Pitfalls of Refugee Private Housing: The Ukrainian Case in Romania
The massive arrival of Ukrainian refugees in Romania after February 2022 required rapid housing solutions in a country with few institutionalized structures to receive migrants seeking protection. In response to this situation, the state authorities relied on private hosts by launching a special program called « 50/20. » Interviews with refugees, hosted through the program, reveal both the benefits and pitfalls of this short-term housing strategy.
According to the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), most forcibly displaced people worldwide remain close to their country of origin. Almost a quarter of Ukrainians, who fled their country after the Russian invasion began on 22 February 2022, are now in neighbouring countries [1]. In Romania, a country sharing a common border with Ukraine, a total of 161,370 Ukrainian migrants have applied for temporary protection or asylum since the beginning of the war, of which 77,900 were registered in the country as of 1st May 2024. This number has fluctuated roughly in the last two years. In addition, 4.3 million border crossings from Ukraine to Romania and 3.7 million from Romania to Ukraine have been registered [1], reflecting high levels of two-way mobility between the two countries.
The 50/20 Housing Program
Among the measures taken to facilitate the reception of Ukrainian refugees, the Romanian government adopted an emergency ordinance (No. 15/2022) on 27 February 2002 and launched the so-called « 50/20 » program. This program relied on Romanian citizens to provide housing for Ukrainian forced migrants, and was partly funded by the European Union. The government promised to pay the hosts RON 50 per day for each Ukrainian they housed, plus RON 20 per day and per person for food [2].
The program was an immediate success. In parallel to the spontaneous mobilization of the Romanian population, it offered landlords a concrete incentive to take in Ukrainian refugees. This financial support from the state proved to be very attractive for hosting large groups of refugees, as it allowed rents to be charged three times higher than on the local property rental market. Thus, landlords preferred to take in mothers with numerous children, or refugees who accepted shared accommodation. They usually facilitated the paperwork and it was relatively easy for refugees to find accommodation through this program.
The 50/20 Program: Benefits and Pitfalls According to Refugees
How effective has this solution been for the migrants themselves? A satisfaction survey [3] conducted by the UNCHR nine months after the start of the 50/20 program showed that 94% of the people registered with UNCHR for cash assistance have benefited from the program. The interviews conducted within the IP45 nccr – on the move project provide qualitative evidence regarding various experiences with this housing program. Accommodation was most often found through virtual groups (Facebook, Telegram, WhatsApp) and personal social networks (friends, volunteers, NGOs), as reported by one of our interviewees:
“When we arrived here, we stayed in a hotel for two weeks and then looked for a flat through the 50/20 program. I posted ads on all the social media platforms where there were and are Ukrainian groups and community volunteers. Someone replied and took us in.”
Almost 90% of the UNCHR survey respondents declared a high level of satisfaction with the living conditions, and the relation with the landlords. Most of our interviewees had good experiences. The landlords are described as “people with a heart”, meaning that they were sensitive and willing to help, guiding refugees through the administrative requirements without adding pressure, as one Ukrainian woman said:
“Our landlords are very nice people who accepted us with our pet […] they didn’t ask for money for utilities or insist on rent payment, they said that when the funds from the government come in, everything will be alright for them.”
However, some interviewees reported concerns about this housing solution. For instance, it was more difficult to find accommodation as a single mother with one child:
“Many Romanians saw [the 50/20 program] as an opportunity to make money. If one rented to several people, one could make more money. So, I was nervous that they wouldn’t offer us a two-room flat just for me and my daughter…”
The food component of the 50/20 program was another cause for concern. 36% of respondents to the UNCHR survey said that they had never received the RON 20 per person per day, either in cash or in kind. Our interlocutors complained about this situation in various ways. Some did not find it so problematic because the landlord always filled the fridge for the refugee’s family. Others, however, faced more difficult conditions and decided to change their accommodation.
“We left the flat in January […] because the landlady was very insensitive. She even turned off the heating to save on gas […] and she didn’t return the money she owed us (about 20 RON each time).”
There was another problem that stopped refugees from using this housing scheme, as the following refugee explained:
“I can’t go to a landlord and tell him he’ll get money from the government when there’s evidence that the state hasn’t reimbursed expenses for almost four months. I can’t risk being evicted from a flat overnight, especially with a small child, we can only rely on ourselves to cover the costs.”
Over time, repeated delays in receiving payments from the government made landlords more reluctant to open their doors to Ukrainian refugees under the 50/20 program.
Epilogue
In most cases, the owners have honestly supported the refugees and even become an important resource within their personal social networks. However, rumors of the abuses described above have circulated among the Ukrainian refugees and created mistrust. What is more, the Romanian rental market has become very tight. The speculative practices of some landlords have led to an explosion in rents, which has caused discontent among the local population.
The 50/20 program, intended to channel state housing and food aid to refugees through local hosts, has reached its limits. As of 1 May 2023, it has been replaced by a new state support program that directly grants (only) refugees from Ukraine under temporary protection a lump sum for accommodation and food in Romania. However, this financial support is significantly lower than that provided under the 50/20 program, and eligibility is conditional on integration into the labor market and schooling for children. Delays in payments by state authorities are also currently being reported by Ukrainian beneficiaries.
Mihaela Nedelcu is a titular professor at the Institute of Sociology, University of Neuchâtel, and a Project Leader of the nccr-on the move project Dealing with crisis and liminal situations: Dealing with Crises and Liminal Situations: The Agency of Ukrainian and Syrian Forced Migrants in Three National Contexts. She studies transnational families, transnational ageing, forced migration, and the impact of ICTs on migration processes.
Notes:
[1] Ukrainian Refugee Situation, accessed on 15.05.2024
[2] RON = the Romanian currency. RON 50 corresponds to about 10 Euros.
[3] Rapid Survey of the 50-20 Program, accessed on 12.04.2024
