Open House PREVI

download Open House PREVI

of 10

Transcript of Open House PREVI

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    1/10

    6

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn

    Julin Salas and Patricia Lucas

    AbstractPREVI, Spanish initials for experimental housing project, was conceived in Lima in 1967. Among other initiatives, itlaunched an international architectural competition that led to the construction of a 500-unit compound based on pro-posals put forward by teams such as Atelier 5, Aldo van Eyck, and iguez de Ozoo and Vzquez de Castro. Theforty years that have lapsed in the interim and the ongoing transformation of the homes by their dwellers afford an

    opportunity to reflect on the suitability of the construction technologies proposed in the competition.Ongoing growth and the rationalisation of construction methods were two of the basic premises underlying the

    competition. The remodelling that has taken place in the interim stands as proof of the success of the first premise, butthe use of traditional techniques to build the additions calls some of the most sophisticated proposals for industriali-sation into question.

    At the time, the tendency was to rely on large-scale industrialisation, as can be seen in the German and Polisharchitects proposals. Nonetheless, many of the PREVI proposals opted for rationalising construction and precastingshort series of small elements, rather than huge three-dimensional members. In the situation presently prevailing inLatin America, the viability of some of the technological proposals deployed in the PREVI might be profitably revisited.

    Keywords PREVI, housing, rationalisation, industrialisation, Latin America.

    THE VALIDITY OF PREVI LIMA PERUFORTY YEARS ON.

    1. WHAT WAS PREVI IN 1970?Contrary to practice in Europe, where urban con-struction must conform to a formal plan, in LatinAmerica even today building is primarily an infor-mal affair. The existence of any number ofunplanned settlements, along with a wide variety ofself-building practices, generate a social, technicaland constructional context that cannot be ignoredwhen proposing possible housing solutions that

    entail the use of low-cost industrial technologies.What options can industrialisation offer in domainswhere informal and planned construction co-exist?How does industrialisation respond in an environ-ment where self-building is a highly likely occur-rence? The PREVI (Spanish initials for experimentalhousing project) experience may shed some lighton dwellers appreciation and interpretation ofhousing designed and built in Lima forty years ago.The fact that most of the proposals submitted to thecompetition were in fact implemented, along with

    the explicit recommendation in the specifications onthe use of industrialised processes, have made the

    PREVI quarter a test bench from which conclusionscan be drawn. Given the time that has lapsed(Figure 1) and user remodelling, the effectiveness ofthe various solutions devised for this competition forsocial housing in Latin America can now beassessed.

    PREVI was conceived in 1967 by thePeruvian Government to improve the housing situ-ation in Lima. It initially included three housingplans or programmes denominated pilot projects in

    the competition specifications, which pursued theobjectives listed below.- PP1 proposed the construction of a new

    quarter based on the proposals submitted inresponse to a competition with a dual scope:national and international. Peter Land, a Britisharchitect associated with the organisation, chose aseries of foreign teams that would be invited to par-ticipate in this section, which included some of themost renowned architects of the time. More specif-ically, the short list included: Atelier 5 (Switzerland),

    Aldo van Eyck (Netherlands), ChristopherAlexander (USA), Candilis, Josic and Woods

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    2/10

    7

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn.

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    (France), Jos Luis iguez de Ozoo and Vzquezde Castro (Spain), James Stirling (United Kingdom),Toivo Korhonen (Finland), Germn Samper(Colombia), Fumihiko Maki, Kionori Kikutake(Japan), Charles Correa (India), Herbert Ohl(Germany), Knud Svenssons (Denmark), OskarHansen and Svein Hatloy (Poland).

    - PP2 formulated practical plans for reno-vating deteriorated housing.

    - The objective in PP3 was to produce adesign for low-cost self-built housing.The earthquake that razed Lima on 30 May 1970prompted the division of PP3 into two programmes,one in accordance with the initial self-building

    premise and another, denominated PP4, thataddressed earthquake-resistant issues.The list of participants in the international

    section for PP1 included some of the most promi-nent members of what came to be known as thethird generation of the modern movement. Thisgroup of architects, while beginning to questionsome of the axioms established in the early twenti-eth century, honoured many of the movementsunderlying intentions, as attested by their interest inthe issue of social housing. Today, Charles Correa,

    one of the architects invited to compete in PREVI,observed that architects had been involved in social

    housing since the early twentieth century. He main-tained that this was the engine that drove the mod-ern movement, unleashing the concern, and theimagination, of architects such as Walter Gropiusand Le Corbusier, who understood the exceptionalrelationship between housing and architecture.(Garca-Huidobro et al., 2008: 150).

    This interest in housing, in conjunction withthe environment prevailing in Peru, where cost andtechnology had to be carefully monitored, favouredthe submission of a series of proposals that aimedto innovate construction methods. In fact, in thePREVI Operating Plan, explicit reference was madeto these requirements in the description of the

    objectives pursued in PP1: Design and constructionof a new urban settlement consisting of low-costhousing, with its respective public facilities and ser-vices, based on research in and development ofnew or existing design and technological solutions,with a view to enhancing the cost-effectiveness ofthe resources used and reduce direct constructionexpense (Barrionuevo et al., 1971 v. 1: 8).

    These premises provided an incentive forsubmitting designs involving viable technologicaloptions in the technical and entrepreneurial cir-

    cumstances prevailing at the time in Peru. The con-struction systems proposed, in which cutting edge

    Figure 1. Lima: the PREVI quarter today. source: authors formulation based on an extract from Google Maps.

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    3/10

    8

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn

    sophistication, which would have been unthinkablein this environment, was ruled out, nonethelessaimed to rationalise and industrialise on siteprocesses while lowering costs. These options weremeant to provide solutions for a wide swathe ofintermediate income families affected by housingshortages in Latin America. They were not gearedto palliating extreme poverty or intended for emer-gency situations. Such needs were addressed moredirectly in PREVI plan PP3, which explicitly encour-aged participants to work in these areas and to pro-pose: a system of lots and services to accommo-date migrant families and deedless occupants (onland taken over) with very low incomes(Barrionuevo et al., 1971 v. 1: 8).

    PREVI was intended to be an opportunity tobuild viable and affordable solutions that couldsolve Latin Americas social housing problem. Abroad sampling of the proposals for economicindustrialisation in place in those years was tested.With the passing of time and the enlargements andinformal construction processes undergone byPREVI housing, these industrialised systems can beassessed, not only for cost-effectiveness and dura-bility, but also to determine which of the varioussolutions proved to be most flexible and adaptable

    for users, or which have co-existed most successful-ly with the changes made in this housing by its

    inhabitants.

    2 . WHAT IS PREVI TODAY?The need for housing and the ambition with whichthe competition was established led to the materi-alisation of most of the international designs sub-mitted (Figures 1 and 2). Around 20 units wereawarded to each team. The jurys final report []highlighted the importance of capitalising fully onthe various ideas put forward by the national andinternational participants (Barrionuevo et al., 1971v. 1: 16). This made the PREVI a test bench for con-struction techniques while generating an urban

    housing complex that is still in use today.Today PREVI is one of Limas more peculiarquarters (Figure 1), grouping the different types ofhousing designed by the architects concerned. Butfar from disregarding the change taking place inthe city, its dwellers have remodelled and enlargedtheir homes, completing them in keeping with theirneeds. This provides a measure of their acceptanceof the PREVI designs and initial architectural solu-tions.

    A review of the main changes affecting the

    quarter, compiled in a book bearing the eloquenttitle El tiempo construye! (time builds) (Garca-

    Figure 2. The PREVI experimental neighbourhood. Source: (Barrionuevo et al., 1971 v. 1: 18).

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    4/10

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn.

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    Huidobro et al., 2008), reveals the increase in res-idential density that has taken place in the urbanfabric through successive enlargements on andadditions to this housing (Figure 3). The nineteensixties approach, which called for one or twostoreys, has grown upward (Figures 4 and 5).Urban dynamics and the enlargements built bymost of the inhabitants have generated a quarterwith a predominance of three-or four-storey build-ings used indistinctly for commercial or residentialpurposes (Figure 6).

    The increase in building density, mixedusage and the pursuit of formal variety to break theserial monotony and individualise the housing arethe most visible changes undergone by the PREVIdesigns. Use and time, through successive enlarge-ments, have changed the design not only of eachindividual house, but of the urban group as awhole. Users have re-interpreted and modified theoverall proposal. The question is whether the tech-nological approach has suffered the same fate.

    3 . RAT IONAL ISED CONSTRUCT IONAND GROWTH OVER T IMEThe specifications for the competition encouragedparticipants to present proposals that, throughrationalised and technically suitable design, wouldlower costs and construction times with respect toconventional procedures. The preference for inno-vation was clear. But innovations also had to be

    adapted to the situation in Lima at the time, char-acterised by country-to-city migration and sponta-

    neous suburban construction in the so-calledyoung towns, informal settlements rising in the wakeof the population overflow. As Peruvian anthropol-ogist Matos Mar judiciously observed, The invasionof lands in the mountains is attendant upon massinvasions of urban property in the capital and majorcities, giving rise to the inordinate growth of slumsand shanty towns (Matos Mar, 2004: 36). One ofthe conditions laid down in PREVI was to assumethat the dwellers, after receiving their homes, wouldundertake remodelling and improvements. Thecombination of an urge to innovate and the needto adapt to local realities spawned what are per-haps the two most visible lines of work in the PREVIcompetition: the commitment to rationalised con-struction and the acknowledgement of that thehousing would grow with time.

    3.1. Enlargeable housingThe pressure exerted by migration from the countryto the city and the appearance of spontaneous, pri-

    marily self-built, settlements, was a clear indicationthat the users of the new housing would very likelyenlarge their new homes with time. The inhabitantshad already proven their construction skills in theinformal sector. For that reason the teams partici-pating in the competition were asked to provide nota finished product, but a structured process able toaccommodate continued growth: The homes wereto be designed for families with two to six childrenand the potential to expand to provide living spacefor up to approximately ten people in the future

    (Barrionuevo et al., 1971 v. 1: 15).As early as 1968, then, PREVI was ques-

    Figure 3. Remodelling of PREVI housing: 1985-2003. Source: (G.-Huidobro et al., 2008: 32)

    9

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    5/10

    1 0

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn

    tioning the definition of housing as a finished prod-uct. The needs to be met and the assimilation oflocal circumstances led to proposals in which hous-ing was viewed as an ongoing construction processable to adapt to the composition of the familieswho would both inhabit and remodel these units.

    This situation was reinforced by the localfamily structure, which differs from the nuclear fam-ily for which European public housing is normallydesigned. This type of family organisation was

    favoured by the economics of the informal orprotest sector. As Matos Mar wrote: Protest sectorcompanies are predominantly family-run and thisimbues them with a very peculiar identity. They arestaffed by both the nuclear and the extended fami-ly (siblings, uncles and aunts, in-laws, cousins)(Matos Mar, 2004: 60). The structure of the extend-ed family that prevailed among these residents gen-erated a new type of home, which was neither anindividual single family dwelling nor collectivehousing based on horizontal ownership, i.e.,

    flats. Garca-Huidobro has called these apparentlyindividual dwellings that in fact house different,generally inter-related nuclear families, multi-familyhomes (Garca-Huidobro et al., 2008: 137).

    These extended families are more prone tothe self-building that makes housing an enlarge-able system. Indeed, recognition of this social real-ity has inspired some of the most significant pro-posals in Latin American housing. This view ofhomes as seeds, enlargeable and improvable overtime, can be detected, albeit with shades of differ-ence, in Mexican architect Carlos Gonzlez Lobos(Gonzlez Lobo, 1999) Gran Galpn system,

    Chilean Alejandro Aravenas proposals or theworks erected by an Argentinean group, CEVE.

    While the remodelling that has lent PREVIits current appearance has completely erased thelines of many of the original architectural propos-als, it is also indicative of the popular success ofhomes able to meet the need to grow. As predict-ed, the homes have been enlarged. The questionnow is how this was done, taking account on theone hand of the changes to which the housing has

    been subjected and on the other of the constructiontechniques used in such enlargements.

    3.2. Rationalised constructionThe specifications for the competition called notonly for design flexibility, but also incentivised theuse of technologies that would adapt to change. Allthe housing designs and construction technologiesmust be flexible and envisage progressive (horizon-tal and/or vertical) growth to suit the dynamic andchanging social, cultural and economic character-

    istics of the families forming the community(Barrionuevo et al., 1971 v. 1: 15).

    Figure 4&5. Upward housing growth, 2010. (Photographs: Christian Schilder)

    Figure 6. Mixed use, 2010(Photographs: Christian Schilder)

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    6/10

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn.

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    The intention to improve the constructionprocess opened the door to the industrialised tech-niques in use at the time in Europe. But those tech-niques had to be tweaked to accommodate theflexibility required to adapt to the technical realitiesprevailing in Peru.

    From the nineteen fifties through the seven-ties, industrialisation in Europes most technologi-

    cally advanced countries underwent a boom periodof mass euphoria: Systems based on large panelspredominated in so-called Eastern Europe andwere quantitatively significant in European Unioncountries. (Salas, 2000: 33). Some of the interna-tional designs submitted to PREVI exuded confi-dence in large-scale industrialisation. The Polishand German proposals purported to transfer con-struction practices developed and used in thosecountries to Lima.

    This was not the most common technolog-

    ical approach adopted by the participants in thecompetition, however. Around 1970 a new stage ofindustrialised construction appeared in Europe. Theoil crisis, the reduction of the mean size of buildingsand the growing proportion of single family homesled to a period of crisis and perplexity (Salas,2000: 35). It was then that the rigidity and adapt-ability of large-scale systems began to be calledinto question for developments that did not involvean especially large number of units. It was also

    around this time when the first so-called compati-ble elements began to appear.

    The criticism levelled against large-scale precastingin Europe in the nineteen seventies, together withthe peculiarities of Peruvian needs, led several par-ticipants to propose rationalised, rather than indus-trial, systems. This was the approach adopted bythe Spanish team, with its Tabibloc proposal(Figures 9 and 10) (Vazquez de Castro, 1981) orthe Swiss Atelier 5s proposal to build lightweight

    panels on site. Other teams, headed by Colombianarchitects Esquerra, Saenz, Urdaneta and Samperand the Dutch architect Aldo van Eyck (Figures 11and 12), proposed systems that rationalised con-ventional techniques by using modular concreteblocks to build reinforced masonry walls. In bothcases, the idea was to test techniques that wouldimprove traditional construction procedures with noneed to export technologies to Peru that would beunsuited to the realities of its capital city.

    4 . THE PP1 -PREV I INDUSTR IAL ISEDPROPOSALS4.1. Analytical sketch of the three construction fam-iliesThe commitment to innovation that characterisedthe competition constituted a specific premiseunderlying the building of the so-called experimen-

    tal neighbourhood, the complex resulting from thematerialisation of the PREVI-PP1 proposals: The

    Table 1. The three PREVI-PP1 technological families

    1 1

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    7/10

    1 2

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn

    objectives sought were to adapt and implement theexperimental construction systems proposed by theparticipants, develop new modular materials forconventional systems, improve existing practicesand methods, design and experiment with newsolutions for building services and establish a com-prehensive approach to indoor facilities(Barrionuevo et al., 1971 v. 1: 19).

    A brief review of the proposals for industri-alisation put forward in the original PP1 designsreveals that although the construction solutions var-ied widely they can be grouped into three families(Table 1). These would include designs based onlarge-scale, Europe-like industrialisation (Figures 7and 8), others opting for rationalised masonry(Figures 11 and 12) and a third group that exploreda promising intermediate approach in which ratio-nalised procedures were combined with more orless industrialised lightweight elements produced in

    small on-site plants (Figures 9 and 10).One of PREVIs research objectives was to

    explore precast systems applicable to social hous-ing. Jacques Crousse, a Peruvian architect whoparticipated in the national section of the competi-tion, now says in this regard: At the time, large-scale precasting was thought to be a promising sys-tem for mass construction intended to meet theenormous demand for housing both in the ThirdWorld and post-war Europe. [] An additionalproblem was the difficulty of providing an open sys-tem, i.e., one in which housing could evolve overtime. [] We found this ambitious project to be

    both realistic and feasible (Garca-Huidobro et al.,2008: 152).

    The PREVI design that best exemplifiedEuropean large-scale industrialisation, submittedby Herbert Ohls German team (Figures 7 and 8),was described as follows: The construction systemproposed consists of overlapping large, mechani-cally joined (with bolts or pins) reinforced concrete

    modules or frames measuring 7.20 m long, 3 mhigh and 1.20 m wide. Each one weighs 6 t and isprecast in steel moulds in a plant located near theworksite. They are assembled on site with a specialbridge crane on wheels for mobility (ININVI, 1988:20). This team also proposed building a spiral stair-way with three-dimensional precast elements.

    As may be deduced from the German pro-posal, PREVI was instituted at a time when large-scale industrialisation was still regarded to be atechnological panacea in the North. But the need

    to provide for adaptations prompted some partici-pants to opt for what is known as rationalisedmasonry, i.e., organisational improvements on tra-ditional, labour-intensive techniques. Others pro-posed small-scale precasting systems or methods torationalise small elements, short series of whichcould be produced on site in some cases.

    One such rationalised constructionapproach was adopted by Tabibloc, the proposalsubmitted by the Spanish team headed by iguezde Ozoo and Vzquez de Castro (Figures 9 and10): The construction system consists of confinedmasonry that uses specially designed concrete

    Figure 7&8. Large-scale industrialisation proposal: PREVI-PP1 Design 16 Germany. Architect: Herbert Ohl

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    8/10

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn.

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    blocks, Tabiblocs. Each block has four partitionsforming three internal openings, the one in the cen-tre to be filled with mortar, constituting an acousticbarrier, and the two side openings to be left emptyfor thermal insulation. Tabiblocs come in 18 shapesfor use in intersections, abutments and joints. In allcases they constitute permanent formwork (ININVI,

    1988: 23).The proposal put forward by Aldo vanEycks Dutch team, while similar, was closer to whatis known as rationalised masonry (Figures 11 and12). The construction system uses concrete andsteel as the basic materials. It consists of reinforcedmasonry walls built with modular concrete blocks.The roof is made of hollow reinforced concretemodules that span the distance between walls orbeams. The result, in short, is a lightweight precastconstruction system (ININVI, 1988: 25).

    4.2. PREVI contributions and transfer of the result-ing technologyThe successive remodelling of PREVI housing canbe used as a basis for assessing the actual viabilityand constructional interpretation of these proposalsfor industrialisation and their possible transfer toother areas of Latin America. Several approachesinvolved rationalisation and small-scale precasting,some of which was conducted on site. In additionto adaptation to local realities, these constructionsolutions were viewed as a possible industrial incu-bator for the areas business fabric.

    Despite the 40 years that have lapsed,however, during which incremental construction hasbeen ongoing, scantly any trace can be found ofthe assimilation of these technological proposals bythe local business fabric. Most of the enlargementswere built with wholly traditional techniques. Doesthis mean that no one capitalised on the techno-

    logical innovations introduced by PREVI? Whilethese techniques appeared not to have taken rootin the local market, relationships can be detectedbetween PREVI technological proposals and con-struction procedures in place in other areas of LatinAmerica.

    The Sandino (Cuba), block-panel (CostaRica), Servivienda (Colombia) and Sancocho(Cuba) systems (Lorenzo Glligo, 2005), based onthe rationalised precasting of small elements, canall be classified in the same construction family as

    some of the PREVI systems. The industrial kernelthat PREVI attempted to plant in its day wouldappear to continue to be a technological seedlingthat is still attempting to develop in Latin America.The technological realities of the marketplace seemto be moving in other directions, however.

    5. CONCLUSIONSForty years after the implementation of the PREVIproposals, a number of conclusions can be drawnin connection with the competition itself and the

    Figure 9&10. Tabibloc: rationalised construction. PREVI-PP1-Design 19 Spain.Architects: iguez de Ozoo and Vzquez de Castro

    1 3

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    9/10

    1 4

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucas

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn

    construction technology it inspired. The results ofthese technologies can also be assessed with a viewto analysing their possible validity for new housingconstruction in Latin America.

    The first item to be assessed is theapproach adopted by PREVI itself in terms of its twobasic premises: growth over time and rationalisedconstruction. The wisdom shown by the competitionorganisers in connection with the first of thesepremises is visible in the mention in the specifica-tions to what was, and continues to be, a typical sit-

    uation in Latin America. Up-scoring the inclusion ofthe potential for enlargement and inviting the short-listed architects to address this possibility con-tributed largely to their submission of housingdesigns geared to healthful growth, avoiding, forinstance, undesirable consequences such as theexistence of poorly illuminated and poorly ventilat-ed rooms.

    The competition also successfully promot-ed technical innovation by favouring rationalised

    construction and small-scale precasting techniques.This call for innovation, in conjunction with a

    demand for flexibility, led Vzquez de Castro andOzoo, Samper, van Eyck and Atelier 5 to presentproposals that involved an intermediate degree ofindustrialisation. These architects proposed improv-ing construction process organisation and produc-ing short series of elements in small labour-inten-sive, equipment-light production plants, somelocated directly on site (Salas, 2000). This interme-diate approach between imported industrialisationand traditional construction even today appears tobe one of the most suitable solutions for Latin

    America.It is no coincidence that the teams from

    technologically developed countries such asGermany, Poland and the United Kingdom submit-ted precast solutions for large-scale members.Another conclusion that can be drawn from PREVIis the direct relationship between technology andthe social and economic situation prevailing whereit is to be used, the technological genes, to use theterm coined by K. Reddy (Reddy, 1998: 27).

    In as much as such conditions are notreadily exportable, particular attention must be paid

    Figure 11&12. Rationalised masonry . PREVI-PP1-Design I11-Netherlands. Architect: Aldo van Eyck

  • 8/13/2019 Open House PREVI

    10/10

    openhouseinternationalVol.37

    No.1,

    Ma

    rch2012TheValidityofPREVI,Lima,

    Peru,

    FortyYearsOn.

    JulinSalasan

    dPatriciaLucasto evaluating technical capabilities at the actual

    worksite, especially where cooperation projects areinvolved. Precast members whose weight or volumeprecludes their handling by local workers or simplelocally available machinery would not appear to bea viable solution. The sole way that such anapproach would be feasible would be for the coun-try of origin to export patents and equipment to thehost, heightening the latter nations technological,and hence economic, dependence.

    Forty years later, the PREVI poses yet anoth-er paradox. Although its implementation ushered ininnovative technologies and the housing wasdesigned for future enlargement, subsequent con-struction has involved primarily traditional tech-

    niques. The political determination that drove theinitial proposal did not last long enough to promoteindustrialised building or access to its products.Indeed, PREVI blocks are among the few compo-nents that are still being manufactured in Perutoday. A modified version (affecting its form andproduction process) of the Tabibloc proposed byiguez de Ozoo and Vzquez de Castro has beenused in a number of projects in Spain, however.While PREVI design and development constitutedan industrial laboratory, then, its findings have

    apparently failed to take root in residential con-struction in Lima.

    The adaptability of the small-scale industri-alisation and rationalised construction systemsintroduced in the wake of the PREVI proposals canbe assessed very favourably. In light of the changesmade in the designs, however, and the realisationthat they were the result of the use of traditionaltechniques, the question that should now be posedis why such technologies failed to take root in thelocal industrial fabric.

    The authors wish to expressly thank Peruvian engineer Raquel

    Barrionuevo, who participated actively in PREVI as a member

    of the building team, for the invaluable information she pro-

    vided and for her generous cooperation in this study.

    REFERENCESBARRIONUEVO R., JARA C. and SANTOLALLA J. 1971,

    PUBLICACIN PREVI, Ministerio de Vivienda y Construccindel Per, Lima.

    GARCA-HUIDOBRO F., TORRES TORRITI D. and TUGS N.

    2008, El tiempo construye! El Proyecto Experimental de

    Vivienda (PREVI) de Lima: gnesis y desenlace,Gustavo Gili,

    Barcelona.

    GONZLEZ LOBO C. 1999, Vivienda y ciudad posibles,Editorial Escala, Bogot.

    ININVI 1988, PREVI 20 aos despus: resultados y conclu-

    siones, Secretara Ejecutiva del Programa de Actividades

    PREVI88, ININVI, Lima.

    LORENZO GLLIGO P. (coord.) 2005,Un techo para vivir.

    Tecnologas para viviendas de produccin social en Amrica

    Latina, CYTED, Edicions UPC, Barcelona.

    MATOS MAR J. 2004, Desborde popular y crisis del Estado.

    Veinte aos despus, Fondo editorial del Congreso del Per,

    Lima.

    REDDY K. 1998, Background and Concept of Appropiate

    Technology, UNIDO, Conferencia en India, Nueva Delhi

    SALAS SERRANO J. 2000, La industrializacin posible de la

    vivienda latinoamericana, Editorial Escala, Bogot.

    VZQUEZ DE CASTO J. A. 1981,Sistema integral Tabibloc,serie 20 de industrializacin de la construccin: prefabricacin

    ligera, Imprenta Safer, Madrid.

    Authors Address:Julin Salas: [email protected] Lucas: [email protected]

    Instituto de Ciencias de la Construccin Eduardo TorrojaConsejo Superior de Investigaciones CientficasC/Serrano Galvache n 4

    28033 - Madrid913020440

    1 5