It was clear from the beginning that tackling a housing backlog accumulated over many years was never going to be easy.

Successive administrations have failed at the attempt, but none have invested as much political capital into the effort as President Prabowo Subianto, who made the issue a key electoral promise and put his brother and top advisor Hashim Djojohadikusumo in charge of the housing task force.

Failure to deliver on the promised 3 million homes, comprising 1 million urban apartments and 2 million rural houses, would cost the President a significant quantum of public support.

Unfortunately, the promise to provide more homes has preceded the formulation of clear policies to make it happen.

The good news is that the promise has been announced so loudly that the government must deliver; it cannot quietly move the issue to the back burner.

Therefore, the past months have been marked by an incessant discussion about who should benefit from and who should pay for the construction or renovation of millions of homes across the country.

Property prices in urban centers like Jakarta have grown much faster than average incomes over the past decade, making home ownership an unreachable dream for many young Indonesians.

Many apartments stand empty but are too expensive for those who would like to live, rather than invest, in them, causing what is now widely referred to as a housing crisis, particularly for Gen Z Indonesians.

As a way out, according to a leaked policy draft, the Public Housing and Settlements Ministry wants developers to build small, or rather, tiny houses to offer buyers an affordable abode while builders still get appealing margins.

That proposal remains controversial within the ministry itself, with some saying it undermines the standards for affordable housing while others argue an adjustment is needed to address high land prices and building costs.

A mock-up of such a house set up in a Jakarta mall looks clean and neat, but one fears to think what a home with an 18 square-meter footprint might look like once a Gen Z couple has inhabited it for a month, let alone for a year, with a baby or two.

The government is banking on the private sector for the lion’s share of investment in the 3 million homes program, and therein lies the problem: There is a significant gap between the square meter price homebuyers can accept and the one that developers demand.

Only the government can help bridge that gap, but the state budget is already stretched, to put it mildly.

Instead of simply ploughing more taxpayer funds into houses for some lucky recipients, with eligibility criteria yet to be clearly defined, the government must find ways to make housing more accessible in general, well beyond the scope of the 3 million homes program.

To have a lasting impact on the overall property market, housing policy must be conceived of as development policy rather than social policy. That requires work on both the supply and the demand side.

On the supply side, development needs to be encouraged by cutting red tape and making available more state-owned land, especially in urban areas where the housing backlog is greatest. More supply would automatically put downward pressure on prices, even without any subsidies.

On the demand side, mortgages need to become more accessible, including for prospective homebuyers who struggle to provide a credit history or proof of fixed income. Partial government guarantees could allow mortgage lenders to offer lower rates or longer tenures.

Indonesia’s mortgages-to-GDP ratio stands at a measly 5 percent as of 2023, compared to 44 percent in Malaysia.

Housing is arguably a state’s prime responsibility after food security, and our government deserves praise for working on both fronts simultaneously, but it may want to take its time to draft clear policies before making bold announcements.