America
In Argentina, public housing run by the State dates back to the end of the century, when the large European immigration that the country received caused its population to multiply sharply, which brought into discussion the need for housing.
In 1889, the first complex of workers' housing was built in the city of Buenos Aires, on land today occupied by the Faculty of Engineering "Facultad de Ingeniería (UBA)") on Avenida Las Heras.[14] But it was in 1915 when the issue of public housing was taken into greater consideration, when the National Commission for Cheap Houses (CNCB) was created through National Law No. 9677 "on Cheap Houses", a initiative of the Cordoba deputy Juan Cafferata. During this first stage, the president of the CNCB was the future president of the country Marcelo Torcuato de Alvear, and the organization built a series of economic neighborhoods made up of very narrow and elongated passages and blocks. What was built did not satisfy all the existing demand, making it clear that subsequent governments also had to do something in the matter.
An organization with socialist ideas, El Hogar Obrero, worked at the same time in the construction of popular housing in Buenos Aires, starting with small buildings and continuing with large complexes until the 1960s. Meanwhile, the issue of housing continued to be a problem mainly in Buenos Aires, but also in other large cities such as Córdoba, Rosario and other provincial capitals.
The Municipal Housing Commission worked in Buenos Aires, today called the City Housing Institute (IVC), and at the national level FONAVI was created, creating numerous working-class neighborhoods throughout the country. With the federalization of public services carried out by Carlos Menem in 1995, FONAVI was disintegrated, becoming provincial authority bodies.
Currently, both the National State and the Provincial Governments (which have provincial Housing Institutes dependent on FO.NA.VI) and the City of Buenos Aires carry out their public housing plans independently, and the issue continues to be a serious unresolved problem.
In Brazil, the need to be able to access housing became essential for families, and more important for those people with limited economic resources, and who, due to factors such as migration and industrialization of the century, were forced to seek a better future for their families in the cities. Displacements due to internal armed conflicts, the appearance of an incipient industry (1930-1970) in the cities, especially in the capitals, the dismantling of the rural world and the concentration of public services in urban environments, generated a demographic explosion whose result was the expansion of urban areas, supported by the development and production of popular urbanizations outside the initiatives of the real estate market and urban public policies.
The importance of housing on the part of the state is shown initially with the government of Getúlio Vargas (1930) and the implementation throughout the populist period that had been based on social criteria; until 1964 with the change of government to Marshal Castelo Branco, in which the second stage of housing policies began, which was based mainly on the Housing Financial System (SFH) and the National Housing Bank (BNH), in which errors and ambiguities caused counterproductive effects that ended up contributing to a worsening of the housing and urban conditions of popular housing.
Housing policy in Brazil.
Some actions began to be taken regarding the housing crisis, since the creation in 1946 of the Casa Popular Foundation, which proposed to cover aspects such as: infrastructure, sanitation, construction, etc.; However, it was disjointed from other political bodies, and therefore the lack of coordinated action became a weakness; to other actions such as the tenant decree-law of 1942, the creation of the Retirement and Social Security Institute in 1937 and Decree Law No. 58, which regulated the sale of urban lots.
A notable percentage of Brazil's population lives in favelas.
In Canada, projects are typically government-subsidized housing buildings, managed by government agencies, and are generally known simply as projects when they are family homes. Especially in Toronto, the style of large high-rise housing complexes in working-class neighborhoods is still continued, although it is a model that has already been abandoned in both the United States and the United Kingdom. In Toronto, these complexes are mostly occupied by immigrants, refugees and low-income Canadians.
Following the decentralization of public housing to municipalities, the Social Housing Services Corporation (SHSC) was created in the Province of Ontario in 2002 to provide social housing providers (public housing, non-profit housing and cooperative housing) with group services. It is a not-for-profit corporation that provides Ontario housing providers and developers with wholesale, underwriting, investment and information services that can add significant value to their operations.
Recently there has been a movement to integrate public housing with market and other types of housing. Revitalization plans for properties such as Vancouver's Regent Park and Lawrence Heights in Toronto seek to provide better conditions for low-income residents and connect them to the rest of the community. However, residents of these communities have had very little effective income from these plans, and have had mixed reactions to the construction.
A plan to provide homes for Vancouver's homeless is taking shape on a local architect's board. It calls for the rapid erection of temporary neighborhoods armed with the same modular units that mining companies provide for their remote workers. "Stop Gap Shelters" is the name given to it by architect Gregory Henriquez. "Everyone in this community has fought for a long time for permanent housing," he said. "But we've gotten to the point where the homeless numbers are so concerning that it leaves me wondering if we're ever going to solve it this way. I don't think so. I think there has to be a measure that addresses the gap. And this is what it's all about." Henriquez drew plans for a motel-type neighborhood, with 48 suites grouped around a central courtyard. The colorful complex includes an administration office, a covered patio, and a second level with a meeting room, all within a typical 120x200 foot urban lot.
Problems of social housing at the beginning of the Cuban Revolution.
In 1959, the Cuban Revolution began for different social reasons, one of them the problem of social housing, which had already been dragging on since previous years. Thus: "According to the 1953 census, of Cuba's housing stock, almost 45% was made up of shacks and huts; and 25%, of subnormal housing (Ceditec, 1975).".
Urban development was concentrated in Havana, where profitability was very high, which led to a large urban investment, absorbing 74.5% of the homes. The State established two laws: the Horizontal Property Law of 1952 and the Law for the Promotion of Insured Mortgages of 1953.
Despite those measures, the problem was not solved, since low-income people do not have the possibility of renting or obtaining housing. That is why they are crowded into precarious housing around the city.
Despite having a government that claims to put the social aspect above all things, slums and overcrowding continue throughout Cuba, and evictions, demolitions of self-built homes and the expulsion of the inhabitants of the interior who approach the main cities to escape poverty are very frequent.
Social housing in Mexico has its antecedents at the beginning of the century, the Mexican revolution gave way to the Constitution of 1917 where it is stipulated that “employers” must provide decent and hygienic housing to workers. However, there was no State housing policy that covered this need, this added to the migration of the rural population to the cities, which increased the demand for urban housing. After an improvement in its economy as a result of the Second World War in Europe, which economically favored Mexico, large housing projects were developed influenced by the ideals of the modern movement. Organizations and entities were created that allowed access to housing, going from being executors to financiers. The development of housing goes from neighborhoods to housing complexes, from rentals to ownership.[15].
At the beginning of the century, as a result of industrialization and the development of the railroad, the growth of industrialized cities began in Mexico City. It was established that employers must provide comfortable and hygienic housing for their workers.[15] The growing demand for land and urban housing did not have a timely response from the public or private sectors, giving rise to the “social production” of housing in popular neighborhoods.[16].
Between the years 1932 -1934, the Federal District planned the construction of housing to try to solve the housing deficit of the working classes, among them the Jardín Balbuena, La Vaquita and San Jacinto complexes. During the year 1938, the Union of Socialist Architects was established, with a thought of post-revolution social transformation, where the proposal of the working-class city of Mexico was given. In the same way, the Swiss architect Hannes Meyer, identified with a collective position from his leadership of the Bauhaus, proposes a technical, functional and economic solution for social needs. During his stay in Mexico, he founded the Institute of Planning and Urbanism, where there was a revolutionary curriculum for the Mexican context, such as German rational urban ideas or housing densification. One of Meyer's most relevant projects was the Colonia Obrera de las Lomas de Becerra, intended for cement factory workers.[17].
Attention to social housing in Mexico through public policies began around the turn of the century, when the 1917 Constitution established the obligation of employers to provide housing to their workers.[18] Some of the main organizations:
Housing Financing Program - PFV[18].
It was created in 1963, as a response to the housing problem in Mexico and its main function was to provide private credit to various sectors of the population, but it was aimed at satisfying the needs of the middle sector. Within this program are the Bank Financing for Housing (FOVI), created in 1963, aimed at supporting social housing with private credit; and the Guarantee and Support Fund for social housing (FOGA).
Institute of the National Fund for Workers' Housing - INFONAVIT[18].
It was created in 1972, aimed at workers in private companies, its approach focused on loans for the acquisition of new housing, improvement of existing housing, construction on own land and payment of liabilities, the first being the most far-reaching. Part of the resources come from 5% contributions from the companies' payroll.
National Fund for Popular Housing - FONHAPO[18].
Created in 1981, it was designed for people who did not have a fixed salary and had low incomes. For this reason, housing programs and different types of credits were created. Among its most important programs were the acquisition of land for housing construction, progressive housing, finished housing, housing improvement and support in materials. Its resources were from the Federation (Treasury) and international loans; within its guidelines were the recovery of at least 1 loan granted to 2 beneficiaries. The program was in force until 1986, when due to the crisis it had to reinvent its operations.
Housing and Social and Urban Development Trust of the Federal District - FIVIDESU[19].
It was created in December 1983, with the purpose of carrying out housing and social and urban development programs to meet the needs of the minimum income population of Mexico City. Until 1992, it granted loans to individuals, families, and mainly organized groups of applicants for different types of housing programs such as: housing improvement or restoration, progressive housing or home base, finished housing, provision of infrastructure and basic urbanization.
It marked the beginning of a series of developments that were intended to solve the housing problem. It was designed by the architect Mario Pani commissioned by the Federal Government, which developed several proposals.[20].
Prior to the 1930s, Peru had different stages of development where political and socioeconomic changes demarcated the path to follow in terms of the evolution of housing as a basic module of the habitability of cities in the country. The most notable case is the city of Lima, the capital city, since since its colonial founding in the century until today it has been the largest city in the country and the most developed city among the main cities in other regions of Peru.
After the War of the Pacific ended and after the consequent occupation of Lima by the Chilean armies, the city experienced one of the first homelessness crises at the end of the century and the beginning of the century. The cause was the disproportion between the very scarce housing construction and population growth. The doubling of the urban population in the last 60 years (1857-1920) was considered alarming.[21].
Already in the first decades of the century, the housing crisis in Lima was more noticeable and population growth became increasingly accentuated. This resulted in the appearance of the first 'barriadas', which were settlements on the outskirts of the city in which the homeless built their houses.[15] The best-known neighborhoods of that time were Armatambo (Chorrillos) and Puerto Nuevo (Callao) in 1928; Matute in 1929 and Leticia founded in 1933. It is in this context that a response from the State emerges: the working-class neighborhoods. The Pro-Unemployed Board, created in 1931 in each department, highlighting that of Lima, was the means from which this modernist urban project was carried out. These working-class neighborhoods had housing and sports areas.
From this, in 1931, the Pro-Unemployed Departmental Boards were created. In the case of the capital city, it was called the Lima Pro-Unemployed Departmental Board - JDLPD, which was originally temporary but was renewed. Its objective was social assistance and execution of works.[22] Between 1931 and 1934, more than 20% of the JDLPD's resources allocated to social assistance works were allocated to the construction of houses for workers. According to the JDLPD in November 1931, 25% of the EAP of Lima was unemployed, in construction it rose to 60% and in the textile sector it was only 12%, in 1932 Lima had 18,680 unemployed workers of which 10,649 (57%) were from the provinces.
After the Workers' Neighborhoods that developed in the 1930s, the ideas of the Modern Movement arrived in Peru with the Neighborhood Units carried out between the 1940s and 1960s. The Neighborhood Unit") arose from the urban idea of the Garden City considered in Latin America for the imported models such as the garden-suburb carried out in England during the postwar period, in a period of modernization and explosive demographic growth. What was transferred was the theory of the neighborhood-unit and the satellite city model, known on this continent as the Neighborhood Unit.[23].
During those decades, a large amount of social housing was proposed and built in Lima. All these developments promoted by the architect Fernando Belaúnde Terry were presented in 1945 during his political campaign to run for the position of deputy for Lima in the National Parliament. Said Government Housing Plan first proposed the decentralization of Lima through the construction of Neighborhood Units, since in those years everything was concentrated in the center; then, the rehabilitation of the slum blocks in the center of Lima. Part of the National Housing Plan promoted by Belaúnde included public policies to be implemented, including the creation of a public entity that would be in charge of carrying out said plan. For this purpose, the National Housing Corporation (CNV) was created in 1946, whose purpose, just as the JDLPD had at the time, was the construction of housing for the middle and popular sectors. The main work of the CNV was the global project of Neighborhood Units.
Among the largest UV projects we have the Neighborhood Unit No. 3 "Unidad Vecinal No. 3 (Lima)") in Lima (1949) and the Matute Neighborhood Unit in La Victoria (1953). According to what was indicated by Patricia Caldas,[23] UV3 shows an open texture, where the distances and free area between buildings are similar, and UV Matute does not show the geometric clarity of UV3 but does show a certain relationship with its urban environment.
After the development of the Neighborhood Units, during the 1960s, an Experimental Housing Project - PREVI) was proposed. In 1965, President Fernando Belaúnde Terry began a series of consultations to explore new ways to control the flow of migrants arriving to the city and prevent the spread of self-construction projects in informal neighborhoods in Lima. The State and the United Nations Development Program - UNDP called on the English architect Peter Land to advise on social housing policies. through the Housing Bank of Peru. From this call emerged the initial form of PREVI with its three pilot projects, which attempted to address the housing problem from complementary perspectives. The proposals were presented to the UNDP in 1966 and were approved in 1967. Work began in 1968 with the intention of carrying out three pilot projects in three years.
Each typology proposed by the architects of both competitions proposed different versions for different family groups: the houses had to accommodate four to six people in a first stage, and eight to ten people in a second, for which each project proposed its growth system. The PREVI project was conceived differently from contemporary institutional housing projects, which in those years usually inherited and responded to post-war problems. That is why it has become a precedent, which includes the concept of “progressive housing” and which understands the house as a starting point that will respond, over time, to the needs of its inhabitants and create heterogeneous neighborhoods. These circumstances have given rise to various urban situations, which enrich not only the housing environment, but also the public spaces of the neighborhood.[24].