Evaluating Social Housing Adequacy in Oman
Introduction
The issue of housing adequacy remains one of the most persistent planning challenges facing governments, institutions, and urban planners across the globe. While shelter is universally recognized as a fundamental human need, the reality is that millions of people, particularly those in low-income brackets, struggle to access housing that is safe, affordable, and suitable for their needs. This challenge is not confined to developing nations; even developed countries grapple with rising housing costs and the inadequate supply of affordable homes. However, it is often the poor and disadvantaged populations who are disproportionately affected by inadequate housing conditions.
In the Sultanate of Oman, the government recognized this challenge early on and established a Social Housing Policy in 1973. The primary objective was to provide adequate housing for low-income Omani citizens, thereby raising their living standards and reducing poverty. Over the decades, hundreds of social housing units have been built and distributed across various cities and villages throughout the Sultanate.
These units are provided under what is known as the Residential Units Program, which is one of three initiatives under the broader Social Housing Policy (the others being Housing Assistance and Housing Loans). The Residential Units Program offers free housing units to Omani households with a monthly income of 400 OMR (Omani Rial) or less. While the policy has been in place for nearly five decades, research evaluating the actual adequacy of these units has been remarkably rare. This gap in knowledge forms the basis of the study summarized here, which aims to critically examine the adequacy of social housing provided between 2001 and 2010 in five governorate centers: Al Rostaq, Nizwa, Sur, Ibri, and Al Buraimi.
Defining Housing Adequacy and Social Housing
Before delving into the findings, it is essential to understand the framework used to define "housing adequacy." This study adopts the definition outlined by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which is also used by UN-HABITAT and various UN human rights treaties. According to this definition, adequate housing is not merely about having four walls and a roof. Instead, it encompasses seven critical components:
Legal security of tenure – protection from forced evictions.
Affordability – housing costs that do not compromise the ability to meet other basic needs.
Availability of services – access to safe drinking water, sanitation, electricity, and waste management.
Habitability – providing physical safety, adequate space, and protection from the elements.
Accessibility – available to disadvantaged groups and those with disabilities.
Location – access to employment, healthcare, schools, and other social facilities.
Cultural adequacy – respect for cultural identity and lifestyle choices.
Social housing, within the context of this study, refers specifically to housing delivered by the Omani government to low-income individuals to facilitate homeownership. This paper focuses exclusively on the Residential Units Program, where eligible Omani households receive free housing units. The Ministry of Housing is the central agency responsible for selecting locations, designs, contractors, number of storeys, and room configurations for each housing unit. These units are typically built as attached housing in a single project location or as detached houses.
Methodology: A Mixed-Methods Approach
To ensure a robust evaluation of social housing adequacy, the researcher employed a mixed-methods approach, combining both primary and secondary data collection with qualitative and quantitative analysis. The primary data sources included:
Survey questionnaires administered face-to-face with household heads.
Interviews with policy makers from the Ministry of Housing.
Site visits for direct observation and documentation of housing quality.
A total of 330 housing units were randomly selected from the total population of social housing units built between 2001 and 2010 across the five wilayats (cities). Additionally, six face-to-face interviews were conducted with purposively selected officials from the Ministry of Housing. The quantitative data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), employing descriptive and comparative statistics, frequencies, percentages, and an adequacy scoring system. This scoring system is widely used in empirical studies measuring public housing satisfaction.
Socio-Economic Characteristics of Respondents
Understanding the demographic profile of social housing beneficiaries is crucial to evaluating whether the policy is reaching its intended target group. The survey of 330 household heads revealed several key findings.
First, the majority of respondents (86.7%) were male, reflecting the dominance of males as household heads in Omani society. Household size varied significantly, ranging from single occupants to as many as 25 persons per dwelling, with an average of 7.1 persons per home. This is slightly below the national average of eight persons per household recorded in 2010.
In terms of age distribution, the largest group of household heads (28%) fell between 31 and 39 years old, followed by 22.9% aged 60 or above. This indicates a fairly even spread across age groups, though the majority were middle-aged or older. Regarding duration of residence, a high percentage (59.7%) had occupied their social housing for between four and six years, which is logical given the study’s focus on units built between 2001 and 2010.
Marital status showed that 84.2% of respondents were married, while only 1.7% were unmarried. Educational attainment was notably low: 38.8% of household heads were uneducated or illiterate, followed by 23.2% who had completed secondary school, and just 1.2% who had attained higher education.
Employment status revealed that 37.2% of respondents were unemployed, 27.5% worked in the public sector, 18.8% in the private sector, and 16.3% were retired. Monthly household income data showed that the vast majority (77.9%) earned 300 OMR or less per month, while 20.2% earned between 301 and 600 OMR. Only 1.9% earned more than 600 OMR. For context, the average household income in Oman in 2011 was 1,172 OMR.
These figures align well with the official policy goal of targeting low-income, unemployed, and retired individuals. The presence of a small percentage earning over 600 OMR was explained by policy makers as a result of income changes occurring after the housing unit was granted; once a household receives a unit, they retain ownership even if their economic status improves.
Objective Housing Adequacy Assessment
The core of the study involved an objective evaluation of the physical characteristics of the social housing units themselves. The researcher used a five-point scale for each of twelve indicators derived from the UN-HABITAT housing adequacy framework. Each indicator received 0 points (inadequate/absent) or 5 points (adequate/present). The sum of these twelve indicators gave each house an "individuals' overall objective adequacy score" (IOAS), with a minimum possible score of 0 and a maximum of 60 points. Higher scores indicate greater adequacy.
Distribution of Adequacy Scores
The results showed that no social housing unit in the study achieved the maximum 60 points for total adequacy. Likewise, no unit scored zero points for total inadequacy. Instead, the scores were spread across a range from 10 to 50 points. The highest score of 50 points was achieved by only 2% of the sample, while the lowest score of 10 points represented around 3.6% of dwellings.
A critical finding was the statistically significant association between the IOAS and the geographical location of the social housing units (χ² = 52.040, df = 4, P ≤ .000). The Cramer’s V test confirmed a strong relationship (Cramer’s V = 0.515) between location and adequacy scores. This means that housing units in different cities received vastly different levels of service provision.
For example, site visits revealed that social housing in Wilayat Al Rostaq had no paved roads until 2013, while similar units in Wilayat Al Buraimi were connected to paved roads. Access to drinkable water, sewerage systems, and other external networks depended entirely on whether those services were already available in the area. This inconsistency is a major issue in evaluating social housing adequacy.
Categorizing More Adequate vs. Less Adequate Housing
Given the wide distribution of scores, the researcher faced a challenge in categorizing units as "more adequate" or "less adequate." The mid-point of the scale is 30 points. To avoid bias, three scenarios were created:
Scenario 1 (30 points in the top half): 45% of units were less adequate, 55% more adequate.
Scenario 2 (30 points in the bottom half): 65% were less adequate, 35% more adequate.
Scenario 3 (30 points as a separate mid-point category): 45% were less adequate, 20% at the mid-point, and 35% more adequate.
Even in the most conservative interpretation (Scenario 3), more social housing units were classified as less adequate than as more adequate. This leads to a crucial conclusion: a high percentage of Omani social housing does not meet the defined measures or the twelve objective indicators adopted by UN-HABITAT.
The Dichotomy Problem: Adequate vs. Inadequate
The study raises an important philosophical and methodological issue regarding how we define housing adequacy. If one applies the strict UN-HABITAT definition requiring a perfect score on all seven components and twelve indicators, then none of the social housing units in the study area would be considered adequate. None achieved the full 60 points. This binary classification (adequate vs. inadequate) creates a false dichotomy.
The researcher argues convincingly that housing units are not simply adequate or inadequate; rather, they fall along a continuum of more or less adequate. The rigid UN approach, while comprehensive, does not reflect the nuanced reality observed in the field. For instance, a house might have excellent structural conditions and good access to water but lack paved roads or cultural adequacy. Is that house entirely inadequate? The study suggests that it is more meaningful to measure housing on a scale of adequacy rather than forcing it into one of two categories. This recommendation is valuable for future research and policy evaluation.
Key Issues Affecting Social Housing Adequacy in Oman
Several recurring themes emerged from the site visits and interviews with policy makers:
Inconsistent Infrastructure Provision: As noted, the location of a housing project determines its access to external services. This creates inequality among beneficiaries. Some social housing recipients enjoy paved roads, reliable sewage systems, and clean water, while others in different wilayats lack these basic amenities.
Maintenance and Structural Condition: The study indicates that maintenance provided by the Ministry of Housing, as well as the structural condition of the units, varies significantly across locations. Some units showed signs of deterioration or inadequate construction quality.
Location and Accessibility: Social housing units are sometimes located in areas that are far from employment centers, schools, healthcare facilities, and markets. This compromises the "location" component of housing adequacy, making it harder for residents to improve their economic situation.
Design and Features: The study concludes that more attention should be given to the features and design of the social housing units themselves. It is not enough to simply provide a roof; the design must be culturally appropriate, functional for large household sizes (average 7.1 persons), and adaptable to the needs of low-income families.
Implications for Policy and Practice
The findings of this research have significant implications for the Ministry of Housing and policymakers in Oman. While the Social Housing Policy has been successful in providing shelter to vulnerable populations, the unemployed, retired, low-income, and poorly educated it has been less successful in ensuring true housing adequacy.
If the goal is simply to provide a physical structure, the program works. But if the goal is to raise living standards, reduce poverty, and integrate low-income families into communities with access to services and economic opportunities, then significant improvements are needed.
Recommendations from the study include:
Standardize infrastructure provision across all social housing projects, regardless of location. Every unit should have access to paved roads, clean water, sewage systems, and electricity.
Adopt a continuum-based adequacy scale rather than a binary adequate/inadequate classification. This will allow for more nuanced policy interventions and targeted improvements.
Improve design standards to reflect the average household size of 7–8 persons, ensuring adequate living space, privacy, and cultural suitability.
Consider location more carefully when selecting sites for future social housing projects. Proximity to employment, schools, and healthcare is essential for breaking the cycle of poverty.
Conduct regular post-occupancy evaluations to monitor the condition of social housing and provide maintenance where needed.
Conclusion
In summary, this paper provides a rare and valuable empirical evaluation of social housing adequacy in Oman. Focusing on five governorate centers for units built between 2001 and 2010, the study found that more social housing units were objectively less adequate than more adequate when measured against UN-HABITAT indicators. None of the 330 surveyed units achieved a perfect adequacy score. Socio-economically, the policy successfully targets low-income, poorly educated, and unemployed Omani citizens.
However, significant disparities exist in the quality of construction, access to external services, and location of housing units across different wilayats. The study recommends moving away from a simplistic adequate/inadequate dichotomy and instead measuring housing on a continuum of adequacy. More attention must be given to the features, design, and infrastructure connectivity of social housing to truly raise the living standards of low-income Omani families. The findings are a call to action for the Ministry of Housing to standardize quality and ensure that every social housing recipient, regardless of their city or village, receives genuinely adequate housing.
Also Read: 10 Year's Affordable Housing Delivery and Financial Strategy