1988
DOI: 10.1016/0197-3975(88)90005-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An institutional framework for housing finance in India

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 1 publication
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mostly, the studies describe housing finance institutional structure (Vora, 1999) and trace the public and private housing finance development in India (Tiwari, 1997). Some authors expose the shortcomings of the formal housing finance system (Mehta and Mehta, 1991; Sandhu, 2013) and point toward the system’s institutional and operational inadequacies (Sundaram, 1988), leading to the exclusion of the low-income households from the market. Some authors take this thread of discussion ahead to argue that the market inclination of the housing finance system is working against the interest of the poor (Mahadeva, 2004; Mahadeva, 2009; Saravanan, 2007) and suggest the direct intervention of the state to stop the systemic exclusion of the poor (Mehta and Mehta, 1991).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mostly, the studies describe housing finance institutional structure (Vora, 1999) and trace the public and private housing finance development in India (Tiwari, 1997). Some authors expose the shortcomings of the formal housing finance system (Mehta and Mehta, 1991; Sandhu, 2013) and point toward the system’s institutional and operational inadequacies (Sundaram, 1988), leading to the exclusion of the low-income households from the market. Some authors take this thread of discussion ahead to argue that the market inclination of the housing finance system is working against the interest of the poor (Mahadeva, 2004; Mahadeva, 2009; Saravanan, 2007) and suggest the direct intervention of the state to stop the systemic exclusion of the poor (Mehta and Mehta, 1991).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%