum, and 75% of state aided housing constructed between 1975 and 1980 was not intended for low-income households. - 28 -
3.35 A further exploration of the evolution of urban household incomes since 1975 highlights the discrepancy between government programs and housing assistance needs. Table 3.6 compares the monthly expenditures of households, by expenditure groups, in 1975 and 1980.1/ A marked improvement has clearly taken place in the incomes of the lowest 60% of households whose revenues rose much faster than the cost of living index that was increasing at 5 - 6% per annum over the same period. There has similarly been a reduction in the percentage of urban households living below the absolute poverty threshold; that is, the "local cost of minimum nutritional and non-food requirements." 2/ The ability of the lowest quintiles to acquire housing is, however, sharply limited by both their ability to save the equity required as well as by their limited residual resources, once basic nutritional,
Table 3.6; MONTHLY EXPENDITURES OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS BY QUINTILE (IN CURRENT TD)
Distribution of Households 1975 1980 Change (%)
Lowest 20% Under 30 Under 45 50.0 20 - 40% 30 - 46 45 - 72 59.0 40 - 60% 46 - 71 45 - 72 59.0 60 - 80% 71 - 115 110 - 145 55.5 Top 20% Over 115 Over 145 26.1 Yedian 55.56 87.0 56.6
% Below Absolute Poverty Threshold 20.0 17.1
Sources; INS, Household Consumption Survey, 1975 and 1980. World Bank, Tunisia; Social Aspects of Development, 1980. clothing and transportation needs have been met. For the two lowest quintiles, it is estimated that average monthly housing expenditures vary between TD 6.5 and TD 15.4, depending on household size (Table 3.7), of which, according to the detailed cross-tabulations of the 1975 Consumption Survey, 56% are non-rent or rent-equivalent expenditures - fuel, maintenance, and household goods. The residual of TD 4-9 is minimal, even under the most favorable home ownership program.
1/ Ibid., pp. 9-14. In 1975, the average urban household of 6.56 persons required an income of TD 43 to rise above the absolute poverty threshold. In 1980, the corresponding figure was TD 58. 2/ On the use of expenditures as a valid analogue for income, see World Bank, Tunisia - Social Aspects of Development (Report 2950-TUN, June 18, 1980), Annex I. - 29 -
Table 3.7; HOUSING EXPENDITURES OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS (PERCENT OF TOTAL EXPENDITURES)
Household 1 - 3 4 - 5 6 - 7 8 + Expenditures Persons Persons Persons Persons
Lowest 20% 26.3% 26.5% 24.7% 21.6% 20 - 40% 26.2 26.4 24.6 21.5 40 - 60% 23.1 23.2 21.6 18.9 60 - 80% 23.9 24.1 22.4 19.7 Top 80% 37.4 37.6 34.7 30.6
Source: Calculated from INS, Consumption Survey, 1975.
3.36 The propensity to save in the form of financial assets of various income groups can be assessed, at least in part, on the basis of CNEL's housing savings contracts and the value of accounts deposited with the National Savings Bank of Tunisia (CENT). As shown, in Table 3.8, the value of savings deposits has more than tripled between 1975 and 1980 and has, in fact, risen annually about 2.5 times faster than GDP. It is clear, however, from the characteristics of participants in CNEL programs, that lower income groups have participated marginally in its savings programs. A comparison between the average incomes of CNEL participants and the income distribution of urban households in the second half of the 1970s, when the bulk of CNEL contracts were underwritten, indicates that the propensity to save (at least on an institutional basis) is considerable in the fourth and fifth quintiles, small in the third, and marginal for the lowest 40%. As such, the most successful government housing program, as measured by the number of dwelling units financed, is beyond the reach of a majority of the urban population. Nonetheless, it should be noted that at least 50% of CNEL's participants have an income of less than the 1980 minimum wage.
Table 3.8: VALUE OF SAVINGS ACCOUNTS .1974-80) (IN MILLIONS OF TDSj
CNEL CENT TOTAL 1974 0.2 22.0 22.2 1975 4.4 30.6 35.0 1976 14.2 37.3 51.5 1977 25.8 41.5 67.3 1978 40.0 48.9 88.9 1979 54.7 57.5 112.2 1980 62.9 65.7 128.6
Source: CNEL and Banque Centrale. - 30 -
3.37 The inability to reach lower income households raises four main questions as to the suitability of current programs.
3.38 First, with the exception of the rural housing program, 98% of beneficiaries of public sector housing programs have been government civil servants and middle- and upper-income individuals. Public resources have been allocated primarily in order to allow them housing whose cost and quality was often beyond their means.
3.39 Second and paradoxically, the public sector may have over-invested while unable to meet the goals it had set for itself. Thus, while the funds allocated would have been sufficient to meet Plan targets, albeit with smaller units, the standards selected for publicly aided housing were set at a level which inevitably engendered slippages. For example, 34% of SNIT-built housing during the period of the Vth Plan were, in fact, carry-overs from the IVth Plan as a result of various implementation problems. While it is possible to state unequivocally that public financing was not a constraint per se, the thrust and characteristics of housing programs have restricted their impact by focussing on a small segment of the population. The very success of the public sector as financier and developer on behalf of a relatively well-off clientele has forced it to continuously expand its activities and preempt a larger portion of the resources available for housing. The rising demand on CNEL, SPROLS and CNRPS may already be overstraining their financial and administrative capabilities.
3.40 Third, in contrast to the profusion of capital available to public and semi-public housing developers, the private sector has had to self-finance over 85% of its investments. The lack of importance of private developers in Tunisia thus is partially a consequence of the preemption of long-term financing by public and semi-public developers.
3.41 Fourth, as a result, a household not eligible for subsidies has to save for about ten years in order to build a dwelling that is less expensive and/or of a lower quality than a household, with similar income, is able to finance through CNEL in four years. Therefore, for those unable to participate in government programs, there is little choice but to acquire housing through the informal sector which, escaping land development and construction regulations, allows a spreading out of individual investment through incremental construction.
5. Environmental Issues
3.42 The environmental deterioration of Tunisian cities is due, in part at least, to the repercussions of public housing programs. On the one hand, the low density at which they are developed preempts most of the serviced sites available; on the other, their high quality and cost puts them beyond the means of that very segment of the population, the rural migrants, which is the major generator of the incremental urban housing demand. Although government programs have managed to successfully marshall the savings of moderate income households towards the production of a substantial number of high quality dwellings, they have been less successful in addressing the more difficult - 31 - problem of providing mass housing at acceptable sanitary standards. This has been due, to a considerable extent, to structural and institutional problems that transcend the approach of public programs that have traditionally stressed aid to the financing of housing as well as the norms it must meet.
3.43 Tunisia's urban environmental problems are mainly due to other factors:
(i) The lack of coordination among the investment programs of the state monopolies responsible for the urban infrastructure and for the provision of housing sites: SONEDE, ONAS, STEG and AFH. At the local level, there has been a persistent inability of physical plans to anticipate the rate and localization of development and provide the necessary public facilities.
(ii) The ambiguous responsibilities of municipal governments which, coupled with the paucity of their financial resources, has prevented them from controlling the growth of informal settlements or taking an active role in providing serviced site and rehabilitating substandard areas.
3.44 In conclusion, it appears that the underlying housing problem in Tunisia is the lack of serviced residential sites in urban areas rather than the inability of a significant portion of the population to house itself. Had affordable, small, serviced lots been available to the private sector, there would have been an impressive improvement in the quality as well as quantity of the urban housing stock.
IV. HOUSING DEMAND AND SUPPLY TO THE END OF THE VITH PLAN
A. OVERVIEW
4.01 The main findings of this chapter indicate that, first, Tunisian national housing investments (public and private sectors) as a whole from mid-1980 to end of the VIth Plan in 1986 are expected to range between TD 1.55 and TD 1.73 billion (constant 1980 prices), or from 21% to 24% of gross fixed capital formation (GFCF) if demand is to be fully met. This is a substantially higher rate than the 16% that prevailed from 1975-80. Public sponsored housing investment would account for about 48-53% the total, up from the 42% over the 1975-80 period. The second and corollary finding is that the public sector will be unable to meet the housing needs of about half the 1980-86 incremental urban demand: this raises a fundamental question as to the appropriateness of current housing policy, both in terms of the housing standards and costs involved, and of the income groups it purports to assist; it also shifts responsibility for addressing housing needs in large part to the private sector.
4.02 These findings as to total investments are based on two alternative projections of housing demand from mid-1980 through 1986, and on comparable calculations on the supply side (including the supply of serviced land). These estimates of course also have to be considered against the preliminary estimates of the VIth Plan itself (1982-86), and can be further disaggregated - 32 - by income levels, and into urban/rural, regional, and public/private (formal and informal) components. 1/
B. HOUSING DEMAND
1 The Projections
4,03 In order to measure the effectiveness of current housing policy the imbalances between public programs and shifting patterns of demand (both geographically and socioeconomically) of the later 1970s were projected to 1986. The results of two alternative projections of housing demand are displayed in Table 4.1. Each projection separated new families formed by marriage, and migrant households. Specifically, housing demand was estimated separately for new families formed by marriage and for migrant households moving to cities. This approach allows the manipulation of the resulting crude demand in a variety of ways reflecting alternative assumptions as to overcrowding, household income, participation in public programs, and means of financing and building housing. Crude governorate marriage rates were applied to net urban and rural populations annually to calculate the formation of new families. Migrant households were divided into two broad categories: households headed by a young male (18-25 years), which were estimated to have an average size of three persons and those headed by males over 25 years of age, with an average size of 5.7. The underlying assumption in this methodology is that the bulk of rural migrant households consist of nuclear families at the time of the original move to the city. Taking into account a substantial number of single-status males (half of the 18-25 years group), the dependency ratio for migrants came out at 3.5. Young, single migrants were, however, incorporated into the urban population used to calculate the formation of new families. 2/
4.04 The key difference between the projections is the treatment of migration, with Projection A being essentially a continuation of past trends, and Projection B taking into account both the magnitude of the rural out-migration and its regional allocation to urban destinations, as related to the sectoral investments proposed and located in the VIth Plan. As the urban implications for families and households are of particular significance, they are given special attention in the paragraphs in this section. The discussion returns to national investment (urban and rural, public and private) in the final section of the chapter.
4.05 The redirection of net migratory flows highlights evolving regional, especially urban demand: Table 4.2 displays the percentage regional apportionment of urban housing demand by families under the two projections, compared with the 1975-80 construction experience. The South and the Center-West account for 30% of urban housing demand under Projection B, while the Northwest remains rapidly urbanizing; the drop in demand from that of 1975-80 for those regions implied under Projection A appears questionable.
1/ Detailed supporting data will be found in Appendix A, Tables C-10 to C-12. 2/ See Note 1, para. 2.02 for definitions of households, dwelling units, families and nuclear families. See also note b to Table 4.1. - 33 -
Table 4.1; PROJIEClIWOF IUN(fAL HUtEI DMAN), MID-1980 T1 END1986 a/
PFRQ0 IrT0N"A"' PROJECTION'"B" Fanily Migrant Dwelling Fanily Migrant DweUirU Forma- House- Equiva- Forma- House- Equiva- Pe1gion tion holds Total lents /b tion holds Total lents /b
TILS 51,000 68,740 119,740 98,410 59,490 80,270 139,760 114,860 NlRlHEAST 56,190 31,110 87,300 78,020 55,370 25,780 81,150 72,620 Urban 28,340 31,110 59,450 50,170 30,860 25,780 56,640 48,800 Rural 27,850 - 27,850 27,850 24,510 - 24,510 23,820 NCRIBST 58,240 21,340 79,580 72,490 60,150 35,140 95,290 86,345 Urban 18,170 21,340 39,510 35,390 20,210 35,140 55,350 49,365 Rural 40,070 - 40,070 37,100 39,940 - 39,940 36,980 MER EAST 49,430 33,170 82,600 78,670 48,160 23,520 71,680 68,740 Urban 33,180 33,170 66,350 62,730 33,860 23,52D 57,380 54,720 Rural 16,250 - 16,250 15,90 14,300 - 14,300 14,820 CENIERWEST 50,440 18,800 69,240 67,380 50,560 38,550 89,110 85,290 Urban 14,590 18,800 33,390 31,530 16,800 38,550 55,350 51,530 Rural 35,850 - 35,850 35,850 33,760 - 33,760 33,760 SFAX 30,810 18,310 49,120 47,610 38,490 460 38,950 38,910 Urban 17,520 18,310 35,830 34,320 26,940 460 27,400 27,360 Rural 13,290 - 13,290 13,290 11,550 - 11,550 11,550 SamIEI 48,980 34,030 83,010 77,820 66,360 46,870 113,230 106,080 Urban 22,460 34,030 56,490 51,300 39,950 46,870 86,820 79,670 Rural 26,520 - 26,520 26,520 26,410 - 26,410 26,410 (UNY TAL 345,090 225,500 570,590 520,400 378,580 250,590 629,170 572,840 Urban 185,260 225,500 410,760 363,850 228,110 250,590 478,700 426,300 Rural 159,830 - 159,830 156,550 150,470 - 150,470 146,540 a/ This period is larger than that of the VIth Plan (1982-86). b/ A dxellirg unit equivalent ws calculated for both urban and rural areas, to reflect the prevalence of nulti-family occupancy of dwellings. For migrant households, regional occuparcy ratios for ne- and two-roo units were used for rw families formed over the projection period.
Source; Based on 1NS and mission demographic estimates.
Table 4.2: 1ERCENTEKAU1OC=TION OF IRBANH)EIBI DBMAID BY RBEION, 1980-86, UM)EF ALTERI P0JECTIONS, AND1975-80 KtUAL O0DETRULTICN
1975-80 1980-86 Daind Regio Construction Projection A Projection B
Tunis 24.1 29.3 29.4 Northeast 13.1 14.5 11.9 Northyest 11.8 9.4 11.4 Center-East 14.4 16.1 11.9 Center4kst 9.6 8.1 11.5 Sfax 9.4 8.8 5.7 South 17.6 13.9 18.2
Source; Bank estimates. - 34 -
4.06 Urban income implications are significant. The distribution of urban families by income level shown in Table 4.3 permits a categorization of housing demand to evaluate the effectiveness of current housing programs. The projections assume that household incomes grow at the same rates as expenditures -- that is, 6.7% per annum in constant 1980 prices; that the income distribution remains essentially stable between 1980 and 1986; and that there are no substantial variations in dwelling occupancy rates during the projection period. About 40% of the increment in urban families are likely to have incomes of under TD 62 per month, the 1980 value of the SMIG (minimum guaranteed wage), while 64% will have incomes of less than TD 100. This increase is the direct consequence of the substantial migration that is expected to occur over the period 1980-86.
Table 4.3; URBAN FAMILIES BY INCOME DISTRIBUTION 1980 AND ALTERNATIVE PROJECTIONS TO 1986
Projection A Projection B Monthly Income 1980 1986 Change 1986 Change (1980 TD)
Under TD 30 37,400 104,400 67,000 110,200 72,800
TD 30-60 99,800 204,900 105,100 220,400 120,600
TD 61-100 187,000 278,400 91,400 297,500 110,500
TD 101-145 99,800 157,200 57,400 165,400 65,600
TD 146-240 112,200 164,500 52,300 176,400 64,200
Over TD 240 87,300 124,900 37,600 132,300 45,000
TOTAL 623,500 1,034,300 410,800 /a 1,102,200 478,700 /b
/a Equivalent to 363,850 dwelling units: see Table 4.1 /b Equivalent to 426,300 dwelling units: see Table 4.1
Source: Bank estimates.
4.07 The transformation of the housing demand of urban families (Table 4.4) into the housing demand of urban households is complicated by the prevalence of multi-family households, particularly among lower-income families. A sliding scale of occupancy ratios (1.18-1.0) was applied, reflecting the multiple occupancy patterns documented by the 1980 INS housing survey. Further, in order to balance the supply and demand portions of the housing equation, it is necessary to add to the demand side 68,000 households currently on government program waiting lists who will have moved into a new - 35 - unit by the end of the projection period. The waiting lists include an estimated 29,300 suburban and 24,800 moderate cost CNEL subscribers and additional 13,300 households currently waiting for units provided by FOPROLOS or the social security agencies. These households have been allocated by income group, to the categorical demand lines in Table 4.4, and subsequent calculations. Account is also taken of demolition in the projections. Around a third of the 1980-86 incremental urban housing demand is attributable to households whose total income is below the 1980 SMIG, depending upon the projection used.
C. HOUSING SUPPLY
4.08 Projections for total housing production, public and private, under the alternative projections of total urban household demand are displayed in Table 4.4.
1. Projections for the Public Sector
4.09 Estimates of urban public housing production for the period 1980-86 were based on;
(i) operations started before 1982;
(ii) CNEL savings contracts reaching maturity;
(iii) the growing pool of FOPROLOS funds; and
(iv) SNIT operations following the same growth pattern as 1975-80.
On the basis of these data, the mission estimated that about 121,000 units would be constructed by the public sector. The degourbification program is excluded from this analysis since for every unit constructed, one is demolished. Inasmuch as those moving into publicly-financed housing vacate units (and are therefore not part of the incremental demand), there is an assumed additional effect as the vacated housing becomes available to other families. This substitution effect results in about 110,000 units being freed, accounting for the total of 231,000 urban units shown in Table 4.4.
2. Role of the Private Sector
4.10 Likely private sector activity can be ascertained, in part, from past performance between 1975 and 1980. While private developers will provide housing to upper income households, low- and middle-income households are likely to continue to rely on the spontaneous activities of the informal sector. At present, two-thirds of the housing construction effort theoretically demanded of the private sector falls on the lowest third of the family income distribution curve. The magnitude of its future activities, as well as the income groups it can reach, can be estimated from the characteristics of one of the sites selected for the proposed Third Urban Project in Tunisia, Ettadhamen, where population grew by 41% from 1975 to 1981. Although the bulk of the households surveyed (71%), reported monthly - 36 -
incomes of between TD 30 and 100, nearly 25% had incomes greater than 100 dinars while few very-low income families lived in the area. Applying the same income distribution to the informal private sector contributions and assigning the balance to either the legal construction sector or to an "unmet need" pool, depending on income, it is possible to depict a probable scenario (Table 4.4) which results in total private sector activity ranging from 261,700 to 321,900 units under the two projections.
Table 4.4; URAMNBDUSEI PR(C)UCITIONBYMCNIfY IUXXE, PUBLICAND PRIVATE SETIORS, UNDER ALTEBNATIVE PROJECTIOi OF TOTALUIfN HOUSEHOIDDE2AD, MID-1980 TO ENDOF 1986 (NUA2BEROF BDUSEHOIDS/UNITS)
Monthlv IixcIoe in 1980 TD Under 30 30-60 61-100 101-145 146-240 Over 240 Total
PRECTICN A
Total demand 64,300 106,000 124,700 87,400 66,600 43,300 492,300 Public Programs Ia 1,300 25,800 90,300 59,200 36,100 17,900 230,600 Private Sector 63,000 80,200 34,400 28,200 30,500 25,4C0 261,700 LegalDevelopxtent - - - 5,800 24,300 22,900 53,000 Informal Developinnt /b 3,300 25,000 30,800 22,400 6,200 2,500 90,200 Utmet Need /c 59,700 55,200 3,600 - - - 118,500
PROJECTIONB
Total demand 69,200 118,500 141,800 94,800 77,500 50,700 552,500 Public Programs /a 1,300 21,100 95,500 58,000 37,100 17,600 230,600 Private Sector 67,900 97,400 46,300 36,800 40,400 33,100 321,900 Legal Development - - - 2,400 32,400 29,800 69,600 Informal Development /b 4,300 32,200 39,700 2,940 8,000 3,300 116,900 Uaaet Need /c 69,600 65,200 6,600 - - - 135,400
/a Includes substitution effect of public prograns. Variations in filtering of stock due to incane distribution in each projection. /b Informal development at Ettadhann standard. /i" '"net need" is defined as households whose size-inccne characteristics result in housing solutions at a lower standard, either through new construction or rentals.
Note; See text discussion (para. 4.07) for basis of calculation of total urban households/units.
Sources; Appendix Tables C.10 and C.l1. - 37 -
4.11 The unmet need of 118-135,000 units - that is, the housing required by very-low income families in the two projections - will be satisfied in a variety of ways. The incidence of multi-family households may continue to increase, as it did between 1975 and 1980; a larger proportion of households with incomes in the TD 30-60 range may build in informal settlements, thereby reducing the quality of structures in these areas since their income is barely sufficient to construct a minimum shelter of concrete blocks; there may be a resurgence in the building of rudimentary shelters occupying land illegally on the urban fringe.
4.12 The ability of the urban housing stock to absorb a greater number of families is questionable insofar as occupancy ratios are already high, especially among lower-income groups. Assuming that it could rise slightly to, say, 1.2 families per dwelling and that new dwellings for middle-income households might be partially sublet and reach an occupancy ratio of 1.12, housing would be provided for an additional 18,000 tenant families, or only 13-15% of the unmet need. It is therefore reasonable to assume that self-housing solutions will gain in importance over the coming years.
3. Land and Services Implications
4.13 The large number of dwellings to be constructed by the drivate sector between 1980 and 1986 (up to 321,900 units under Projection B in Table 4.5, or 58% of total housing construction over the period) raises the issue of the availability of an adequate supply of serviced land. AFH is expected to provide some 2,500 hectares of serviced land by the end of the VIth Plan. With the exception of 46,400 dwelling units, most of which will be constructed by SNIT on its own serviced plots, all public programs will have to be accommodated on AFH sites, the balance, if any, becoming available for private development.
4.14 Although AFH will be able to provide public programs with an adequate number of serviced sites throughout the country (the slight shortages in the Center-East and Sfax regions being easily remedied by increasing the density of publicly sponsored projects to 30 and 33 dwellings per hectare), its ability to meet private sector requirements varies widely. In the northern regions, the availability of some 1,200 hectares of serviced land beyond the combined requirements of public programs and the legal private sector will be of little assistance in meeting the housing needs of the 90 - 117,000 households who rely on informal development to meet their housing need: without additional assistance, the price of improved land is beyond the means of the 80% whose monthly income is below TD 60 at current standards. In the central and southern regions, public programs will preempt all available AFH sites, leaving the private sector, both legal and informal, to fend for itself. Although a certain amount of legal development, particularly that for upper-income groups, will obviously occur on privately improved sites, this proportion will depend largely on the availability and capacity of secondary infrastructure networks. - 38 -
4. Regional Implications
4.15 Table 4.5 allocates regionally the 121,400 dwelling units that are likely to be constructed by the end of 1986 with financing provided under the Vth and VIth Plans, on the basis of the governorate of residence of CNEL savers and the location of committed FOPROLOS programs. The discrepancies that are evident in all regions except Tunis, where 48% of all publicly assisted housing is concentrated, underline the consequences of shifting migratory movements on the formulation of a housing strategy. Current programs reflect past demand estimates: as in 1975-80, when it received 90% of government programs, the coastal plain accounts for over 80% of public assisted housing while the Northwest, Center-West, and the South, regions where the rate of urbanization started to pick up momentum in the late 1970s, and which are expected to account for 40% of the incremental urban population by 1986, receive less than 20% of government programs.
Table 4.5: REGIONAL ALLOCATION OF PUBLIC PROGRAMS (1980-86) (NUMBER OF COMPLETED UNITS)
North- North- Center Center Category Tunis east west East West Sfax South
Suburban 20,000 4,600 3,800 5,800 2,100 3,700 1,700 Moderate Cost 16,100 3,700 3,000 4,700 1,700 2,900 1,400 FOPROLOS 11,900 2,700 2,200 3,500 1,300 2,200 1,000 Rental 10,700 2,500 -- 3,000 2,500 2,000 700 Total 58,700 13,500 9,000 17,000 7,600 10,800 4,800 T(% (48.4) (11.1) (7.4) (14.0) (6.3) (8.9) (4.0)
Incremental Housing Demand /a Projection A 157,300 69,100 43,700 78,200 37,400 44,900 61,700 (%) (32.0) (14.0) (8.9) (15.9) (7.6) (9.1) (12.5)
Projection B 175,500 66,500 57,800 69,600 56,900 37,400 88,800 (%) (31.8) (12.0) (10.5) (12.6) (10.3) (6.8) (16.1)
/a From Table 4.4. See text discussion (para. 4.07) for basis of calculation.
Note: Exclusive of 21,800 units for relocatees from the d6gourbification program. Based on governorates of residence of CNEL savers and operational projections of CNRPS and SPROLS. - 39 -
4.16 The disparity between regional demand and public programs can be ascertained by matching the income distribution of the urban population and the total supply provided by public programs and the turnover of the housing stock they will induce. Significant regional variations exist in both the percentage of total demand met by government programs and their ability to meet the housing needs of particular income groups. _1 In Tunis, the induced impact of public programs is sufficient to meet 64% of total housing needs, only the very poor, with incomes below TD 60 per month, not being reached effectively. Indeed, were it not for CNEL's role as a state-run housing savings institution, it could be argued that current policy was detrimental to legal private developers whose activities are expected to fall to 7% of total and 20% of privately financed housing construction. On the other hand, the legal private sector is expected to be most active in the Northeast and the South (30% of private construction), Sfax (27%), and the Center-West (18%).
4.17 The greatest percentage of spontaneous construction is likely to be in the South, the Northwest and the Center-West (60% or more of total construction), followed by the Center-East and the Northeast (43-46%) and Sfax (33%). The lower rated projected in Tunis (29%) is at variance with past experience. In 1975-80, Tunis accounted for the greatest amount of spontaneous development, and together with the Northeast, accounted for a third of this sector's activity. Qualitative differences occur as well. In the Northeast and the South, informal housing solutions are expected to be selected by a broad spectrum of income groups as a result of the inadequacy of public programs relative to demand; in other regions, it is anticipated that only the poor will resort to spontaneous housing, of low quality, as the substitution effect and filtering of public programs satisfy the needs of moderate income families.
D. HOUSING INVESTMENT, 1980-86
1. Total Investment
4.18 On the assumption that demand is fully met, and on the basis of mid-1980 constant TD, national (that is, including rural as well as urban) investment in housing over the period 1980-86 would be in the following range:
Units TD millions Category Projection A Projection B Projection A (%) Projection B (%)
Public sector: (urban and rural) 200,100 200,100 828 (53.4) 828 (47.9)
Private urban: of which " legal" 53,000 69,600 425 (27.4) 558 (32.3) "informal" 208,700 252,300 188 (12.1) 238 (13.8)
Private rural: 156,600 146,500 110 (7.1) 103 (6.0) Total: 618,400 668,500 1,551 (100.0) 1,727 (100.0)
1/ See Appendix A, Tables C-10 (Projection A) and C-l1 (Projection B). - 40 -
4.19 Taken as a whole, housing investments to 1986 are cherefore expected to range between TD 1.55 and TD 1.73 billion, or 21-24% of GFCF if demand is to be met fully. This is a substantially higher rate than the 16% that prevailed in 1975-80. It should also be noted that publicly sponsored housing investment would account for from 48% to 53% of total housing investment, up from 40% over the 1975-80 period (see Table 3.4). Yet, the public sector would be unable to assist the housing needs of about two-thirds of the 1980-86 incremental demand in spite of being by far the single largest contributor to the share of housing in the country's GFCF. This raises a fundamental question as to the appropriateness of current housing policy both in terms of the housing standards (and costs) that it has selected and of the income groups it has chosen to assist.
2. Public Sector Investment
4.20 Financing the 200,100 public sector dwellings at an estimated cost of TD 828 million would be shared among several participants; 36% of the investment would be assumed by CNEL and 25% by the several social security agencies; the Government would directly finance 23% of the investment while the remaining 16% would be provided by beneficiaries' equity. The Government's share would consist both of direct loans for rural housing built by SNIT(TD 47 millions) and for the degourbification program (TD 77.9 million) as well as of direct and indirect aids and subsidies to other programs. These items can be evaluated at around TD 67 millions, a 126% increase over the amount expended in 1975-80. For the most part, they are attributable to the bonuses granted to participants in the CNEL housing savings programs. The rapid rise expected for CNEL financed activities, due to the maturing of savings contracts, will increase the cost of the Government's contribution from TD 4.2 millions in 1975-80 to TD 24.3 million in 1980-86. The direct and indirect participation of the Government will amount to no less than 12-15% of total housing investment to 1986, well above the norm for most countries.
3. Private Sector Investment
4.21 Estimating private activity is hampered by lack of data on the one hand and is viewed by the authorities as somewhat beyond their domain. Yet, policy choices influence actions of the private sector. If for example, target markets and standards of public housing remain as at present, clearly there is a risk of resurgence of low quality, unserviced informal communities on the urban fringe as public programs do not effectively address the needs of low-income groups. During the period 1975-80, the private sector contributed almost 233,000 units for a total investment of about TD 466 million (see Table 3.4); for the period to the end of the VIth Plan we estimate about 418,000-468,000 private urban and rural units for an investment of TD 723-899 million (para. 4.18). These are magnitudes clearly too large to be treated as residuals and have implications for housing policy under the VIth Plan. Responsibility for providing housing will, it is clear, be shifted in large part to the private sector. - 41 -
V. POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.01 The analysis presented in this review has identified the factors -- notably those of population growth, migration, urbanization and regional imbalance -- which will shape the forces of supply and demand and form a challenge to which the Tunisian housing sector must respond over the next few years. The review also identifies opportunities for programmatic or institutional interventions which will assist the Tunisian authorities in addressing that challenge, and thus in enhancing the efficiency and the equity of shelter provision.
5.02 The following discussion summarizes the policy issues which arise from the interaction of the demand and supply sides of the housing equation. It then presents a series of recommendations to the Tunisian authorities that address the main constraints identified by the review with respect to land, financing, institutional and management issues, and technical and other matters, and which focus heavily on urban areas. The recommendations are summarized in Figure 5.1.
A. POLICY ISSUES
5.03 The main policy issues follow from the basic conclusion of the review that, given supply constraints, the capacities of both the public and the private sectors will be overextended if anticipated demand for housing is to be met through 1986 and beyond.
5.04 On the demand side, the key issues stem from;
(i) the rising urban housing demand resulting from migration, new household formation, rapid growth in real household income, the high proportion of upper income expenditure going to housing the special needs of low income groups (the 60% of urban households whose income is lower than TD 100 accounted for 52% of the 1980 urban population and will continue to grow through in-migration), especially those in urban fringe settlements;
(ii) the evolving regional housing demand patterns that are not congruent with government spatial investment policies, specifically with respect to the anticipated substantial concentration of low-quality spontaneous housing in the more rapidly urbanizing governorates of the South, the Northwest, and the Center-West;
(iii) together with rising urban housing demand there remains a current backlog of service provision, especially to informal urban fringe settlements; and
(iv) the overextension of the institutional and other capacities of both public and private sectors as a result of increasing demand. Figure 5.1: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARYOF FINDINGS l DEMANDCONSIDERATIONS F SUPPLY CONSIDERATIONS I R E C 0 M M E N D A T I 0 N S
| * rising urban housing I LAND | 1. To resolve the bottleneck in delivery of serviced land (i) AFH's procedures and programs I | demand resulting from; | should be reevaluated (ii) municipalities should play a greater role in land assembly l I -- migration | - supply of serviced | and delivery of sites. I - new household | land a main problem l | formation in face of expected | 2. Priority should be given to formulating a land policy that will be based on the government's | - rapid growth in rapid growth of I facilitating and capitalizing on the private sector's housing construction capability for | real household | housing demand the orderly development of sites. I income l l 3. Encourage municipalities to lay out sites and services areas before significant I l| I settlement occurs.
1 FINANCIAL | 4. Examine potential for diversifying CNEL's operations and making it into a comprehensive | -- need for savings | housing bank handling a variety of related issues. mobilization |*evolving regional | -need for financing |5. Review interest rates in the housing sector, as part of a general review of interestl | housing demand I various phases of | rate policy. I not congruent | urban development I with government I -- need equal treatment of I 6. Encourage potential home owners to take a conatruction loan, with the proceeds of which they I | spatial investment I civil servants, salariedl would construct their own dwellings or subcontract to a small contractor instead of buying l | policies I workers, and non- a turnkey project. salaried households I * rising demand for | -- need for separate and | 7. Strengthen loan programs for non-salaried households. | housing will in turn specialized financing | l I generate incremental | for lovr-incomehouse- 8. Continue to review FOPROLOS program with a view to (i) planning for use of its increasing as-I | demand for adequate I holds and middle-class sets and (ii) containing costs so that it can continue to serve the market it was crested for. supply of serviced l l__ | land while there is l l | current backlog of I INSTITUTIONAI | 9. Clarify the role of agencies concerned with physical planning. | urban service provision especially | -- need to assure supply 110. Review interrelationships between CNEL, AFH, and SNIT to Ci) give SNIT a more realistic | | to informal urban | of new units for home (reduced) role (ii) give AFH means to accomplish its share of VIth Plan (iii) encourage use | I fringe settlements | ownership | of CNEL's resources for financing more private sector development. Also, review role of l -- need to strengthen I national infrastructure companies with reference to housing sector institutions. l * demand for housing I institutional capacity l | will overextend I generally I11. Reinforce structure for carrying out upgrading projects and identify a specific program l institutional and l J for action.
other capacities of l T | both private and | TECHNICAL/OTHER :12. Standardized information-gathering format should be developed in the MOH to monitor l I public sectors Il construction /housing data. | - need for data collectionl I and policy monitoring IlJ. Establish Planning, Analytical, Technical Units in MOH to assist policy formulation | | by MOH I by providing data base.
114. Review housing subsidy policies in terms of (i) government's willingness to defray the I rising costs of such subsidies and (ii) equity of current policies (see also 15). i
l15. Review current policy for rental housing in terms of (i) levels of service l| l (ii) rent control (iii) target markets. - 43 -
5.05 On the supply side, the key issues stem from:
(i) the supply of serviced land is the main impediment to satisfaction of the expected rapid growth of housing demand;
(ii) associated financial issues include the need for savings mobilization, the need for equal treatment of nonsalaried workers as well as civil servants and salaried workers, the need for more financing for low-income households and the middle class, and a general confrontation of the issue of high and hence costly standards;
(iii) institutional issues include the need to assure the supply of new units for home ownership, and to strengthen institutional capacity generally, and to enhance the capacity for field intervention in particular, without adding to institutional proliferation; and
(iv) technical and other issues including the need for strengthened data collection and policy monitoring by MOH, the need to facilitate the supply of rental housing, and the need to review housing subsidy and rental policies.
5.06 Institutional issues deserve special attention. The creation of the new Ministry of Housing offers a unique opportunity to undertake a number of organizational changes that will strengthen interagency coordination and unplug organizational bottlenecks that have hampered the effectiveness of some programs, particularly the provision of a sufficient number of serviced sites to accommodate both public and private sector housing construction. As the MOH is still formulating its role and the scope of its activities, institutional changes if acceptable, can be quickly implemented.
5.07 The magnitude of committed public housing construction programs, and their consequent inertia, suggest that programmatic issues cannot realistically be addressed until towards the end of the VIth Plan, especially if major changes are contemplated. Programmatic issues can possibly be most effectively addressed in the interim through intensive experimentation, whereby new means of programming, instructing, and financing can be tested through carefully monitored pilot programs that are sensitive to regional variations.
5.08 The role of the private sector is another issue deserving special attention. Although the review acknowledges the political and financial commitment of the Tunisian authorities to the provision of adequate housing, it is clear that there has hitherto been a failure to take into account the dynamism of families desirous of constructing their own houses through self-help, and to assist such activities by (i) assuring provision of urban services for such groups; (ii) containing the proliferation of illegal settlements within a planning framework; and (iii) creating an environment conducive to encouraging entrepreneurs who will help move the major responsibility for addressing needs to the private sector. - 44 -
B. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Land Issue
5.09 Recommendation 1; To resolve the bottleneck in delivery of serviced land; (i) AFEH's procedures and programs should be reevaluated; 4-ii) municipalities should play a greater role in land assembly and delivery of sites. (i) Evaluation of AFH programs. In the past, AFH has offered sites ranging from 200 - 400m2 and with very high levels of infrastructure. Consideration should be given to reducing plot sizes and infrastructure standards with a view to making plots more affordable to a broader range of target markets and also speeding up AFH's ability to construct its projects. Individuals must pay for plots in advance and then wait for long periods (in the past, up to 4 years) for delivery of their plot. This policy should be reviewed with a view to introducing a loan mechanism for acquisition of a serviced site (see Recommendation 4) together with a loan for construction materials (Recommendation 7). This latter point implies a concomitant evaluation of AFH's overall financial policy to permit it to finance the acquisition of land on the basis of its approved 5 year program through funds additional to those of beneficiaries.
(ii) Municipalities. To assist municipalities in undertaking the technical studies required to prepare serviced residential plots, it is proposed that;
(a) CPSCL assist local governments to prepare applications to ensure technical consistency and compatability with bureaucratic procedures; and
(b) public works should be undertaken locally. In the absence of qualified municipal personnel, supervision would be subcontracted to AFH or ARRU for shelter projects and to MOE for public works.
5.10 Recommendation 2; Priority should be given to formulating a land policy that will be based on the government's facilitating and capitalizing on the private sector's housing construction capability for the orderly development of sites. The following approach is suggested;
(a) concentrate public investment on the acquisition, improvement, and disposal of land;
(b) regularize the ownership status of existing settlements in order to encourage housing investment;
(c) formulate realistic development regulations that recognize the ability of lower-income households to construct a minimal shelter (at least initially), that encourage the enlargement and improvement of the shelter as household incomes grow, and that accommodate mixes of housing types in order to increase the supply of privately developed rental units as well as employment-generating uses; - 45 -
(d) regionalize land development and construction standards to account for local variations in housing demand, income, climate, and life style; and
(e) review the procedures for approving developers which may act as a disincentive to participation.
5.11 Recommendation 3: Encourage municipalities to lay out sites and services areas before significant settlement occurs. Given the pressure on communities for serviced areas, there is a need to demarcate areas for development before spontaneous development takes place. AFH should be encouraged to help municipalities to better plan these rudimentary sites and services projects. Such an approach consists only of demarcating roads and plot boundaries in a first phase of development. This approach would help guide the development of subdivisions and facilitates the provision of services at a later stage based on residents' financial ability and willingness to pay for infrastructural improvements.
2. Financial Issues
5.12 Recommendation 4: Examine the potential for diversifying CNEL's operations and making it into a comprehensive housing bank handling a variety of related issues. This would require a study in itself to examine resource mobilization, lending programs and financing arrangements. At present, CNEL and FOPROLOS account for two-thirds of public investments in housing and for 80% of publicly subsidized investment in urban areas. In particular, CNEL is the main instrument used by the Government to implement its financial policies pertaining to urban housing, the manipulation of the interest rate charged by individual programs allowing considerable flexibility. A new range of activities would give CNEL much greater flexibility and might include:
- housing loans for a greater number of non-salaried wage earners and lower-income savers;
- loans for the purchase of serviced lots (already under consideration);
- prefinancing of AFH activities (already under consideration);
- financing a large portion of turnkey projects through private developers with construction loans to be converted to permanent finance for home buyers; and
- encouraging savers to take construction mortgages rather than financing for "turnkey" houses.
5.13 Recommendation 5: Review interest rates in the housing sector, as part of a general review of interest rate policy. Interest rates in other sectors of the economy are much higher, in the range of 10-12%; these latter rates appear reasonable given estimates of inflation - 46 - which range from 8-10%. Thus, there appears to be a case for an increase of interest rates in the housing sector. This should, of course, be carried out in the context of the subsidization program and an evaluation of overall equity issues.
5.14 Recommendation 6: Encourage potential home owners to take a construction loan (with the proceeds of which they would construct their own dwelling, or subcontract to a small contractor) instead of buying a turnkey project. Given that the annual rate of production of public housing programs is likely to grow from 10,000 units in 1980 to 37,000 in 1986, it is neither probable nor, for the reasons stated above, desirable that SNIT be saddled with this 25% annual rate of construction growth. It would therefore be advisable to capitalize upon the growing capacity of AFH to provide serviced sites, particularly in the Tunis region, and encourage CNEL and FOPROLOS beneficiaries to take a construction mortgage rather than buy a turn-key unit. This policy would be beneficial in two ways: the lower construction costs of the small-scale private sector would result in larger units; and the shorter construction period would allow the construction of a larger number of units, SNIT normally requiring four to five years to complete a project. A larger proportion of turnkey projects should also be allocated to licensed private developers.
5.15 Recommendation 7: Strengthen loan programs for non-salaried households. In view of the large pool of families (over 200,000) with incomes whose median income is of the order of TD 75 and the fact that current public programs focus heavily on middle and upper income state functionaries, it is proposed to create a loan program which would finance (i) acquisition of a serviced plot, and (ii) provide funds for the acquisition of construction materials.
5.16 Recommendation 8: Continue to review the FOPROLOS program with a view to (i) planning for use of its increasing assets and (ii) containing costs so that it can continue to service the market it was created for. FOPROLOS is funded by a 2% levy on wages and thus over time a large pool of funds can be anticipated. As of the end of 1980, only 30% of FOPROLOS resources had been committed while only 12 loans were granted for the construction of a house as opposed to 4,316 for the purchase of a turnkey dwelling. The reliance on turnkey projects (97% of which are undertaken by SNIT) has resulted in rapidly rising production costs as well as long delays in delivery times. As is the case with CNEL, ways must be found to encourage beneficiaries to take mortgage loans rather than buy turnkey units. This would have the advantages of significantly speeding up construction, reducing costs and hence a better utilization of FOPROLOS funds. As much lower income housing is now constructed by individuals and small scale constructors, this would have the added advantage of stimulating this subsector. Originally budgeted at TD 3,600 in 1978, the average cost of a FOPROLOS dwelling is now about TD 4,200. Given this 50% increase in four years, the outreach of the program is shrinking significantly. Whereas it was conceived for households with incomes between TD 64 and 96, the new cost schedule will restrict the - 47 -
program to households earning more than TD 150 (assuming housing costs at 20% of the household budget), that is, 2.3 times the 1980 value of the SMIG. If this program is to respond to the market it was created for, there should be a reduction in standards to affordable levels.
3. Institutional and Management Issues
5.17 Recommendation 9: The roles of agencies concerned with physical planning should be clarified. MOH must also address the physical planning aspects of housing programs in order to improve coordination among housing development, infrastructure construction and the provision of educational, health, and social services. With the exception of the District of Tunis, the planning function is currently divided among several public agencies and lacks coordination. The framework suggested below provides a reasonable framework for the various aspects of physical planning. Large Scale Planning. The Ministry of Equipment should concentrate its technical resources on the preparation of large scale development plans at the regional and governorate scale.!1 The Ministry's Direction de l'Amenagement du Territoire is currently studying the possibility of a national physical planning approach and their effort should be encouraged. Urban Planning. Consideration should be given to charging the Ministry of Housing with the responsibility for the preparation and supervision of municipal physical plans; it would then be a Ministry of Urbanism and Housing, a move which appears justified. Its role would be to delineate planning areas consistent with urban expansion trends, define the content of physical plans, and either review or approve the plans prepared by or for the municipalities. Creation of Special Planning Districts. The experience of the last decade has shown that a substantial portion of informal housing construction occurs on the urban fringe, outside municipal jurisdictions. MOE or MOH should be empowered to propose special planning districts in areas where development trends clearly transcend jurisdictional boundaries. The Ministry would be responsible for the preparation of comprehensive land development plans to be administered either by the principal local government in the special district.
5.18 Recommendation 10: Review the complex interrelationships between CNEL, AFH and SNIT with a view to; (i) giving SNIT a more realistic role; (ii) giving AFH the means to accomplish its share of the VIth Plan; and (iii) encouraging the use of CNEL's resources for financing more private sector developers. There has been an underutilization of CNEL resources - for example, at the end of 1980, it had TD 86 million short-term funds lent to promoters (most of it SNIT) as opposed to TD 55 million outstanding in mortgages, ostensibly its main line of business. CNEL prefinances about two-thirds of SNIT's activities, a major consequence of which is that practically all CNEL's savers have no option but SNIT's turnkey projects. As SNIT's program for the VIth Plan covers 60% of public sector housing construction, the same structure is being perpetuated. This may be inefficient inasmuch as CNEL's A and B savings programs had to be abandoned as a result of the high cost of SNIT's turnkey
1/ This recommendation should be modified in the light of the role of the new Commissariat Regional au Developpement, when this is known. - 48 - programs, not an inordinate rise in construction costs or an inadequate financing formula. While recognising the invaluable contribution of SNIT, we believe that private sector developers should also be encouraged by having access to the same facilities as SNIT; success in this would ease SNIT's task considerably under the VIth Plan. As proposed above, it is time to consolidate AFH's role of land assembler and perhaps to facilitate that task by permitting CNEL to prefinance AFH operations. Certainly, AFH has an ambitious program under the VIth Plan. Increasing its responsibility (together with the proposed emphasis on mortgage loans below) would make attainment of the objectives of the VIth Plan that much easier.
5.19 Recommendation 11; Reinforce the structure for carrying out upgrading projects and identify a specific program for action. As a result of efforts made through the Bank's second urban project and USAID supported projects, the Government has accepted the concept of upgrading and recently created ARRU to carry out upgrading works. The VIth Plan does not adequately take into account the effort needed to make this a national effort. A study by SOTUETEC Lnventorying upgrading needs should be completed in the near future and will serve as a basis for identifying a program of existing communities requiring upgrading. This could be financed in part at least on the budget line ddgourbification which, although ostensibly a rural program, is concerned with settlements in the urban fringe.
4. Technical and Other Issues
5.20 Recommendation 12: A standardized information-gathering format should be developed in the Directorate of Planning and Statistics in the MOH to ascertain with some accuracy shifts in demand, construction activity, transformation of the housing stock, and levels of occupancy throughout the country. The format of INS published data does not lend itself to this type of analysis as it ranges from overly detailed cross-tabulations of peripheral information (the number of fixtures in bathrooms and kitchens, for example) to being overly cryptic in its description of such important interrelated indicators as structure types, sizes of units, and construction materials. In spite of its breadth and generally high quality, the utilization of the statistical data generated by INS presents technical difficulties. Although information may contain the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the housing stock, the analyst cannot prepare correlations between the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the population and the spatial and physical characteristics of the stock. Extracting the information is difficult as it requires elaborate special runs which in fact are technically cumbersome. It will be necessary to create a data bank and undertake frequent sampling of small urban areas, compatible with the decennial census, and be mutually interactive to allow trend analyses as well as formalize a continuous updating of census tracts.
5.21 Recommendation 13: The Ministry of Housing should be charged with the development, monitoring, and utilization of data and indicators pertinent to housing for use in policy formulation for both the public and private - 49 - sectors. The activities should be allocated to three specialized units; a Planning Unit responsible for the programming of public- housing activities and their spatial allocation; an Analytical Unit responsible for the gathering and analysis of the necessary statistical information; and a Technical Unit charged with studying construction methods and following execution of projects. Planning Unit. The Planning Unit would furnish the Minister of Housing with the information necessary to choose among policy options and prepare the Ministry's annual investment and operational budgets. It would prepare all public housing programs by specific target groups, by region and municipality, and would be responsible for monitoring effectiveness. It would be responsible for orchestrating the planning activities of agencies dependent upon the Ministry of Housing (ARRU, SNIT, AFH) and CNEL as well as coordination of planning with other government agencies whose activities affect housing (for example, MOE, ONAS, SONEDE, STEG), and regional and municipal physical planning activities. Analytical Unit. The responsibilities of the analytical unit can be divided into (i) longer-range forecasts intended to alert the Ministry to changes in the structural and spatial characteristics of demand, and (ii) the documentation of existing conditions leading to the development of programs and projects. It would work closely with MOPF to monitor the macro impact of housing policy. Technical Unit. The technical unit should actively seek innovative solutions to improve the housing of low-income households. To this end, special attention should be paid to undertaking experimental projects where new technical and financing approaches can be tried out and, if successful, incorporated in national programs. Of equal importance, is the evaluation of planning norms and technical standards used in housing and infrastructural services and their effect on development costs and affordability.
5.22 Recommendation 14; Review the housing subsidy policy in terms of (i) the Government's willingness to defray the rising costs of such subsidies and (ii) the equity of the current policy (see also next Recommendation on rental policy). The Government partially subsidizes CNEL's programs. The interest paid to savers is supplemented by an additional 2% provided by the state while the agency's mortgages benefit from a 1% reduction in the interest rate. This amounts to an indirect interest subsidy of TD 250 for a suburban dwelling and TD 415 for a moderate cost unit. Until 1980, the relatively small number of mortgages issued by CNEL had kept the total cost of this public subsidy to about TD 500,000; given CNEL's forecasted increased activity, public subsidies will amount to nearly TD 10 millions by 1986. Although little can be done about current contractual arrangements, MOH should review (with MOPF) the potential impact of maintaining the present policy which favors higher income households. In light of the diversity of CNEL savings contracts, which range from TD 2,000 to TD 14,000, a modulated approach, favoring smaller contracts subscribed by households with low incomes would be more equitable and advantageous, particularly if they opt for a construction mortgage. MOPF and MOH may want therefore to examine the impact of a sliding scale of interest subsidies on the rate of production of different housing types. - 50 -
5.23 Recommendation 15: Review current policy for rental housing in terms of (i) levels of subsidy, (ii) rent control, and (iii) target markets. For projects financed by both SPROLS and CNRPS, there is a substantial gap between the quality and cost of the dwelling and the asking rent. It is estimated that current rents should be inflated three to four times in order to meet the real costs of financing, operating, and maintaining the buildings. There is thus an important hidden subsidy underlying public sector rental programs. The rent control law may also result in distortions although its impact does seem to be limited; however, it may hamper reformulating rental policy, for example in encouraging private sector construction of rental housing for low income families. MOPF and MOH should undertake a review of this subsector in liaison with the financing institutions. - 51 -
TUNISIA
HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW
ANNEX ONE
HOUSING SECTOR INSTITUTIONS
The following discussion supplements that contained in Chapter III of the main text by providing more detailed information as to the operations of SNIT, AFH, CNEL, and SPROLS.
- 52 -
ANNEX ONE Page 1 of 12
A. SOCIETE NATIONALE IMMOBILIERE DE TUNISIE (SNIT)
1.1 Established in 1957, the Societe Nationale Immobiliere de Tunisie (SNIT) was responsible for the administration of government housing programs until the reformulation of housing policy that occurred in the early 1970s. The bulk of its activities was concentrated on the Tunis region where it took an active part in the slum clearance programs initiated since independence. One of its achievements was the construction of heavily subsidized housing projects (Ibn Khaldoun, El Khadra, Kabaria, etc.) which were originally intended to relocate households displaced by slum clearance projects. Following the creation, in 1974, of the Agence Fonciere d'Habitation (AFH), which was assigned the responsibility of acquiring and improving land for residential development, and the Caisse Nationale d'Epargne-Logement (CNEL), a public building society whose role was to channel domestic savings towards the production of housing by offering attractive terms to households subscribing to one of its housing savings contracts, SNIT has concentrated on the construction of subsidized housing.
1.2 SNIT's activities are highly diversified. With an annual production of about 17,000 dwellings, it is responsible for the financial administration of the rural housing program, 1/ the construction of "suburban" housing for the relocation of displacees of the slum clearance program, of various housing types for CNEL's and FOPROLOS's several housing savings programs, and of a limited number of higher-income housing projects undertaken on a quasi-commercial basis. It generally constructs projects on a turnkey basis, its staff assuming the full range of responsibilities from land acquisition and project feasibility studies to the development of housing prototypes and the supervision of construction. The main office of SNIT comprises seven departments (technical studies, auditing, real estate, operations, administration, finance, data processing) and 26 sub-departments. Three regional branches, in Bizerte, Sousse and Sfax, ensure the supervision of field operations.
1.3 SNIT's programs consist of the following housing types (Table 1);
(a) Rural housing, consisting of two-room units whose average current cost is on the order of TD 1,500. Outside of Tunis, SNIT acts as a financial intermediary between the central government and the governorates; it disburses public subsidies as well as assumes the responsibility for loan recovery. In Tunis governorate, it is the actual developer of rural housing.
(b) Degourbification programs in the Tunis governorate. SNIT is responsible for the construction of "suburban" housing for the relocation of displaced households.
1/ As well as for actual construction in Tunis Governorate. - 53 -
ANNEX ONE Page 2 of 12
(c) Publicly subsidized housing, financed by either CNEL or FOPROLOS, consisting either of "suburban" or moderate-cost units. Between 1975 and 1980, SNIT was in charge of the implementation of over 90% of housing pre-financed by CNEL.
(d) "Special projects", consisting primarily of luxury housing, of which 1,600 units were built between 1977 and 1979.
The relative importance of each program varies from year to year as shown in Table 1. Most recently, in 1981, the investment budget of SNIT amounted to TD 57.8 million apportioned as follows:
Rural housing - 13.0% Degourbification - 12.0 CNEL programs - 67.0 Special projects - 8.0 100.0
Table 1; Summary of SNIT Activities, 1975-81 (Number of Units)
Category 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 /a 1. Rural Housing a. Programmed 8,136 8,849 8,339 8,900 7,150 - 8,000 b. Built 7,800 8,200 7,749 13,099 8,496 7,344 10,170
2. Suburban Housing a. Programmed 1,427 2,517 5,115 5,222 4,692 6,374 7,463 b. Built 2,000 /b 2,000 /b 1,537 2,912 5,725 4,276 7,222
3. Moderate Cost Housing a. Programmed 2,493 1,954 3,650 2,803 3,724 4,588 6,728 b. Built 2,000 /b 2,000 /b 4,610 3,557 3,469 4,445 3,672
4. Luxury Housing 745 - 342 616 604 505 NA
5. Total SNIT Construction
(l.b+2.b+3.b+4) 12,545 12,200 14,238 20,184 18,294 16,570 21,064
/a Estimate for 1981. /b Estimated from a total of approximately 4,000 units built 1975-76. - 54 -
ANNEX ONE Page 3 of 12
1.4 It is clear that the virtual monopoly held by SNIT on the production of subsidized housing is due, in no small part, to its institutional strength and financial resources. Operationally, it is able to undertake projects equivalent to 50% of the Plan's objectives; furthermore, the quality of its management has allowed it to keep its gross profit margin (including overhead and financing costs) up to five points lower than the legal maximum of 18% of project costs. Yet, SNIT's investment budget has remained relatively stable over the past few years, indicating that it may be reaching a ceiling in its capacity to undertake housing development.
1.5 As shown in Tables 2 and 3, SNIT has managed to keep its unit construction costs relatively steady in spite of an average annual rate of inflation in the construction sector of nearly 9% between 1977 and 1980. This has been achieved with no significant change in the quality of the units, largely as a result of better management and the utilization of standardized designs. On the debit side, SNIT has clearly been unable to promote less expensive units affordable to a greater proportion of lower-income households for two reasons: its turnkey approach providing a relatively spacious and well-finished unit; and the generous plot sizes, which raise land and infrastructure costs.
Table 2; Characteristics of SNIT Housing Types
Unit Cost/Dwelling Average Area (m2) Average Cost/m2
Rural 1,500 25 60.0 Suburban 4,200 40 105.0 Moderate Cost 7,000 80 87.5 Luxury 16,000 NA NA
Note; Unit costs include land and infrastructure. For a moderate cost unit, construction = 73.0%; land improvements = 8.0%; electrical and water connections = 6.0%; and managerial costs = 13.0%.
Table 3; Unit Costs (Current Tunisian dinars)
1977 1978 1979 1980 1. Average Construction Cost/m2 Rural housing 51 51 59 59 Suburban housing 72 69 70 70 Moderate cost housing 62 59 62 64
2. Infrastructure Costs/Dwelling Units Streets drainage and sewerage 250 350 450 550 Electrical connections 110 125 135 175 Water supply 150 175 220 225
Source; SNIT. - 55 -
ANNEX ONE Page 4 of 12
B. AGENCE FONCIERE D'HABITATION
1.6 AFH, created together with the Tourism Land Agency and the Industrial Land Agency under Law 73-21 in 1973, is a non-profit organization operating under private law which is authorized to assemble land and carry out sites and services projects. Under the aegis of the Ministry of Housing, it is organized into a general directorate, a financial and administrative division, a studies division, a technical department and a real estate division. It is staffed by some 30 professional staff, including 15 engineers, who play a largely managerial role.
1.7 Since its creation, AFH has accumulated some 3,000 hectares, over 80% of which have been located in the Tunis region. Recently, more sites have also been acquired in provincial cities, including Sousse, Sfax and Gabes. Its statutory role is to acquire, improve and dispose of housing sites located in development areas. It is responsible for selecting sites, undertaking the necessary technical studies and supervising construction. It may acquire land by eminent domain if a negotiated purchase proves unfeasible.
1.8 AFH is essentially a self-financing non-profit organization (Table 4). At its inception, it was granted a capital of TD 2 million and has since borrowed TD 5 million from the government to which was added an exceptional grant of TD 187,000 in 1978. Its land sales are made at cost, although substantial advance payments are required, which are used to defray the agency's operating costs and provide a revolving fund for future land acquisitions. Its charges are assessed as follows;
- individual lots; full payment in advance on the basis of sealed bids;
- real estate developers, whether private or public sector: 60% to be paid upon approval of the project, 30% on initiation of work, and 10% when the land title is transferred.
- commercial lots; sale to the highest bidder when the lots are improved.
AFH's performance to date has been disappointing. In spite of its innovative approach, its financing formula seems to have rapidly reached a ceiling. On the one hand, the pre-financing requirement of its activities has resulted in a protracted period before the improved site can be delivered as a result of time-consuming title clearing procedures. On the other, AFH's limited capital resources have not allowed it to constitute sufficient land reserves to respond to the demand of either public or private sector. Furthermore, the necessity of paying cash in advance for a relatively large lot has drained the resources of moderate income purchasers; as a result, they have often been forced to delay home construction on their serviced site for several years. - 56 -
ANNEX ONE Page 5 of 12
Table 4: Agence Fonciere Habitation Unaudited Balance Sheet as of December 31, 1980 (TDO00)
1977 1978 1979 1980 ASSETS Current Assets 3,947 6,375 4,617 8,177 Land Reserves and Work in Process 13,022 16,713 21,918 26,583 Fixed Assets 906 1,645 480 502 Total Assets 17,875 24,733 27,015 35,262
LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL Current Liabilities 13,108 21,535 23,818 31,538 Long-term debt 2,123 424 216 - Provisions - 115 248 726
CAPITAL AND RESERVES Capital 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Retained earnings 644 659 733 998 Total Liabilities and Capital 17,875 24,733 27,015 35,262
C. CAISSE NATIONALE D'EPARGNE-LOGEMENT
1.9 CNEL was established in 1974 under Law No. 73-24 which introduced a housing savings scheme to Tunisia. CNEL is a public, autonomous agency under the aegis of Ministry of Planning and Finance. Its Board of Directors is made up of representatives from the Prime Ministry, Ministries of Housing, Planning and Finance, Social Affairs, Transport and Telecommunications, and BCT; it is chaired by CNEL's President and meets quarterly. Its role is to channel domestic savings into the production of housing by offering attractive terms to households subscribing to one of its housing savings contracts.
1.10 CNEL's housing saving contracts are for either four or five years with saving targets agreed at the beginning of the contracts, as follows:
Contract Type A B C D E F G Total
Monthly Income (TD) 30 55 90 120 150 210 250 Number of Contracts 2,671 11,886 20,204 12,202 6,185 13,497 - 66,787 % of Total 4 18 30 18 9 21 100 Amount (TD) 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000
Savings are remunerated at 6% per annum including a government subsidy (2% for savings in TD; 3% for foreign exchange) and are compounded yearly. Provided the subscriber can justify a steady income, he may borrow up to twice the - 57 -
ANNEX ONE Page 6 of 12 amount saved plus accumulated interest with a ceiling of TD 13,000. These contracts are reasonable for higher income families but the more modest contracts have not kept pace with inflation and in fact contracts A and B have been suspended.
1.11 CNEL also grants bridging loans to beneficiaries who want to borrow without waiting for their saving contracts to mature; these loans amounted to TD 14 million at the end of 1981. In its early years, CNEL also granted loans (credit immediat) to subscribers who did not complete their saving contracts. These loans provided up to 60% of project cost with a ceiling of TD 5,000 (downpayment of 40%) and were for a period of 10 years. These loans were discontinued in 1980 and they represented only TD 7.4 million at the end of 1981. By law, CNEL can also prefinance housing promoters. At the end of 1981, these short-term loans amounted to TD 34.5 million with SNIT, Tunisia's major housing developer, accounting for 95% of the total.
1.12 Since 1978, CNEL has managed FOPROLOS, a Government fund financed with a 2% levy on wages which was created when CNEL's A and B contracts collapsed. Its main purpose is to grant housing loans to wage-earners whose salaries are up to one and a half times the minimum salary. It covers a category of savers not catered to by CNEL. The loan amount is limited to TD 2,800 and the dwelling site is limited to 50 m2. Those who earn between 1.5 and 3 times the minimum wage are eligible for a personal loan limited to TD 528 to help them complete the downpayment required under the normal CNEL loan. At the end of 1981, outstanding loans granted under the FOPROLOS scheme amounted to TD 28.5 million. This is a program that is expected to gain in importance over the next few years.
1.13 CNEL's programs account for the bulk of housing financing available in Tunisia. Commercial loans are available at 10.5% for the construction of luxury housing; they represent but a minute proportion of housing finance insofar as they cannot exceed 2% of call and term deposits and only 50% can be channelled into the secondary mortgage market. As opposed to the commercial rate of 10.5%, CNEL/FOPROLOS programs are as follows:
Interest Mortgage Target Down Rate Life Population Payment
1. FOPROLOS 3% 15 years TD 64-192/month 15%
2. CNEL Housing Savings Contracts* 5.5% 10-15 years TD 90-210/month 20%
3. CNEL Anticipatory Loans 7.0% Up to 2 years TD 90-210/month
4. CNEL Direct Loans 6.0% Variable Variable
* CNEL's Housing Savings Contracts Loans benefit from a 1% interest bonus rate provided by the government, regardless of the borrower's income. - 58 -
ANNEX ONE Page 7 of 12
These interest rates are clearly subsidized indirectly as current rates of inflation in Tunisia are of the order of 8 - 10%.
1.14 CNEL started operations in 1974 (Tables 5 - 7) with an initial government grant of TD 420,000; at the end of 1981, it had accumulated reserves of TD 3.5 million. Its main resources are savings contracts (TD 80.2 million at the end of 1981) and borrowings (about TD 60 million at mid 1981). It has also borrowed abroad, twice from USAID sponsored projects and once from the United Arab Emirates. Under a facility called the CNEL ratio, CNEL can also draw up to 5% of commercial bank deposits for up to 10 years at a 5.5% annual rate of interest. Through FOPROLOS, CNEL has access to about TD 20 million in 15 years, 3% loans. CNEL's resource gap at the end of 1981 was TD 18.3 million but it was covered by the CNEL ratio. CNEL's cost of borrowing is estimated not to exceed 3.5%.
1.15 CNEL is a well managed institution. It has consistently shown a profit, estimated at TD 1.5 million for 1981. Expenses are kept at a reasonable level and financial expenses reflect a conservative financial policy; as a result, CNEL's spread is about two percentage points. Although highly leveraged CNEL's long-term debt/equity ratio has been decreasing over time to reach 5.2:1 at the end of 1981. Interest coverage and debt service coverage ratios are satisfactory, at about 1.4 and 1.2 respectively.
1.16 CNEL has been very effective in mobilizing domestic resources. Whereas the initial objective had been to attract 8,000 subscribers per year, at the end of 1981 they numbered 87,637, equivalent to more than 12,000 per year. On the other hand, at the end of 1981, it had only granted a total 22,739 housing loans, equivalent to an average of about 3,600 a year. Even taking into account the lag between opening a savings account and obtaining a loan, it is apparent that CNEL has been unable to lend all its savings deposits. One reason is that its savings plans have not kept up with inflation and many subscribers have completed their savings plans but find themselves unable to finance a home under terms of their contracts. For example, the current costs of a SNIT suburban unit is in excess of TD 5,200, whereas CNEL programs designed to finance such housing (contracts A and C) only finance up to a maximum of TD 4,000. This problem is likely to become more serious over the next few years, particularly as the rhythm of maturing savings contracts is going to accelerate:
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 4,093 4,395 8,412 23,956 21,977 - 59 -
ANNEKI1 Page8 of 12
Table 5: Caisse Iticnale d'Epargne-Iogement (CNEL) Performance Indicators, 1977-81
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981
Profitability Indicators
Net profit as % of average net worth 50.1 51.9 41.2 40.3 44.7
Operatioal Indicators
Gross incmae as % of average total assets 5.1 5.1 5.6 5.1 5.1 (same ratio, excludirg FBOII0OSand USAID) 5.6 5.4 6.1 5.8 6.2 Administrative expenses/a as % of average total assets 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.6 Financial expenses as % of average total assets 2.8 2.8 3.2 2.8 2.6 Inccxe from loans as % of average loan portfolio 14.2 5.3 5.9 5.6 6.3 Cost of term debt as % of average term debt 3.1 3.3 3.6 3.5 3.4 ib Spread 11.1 2.0 2.3 2.1 2.9
Finaicial Structure Indicators Lb
Total debt /c over year-end net worth 46.0 38.9 37.6 31.0 32.8 Lorg-term debt /c over year-end net worth 18.0 11.7 10.1 7.1 5.2 Provision for risk as % of longterm loans 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.2 1.4 Interest coverage ratio 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 Debt service coverage ratio 1.07 1.11 1.13 1.13 1.19 Housing savings over year-end net worth 23.4 21.8 21.8 19.2 23.3
/a Including bonus to personnel. /b Mission's estimates. /c EKcludirg FOPRCLOSfunds and portion of LsAIDloans onlent to other institutions. - 60 - ANNEX ONE Page 9 of 12
Table 6: Caisse Nationale d'Epargne-Logement (CNEL) Unaudited Income Statements 1977-1981 (TD 000)
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 /a 1982 /b
INCOME
Interest on: Prefinancing - 2,371 3,130 2,874 n.a. 3,053 Loans 1,848 567 1,372 2,203 n.a. 3,636 Deposits 474 148 61 192 n.a. n.a. Government subsidy /c - 45 34 70 n.a. 450 2,322 3,131 4,597 5,338 6,475 /d n.a. Management fee on Foprolos Scheme - 2 19 92 n.a. 185 Exceptional profits 19 62 187 235 n.a. 59 Other incomes 9 44 71 111 n.a. n.a. Total Income 2,351 3,239 4,874 5,776 6,950 /d 7,502 /a
EXPENDITURES
Interest on: Saving accounts 756 1,223 1,772 2,008 2,309 3,073 Short term loans ) 33 337 401 ) 313 Long term loans ) 512 451 563 625 )1,197 448 USAID loans ) 52 90 164 ) 259 1,268 1,759 2,762 3,201 3,506 4,093 Administrative Expenses 564 656 981 1,213 1,748 2,056 of which salaries (351) (428) (643) (863) (1,261) (1,560) Depreciation 43 55 63 91 110 150 Other expenditures 12 30 70 138 100 /d 31 Total Expenditures 1,887 2,500 3,876 4,643 5,464 /d 6,330
Profits 464 739 998 1 ,133 1,486 /d 1,172 of which allocated to: provisions for risk 50 100 200 220 250 /d n.a. reserves 394 500 700 700 850 /g n.a. bonus to personnel 20 139 98 213 386 Id n.a.
/a Preliminary data for 1981. /b CNEL's projections for 1982. /c The Government subsidy reduces the interest rate on CNEL loans from 5.5% to 4.5% p.a. /d Mission estimate. - 61 - ANNEX OhE Page 10 of 12
Table 7: Caisse Nationale d'Epargne-Logement (CNEL) Unaudited Balance Sheet, 1977-1981 (TD 000)
/h 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981
ASSETS
Current Assets Cash 6,017 1,759 4,920 7,523 9,755 Prefinancing of promotors 25,353 34,951 41,416 34,776 35,317
Loans maturing within the year 808 683 822 1,185 n.a. Others (short-term receivables) 2,812 2,033 7,279 3,855 n.a.
Medium-term loans /a 10,899 13,129 14,883 15,165 6,245
Long-term loans 9,171 18,055 28,921 48,059 58,600 of which: saving loans /b (459) (7,476) (23,609) (35,364) immediate loans /c (6,390) (8,263) (8,299) (7,392) bridge loans /d (8,205) (9,054) (14,351) (14,044) SNIT /e (3,000) (2,400) (1,800 less provision for risk 50 150 350 570 820 /i Net loans portfolio 9,121 17,905 28,571 47,489 57,780 Fi
FOPROLOS loans - 605 4,015 12,034 28,531
Fixed assets(net) 321 328 351 887 B77
Total Assets 55,331 71,393 102,257 122,914 150,348 /i
LIABILITIES
Current Liabilities Short-term debts 1,949 6,072 7,601 8,766 n.a. Housing savings 26,268 37,585 52,729 61,422 80,249 Other (short-term payables) 2,540 2,254 3,402 5,041 n.a
Long-term debts 23,451 23,451 30,775 29,047 n.a. of which: CNEL ratio /f (7,100) (7,100) (10,201) (8,154) (8,154) USAID loans 7/ (4,352) (4,352) (8,386) (8,326) (7,331) United Arab Emirates (10,899) (10,899) (10,899) (10,899) (6,245) maturing within the year (1,100) (1,100) (1,289) (1,668) n.a.
FopRoLoS scheme - 308 5,327 15,436 26,319
Net worth 1,123 1,723 2,423 3,202 3,452 /i of which: Government grants (420) (420) (420) (420) (420) Reserves (703) (1,303) (2,003) (2,782) (3,032)/i TOTAL LIABILITIES 55,331 71,393 102,257 122,914 150,348
/a Loans made with the United Arab Emirates loan. /b Loans made to contract savers, at 4.5% p.a. over 10 years for 4-year saving contracts, or over 15 years for 5-year saving contracts. /c Loans granted in the late 1970s to applicants for whom the 4-year minimum saving contract was waived. The granting of new loan has been discontinued. /d Loans granted to CNEL beneficiaries before their saving contracts mature. fe Societe Nationale Immobiliere de Tunisie, Tunisia's larrest housing developer. Most of CNEL's financing of SNIT is found under Prefinancing of Promoters through 3-month loans which are rolled over for up to 2 years. /f CNEL is allowed to borrow from Tunisian commercial banks at 5.5% p.a. over 10 years the equivalent of up to 5% of commercial banks' deposits. At the end of 1981, CNEL had used less than 15% of this facility. Out of this total, CNEL is using directly only TD2.1 million to grsanthousing loans, the rest being onlent to other institutions. /h 1931 data are preliminary. /i Mission's estimate. - 62 -
ANNEX ONE Page 11 of 12
D. SOCIETE POUR LA PROMOTION DE LOGEMENTS SOCIAUX (SPROLS)
1.17 Created in 1977, SPROLS is under the tutelage of the Ministry of Social Affairs; it is responsible for the construction of subsidized rental housing for beneficiaries of the social security programs (CNSS and CAVIS), a role it took over from CNSS. During the period of the Vth Plan (1977-81), SPROLS was to build 10,000 dwelling units, 7,000 of which were to be located in Tunis. Eighty percent of the financing was provided by CNSS and 20% by CAVIS. Although most SPROLS housing is still under development, the quality of construction appears to be good, its costs of TD 75/m2 reasonable, and its rentals of TD 30-35 per month for an 80m2 apartment moderate.
1.18 In order to meet its obligation to produce housing rapidly, SPROLS has opted for a purely managerial role, subcontracting all technical work and limiting its activities to sites provided by AFH. In the long run, it is unclear whether it will be able to produce a sufficient number of units (its June 1981 waiting list had reached 17,000) while balancing its budget. This is due to rapidly rising construction costs and the low rents it charges. At present, it borrows money at a subsidized interest rate of 4%, amortizes construction over 30 years, and its policy is to raise rents at only 3% per annum, which is significantly lower than the real increase in its operations and management costs.
E. CAISSE NATIONALE DE LA RETRAITE ET DE LA PREVOYANCE SOCIALE
1.19 The national retirement fund (CNRPS) has a double role as a developer of rental housing and a financier of housing loans to its members. It offers land acquisition and construction loans and mortgages for the purchase of existing housing. Thirty percent equity is required on all loans, whose maximum value is set at TD 5,000 or 2.5 times the borrower's annual salary, whichever is less. Loans have a 15 year life (with a one year grace period) and have a floating interest rate pegged to the borrower's monthly salary; TD 40 - 80 = 3%; TD 80 - 120 = 4%; over TD 120 = 6%. some 10,000 loans, valued at TD 30 million, have been underwritten since 1976, distributed as follows by salary level of borrower;
Monthly Salary % of Loans
Over 120 dinars 70% 120 - 80 dinars 20% 80 - 40 dinars 10%
In order to increase loans to the lower income brackets, the Fund is contemplating lowering the equity requirement and increasing the annual salary coefficient. - 63 -
ANNEX ONE Page 12 of 12
1.20 CNRPS's rental housing program focuses on planned developments including all required community facilities - shops, schools, day care centers, recreation areas. Some TD 48 million have been invested since 1977 in the construction of 3,400 dwellings, ranging from 40m2 efficiency units to large apartments of 140m2. In spite of total development costs averaging TD 130/m2, the policy is to keep rents at TD 0.5/m2/month, while operations and maintenance costs annually amount to 10% of the original cost of construction. Under these circumstances, and in spite of rent increases of 5% every three years, it is hard to imagine how the Fund will be able to balance its budget in spite of its ability to borrow money from the Treasury at 5% and amortize its projects over 30 years. - 64 -
TUNISIA HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW
APPENDIX A
STATISTICAL TABLES
LIST OF TABLES
Table Number Page
A. General Demographic, Economic, and Services Provision Data
A-1 Population of the 20 Largest Cities .66 A-2 Total and Urban Population Increase (1975-1980) ...... 67 A-3 Immigration, Emigration and Net Migration between Governorates .68 A-4 Economic Activity and Unemployment (% .69 A-5 Employment by Type of Economic Activity 70 A-6 Demand for and Supply of Employment and Actual Placements .71 A-7 Primary Education .72 A-8 Secondary Education .73 A-9 Health Facilities and Services Indicators 74 A-10 Evolution of Public Investments for Infrastructure and Social Services, Actual Expenditures ('000 Dinars) ...... 75 - 65 -
B. Housing and Infrastructure Provision Data, 1975-80
B-1 1975 Housing Characteristics ...... 76 B-2 1980 Housing Characteristics ...... 77 B-3 1975-1980 Housing Activity (a) Change in Number of Dwellings ...... 78 B-3 1975-1980 Housing Activity (b) Construction and Demolition ...... 79 B-4 Urban Housing Characteristics - 1975...... 80 B-5 Urban Housing Characteristics - 1980...... 81 B-6 1975-1980 Housing Activity - Urban Areas (a) Change in Number of Dwellings, 1975-80...... 82 B-6 1975-1980 Housing Activity - Urban Areas (b) Construction and Demolition, 1975-80...... 83 B-7 Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975 and 1980, Urban (X 1,000)...... 84 B-8 Change in Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975 and 1980, Urban (X 1,000)...... 85 B-9 Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975 and 1980, Rural Areas (X 1,000)...... 86 B-10 Change in Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975 and 1980, Rural Areas (X 1,000)...... 87 B-li Families Connected to the Electrical Network (x 1,000) ...... 88 B-12 Families Connected to Public Water System (x 1,000) ...... 89
C. Regional Data and 1980-86 Projections
C-1 Population, Urban and Rural, by Region and Governorate, 1975...... 90 C-2 Social Services Indicators ...... 91 C-3 Regional Allocation of Selected VIth Plan Investments. 92 C-4 Changes in Housing Characteristics, 1975-1980...... 92 C-5 Construction Activity, 1975-1980 ...... 93 C-6 Selected Regional Characteristics...... 93 C-7 Regional Distribution of Housing Construction Activity - Rural...... 94 C-8 Regional Distribution of Housing Construction Activity - Urban...... 94 C-9 Regional Quality Indices, Urban Areas...... 95 C-10 Housing Production, 1980-1986, by Category of Developer (Projection A)...... 96 C-li Housing Production, 1980-1986, by Category of Developer (Projection B)...... 97 C-12 Forecasted Utilization of AFH Sites (in Dwelling Units)...... 99 Table A-1; Population of the 20 largest Cities
City City;Total (20) City;Governorate City City:Total (20) City:Governorate Population Population Population Population Population Population City Governorate 1975 1975 (%) 1975 (%) (1980) 1980 (%) 1980 (%)
1. Tunis Tunis 880,190 50.9 92.8 1,232,800 54.4 100.0 2. Sfax Sfax 174,902 10.1 36.4 224,600 9.9 41.2 3. Sousse Sousse 80,449 4.7 31.8 90,800 4.0 31.4 4. Bizerte Bizerte 68,329 4.0 20.0 88,300 3.9 23.9 5. Kairouan Kairouan 56,406 3.3 16.6 66,400 2.9 17.3 6. Gafsa Gafsa 45,300 2.6 19.2 50,600 2.2 18.4 7. Menzel Bizerte 43,918 2.5 12.9 46,800 2.1 12.7 Bourguiba 8. Gabes Gabes 43,136 2.5 16.6 84,800/a 3.7 29.6 9. Beja Beja 41,134 2.4 16.0 45,400 2.0 16.3 10. M'Saken Sousse 33,214 1.9 13.1 38,100 1.7 13.1 11. Mo-nastir MDnastir 33,126 1.9 15.0 34,800 1.5 13.3 12. Nabeul Nabeul 32,293 1.9 8.7 34,500 1.5 8.5 13. Le Kef Le Kef 30,745 1.8 13.0 31,200 1.4 12.4 14. Mahdia Mahdia 27,184 1.6 12.6 35,000 1.5 14.2 15. Mbknine Mnastir 25,977 1.5 11.7 29,900 1.3 11.5 16. Kasserine Kasserine 25,148 1.5 10.5 29,600 1.3 9.8 17. KalaaKebira Sousse 23,181 1.3 9.2 28,800 1.3 10.3 18. SakietEzzit Sfax 22,327 1.3 4.7 25,300 1.1 4.7 19. Jendouba Jendouba 20,937 1.2 6.9 26,200 1.2 7.8 20. Mateur Bizerte 20,492 1.2 6.0 21,800 1.0 5.9
IOTAL (20) 1,728,388 100.0 2,265,700 100.0
/a Accordingto the new limits of the municipality. Based on these new limits the 1975 population of Gabes wes 72,818people.
Source; 1975 Population;INS 1975Census, Population by Administrative Division. 1980 Population: INS Estimretesexcept for Tunis (World Bank Estimates). Table A-2: Total and Urban Population Increase (1975-1980)
Gross Increase Natural Increase Net Migration Urban Total Urban Total Urban Total Absolute % Anual Absolute % Anmtal Absolute % Annual Absolute % Annual Absolute % Annual Absolute % Annual Govemnorate NLUber Rate 14mber Rate Nurber Rate Nunber Rate Nntber Rate Nunber Rate
TUNISDlSIRICr 352,610 6.9 284,770 5.4 203,710 4.0 135,870 2.6 148,900 2.9 148,900 2.8 (116,110)/a (2.6) (226,500) (4.3)
NORH E:ASTREGION 107,370 4.8 125,940 2.6 58,170 2.6 131,840 2.7 49,200 2.2 -5,900 -0.1 Bizerte 21,590 2.3 28,480 1.6 25,790 2.7 48,980 2.8 -4,200 -0.4 -20,500 -1.2 Zaghoan 45,120 14.8 60,P870 5.3 6,520 2.1 29,370 2.6 38,600 12.7 31,500 2.7 Nabeul 40,660 4.1 36,590 1.9 25,860 2.6 53,490 2.8 14,800 1.5 -16,900 -0.9
NORM WESTREGION 98,230 8.6 109,520 2.1 27,330 2.4 141,630 2.7 70,900 6.2 -32,110 -0.6 Beja 30,010 8.3 31,540 2.4 8,710 2.4 36,750 2.7 21,300 5.9 -5,210 -0.3 Jendouba 23,280 8.7 32,090 2.0 6,380 2.4 43,190 2.7 16,900 6.3 -11,100 -0.7 Le Kef 29,540 8.9 15,480 1.3 8,(Y40 2.4 33,880 2.8 21,500 6.5 -18,400 -1.5 Siliana 15,400 8.8 30,410 2.9 4,200 2.4 27,810 2.7 11,200 6.4 2,600 0.2
CENT EAST IEION 101,870 4.4 106,950 2.9 60,170 2.6 98,950 2.7 41,700 1.8 8,000 0.2 Sousse 36,210 3.8 36,130 2.7 25,510 2.7 36,230 2.7 10,700 1.1 -100 0.0 Yrnastir 41,660 4.5 39,260 3.3 24,560 2.7 31,760 2.7 17,100 1.8 7,500 0.6 bhd ia 24,000 6,0 31,560 2.8 10,100 2.5 30,960 2.7 13,900 3.5 600 0.1 a\
(C2N1ERWEST 1EtSION 97,250 11.5 ]54,040 3.6 19,250 2.3 114,040 2.7 78,000 9.2 40,000 0.9 Kairouan 36,960 8.6 43,380 2.4 10,360 2.4 48,780 2.7 26,600 6.2 -5,400 -0.3 Kasserine 49,320 15.2 62,340 4.7 6,920 2.1 34,340 2.6 42,400 13.1 28,000 2.1 Sidi Bouzid 10,970 12.5 48,320 4.1 1,970 2.2 30,920 2.6 9,000 2.3 17,400 1.5
SFAX 38,700 2.6 64,890 2.6 40,700 2.7 68,790 2.8 -2,000 -0.1 -3,900 -0.2
SOLThREGION 133,450 6.7 120,350 2.9 50,250 2.5 113,050 2.7 83,200 4.2 7,300 0.2 Gafsa 31,070 4.2 38,560 3.1 19,370 2.6 33,860 2.7 11,700 1.6 4,700 0.4 Gabes 43,680 7.8 26,790 2.0 13,980 2.5 37,290 2.8 29,700 5.3 -10,500 -0.8 1edenine 58,700 8.4 55,000 3.5 16,900 2.4 41,900 2.7 41,800 6.0 13,100 0.8
OfDU]RYTOtAl. 929,480 6.2 966,460 3.2 459,580 3.1 804,170 2.7 469,900 3.1 162,290 0.5 (3 8 1,980)/a (2.6) (547,500) (3.6)
/a Tunis' 1975 rural population (and their descendants) have 'oecxme part of the 1980 urban/total poptilation not thrcugh niigration to urban areas but through the expansion of the urban areas. As such, this rural-turned-urban population was not included in the urban population increase due to migration. Its inclusion in the natural urban population increases, however, gives the misleading inpression that the amnual birth-death rate for Tunis is 4%. The figures irn parentheses correspond to the rural-turred-urban population being considered rural-urban migrants.
Note; The data shcbi, and maethodsof calculation used in this table are based on Mission estimates which result in different gross estimates and hence overall rates of grawth fran the official data shown in Table 1.1 lrgely du to different asupiCtiX-W of u an rural poiiations. The differerces do not, hcwver, change the trends in natural and migrational growth. Table A-3: Immigration, Emigration and Net Migration between Governorates
Overall Migration Until 1975 Migratory Flow During 1970-1975 Immigrants: bI Emigrants: Net Net Migrat: c/Immigrants: d/ Emigrants: Net Nec Mlgrat. Governorate Immigrants 1975 Popul. Emigrants 1975 Popul. Migration 1975 Popu2. Immigrants 1975(Popul. Emigrants 197,5Popul. Migration 1975 Pou
TUNIS DISTRICT 318,650 33.6 38,000 4.0 +280,650 +29.6 81,030 8.6 40,930 4.3 +40,100 -4.3
NORTH EA;T REGION 71,980 7.8 83,530 9.1 -11,550 -1.3 30,020 3.3 40,270 4.4 -10,250 -1.1 Bizerte 22,380 6.6 33,750 9.9 -11,370 -3.3 8,090 2.4 15,930 4.7 -7,840 -2.3 Zaghouan 23,520 11.5 26,960 13.2 -3,440 -1.7 9,310 4.6 12,280 6.0 -2,970 -1.4 Nabeul 26,080 7.0 22,820 6.1 +3,260 +0.9 12,620 3.4 12,060 3.2 +560 +0.2
NORTH WEST REGION 34,320 3.5 170,480 17.3 -136,160 -13,8 22,640 2.3 54,430 5.5 -31,790 -3.2 Be ja 9,840 3.8 57,460 22.4 -47,620 -18.6 6,290 2.5 16,950 6.6 -10,660 -4.1 Jendouba 7,260 2.4 35,560 11.8 -28,300 -9.4 4,500 1.5 12,340 4.1 -7,840 -2.6 Le Kef 11,900 5.0 43,770 18.5 -31,870 -13.5 7,440 3.2 15,100 6.4 -7,660 -3.2 Siliana 5,320 2.8 33,690 17.4 -28,370 -14.6 4,410 2.3 10,040 5.2 -5,630 -2.9 1
CENTER EAST REGION 48,300 7.0 76,270 11.1 -27,970 -4.1 35,990 5.2 27,650 4.0 +8,340 +1.2 CC Sousse 26,120 10.3 25,780 10.2 +340 +0.1 12,790 5.1 12,450 4.9 +340 +0.2 Mondatir 15,510 7.0 27,040 12.2 -11,530 -5.2 13,370 6.1 7,520 3.4 +5,850 -2.7 NAhdia 6,670 3.1 23,450 10.9 -16,780 -7.8 9,830 4.6 7,680 3.6 *2,150 +1.0
CENTER WEST REGION 24,520 3.1 62,050 7.8 -37,710 -4.7 20,170 2.5 23,640 3.0 -3,470 -0.5 Kairouan 8,640 2.5 30,210 8.9 -21,570 -6.4 6,840 2.0 10,250 3.0 -3,410 -1.0 Kasserine 8,330 3.5 22,550 9.4 -14,220 -5.9 7,720 3.2 9,240 3.9 -1,520 -0.7 Sidi Bouzid 7,550 3.5 9,290 4.3 -1,740 -0.8 5,610 2.6 4,150 1.9 +1,460 +0.7
SFAX 17,250 3.6 37,370 7.8 -20,120 -4.2 14,570 3.0 16,800 3.5 -2,230 -0.5
SOUTH REGION 30,350 3.8 77,490 9.8 -47,140 -6.0 27,810 3.5 28,510 3.6 -700 -0.5 GaEsa 9,140 3.9 16,250 6.9 -7,110 -3.0 6,450 2.7 8,980 3.8 -2,530 -1.1 Gabes 10,380 4.0 26,510 10.2 -16,130 -6.2 9,320 3.6 10,130 3.9 -810 -0.3 Medenine 10,830 3.7 34,730 11.9 -23,900 -8.2 12,040 4.1 9,400 3.2 +2,140 +0.9
COUNTRY TOTAL 545,190 9.7 545,190 9.7 - - 232,230 4.1 232,230 4.1 - -
a/ Born outside the corresponding governorate on the left but living there in 1975. b/ Born in the corresponding governorate on the left but not living there in 1975. c/ Immigrated to corresponding governorate on the left during 1970-75 from governorate of previous residence before 1970. d/ Residents of corresponding governorate on the left before 1970 emigrated to other governorate during 1970-75. Source: Bank estimates. - 69 -
Table A-4: EconomicActivity and Unemployment (%)
Active Age Population Econ.Active Pop. Unenployed:Eccnmmically Active Populat. -Total Population :Active Age Pop. (Unemploynent Rate) 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 Governorate Urban Rural Total
TUNISDISTRICT 61.2 63.7 50.2 45.9 12.6 15.4 12.9 8.7
NORIHEAST REGION 58.1 58.3 50.4 48.5 15.4 14.0 14.7 12.4 Bizerte 58.7 59.5 48.8 46.5 21.6 18.2 20.0 17.5 Zaghouan 57.7 55.8 47.6 46.2 13.9 15.8 15.3 12.4 Nabeul 57.8 58.5 53.5 51.5 10.0 9.6 9.8 8.3
NORH WEST REGION 57.9 56.4 49.5 47.9 21.0 25.6 24.5 20.9 Beja 58.9 58.3 54.7 46.5 18.2 18.6 18.5 20.5 Jendouba 57.8 55.0 47.0 46.9 24.9 34.5 32.8 25.4 Le Kef 57.6 57.9 48.1 56.8 20.0 20.9 20.6 14.9 Siliana 56.9 54.6 48.4 40.6 24.3 26.1 25.7 23.8
CENTEREAST REGION 57.9 59.1 52.7 48.4 11.0 11.9 11.3 10.8 Sousse 59.4 59.7 48.9 47.0 11.6 14.7 12.4 12.6 ibnastir 57.6 60.3 55.8 50.3 11.4 19.1 12.6 8.5 Mahdia 56.5 57.0 54.0 48.0 8.7 8.8 8.7 11.4
CENTERWEST REGION 54.8 52.7 51.4 64.3 14.5 18.9 18.2 6.9 Kairouan 56.6 53.3 49.6 60.8 14.5 23.6 21.3 6.7 Kasserine 53.5 53.2 54.5 67.4 16.3 15.3 15.5 6.8 Sidi Bouzid 53.5 51.4 51.1 67.3 9.0 16.7 16.2 7.8
SFAX 58.8 60.0 45.0 41.2 8.0 16.5 11.5 12.9
SOUTHREGION 56.5 55.6 47.2 46.1 13.1 14.2 13.9 12.2 Gafsa 55.4 55.5 47.0 45.2 16.5 18.0 17.1 14.5 Gabes 56.7 56.7 46.6 48.0 12.2 18.5 16.0 12.4 1iedenine 57.1 54.7 47.8 45.2 8.3 10.2 9.7 10.0
OJUNTRYTOIAL 57.9 58.0 49.7 49.0 13.3 19.5 15.7 12.0
Source:INS, 1975 Census and PopulationSurvey, 1980, supplamentedby other officialdata, for TablesA-4 to A-10. Table A-5: Emnployme~ntb y pe of Economic Activity (%)
Agriculture Industry Construction Services and Trade 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 Governorate Urban Rural Total Total Urban Rural Total Total Urban Rural Total Total Urban Rural Total Total
TUNIS DISTRICT 3.7 52.3 5.5 4.2 26.5 17.1 26.1 29.5 10,4 9.5 10.4 10.0 59.4 21.1 58.0 56.3
NORTH EAST REGION 26.0 74.0 52.0 45.5 24.4 7.2 15.1 17.6 10.0 6.1 7.9 10.4 39.6 12.7 25.0 26.5 Bizerte 21.0 73.3 45.4 39.5 29.3 8.3 19.5 19.8 8.2 7.2 7.8 12.6 41.5 11.2 27.3 28.1 Zaghouan 35.1 68.4 59.8 51.8 12.5 8.8 9.7 12.7 8.7 6.9 7.4 12.5 43.7 15.9 23.1 23.0 Nabeul 27.5 78.2 53.1 46.9 23.7 5.4 14.4 18.3 11.6 4.8 8.2 7.9 37.2 11.6 24.3 26.9
NORTH WEST REGION 12.8 62.3 49.8 50.9 27.4 13.9 17.3 19.0 9.7 11.4 11.0 10.0 50.1 12.4 21.9 20.1 Beja 20.5 69.1 54.4 53.7 27.4 14.2 18.2 14.7 10.9 8.1 8.9 11.5 41.2 8.6 18.5 20.1 Jendouba 8.0 50.2 42.0 49.6 23.0 15.3 16.8 13.9 7.7 16.3 14.6 9.8 61.3 18.2 26.6 26.7 Le Kef 5.5 61.2 44.4 44.6 31.7 14.8 19.9 29.9 9.9 12.7 11.9 9.0 52.9 11.3 23.8 16.5 Siliana 15.1 70.9 61.1 61.1 23.8 10.4 12.8 12.8 8.7 8.0 8.1 10.2 52.4 10.7 18.0 15.9 1
CENTER EAST REGION 15.2 75.0 36.3 26.3 38.6 10.2 28.6 31.2 11.5 6.9 9.9 11.6 34.7 7.8 25.2 30.9 ° Sousse 13.3 79.8 28.5 16.9 29.9 11.1 24.9 33.9 12.9 8.9 11.8 13.1 43.9 9.2 34.8 36.1 1 Monastir 12.4 56.4 18.8 18.5 48.4 21.3 44.5 39.0 10.3 8.5 10.0 10.8 28.9 13.8 26.8 31.7 Mahdia 26.5 81.0 62.1 46.7 34.1 7.3 16.6 18.7 11.2 5.7 7.6 10.8 28.2 6.0 13.7 23.8
CENTER WEST REGION 7.9 71.6 60.2 60.4 33.1 9.7 13.9 16.1 11.8 9.2 9.7 9.0 47.2 9.5 16.2 14.5 Kairouan 5.5 73.3 55.0 60.1 39.2 7.8 16.3 11.9 10.6 9.4 9.7 12.6 44.7 9.5 19.0 15.4 Kasserine 10.0 72.2 62.1 59.5 25.4 9.9 12.5 17.5 14.3 9.9 10.6 7.8 50.3 8.0 14.8 15.2 Sidi Bouzid 15.7 69.1 65.5 61.7 18.7 11.6 12.0 20.6 11.9 8.1 8.4 5.2 53.7 11.2 14.1 12.5
SFAX 10.6 74.7 35.4 31.1 31.7 6.4 21.9 22.4 13.2 6.8 10.7 11.0 44.5 12.1 32.0 35.5
SOUTH REGION 17.8 55.4 38.2 33.6 32.6 14.3 22.7 25.7 14.6 13.8 14.1 12.0 35.0 16.5 25.0 28.7 Gafsa 15.2 63.3 32.6 27.8 42.6 22.4 35.3 39.7 11.5 5.7 9.4 10.7 30.7 8.6 22.7 21.8 Gabes 18.3 57.1 37.0 40.8 30.4 16.1 23.5 23.8 16.7 12.7 14.7 8.5 34.6 14.1 24.8 26.9 Medenine 21.5 51.6 43.2 31.8 19.5 10.5 13.0 16.9 16.4 17.2 17.0 15.9 42.6 20.7 26.8 35.4
COUNTRY TOTAL 12.3 67.6 39.1 36.3 29.9 10.8 20.7 22.9 11.4 9.5 10.4 10.4 46.4 12.1 29.8 30.4 Table A-6: Demind for and Supply of Employmeuitand Actual Placements
1975 1980 Demanid for Supply of Acttial Supply: Placem.ents:Placements: Demand for Supply of Actual Supply: Placements: Placements: Governorate Employment Employment Placements Demand (M) Supply (Z) Demand Employment Employment Placements Demand () Supplv (2) Demand (Y)
TUNIS DISTRICT 18,546 13,958 11,684 75.3 83.7 63.0 27,444 10,619 6,953 38.7 65.5 25.3
NORTH EASr REGION 21,642 12,606 10,781 58.2 85.5 49.8 41,043 10,035 8,770 24.4 87.4 21.4 Bizerte 8,868 3,260 2,948 36.8 90.4 33.2 16,015 2,622 2,459 16.4 93.8 15.4 Zaghouan 3,243 2,027 1,987 62.5 98.0 61.3 9,972 2,269 1,816 22.8 80.0 18.2 Naneul 9,531 7,319 5,846 76.8 79.9 61.3 15,056 5,144 4,495 34.2 87.4 29.9
NORTH WEST REGION 31,323 12,774 10,184 40.8 79.7 32.5 43,339 14,395 13,442 33.2 93.4 31.0 Beja 6,904 2,905 2,885 42.1 99.3 41.7 10,611 2,936 2,702 27.7 92.0 25.5 Jerndouba 12,504 6,701 4,627 53.6 69.0 37.0 15,366 6,611 6,332 43.0 95.8 41.2 Le Kef 8,532 1,611 1,239 18.9 76.9 14.5 9,626 2,119 1,901 22.0 89.7 19.7 Siliana 3,383 1,557 1,433 46.0 92.0 42.4 7,736 2,729 2,507 35.3 91.9 32.4 1
CENTER EAST fEGIOtN 20,975 10,696 9,329 51.0 87.2 44.5 32,316 9,470 8,687 29.3 91.7 26.9 I Sousse 11,770 6,169 5,312 52.4 86.1 45.1 16,070 6,191 5,668 38.5 9'.6 35.3 .ionasttr 4,902 2,246 1,971 45.8 86.8 40.2 9,189 1.818 1,603 19.8 88.2 17.4 .lahdia 4,303 2,281 2,046 53.0 89.7 47.5 7,057 1,461 1,416 20.7 96.9 20.1
CENTER WEST RFGION 12,939 6,658 5,809 51.5 87.2 44.9 27,713 5,125 4,795 18.5 93.6 17.3 Kairuuan 5,394 3,013 2,609 55.9 86.6 48.4 12,855 2,233 2,177 17.4 97.5 16.9 Kasserine 3,679 1,111 844 30.2 76.0 22.9 7,189 1,317 1,237 18.3 93.9 17.2 Sidi Llouzid 3,866 2,534 2,356 65.5 93.0 60.9 7,669 1,575 1,381 20.5 87.7 18.0
SFAX 10,543 6,344 4,306 60.2 67.9 40.8 15,713 4,25. 3,451 27.1 81.1 22.0
SOUTH REGION 22,039 13,190 10,253 59.8 77.8 46.5 36,782 9,099 8,212 24.7 90.3 22.3 Gafsa 6,424 3,377 2,736 52.6 82.5 43.4 12,901 3,135 2,773 24.3 88.5 21.5 Gabes 8,936 4,466 3,937 50.0 88.2 44.1 12,624 2,826 2,695 22.4 95.4 21.3 Medenine 6,679 5,347 3,535 80.1 66.1 52.9 11,257 3,138 2,744 27.9 87.4 24.4
COUNTRY TOTAL 138,007 76,226 62,351 55.2 81.8 45.2 224,350 62,997 54,310 28.1 86.2 24.2 Table A-7; Primary Education
Enrollmeng Ratio (X) Students per School Students per Classroom Students per Class Shift Students per Teacher Goverriorate 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1940
TUNIS DISTRICT 71.2 67.7 727.5 703.7 76.9 69.5 38.3 35.1 38.7 37.7
NORTH EAST REGION 62.4 63.8 376.7 377.8 68.3 66.9 35.4 32.9 40.8 38.2 Bizerte 62.0 63.3 393.6 387.9 66.7 66.1 35.0 33.0 40.3 39.0 Zaghouan 59.8 61.6 285.1 305.0 63.8 65.9 34.6 33.9 40.1 39.4 Nabeul 64.0 65.5 429.6 422.0 72.3 68.1 36.3 32.4 41.7 37.0
NORTH WEST REGION 52.1 52.7 324.6 329.5 65.9 66.5 34.3 34.0 41.5 40.5 Beja 52.0 53.4 382.0 382.2 63.1 65.9 33.7 34.2 39.6 40.6 Jendouba 50.3 50.7 389.5 394.3 70.6 68.6 36.5 36.3 45.5 40.8 Le Kef 55.7 56.6 291.8 301.1 65.2 65.5 33.7 34.2 39.6 40.6 Siliana 50.8 50.5 249.3 256.6 63.9 65.6 32.9 33.0 40.6 39.7
CENTER EAST REGION 64.0 68.1 486.3 488.7 68.0 67.4 35.5 33.4 37.7 37.5 Sousse 64.5 70.9 508.3 545.5 68.2 69.1 35.7 33.7 36.6 37.1 Monastir 70.2 72.1 549.5 530.6 71.1 64.7 36.1 32.5 38.9 36.0 Mahdia 56.6 61.2 401.9 400.6 63.9 68.6 34.3 34.1 37.5 39.9
CENTER WEST REGION 44.7 54.9 258.1 291.4 60.2 70.1 33.2 34.4 40.4 41.2 Kairouan 46.2 55.2 286.5 352.3 59.5 73.3 33.1 35.9 39.6 41.6 Kasserine 44.9 55.2 256.7 297.0 62.1 72.2 34.1 35.3 42.4 42.7 Sidi Bouzid 42.1 54.1 223.6 230.2 59.3 64.1 32.3 31.8 39.4 39.2
SFAX 62.4 61.7 396.1 382.0 65.9 61.3 34.7 30.8 37.4 34.7
SOUTH REGION 60.6 66.2 362.9 389.4 67.0 69.7 36.1 34.6 41.2 40.5 Gafsa 60.2 64.7 405.5 401.7 67.8 67.8 35.6 34.3 39.9 39.7 Gabes 57.9 67.4 372.0 405.9 67.0 69.8 35.9 34.6 40.8 40.1 Medenine 63.4 66.5 327.8 368.4 66.4 71.1 36.6 34.9 42.8 41.5
COUNTRY TOTAL 59.5 61.8 397.1 399.9 68.0 67.7 35.-5 33.8 39.7 38.7 Table A-8: Secondary Education
Number of Students: Governorate Population Students per School Students per Class Shift Students per Teacher Governorate 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980
TUNIS DISTRICT 4.9 5.4 2000 1414 32.6 35.4 20.8 22.2
NORTH EAST REGION 2.7 3.9 991 1156 31.2 33.5 19.7 20.9 Bizerte 2.8 4.4 1076 1169 31.4 34.0 19.7 20.9 Zaghouan 1.3 2.0 526 871 30.9 33.1 19.3 21.6 Nabeul 3.3 4.6 1132 1257 31.1 33.1 19.3 21.6
NORTH WEST REGION 2.5 3.4 987 1033 30.4 33.7 21.9 22.1 Beja 2.8 4.0 1025 1107 29.9 33.7 20.6 21.1 Jendouba 2.4 3.2 1216 1335 31.6 34.2 22.9 22.3 Le Kef 2.4 3.4 799 779 30.6 33.6 23.1 22.9 Siliana 1.4 3.1 881 982 28.4 33.2 20.7 22.4
CENTER EAST REGION 4.2 4.9 1102 1150 30.4 33.7 20.4 20.9 Sousse 5.1 5.7 1075 1099 30.2 33.6 20.3 20.3 Monastir 4.6 5.6 1270 1324 30.1 34.0 20.1 21.2 Mahdia 2.6 3.3 932 1006 31.6 33.4 21.4 21.5
CENTER WEST REGION 1.8 2.5 834 918 29.8 33.2 21.3 22.5 Kairouan 2.2 2.6 921 831 29.7 32.8 20.1 20.9 Kasserine 1.9 2.5 661 1063 28.7 33.7 22.3 23.9 Sidi Bouzid 1.0 2.4 1098 923 32.8 33.5 24.4 23.5
SFAX 5.0 5.9 1493 1333 33.0 34.3 22.2 21.7
SOUTH REGION 2.9 4.0 927 1061 30.9 33.8 21.4 22.4 Gafsa 3.2 4.6 752 1059 30.3 34.3 20.2 24.2 Gabes 2.8 4.3 1041 1035 31.0 33.9 21.6 21.2 Medenine 2.9 3.2 1048 1098 31.4 33.2 22.5 22.0
COUNTRY TOTAL 3.3 4.2 1077 1166 31.4 34.1 21.0 21.8 Table A-9; Health Facilities and Services Indicators
Inhabitants per Hospital Bed Inhabitants per Health Center Inhabitants per Doctor 1975 1980 1975 1980 1976 1979 Governorate Urban Total Urban Total Urban Total Urban Total Urban Total Urban Total
TUNIS DISTRICT 166 178 221 221 19,135 20,609 20,210 20,210 1,407 1,493 1,434 1,456
NORTH EAST REGION 233 528 291 593 4,411 10,000 3,888 7,923 3,518 7,753 2,321 4,775 Bizerte 191 363 218 401 5,997 11,387 5,303 9,739 2,861 5,397 2,026 3,746 Zaghouan 541 2,440 1,007 2,954 2,067 9,319 2,923 8,577 5,348 22,000 3,200 10,229 Nabeul 251 518 295 547 4,511 9,333 3,509 6,506 4,063 8,232 2,458 4,623
NORTH WEST REGION 121 626 179 673 2,102 10,860 1,809 6,799 2,392 11,623 1,971 7,889 Beja 142 598 204 624 2,262 9,506 2,169 6,623 2,204 8,686 1,910 6,229 Jendouba 106 715 158 772 1,724 11,589 1,946 9,526 2,124 13,383 1,871 9,742 Le Kef 92 390 141 416 3,286 13,901 1,940 5,723 2,350 9,265 1,740 5,520 Siliana 242 1,590 338 1,687 1,405 9,238 1,151 5,754 3,992 24,875 3,348 17,683
CENTER EAST REGION 281 463 381 582 5,055 8,310 3,920 5,990 3,180 5,154 2,115 3,277 Sousse 194 276 266 359 6,589 9,362 4,460 6,019 1,920 2,700 1,474 2,009 Monastir 485 627 614 751 5,351 6,917 5,754 7,043 8,209 10,491 3,248 4,019 Mahdia 317 971 437 1,144 2,933 8,985 1,967 5,150 3,763 11,185 2,709 7,318
CENTER WEST REGION 182 1,079 305 1,266 2,231 13,258 1,819 7,476 3,608 20,044 2,371 10,539 Kairouan 144 680 218 767 3,797 17,906 3,209 1,128 3,386 15,070 2,054 7,667 Kasserine 273 1,362 553 1,716 2,086 10,420 1,908 5,922 4,936 22,436 3,439 11,748 Sidi Bouzid 225 3,534 301 3,218 762 11,977 588 6,283 2,255 32,629 1,678 19,223
SFAX 293 495 330 558 4,582 7,742 3,587 6,054 3,409 5,758 2,263 3,822
SOUTH REGION 266 600 323 607 2,521 5,674 2,372 4,456 5,153 11,205 2,776 5,413 Gafsa 283 496 310 513 6,747 11,807 3,018 4,994 7,815 13,539 2,957 4,950 Gabes 224 599 280 569 1,622 4,334 1,958 3,983 3,322 8,413 2,497 5,359 Medenine 292 724 386 759 2,003 4,958 2,297 4,513 5,611 13,265 2,869 5,902
COUNTRY TOTAL 203 427 265 484 4,651 9,791 3,963 7,240 2,332 4,607 1,921 3,614 Table A-10: Evolution of Public Investments for Infrastructure and Social Services
Actual Expenditures ('000 Current TD)
Sector 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
EDUCATION 85,637.0 96,983.0 140,241.4 157,639.6 167,625.0 179,705.0 1. Capital Costs 9,495.0 9,748.0 27,508.4 26,310.6 22,826.0 23,640.0 - Primary Education 420.0 729.0 1,206.5 2,283.0 - Secondary Education 10,678.5 9,439.2 6,567.9 7,282.0 - Higher Education 15,394.2 15,014.0 14,761.7 13,760.0 - Other 1,015.7 1,128.3 290.7 315.0
2. Operating Costs 76,142.0 87,235.0 112,733.0 131,329.0 144,799.0 156,065.0 - Primary and Secondary n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 116,536.0 124,263.0 - Higher Education n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 28,263.0 31,802.0
IIEALTH 32,645.0 40,589.0 52,522.0 60,075.0 68,652.0 77,649.0 1. Capital Costs 6,461.0 8,664.0 13,896.0 12,773.0 14,548.0 16,945.0 2. Operating Costs 26,184.0 31,925.0 38,626.0 47,302.0 54,104.0 60,704.0
WATER SUPPLY 20,526.0 19,587.0 27,287.0 41,326.0
SEWERAGE 8)9l0.0 8,855.0 9,656.0 17,262.0 16,568.0
ELECTRICITY 23,914.0 24,531.0 35,324.0 28,239.0 77,032.0 36,200.0 - Production 5,502.0 5,124.0 16,203.0 10,208.0 47,719.0 9,300.0 - Transmission 6,677.0 7,319.0 4,904.0 3,559.0 12,282.0 6,700.0 - Distribution 9,018.0 9,849.0 11,582.0 12,945.0 15,591.0 18,000.0 - Administration 2,717.0 2,239.0 2,635.0 1,527.0 1,440.0 2,200.0 - 76 -
Table B-1: 1975 Housing Characteristics
ETi TiD TiSD TiR Tii&iii EDU's Ia
TUNIS DISTRICT 128,570 114,715 9,930 3,925 18,870 147,440
NORTHEAST 113,180 92,135 8,045 13,000 45,660 158,840 Urban 61,940 50,935 7,175 3,830 6,550 68,490 Rural 51,240 41,200 870 9,170 39,110 90,350
NORTHWEST 104,800 59,640 5,240 39,920 62,760 167,560 Urban 28,210 16,260 2,360 9,590 3,730 31,940 Rural 76,590 43,380 2,880 30,330 59,030 135,620
CENTER EAST 109,460 90,500 7,670 11,290 24,320 133,780 Urban 74,160 61,445 7,130 5,585 4,410 78,570 Rural 35,300 29,055 540 5,705 19,910 55,210
CENTER WEST 91,620 58,205 5,490 27,925 60,200 151,820 Urban 20,880 13,390 3,240 4,250 2,200 23,080 Rural 70,740 44,815 2,250 23,675 58,000 128,740
SFAX 77,560 68,235 5,880 3,445 14,460 92,020 Urban 51,710 45,720 5,590 400 2,040 53,750 Rural 25,850 22,515 290 3,045 12,420 38,270
SOUTH 120,810 87,540 7,265 26,005 33,580 154,390 Urban 58,880 42,715 5,780 10,385 4,250 63,130 Rural 61,930 44,825 1,485 15,620 29,330 91,260
COUNTRY TOTAL 746,000 570,970 49,520 125,510 259,850 1,005,850 Urban 424,350 345,180 41,205 37,965 42,050 466,400 Rural 321,650 255,790 8,315 87,545 217,800 539,450
Source; INS, 1975 Census.
/a ETi = Total Standard Type I, of which; TiD = All Permanent Construction (Type I.D) TiSD = Permanent Walls Only (Type I S.D.) TiR = Impermanent (Type I.R) Tii&iii = Total Substandard (Types II & III) EDUs = Total Dwelling Units
See notes to Text Table 2.1 for full definitions of categories. - 77 -
Table B-2; 1980 Housing Characteristics
Total Total Ti TiD TiSD TiR Tii&iii Dwellings
TUNIS DISTRICT 170,100 168,500 1,000 600 11,600 181,700
NORTHEAST 141,500 131,900 4,700 4,900 32,600 174,100 Urban 82,700 80,300 2,100 200 4,500 87,200 Rural 58,800 51,600 2,600 4,600 28,100 86,900
NORTHWEST 140,900 99,800 14,700 26,400 35,900 176,800 Urban 42,800 39,000 2,300 1,500 3,200 46,000 Rural 98,100 60,800 12,400 24,900 32,700 130,800
CENTER EAST 135,200 127,100 2,800 5,300 12,100 147,300 Urban 96,400 94,900 1,100 400 1,600 98,000 Rural 38,800 32,200 1,700 4,900 10,500 49,300
CENTER WEST 134,600 113,400 8,900 12,300 31,600 166,200 Urban 33,200 32,800 200 200 2,600 35,800 Rural 101,400 80,600 8,700 12,100 29,000 130,400
SFAX 102,600 102,400 200 -- 5,700 108,300 Urban 68,500 68,500 -- -- 1,100 69,600 Rural 34,100 33,900 200 -- 4,600 38,700
SOUTH 153,600 141,400 5,400 6,800 12,400 166,000 Urban 83,800 77,200 3,200 3,400 3,400 87,200 Rural 69,800 64,200 2,200 3,400 9,000 78,800
COUNTRY TOTAL 978,500 884,500 37,700 56,300 141,900 1,120,400 Urban 577,500 561,200 9,900 6,400 28,000 605,500 Rural 401,000 323,300 27,800 49,900 113,900 514,900
Source: INS, Population Survey, 1980. - 78 -
Table B-3: 1975-1980 Housing Activity (a) Change in Number of Dwellings
Total Ti Units Ti-D Units Ti-SD Units Ti-R Units Tii&iii Units
TU¶S DISTRICT 34,060 41,530 53,785 (8,930) 3,325 (7,270)
N)RI13AST 15,260 28,320 39,765 (3,345) (8,100) (13,060) Urban 18,710 20,760 29,365 (5,075) (3,530) (2,050) Rural (3,450) 7,560 10,400 1,730 (4,570) (11,010)
N0RFHEST 9,040 36,100 40,160 9,460 (13,520) (27,060) Urban 13,860 14,590 22,740 (60) (8,090) (730) Rural (4,820) 21,510 17,420 9,520 (5,430) (26,330)
CENTEREAST 13,520 25,740 36,600 (4,870) (5,990) (12,220) Urban 19,430 22,240 33,455 (6,030) (5,185) (2,810) Rural (5,910) 3,500 3,145 1,160 (805) (9,410)
CENTRIEST 14 42,980 55,195 3,410 (15,625) (28,600) Urban 12,720 12,320 19,410 (3,40) (4,050) 400 Rural 1,660 30,660 35,785 6,450 (11,575) (29,000)
S-AX 16,280 25,040 34,165 (5,680) (3,445) (8,760) Urban 15,850 16,790 22,780 (5,590) (400) (940) Rural 430 8,250 11,385 (90) (3,045) (7,820)
SOITJH 11610 32,790 53,860 (1,865) (19,205) (21,180) Urban 24,070 24,920 34,485 (2,580) (6,985) (850) Rural (12,460) 7,870 19,375 715 (12,220) (20,330)
00UNTRYTOTAL 114150 232,500 313,530 (11,820) (69,210) (118,150) Urban 138,700 153,150 216,020 (31,305) (31,565) (14,250) Rural (24,550) 79,350 97,510 19,485 (37,645) (103,900)
Source: Estimate based on INS data. Table B-3: 1975-1980 Housing Activity (Cont'd) (b) Construction and Demolition
Ti-SD Upgraded Ti-D Ti-SD Tii&iii Total Total Ti-SD Ti-R Tii&iii to Ti-D Built Built Built Built Demolished Demolished Demolished Demolished
TUNIS DISTRICT 7,275 46-510 46,510 12,150 1,655 3,325 7,270
NORTHEAST 4,595 35,170 2,505 230 37,905 22,645 1,255 8,170 13,220 Urban 4,100 25,265 280 230 25,775 7,065 1,255 3,600 2,210 Rural 495 9,905 2,225 -- 12,130 15,580 -- 4,570 11,010
NORTHWEST 1,970 38,190 11,920 810 50,920 41,880 490 13,520 27,870 Urban 885 21,855 1,315 810 23,980 10,120 490 8,090 1,540 Rural 1,085 16,335 10,605 -- 26,940 31,760 -- 5,430 26,330
CENTER EAST 2,760 33,840 1,355 525 35,720 22,200 3,465 6,065 12,670 Urban 2,565 30,890 -- 525 31,415 11,985 3,465 5,260 3,260 Rural 195 2,950 1,355 -- 4,305 10,215 -- 805 9,410
CENTER WEST 2,450 52,745 7,455 1,170 61,370 46,990 1,595 15,625 29,770 Urban 1,445 17,965 -- 1,170 19,135 6,415 1,595 4,050 770 Rural 1,005 34,780 7,455 -- 42,235 40,575 -- 11,575 29,000
SFAX 4,860 29,305 150 29,455 13,175 970 3,445 8,760 Urban 4,620 18,160 -- -- 18,160 2,310 970 400 940 Rural 240 11,145 150 -- 11,295 10,865 -- 3,045 7,820
SOUTH 545 53,315 825 350 54,490 42,880 2,145 19,205 21,530 Urban 435 34,050 -- 350 34,400 10,330 2,145 6,985 1,200 Rural 110 19,265 825 -- 20,090 32,550 -- 12,220 20,330
COUNTRY TOTAL 24,455 289,075 24,210 3,085 316,370 201,920 11,575 69,355 121,090 Urban 21,325 194,695 1,595 3,085 199,375 60,375 11,575 31,710 17,190 Rural 3,130 94,380 22,615 -- 116,995 141,545 -- 37,645 103,900
Source: Estimate based on INS data. - 80 -
Table B-4; Urban Housing Characteristics - 1975
ETi TiD TiSD TiR Tii&iii EDU's
TUNIS DISTRICT 128,570 114,715 9,930 3,925 18,870 147,440
NORTHEAST 61,940 50,935 7,175 3,830 6,550 68,490 Bizerte 27,360 22,860 2,380 2,120 3,550 30,910 Zaghouan 5,870 4,775 1,065 30 1,060 6,930 Nabeul 28,710 23,300 3,730 1,680 1,940 30,650
NORTHWEST 28,210 16,260 2,360 9,590 3,730 31,940 Beja 8,190 4,715 635 2,840 1,570 9,760 Jendouba 7,700 4,465 845 2,390 600 8,300 Le Kef 8,010 4,625 570 2,815 1,070 9,080 Siliana 4,310 2,455 310 1,545 490 4,800
CENTER EAST 74,160 61,445 7,130 5,585 4,410 78,570 Sousse 31,130 25,920 2,620 2,590 2,230 33,360 Monastir 29,390 24,255 2,165 2,920 1,730 31,120 Mahdia 13,640 11,270 2,345 25 450 14,090
CENTER WEST 20,880 13,390 3,240 4,250 2,200 23,080 Kairouan 10,770 6,930 1,180 2,660 1,130 11,900 Kasserine 7,840 5,010 1,700 1,130 820 8,660 Sidi Bouzid 2,270 1,450 360 460 150 2,520
SFAX 51,710 45,720 5,590 400 2,040 53,750
SOUTH 58,880 42,715 5,780 10,385 4,250 63,130 Gafsa 22,230 16,120 1,435 4,675 1,350 23,580 Gabes 14,040 10,225 1,435 2,380 1,430 15,470 Medenine 22,610 16,370 2,910 3,330 1,470 24,080
COUNTRY TOTAL 424,350 345,180 41,205 37,965 42,050 466,400
Source: INS, 1975 Census. - 81 -
Table B-5; Housing Characteristics - 1980
ETi TiD TiSD TiR Tii&iii EDU's"
TUNIS DISTRICT 170,100 168,500 1,000 600 11,600 181,70()
NORTHEAST 82,700 80,300 2,100 300 4,500 87,200 Bizerte 34,100 32,700 1,300 100 1,600 35,700 Zaghouan 8,800 8,300 400 100 800 9,600 Nabeul 39,800 39,300 400 100 2,100 41,900
NORTHWEST 42,800 39,000 2,300 1,500 3,200 46,000 Beja 10,800 10,500 100 200 600 11,400 Jendouba 10,600 8,500 1,600 500 1,400 12,000 Le Kef 14,000 12,700 600 700 500 14,500 Siliana 7,400 7,300 -- 100 700 8,100
CENTER EAST 96,400 94,900 1,100 400 1,600 98,000 Sousse 41,200 40,500 500 200 400 41,600 Monastir 37,400 36,900 400 100 300 37,700 Mahdia 17,800 17,500 200 100 900 18,700
CENTER WEST 33,200 32,800 200 200 2,600 35,800 Kairouan 16,200 16,000 100 100 2,300 18,501D Kasserine 11,600 11,400 100 100 200 11,800 Sidi Bouzid 5,400 5,400 -- -- 100 5,500
SFAX 68,500 68,500 -- -- 1,100 69,600
SOUTH 83,800 77,200 3,200 3,400 3,400 87,2010 Gafsa 25,300 23,300 1,000 1,000 1,700 27,000 Gabes 24,400 22,500 900 1,000 1,100 25,5010 Medenine 39,100 31,400 1,300 1,400 600 34,700
COUNTRY TOTAL 577,500 561,200 9,900 6,400 28,000 605,500
Source: INS, Population Survey, 1980, - 82 -
Table B-6; 1975-1980 oiusing k:tivity - Urban Areas (a) Change in Nunber of Dwellings - 1975-1980
Total Ti Units Ti-D Units Ti-SD Units Ti-R Units Tii&iii Units
TUNISDISIRICT 34,060 41,530 53,785 (8,930) 3,325 (7,270)
NORTHEAST 18,710 20,760 29,365 (5,075) (3,530) (2,050) Bizerte 4,790 6,740 9,840 (1,080) (2,020) (1,950) Zaghouan 2,670 2,930 3,525 (665) 70 (260) Nabeul 11,250 11,090 16,000 (3,330) (1,580) 160
N0RrlWEST 13,860 14,590 22,740 (60) (8,090) (730) Beja 1,640 2,610 5,285 (535) (2,640) (970) Jendouba 3,500 2,900 4,035 755 (1,890) 600 Le Kef 5,420 5,990 8,075 30 (2,115) (570) Siliana 3,300 3,090 4,845 (310) (1,445) 210
CENTEREAST 19,430 22,240 33,455 (6,030) (5,185) (2,810) Sousse 8,240 10,070 14,580 (2,120) (2,390) (1,830) t,nastir 6,580 8,010 12,645 (1,765) (2,870) (1,430) Mahdia 4,610 4,160 6,230 (2,145) 75 450
ENTERWEST 12,720 12,320 19,410 (3,C40) (4,050) 400 Kairouan 6,600 5,430 9,070 (1,080) (2,560) 1,170 Kasserine 3,140 3,760 6,390 (1,600) (1,030) (620) Sidi Bouzid 2,908 3,130 3,950 (360) (460) (150)
SFAX 15,850 16,790 22,780 (5,590) (400) (940)
sCLJH 24,070 24,920 34,485 (2,580) (6,985) (850) Gafsa 3,420 3,070 7,180 (435) (3,675) 350 Gabes 10,030 10,360 12,275 (535) (1,380) (330) Madenine 10,620 11,490 15,030 (1,610) (1,930) (870)
ODINlRY OTAL 138,900 153,150 216,020 (31,305) (31,565) (14,450)
Source; Estimate based on INS data. Table B-6: 1975-1980 Hlousing Activity - Urban Areas (Cont'd) (b) Construction and Demolition, 1975-1980
Ti-SD Upgraded Ti-D Ti-SD Tii&iii Total Total Ti-SD Ti-R Tii&iii to Ti-D Built Built Built Built- Demolished Demolished Demolished Demolished
TUNIS DISTRICT 7,275 46,510 -- 46,510 12,150 1,655 3,325 7,470
NORTHEAST 4,100 25,265 280 230 25,775 7,065 1,255 3,600 2,210 Bizerte 1,360 8,480 280 -- 8,760 3,970 -- 2,020 1,950 Zaghouan 610 2,915 -- 70 2,985 315 55 -- 260 Nabeul 2,130 13,870 -- 160 14,030 2,780 1,200 1,580 --
NORTHWEST 885 21,855 1,315 810 23,980 10,120 490 8,090 1,540 Beja 240 5,545 -- -- 5,545 3,905 295 2,640 970 Jendouba 315 3,720 1,070 600 5,390 1,890 -- 1,890 -- Le Kef 215 7,860 245 -- 8,105 2,685 -- 2,115 570 Siliana 115 4,730 -- 210 4,940 1,640 195 1,445 --
CENTER EAST 2,565 30,890 -- 525 31,415 11,985 3,465 5,260 3,260 Sousse 940 13,640 -- -- 13,640 5,400 1,180 2,390 1,830 Monastir 780 11,865 -- -- 11,865 5,285 985 2,870 1,430 Mahdia 845 5,385 -- 525 5,910 1,300 1,300 -- --
CENTER WEST 1,445 17,965 _ _L170 19,135 6,415 1,595 4,050 770 Kairouan 525 8,545 -- 1,170 9,715 3,115 555 2,560 -- Kasserine 760 5,630 -- -- 5,630 2,490 840 1,030 620 Sidi Bouzid 160 3,790 -- __ 3,790 810 200 460 150
SFAX 4,620 18,160-- 18,160 2,310 970 400 940
SOUTH 435 34,050 -- 350 34,400 10,330 2,145 6,985 1,200
Gafsa 110 7,070 -- 350 7,420 4,000 325 3,675 -- Gabes 105 12,170 -- -- 12,170 2,140 430 1,380 330 Medenine 220 14,810 -- -- 14,810 4,190 1,390 1,930 870
COUNTRY TOTAL 21,325 194,695 3,085 199,375 60,675 11,575 31,750 17,390
Source: Estimate based on INS data. Table B-7: Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975 and 1980 - Urban (x 1,000)
1975 1980 One Two Three Four Five Six One Two Three Four Five Six Room Room Room Room Room Plus (ND) Room Room Room Room Room Plus (ND)
TUNIS DISTRICT 25.1 44.5 48.1 26.5 11.9 11.1 3.1 53.5 69.7 51.0 22.1 7.8 4.5 1.1
NORTHEAST 13.7 25.3 18.6 9.1 3.2 3.2 0.7 27.3 34.0 19.5 5.5 1.4 0.2 0.2 Bizerte 6.0 12.3 7.5 3.8 1.4 1.1 0.5 8.3 15.5 9.8 1.8 0.6 0.3 0.3 Zaghouan 1.6 2.8 1.7 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.1 3.5 4.5 1.9 0.8 0.2 0.1 -- Nabeul 6.1 10.2 9.4 4.5 1.4 1.6 0.1 15.5 14.0 7.8 2.9 0.6 0.3 0.4
NORTHWEST 8.0 11.6 8.4 3.3 1.4 1.3 0.4 16.0 17.0 11.0 4.2 1.0 0.2 0.1 Beja 2.6 3.4 2.8 1.3 0.6 0.4 0.1 5.3 4.6 2.6 1.0 0.2 -. 2 -- Jendouba 2.4 2.9 1.6 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.2 3.7 4.2 2.9 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 Le Kef 2.0 3.0 2.8 1.0 0.4 0.7 0.1 5.2 5.5 3.5 1.3 0.4 0.2 -- Siliana 1.0 2.3 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 -- 1.8 2.7 2.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 --
CENTER EAST 17.7 26.7 19.2 9.1 3.0 2.3 0.6 22.0 38.0 22.6 8.3 1.7 1.1 0.5 Sousse 7.8 11.2 8.4 4.0 1.4 1.1 0.2 11.9 16.2 9.9 3.4 0.6 0.4 0.2 X Monastir 6.4 10.9 2.6 3.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 10.0 15.0 9.1 3.5 0.8 0.4 0.2 Mahdia 3.5 4.6 3.2 1.5 0.4 0.4 -- 5.1 6.8 3.6 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.1
CENTER WEST 4.3 8.1 6.4 3.3 1.0 0.7 0.2 9.5 12.9 9.1 2.9 0.5 0.3 0.2 Kairouan 2.2 4.0 3.5 2.0 0.6 0.5 0.2 6.4 7.6 4.1 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 Kasserine 1.6 3.2 2.4 1.1 0.3 0.1 -- 2.3 3.8 3.8 1.2 0.2 0.1 -- Sidi Bouzi 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 -- 0.8 1.5 1.2 0.7 0.1 0.1 --
SFAX 6.4 15.4 15.5 9.1 2.7 1.7 0.1 8.7 19.2 21.1 2.8 1.7 0.7 0.2
SOUTH 10.6 19.1 16.9 8.6 3.6 4.2 0.2 18.5 28.9 23.3 10.3 2.6 2.0 0.1 Gafsa 4.2 7.6 6.9 2.9 1.2 1.6 -- 2.7 10.6 6.7 2.0 0.1 Gabes 1.8 4.8 4.5 2.9 1.4 1.5 0.1 5.2 8.4 6.6 3.9 0.7 0.6 -- Medenine 4.6 6.7 5.5 2.8 1.0 1.1 0.1 5.6 9.9 10.0 4.4 1.2 0.6 --
COUNTRYTOTAL 85.8 150.7 133.1 69.0 26.8 24.5 5.3 160.5 214.7 157.6 61.1 16.7 10.0 2.9
Total = 495.2 Total = 623.5
Source: INS, Census, 1975 and Population Survey, 1980. - 85 -
Table B-8: Change in Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975-1980 - Urban Areas (x 1,000)
One Two Three Four Five Six & Room Room Room Room Room Over N.D. Total
TUNIS DISTRICT 28.4 20.2 2.9 (4.4) (4.1) (6.6) (2.0) 34.4
NORTHEAST 13.6 8.7 0.9 (3.6) (1.8) (2.5) -- 15.3 Bizerte 2.3 3.2 2.3 (2.0) (0.8) (0.8) (0.2) 4.0 Zaghouan 1.9 1.7 0.2 -- (0.2) (0.4) (0.1) 3.1 Nabeul 9.9 3.8 (1.6) (1.6) (0.8) (1.3) 0.3 8.2
NORTHWEST 8.0 5.4 2.6 0.9 (0.4) (0.6) (0.3) 15.6 Beja 2.7 1.2 (0.2) (0.3) (0.4) (0.2) (0.1) 2.7 Jendouba 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.5 0.1 (0.1) (0.1) 4.3 Le Kef 3.2 2.5 0.7 0.3 -- (0.5) (0.1) 6.1 Siliana 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.4 (0.1) -- -- 2.3
CENTER EAST 9.3 11.3 3.4 (0.8) (1.3) (1.2) (0.1) 20.6 Sousse 4.1 5.0 1.5 (0.6) (0.8) (0.7) -- 8.5 Monastir 3.6 4.1 1.5 (0.1) (0.4) (0.4) (0.2) 8.1 Mahdia 1.6 2.2 0.4 (0.1) (0.1) (0.1) 0.1 4.0
CENTER WEST 5.2 4.8 2.7 (0.4) (0.5) (0.4) -- 11.4 Kairouan 4.2 3.6 0.6 (1.0) (0.4) (0.4) -- 6.6 Kasserine 0.7 0.6 1.4 0.1 (0.1) -- __ 2.7 Sidi Bouzid 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.5 ------2.1
SFAX 2.3 3.8 5.6 (1.3) (1.0) (1.0) 0.1 8.5
SOUTH 7.9 9.8 6.4 1.7 (1.0) (2.2) (0.1) 22.5 Gafsa 3.5 3.0 (0.2) (0.9) (0.5) (0.8) 0.1 4.2 Gabes 3.4 3.6 2.1 1.0 (0.7) (0.9) (0.1) 8.4 Medenine 1.0 3.2 4.5 1.6 0.2 (0.5) (0.1) 9.9
COUNTRY TOTAL 74.7 64.0 24.5 (7.9) (10.1) (14.5) (2.4) 128.3
Source: INS, 1975 Census and Population Survey, 1980. Table B-9; Numberof Families, by Size of Unit, 1975 and 1980 - Rural (x 1, 000)
1975 1980 Oae Two Thre Four Five Six One Two Ihree Four Five Six Raom Room Room Roam Room Plu (N.D.) Room Roam Room Room Roam Plus (N.D.)
TUNIS DISIRICT
NORIHEAST 44.0 19.6 9.0 3.8 1.2 1.3 1.5 40.4 34.8 10.1 3.3 0.7 0.2 0.7 Bizerte 15.0 9.4 2.1 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.6 13.5 12.3 2.6 0.7 - - 0.2 Zagbouan 11.4 1.0 3.5 1.4 0.5 0.4 0.7 10.8 12.6 3.5 1.4 0.4 0.1 0.2 Nabeul 17.6 9.2 3.4 1.8 0.5 0.8 0.2 16.1 9.9 4.0 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.3
NOEIEIEST 77.7 36.5 12.7 4.5 1.5 1.1 1.8 64.8 52.5 15.7 6.5 1.2 0.5 0.3 Beja 21.7 6.5 1.8 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.4 17.2 9.4 2.5 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 Jenldouba 29.7 11.2 2.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.7 20.6 18.0 5.7 2.7 0.4 0.1 0.1 le Kef 13.1 10.2 5.7 1.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 11.6 12.1 4.2 1.7 0.5 0.2 - Siliana 13.2 8.6 3.2 1.2 0.5 0.4 0.4 15.3 13.0 3.3 1.1 0.2 0.1 -
CENIEREAST 23.5 17.7 5.8 1.7 0.8 0.6 0.3 23.9 18.8 5.2 1.4 0.5 0.1 0.1 Sousse 6.4 5.0 1.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.1 6.9 4.2 1.2 0.3 0.1 - - Mxuastir 2.9 3.4 1.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.8 4.2 1.1 0.2 0.1 - Mahdia 14.2 9.3 2.4 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 14.2 9.9 2.9 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.1
CENIr WEST 80.7 25.4 6.5 2.4 0.9 0.8 2.4 65.1 41.9 11.1 3.9 1.2 0.6 0.2 Kairouan 32.6 11.2 2.0 0.7 0.3 0.2 1.7 23.3 19.0 3.7 1.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Kasserine 23.2 6.9 2.6 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.2 22.1 9.6 3.1 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 Sidi Bouzi 24.9 7.3 1.9 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 19.7 12.3 4.3 1.5 0.6 0.2 -
SFAX 20.1 9.9 3.1 1.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 18.7 14.6 4.0 1.2 0.7 0.1 0.2
SCVTH 32.1 23.6 12.6 5.9 2.6 2.8 1.0 24.2 26.5 15.6 6.2 2.0 1.0 0.1 Cafsa 8.4 4.9 2.5 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.1 6.8 5.6 4.9 1.0 0.2 0.1 - Gabes 10.0 8.7 5.1 2.9 1.3 1.7 0.3 8.8 9.9 4.5 2.4 0.8 0.3 - Mbdenine 14.7 10.0 5.0 1.9 0.6 0.5 0.6 8.6 11.0 6.2 2.8 1.0 0.6 0.1
ODNIRY TOTAL 279.1 132.7 49.7 19.5 7.4 6.8 7.2 237.1 189.1 61.7 22.5 6.3 2.5 1.6
Total- 502.4 Total 3 520.8
Source. INS, 1975 Cnamusand PopulationSurvey, 1980. - 87 -
Table B-10: Change in Number of Families, by Size of Unit, 1975-1980 - Rural Areas (x 1,000)
One Two Three Four Five Six & Room Room Room Room Room Over N.D. Total
TUNIS DISTRICT
NORTHEAST (3.6) 15.2 1.1 (0.5) (0.5) (1.1) (0.8) 9.8 Bizerte (1.5) 2.9 0.5 0.1 (0.2) (0.1) (0.4) 1.3 Zaghouan (0.6) 11.6 -- -- (0.1) (0.3) (0.5) 10.1 Nabeul (1.5) 0.7 0.6 (0.6) (0.2) (0.7) 0.1 (1.6)
NORTHWEST (12.9) 16.0 3.0 2.0 (0.3) (0.6) (1.5) 5.7 Beja (4.4) 2.9 0.7 0.2 (0.2) -- (0.2) (1.0) Jendouba (9.1) 6.8 3.7 2.0 0.3 -- (0.6) 3.1 Le Kef (1.5) 1.9 (1.5) (0.1) (0.1) (0.3) (0.3) (1.9) Siliana 2.1 4.4 0.1 (0.1) (0.3) (0.3) (0.4) 5.5
CENTER EAST 0.4 1.1 (0.6) (0.3) (0.3) (0.5) (0.2) (0.4) Sousse 0.5 (0.3) (0.4) (0.2) (0.4) (0.3) (0.1) (1.2) Monastir (0.1) 0.8 (0.7) (0.2) (0.1) (0.2) (0.1) (0.6) Mahdia -- 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.2 -- -- 1.4
CENTER WEST (15.6) 16.5 4.6 1.5 0.3 (0.2) (2.2) 4.9 Kairouan (9.3) 7.8 1.7 0.7 -- -- (1.6) (0.7) Kasserine (1.1) 2.7 0.5 (0.1) (0.1) (0.3) (0.1) 1.5 Sidi Bouzid (5.2) 6.0 2.4 0.9 0.4 0.1 (0.5) 4.1
SFAX (1.4) 4.7 0.9 -- 0.3 (0.1) -- 4.4
SOUTH (8.9) 2.9 3.0 0.3 (0.6) (1.8) (0.9) (6.0) Gafsa (1.6) 0.7 2.4 (0.1) (0.5) (0.5) (0.1) 0.3 Gabes (1.2) 1.2 (0.6) (0.5) (0.5) (1.4) (0.3) (3.3) Medenine (6.1) 1.0 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.1 (0.5) (2.0)
COUNTRY TOTAL (42.0) 56.4 12.0 3.0 (1.1) (4.3) (5.6) 18.4
Source; INS, 1975 Census and Population Survey, 1980. - 88 -
Table B-ll Families Comnected to the Electrical Network (x 1,000)
1975 1980 1975-1980 Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
TUNS DISTRICI 135.9 1.6 132.5 179.0 5.6 184.6 43.1 4.0 47.1
NR1THEAST 50.9 8.3 59.2 76.5 17.7 94.2 25.6 9.4 35.0 Bizerte 22.0 1.6 23.6 32.9 4.2 37.1 10.9 2.6 13.5 Zaghouan 4.7 2.4 7.1 8.3 4.1 12.4 3.6 1.7 5.3 Nabeul 24.2 4.3 28.5 35.3 9.4 44.7 11.1 5.1 16.2
NORTIVHEST 21.0 3.6 24.6 35.6 28.4 64.0 14.6 24.8 39.6 Beja 6.8 1.2 8.0 11.6 4.6 10.2 4.8 3.4 8.2 Jendouba 5.5 1.3 6.8 7.2 15.9 23.1 1.7 14.6 16.3 Le Kef 6.4 0.7 7.1 11.6 5.6 17.2 5.2 4.9 10.1 Siliana 2.3 0.4 2.7 5.2 2.3 7.5 2.9 1.9 4.8
(ENER EAST 53.7 1.6 55.3 84.6 10.0 94.6 30.9 8.4 39.3 Sousse 25.0 0.6 25.6 35.2 4.1 39.3 10.2 3.5 13.7 Jnastir 21.3 0.8 22.1 35.1 4.0 39.1 13.8 3.2 17.0 Mahdia 7.4 0.2 7.6 14.3 1.9 16.2 6.9 1.7 8.6
ENIERWEST 14.1 1.4 15.5 24.6 8.2 32.8 10.5 6.8 17.3 Kairouan 8.9 0.5 9.4 11.0 3.0 14.0 2.1 2.5 4.6 Kasserine 4.0 0.3 4.3 9.8 2.2 12.0 5.8 1.9 7.7 Sidi Bouzid 1.2 0.6 1.8 3.8 3.0 6.8 2.6 2.4 5.0
SFAX 42.5 2.2 44.7 56.9 5.3 62.2 14.4 3.1 17.5
So TH 35.2 4.6 39.8 63.7 23.0 86.7 28.5 18.4 46.9 Gafsa 15.7 1.5 17.2 23.8 8.0 31.8 8.1 6.5 14.6 Gabes 11.3 0.9 12.2 20.0 8.3 28.3 8.7 7.4 16.1 Medenine 8.2 2.2 10.4 19.9 6.7 26.6 11.7 4.5 16.2
XOUNIRYTOTAL 353.3 23.3 376.6 520.9 98.2 619.1 167.6 74.9 242.5
PERCENT 71.3 83.5
Source. IT, 1975 Census. INS, Population Surwy, 1980. - 89 -
Table B-12;Families Co'mected to Public Water System (x 1,000)
1975 1980 1975-1980 Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
TUNESDISTRICT 119.0 0.7 119.7 162.4 2.7 165.1 43.4 2.0 45.4
NORrHEAST 34.6 3.4 38.0 59.8 7.0 66.8 25.2 3.6 28.8 Bizerte 17.7 0.7 18.4 26.9 0.1 27.0 9.2 (0.6) 8.6 Zaghouan 4.0 1.6 5.6 6.1 4.9 11.0 2.1 3.3 5.4 Nabeul 12.9 1.1 14.0 26.8 2.0 28.8 13.9 0.9 14.8
NORrh4EST 23.9 3.0 26.9 33.2 9.6 42.8 9.3 6.6 15.9 Beja 7.0 0.9 7.9 10.6 1.7 12.3 3.6 0.8 4.4 Jendouba 6.8 1.2 8.0 7.9 6.5 14.4 1.1 5.3 6.4 Le Kef 7.2 0.5 7.7 9.4 1.2 10.6 2.2 0.7 2.9 Siliana 2.9 0.4 3.3 5.3 0.2 5.5 2.4 (0.2) 2.2
CENISREAST 38.0 2.1 40.1 78.9 5.6 84.5 40.9 3.5 44.4 Sousse 18.8 0.8 19.6 35.1 1.2 36.3 16.7 0.4 16.7 1Jbnastir 15.7 0.4 16.1 32.8 3.1 35.9 17.1 2.7 19.8 Mahija 3.5 0.9 4.4 11.0 1.3 12.3 7.5 0.4 7.9
CENIERWEST 13.3 1.2 14.5 20.8 2.1 22.9 7.5 0.9 8.4 Kairouan 7.6 0.7 8.3 8.3 0.2 8.5 0.7 (0.5) 0.2 Kasserine 4.8 0.2 5.0 10.1 0.9 11.0 5.3 0.7 6.0 Sidi Bouzid 0.9 0.3 1.2 2.4 1.0 3.4 1.5 0.7 2.2
SFAX 20.6 1.0 21.6 36.7 0.1 36.8 16.1 (0.9) 15.2 sOUrH 29.4 4.1 33.5 49.7 8.7 58.4 20.3 4.6 24.9 Gafsa 13.1 1.0 14.1 17.2 6.1 23.3 4.1 5.1 9.2 Gabes 10.9 0.9 11.8 18.6 1.4 20.0 7.7 0.5 8.2 Sdenine 5.4 2.2 7.6 13.9 1.2 15.1 8.5 (1.0) 7.5
OGWNI TtAL. 278.8 15.5 294.3 441.5 35.8 477.3 162.7 20.3 183.0
PERCENT 56.3 70.8
Source. flS, 1975 Census. INS, Population Survey, 1980. - 90 -
Table C-1; Population, Urban and Rural, by Region and Governorate, 1975
1975 Population
Urban Rural Total Urban
TUNIS 880,190 67,840 948,030 92.8
NORTHEAST 405,830 514,130 919,960 44.1
Bizerte 179,910 161,710 341,620 52.7 Zaghouan 45,480 159,550 205,030 22.2 Nabeul 180,440 192,870 373,310 48.3
NORTHWEST 191,270 787,010 978,280 19.6
Beja 61,090 185,570 246,660 25.0 Jendouba 44,820 256,490 301,310 14.9 Le Kef 55,860 180,460 235,320 23.6 Siliana 29,500 169,490 193,990 15.2
CENTER EAST 415,530 270,220 689,750 60.8
Sousse 177,890 74,880 252,770 70.4 Monastir 171,240 50,100 221,340 67.7 Mahdia 70,400 145,240 215,640 32.6
CENTER WEST 133,850 661,610 795,460 16.8
Kairouan 72,140 268,080 340,220 21.2 Kasserine 47,980 191,680 239,660 20.0 Sidi Bouzid 13,730 201,850 215,580 6.4
SFAX 284,100 195,910 480,010 59.2
SOUTH 350,450 438,200 788,650 44.4
Gafsa 134,930 101,210 236,140 57.1 Gabes 97,320 162,690 260,010 37.4 Medenine 118,200 174,300 292,500 40.4
COUNTRY TOTAL 2,665,220 2,934,920 5,600,140 47.6
Source; INS, 1975 Census. - 91 -
Table C-2: Social Services Indicators
1975 1980 Enrollment Persons Enrollment Perscns Ratios of per Persons Ratios of per Persons % 6-14 Hbspital per % 6-14 Hbspital per Urban Years Old Bed Doctor Urban Years Old Bed DDctor
TUNTSDISTRICT 92.8 78.9 178 1,493 100.0 75.2 221 1,456
NCRTHEAST 44.1 69.1 528 7,753 49.1 68.1 593 4,775
Bizerte 52.7 68.7 363 5,397 54.4 69.2 401 3,746 Zaghouan 22.2 66.5 2,440 22,0C0 34.1 62.8 2,954 10,229 Nabeul 48.3 70.8 518 8,232 53.9 69.9 547 4,623
NORJTIEST 19.4 57.7 626 11,262 26.6 56.0 643 7,889
Beja 23.8 57.8 598 8,686 32.7 56.8 624 6,229 Jendouba 14.9 55.3 715 13,383 20.4 54.4 772 9,742 Le Kaef 23.6 61.6 390 9,265 33.9 61.3 416 5,520 Siliana 15.2 56.4 1,590 24,875 20.0 51.5 1,687 17,683
CENTEREAST 60.8 70.6 463 5,154 65.4 71.3 582 3,277
Sousse 70.4 71.6 276 2,700 74.1 73.5 359 2,009 Mbnastir 77.4 77.7 627 10,491 81.7 78.0 251 4,019 Mahdia 32.6 62.7 971 11,185 38.2 62.5 1,144 7,318
CENTERWEST 16.8 49.7 1,079 20,044 24.3 53.1 1,266 10,539
Kairouan 21.2 51.5 680 15,070 28.4 53.0 767 7,667 Kasserine 20.0 49.7 1,362 22,436 32.2 54.7 1,716 11,748 SidiBouzid 6.4 47.0 3,534 32,629 9.4 51.5 3,218 19,223
SFAX 59.2 68.9 495 5,758 59.2 67.8 558 3,822
SOUTH 44.4 67.1 600 11,205 53.2 68.5 607 5,413
Gafsa 57.1 66.6 496 13,539 80.4 68.0 513 4,950 Gabes 37.4 63.9 599 8,413 49.2 69.9 569 5,359 Mkdenine 40.4 70.5 724 13,265 50.9 67.7 759 5,902
COMMTRYTOTAL 47.5 65.9 427 4,607 54.7 65.3 489 3,619
Source:INS, 1975 Census. IN, PopulationSurvey, 1980. - 92 -
Table C-3: Regional Allocation of Selected VIth Plan Investments (%)
Tunis Center- & East Non- North- North- & Center- Region- East West Sfax West South alized
Agriculture 22.6 13.2 3.8 7.2 8.4 44.8 Mining 2.9 18.9 -- -- 78.2 -- Electricity 83.6 0.7 -- 9.1 6.6 -- Hydrocarbon 35.8 -- 0.5 -- 63.7 -- Water 24.7 6.6 44.0 -- 24.7 -- Industry & Manufacturing 16.7 2.4 6.9 2.5 20.5 51.0 Tourism 61.1 0.3 25.8 -- 12.8 --
% of Total Investment 29.4 5.5 7.5 3.3 25.6 28.7 Total (TD million) 1,534.0 285.5 391.8 173.5 1,338.4 1,501.8
Source: Ministry of Planning and Finance. VIth Plan figures are subject to change.
Table C-4: Changes in Housing Characteristics, 1975-1980
Urban Rural Total
1. Total Units Added/(Demolished) 138,900 (24,550) 114,350
2. Type I Units 153,150 79,350 232,500 Type I-D 216,500 97,500 313,500 Type I-SD (31,300) 19,500 (11,800) Type I-R (31,600) (37,600) (69,200)
3. Types II and III Units (14,250) (103,900) (118,150) - 93 -
Table C-5: Construction Activity, 1975-1980
Urban Rural Total 1. Total Units Built 199,400 117,000 316,400 Type I-D Built 194,700 94,400 289,100 Type I-SD Built 1,600 22,600 24,200 2. Total Units Upgraded Type I-SD to I-D 21,300 3,100 24,400
3. Total Units Demolished 60,500 141,500 202,000
Type I-SD 11,600 -- 11,600 Type I-R 31,700 37,600 69,300 Type II and III 17,200 103,900 121,100
Table C-6: Selected Regional Characteristics
1975 1980 1975 1980 Population Population Housing Quality Housing Quality
%of % of % of % of % % % x Total Urban Total Urban Standard Substandard Standard Substandard
Tunis 16.9 92.8 18.8 100.0 77.8 15.5 92.7 6.7 Northeast 16.4 44.1 15.9 49.1 58.0 36.9 75.8 21.5 Northwest 17.6 19.4 16.6 26.6 35.6 61.3 56.4 35.2 Center-East 12.3 60.8 12.1 65.4 67.6 26.6 86.3 11.8 Center-West 14.2 16.8 14.5 24.3 38.3 58.0 68.2 26.4 Sfax 8.6 59.2 8.3 59.2 74.2 19.5 94.6 5.3 South 14.1 44.4 13.8 53.2 56.7 38.6 85.2 11.6
Total Tunisia 100.0 47.5 100.0 53.4 56.8 38.3 78.9 17.7
Notes: 1980 Population. The Tunis district is assumed to be fully urban. Housing Characteristics. Standard housing consists of Type I-D, substandard housing includes Type I-R and Types II and III. - 94 -
Table C-7: Regional Distribution of Housing Construction Activity-Rural
Total Type Type Type Type Standard Standard Units I-D I-SD I-R II/III Units Units Built Built Upgraded Demolished Demolished 1975 1980 z z ~ ~% % % % Northeast 10.0 10.1 15.8 12.1 10.4 45.6 59.2 Northwest 22.3 16.6 34.7 14.4 25.4 32.0 46.4 Center-East 6.0 6.0 6.2 2.4 9.1 52.6 67.4 Center-West 34.8 35.4 32.1 30.7 27.9 34.8 61.9 Sfax 10.2 12.3 7.7 8.1 7.5 58.8 87.9 South 16.6 19.6 3.5 32.2 19.7 49.1 81.5
Totals 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 41.9 63.1
Table C-8: Regional Distribution of Housing Construction Activity-Urban
Total Type Type Type Types Standard Standard Units I-D I-SD I-R II/III Units Units Built Built Upgraded Demolished Demolished 1975 1980 %. % % % % % %
Tunis 24.1 24.3 34.1 10.6 49.3 77.8 92.8 Northeast 13.1 13.2 19.2 11.2 14.9 74.4 92.3 Northwest 11.8 11.4 4.2 25.3 4.2 50M9 84.8 Center-East 14.4 14.5 12.0 16.5 19.9 78.2 96.9
Center-West 9.6 9.4 6.8 12.9 -- 58.0 91.4 Sfax 9.4 9.5 21.7 1.3 6.2 85.1 98.4 South 17.6 17.8 2.0 22.2 5.6 67.7 88.5
Totals 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 74.0 92.7 - 95 -
Table C-9; Regional Quality Indices, Urban Areas
Median No. % of Units With % Substandard Persons/DU Rooms/DU Public Water Units 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980 1975 1980
Tunis 6.43 6.79 2.2 1.8 70.8 80.5 22.2 7.2
Northeast 5.93 5.90 1.8 1.5 46.1 67.4 25.6 7.7
Northwest 5.99 6.29 1.6 1.5 60.6 66.2 49.1 15.2
Center-east 5.34 5.60 1.7 1.6 43.8 79.3 21.8 3.1
Center-west 5.80 5.60 1.8 1.6 52.9 58.5 42.0 8.6
Sfax 5.29 4.64 2.1 2.1 43.8 62.0 14.9 1.6
South 5.55 5.37 1.9 1.8 40.3 58.2 32.3 11.5
TUNISIA 5.71 5.76 1.9 1.7 53.5 70.6 26.0 7.3 - 96 -
Table C-10: Urban Housing Production, 1980-86; by Category of Developer (Projection A)
Income Groups (TD/month) Under 30 30-60 61-100 101-145 146-240 Over 240 Tocal
TUNIS
Total demand 15,300 24,000 40,800 46,900 19,100 11,200 157,300 Public Programs - 2,100 24,900 17,600 9,600 4,500 58,700 Substitution Effect: 600 12,500 15,900 11,100 8,600 4,100 52,800 Balance - Private Sector 14,700 9,400 - 18,200 900 2,600 45,800 Legal Private Sector - - - 3,800 700 2,300 6,800 Other Private Sector 14,700 9,400 - 14,400 200 300 39,000
NORTHEAST
Total demand 8,100 13,500 16,600 12,100 14,000 4,800 69,100 Public Programs - 500 5,700 4,100 2,200 1,000 13,500 Substitution Effect 100 1,900 4,700 2,600 2,000 900 12,200 Balance - Private Sector 8,000 11,100 6,200 5,400 9,800 2,900 43,400 Legal Private Sector - - 1,100 7,800 2,600 11,500 Other Private Sector 8,000 11,100 6,200 4,300 2,000 300 31,900
NORTHWEST
Total demand 9,000 14,700 11,400 4,900 800 2,900 43,700 Public Programs - 300 4,400 2,700 1,200 400 9,000 Substitution Effect 100 1,400 3,700 2,200 (400) 1,100 8,100 Balance - Private Sector 8,900 13,000 3,300 - - 1,400 26,600 Legal Private Sector - - - - - 1,300 1,300 Other Private Sector 8,900 13,000 3,300 - - 100 25,300
CENTER-EAST
Total demand 12,600 20,100 21,800 8,100 6,600 9,000 78,200 Public Programs - 600 7,200 5,100 2,800 1,300 17,000 Substitution Effect 200 2,300 6,100 3,000 2,50G 1,200 15,300 Balance - Private Sector 12,400 17,200 8,500 - 1,300 6,500 45,900 Legal Private Sector - - - - 1,000 5,900 6,900 Other Private Sector 12,400 17,200 8,500 - 300 600 39,000
CENTER-WEST
Total demand 6,300 10,600 8,600 3,600 4,300 4,000 37,400 Public Programs - 300 2,900 2,300 1,400 700 7,600 Substitution Effect 100 1,000 2,500 1,300 1,300 600 6,800 Balance - Private Sector 6,200 9,300 3,200 - 1,600 2,700 23,000 Legal Private Sector - - - - 1,300 2,400 3,700 Other Private Sector 6,200 9,300 3,200 - 300 300 19,300
SFAX
Total demand 5,000 9,000 12,000 6,300 8,700 3,900 44,900 Public Programs - 400 4,700 3,100 1,800 800 10,800 Substitution Effect 100 1,500 3,800 2,000 1,600 700 9,700 Balance - Private Sector 4,900 7,100 3,500 1,200 5,300 2,400 24,400 Legal Private Sector - - - 200 4,200 2,200 6,600 Other Private Sector 4,900 7,100 3,500 1,000 1,100 200 17,800
SOUTH
Total demand 8,000 14,100 13,500 5,500 13,100 7,500 61,700 Public Programs - 300 2,100 1,300 800 300 4,800 Substitution Effect 100 700 1,700 800 700 300 4,300 Balance - Private Sector 7,900 13,100 9,700 3,400 11,600 6,900 52,600 Legal Private Sactor - - - 700 9,300 6,200 16,200 Other Private Sector 7,900 13,100 9,700 2,700 2,300 700 36,400
COUNTRY TOTAL
Total demand 64,300 106,000 124,700 87,400 66,600 43,300 492,300 Public Programs - 4,500 51,900 36,200 19,800 9,000 121,400 Substitution Fffect 1,300 21,300 38,400 23,000 16,300 8,900 109,200 Balance - Private Sector 63,000 80,200 34,400 28,200 30,500 25,400 261,700 Legal Private Sector - - - 5,800 24,300 22,900 53,000 Other Private S2ctor 63,000 80,200 34,400 22,400 6,200 2,500 208,700 - 97 -
Table C-ll: Urban Housing Production, 1980-86; by Category of Developer (Projection B)
Income Groups (TD/month) Under 30 30-60 61-100 101-145 146-240 Over 240 Total
TUNIS
Total demand 16,500 26,400 45,300 50,300 22,100 14,900 175,500 Public Programs - 2,100 24,900 17,600 9,600 4,500 58,700 Substitution Effect 600 8,000 20,400 11,100 8,600 4,100 52,800 Balance - Private Sector 15,900 16,300 - 21,600 3,900 6,300 64,000 Legal Private Sector - - - 4,300 3,100 5,700 13,100 Other Private Sector 15,900 16,300 - 17,300 800 600 50,900
NORTHEAST
Total demand 6,100 13,100 15,900 11,600 15,300 4,500 66,500 Public Programs - 500 5,700 4,100 2,200 1,000 13,500 Substitution Effect 100 1,900 4,700 2,600 2,000 900 12,200 Balance - Private Sector 6,000 10,700 5,500 4,900 11,100 2,600 40,800 Legal Private Sector - - - 1,000 8,900 2,300 12,200 Other Private Sector 6,000 10,700 5,500 3,900 2,200 300 28,600
NORTHWEST
Total demand 11,500 19,100 15,900 6,100 1,800 3,400 57,800 Public Programs - 300 4,400 2,700 1,200 400 9,000 Substitution Effect 100 1,400 3,500 1,700 600 800 8,100 Balance - Private Sector 11,400 17,400 8,000 1,700 - 2,200 40,700 Legal Private Sector - - - 300 - 2,000 2,300 Other Private Sector 11,400 17,400 8,000 1,400 - 200 38,400
CENTER-EAST
Total demand 11,500 17,600 19,400 7,200 5,600 8,300 69,600 Public Programs - 600 7,200 5,100 2,800 1,300 17,000 Substitution Effect 200 2,300 7,000 2,100 2,500 1,200 15,300 Balance - Private Sector 11,300 14,700 5,200 - 300 5,800 37,300 Legal Private Sector - - - - 200 5,200 5,400 Other Private Sector 11,300 14,700 5,200 - 100 600 31,900
CENTER-WEST
Total demand 8,900 15,600 14,400 5,300 6,900 5,80O 56,900 Public Programs - 300 2,900 2,300 1,400 700 7,600 Substitution Effect 100 800 2,500 1,500 1,300 600 6,800 Balance - Private Sector 8,800 14,500 9,000 1,500 4,200 4,500 42,500 Legal Private Sector - - - 300 3,400 4,100 7,800 Other Private Sector 8,800 14,500 9,000 1,200 800 400 34,700
SFAX
Total demand 4,300 7,600 9,900 5,300 7,100 3,200 37,4OO Public Programs - 400 4,700 3,100 1,800 800 10,800 Substitution Effect 100 1,500 3,800 2,000 1,600 700 9,700 Balance - Private Sector 4,200 5,700 1,400 200 3,700 1,700 16,900 Legal Private Sector - - - 100 3,000 1,500 4,600 Other Private Sector 4,200 5,700 1,400 100 700 200 12,300
SOUTH
Total demand 10,400 19,100 21,000 9,000 18,700 10,600 88,800 Public Programs - 300 2,100 1,300 800 300 4,800 Substitution Effect 100 700 1,700 800 700 300 4,300 Balance - Private Sector 10,300 18,100 17,200 6,900 17,200 10,000 79,700 Legal Private Sector - - - 1,400 13,800 9,000 24,200 Other Private Sector 10,300 18,100 17,200 5,500 3,400 1,000 55,500
COUNTRYTOTAL
Total demand 69,200 118,500 141,800 94,800 77,500 50,700 552,500 Public Programs - 4,500 51,900 36,200 19,800 9,000 121,400 Substitution Effect 1,300 16,600 43,600 21,800 17,300 8,600 109,200 Balance - Private Sector 67,900 97,400 46,300 36,800 40,400 33,100 321,900 Legal Private Sector - - - 7,400 32,400 29,800 69,600 Other Private Sector 67,900 97,400 46,300 29,400 8,000 3,300 252,300 - 98 -
Table C-12; Forecasted Utilization of AFH Sites (in dwelling units)
Private Sector Demand /b Balance Public ---- Projection------Projection----- Programs /a Balance A B A B
Tunis 36,500 31,800 1,100 4,400 30,700 27,400
North East 8,400 16,200 8,700 10,000 7,500 6,200
North West 4,800 7,200 - 800 7,200 6,400
Center East 10,500 (1,600) 5,700 5,000 (7,300) (6,600)
Center West 5,300 1,000 3,100 7,100 (2,100) (6,100)
Sfax 6,600 (2,600) 6,000 3,700 (8,000) (6,300)
South 2,900 3,700 16,300 23,200 (13,300) (19,500)
Total 75,000 55,700 40,900 54,200 14,800 1,500
/a Other than SNIT. /b Legal development only.
Note; Numbers in parentheses indicate negative balance.
- 99 -
TUNISIA
HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW
APPENDIX B
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING STOCK
1975-80
- 100 -
APPENDIX B Page 1 of 9
TUNISIA HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING STOCK, 1975-80
B.O1 The following discussion provides a detailed supplement to the findings summarized in Chapter II of the main text. It begins with a review of regional variation in the housing stock, then continues with an examination of the evolution of the rural and then the urban housing stock, including the question of service provision. It concludes by reviewing patterns of tenure.
A. REGIONAL DIFFERENCES
B.02 The existence of regional differences in the evolution of the housing stock would hardly be surprising, in view of the importance of inter- and intra-regional population movements, as well as variations in regional levels of economic development. The following analysis uses the seven regions defined by the INS in 1980 to detail further the changes that have occurred in the Tunisian housing stock. As can be seen in Appendix A, Table C-5, all regions except Tunis and the Northwest experienced a relative decline in population, while the most urbanized regions generally had the highest proportion of standard housing in both 1975 and 1980. Indeed, the general improvement in the quality of the housing stock over the last five years of the decade is all the more remarkable in that it occurred throughout the country, with only two predominantly rural regions (the Northwest and the Center-West) lagging behind national norms. Even in these two cases, major improvements took place in the quality of the urban housing stock.
B.03 The information presented in Appendix A, Tables C-6 and C-7 underlines the fact that substantial construction activity took place in both urban and rural areas, with little regard to regional differences in rates of population change. In rural areas, new units seem to have been built largely to replace existing substandard dwellings; in cities, construction responded both to existing housing conditions and to policy decisions favoring selected localities, in the Southern region, for example. Regional construction activities between 1975 and 1980 were thus primarily remedial in nature. It is therefore not surprising that, in most urban areas, an increase in overcrowding occurred over the period in spite of the general improvement of the structural quality of the housing stock. The following sections detail the evolution that took place in rural and urban areas. - 101 -
APPENDIX B Page 2 of 9
B. EVOLUTION OF THE RURAL HOUSING STOCK
B.04 The combination of an essentially stable population, resulting from continued outmigration to the cities, and of a vigorous campaign to eliminate shanties (gourbis) and construct modern rural housing has permitted a substantial upgrading of housing quality (Table 1). It is estimated that no less than 141,000 substandard units, about 30% of which were vacant in 1975, have been demolished, while 121,000 units were constructed, 81% being of permanent, mainly cementatious materials. As a result, substandard dwellings, which accounted for 64% of the rural housing in 1966 and 40% in 1975, can be estimated to have dropped to about 114,000 or 22% of the rural stock.
Table 1; Structural Characteristics of the Rural Housing Stock
1975 1980
Permanent materials 41.9 63.0 Semi-permanent 1.5 5.4 Rudimentary 16.2 9.6 Substandard 40.4 22.0
Source; Appendix A, Tables B-1 and B-2
B.05 While 56% of rural families lived in one-room dwellings in 1975, this proportion fell to 46% in 1980. There has been, however, no improvement in the overcrowding of occupied units which, in 1975, sheltered an average of 1.02 families occupying 1.7 rooms. While, in 1980, the average rural family lived in 1.8 rooms, multiple family households had increased slightly since rural dwellings were occupied by 1.04 family. As a result, the average number of persons per habitable room rose from 3.4 in 1975 to 3.5 in 1980.
B.06 The seeming contradiction between an improvement in the physical quality of the rural housing stock and continued overcrowding is attributable to the small size of units constructed, either as part of the government's rural re-housing program (degourbification) or by the private sector. SNIT's rural house consists of two habitable rooms, a cooking shed, a sanitary facility and an enclosed yard for the keeping of domestic animals; with a built-up area of 25m2 or slightly more, it is intended to house a family whose average size is 5.6 persons. Keeping in mind that SNIT programs account for 35% of new rural construction, it is evident that most units built by the private sector are small units as well. It is estimated that no less than - 102 -
APPENDIX B Page 3 of 9 two-thirds of the 90,000 units built privately in rural areas consisted of a single room while only 13% had three or more rooms. The ability of the rural population to undertake but modest housing investments is demonstrated further by the gradual extension of the housing stock standing in 1975. According to our estimates, 68% of the dwellings that were enlarged were one-room units to which another room was added. Although testimony to the ability of people to improve their housing, it is significant that additions affected only 13% of the one-room dwellings existing in 1975 (exclusive of those demolished over the ensuing five years); similarly, 10% of two-room dwellings were enlarged, as was only 8% of dwellings with three or more rooms.
B.07 It can be surmised from these trends that, aside from a significant increase in the proportion of dwellings built of durable materials, the evolution of the rural housing stock has simply kept up with the limited local demand generated by a relatively stable population. To a considerable extent, it is in the very stability of a population 49% of whose 1975-80 increment is estimated to have migrated to the country's cities or abroad that permitted whatever improvement took place in housing conditions. Since migration held the net increase in rural nuclear families to 25,000 as opposed to the 119,000 that were generated by the demographic base, the SNIT rural programs were able to more than keep up with the demand for new units and significantly improve housing conditions in spite of the implementation delays it encountered during the IVth Plan period and in the early years of the Vth Plan. Since the net increase in rural households was approximately 18,000 while 128,000 new dwellings were constructed, approximately 85% of new construction benefitted households that possessed some form of shelter in 1975.
B.08 It should be noted that the numerical stability of the rural population should not be interpreted as spatial immobility. On the contrary, substantial population movements have occurred within the rural environment which start to explain a seemingly surprisingly high rate of rural housing construction. Considering the 10-15% drop in agricultural employment that pertained in most governorates between 1975 and 1980, it can be surmised that a considerable portion of new rural housing was built on the periphery of urban areas. Although located in what is considered, for statistical purposes, a rural environment, it is, in fact, an unrecorded manifestation of the emigration from rural areas. As shown in Appendix A, Table B-10, most governorates experienced a net drop in the number of rural families while the governorate that showed the greatest net gain in rural families is Zaghouan, which is clearly within the sphere of influence of greater Tunis.
B.09 Major efforts were undertaken during the quinquiennum to improve the levels of public services. By 1980, rural electrification had reached 75,000 additional families, bringing the percentage of families connected to the STEG network from 4.6% in 1975 to 14.4% in 1980. Although the availability of electrical service still varies considerably among regions and governorates, considerable progress has been made to equalize the level of service within the country. With the exception of the governorates of Kairouan, Kasserine, - 103 -
APPENDIX B Page 4 of 9
Sidi Bouzid, Siliana and Mabdia, where electricity is still available to only about 7% of rural families, most other governorates have reached a service rate of 20% or more.
B.10 The extension of public water lines to rural areas has, understandably, not progressed significantly. The small size of rural settlements, their dispersal, as well as the urgency of providing water distribution networks in the rapidly growing cities have concentrated investments in selected urban areas. It is worth noting, however, that some 20,000 additional "rural families" were connected to the SONEDE system between 1975 and 1980. As stated above, it can be surmised that these families, although defined as rural, are living in the urban fringe, within the service area of an urban distribution network. Based upon the data in Appendix A, Table B-12, it can be estimated that no less than 36,000, or 7% of rural families, are clearly part of the urban population.
C. EVOLUTION OF THE URBAN HOUSING STOCK
B.11 The housing market in urban areas has been influenced primarily by an accelerating rate of migration to the country's principal provincial cities as well as the Tunis region. A comparison between urban natural increase rates from 1975 to 1980 and mid-1980 levels indicates a net migratory balance amounting to no less than 470,000 persons, of whom nearly a third settled in the Tunis District. Net migration thus accounts for half of the quinquennium's urban population growth and is widespread in all regions, except that of Sfax. Urban migration has thus increased by about 76% over the 1970-75 flows. 1/
B.12 The pressure on the urban housing stock clearly increased from 1975 to 1980 in spite of the construction of 193,000 new dwellings. On the positive side, there has been an improvement in the structural quality of the stock resulting from the fact that over 90% of new construction utilized permanent materials. Meanwhile, over 46,000 substandard dwellings were demolished while some 21,000 units were improved structurally. The improvement in the structural characteristics of the urban housing stock is shown in Table 2. On the negative side, overcrowding has increased since 1975. The proportion of families living in one-room units has increased from 17% in 1975 to 26% in 1980, with the largest increases occuring in Tunis and the Nabeul governorate.
1/ Chadli Trifa, "Les courants migratoires internes en Tunisia," Tunis, INS, ND. - 104 -
APPENDIX B Page 5 of 9
Table 2: Structural Characteristics of the Urban Housing Stock
1975 1980
Permanent Materials 74.0 93.0 Semi-permanent 8.8 1.6 Rudimentary 8.2 1.1 Substandard 9.0 4.6
Source: Tables B-1 and B-2
B.13 The large number of one-room dwellings added to the urban stock (Table 3) (nearly 37% of the 1975-80 increment) is the result of both conversions, which are estimated to have affected roughly a fifth of the 1975 Type I-D stock, and the construction of new units by the informal sector. In spite of the sponsorship of 39,300 new units by the SNT and other public and semi-public agencies, the demand for urban housing generated by normal demographic factors and sustained migratory flows has clearly outstripped thecapability of the public sector to provide a sufficient number of units at an affordable price. Thus, 82% of housing was financed privately, half of which consisted of one-room units. The contribution of the public and private sectors have acquired distinct characteristics: the former is responsible for slightly over half of the larger units (three rooms and over) constructed in urban areas while the latter finances 90% of the one- and two-room units created, the public sector's intervention being limited to SNIT's suburban housing which accounted for only 20% of its urban programs.
Table 3: Percentage of Urban Families Living in One-Room Units
1975 1980 Differential
Tunis 15.0 26.3 76.5 Northeast 18.7 30.9 65.2 Northwest 23.5 32.1 36.6 Center-East 22.7 27.4 20.7 Center-West 18.1 27.0 49.2 Sfax 12.6 14.7 16.7 South 16.8 21.6 28.6
Source: Tables B-7 and B-8. - 105 -
APPENDIX B Page 6 of 9
B.14 The disparity between the levels of intervention of the two sectors is symptomatic of the divergence that exists between the long-term commitments of public programs and the realities of the demand for shelter on the part of a highly dynamic urban population. As described in Chapter II of the main report, the rate of implementation of government programs has tended to lag. of the 85,000 urban dwellings programmed for the Vth Plan (1977-81), less than a third have been completed while half the units completed between 1975 and 1980 were programmed and financed under the aegis of the Fourth Plan. Although slippage of public housing programs is common, the situation is aggravated in this case by the rate at which the demand for urban housing is progressing. It is estimated, on the basis of marriage registration data, that 150,000 urban nuclear families were formed between 1975 and 1980, of whom 38,000 were attributable to migrants. The disparity between supply and demand has been compensated through doubling up, the average number of nuclear family per household rising from 1.2 in 1975 to 1.5 in 1980; the conversion of larger units into smaller ones to provide additional housing, resulting in a loss of about 24,000 units with four or more rooms; and a vigorous participation of the informal sector.
B.15 The contribution of the informal sector has significant qualitative as well as quantitative aspects. There has been a considerable amount of upgrading of units which, in 1975, had walls constructed of cement brick but roofs of impermanent materials. More significantly, new construction is of good quality and while some of the new units built by the informal sector are of semi-durable materials, it is an insignificant number compared to those of permanent materials while there is little evidence of the construction of new shanties within the urban perimeter. 1/ Indeed, the private sector, both formal and informal, is responsible for 73% of the improvement in the quality of the urban housing stock from 1975 to 1980, the informal sector alone contributing 46% of the 213,000 Type I-D units gained over this period. Finally, there has been an enlargement of units taking place as well although at a relatively slow rate. It appears that the acquisition of a plot and the construction of the original one-room dwelling exhausts private resources and that further investment does not occur for several years.
B.16 The consequences of the high rate of construction that pertained in urban areas have had repercussions on the level of public services, particularly in areas that have developed with little guidance from municipal authorities. With the exception of electrical service, which now reaches 84% of urban families as opposed to 71% in 1975, a significant proportion of the urban population is still lacking access to the public water supply and an even larger number have to rely on septic systems in spite of a relatively high density of development. As a result, environmental conditions have deteriorated, particularly in informal developments.
1/ As stated earlier, more rudimentary dwellings are, however, being constructed on the urban fringe by recent rural migrants. - 106 -
APPENDIX B Page 7 of 9
B.17 Thanks to a sustained effort by SONEDE, the state water monopoly, there has been a significant increase in the number of dwelling units connected to the public water system. In 1975, only 56% of urban dwellings had access to piped water. By 1980, 71% of urban housing was served by the public system, an increase of 163,000 units over 1975 service levels. Improvements in urban water distribution systems occurred in all regions, with the greatest increases in service levels occurring in the Center-East (+129%), the South (+96%), and the Northeast (+89%). At present, over 79% of units in Greater Tunis are connected to the public water supply, while, for other urban areas, the connection rate averages 56%. In rural areas, largely on the periphery of urban centers, 20,000 units were also connected.
B.18 If the availability of public water showed a dramatic increase, sewering of urban areas lagged far behind. Slightly over 107,000 new connections to municipal sewer systems were achieved by ONAS between 1975 and 1980. Keeping in mind that some 193,000 new dwelling units were built in urban areas over the same period, the proportion of sewered units fell from 58% to 55% of the standard housing stock. 1/ Indeed, the gap between the activity levels of SONEDE and ONAS has precipitated urban environmental problems of some magnitude, as the proportion of standard units connected to the public water system and sewers fell from 80% to 72%. There is persistent evidence that urban sanitary conditions are deteriorating both in older sections, where overtaxed systems are increasingly unable to absorb the additional load created by overpopulation and redevelopment; and in newer peripheral developments, where SONEDE has been particularly active. It is in those relatively dense areas that sanitary problems are most evident as individual septic pits are unable to handle the increased rate of water consumption which, following connection to the public system, typically jumps to 70-80 liters per day per capita, as opposed to the 8-10 liter consumption levels that pertain when water has to be carried from a public distribution point.
B.19 Regional differences exist in the quality of the urban housing stock, as are shown in Appendix A, Table C-8. Although overcrowding is more prevalent in Tunis than in other regions, as a result of immigration, the availability of public services exceeds that found in other urban areas. Among other large cities, Sousse, Gabes and Bizerte have over 70% of units connected to the SONEDE system; Sfax, Kairouan and Gafsa lag substantially behind national norms both in water supply and sewerage. Although the percentage of substandard units has decreased dramatically in all regions, substantial concentrations still exist in the Northwest and the South.
1/ The standard urban housing stock is defined as all Type I-D buildings, numbering 345,180 in 1975 and 561,200 in 1980. - 107 -
APPENDIX B Page 8 of 9
B.20 Other differences among urban areas pertain to the quality of the housing constructed between 1975 and 1980. Nationally, 98% of new housing consisted of Type I-D units, villas, apartments and diyar built of permanent materials. In a few governorates, however, a significant number of substandard units were constructed as well. In Le Kef, 31% of new units were either built of semi-permanent or impermanent materials as were 12% of the units built in Kairouan and 9% of those in Mahdia. In spite of slum clearance, concentrations of structurally substandard housing still exist in the following governorates: Jendouba, Kairouan, Gafsa, Siliana, Le Kef, Zaghouan and Gabes.
D. EVOLUTION OF TENURE PATTERNS
B.21 It is estimated that over 175,000 families became property owners between 1975 and 1980, raising the percentage of owners from 73% to 79% of families. The major portion (74%) of this increase in owners occurred in urban areas, particularly in the Tunis region, where the number of property owners increased from 44% to 59% of families and in the cities of the Southern region and the Center-east region, which showed increases in families owning property from 76% to 82% and from 80% to 86%, respectively. It should be noted that these are aggregate figures, including not only owner-occupants but also multiple-ownership and occupancy patterns as well. In 1975, for example, 14% of owner-occupied dwelling units were lived in by more than one family, either under a multiple ownership status, as tenants of the principal occupant-owner, or under some other arrangement. Although comparable figures are not available for 1980, there is little reason to believe that this situation has changed. Furthermore, ownership is reported as the predominant form of tenure (81%) by occupants of shanties who, as a group, account for 11% of property-owning families. Ownership therefore covers a broad band of socio-economic characteristics and is far from being restricted to the wealthier segments of the population.
B.22 As shown in Table 3, the largest increase in owner occupancy occurred in predominantly single-family structures (dar and villa), which accounmted for 87% of the differential in owner-occupied units between 1975 and 1980. Although apartments are still predominantly rented, it should be noted that about a quarter of the apartments added over this period were sold to their occupants, amounting to a 158% increase in the number of owner-occupied apartment units. - 108 -
APPENDIX B Page 9 of 9
Table 3; Tenure of Families, by Building Type Total Number Own Rent Free Other Of Units
1975 Dar/villa 72.4 9.0 7.4 11.1 704,080 Apartments 24.7 68.1 -- 7.2 41,290 Shanties 72.8 1.8 17.5 7.9 217,110 Other 32.7 21.7 16.3 29.3 42,560
1980 Dar/villa 82.3 10.3 6.8 0.6 835,900 Apartments 25.6 68.6 5.1 0.6 142,600 Shanties 80.9 1.2 15.4 2.5 122,300 Other 56.9 23.8 16.2 3.1 19,700
B.23 It can be surmised that about 30% of sales corresponded to housing upgrading programs associated with the elimination of shanties and other forms of substandard housing. Thus, the number of shanty owners decreased by about 59,000, while owner-occupied oukala and other substandard housing types diminished by 2,700.
B.24 There are few variations in tenure patterns among the regions, with the following exceptions;
- The largest proportion of non-owner occupants are concentrated in the Tunis region, where only 54% of families are owners, as opposed to an average of 85% for the other regions.
- Tunis is also characterized by a high incidence of insecurity of tenure for occupants of gourbi and shanties, over half of whom are not reporting a legal form of tenure. While the degourbification program of the late 1970s managed to regularize occupancy of this type of dwelling in most of the country's other regions, the rapid growth of both the Tunis region and the cities of the Northwest region has perpetuated the presence of a small number of families (2% in Tunis and 5% in the Northwest) living under illegal or semi-legal conditions in makeshift dwellings.
IBRD 16578 90 10° 11JULY 1982 TUNISIA
HOUSING SECTOR REVIEW - Bizerte
TUNIS l 2. . . - 7Bela o Cities
Salt Lakes Jendoubo . Nobeul Xl Ports ~ ,,,-\-.Zaghaualn0~~~~,_ International Airports .- 0 Provincial Boundaries International Boundoares Le Kef
-36' 36S
i. ,- ;' S, u ,- Monastr K aKniruo
)- - . > -~. 6 .Mcahd,a. _
35°V ! ° 5id, Bouzid
Sfax
.Gafsa
f~~Y (~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1-°
Tozeur t -/Gobes0 °t
g ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~Ttom3° 3._ FRAN AN . - 0 -- )
,0,
SPAIN , "ALB,Ay.p ' N
_ TUNISIA MAA -LT
KILOMETERS 0 20 40 60 80 IOC
A L G E R I A .tadets at tie ,epl,t to whOb 1 5 attached t,h SSv OO&O5dtt,e
BAbo,datesshowht onthfmap do,tot ,itpJy 0 theppat o the e5'o/,' dL I B Y A X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~aftee 9n /.dttn th tege 10° ettt ,at etaateta .- LIB' _ttittat