Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article examines the implementation of the Social Rehabilitation of Uninhabitable Houses (RS-RTLH) program in Surabaya as an integrated model of social protection that bridges poverty reduction, local economic empowerment, and inclusive urban governance. Employing a qualitative approach through interviews, observations, and document analysis, the study reveals that RS-RTLH not only improves the physical quality of housing but also strengthens social capital, revitalises community solidarity, and generates micro-economic benefits such as home-based enterprises and increased household productivity. The program’s success is underpinned by adaptive institutional coordination, digital transparency, and co-production practices between government and communities. Surabaya’s experience demonstrates how local innovation and collaborative governance can transform housing interventions into instruments of socio-economic empowerment, advancing the achievement of SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ardiputra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: