Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Urban Housing Initiatives in South America: Caracas, Rio de...

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN HOUSING INITIATIVES

IN SOUTH AMERICA:

CARACAS, RIO DE JANEIRO, AND SAO PAULO

by

Vanessa N. Francis

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of City and Regional Planning

MORGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

December 2007

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

UMI Number: 1451948

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and

photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper

alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized

copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

®

UMIUMI Microform 1451948

Copyright 2008 by ProQuest LLC.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway

PO Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346


COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN HOUSING INITIATIVES

IN SOUTH AMERICA:

CARACAS, RIO DE JANEIRO AND SAO PAULO

by

Vanessa N. Francis

has been approved

October 2007

THESIS COMMITTEE APPROVAL:

ChairSiddhartha Sen, Ph.D.

Pressley, pftrCL.^o /c e Ann

Anne Genin, LL.M.


DEDICATION

To my grandmother, Mercides Griffin, thank you for your inspiration.


iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to acknowledge the following people that were integral to

completion of this project: Dr. Siddhartha Sen, my advisor for his great

ideas regarding the direction of the project; Patricia Francis, for the much

needed reality check and forcing me to get this thesis "done already!";

Ernest Francis, for giving me my adventurous spirit to travel to some of the

locations mentioned in this thesis; Dr. Nicole Francis-Williams, of Visionary

Policy Institute for offering me advice of someone who has been here

before; Dr. Joyce Pressley and; Professor Anne Genin, for supplying me

with the tools to expand my knowledge on international issues. I would

also like to acknowledge the several subject matter experts I have

communicated with throughout the progress of this project: Roberto F.

Asprilla, Executive Director of the Afro-Latino Development Alliance; Jose

Brakarz, Senior Specialist at the Inter-American Development Bank and

Sujatha Fernandes, Assistant Professor of Sociology at Queens College,

City University of New York. Lastly, I would like to thank my family and

friends for there unyielding support and patience.


V

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables......................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures.................................................................................................. .— viii

Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................ix

Chapter 1 Introduction................................. 11.1 Housing in the Developing World.......................................11.2 Problem Statement..............................................................31.3 Objectives of Analysis.......................................................... .41.4 Organization of Thesis.......................................................... .4

Chapter 2 Methodology.............................................................................. 62.1 Identification of Study Cities.................................... 62.1.1 Constitutional Framework .................................... 62.1.2 City Size.......................... ..82.1.3 Economic Importance....................................................92.2 Research M ethod.............................................................. .102.3 Data Sources...................................................................... 10

Chapter 3 Urban Housing in Latin America: A Review ofthe Literature............................. 133.1 Historical Evolution of Urbanization in Latin Am erica 133.2 Development of the Informal Housing Sector.................143.2.1 Creation of Self-Help Housing .................................143.2.3 Consequences of Self-Help Housing........................... 173.2.3 Increasing Poverty...................... ;.........193.2.4 Environmental Issues.....................................................21

3.3 Informal Housing in the Study Cities.................................233.4 Housing Policies in Latin Am erica.....................................313.4.1 Strategies....................................................................... 313.4.2 Strategies in Study Cities.............................................. 363.4.3 The Role of Non-State Actors...................................... 383.5 Summary......................... 41

Chapter 4 Housing Initiatives Implemented in Study Cities...................... 424.1 Overview.............................................................................424.1.1 Caracas: Proyecto Caracas Mejoramiento de los Barrios (CAMEBA).................................................................................. .43


vi

4.1.2 Rio de Janeiro: Favela/Bairro.......................................... 504.1.3 Sao Paulo: Environmental Recovery Program for theGuarapiranga Basin (Programa Guarapiranga)..................564.2 Comparative Analysis of Housing Programs................. .614.2.1 Primary Focus of Program/Initiative............................644.2.2 Program/Initiative Timeline...........................................654.2.3 Program/Project Scope................................................664.2.4 Number of Individuals Impacted by Program...........664.2.5 Level of Environmental Focus......................................674.2.6 Program/Initiative Costs................................................684.2.7 Funding Source(s)......................................................... 694.2.8 Participatory Strategies.................................................724.2.9 Land Titling/Tenure........................................................ 754.2.10 Resettlement Strategies................................................774.3 Select Socioeconomic Impacts of Housing Programs...824.4 Summary.............................................................................87

Chapter 5 Conclusion.....................................................................................895.1 Overview............................................................................ .895.2 Future Research Suggestions........................................... 905.3 Policy Recommendations................................................. .925.4 Conclusion..........................................................................96

Referenced Work................................................................................................98

Appendixes........................................................................................... 122


LIST OF TABLES

vii

Table 1: South America’s 15 Largest Cities, by Population......................... .9Table 2: The Growth of Self-Help Housing in Study Cities.......................... .16Table 3: Total Dwelling Units vs. Informal Dwelling Units, Rio de Janeiro -1990 and 2000................................................................................................. 27Table 4: Total Dwelling Units vs. Informal Dwelling Units, Sao Paulo - 1990and 2000 30Table 5: Favela Numbers and Population by District,Rio de Janeiro, 1948....................................................................................... 52Table 6: Urban and Favela Populations of the Rio de JaneiroMunicipality, 1950-1980............................................................................. ....53Table 7: Housing Typology of Metropolitan Sao Paulo, 1999....................57Table 8: Housing Initiatives Matrix................................................................. 63Table 9: Resettlements Executed - CAMEBA ................................... 80Table A1: Urbanization Levels for 22 Countries in Latin America,1950-2030....................................................................................................... 121Table B1: Poor Population Estimates in Urban Areas, South AmericanCountries & Latin America (Percentage of Total Population)...............123Table B2: Indigent Population Estimates in Urban Areas, South American Countries & Latin America (Percentage of Total Population)................ 124


viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Levels of Urbanization for Selected Major World Regions,1925 to 2025......................................................................................................14Figure 2: Urban Poverty vs. Total Poverty - Latin America, Venezuela andBrazil (Per ce n t)............................................................................................... 20Figure 3: Informal Housing - Caracas........................................................... 24Figure 4: Rochina Favela - Rio de Janeiro................. ................................. 26Figure 5: Informal Housing - Sao Paulo......................................................... 29Figure 6: Housing Construction in Venezuela, 1997 to 2003....................37Figure 7: Location Map of Petare Norte and La Vega, Caracas...........45Figure 8: Aftermath of December 1999 Flooding in Vargas State........... 46Figure 9: Map of Affected Areas of 1999 Flooding, Venezuela................47Figure 10: Location of Favelas and Illegal Squatters,Rio de Janeiro, 1995....................................................................................... 52Figure 11: Location of Informal Settlements and Illegal Subdivisions in theSao Paulo Municipality, 2000.........................................................................58Figure 12: Families Impacted by Resettlement Component o f ProgramaGuarapiranga................................................................................................. 82Figure C 1: Caracas.................................................................................... 125Figure C2: Rio de Janeiro...........................................................................126Figure C3: Day V iew -S ao Paulo............................................................... 127Figure C4: Evening View - Sao Paulo.......................................................127


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AMC

CAMEBA

CDHU

CSO

ECLAC

FINEP

FUNDACOMUN

IADB

IFI

IMF

MDG

MINDUR

MSTC

NGO

PAD

Area Metropolitana de Caracas (Caracas Metropolitan

Area)

Proyecto Caracas Mejoramiento de los Barrios

(Caracas Slum-Upgrading Project)

Companhia de Desenvolvimento Habitacional e Urbano

do Estado de Sao Paulo (State of Sao Paulo Urban and

Housing Development Agency)

Civil Society Organization

Economic Commission for Latin America and the

Caribbean

Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (Research and Projects

Finance/The Brazilian Innovation Agency)

Desarrollo de la Comunidad y Formento Municipal

(Foundation for Community Development and Municipal

Promotion)

Inter-American Development Bank

International Financial Institution

International Monetary Fund

Millennium Development Goal

Ministerio de Desarrollo Urbano (Ministry of Urban

Development/Venezuela)

Movimento de Sem-Teto do Centro (Downtown Homeless

People's Movement/Sao Paulo)

Non-Governmental Organization

Project Appraisal Document


X

PDVSA

PMSP

R$

SABESP

SEHAB

SMA

SMH

UN-Habitat

Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. [Venezuelan State-owned Oil

Company)

Prefeitura do Municipio do Sao Paulo (City Hall of Sao

Paulo)

Symbol for the Brazilian currency the Real (pronounced

ree-ahl)

Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao

Paulo (State of Sao Paulo Basic Sanitation Agency) Secretaria Municipal de Habitagao (Municipal Secretariat

of Housing and Urban Development/Sao Paulo)

Secretaria de Estado do Meio Ambiente (State of Sao

Paulo Environmental Secretariat)

Secretaria Municipal do Habitat (Municipal Housing

Department - Rio de Janeiro)

United Nations Human Settlements Programme


ABSTRACT

Title of Thesis: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPORARY

URBAN HOUSING INITIATIVES IN

SOUTH AMERICA:

CARACAS, RIO DE JANEIRO AND SAO PAULO

Vanessa N. Francis, Master of City and Regional Planning, December 2007

Thesis chaired by: Siddhartha Sen, Ph.D.Department of City and Regional Planning

Due to increased urbanization in the global south during the later

half of the 20th century, a severe lack of suitable housing and related

infrastructure in low-income communities has developed. In order to

address housing deficit issues, particularly in large metropolitan areas,

national and local governments have implemented various policies and

programs intended to improve housing conditions of residents living in

poverty-stricken communities. To determine what types of programs

provide housing for low-income residents, this thesis will examine select

housing programs implemented in the South American cities of Caracas,


Venezuela, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and Sao Paulo, Brazil from the 1990s

through the early 21st century.

This study will provide an overview of urban housing in Latin America

during the 20th century, including housing policies that contributed to the

growth of housing settlements for low-income residents. The impact of the

proliferation of low-income housing in urban areas will be discussed. This

study will then present a narrative on select urban housing improvement

and upgrading programs implemented in the low-income neighborhoods

in the study cities. Data and other pertinent information regarding these

initiatives were obtained from urban housing policy reports and briefs and

program evaluations. The overarching goal of this assessment is to

establish if programmatic outcomes were successful and to examine the

impacts of such programs in the social and economic realms.

Keywords: urban housing, Caracas, urbanization, Rio de Janeiro, South

America, Sao Paulo, Venezuela, Brazil, slum upgrading


1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Housing in the Developing World

According to the United Nations Settlement Programme (UN-

Habitat, 2003c), by 2007 the majority of the world’s population will live in

urbanized areas. The swelling numbers of urban dwellers, particularly in

the developing world, has resulted in an increase of people living in slums1

(Browne, 2003). Throughout the developing world, access to adequate

housing and related infrastructure is typically out of reach for a significant

portion of the population. In 2003, an estimated 900 million residents living

in urban areas and over 1 billion residents in rural areas lived in

substandard housing. Inadequate housing is typically subjected to

overcrowding, lack of adequate water supplies, lack of sanitation services

including refuse collection and drainage facilities (UN-Habitat, 2003b).

To address this problem of inadequate housing in developing

regions over the last 40 years, programs and policy initiatives have been

instituted on a local and regional scale and have been supported by

national governments, international organizations and nongovernmental

organizations. Such programs include (1) urban upgrading; (2) programs

1 Defined as “a contiguous settlement where the inhabitants are characterized as having inadequate housing and basic services.” (UN-Habitat, 2006, p. 1).


2

that provide services and infrastructure development; (3) creation of

housing policies designed to foster development of adequate housing; (4)

financing of housing projects; and (5) community rebuilding in the wake

of natural disasters.

The primary intent of these programs is noble because such

programs create affordable housing for low-income residents and

adequate community infrastructure and opportunities for homeownership

through land title transfers/tenure security programs and home loans.

However, these programs face several challenges that impact their

progress. Possible issues arising consist of funding problems or shortages,

political problems (e.g., change in administrations, other pressing

municipal and regional priorities), quality of redevelopment, higher-

income populations taking advantage of housing programs, and real

estate matters including land speculation and corruption.

This thesis will review contemporary2 initiatives that have been

implemented and the outcomes of these programs in a South American

context. Using the cities of Caracas, Venezuela, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and

Sao Paulo, Brazil as examples of municipalities that have implemented

various policies and programs to address the urban housing shortages for

2 For this analysis, "contemporary" will include programs implemented from approximately 1990 to 2003.


3

low-income residents, this thesis will provide a comparative analysis of the

reviewed programs, discussing their positive and negative attributes and

providing possible recommendations with the intent of improving these

programs.

1.2 Problem Statement

Since 1950, the developing world has urbanized at lightening

speed. Significant portions of the population of urban areas in developing

countries have low incomes and are resource deficient. A consequence

of so much urbanization in these areas is the lack of adequate housing or

housing in general that is within a reasonable cost range for low-income

populations. As stated by Browne (2003), inadequate living quarters

represent a ‘‘multifactorial epidem ic” , she mentions rapid urbanization as

one factor for the urban housing crunch in developing countries.3 For the

purposes of this study, the im pact of urbanization on the low-income

housing sector will spotlight South America's response to improving

dwelling conditions for its poor populations.

To focus on this aspect of urban housing in South American

countries, the study will address the following research inquires:

3 According to Browne (2003), other factors include economic restructuring, natural disasters, and political events.


4

1. What housing initiatives were enacted during the late 20th and

21s1 centuries to alleviate housing conditions for low-income

populations in the study cities?

2. What are the outcomes of these programs?

1.3 Objectives of Analysis

The purpose of this analysis is to assess the impacts of reform

programs instituted in the study cities during the 1990s and early 2000s.

The analysis will highlight the positive points and outcomes of these

programs as well as examine program and initiative shortcomings.

1.4 Organization of Thesis

This thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter 2 provides the method

and approach used for selection of the study cities. This section includes

how the study cities were chosen for examination, queries what will allow

for a segue to the comparative analysis, a research design and data

sources used.

Chapter 3 provides a literature review examining urban housing in

Latin America. An overview of housing issues in urbanized areas and a

discussion of housing policies to address the issues will be provided.

Further, the chapter will focus on the informal housing sector and the

impacts it has for the residents who call these places home and its

impacts on the broader urban area. Chapter three will also briefly focus


5

on the impact of UN Millennium Development Goals on housing policies

throughout the developing world.

Chapter 4 provides profiles of the three housing initiatives that are

used for comparison in the study. The housing initiatives discussed in this

chapter are (1) Proyecto Caracas Mejoramiento de los Barrios

(CAMEBA)—a housing program implemented in two low income areas in

Caracas in 1999; (2) Favela/Bairro—a housing program that targeted mid

sized slums in Rio de Janeiro in 1996; and (3) the Environmental Recovery

Program for the Guarapiranga Basin (Programa Guarapiranga)—an

environmental rehabilitation program implemented in Southwestern Sao

Paulo in the mid-1990s that included an urban housing component.

Afterwards a comparative analysis of the programs will be presented in a

matrix format followed with a discussion of the social and economic

impacts of these programs.

Chapter 5 will conclude the study by providing suggestions for

future research regarding urban housing programs in South America.

Afterwards, a discussion of programmatic shortcomings and policy

recommendations will be detailed.


6

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

2.1 Identification of Study Cities

The decision to examine the topic of urban housing in Caracas, Rio

de Janeiro and Sao Paulo was determined using a three-prong

approach. The approach includes studying constitutional precedents

that pave the way for the development of urban housing policies, the size

and population of urban populations within urban areas of South America

and the role of the economy in urban areas on the continent.

2.1.1 Constitutional Framework

The first portion of the approach was to determine if bofh

Venezuela and Brazil addressed urban housing from a legal standpoint.

Several policies on the national level have been instituted by Venezuela

and Brazil to address urban and rural housing for their respective country's

poor. Both countries have portions of their national constitution devoted

to insuring suitable housing for its citizens. For example, constitutional

amendments addressing housing for Venezuela and Brazil are stated

below:


7

1. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Chapter V, Article

82:

“ Every person has the right to adequate, safe and comfortable,

hygienic housing, with appropriate essential basic services,

including a habitat such as to humanize family, neighborhood and

community relations. The progressive meeting of this requirement is

the shared responsibility of citizens and the State in all areas. The

State shall give priority to families, and shall guarantee them,

especially those with meager resources, the possibility of access to

social policies and credit for the construction, purchase or

enlargement of dwellings.”4 (Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic

of Venezuela, 2000)

2. Federal Republic of Brazil Constitution, Article 6:

“ Education, health, work, habitation5, leisure, security, social

security, protection of motherhood and childhood, and assistance

to the destitute, are social rights, as set forth by this Constitution.”

(Constitution of the Federal Republic of Brazil, 1988)

4 This reform, in addition to numerous other reforms dealing with social, economic, cultural and educational rights, was enacted in the 1999 Venezuelan Constitution.5 “ Flabitation" was added as an amendment (Amendment No. 26) to the Constitution on February 14-2000.


8

2.1.2 City Size

The second portion of this approach was to determine the size of

the study cities in the context of their own countries and South America.

For the purposes of this study, a city is defined an incorporated

municipality and its metropolitan area. As noted by Gilbert (1996), two of

the study cities (Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro) are considered “mega

cities”6 while one city considered, Caracas, does not meet the criteria to

be a mega-city (due to population) but is a large urban area. Caracas,

the largest city in Venezuela, ranks 13th in the 15 largest cities in South

America. Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro are the two largest cities in Brazil.

Sao Paulo is also the largest city in South America with a metropolitan

population close to 20 million. It is important to consider population size of

the study cities since this factor impacts housing issues within the study

cities and their surrounding metropolitan areas.

6 As defined by the United Nations Department of International Economic and Social Affairs (1986), a megacity is a city having a population of at least eight million inhabitants by the 21st century.


9

Table 1: South America’s 15 Largest Cities, by Population 2005

Rank City Country Population(thousands)

1 Sao Paulo Brazil 18,3332 Buenos Aires Argentina 12,5503 Rio de Janeiro Brazil 11,4694 Bogota Colombia 7,7475 Lima Peru 7,1866 Santiago Chile 5,6837 Belo Horizonte Brazil 5,3048 Porto Alegre Brazil 3,7959 Recife Brazil 3,52710 Brasilia Brazil 3,34111 Fortaleza Brazil 3,23712 Medellin Colombia 3,05813 Caracas Venezuela 2,91314 Curitiba Brazil 2,90815 Campinas Brazil 2,634

Source: United Nations (2006)

2.1.3 Economic Importance

The third part of the three-prong approach considered the

economic importance of urban areas. Caracas and Sao Paulo are the

economic centers of their respective countries. Rio de Janeiro, while not

considered the economic powerhouse as is Sao Paulo, plays a major role

in the economic vitality of Brazil especially in the tourism and

manufacturing sectors. The economic standing of these cities translates

into economic opportunity and attracts migrants from other locations of

their respective countries. Internal migration patterns as a consequence


10

of relocation for employment have played a part in the increase of

population in urban areas, thereby increasing the need for housing.

2.2 Research Method

In this thesis, the comparative analysis method is used. According

to Valenzuela (1998), the application of comparative analysis to dissect

social and historical occurrences and trends is a traditional approach to

explaining such incidences. The purpose of using this method is to provide

a thorough comparative evaluation of select housing initiatives within the

framework of Latin American society. Using the comparative analysis

method will also allow for review of techniques applied in certain study

cities not applied in others and development of recommendations to

improve housing programs and initiatives.

2.3 Data Sources

In order to provide a complete picture supporting the idea of the

necessity for urban housing initiatives, socio-economic data of the

communities impacted by implemented programs discussed in the study

are reviewed. Social and economic data presented include (1) basic

population data at the local and regional level; (2) urban poverty7

percentages in relation to national poverty; (3) number of existing housing

7 In 2000, the international poverty line was less than US$1.08 per day. In middle- income countries, the poverty line is sometimes calculated at US$2 a day. This figure can fluctuate slightly depending if an urban or rural area is specified.


11

units that are used by low-income populations; and (4) community

infrastructure. Data presented will be from early8 and middle 20th century9

to 2005. In addition, information from policy documents and independent

evaluations relating to urban housing initiatives will be presented. Sources

for data and documents were obtained primarily from the following

institutions:

1. United Nations Population Division—Under the United Nations

Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the Population Division is

charged with monitoring population trends on a global scale.

2. Brazilian Institute of Statistics and Geography/ Instituto Brasileiro de

Geografia e Estatistica (IBGE)—A governmental agency that tracks

social, geographic, and environmental statistical information. IBGE

also conducts Brazil's national population census every ten years.

3. Venezuela National Statistics Institute/lnstituto Nacional de Estadistica

de Venezuela (INE)—A governmental agency that tracks social and

economic data related to Venezuelan society. INE conducts the

country’s population census.

4. Joao Pinheiro Foundation/ Fundagao Joao Pinheiro—A governmental

agency located in Minas Gerais State in Brazil that provides technical

8 For this study, early 20th century refers to the mid-1920s to the late 1940s.9 Early 20th century refers to the 1920s to the 1940s. Mid-20,h century refers to the 1950s to the 1970s.


12

and research assistance for Brazil's regional and national governments

in the areas of urban planning, economics, higher education, cultural

heritage issues, and social issues.

5. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

(ECLAC)— A regional commission of the United Nations, the Economic

Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean serves as a catalyst

for promoting economic and regional social development in and

between member countries.

6. Inter-American Bank (IADB)—Established in 1959, the Inter-American

Development Bank serves as a multilateral finance institution for

regional development in Latin America and the Caribbean.

7. World Bank—Established in 1944, a multilateral financial institution

focused on providing economic growth in the developing world.

8. Municipal Governments of Caracas, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo—

Local governments of the three study cities; data supplied by these

entities was provided to regional and national statistical agencies.


13

CHAPTER 3

URBAN HOUSING IN LATIN AMERICA:

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

3.1 Historical Evolution of Urbanization in Latin America

Prior to the 20th century, Latin America was composed of countries

with predominately rural populations. Urban areas existed as early as the

16th century and were typically situated in indigenous seats of economic

and political power (Portes, 1979). However, the physical size, population

and number of urban areas remained relatively small. With the onset of

the industrial revolution in the Western hemisphere and the creation of

economic opportunities in Latin American cities brought about by

European investment, residents of rural communities began to migrate to

urban areas. As mentioned by Berry (1981), poor conditions in the rural

areas of Latin America also contributed to the migration of rural residents

to cities. During the early 20th century, urbanization rates in Latin America

began to increase rapidly. As shown in Figure 1, urbanization levels in

Latin America increased from 25 percent in the mid-1920s to over 60

percent by the mid-1970s. By the turn of fhe 21st century, urbanization

rates in Latin America were slightly over 75 percent, representing an

urbanization level comparable to North America and Europe (Lattes, et


14

al., 2001). According to projections provided by the United Nations, by

2025, Latin America will have an urbanization level of approximately 82

percent, representing an urbanization level slightly lower than North

America but slightly higher than Europe (United Nations, 2005b; United

Nations, 2006b; Lattes, et al., 2001).

Figure 1: Levels of Urbanization for Selected Major World Regions,1925-2025

90% g? 80%75 70%5 60% g 50% f 40% c 30%I 20% -

World North Latin Europe Oceania Africa America America

01925 □ 1950 H I 975 0 2000 02025

Source: Compiled by author from Lattes, et al. (2004)

Asia

3.2 Development of the Informal Housing Sector

3.2.1 Creation of Self-Help Housing

As a result of Latin America urbanizing at a high rate, the demand

for housing rose in tandem with urban expansion (Gilbert, 1996). However,

a significant portion of housing targeted towards low-income population

was not developed by the private sector or municipal sector but by low-


15

income residents themselves. Known as self-help housing10 in the

development community, the residences built by low-income populations

lacked municipal services, were built out of shoddy materials and in many

cases the land on which the housing was built was not owned by the

person or family who built the house. This phenomenon is known for its

lack of land tenure, or tenure insecurity. According to Payne (2002), the

majority of households that lack tenure to the land their houses are built

on live in the global South11 or in Eastern European countries with

transitioning economies.

On a worldwide scale, housing built illegally, including informal

settlements account for approximately 70 to 90 percent of new housing in

the developing world (van Horen, 2000; Hardoy & Satterthwgite,.1989).

McNamara provides an impression of informal housing has upon first sight:

The deprivation suffered by the poor is nowhere more visible than in

the matter of housing. Even the most hardened and unsentimental

observer from the developed world is shocked by the squalid slums,

and ramshackle shackle shantytowns that ring the periphery of

10 “ Housing that begins informally, without a title deed or services, and which the members of the household design, finance, and often build with their own hands.” (UN-Habitat, 2003a, p. xiv)11 Global South refers to Africa, Latin America, and South Asia and the Middle East. This term is used interchangeably with "third world" and “developing world".


16

every major city. The favelas, the bustees12, the bidonvilles13 have

become almost the central symbol of poverty that pervades two-

thirds of the globe. It is the image that is seared into the memory of

every visitor. (McNamara, 1975, p. 342)

The proliferation of this type of housing has led to the creation of the

informal housing sector (Huchzermeyer, 2002). The growth of informal

housing in Latin America is clearly evident in major cities. Table 2 presents

population growth in informal housing settlements in the study cities during

various time points in the 20th century.

Table 2: The Growth of Self-Help Housing in Study Cities

Population in City Squatter

Population Settlements14 City Year (Thousands) (Thousands) PercentageRio de Janeiro 1947 2,050 400 20

1957 2,940 650 221961 3,326 900 271970 4,252 1,276 30199115 9,696 921 10

Caracas 1961 1,330 280 211964 1,590 556 351971 2,200 867 391985 2,742 1,673 61Continued on page 17

,2 Informal settlements/housing in India.13 Informal settlements/housing in French-speaking countries.14 “ ...settlements established by people who have illegally occupied an area of land and built their housing upon it..." (UN-Habitat, 2003c, p. 82).15 The figure for this year is based only on the favela population.


17

1991 2,966 1,238 42

Sao Paulo 1973 6,561 72 11980 8,493 321 51985 8,929 440 61987 9,109 813 81991 9,483 1,050 9198916 10,436 3,238 31

Source: Compiled by author from Gilbert (1996)

3.2.2 Consequences of Self-Help Housing

While informal housing is clearly not an ideal living situation due to

lack of services, structural quality and tenure uncertainty, the role of this

type of housing plays a considerable role in the urbanization of cities in

developing countries. According to Ulack (1978), the determination of

whether an informal settlement can play a positive or negative role within

an urban environment depends on the location and age of a settlement,

socioeconomic characteristics of the settlement, and ties to former,

typically rural communities. Using Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines as a

case study, it was determined the location of a settlement could have a

positive im pact on employment opportunities for its residents (Eyre, 1972).

Settlements situated near transportation services, which made

16 Except for the 1989 figure, the figures are based only on the favela population and therefore underestimates the total population living in informal housing arrangements.


18

transportation less expensive, and other urban amenities were closer to

jobs and provided for greater access to markets.

Ulack also established that the older a settlement, the higher

chance that it would be accepted as a legitimate part of a city. Also, in

older settlements, the socioeconomic status of residents was higher

compared to younger and less established settlements. Income levels

and education levels were higher in the older settlements presumably

meaning the residents living in the older settlements had more valuable

skills to contribute to the city. In the realm of point of origin, study results

were inconclusive in determining if a resident’s connection with his/her

former community was a positive impact on the new informal settlement

and the greater urban setting.

Taking into consideration possible positive impacts that informal

settlements may have in an urban area, further attention is needed to

discuss the adverse impacts of urbanization in relation to housing for low-

income communities. Extraordinary growth of urban areas has created or

exacerbated social and environmental problems including overcrowding,

especially for low-income persons. This occurrence has created housing

deficits, health issues including lack of access to drinking water, urban air

pollution and other environmental hazards worsened by low-income

populations settling in environmentally sensitive areas.


19

3.2.3 Increasing Poverty

A consequence of the rapid urbanization in Latin America is the

significant increase of poverty in high density environments. According to

data from the Economic Commission for Latin American and the

Caribbean (ECLAC), in 2004, the percentage of the urban populations in

Latin America living in poverty was approximately 37 percent. In urban

areas of Venezuela and Brazil, the percentage of urban populations living

in poverty in 1999 were 53 percent and in 2003, 36 percent respectively.

Also, from 1971 to 1998, there was a net decrease in real household

income and employment in almost 20 countries located in Latin America

and the Caribbean. Poverty in Latin America (particularly in urban areas)

was also exacerbated in the 1980s due by outcomes of economic

restructuring of Latin American regional economies. This contracted

national money supplies and led to reduced public expenditures on

local/municipal services, housing services, infrastructure development

among other public sector priorities (Brockerhoff & Brennan, 1998). As

shown in Figure 2, for all of Latin America, urban poverty is close to the

level of level of poverty, except in Venezuela. In urban areas, Venezuela

has a significantly higher percentage of people living in poverty than in

Brazil or Latin America.


20

Figure 2: Urban Poverty vs. Total Poverty - Latin America, Venezuela, and Brazil (Per cent)

Latin America (2004) Venezuela (1999) Brazil (2003)

i National 0 Urban

Source: Compiled by author from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (2006)

A concentration of poverty can lead to a host of problems,

including placing extra burden on public and urban resources, increased

crime, and health problems such as the spread of communicable

diseases, and health conditions related to lack of access to potable

water, inadequate or sub-standard sanitation systems, municipal services,

and dearth of health care options. In a report published by the World

Resources Institute (1996), at least 220 million residents living in urban areas

in the developing world do not have access to clean drinking water or

working latrines. Child mortality rates in the developing world are


21

considerably lower for youth living in non-squatter areas than for youth

living in squatter settlements areas.

According to the literature, particular problems related to the rise in

poverty in Latin America reflect those that take place throughout the

developing world.

3.2.4 Environmental Issues

As reported by Brennan (1999), tremendous environmental stress is

being experienced by large cities in developing countries. While

environmental stressors can be attributed to many sources (i.e., pollution,

environmental degradation and inadequate sanitation), current

environmental issues are heavily impacted by rapid urbanization and the

substantial increase of population in cities. Agnotti (1996) provides an

example of these issues in Sao Paulo. Cubatao, which is the main

petrochemical processing center in Brazil, and located less than 80

kilometers from Sao Paulo, produces approximately 1,000 tons of toxic

emissions that are discharged into the air on a daily basis. Agnotti

addresses the adverse impacts of the Cubatao petrochemical industry. In

the 1980s, there was an infant mortality rate up towards 35 percent in

nearby favelas and 80 percent of local children having respiratory

problems due to pollution brought on by the petrochemical factories

(Finquelievich, 1990)'.


22

Housing built on geological unstable areas has posed an additional

environmental hazard within low-income communities. According to

Jimenez Diaz (1992), a consequence of the rapid growth of Caracas from

the 1950s to the 1990s and limited space within city limits, growth has

taken place on the city ’s hillsides, comprised primarily of squatter

settlements. With the hillsides lacking the structural stability to support

expansive settlement, slope failures have become an increasing

occurrence since the 1970s. Prior to this time, slope failures were primarily

caused by earthquakes.

Jimenez Diaz also analyzed the number of slope failures and their

locations that occurred in Caracas from 1800-1989. Landslide

occurrences were greater in areas with large informal settlements:

The areas where landslides have occurred between 1800 and 1970

have suffered increase deterioration during the 1970s and 1980s.

Between 1800 and 1949, 12 landslides occurred. In the next 20

years, there were 23. In the recent past, their number has grown

considerably - 221 landslides took place between 1971, and a

further 266 between 1980 and 1987 (Jimenez Diaz, 1992, pp. 85-86).

Rapid urban expansion is also beginning to compromise the

sustainability of local watersheds. In the late 1990s, over 1 million residents

of urban squatter settlements in the developing world were living near or


23

in protected watersheds and wetland areas. These areas are now

covered by housing and streets (World Resources Institute, 1996). This

growth of impervious surfaces has affected storm drainage patterns which

increase the likelihood of landslides.

3.3 Informal Housing in the Study Cities

For all of the factors stated, housing availability is a constant issue in

Latin America and throughout the developing world. The study cities are

no exception. The following narrative details the informal housing situation

in Caracas, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo.

A. Caracas, Venezuela

In Caracas, the prevailing low-income housing option available

(outside of public housing known as superbloques17) are the barrios de

rancho (ranchos). Typically located in the periphery of the formal city

and in many cases, spilling over into neighboring jurisdictions within the

Caracas metropolitan area (AMC), over one-third of Caracas’ population

occupy ranchos (Aleman, 2005). Typically, these dwellings were built out

of a myriad of materials, including tin, brick tile, earth, cardboard, and

scrap (Figure 3).

,7 Equivalent to high rise public housing in the United States.


Figure 3: Informal Housing - Caracas

” ,

Source: Delaney (2005)

Issues afflicting rancho neighborhoods include inferior quality of

housing structures, high density, overcrowding, crime, environmental

hazards, and lack of adequately defined property rights (Gruner, 2006)

With their being located in the AMC's periphery, rancho dwellers are

socially and spatially segregated from the formal city. As a result,


25

according to Gruner (2006), the living environment suffers from the lack of

urban services and infrastructure provision, access issues, and institutional

deficits.

B. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Rio de Janeiro’s residents who live in informal dwellings represented

approximately 20 percent of the total city population in 2000 (Dowall,

2006). This percentage represents a 76 percent increase in the total

informal housing structures located in the city since the early 1990s.

During the same time period, informal housing dwellings for all of Brazil's

metropolitan areas increased by 43 percent and approximately 57

percent increase for all of the country’s urban areas. Though Rio’s

population growth is beginning to slow overall (Dowall, 2006). The data in

Table 3 demonstrates that the demand for low-income housing has

significantly increased.

In Rio de Janeiro, several types of informal communities are present.

Two of the most well known types of informal housing are favelas and

cortigos. Appearing as early as the late 1800s, the development of

favelas (and also cortigos) served as a Brazilian version of urban renewal

policy of Rio’s central business district in the sense that the development

of favelas was spurred by former slaves being pushed out of the city

center yet still serving as a low-wage labor force for the middle and upper


26

class Brazilian society (Godfrey, 1999). As defined by Xavier and

Magalhaes (2003), favelas are considered “ highly consolidated invasions

of public or private land developed by the poor on lands lacking

infrastructure or planning. Cortigos are a type of social housing consisting

of one or more buildings or a group of rooms where apartments or rooms

are rented (or sub-leased) without a formal legal agreement.

Figure 4: Rochina Favela - Rio de Janeiro

Source: Otto (2006)


Reproduced with

permission

of the copyright owner.

Further reproduction prohibited

without permission.

Table 3: Total Dwelling Units vs. Informal Dwelling Units, Rio de Janeiro - 1991 and 2000

MetroArea

1991 Total Permanent Dwellings

1991InformalDwelling

Units*

1991 Percent of

Total


2000InformalDwellingUnits**

2000 Percent Of Total

Informal Increase as a % of Total

Increase

Rio de Janeiro 2,753,543 273,669 9.9% 3,252,659 654,324 20.1% 76.3%

TotalMetroRegions

11,163,447 1,428,371 12.8% 15,002,485 3,084,274 20.6% 43.1%

TotalUrbanBrazil 34,734,715 4,652,611 13.4% 44,776,740 10,261,076 22.9% 55.8%Source: Compiled by author from Dowall (2006)

to• " 4

28

C. Sao Paulo, Brazil

In Sao Paulo, informal housing is the most pervasive form of housing

for low-income residents (Maricato, 1979; Evers & Pompan, 1987). Informal

housing accounted for slightly over 11 percent of all housing in Sao Paulo

in 2000. As shown in Table 4, this percentage represents a 29 percent

increase in informal housing structures from 1991. Compared to Rio de

Janeiro, the number of informal housing units in Sao Paulo are lower in

relation to all dwelling units. Considering Sao Paulo is Brazil’s largest city

the country’s economic center and due to the leveling off of informal

housing construction in Rio de Janeiro, it is possible that Sao Paulo's

informal communities will continue to grow well past 2010.18 This will further

exacerbate urban issues related to housing availability, affordability, and

access to urban services and other social issues.

,8Considering the total urban population of Sao Paulo is projected to increase to 20.5 million inhabitants by 2015 (from approximately 18.3 million inhabitants in2005), it is assumed by the author that city's population living in informal housing settlements will continue to increase as well.


Figure 5: Informal Housing, Sao Paulo

Source: http://www.britannica.com/eb/art-101189


http://www.britannica.com/eb/art-101189

Reproduced with

permission



without permission.

Table 4: Total Dwelling vs. Informal Dwelling Units, Sao Paulo - 1991 and 2000MetroArea


1991InformalDwelling

Units*

1991 Percent of Total

2000 TotalPermanentDwellings*

2000InformalDwellingUnits**

2000 Percent Of Total

Informal Increase as a % of

Total Increase

Sao Paulo 3,967,579 273,669 6.9% 4,992,570 571,466 11.4% 29.1%

TotalMetroRegions

11,163,447 1,428,371 12.8% 15,002,485 3,084,274 20.6% 43.1%

TotalUrbanBrazil 34,734,715 4,652,611 13.4% 44,776,740 10,261,076 22.9% 55.8%

Source: Compiled by author from Dowall (2006)

COo

31

3.4 Housing Policies in Latin America

To address the issue of informal housing in developing countries,

municipal and national governments have implemented various policies

throughout the mid-20th century up until present times. In similar fashion

to the urban renewal programs in urban areas of the United States, early

policies for addressing informal housing primarily focused on slum

clearance and redevelopment. This method consisted of temporarily

relocating residents of informal communities in order to clear the land and

construct housing on the site. In Brazil during the military regime in the

1960s, mass eradication of favelas in Rio de Janeiro and other Brazilian

cities was the primary policy used towards informal settlements (Portes,

1979).

3.4.1 Strategies

Typically, high-rise buildings were the style of housing proposed in

order to accom m odate the high population density of the informal

community (World Bank, 1999). Rondinelli (1990a) states that slum

clearance and redevelopment policies were largely a failure during this

time period and in many cases exacerbated urban poverty. In most

cases, social services, employment opportunities and other municipal

services were not provided and the price for rental units in newly

constructed public housing was prohibitive to many low-income families


32

and in many cases was only affordable to middle-class residents

(Rondinelli, 1990a). Rondinelli further explains the problems with slum

clearance and redevelopment policies. Such policies were cost

prohibitive for national governments due to the demolition and

reconstruction costs (ibid). Also, compensation to owners of demolished

properties taxed government coffers (Rondinelli, 1990a. Other issues that

brought about by slum clearance and redevelopment included the

displacement of large populations, thereby disputing the lives of low-

income communities.

Disruptions to the lives of poor families and to home-based small

businesses due to slum clearance and redevelopment include families

having to move into other low-income communities that increase in

overcrowding in other parts of cities and the increase of transportation

costs for families that were located farther away from their employers

(Rodinelli, 1990b). And in many cases, families were not able to afford the

newly redeveloped housing. Such policies typically did not alleviate the

deficit of adequate housing and in certain cases exacerbated the

housing situation in low-income communities.

During the 1970s, international funding agencies such as the World

Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank (Le Cocq d'Oliveira &

HOber, 2006) played a significant role in the urban housing policy in the


developing world. Countries receiving capital from funding agencies

began to implement sites-and-services programs and urban/slum

upgrading programs (in many cases, a condition of receiving funding

from IFIs were for countries to implement urban/slum upgrading

programs). According to the literature (Abiko, et al., 2003; Buckley &

Kalarickal, 2004; Field & Kremer, 2005; Laquian, 1976; Peattie & Aldrete-

Haas, 1981), sites-and-services projects are the development of land

tracts in an urban area and are supplied with municipal services including

sewage lines, electricity, solid waste collection, access to potable water,

stormwater drainage, roads, sidewalks and in some cases, housing.

Primary housing construction would be taken on by residents themselves.

In contrast, urban or slum upgrading consist of improving the built

environment of existing slum communities by installing the

aforementioned municipal services (Imparato & Ruster, 2003).

Implementation of sites-and-services projects offered several advantages.

One advantage is that public funds could be maximized fo benefit many

residents of low-income communities. Another advantage would be that

project costs would not rise due to residents building their homes or having

homes built by civil society and/or community organizations (Tebbal &

Kay, 2001). The final advantage to sites-and-services focuses on

community residents. Since housing construction was typically up to the


34

financial capacity of the resident of a project area, it was believed that

residents building at their own pace would in turn provide savings for the

resident.

There are also flaws within the sites-and-services method. Flaws in

the sites-and-services approach included the assumption that an infinite

amount of land, whether publicly or privately owned, was available for

such projects. According to Tebbal and Kay (2001), governments and

policy makers in charge of implementing the programs mistakenly

assumed technical assistance was readily available to residents of a

project area. Since low-income residents were already financially

strapped, many times housing was not fully completed due to lack of

income and the incurring debt from loans used for housing construction.

Taking into consideration these disadvantages, sites-and-services projects

were successful on a limited basis.

Appearing as a method to improve communities in the mid-1970s,

urban upgrading projects consisted of improvements that were either

shelter or non-shelter related (Buckley & Kalarickal, 2004). According to

World Bank program evaluation, programmatic and financial policy

experience in this area, the advantages of upgrading communities is that

it are an affordable option for governments to slum clearance and

redevelopment projects (Peattie & Aldrete-Haas, 1981; World Bank, 1999).


35

Urban upgrading also lessens the disruption to social and economic

networks of a community. The impacts on the lives of a community’s

residents are immediate after the completion of urban upgrading

projects. Quality of life is improved and provides a sense of community .

cohesiveness.

Urban upgrading projects have incurred a more successful track

record of implementation in developing countries. Field and Kremer

(2005) detail urban/slum upgrading features. Project features include:

1. Land tenure regularization using the methods of property mapping,

registration and obtaining of land titles;

2. As mentioned earlier, improving of basic infrastructure (i.e., water,

waste collection, electricity, etc.);

3. Correction or removal of environmental hazards;

4. Provision of incentives for management and maintenance of the

community;

5. Developing or rehabilitation of facilities that serve the community at

large such as day care centers, community centers, recreation

centers and health clinics;

6. Education and health care access; and programs addressing social

and human services issues;


36

7. Construction of residential dwellings - this includes upgrading of

housing materials, new construction and home expansion;

8. Income generation through employment opportunities and micro

loans to start new business ventures; and

9. Crime prevention and control.

3.4.2 Strategies in Study Cities

A. Caracas, Venezuela

In more recent times, housing policy that addresses growing urban

populations have been in great demand in the study cities and

throughout Latin America due to housing deficits in the region and

continued need for standard housing conditions for low-income residents.

The Caracas Chamber of Real Estate estimates that there is a deficit of

decent, adequate housing in Venezuela by 1.7 million homes (Ellsworth,

2006). As shown in Figure 7, the number of constructed housing units (by

both public and private sectors) within Venezuela decreased significantly

from the late 1990s to the early 2000s (McCue, 2003). The housing

situation has become so intense in Caracas that in early 2006, Juan

Barreto, the Mayor of Caracas issued a decree to expropriate

abandoned buildings in the city to be used for housing for the city's poor

and homeless (Parma, 2006). In many cases, low-income residents were

already illegally occupying abandoned buildings. Further addressing the


37

city's housing shortage, Barreto called for the expropriation of two golf

courses within the city to make way for the building of homes for 25,000

families, however, call for such measures was criticized by the Venezuelan

national government (Gould, 2006; Ellsworth, 2006).

Figure 7: Housing construction in Venezuela, 1997 to 2003

100,000 -|90.000 -80.000 -70.000 -60.000 -50.00040.000 -30.000 -20.000 -10,000 -

A .

a Public Sector

a Private Sector

— h-,-—]u1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

B Pubic Sector 80,811 48,092 20,075 18,313 18,000 10,239 4,668B Private Sector 11,168 13,703 11,015 4,839 4,800 4,477 4,143

Source: McCue (2003)

B. Sao Paulo, Brazil

Brazil's urban areas are also dealing with the adverse outcomes of

housing shortages. According the Sao Paulo state officials, the Sao Paulo

metropolitan area had a shortage of approximately 400,000 houses in

2003 (Jones, 2003). This shortage has spurred Movimento de Sem-Teto do

Centro (MSTC) also known as the ‘‘roofless movement", an organization


38

that seizes buildings abandoned in urban areas throughout the country for

homeless individuals and families and low-income residents who were

priced out of other types of housing (Phillips, 2006). In response, city

housing administrators, urban planners, and other pertinent officials have

sought to relocate low-income persons from inner-city housing to Sao

Paulo's periphery. As reported by Phillips (2006), the relocation strategy,

noted by the Sao Paulo-based human rights organization Rede Social de

Justiga e Direitos Humanos (Social Network for Justice and Human Rights),

will further disenfranchise the urban poor socially and economically.

3.3.3 The Role of Non-State Actors

Over the past three decades, non-governmental organizations

(NGOs) and have emerged to play a significant position in the social

development of the global south. NGOs are commonly defined as entities

that are “ largely or entirely autonomous from central government funding

and control: emanating from civil society...or from political impulses

beyond state control and direction" (Josselin & Wallace, 2001, p. 3).

Typical roles that NGOs play between governments and civil society

include (1) promoting organizational/agency pluralism between the state

and its citizens; (2) supporting the development of micro-enterprise

institutions; (3) political and civil rights involvement and promotion and

providing legal aid services; (4) encouraging bottom-up democratization;


39

(5) influencing other independent sector actors; and (6) expanding

acquisition of capital through the development of micro-enterprise

(United Nations, 2003c; Fisher, 1998).

However, NGO involvement in delivering housing in low-income

communities in developing regions is a relatively new occurrence (Sen,

1998). The need for NGO involvement in the informal housing sector arose

from lack of interest of official financial and development institutions to

provide assistance in matters related to, particularly in urban settings

(Jones & Mitlin, 1999). Typically, the role provided by NGOs includes

actual construction of housing (Bradshaw & Schafer, 2000) or providing

financial assistance for communities to build their own dwellings (Jones &

Mitlin, 1999).

In many cases, NGO involvement in these two areas may overlap.

For example, an organization primarily charged with providing financing

for housing may also provide technical assistance to communities in the

form of plan and cost estimate preparation and assisting community

groups with preparing documentation to obtain loans (Ferguson, 1999).

One other type of non-state actor that has played a part in

encouraging better living conditions for urban residents in the developing

world are international organizations, in particular, the United Nations

(UN). In September 2000, the UN adopted the United Nations Millennium


40

Declaration, a UN resolution that set forth eight goals with the overarching

objective of improving social and economic development of low-income

populations throughout the developing world. (United Nations, 2001a)

These goals, called the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), address

extreme poverty, hunger, gender inequality, education, child mortality,

maternal health, health issues, and global development. One of the

MDGs that relates to this study is Goal 7: “ Ensure environmental

sustainability.” The targets for this goal are:

1. “ Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country

policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources” ;

2. "Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access

to safe drinking water"; and

3. "Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum

dwellers by 2020” (United Nations, 2005).

According to data from the 2007 Millennium Development Goals

Report, the percentage of urban populations in the developing world

living in slums has decreased from 47 percent in 1990 to 37 percent in

2005. In Latin America during the same time period, urban populations

living in slums have decreased from 35 percent to 27 percent. In terms of

MDG 7, the preceding figures show that a real decrease in slum

populations are taking place, however, with the increase of urban


41

dwellers that will occur over the next decade, the challenge to make

gains in the lessening ot urban slum dwellers will be a daunting task.

3.4 Summary

Over the past three decades, several housing and community

improvement strategies have been instituted in the developing countries.

As shown by the literature, urban upgrading programs have historically

shown to have the greatest capability of improving the quality of life low-

income neighborhoods on the individual and community wide scale. As

the developing world further urbanizes during the 21st century, urban

upgrading programs that address adequate housing in urban areas will

be needed for the further increase urban populations. If this type of

program is implemented correctly, it will be possible to improve the living

conditions of millions of residents in the slums which McNamara (1975)

discussed over thirty years ago.


42

CHAPTER 4

HOUSING INITIATIVES IMPLEMENTED IN STUDY CITIES

4.1 Overview

From the 1970s to present times, municipal, regional and national

governments have created programs and initiatives geared toward

improving the lives of low-income residents. In this section, the focus will

be shifted from a general discussion regarding low-income housing to a

description and comparison of three housing programs in the chosen

study cities. The first program to be profiled is Proyecto Caracas

Mejoramiento de los Barrios (known as CAMEBA) which was employed in

two areas of Caracas, Venezuela with a high concentration of informal

housing. The second program summary, Favela/Bairro, is an

internationally known program targeting mid-sized favelas and other

informal housing in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The third program examined,

Programa Guarapiranga, focuses on the environmental health of the

Guarapiranga Basin, the area adjacent to Guarapiranga Reservoir in the

southern section of Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Each program has a distinct component that makes it unique in its

final impact on its respective communities. For CAMEBA, the

incorporation of participatory democracy regarding the decisions made


43

for the affected communities was its distinguishing component.

Favela/Bairro’s international recognition is attributed to the formalization

of informal communities. Programa Guarapiranga focuses on sustainable

development and improving the natural resources for the benefit of not

only residents of low-income communities but to millions of residents living

in the Sao Paulo metropolitan region.

4.1.1 Caracas, Venezuela: Proyecto Caracas Mejoramiento de los

Barrios (CAMEBA)

Located in a valley surrounded by the Avila mountain range (to the

north separating it from the Caribbean Sea), Caracas is a large city but

lacks flat land for development. Because of this land deficit, informal

settlements, called barrios or ranchos creep up the hillsides in the urban

periphery. Growth was unchecked and by 1990, 44 percent of residents

of the Caracas metro area (AMC) resided in informal housing. This

percentage represented over 1.3 million people (World Bank, 1998). The

area’s barrios were plagued with extremely poor living conditions

including insufficient urban services and infrastructure, lack of access to

other parts of the city, crime, environmental issues and the lack of

adequate housing. In 1991, the Venezuelan Ministry of Urban

Development (MINDUR) developed a rehabilitation and incorporation

plan for the barrios, the first of such in Caracas’ history. An outgrowth of


44

this policy is the Plan Sectorial, created in 1995 which provided a guideline

and recommendations for physical upgrading of the barrios. Plan

Sectorial also set forth the division of the AMC into physical planning units.

To further the goal of barrio improvement, in 1998, Proyecto

Caracas Mejoramiento de los Barrios (CAMEBA) was launched.

Supported by a $60.7 million loan from the World Bank (the entire project

cost was $150 million), CAMEBA’s objective was to improve the quality of

life in two of Caracas’ barrio agglomerations, La Vega, located in the

southwestern section of the metro area and Petare Norte, located in the

east. Figure 7 shows the location of both neighborhoods in Caracas. Due

to damage produced by widespread flooding and landslides in late 1999

in towns in the neighboring Vargas state, CAMEBA ultimately included a

third community, La Guaira (which is the capital of Vargas State), in the

program. The aftermath of the flooding and landslides in Vargas State is

shown in Figure 8 below. Figure 9 provides a map of all areas in

Venezuela that were affected by the 1999 flooding and landslides.


Reproduced with

permission



without permission.

Figure 7: Location Map of Petare Norte and La Vega, Caracas (Neighborhoods are Shaded Areas)

Source: World Bank, 1998

4C n

Source: Marin (2004)


47

Figure 9: Map of Areas Affected by 1999 Flood, Venezuela (Affected Areas are Shaded)

Caribbean $aaAntilles

MirandaCaaafccibdi TueuplU

VENEZUELA

Source: United States Agency for International Development (2001)

The project was executed by the Foundation for Community

Development and Municipal Promotion (FUNDACOMUN)19 and was set to

be implemented over a five year time period (1999 to 2004). The total

number of persons impacted CAMEBA activities totaled approximately

200,000.

For the preparation phase of CAMEBA, a social assessment was

conducted to pinpoint issues that were most important to all the barrios.

In all of the barrios where CAMEBA was to be implemented, the top

priorities identified by community residents were: (1) safety; (2) water

19 For more information on FUNDACOMUN, see p. 44.


48

system improvement; (3) sewage system improvement; (4) improvement

of access to barrios from formal city areas; and (5) improved

vehicle/ppdestrian access. Using data from the social assessment, the

project’s objectives are the following (World Bank, 1998, p. 11):

Water Supply

1. “ Improve water systems to a minimum service standard of eight hours

of water, seven days a week, consequently reducing risks associated

with poor water service, eliminating the need to store water, and

lowering water losses” ;

Sanitation/Sewage and Storm Drainages

2. “ Provide adequate and properly engineered sewerage to all

households and eliminate the current practice of combining surface

rain water drainage with household wastewater drainage, thus

providing direct health and environmental health benefits to the

community” ;

Transportation and City Services

3. "Provide much improved access both to-and-from and within the

barrios, resulting in better circulation for public transportation,

emergency vehicles and police, solid waste collection vehicles and

other transport vehicles, as well as lowering transport costs (time and

money) for the barrio dwellers” ;


49

Street Lighting

4. “ Improve public lighting in streets and alleyways resulting in enhanced

safety” ;

Housing Quality and Safety

5. “ Reduce the number of families living in high geotechnical risk areas or

in structurally unsound buildings";

6. “ Empower communities by fostering community participation and

decision making at the local level, together with the provision of local

institutional support resulting in stronger and better organized

communities"; and

Credit Access

7. “ Improve access to housing credit through formal market channels so

that families may improve their condition of their housing or expand

their housing unit for productive use."

To manage the task of implementing CAMEBA, an institutional

framework was put into place consisting of several units. The first unit,

FUNDACOMUN, a branch of the Ministry of Infrastructure, served as the

strategic planning entity and liaison to national government concerning

CAMEBA. FUNDACOMUN’s role included budget and resource allocation

and funding provision. The project management unit (PMU) is responsible

for the daily coordination and administration of the project. The PMU


50

works in conjunction with a Technical Commission that deals with project

technical assistance and oversees procurement-contracting

administration, and project administration. The Commission also oversees

the physical planning units (UPF-PMU) for Petare Norte, La Vega and La

Guaira.

The UPF - PMUs perform management tasks and coordination of

acfivities at the neighborhood level. Several programs that the UPF-PMUs

are responsible for include relocation and resettlement for community

residents, land tenure/titling and environmental projects. The UPF-PMU is

also in charge of managing construction projects within the

neighborhoods. The UPF-PMUs work along with Local Design Offices

(LDOs) and Local Co-Management Groups (LCGs). LDOs and LCGs assist

the communities in the design and implementation of neighborhood

improvement plans (NIP) and serves as a representative body for

community members.

4.1.2 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Favela/Bairro

As mentioned earlier, the history of the favelas begins in the late

1880s and 1890s after the abolition of slavery in Brazil in 1888. After

abolition, former slaves migrated from plantations into Brazil’s cities and

soon after, the first favelas began to materialize. In Rio de Janeiro, the first

favela appearing approximately in 1897 was called Moro de Providencia,


51

located in the city center (South Zone). Later in the 1900s, the community

was later named Moro de Favela, from which the term “ favela"

originated (Xavier & Magalhaes, 1993).

As in other areas of South America, Rio urbanized at a high rate

during the 20th century. As the .population of the city rose, favelas

proliferated in Rio’s hillsides and its periphery. During the first half and

partially the second half of the 20th century, many government policies

addressing favela proliferation advocated and implemented demolition.

An example of this policy is federal legislation introduced in 1937 that

banned new construction in Rio’s favelas (FINEP, 1985). Flowever, the

growth of favelas accelerated in the 1940s due to increased urbanization,

rising costs of living and Real Estate appreciation (Guimaraes, 1953).

Figure 10 shows the location of Rio de Janeiro's informal housing in 1995,

detailing both favelas and illegal and clandestine housing. Shown in

Table 5, by the end of the 1940s, the highest percentage of favelas were

located in Rio’s suburbs and in the northern section of the city.


Figure 10: Favelas & Illegal Squatters, Rio de Janeiro, 1995

iX, -

■ r

Source: Xavier and Magalhaes (2003)

Table 5: Favela Numbers and Population by District, Rio de Janeiro,1948

52

District Favelas Favela PopulationNumber Percentage Number Percentage

Zona Sul 25 23.8 29,037 20.9Centre 4 3.8 6,781 4.8Zona Norte 28 26.6 56,443 40.5Suburbs 37 35.2 38,298 27.2Periphery 11 10.4 8,308 5.9Total 105 100 138,837 100Source: Fiori, et al. (2000)

Regardless of the increase of favelas and Rio's low-income

population, demolition efforts of these communities were intensified

during the 1950s and 1960s, particularly during Brazil’s military


53

dictatorship.20 Additionally, the number of city and favela residents

continued to increase during the mid-20th century. According to the

data, by 1980, the Rio’s favela population represented over 12 percent of

the total population in the city (see Table 6).

Table 6: Urban and Favela Populations of the Rio de Janeiro _______ Municipality, 1950-1980______ ____________

Year Urban Population FavelaPopulation

% Favelado21 of Total

1950 2,303,063 169,305 7.41960 3,198,591 335,063 10.51970 4,251,918 565,135 13.31980 5,903,280 722,424 12.2

Source: Fiori, et al. (2000)

As result of the growing population, Rio de Janeiro developed its

city master plan in 1992 called Plano Director. An overarching goal of

Plano Director was to "transform both the infrastructure and image of the

city” (Fiori, et al., 2000, p. 56). The master plan addressed the need to

upgrade and legalize favelas and other types of informal housing.

In order to carry out this overarching objective, Secretaira

Municipal do Habitat (SMH), Rio de Janeiro’s Housing Department, was

c re a ted in 1993 to im p lem ent programs th a t tack led urban poverty and

housing in the city. It was also out of this objective that the new urban

20 This period consists of the Vargas Era (Republic of 1946) and the military dictatorship that lasted from 1964 to 1985.21 A resident of a favela.


54

upgrading program "Favela/Bairro" was envisioned. Implemented as a

multi-phase effort in 1994, Favela/Bairro focused on mid-sized

communities and was specifically intended to address communities that

had between 500 to 2,500 households. At the time of the beginning of the

program, there were 661 favelas in Rio de Janeiro with one-third of these

communities falling into the mid-sized category (Fiori, et al., 2001; SMH,

1999). The primary objective of Favela/Bairro was to upgrade aH of Rio's

mid-sized favelas by 2004. The components of the Favela/Bairro were

(Fiori, et al., 2000):

1. Installation and upgrading water, sewage and drainage

infrastructure;

2. Upgrading public and household electrical systems;

3. Reforestation;

4. Creation and paving of roads and sidewalks;

5. New housing construction for resettlement;

6. Elimination of areas that were geologically unstable or at risk;

7. Implementation of trash collection;

8. Creation of process for land tenure legalization;

9. Creation of public places;


55

10. Construction and redevelopment of buildings for use by social

programs such as community centers, day care centers and

employment training centers;

11. Development of sports and passive recreational facilities; and

12. Construction of commercial/retail businesses; and

13. Development and operation of social and urban advice centers.

The program was funded by State and municipal resources and a

loan from the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). Over a five year

period, IADB disbursed two loans for US$180 million dollars each for the first

and second phases of the project. IADB funding covered approximately

60 percent of the project costs (Fiori, et al., 2000). Favela/Bairro also

engaged various municipal sector organizations, private sector

corporations, non-governmental organizations and resident associations in

order to implement the upgrading procedures discussed above.

Jose Brakarz of the Inter-American Development Bank provided

further information regarding Favela/Bairro. As mentioned by Brakarz in

an online discussion with the thesis’ author (Email, 2007), 133 favelas were

targeted for urban upgrading. The favelas were selected based on level

of need and the occurrence to infrastructure deficits within the

neighborhood. The program was implemented over two phases (Phase I;

54 favelas; Phase II: 89 favelas). Involvement and participation of Non-


56

Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as well as Civil Society Organizations

(CSOs) was significant and served in various community development

sub-projects including operation of child care centers during the first

phase of the project.

4.1.3 Sao Paulo, Brazil: Environmental Recovery Program of the

Guarapiranga Basin (Programa Guarapiranga)

During the past four decades, the population of Sao Paulo has

greatly increased. This population increase was a large result of in-country

migration. From the 1970s to the 1980s, the city's population grew at an

annual rate of six percent (Budds, Teixeira & SEHAB, 2005). As one

consequence of the growth, Sao Paulo’s housing and urban infrastructure

were unable to adequately sustain their burgeoning population and in

turn informal settlements (also known as squatter settlements, irregular

settlements, favelas and cortigos) occupied by low-income persons and

families began to multiply. The increase of the city’s population also

exacerbated the region’s land shortage, escalating Real Estate prices. As

a result, a large number of Sao Paulo's low-income population were

faced with few housing choices and had to move towards the city’s

periphery creating informal settlements in these areas. By 1999, over 50

percent of Sao Paulo’s metropolitan population lived in sub-standard

housing conditions. Table 7 provides a breakdown in the types of housing


57

present in Sao Paulo and the percentage of the population living in the

different types of structures.

Table 7: Housing Typology of Metropolitan Sao Paulo, 1999Number ofHouseholds(thousands)

Population(%)

Structure(%)

Standard Housing 1,245 43.6 49Irregular settlements(loteamentos) 1,041 37.5 25.5Favelas 379 13.3 19.4Tenement housing (cortigos) 161 5.6 6.1

TOTAL 100.0 100.0Source: Compiled by author from World Bank (2002)

Over time, several informal settlements (see Figure 11) began to

encroach on the Guarapiranga Reservoir, an artificially created lake in

the southwestern portion of the Sao Paulo metropolitan area. With the

ability to hold approximately 180 million cubic meters (m3) of water

(Abiko, et al., 2003), the Guarapiranga provides drinking water to

approximately 25 to 30 percent of the city’s population (roughly 3 million

residents). The reservoir is located in the Guarapiranga Basin, which is

home to approximately 500,000 residents. Note in Figure 11 the high

concentration of informal settlement adjacent to the Guarapiranga

Reservoir.


58

Figure 11: Informal Settlement Locations, Sao Paulo Municipality

10 km

Source: Budds, et al. (2005)

As a result of the lack of municipal services being present in the

informal settlements, waste from these settlements drained directly into

the reservoir, which serves a considerable portion of the population in Sao

Paulo. Due to this issue, the water quality of the Guarapiranga Reservoir

deteriorated significantly. Nutrients from human waste, including nitrogen

and phosphorus that were discharged into the reservoir began to


59

produce algae and required the Sao Paulo municipality to employ

expensive treatment strategies (Bartone & Rodriguez, 1993). Pollution in

the reservoir from the informal settlements have also contributed the

impediment of treatment filters, taste and odor issues (Bartone and

Rodriguez, 2003).

In response to the reservoir being environmentally compromised, from

1993 to 2000, the Guarapiranga River Basin Environmental Sanitation

Project (Programa Guarapiranga) was instituted and implemented to

attend to and correct the urban and environmental threats to the

reservoir and its surrounding environs and to create an environment of

lasting sustainable development. The program was a joint effort

implemented by several municipal and state agencies: State of Sao

Paulo Basic Sanitation Agency (SABESP); State of Sao Paulo Environmental

Secretariat (SMA); State of Sao Paulo Urban and Housing Development

Agency (CDHU); Municipality of Sao Paulo; Municipality of Embu; and

Municipality of Itapecerica da Serra. Funding was partially provided by

the World Bank ($119 million). The programs components included:

1. Water supply and sewerage works;

2. Municipal solid waste collection and disposal;

3. Urban upgrading/rehabilitation;

4. Environmental protection; and


60

5. River basin management.

A description of each component is presented below (World Bank, 2004).

1. Component 1: Water Supply and Sewage Works— This component

included the creation of 13 pumping stations for the exportation of

840 million gallons per day of wastewater from the Guarapiranga

Waterbasin to the Sao Paulo Regional treatment system, which is

located downstream; a 264 kilometer expansion (approximately 164

miles) which included over 13,000 connections; and 45,000 sewer

connections to the existing sewer network.

2. Component 2: Municipal Solid Waste Collection and Disposal—

Component 2 included the collection of all waste in the

Guarapiranga Waterbasin including domestic and hospital waste;

and the cleaning and closing down of open dump waste sites.

3. Component 3: Urban Rehabilitation/Upgrading—Component 3

was comprised of the drainage restoration and construction of

1,300 hectares (3,212 acres) of urban areas located in flood plains;

upgrading of urban infrastructure for over 17,000 families in 130

favelas; and land development and relocation for over 3,500

families living in 93 favelas located in high-risk areas of the

Guarapiranga Basin.


4. Component 4: Environment Protection—Component 4 consisted of

the redevelopment of 1,800 hectares (4,448 acres) of river banks,

parks and reservoir shores/margins; planting of native vegetation;

and development of fwo recreational and ecological parks using

over 1,000 acres of land.

5. Component 5; River Basin Management—Component 5 included

the creation of an environmental master plan; training programs

focusing on environmental management; the creation of an

information management system oriented towards the

environmental upkeep and improvement of the Guarapiranga

Basin; and the provision of technical assistance.

According to the research, this collective approach to improving

the overall environment of the Guarapiranga Basin has raised the quality

of life for the areas residents and for the greater Sao Paulo metropolitan

area. The structure of Programa Guarapiranga can also serve as a

template for environmental improvement in urban areas both in

developing and developed areas.

4.2 Comparative Analysis of Housing Programs

As mentioned in Chapter 2, using a comparative analysis approach

will allow for examination and evaluation of the programmatic trends and

occurrences of CAMEBA, Favela/Bairro and Programa Guarapiranga. For


the purposes of analyzing similarities and differences of the initiatives,

features studies include (1) primary focus of the program/initiative; (2)

program timeline; (3) project/program scope; (4) number of individuals

affected by program; (5) level of environmental focus of each program;

(6) program/initiative costs; (7) funding sources for the programs; (8)

participatory strategies; (9) the use of land titling and tenure program to

provide community members legal ownership of the land where their

dwelling is located; and (10) methods for resettling populations that were

living in environmentally sensitive areas. A programmatic matrix

summarizing the findings is presented in below.


63

Table 8: Housing In tiatives Matrix

ProgrammaticFeature

CAMEBACaracas, VE

Favela/BairroRio de Janeiro, BR

ProgramaGuaraplrangaSao Paulo, BR

Primary Focus Urban/slumupgrading;landslideprevention; social and economic community investment

Urban/slum upgrading; social and economic community investment

Urban/slumupgrading;Environmentalsanitation andinfrastructure;Environmentaleducation

Timeline 1999-2004 1996-2000 (Phases 1 and 2)

1993-2001

Project Scope Three barrios - two which are located in Caracas and one community located in neighboring state (Vargas); Scope originally consisted of only two neighborhoods in Caracas

Medium-sized favelas in city boundaries.

639 square kilometercatchm ent area in southern section of city.

Approximate no. of persons impacted by program

197,000 500,000 250,000

Level ofEnvironmentalFocus

Medium/High Medium High

Project Cost (Final Estimate)

$55 million $600 million (Phases 1 & 2; $300 million for each phase)

$338.5 million

Funding Source(s) National, regional government; World Bank

National, regional government; Inter- American Development Bank

National, regional government; World Bank

Participation Community involvement/ development of neighborhood improvement plans (NIPS); community participation in project oversight.

Stakeholders meetings; Focus groups comprised of community representatives and members to garner feedback.

Stakeholders meetings; Focus group meetings.

Continued on page 64


64

Land Titling Component?

Yes Yes (Limited Use) Yes (Limited Use)

Resettlementstrategies

Resettlement for a small % of households; Included development of SpecificResettlement Action Plans.

Limited only to residents living in geographically unstable areas.

Resettlement for a small % of households; Program policy d ictated that resettlement be kept at a minimum.

Source: C om piled oy author

4.2.1 Primary Focus of Program/Initiative

CAMEBA, Favela/Bairro and Programa Guarapiranga all focus on

the upgrading of their targeted communities though focusing on

upgrading from different perspectives: CAMBEA not only focused on the

improvement of housing but on providing opportunities for land titling of

dwellings in the targeted communities; Favela/Bairro focused heavily on

the social and economic improvement of low-income residents living in

favelas; and Programa Guarapiranga, while primarily an environmental

improvement program, had a significant urban rehabilitation

subcomponent that included favela upgrading by way of the installation

of sanitary systems, storm drainage, access improvement, new home

construction, and resettlement.

Each featured program had a defined focus on the upgrading

initiatives. Whether the focus was on community participation, social


65

development or environmental improvement, each program had the

goal of improving the quality of life of residents living in the project areas.

4.2.2 Program/Initiative Timeline

One of the objectives of this thesis was to study and compare urban

housing initiatives that began operation during the 1990s in to the 2000s.

Programa Guarapiranga was the first program to be implemented in

1993. In the spirit of urban improvement that was gaining momentum in

Brazil in the 1990s, Favela/Bairro was implementation in 1996. Occurring in

three phases, Phases 1 and 2 lasted until 2000. Phase 3 of the program is

currently in operation. CAMEBA began at the end of the 1990s and

continued operation until 2004. One issue that adversely impacted

CAMEBA and Programa Guarapiranga were delays in implementing the

program due to political issues. Program delays (especially for CAMEBA)

are further discussed in Chapter 5.

What is interesting about the program timelines is that these

programs were implemented prior to the re-drafting of Venezuela's

constitution in 2000 which addressed the issue of housing and Brazil's

constitutional amendment for housing that was enacted in February 2000

(see Chapter 2). The time at which these programs took place suggests

that their implementation as well as the timeline of other similar initiatives


66

played a part in housing becoming enough of a priority in Venezuela and

Brazil to bring about legislation to improve housing conditions.

4.2.3 Project/Program Scope

All of the programs studied were very much localized22 in scope. As

mentioned earlier, CAMEBA focused on three communities, two within

Caracas metro area boundaries and one neighborhood in a neighboring

state. Favela/Bairro focused on medium-sized favelas within Rio de

Janeiro, whereas Programa Guarapiranga targeted a catchment area

surrounding the Guarapiranga Basin in southwestern Sao Paulo. While

being localized programs, CAMEBA, Favela/Bairro and Programa

Guarapiranga collectively impacted several million people, not only in

the context of several neighborhoods but throughout their respective

great urban and metropolitan areas. Because of the localized scope of

all three programs, similar types of initiatives can be employed in

communities with comparable social and economic demographics.

4.2.4 Number of Individuals Impacted by Program

One common trait of the three programs is the significant number

of residents the programs have impacted in their respective cities.

Upgrading projects employed under CAMEBA impacted almost 200,000

22 Meaning programs were targeted towards specific areas of the city (neighborhoods and other sub-areas).


67

residents of Caracas and Vargas State. Approximately 500,000 of favela

dwellers in Rio de Janeiro were affected by social and economic

upgrading activities brought about through the Favela/Bairro Project.

Over a quarter-million Sao Paulo residents living in substandard housing

were impacted by Programa Guarapiranga.

Overall, approximately 900,000 individuals from low-income

communities were impacted by the three profiled programs. The sheer

amount of individuals that benefited from living in areas targeted by these

programs shows that urban upgrading projects can have a significant

influence on the livelihoods of poor individuals.

4.2.5 Level of Environmental Focus

By far, Programa Guarapiranga had the most important of an

environmental component out all of the studied initiatives. This program

had four environmental initiatives which included improvement of the

water supply and sewage system in the Guarapiranga Basin (a

component that affects not only Basin residents but also a large swath of

the metropolitan population), solid waste collection and disposal,

management of the Basin area and environmental protection of the

surrounding areas. The educational component of Programa

Guarapiranga was to provide environmental education for area residents

to explain the importance of the Reservoir in relation to resident’s health


68

and the surrounding environment. CAMEBA's environmental focus chiefly

came in the form of rebuilding part of La Guaira after the 1999 landslides

and flooding in Vargas State.

Environmental issues were important in Petare Norte and La Vega

as well, and expressed the building of retaining walls on hillsides where

many homes were located to prevent landslides and the installation of

municipal sewage connections. Favela/Bairro, while promoting

environmental practices through construction of sewage connections

and retaining walls, focused more on socioeconomic outcomes for

residents living in the programs targeted favelas.

4.2.6 Program/Initiative Costs

As could be imagined, none of the upgrading programs were

inexpensive. However, in terms programmatic costs for similar projects,

costs represent a broad range. Final cost tallies show that CAMEBA cost

$55 million, Favela/Bairro totaled at approximately $600 million and

Programa Guarapiranga costs almost $339 million. Costs for the CAMEBA

project were significantly lower due to the smaller areas of land that was

targeted by project activities compared to Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo.

Funding for these projects came from several sources.


69

4.2.8 Funding Source(s)

Funding for all three projects came from a combination of

municipal and national coffers of the respective countries and from

international financial institutions (IFIs), which in many cases provided a

significant amount of total program costs. In most cases, the acceptance

of institutional funding was conditional. Particular guidelines or

benchmarks for intended programs had to be followed in order for

governments to secure funding. The organization that provided monies to

the CAMEBA and Programa Guarapiranga programs was the World Bank

and the funding organization that provided funding for Favela/Bairro was

the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). The World Bank distributes

funding in the form of loans for projects in low- and middle-income

countries worldwide while the IADB directs its attention to countries in Latin

America and the Caribbean.

The World Bank Group is comprised of five sub-agencies. Two of

the sub-agencies, the International Bank for Reconstruction and

Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association are

the branches that are typically thought of in relation to the work of the


70

World Bank.23 Both organizations focus on programs related to poverty

alleviation and social/economic development. The types of assistance

provided by these organizations include the provision of loans and grants,

technical assistance to governments and the private sector for

development projects, policy development and implementation.

While both organizations have laudable goals to reduce poverty

and uplift countries in the developing world, the World Bank, and to a

lesser extent, IADB, have come under scrutiny regarding their lending

accountability practices. As explained by Sparr and Jenkins (2005),

foreign debt occurred by loans from IFIs acts as an “albatross" for low and

middle-income countries in the sense that monies that are needed to

addresses social and economic issues of these countries are used to pay

back the IFI loans in the form of high interest and principal costs. In many

cases, loans provided by IFIs (the World Bank and the International

Monetary Fund in particular) include extensive conditions attached. In

the distant and not so distant past, loan conditions include “ trade

liberalization, privatization, currency devaluation, deregulation, and

reductions in social expenditures” (Sparr & Jenkins, 2005). Loans with such

23 The other three sub-agencies of the World Bank are the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), and the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).


71

measures attached have resulted in adverse social and economic

outcomes in the beneficiary countries.

It should be noted that in April 2007, Venezuela announced that it

had paid back all of its outstanding debts with the World Bank which

totaled $3.3 billion (Martinez, 2007; Holland, 2006). This amount included

the approximately $30 million that was loaned to Venezuela tor the

CAMEBA program. Brazil, while recently paying off its debt owed to the

IMF, is paying on debts incurred from loans from the World Bank and IADB

(the loans for Favela/Bairro and Programa Guarapiranga were $189.5

million and $118.9 million, respectively).

With respect to replicating similar types of housing programs in other

low-income communities, it is certainly possible that loans from IFIs will

serve as funding sources. While Venezuela and Brazil are considered

middle-income countries, both have significant low-income populations

that need access to adequate housing and related services. With limited

financial resources, Venezuela and Brazil are still in a position to have to

dependent upon financial assistance from IFIs to help fund social

programs.


72

4.2.9 Participatory Strategies

A. CAMEBA

Each of the programs featured in this study incorporated

community participation during both the pre-implementation and

implementation stages in various degrees. Qualitative evidence shows

that CAMEBA had the highest rate of community participation out of all

three programs. Community participation or participatory democracy

was a built-in component of CAMEBA and was expressed in the following

ways: community input on the development Neighborhood Improvement

Plans (NIPs) and actual participation of community residents in project

oversight. Participants in project oversight included neighborhood

inspectors, social promoters, surveyors and “seers.” These positions were

filled by neighborhood residents who were then trained by CAMEBA staff.

Neighborhood inspectors supervise construction/rehabilitation sites

and collaborate with contractors and CAMEBA staff to ensure that

construction guidelines are correctly followed. Neighborhood inspectors

are elected by barrio residents and are trained by CAMEBA staff. The

inspectors’ responsibilities include supply management and administrative

functions. Social promoters consist of CAMEBA staff members who are

recruited from barrios. The primary responsibility of social promoters is to

monitor ongoing social improvement projects included within the


73

program. Surveyors recruited from the barrios are responsible for

administration of household surveys and revision of the repository for

survey information. “Seers” are barrio residents that are invited by

CAMEBA staff to monitor procurement procedures (Falconer, 2005). The

recruitment of barrio members to serve in key positions in program

implementation and monitoring provided a high degree of credibility

within the impacted communities, which was a significant to the success

of CAMEBA.

B. Favela/Bairro

As mentioned earlier, the responsibility for promoting community

involvement of Favela/Bairro fell under the social policies for favelas

instituted by Rio’s Municipal Housing Department (Secretaria Municipal de

Habitgao - SMH). From an institutional standpoint, the primary purpose for

promoting community participation was to ensure the Favela/Bairro

would run smoothly. It is also worth mentioning that the Inter-American

Development Bank, which served as the primary financier of the project

demanded a community participation component to the program (Fiori,

et a l„ 2001).

SMH officials believed in promoting community participation. The

idea was that by holding community meetings and hiring residents as

contractors for building projects should prevent communication mistakes


74

and work disruptions in the program. This view was also held by private

sector contractors that provided construction services for the project. As

time progressed, social policies regarding community participation in

Favela/Bairro evolved to promoting community participation as a way to

involve the im pacted communities. By using this strategy, community

members have a true say in the design and implementation of projects

taking place that will ultimately affect their lives.

C. Programa Guarapiranga

Community participation under Programa Guarapiranga included

the identification of community agencies, key stakeholders, and

community leaders. There was collaboration with these entities to

promote Programa Guarapiranga among community residents. In

December 2000, during a final assessment meeting of Programa

Guarapiranga that was held among community organizations and

governmental institutions participating in the project included a discussion

of the following issues pertaining to the program (World Bank, 2004) were

discussed:

1. The importance of intervention in slum areas; working with limited

resources within the urban housing and urban upgrading context;

and;


75

2. Land legalization and formalization; the importance of public

spaces to a community; promotion of a metropolitan housing

strategy; improvement in the built and natural environment within

urban areas; and social inclusion of low-income populations in the

strategic decision-making process of urban upgrading activities

(World Bank, 2004).

4.2.10 Land Titling/Tenure

In developing countries, a huge obstacle for low-income residents

living in informal settlements is the ability to secure tenure in relation to the

land of their dwelling site. According to the International Land Coalition

(2003), residents of low-income communities that possess secure land

access have the ability to dismantle the poverty cycle. Today, many

urban housing and upgrading programs include land titling or land tenure

access as important factors in their broader programs.24 To address this

problem, Venezuela and Brazil have promoted land titling schemes to

com bat urban and rural poverty. In fact, in 2006 Venezuela established

the National Office for Land Titling (ONTT) to serve as the executing

agency for a nation-wide program and legislative framework for urban

land titling created in early 2002. The legislative framework was

24 Examples include Mision Habitat and Mision Villanueva in Venezuela; and Multi-Phase Low-income Housing Program in Nicaragua.


76

formalized in 2006 as the Law of Urban Land Titling. During the late 1980s

to the 1990s and the early part of the 21st century, Brazil also enacted

legislation for land titling. Examples include constitutional reforms in 1988

that specified the right to own land, Morar Legal, a program used to

promote property regularization and land titling implemented in the mid-

1990s (Bate, 2002), and the Federal Law No. 10.257. Made into law in

2001 and Title “The City Statute," this law enables municipalities to enact

programs that promote land tenure regularization in urban areas (Instituto

Polis, 2002).

Of the three profiled initiatives, CAMEBA was the only program that

placed a heavy emphasis on land titling. The titling process included land

surveying and recording which allowed for the determination of the land

values and ownership of the properties where neighborhood residents

resided. As of June 2006, for the barrios of La Vega and Petare Norte,

over 7,000 parcels of land were titled and over 14,000 proof of titles were

delivered to residents, most of which were issued to women. Once

ownership was established and property titles were provided to residents,

some residents were able to obtain small loans for home improvements

using the titles as a form of collateral (World Bank, 2007). Residents

receiving titles for their property were also aware of the need to pay for

the public improvements made in their communities. In some cases many


77

residents were not aware that they were required to pay property taxes

on their dwellings (World Bank, 2007).

Although land tenure issues were a component of Favela/Bairro

and Programa Guarapiranga, unlike CAMEBA, these programs did not

heavily focus on land/property ownership. For Favela/Bairro, while land

tenure was a component of urban upgrading, its reach only included the

provision of land certificates to favela dwellers. Unlike property titles, the

land certificates stated a ‘right to use’ of the land where the favela

dwelling are located. Issuance of land certificates protects residents from

being evicted from their home and allows for the municipal government

to collect property taxes and payments for upgraded neighborhood

services from residents. Essentially, land certificates serve as a leasing

arrangement between the favela household and the city (Costantino,

2003). Land titling initiatives for Programa Guarapiranga were similar to

Favela/Bairro by providing land certificates to residents living in informal

settlements.

4.2.11 Resettlement Strategies

Both CAMEBA and Programa Guarapiranga had extensive

resettlement programs. Resettlement activity included in the Favela/Bairro

program was limited to residents living in neighborhood sub-areas that

were determined to be geologically unstable. The majority of upgrading


78

in the Favela/Bairro was performed in-situ. Therefore, only resettlement

strategies for CAMEBA and Programa Guarapiranga will be discussed.

A. CAMEBA

According to the World Bank’s Project Appraisal Document for

CAMEBA (World Bank, 1998), the purpose for instituting resettlement for a

percentage of the population in Petare Norte and La Vega were to (1)

appropriate space for infrastructure improvements (i.e., drainage canals

and the widening of access roads) and (2) remove dwellings that were

structurally deficient or located in geologically unsound areas. Plans for

relocation fell under the categories of site-specific resettlement plans for

12 urban redevelopment units (UDUs) which were introduced in 1998. In

2001, a process called the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) which was

introduced to serve as an encompassing policy for resettlement for all

areas impacted by CAMEBA, thereby replacing the site-specific

settlement plans. Serving as a legal and institutional structure for

relocation activities, the Resettlement Action Plan provided

socioeconomic characteristics of impacted families, addressed the need

for housing reconstruction for displaced families, and determined the

hazards involved in resettlement activities (World Bank, 2007).

In 2002, the first several families were relocated due to a new road

and a waste water collection structure built in La Vega. By July 2006, 79


79

resettlement cases had been further carried out in Petare Norte and La

Vega. Three resettlement cases were executed in Vargas. Sixty-one

settlement cases had been programmed (meaning were in the process of

execution) in all three areas. CAMEBA resettlement activities were also

instituted in several smaller zones throughout the Caracas metropolitan

area and had a total of 108 resettlements executed or in process of being

so. Table 9 shows 84 percent of the total 248 planned and implemented

resettlement cases took place, resulting in the resettlement component of

CAMEBA being highly successful.25

25 Over the course of CAMEBA, the number of resettlement cases in Petare Norte and La Vega were adjusted downward. Adjustments were caused by various factors, one being reduction of loan funding provided by the World Bank. This adjustment in resettlements cases is shown in the first column of Table 9.


80

Table 9: Resettlements Executed - CAMEBA

Design/Program/PolicyChanges

PetareNorte

LaVega Vargas

TotalCAMEBA

AreasOtherAreas TOTAL

No. of Resettlement cases (housing units) according to PAD* (Sept. 1998)

1,421 803 0 2,224 0 2,224

No. of Resettlement cases according to Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) - March 2001

649 504 0 1,153 0 1,153

No. of Resettlement cases according to Mid Term Review (June 2002)

376 355 0 731 0 731

Estimated No. of Resettlement cases due to Reduction of Loan Amount (March 2004)

253 239 0 493 0 493

Resettlement cases estimated in the Specific Resettlement Actions Plans (January 2006)

148 139 0 287 0 287

Resettlement Executed 34 42 3 79 35 114

% of implementation against the estimated number on March 2004

23% 30.1% 27.5% 39.7%

Resettlement cases programmed 31 27 3 61 73 134

Total Resettlement cases (Implemented + Programmed) 65 69 6 140 108 248

% (Implemented + Programmed) 44% 49.5% 48.8% 86.4%

*Project Appraisal Document Source: World Bank (2007)

B. Programa G uarap iranga

The initial and overarching purpose of the creation of a

resettlement plan for Programa Guarapiranga came from the need to

clear locations near the Basin to make way for environmental upgrading


81

projects that fell under the auspices of the program. Due to the risk of

landslides and/or structure failure a policy of limiting the amount of

redevelopment and resettlement of slum areas in the Basin area was

instituted (World Bank, 2004).

During the planning phase of the project, it was estimated by data

collected by PMSP and CDHU, 3,700 families would need to be relocated

from various slums in areas impacted by Programa Guarapiranga. Actual

relocation need was determined on an intermittent basis. Resettlement

and relocation work was performed throughout the project. Carried out

from 1993 to late 2000, over 2,839 families were subject to resettlement.

As shown in Figure 12, the majority of the families were relocated to

apartments, many of which were subleased from other tenants.


82

Figure 12: Families Affected by Resettlement Component of Programa Guarapiranga

A p a r tm e n t b lo c k s P ro p e rtie s Built in R o o m s T o ta l

S lu m A re a s

S tru c tu res F a m ilie s W e re R e lo c a te d to

Source: Compiled by author from World Bank data (2004)

4.3 Select Socioeconomic Impacts of Initiatives

According to Field and Kremer (2005), socioeconomic impacts of

urban upgrading and housing programs are measured by improvements

of various relevant indicators. The latter are quantified at the individual

and community levels. At the individual level, indicators are

improvements in health, educational attainment, employment and

land/tenure security. At the community level, indicators include real

estate values, economic development, poverty levels, criminal activity

rates, and environmental hazards. Other community indicators include


83

management of local resources, institutional/programmatic

advancement and program integration with municipal and regional

governments. The balance of this section will detail impacts of CAMEBA,

Favela/Bairro and Programa Guarapiranga at the individual and

community levels.

A. CAMEBA

In the case of CAMEBA, socioeconomic indicators at the individual

level significantly focused on land titling. In the area of land titling,

approximately 46 percent of the land in Petare Norte and La Vega

received a property title, with the majority of land titled in La Vega (114.52

Hectares). Sixty-three percent of residents of these two areas benefited

from the property titles (over 100,000 residents). In terms of families, 86

percent of families residing in Petare Norte and La Vega benefited from

land titling (approximately 27,000 families). In the area of property values,

real estate values increased by two percent in Petare Norte and 10

percent in La Vega due from 1998 to 2006 due to upgrading activities

(World Bank, 2007).

At the community level, physical improvements that were made

during CAMEBA included (ibid):

1. Development of 1,630 meters of primary access roads;


84

2. Construction of 14,353 meters of secondary access roads and

pedestrian walkways;

3. Development of 12,696 meters of additional storm drainage

structures;

4. Installation of 5,727 meters of water distribution pipelines;

5. Installation of 12,147 meters of sewage networks;

6. Establishment of 27,004 square meters of geological risk mitigation

structures;

7. Installation of 2,280 power lines;

8. Building of community service centers; and the

9. Creation of 5,251 square meters of community spaces.

B. Favela/Bairro

Favela/Bairro, the most well-known program of the three programs

mentioned, had the overarching goal of integrating favelas and their

residents on a social and physical level into the larger urban context of Rio

de Janeiro. With this in mind, a primary objective of the program was to

improve basic living standards of residents living in mid-sized

favelas. On the individual level, as detailed by Soares and Soares (2005),

the upgrading or connection of favela dwellings to a municipal sewer is

typically associated with lower mortality rates. Upgrading of sewer

systems in favelas was a component of the Favela/Bairro; however, there


85

were no significant impacts of mortality rates as associated with diseases

due to substandard waste treatment schemes. One theory of this finding

is that sewage connections and sanitation services in Favela/Bairro

targeted neighborhoods were already in high use prior to the

implementation of Favela/Bairro (Soares & Soares, 2005).

From the community perspective, unfortunately, there were no

specific goals to improve primary health clinics or formalized primary or

secondary level education within the program’s framework. According to

Fiori, Riley, and Ramirez (2000), this lacking was considered by some

program participant to be a "major failing" of Favela/Bairro. However, in

terns of property values, average property values in the targeted favelas

increased anywhere from 28 to 43 percent (the typical property value of

a targeted dwelling in a favela was $12,000) (Smolka, 2003).

C. Programa Guarapiranga

According to survey results26 for Program Guarapiranga (World

Bank, 2004), residents lives improved in the areas of (1) improvements in

26 The methodology for this survey, directed at program beneficiaries, included a questionnaire self-contained inquires (‘Yes-No’ questions) and questions that respondents were able to provided qualitative responses. The survey attem pted to determine social living conditions prior to and after implementation of Programa Guarapiranga. The survey also addressed the following: health conditions, public safety, community life, confidence within the community, sanitation improvements, urban design modifications, population density, domestic living conditions, opportunities for income generation, improvements as a result of urbanization, family resettlement and relocation, and program sustainability.


86

sanitation (2) urban layout redesign; (4) household living conditions; (5)

health conditions; (6) public safety; (7) community cohesiveness; and (8)

various other related matters. A majority of residents in the impacted

communities confirmed that water and sewage services have vastly

improved (74% and 85%, respectively). A lower satisfaction rate for

stormwater drainage services and garbage disposal services was

reported. Forty-seven percent of respondent reported that stormwater

still drained on street surfaces and 54 percent reported that garbage

disposal issues still existed.

In the area of urban layout design and population density, 87

percent of respondents reported the improvement of vehicle access due

to design changes in communities. Fifty-nine percent reported improved

pedestrian access.

In the area of housing and health conditions, over 45 percent of

survey participants had improved housing and over 50 percent had

invested over R$2,000 in housing upgrades in order to improve living

conditions. According to survey findings, 75 percent of families living in

slum or low-income areas responding reported improved health

conditions (World Bank, 2004).

Residents also reported improved public safety conditions. Twenty-

seven percent of respondents reported improvement in public safety.


87

Unfortunately, 38 percent reported public safety worsening (World Bank,

2004). Since public safety was not a significant component to the

objectives of Programa Guarapiranga, this finding is not surprising.

For the area of community involvement and cohesiveness, there

was a slight increase in low-income residents belonging to community

organizations with nine percent at the beginning of the program to 13

percent fully participating in community organizations (World Bank, 2004).

Other related matters included self-confidence in respective

communities, satisfaction with relocation, resettlement initiatives and the

sustainability of urban upgrading improvements that had taken place in

targeted communities and income generation opportunities. In fact,

survey results showed that three percent of survey interviews reported that

their incomes have increased due to the urban upgrading activities

taking place in their communities (World Bank, 2004). Evaluators of

Programa Guarapiranga anticipate that as the target areas are able to

access municipal services, employment opportunities within the target

communities will develop in the low-income communities (World Bank,

2004).

4.4 Summary

As demonstrated in this chapter, CAMEBA, Favela/Bairro and

Programa Guarapiranga promoted a multifaceted approach to promote


88

poverty alleviation in low-income communities. Primary components used

to improve resident living quality include the use of land titling and tenure

programs, community participatory strategies, and resettlement of

housing for specific purposes. The use of such strategies has directly and

indirectly touched the lives of millions low-income residents of Caracas,

Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo. The programs featured in this chapter

serve as excellent examples of urban housing and community

improvement in developing countries. In the final chapter of this thesis, an

overview of the research will be presented, policy recommendations for

urban housing and upgrading programs will be stated and ideas for future

research on this topic will be provided.


89

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

5.1 Overview

Over the course of this study, urban housing in Latin America has

been examined from the perspective of the living conditions for low-

income residents. Three specific cases of programs with the core intention

of alleviating substandard housing and improving the overall living

conditions for poor communities have been addressed. These programs

show instances of how social development policies have the ability to

induce real change at the micro-local or neighborhood level. In the

beginning of this chapter, recommendations for further research in this

subject area. Further, several policy recommendations to provide

possible ideas in furthering the goals of these programs will be made.

These recommendations address the role of national or regional political

climate, the use of technology, the promotion of participatory

democracy and betterment of urban planning policy to address urban

housing issues that effect low-income communities.


90

5.2 Future Research Suggestions

The research and findings presented in this study allows for several

suggestions that will improve the quality of information on urban housing

programs:

1. Independent organizations should conduct more in-depth research

into this area to provide a more diverse view of urban housing and

upgrading programs in the South American region. Much of the

information and data gathered for this study was provided by

institutions that have a financial and political stake in the programs

profiled. Therefore, the potential for bias via the data is present.

Further independent study into this subject could produce more

objective results in final analysis.

2. Further study into long-term outcomes of obtaining legal title for

housing should be conducted. A longitudinal study over a five- to ten-

year period from the date of property title being established will serve

as a sufficient basis for analyzing outcomes related to the long-term

implications of low-income residents obtaining property ownership for

land that is presently or was recently illegally occupied property. The

importance for this type of study will show if obtaining legal title for

occupied land has increased household net worth of households and

if ownership has translated into a greater sense of community.


9!

3. It was briefly overviewed that urban upgrading provided a wider array

of employment options for low-income residents. In CAMEBA, many

neighborhood residents were trained to performed project

management roles throughout implementation. Further study on how

these residents have been able to use their acquired project

management skills to broaden their employment opportunities is .

needed. This will encourage municipalities incentive to provide these

opportunities to community residents on a larger scale, thereby,

creating an increase in skilled workers able to contribute to the larger

urban economy.

The recommendations for further research provide an opportunity

for other parties interested in urban housing issues to examine housing

programs at a more concise level. Research can follow several paths.

These paths include evaluating programs using data obtained

independently, the designing and implementing of a particular program

features that affect program outcomes, as well as creation of a program

evaluation that can determine the employability of residents after they

have participated in urban housing initiatives. The study of these paths will

broaden the knowledge of urban housing for low-income communities for

use in many fields including government, academia, city administration,

urban planning and international development.


92

5.3 Policy Recommendations

Initiatives such as CAMEBA, Favela/Bairro and Programa

Guarapiranga have promoted individual and community-wide stability

through the improvement of housing in communities with poor dwelling

and overall living conditions that these programs have targeted. The

researcher has developed three policy recommendations that will

provide possible options for the improvement of the operation of urban

housing initiatives in developing countries.

The first recommendation is to promote a political climate where

policies related to urban upgrading projects are insured continuity despite

administration changes. This recommendation is easier said than done.

Over the last 100 years, Latin American societies have been marred by

political instability. Several examples of political instability in the regional

include the military dictatorship in Chile during the 1970s and 1980s,

political issues occurring in the Dominican Republic in the mid-1960s, and

military rule in Brazil during the 1960s and 1970s. More recent examples of

political volatility the Latin American Debt Crisis in the 1980s to the

overthrow of former Panamanian President Manuel Noriega in 1989, and

economic austerity measures27 and subsequent political breakdown in

27 Brought about by World Bank policies.


93

Argentina in early 2000. Such a political climate has the potential to

interfere with municipal and regional projects focused on social

development.

For example/implementation of projects under CAMEBA were

extremely challenging, fraught with work delays partially due to the

transition of the Rafael Caldera administration (1994-1998) to the Hugo

Chavez administration (1999 to present). The early Chavez administration

was much more concerned with constitutional reforms and considered

CAMEBA a holdover from the Caldera administration, consequently

providing little support for the project. Proponents for CAMEBA within the

Chavez administration pushed for the project to be implemented. It

wasn’t until December 1999, after the landslides and flooding in Vargas

state that the Chavez administration took CAMEBA seriously. CAMEBA

was reconfigured to address housing and urban upgrading in Vargas and

was implemented in late December.

After being approved for operation, CAMEBA still haltingly operated

in the midst of political instability. Events including currency devaluation in

2001 and the subsequent economic recession in 2002 to 2003; the failed

coup of Chavez in April 2002, an employee strike at PDVSA, the now state-

owned petroleum company in 2003; and a presidential recall referendum

in August 2004 all contributed to the stalling of CAMEBA. Instability in


94

CAMEBA’s administrative component was also a key factor in the erratic

progress of the program. From the start of the project, FUNDACOMUN had

seven presidents and 13 general managers; and on the local level,

community hostility towards government intervention due to historical

distrust of failed government involvement in barrios (Falconer, 2005).

Nevertheless, CAMEBA became a relatively successful program that not

only benefited its targeted neighborhoods but served as a prototype for

recent housing programs that will impact low-income communities

throughout Caracas and Venezuela, including Mision Habitat and Mision

Villanueva, two initiatives started by the Chavez administration in 2004

and 2006.

The question becomes, is political insulation of housing programs

feasible? While it is beyond the scope of this study to provide possible

solutions to promote political stability in Latin American countries, it is true

that relative stability will allow for an environment more willing and able to

address the problem of substandard housing. This is highly imperative

considering the fact that a significant portion of Latin America’s

population lives in poverty (see Appendix B).

The second recommendation is to continue to promote

participatory democracy initiatives that will enable residents of low-

income neighborhoods to have a voice in the development of their


95

communities. Thoroughly noted in Chapter 4, community participation

and input are vital to the success of an urban housing program and serve

as a promotion tool for greater communication between the residents,

community organizations, organizations that assist in these projects that

work outside of government reach, (such as NGOs and CSOs) and

governmental organizations. To further promote participatory

democracy, institutional initiatives should be put into place in order to

serve as a template for future programs that address social issues

affecting communities of all economic levels of a municipality.

The final recommendation is for governments to address an

increasing urban population by proactively creating housing choices for

low-income residents new to metropolitan areas. As noted by Cerrutti

and Bertoncello (2003), urbanization in Latin America increased at a rapid

pace during the over the past fifty years. This is also apparent at the

regional level; the populations of Caracas, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo

will continue to climb until 2025 to 2030. The availability of housing will be

and increasing issue that will heavily impact the quality of life for low-

income residents in all three cities.28 While cities have to contend with a

28 This is not to say that urban migration should be diverted to less developed areas. Urban areas will continue to draw large populations considering the economic opportunities available that do not exist in rural areas. However, city and regional governments should plan diligently to anticipate and accom m odate an increasing number of urban dwellers.


'96

myriad of urban issues with limited financial resources, action should still

be taken to provide new construction and housing upgrading projects.

To insure that housing policy stays at the forefront of municipal and

national priorities, housing development plans and city master plans

should be developed and/or updated on a continuous basis.

Overall, the three proposed policy recommendations provide

methods on the handling of various impediments to the progress of urban

housing initiatives. Such obstacles take in comprise of possible volatile

political environments, implementation of community involvement and

the challenges presented by an increasing urban population. These

policy recommendations, while serving as possible options for CAMEBA,

Favela/Bairro and Programa Guarapiranga can also be taken into

consideration during the planning of urban housing programs. The policy

recommendations presented could assist in insulating urban programs

from outside factors that otherwise could have adverse outcomes on

such programs.

5.4 Conclusion

This study provided a look how at low-income housing develops in

urban areas in South America and compared how different cities on the

South American continent have addressed providing adequate housing

choices for this subset of their urban populations. The provision of housing


97

for all is in line with national and constitutional objectives of these

countries that were instituted within the last decade. Evidence provided

in this study shows that, if implemented well, urban housing programs

have the ability to greatly improve the lives of residents living in low-

income communities.

Improvements to the daily lives and future prospects of residents

include physical infrastructure improvements that will benefit residents

immediately in the areas of health, economics and safety. The obtaining

of property rights will allow for residents to incur an increase in household

wealth and will allow for the house to be used as a tool to obtain bank

funding for home projects. Upgrading and land titling are also shown to

assist in increase real estate property values of home. In conclusion,

housing policies and programs that improve the infrastructure of low-

income areas positively impact not only residents of these communities

but also benefit the broader urban areas in which these communities are

located. The overall goal and outcome of these programs is to alleviate

the widespread poverty that harshly impacts many citizens of the

developing world.


98

REFERENCED WORK

Abiko, A., de Azevedo Cardoso, L. R., Rinaldelli, R., & Haga, H. C. R.

(2005, April). Basic Costs of Slum Upgrading in Brazil. Paper

presented at the Third Urban Research Symposium, Brasilia, Brazil.

Retrieved March 21, 2007 from

http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2005/pp.html

Agnotti, T. (1996). Latin American Urbanization and Planning:

Inequality and Unsustainability in North and South. Latin American

Perspectives, 91(23) 4, 12-34.

Aleman, A. A. A. (2005, September 16-17). A Theoretical Framework of

the Integration Process of barrios in Caracas, Venezuela. Paper

presented at the Network-Association of European Researchers on

Urbanisation in the South Conference, Lund, Sweden. Retrieved on

November 27, 2006 from

http://www.naerus.net/sat/workshops/2005/papers/! .pdf

Bartone, C. & Rodriguez, E. (1993). Watershed Protection in the Sao Paulo

Metropolitan Region: A Case Study of Issue-Specific Urban

Environmental M anagem ent Strategy. Retrieved April 24, 2007 from

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resour

ces/336387-1169578899171 Ad-ue9.htm

Bate, P. (2002). From Raze to Rebuild. Retrieved October 21, 2007 from


http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2005/pp.html

http://www.naerus.net/sat/workshops/2005/papers/

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resour

http://w ww.iadb. org/iadbamerica/index.cfm?thisd=1429&articlepr

eview=0&

Berry, B. J. L. (1980). Urbanization and Counterurbanization in the

United States. The ANNALS of the American Academ y of Political

and Social Science, 451, 13-20.

Berry, B. J. L. (1981). Comparative Urbanization: Divergent Paths in the

Twentieth Century. New York: St. Martin’s Press. (Original work

published 1973).

Botas, P. (2003, December 5). Rio de Janeiro to spend US$1 billion on

innovative slum improvement programme. City Mayors. Retrieved

January 31, 2007 from

http://www.citymayors.com/report/rio_favelas.html

Bourne, L. S. & Simmons, J. (2004). The Conceptualization and Analysis of

Urban Systems: A North American Perspective. In T. Champion & G.

Hugo (Eds.), New Forms of Urbanization: Beyond the Urban-Rural

Dichotomy. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate Publishing Company.

Bradshaw, Y. W. & Schafer, M. J. (2000). Urbanization and

Development: The Emergence of International Nongovernmental

Organizations Amid Declining States. Sociological Perspectives,

43(1), 97-116.

Brennan, E. (1999). Population, Urbanization, Environment, and Security:


http://www.iadb

http://www.citymayors.com/report/rio_favelas.html

A Summary of the Issues. Prepared for the Woodrow Wilson

International Center for Scholars, Comparative Urban Studies

Project’s conference entitled "The 21st Century Urban Agenda:

Urbanization, Population, Environment and Security", Washington,

DC. Retrieved October 5, 2006 from

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/featurel .pdf

Brockerhoff, M. & Brennan, E. (1998). The Poverty of Cities in Developing

Regions. Population and Development Review, 24 (1), 75-114.

Brooke, J. (1991, March 20). Rio Slum Dwellers Seize Luxury

Apartments. New York Times, p. A5.

Browne, V. J. (2003). Give Me Shelter: The Global Housing

Crisis. Environmental Health Perspectives, 111 (2), A 92- A 99.

Browning, H. L. (1958). Recent Trends in Latin American Urbanization.

The ANNALS of the American Academ y of Political and Social

Science, 316, 111-120.

Buckley, R. M. & Kalarickal, J. (2004). Shelter Strategies for the Urban

Poor: Idiosyncratic and Successful, but Hardly Mysterious. World

Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3427. Retrieved on November

27, 2006 from


http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/featurel

http://www.wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB

/2004/10/27/000160016.20041027133503/Rendered/PDF/wps3427.p

df

Budds, J., Teixeira, P. & Sao Paulo Municipal Secretariat of Housing and

Urban Development (SEHAB). (2005). Ensuring the right to the city:

pro-poor housing, urban development and tenure legalization in

Sao Paulo, Brazil. Environment & Urbanization, 17(1), 89-113.

Cerrutti, M. & Bertoncello, R. (2003, June). Urbanization and Internal

Migration Patterns in Latin America. Paper prepared for the

Conference on African Migration in Comparative Perspective,

Johannesburg, South Africa.

Champion, T. & Hugo, G. (Eds.). (2004). New Forms of Urbanization:

Beyond the Urban-Rural Dichotomy. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate

Publishing Company.

Collier, R. (2006, October 2). Venezuela’s oil wealth funds gusher of

anfi-poverty projects. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved October

5, 2006 from

http://www.sfgate.com/cgibin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/02/MN

GHQLGL9R1.DTL

Costantino, R. (2003). Favela Bairro Program: Poverty Alleviation or

Economic Consolidation. Retrieved April 27, 2007 from


http://www.wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB

http://www.sfgate.com/cgibin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/02/MN

http://istsocrates.berkeley.edu:7001/Research/graduate/summer20

03/costantino/index.html

Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. (2000).

Retrieved on February 4, 2007 from

http://www.misionvenezuela.org/espanol/ConstitutionoftheBolivaria

ningles.pdf

Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil. (1988). Retrieved on

February 4, 2007 from

http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Constituicao/Constitui%C3%A

7ao.htm

Daland, R. T. (1969). Urbanization Policy and Political Development

in Latin America. American Behavioral Scientist 12, 22-33.

Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. London; New York: Verso,

de Fernandes, C. (2005). Sao Paulo. [Photograph]. Retrieved April 5, 2007

from http://www.sxc.hu/photo/277763

de Oliveira, O. & Roberts, B. (1996). Urban Development and Social

Inequality in Latin America. In J. Gugler (Ed.), The Urban

Transformation of the Developing World (pp. 253-314). New York:

Oxford University Press, Inc.

Delaney, T. (2005). Caracas Barrio. [Photograph]. Retrieved April 2, 2007



http://istsocrates.berkeley.edu:7001/Research/graduate/summer20

http://www.misionvenezuela.org/espanol/ConstitutionoftheBolivaria

http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Constituicao/Constitui%C3%25A

http://www.sxc.hu/photo/277763


Dowall, D. (2006). Brazil’s Urban Land and Housing Markets: How

Well Are They Working? Institute of Urban & Regional

Development, University of California, Berkley. Retrieved on January

29, 2007 from

http://www-iurd.ced.berkeley.edu/pub/WP-2006-08.pdf

Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. (2006).

Statistical Yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean.

Santiago, Chile: United Nations.

Ellner, S. (1999). Obstacles to the Consolidation of the

Venezuelan Neighborhood Movement: National and Local

Cleavages. Journal of Latin American Studies, 31(1), 75-97.

Ellsworth, B. (2006, September 1). Venezuela housing crunch hurts

Chavez political base. Caribbean Net News. Retrieved on January

29, 2007 from http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/cgi-

script/csArticles/articles/000033/003378.htm

Evers, T. & Pompan, C. M. (1987). Labor-Force Reproduction

and Urban Movements: Illegal Subdivision of Land in Sao Paulo.

Latin American Perspectives, 14(2), 187-203.

Eyre, L. A. (1972). The Shantytowns of Montego Bay, Jamaica.

Geographical Review, 62(3), 394-413.


http://www-iurd.ced.berkeley.edu/pub/WP-2006-08.pdf

http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/cgi-

Falconer, A. P. (2005). Public Works and Citizenship: Empowerment in

Venezuela's Barrios. Retrieved May 4, 2007 from

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPCENG/Resources/TOL_Partici

pation_in_Policy_Based_Lending_in_LAC.pdf

Ferguson, B. (1999). Micro-finance of housing: a key to housing the low or

moderate -incom e majority? Environment and Urbanization, 11(1),

185-200.

Field, E. and Kremer, M. (2005). Impact Evaluation for Slum

Upgrading Interventions. World Bank. Retrieved December 5, 2006

from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANPOVERTY/

Resources/kremer_field.pdf

FINEP. (1985). Habitagao Popular: Inventario da agao governmental

FINEP, Rio de Janeiro.

Finquelievich, S. (1990). Technology and the Urban Environment: Trends

and Challenges in Latin American Cities. Paper presented to the

International Congress Sustainable Habitat on an Urbanized Planet.

Berlin, Germany, March 19-25.

Fiori, J., Riley, E. & Ramirez, R. (2000). Urban Poverty Alleviation Through

Environmental Upgrading in Rio de Janeiro. London: University

College of London Development Planning Unit.

Fiori, J., Riley, E. & Ramirez, R. (2001). Favela Bairro and a New


http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPCENG/Resources/TOL_Partici

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANPOVERTY/

Generation of Housing Programmes for the Urban Poor. Geoforum,

32(4)521-531.

Fisher, J. (1998). Nongovernments, NGOs and the Political Development of

the Third World. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.

Fix, M., Arantes, P. & Tanaka, G. (2003). The Case of Sao Paulo. In The

Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements 2003.

Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme

(UN-Habitat). Retrieved January 18, 2007 from

http://www.ucl.ac.Uk/dpuprojects/Global_Report/pdfs/SaoPaulo.p

df

FUNDACOMUN. (2005). Proyecto Caracas Mejoramiento de los Barrios

(CAMEBA). Accessed on April 10, 2007 from

http://www.fundacomun.gob.ve/view/docs/CAMEBA_5_12_05.pdf

Fundgao Joao Pinheiro (2002). Deficit Habitacional no Brasil 2000.

Informativo CEI - Demographia. Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Government

of Minas Gerais.

Fundgao, Joao Pinheiro (2005). Deficit Habitacional no Brasil:

Municfpos Selecionados e Microregioes Geograficas, 2a Edigao.

Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Government of Minas Gerais.

Galiani, S. and Schargrodsky, E. (2006). Property Rights for the Poor:


http://www.ucl.ac.Uk/dpuprojects/Global_Report/pdfs/SaoPaulo.p

http://www.fundacomun.gob.ve/view/docs/CAMEBA_5_12_05.pdf

Effects of Land Tifling. Accessed June 3, 2007 from

http://200.32.4.58/~eschargr/PropertyRights-March 13-2006,pdf

Gilbert, A. (Ed.). (1996). The Mega-City in Latin America. New

York: United Nations University.

Ginger, R. (Ed.). (1969). Modern American Cities. Chicago:

Quadrangle Books.

Godfrey, B. J. (1999, January). Revisiting Rio de Janeiro and Sao

Paulo. Geographical Review, 89(1), 94-121.

Gonzalez de la Rocha, M. (Translated by Barbara B. Gantt). (1995).

The Urban Family and Poverty in Latin America. Latin American

Perspectives, 85(2), 12-31.

Gould, J. E. (2006, September 17). Mayor in Venezuela Eyes Golf

Courses for Housing [Radio Program]. Washington, DC: National

Public Radio.

Gruner, A. (2006, September 7-9). Development of an Integrated

Process Model for Urban Upgrading Case Study: Area

Metropolitana de Caracas. Paper presented at the 7th Network-

Association of European Researchers on Urbanisation in the South,

Darmstadt, Germany. Retrieved January 20, 2007 from

http://www.naerus.net/sat/workshops/2006/papers/gruner.pdf

Gugler, J. (Ed.) (1996). The Urban Transformation of the Developing World.


http://200.32.4.58/~eschargr/PropertyRights-March

http://www.naerus.net/sat/workshops/2006/papers/gruner.pdf

New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

Guimaraes, A. (1953). As favelas do Distrito Federal. Revista

Brasileira de Estatistica, Ano XIV, No. 55, (pp. 250-277).

Hardoy, J. & Satterthwaite, D. (1989). Squatter Citizens: Life in the Urban

Third World. London: Earthscan Publications.

Hausner, P. & Gardner, R. (1982). Urban Future: Trends and Prospects.

Reprint No. 146. Honolulu: East-West Population Institute.

Hay Jr., R. (1979). Patterns of Urbanization and Socio-Economic

Development in the Third World: An Overview. In J. Abu-Lughod &

R. Hay, Jr. (Eds.). Third World Urbanization (pp. 71-101). New York:

Methuen.

Holland, A. (2006, February 11). Venezuela’s Urban Land

Committees and Participatory Democracy. Venezuelanalysis.com.

Retrieved January 29, 2007 from

http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=l 668

Huchzermeyer, M. (2002). Informal Settlements: Production and

Intervention in Twentieth-Century Brazil and South Africa. Latin

American Perspectives, 29(1), 83-105.

Imparato, I. (2001). The Guarapiranga River Basin Environmental

Sanitation Project. Retrieved March 2, 2007 from

http://www.worldbank.org/urban/upgrading/guarapiranga.htm l


http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=l

http://www.worldbank.org/urban/upgrading/guarapiranga.html

Imparato, I. & Ruster, J. (2003). Slum Upgrading and Participation: Lessons

from Latin America. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Instituto Polis. (2002). Statute of the City: The Collective Construction of

Innovative Legislation. Paper presented at the UN-Habitat World

Forum in Nairobi (April 29-May 5, 2002). Retrieved on October 21,

2007 from http://www.polis.org.br/obras/arquivo_163.pdf

Inter-American Development Bank. (1995). Rio de Janeiro Urban

Upgrading Program - Loan Proposal. (Report No.: BR-0182).

Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank. Retrieved

March 16, 2007 from

http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=BR0182&Langua

ge=English

Inter-American Development Bank. (2000). Rio de Janeiro Urban

Upgrading Program, “Favela-Bairro" - Stage II (Report No.: BR-0250).

Retrieved June 29, 2007 from


ge=English

International Land Coalition. (2006). The International Land Coalition

(Brochure). Rome: International Land Coalition.

James, I. (2006, November 19). Chavez’s Caracas Home-Building


http://www.polis.org.br/obras/arquivo_163.pdf



Sows Hope. Washington Post. Retrieved on February 3, 2007 from

http://www.washingtonpost.eom/wpdyn/content/article/2006/11 / I

9/AR2006111900499.html

Jimenez Diaz, V. J. (1992). Landslides in the Squatter Settlements

of Caracas: Towards a Better Understanding of Causative Factors.

Environment and Urbanization, 4(2), 80-89.

Jones, G. A. & Mitlin, D. (1999). Housing Finance and Non-Governmental

Organizations in Developing Countries. In G. A. Jones & K. Datta

(Eds.), Housing and Finance in Developing Countries. London:

Routledge.

Jones, P. M. (2003, August 4). ‘Roofless’ Brazilians seek shelter;

Squatters also want recognition. Chicago Tribune, p. 3.

Josselin, D. & Wallace, W. (2001). Non-State Actors in World Politics: A

Framework. In D. Josselin and W. Wallace (Eds.). Non-State Actors in

World Politics. New York: Palgrave.

Lacabana, M. & Cariola, C. (2003). Globalization and Metropolitan

Expansion: Residential Strategies and Livelihoods in Caracas and its

Periphery. Environment & Urbanization, 15(1), 65-74. Retrieved on


http://eau.sagepub.eom /cgi/reprint/l 5/1165. pdf

Laquian, A. A. (1976). Whither Site and Services? Science, 192 (4243),


http://www.washingtonpost.eom/wpdyn/content/article/2006/11

http://eau.sagepub.eom/cgi/reprint/l

950-955.

Lattes, A. E., Rodriguez, J. & Villa, M. (2004). Population Dynamics and

Urbanization in Latin America: Concepts and Data Limitations. In T.

Champion & G. Hugo (Eds.), New Forms of Urbanization: Beyond

the Urban-Rural Dichotomy. Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate

Publishing Company.

LDS Mission Network. (2005). Venezuela Caracas. [Photograph].

Retrieved April 5, 2007 from

http://www.mission.net/venezuela/caracas/page.php?pg_id=864

Le Cocq d'Oliveira, S. & Huber, C. (2006, September 7-9). The Inter-

American Development Bank urban policies in Brazil. Paper

presented at the 7th Network-Association of European Researchers

on Urbanisation in the South, Darmstadt, Germany. Retrieved


http://www.naerus.net/saf/workshops/2006/papers/lecocq.pdf

Lombardi, J. W. & Damas, G. C. (1975). Venezuela: Formation, Structure,

and Dynamics of a Primate City: A Case Study of Caracas. Latin

American Research Review, 10(2), 135-138.

Maricato, E. (Ed.). (1979). A produpao capitalista da casa (e da cidale)

no Brasil industrial. Sao Paulo: Ed. Alfa-Omega.

Marin, T. (2004). The 1999 Venezuelan Flood. Retrieved August 20, 2007


http://www.mission.net/venezuela/caracas/page.php?pg_id=864

http://www.naerus.net/saf/workshops/2006/papers/lecocq.pdf

I l l

from http://serc.carleton.edu/files/NAGTWorkshops/

health04/MarinPoster.ppt

Martinez, N. (2007, May 4). Adios, World Bank! Retrieved July 15, 2007

from http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4200

McCue, D. T. (2003). Risk and Opportunities: An Assessment of Housing

Finance in Venezuela. Accessed on November 19, 2006 from

http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/education/outstanding_stundent_pa

pers/mccue_venezuela_04.pdf

McEwen, A. (2001). Land Reform in Developing Countries: Legal and

Institutional Aspects. Retrieved June 2, 2007 from

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~amcewen/ILM2.pdf

McMahon, C. (2006, April 5). Can city lose a slum, not its people?

Chicago Tribune, p. 11.

McNamara, R. S. (1975). Urban Poverty in Developing Countries: A World

Bank Analysis. Population and Development Review, 1 (2), 339-346.

Mitchell, J. (1998, September). Political Decentralization: A New Tool

for the Segregation of Urban Space? The Case of Chacao in

Caracas, Venezuela. Paper presented at the 1998 meeting of the

Latin American Studies Association, Chicago.

Nieto, R. (2004, September 4). Venezuela’s Public Housing Program


http://serc.carleton.edu/files/NAGTWorkshops/

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4200

http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/education/outstanding_stundent_pa

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~amcewen/ILM2.pdf

Attempts a Housing Revolution. Venezuelonalysis.com. Retrieved

on February 3, 2007 from

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=l 357

O ’Hare, G. (2002). The favelas of Rio de Janeiro: A Temporal and

Spatial Analysis. Geo Journal, 56(3), 225-240.

Osava, M. (2003, February 11). Brazil: Lula Says IMF Pact Won’t

Hurt Social Projects. Global Information Network, p. 1.

Otto, A. (2006). Favela Rochina [Photograph]. Retrieved on October 23,

2007 from http://realtravel.com/rio_deJaneiro-journals-

jl292563.html

Parma, A. (2006, January 12). Venezuelan Homeless Occupy Abandoned

Buildings, City Preps Legal Take-over. Retrieved April 30, 2006 from

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1867

Payne, G. (2002). Introduction. In G. Payne (Ed.). Land, Rights &

Innovation: Improving Tenure Security for the Urban Poor. London:

Intermediate Technology Publications.

Peattie, L. & Aldrete-Haas, J. A. (1981). “Marginal" Settlements in

Developing Countries: Research, Advocacy of Policy, and

Evolution of Programs. Annual Review of Sociology, 7, 157-175.

Phillips, T. (2006, January 23). Housing Crisis: Support grows for


http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=l

http://realtravel.com/rio_deJaneiro-journals-

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1867

urban coalition that takes over disused buildings for homeless and

poor: Brazil’s roofless reclaim cifies. The Guardian, p. 23.

Portes, A. (1979). Urban Lafin America: The Political Condition from

Above and Below. In J. Abu-Lughod & R. Hay Jr. (Eds.). Third World

Urbanization (pp. 59-70). New York: Methuen.

Portes, A. (1989). Latin American Urbanization during the Years of the

Crisis. Latin American Research Review, 24(3), 7-44.

Potter, R. B. (Ed.). (1989). Urbanization, Planning & Development in the

Caribbean. London: Mansell Publishing Limited.

Reif, B. & Quezada, F. (2003, December 15-17). Housing Information

System: A Simulation Model for Strategic Decision Making Applied

in Venezuela. Paper presented at the Urban Research Symposium,

Urban Development for Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction,

Washington, DC. Retrieved September 8, 2006 from

http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2003/docs/papers/reif

.pdf

Rich, J. L. (2001, December 1). Brazilian Slums Prove Location

Reigns Supreme in Real Estate. New York Times, p. 1A 15.

Rondinelli, D. A. (1990a). Housing the Urban Poor in Developing Countries:


http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2003/docs/papers/reif

The Magnitude of Housing Deficiencies and the Failure of

Conventional Strategies Are World-Wide Problems. American

Journal of Economics and Sociology, 49(2), 153-166.

Rondinelli, D. A. (1990b). Housing the Urban Poor in Developing Countries:

Other Policy Options for National Shelter Strategies Are Examined

Since Conventional Ones Are Inadequate. American Journal of

Economics and Sociology, 49(3), 257-269.

Rohter, L. (2001, April 7). Sao Paulo’s ‘Roofless’ Seize Downtown

Buildings. New York Times, p. A7.

Sanchez, F. (2006, January 11). Housing shortage grows tense in

Caracas. Associated Press. Retrieved February 3, 2007 from

http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2006/01/

11 /housing_shortage_grows_tense_in_caracas/

Sao Paulo: favela. [Photograph]. Retrieved October 23, 2007, from

Encyclopedia Britannica Online:

http://www.britannica.com /eb/art-l 01189

Schaefer, A. (2005). Sao Paulo. [Phofograph]. Retrieved April 7, 2007 from


Sen, S. (1998). On the origins and reasons behind nonprofit involvement

and non-involvement in low income housing in urban India. Cities,

15(4), 257-268.


http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2006/01/

http://www.britannica.com/eb/art-l


SMH. (1999). Caidadelnteira. A Politico Habitacional da Cidade do Rio

de Janeiro, Secretaria Municipal de Habitagao, Rio de Janeiro.

Smolka, M. O. (2003, January). Informality, Urban Poverty and Land

Market Prices. Land Lines, 15(1). Retrieved May 29, 2007 from

http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/PubDetail.aspx?pubid=723

Soares, F. & Soares, Y. (2005). The Socio-Economic Impact of Favela-Bairro:

What do the Data Say? Washington, DC: Inter-American

Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight.

Sparr, P. and Jenkins, B. (2005). The Debt Burden: Is an end in sight?

Retrieved July 24, 2007 from

http://www.bicusa.org/Legacy/BIC_IFIJnfo_Brief_Debt.pdf

Stephens, C., Akerman, M., Avle, S., Maia, P. B., Campanario, P., Doe, B.

and Tetteh, D. (1997). Urban equity and urban health: using

existing data to understand inequalities in health and environment

in Accra, Ghana and Sao Paulo, Brazil. Environment and

Urbanization, 9 (1), 181 -202.

Stewart, J., Balchin, P. (2002). Community self-help and the

homeless poor in Latin America. The Journal of The Royal Society for

the Promotion of Health, 122(2), 99-107.

Tebbal, F. & Ray, K. (2001). Housing the Urban Poor: Lessons Learned


http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/PubDetail.aspx?pubid=723

http://www.bicusa.org/Legacy/BIC_IFIJnfo_Brief_Debt.pdf

(1960-1996). Habitat Debate, 7(3). Accessed July 12, 2007 from

ww2.unhabitat.org/mdg/documents/global/Vol7_No3_housing_the

_urban_poor.doc

Thorne, J. (2006, October 30). Hundreds of homeless storm Sao

Paulo housing projects. The America's Intelligence Wire, p. N/A.

Retrieved February 3, 2007 from InfoTrac OneFile database.

Thuler, D. (2006). Rio de Janeiro [Photograph]. Retrieved on April 5, 2007


Ulack, R. (1978). The Role of Urban Squatter Settlements.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 68(4), 535

550.

United Nations. (2001 a). Road Map Towards the Implementation of the

United Nations Millennium Declaration: Report of the Secretary

General. New York: United Nations.

United Nations. (2007). The Millennium Development Goals Report 2007.

New York: United Nations.

United Nations. (2001b). World Urbanization Prospects: The 1999

Revision. New York: United Nations.

United Nations. (2005a). UN Millennium Development Goals Website.

Retrieved October 19, 2007 from

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/



http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/

United Nations. (2005b). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2004


United Nations. (2006a). The Millennium Goals Development Report 2006.

New York: United Nations.

United Nations. (2006b). World Population Prospects: The 2005


United Nations Department of International. Economic and Social Affairs.

(1986). Population Growth and Policies in Mega-Cities: Seoul.

Population Policy Paper no. 4. New York: United Nations.

UN-Habitat. (1981). Upgrading of Urban Slums and Squatter Areas. United

Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat). Nairobi, Kenya.

Retrieved January 22, 2007 from

http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/3617_80393_CHS-OP-

81-4.pdf

UN-Habitat. (2003a). Rental Housing: An Essential Option for the Urban

Poor in Developing Countries. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations

Human Settlements Programme.

UN-Habitat. (2003b). Slums of the World: The Face of Urban Poverty in the

New Millennium? (Working Paper) Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations

Human Settlements Programme.

UN-Habitat. (2003c). The Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human


http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/3617_80393_CHS-OP-

Settlements 2003. London: Earthscan Publications.

UN-Habitat. (2006). Analytical Perspective of Pro-Poor Slum Upgrading

Frameworks. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements

Programme.

United States Agency for International Development. (2001). Venezuela

Flood Situation (Map). Retrieved October 20, 2007 from

http://wvvww.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/SKAR64GBGT20p

enDocument&rc=2&emid=FL-1999-0547-VEN

Valenzuela, J. S. (1998). Macro Comparisons without the Pitfalls: A

Protocol for Comparative Research. Retrieved April 6, 2007 from

http://www.nd.edu/~jvalenzu/comparativeAnalysis.html

Van Horen, B. (2000). Informal Settlement Upgrading: Bridging the

Gap Between the De Facto and the De Jure. Journal of Planning

Education and Research, 19, 389-400.

Van Roy, R. (1984). Undocumented Migration to Venezuela.

International Migration Review, 18(3), 541-557.

Venezuelanalysis.com. Chavez Disappointed with His Government's

Public Housing Achievements. (2005, August 1). Retrieved on


http://w w w . venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno= 1704

Wagner de Reyna, A. (Translated by Kathinka Tabourin) (1984). Latin


http://wvvww.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/SKAR64GBGT20p

http://www.nd.edu/~jvalenzu/comparativeAnalysis.html

http://www

America: Culture and Poverty. Diogenes, 32, 39-51.

Wiesenfeld, E. (1997, January). Construction and the Meaning of a

Barrio House: The Case of a Caracas Barrio. Environment and

Behavior, 29(1), 34-52.

Wiesenfeld; E. (1997). From Individual Need to Community

Consciousness: The Dialects between Land Appropriation and

Eviction Threat (A Case Study of a Venezuelan "Barrio."

Environment and Behavior, 29 (2), 198-212.

Wilpert, G. (2005, September 12). Venezuela's Quiet Housing

Revolution: Urban Land Reform. Venezuelanalysis.com. Retrieved


http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?arfno=1551

World Bank. (1998). Project Appraisal Document on a

Proposed Loan in the Amount of US$60.7 Million to Venezuela for a

Caracas Slum-Upgrading Project. Report No.: 17924 VE. World

Bank: Columbia, Ecuador and Venezuela Country Management

Unit - Latin America and the Caribbean Region.

World Bank. (2002). Brazil Progressive Low-lncome Housing: Alternatives

for the Poor. Brazil Country Management Unit; Finance, Private

Sector and Infrastructure Unit - Latin America and the Caribbean

Region (Report No. 22032 BR). Retrieved on January 12, 2007 from


http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?arfno=1551

http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/LAC/LACInfoClient.nsf/d2968495117

4975c85256735007fef 12/acbe79afb30971 b585256ce0007424b5/$FIL

E/Housing%20Dec.%2021-%20Cover%20-%20Full%20Document.pdf

World Bank. (2004). Implementation Completion Report on a Loan in the

Amount of US$ 245 Million Equivalent to the States of Sao Paulo and

Parana and for the Federal State of Brazil for the Water Quality &

Pollution Control Project. Report No.: 28962. World Bank: Brazil

Management Unit - Latin America and the Caribbean Region.

World Bank. (2007). Implementation Completion Report on a Loan /Credit

In the Amount of US$ Million 29.4 to Venezuela for a Caracas Slum-

Upgrading Project. Report No.: ICR000066. Retrieved April 7, 2007

from htfp://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDS

ContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/05/04/000020953_20070504104722/Re

ndered/PDF/ICR66.pdf

World Resources Institute. (1996). World Resources 1996-97. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Xavier, H. N. & Magalhaes, F. (2003). The Case of Rio de Janeiro. In

The Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements 2003.

Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme

(UN-Habitat). Retrieved January 18, 2007 from

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_Report/pdfs/Rio.pdf


http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/LAC/LACInfoClient.nsf/d2968495117

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_Report/pdfs/Rio.pdf

121

Appendix A: Latin American Urbanization Levels, Historical and Projected

Table A1: Urbanization Levels for Latin American and Caribbean Nations, 1950-20303

Country Urbanization Level (%)

1950

Uruguay 78.0

Argentina 65.3

Venezuela 46.8

Chile 58.4

Brazil 36.0

Cuba 49.4

Puerto Rico 40.6

Mexico 42.7

Colombia 37.1

Peru 35.5

Ecuador 28.3

Dominican Republic 23.8

Bolivia 37.8

Panama 35.8

Nicaragua 34.9

Jamaica 26.7

Paraguay 34.5

Honduras 17.6

Costa Rica 33.5

1960 1970 1980 1990

80.1 82.1 85.2 88.7

73.6 78.4 82.9 86.5

61.2 71.6 79.4 84.0

67.8 75.2 81.2 83.3

44.9 55.8 66.2 74.7

54.9 60.2 68.1 73.6

44.5 58.3 66.9 71.3

50.8 59.0 66.3 72.5

48.2 57.2 63.9 69.5

46.3 57.4 64.6 68.9

34.4 39.5 47.0 55.1

30.2 40.3 50.5 58.3

39.3 40.7 45.5 55.6

41.3 47.7 50.5 53.7

39.6 47.0 50.3 53.1

33.8 41.5 46.8 51.5

35.6 37.1 41.7 48.7

22.8 28.9 34.9 41.8

36.6 39.7 43.1 45.8

Continued on page 122

2000 2010 2020 2030

91.2 93.0 94.1 94.7

89.9 92.0 93.1 93.9

86.9 89.1 90.7 91.8

85.7 87.8 89.5 90.7

81.3 85.2 87.3 88.9

75.3 77.3 79.7 82.3

75.2 78.5 81.3 83.6

74.4 76.7 79.3 81.9

73.9 77.6 80.5 83.0

72.8 76.3 79.3 81.9

65.3 73.1 77.8 80.6

65.1 70.5 74.5 77.7

62.5 67.8 72.1 75.7

56.2 59,6 64.0 68.6

56.1 60.3 65.1 69.5

56.1 61.0 65.9 70.3

56.0 62.3 67.3 71.5

52.7 61.2 66.7 71.0

47.8 51.2 56.0 61.4


122

El Salvador 36.5 38.4 39.4 41.6 43.9 46.6 51.0 56.6 62.0

Guatemala 29.5 32.5 35.5 34.7 38.1 39.7 43.5 49.4 55.4

Haiti 12.2 15.6 19.8 23.7 29.5 35.7 42.3 48.8 54.9

Total 41.4 49.3 57.5 65.0 71.1 75.4 78.6 81.1 83.3

a Countries are ordered by level of urbanization in 2000Source: Compiled by author from United Nations (2001); Lattes, et al.(2004)


123

Appendix B: Urban Poverty Estimates, Latin America

Table B1: Poor29 Population Estimates in Urban Areas, South American Countries & Latin America (Percentage of Total Population)

Urban Poverty

Country Year National Total Metro Area Balance1990 21.2

Argentina 2000 45.4 41.5 49.62004 29.4 25.9 33.61989 52.6 48.1

Bolivia 1999 60.6 48.7 45.0 63.92002 62.4 52.0 48.0 58.21990 48.0 41.2

Brazil 2001 37.5 34.12003 38.7 35.71990 38.6 38.5 32.1 43.5

Chile 2000 20.2 19.7 14.4 23.42003 18.7 18.5 12.4 22.71991 56.1 52.7

Colom bia 1999 54.9 50.6 43.1 53.12002 50.6 39.8 53.81995 62.1

Ecuador 1999 63.52002 49.01990 43.2 ,,,

Paraguay 1999 60.6 49.0 39.5 61.32001 61.0 50.1 42.7 59.11986 59.9 52.3 45.1 59.6

Peru 2001 54.8 42.0 <. •2003 54.7 43.1 • •.1990 17.9 11.3 24.3

Uruguay 1999 9.4 9.8 9.02002 15.4 15.1 15.81990 39.8 38.6 29.2 41.2

Venezuela 1999 49.4 53.0 29.2 41.220021990

48.648.3 41.4

Latin America 20032004

44.341.7

38.936.7

... ...

Source: ECLAC (2006)

29 Percentage of population having incomes amounting to less than twice the cost of a basic food basket. Includes indigent population.


124

Table B2: Indigent30 Population Estimates in Urban Areas, South American Countries & Latin America (Percentage of Total Population)

Urban Indigence

Country Year National Total Metro Area Balance1990 5.2

Argentina 2000 20.9 18.6 23.32004 11.1 9.6 12.91989 ,,, 23.0 ... 19.4

Bolivia 1999 36.4 19.8 17.5 29.02002 37.1 21.3 18.8 25.01990 23.4 16.7

Brazil 2001 13.2 10.4 ...2003 13.9 11.41990 13.0 12.5 9.3 14.9

Chile 2000 5.6 5.1 3.9 6.02003 4.7 4.4 2.8 5.61991 26.1 20.0

Colombia 1999 26.8 21.9 19.6 22.72002 23.7 17.1 25.71995 26.2

Ecuador 1999 31.3 ...

2002 19.4 ...

1990 13.1 ...Paraguay 1999 33.9 17.4 9.2 28.0

2001 33.2 18.4 10.4 28.11986 29.5 19.2 12.9 25.5

Peru 2001 24.4 9.92003 21.6 8.6 ...

1990 3.4 1.8 5.0Uruguay 1999 1.8 1.9 1.6

2002 2.5 2.7 2.21990 14.4 13.1 8.0 14.5

Venezuela 1999 21.7 ... ...

20021990

22.222.5 15.3

Latin America 20032004

19.217.4

13.712.4

... ...

Source: ECLAC (2006)

30 Percentage of population having incomes less that the cost of a basic food basket.


Appendix C: Views of Study Cities

Figure C1: Caracas

Source: LDS Mission Network (2005)


Figure C2: Rio de Janeiro

Source: Thuler (2006)


127

Figure C3: Day View of Sao Paulo

—

Source: Schaeffer (2005)

Figure C4: Evening View of Sao Paulo

Source: de Fernandes (2005)


Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Urban Housing Initiatives in South America: Caracas, Rio de...

Documents

Transcript of Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Urban Housing Initiatives in South America: Caracas, Rio de...