Informal Housing: Conventional Wisdoms Reappraised (P. M. Ward)

(www.texashousing.org)

"Since the mid-1970s self-help housing policies have entered the mainstream of international planning conventional wisdom. Prior to this period self-help advocacy was limited largely to academics or research workers concerned to identify the natures of squatter or irregular settlements, the characteristics of their populations, and the processes whereby theses areas were physically upgraded and became part of the urban fabric. They argued that the self-build and the mutual-aid activities in these neighbourhoods should be stimulated through supportive government intervention. This would include the provision of essential services which the residents could not organise themselves or readily afford, and the provision of some sort of tenure security (invariably outright ownership) that would stimulate investment in the dwellings.

[...] the incorporation of self-help philosophy into planning has not been without criticism. Emerging practices are criticised on several grounds. It is said to be an abrogation of government responsibility insofar as housing construction is placed firmly in the hands of the worker rather than those of the industrialist, local or central government. Labour is, therefore, exploited twice over; first in the workplace where wages are low; second, in the home where householders bear the burden of life in poor dwelling conditions with inadequate services and have to use their spare time and labour to build or improve their dwellings. This is a primary means whereby labour is reproduced cheaply. Others have suggested that self-help romanticises and confuses freedom of choice to construct one's own home with no choice at all (Harms, 1976). Politically it is seen as inherently conservative; the acquisition of home ownership through a bootstraps self-help approach fosters a petty-burgois mentality (Harms, 1976). [...] In is increasingly apparent that self-help functions to the advantage of a range of interests: it offers politicians opportunities for patronage and social control exercised through vote catching and negotiation over services and land. The construction industry benefits through an enhanced market for materials; while industry, commerce and the rich in general benefit through being able to pay low wager. Lastly, it is argues that successful consolidation achieved by low-income groups in the past is seriously threatened as economic growth declines, inflation increases, real wages drop and, as self-help policies require, a commitment to pay the costs of land and legal recognition, together with the costs of service installation and land taxes."

Ward, Peter M. (1982) Informal Housing: Conventional Wisdoms Reappraised. Built Environment, Vol 8, No 2. pp. 84-94.

Housing and the Informal City

Vertical Yard
(www.housinginformalcity.co.za)

Housing Possibilities

"Can we imagine a move away from the ‘shrunken mansion’ syndrome satisfying a perceived aspiration towards a dynamic flexibility which can deliver subsidised housing in which the unit becomes an asset leading to income generation?

[...] The settlement upgrade would be planned for the increased occupation density from the start in terms of infrastructure and social amenities.

The design of the proposed housing types also attempts to incorporate and enable income generation through accommodating rental rooms, retail and small business enterprise. Houses are located close to the street boundary to create a sense of urbanity, surveillance, ease of trading and to limit the amount of unusable space between units. Micro-loans, in addition to a basic starter unit (funded by means of the subsidy), can assist owners to construct quality rental rooms as per various pre-defined options. Part of the resultant rental income would go towards repaying the loan. Both the Vertical Yard and the 14x7m Row House offer two different approaches to achieve growth over time and a mix of uses and economies."

Read full article.

Research project 2008-2010.

26'10 south Architects & Prof. Lone Poulsen (Wits University) in partnership with the Goethe-Institut, South Africa.

26'10 team: Thorsten Deckler & Anne Graupner (26'10 principals), Tahira Toffa, Guy Trangos, Shammemah Davids, Claire Lubell, Lara Wilson, Nzinga Mboup.

How expensive is the cheapest house in Latin America?

"How expensive is the cheapest house in Latin America? The cheapest dwelling offered by the private sector in Latin America without any construction subsidies averaged $24,000 in 2010, and families needed 21 months of full income to pay for them, according to "Room for Development: Housing Markets in Latin America and the Caribbean", the latest edition of the IDB´s flagship publication Development in the Americas. The figure shows the average prices for the cheapest private-sector housing in large cities in Latin America. Caracas, Buenos Aires and Santiago are the region´s most expensive while La Paz, Managua and Guayaquil are the cheapest. Factoring in the level of income and the time that it would take a household to pay for the house, Buenos Aires, Caracas and Montevideo are the most expensive and Bogota, Guadalajara and San Jose are the cheapest."

Development in the Americas - Housing for All: Housing prices infographic