A Comparative Study on Unit Plans of Public Rental Housing in China, Japan, and South Korea: Policy, Culture, and Spatial Insights for China’s Indemnificatory Housing Development

In the current context where China is continuously emphasizing the construction and supply of indemnificatory housing, and actively promoting the construction of “Better Housing” for such housing, the development experiences of Japan and South Korea in the field of public housing reveal that the construction and supply of public housing cannot be separated from the interaction and coordinated development of the policy system, spatial composition, and cultural factors. Based on this, this study takes the public rental housing in China, Japan, and South Korea as the research objects, through comparative analysis of their policy systems, cultural backgrounds, and spatial composition characteristics of unit plans, to explore the implications for the development of China’s indemnificatory housing, and provides theoretical basis and practical references for optimizing the supply system and space design of China’s indemnificatory housing. The study selects typical cases of public rental housing from the three countries, and conducts comparisons from dimensions such as unit plane shape, L.D.K. layout, bedroom configuration, transitional space, balcony design, and bathroom composition. Findings indicate that Japan’s UR rental housing focuses on refined and diversified design, South Korea’s public housing emphasizes spatial flexibility, while China’s indemnificatory housing, while pursuing standardized construction, faces challenges of area limitations and insufficient functional adaptability. Based on the experiences of the three countries, this study proposes a tripartite guidance suggestion of “Policy–Space–Culture” to advance the realization of “Better Housing” objectives and ensure that China’s indemnificatory housing meets both international advanced experience and local social and cultural specific needs: (1) policy systems—strengthening legalization and long-term sustainability in governance; (2) spatial composition—incorporating flexible layouts and human-centric detailing; (3) cultural adaptability—balancing traditional living habits with contemporary needs.