Given increasing economic affluence, improvement in housing conditions and population decline in the last three decades, Romanians should be more likely to experience better housing than ever before, particularly in terms of the availability and affordability of space. But substantial improvement alongside numerous people still suffering poor conditions begs the important question of who has benefited and who has been excluded. Engaging the theoretical framework of diverse economies and drawing on 2007 and 2018 Eurostat-SILC micro-data, we examine the realignment between housing and income stratification across a proposed housing typology that reflects historically enduring arrangements of housing provisions and economic hierarchies. We find that residents’ socioeconomic profiles differ significantly by type of housing (e.g. showing surprising economic prosperity in urban flats and extreme poverty in some rural houses), which positions our typology as an expression of housing stratification. Furthermore, multivariate analyses highlight the increasingly stronger relationship between income and housing consumption over the decade. Of concern, a large share of the population (the bottom 40% of the income distribution) has fallen further into housing disadvantage after controlling for overall improvements in housing conditions. Conversely, the relative distance between middle- and higher-income households has decreased; given the dominance of small dwellings in the housing stock, higher-income groups seem unable to transfer their financial gains into space in their main residence except a minority engaged in the self-provision of ‘villas’. These patterns of housing stratification indicate a move towards a 40%/60% ‘hour-glass’ society if housing continues to remain outside the political agenda.

鉴于最近三十年来日益富裕的经济，住房条件的改善和人口的减少，罗马尼亚人应该比以往更有可能体验到更好的住房，特别是在空间的可利用性和可承受性方面。但是，仍然有许多人在取得重大进步处境艰难的人提出了一个重要问题，即谁受益，谁被排斥在外。结合不同经济体的理论框架，并利用2007年和2018年的欧盟统计局-SILC微观数据，我们研究了一种拟议的住房类型的住房和收入分层之间的调整，该类型反映了住房供应和经济等级制度的历史悠久的安排。我们发现，居民的社会经济状况因住房类型的不同而有显着差异（例如，显示出令人惊讶的城市公寓经济繁荣和某些农村住房中的极端贫困），这将我们的类型学定位为住房分层的一种表现。此外，多变量分析强调了十年来收入与住房消费之间日益紧密的关系。值得关注的是 在控制了住房条件的总体改善之后，很大一部分人口（收入分配的底部40％）进一步陷入了住房不利。相反，中等收入和高收入家庭之间的相对距离减小了；鉴于住房中的小住宅占主导地位，高收入群体似乎无法将其财务收益转移到其主要住所的空间中，只有少数人自行提供“维拉斯”。这些住房分层模式表明，如果住房继续保持在政治议程之外，则朝着40％/ 60％的“沙漏”社会迈进。中高收入家庭之间的相对距离减少了；鉴于住房中的小住宅占主导地位，高收入群体似乎无法将其财务收益转移到其主要住所的空间中，只有少数人自行提供“维拉斯”。这些住房分层模式表明，如果住房继续保持在政治议程之外，则朝着40％/ 60％的“沙漏”社会迈进。中高收入家庭之间的相对距离减少了；鉴于住房中的小住宅占主导地位，高收入群体似乎无法将其财务收益转移到其主要住所的空间中，只有少数人自行提供“维拉斯”。这些住房分层模式表明，如果住房继续保持在政治议程之外，则朝着40％/ 60％的“沙漏”社会迈进。