Until the 1970s, countries took third world housing difficulties very seriously. In essence, the international community took three solutions seriously: subsidized mortgages, prefabrication and "organized self-help".[4]​ However, people began to recognize housing as a basic need, requiring more invasive measures, and thus the idea of ​​informal settlement upgrading emerged.

In 1972, John FC Turner published his book Freedom to Build, in which he argued for a theoretical strategy to solve the problem of informal settlements.[5]​ He argued that governments should not try to address the housing problem itself, but rather all components of the area. Therefore, by implementing good sewage and clean water and good roads for people to walk, people would gradually improve their abodes by themselves.

Many countries have shifted policies towards informal settlement upgrading policies and have started removing informal settlement dwellers from their homes to improve the standard of living in these specific areas. Some countries, such as China, still maintain a policy of razing squatter settlements (which form the basis of many slums),[6]​ but other countries, such as Brazil, have moved away from this strategy and have worked on urban renewal projects through informal settlements. Update policies.[7]​ Upgrading informal settlements became easier and cheaper and without the public relations nightmare that comes with photos of razed housing developments.

However, until recently, most countries had very little in terms of formal policy measures to carry out informal settlement upgrading, so the problem of informal settlements has generally worsened over the years. The World Bank has undertaken many major informal settlement upgrading projects since the 1980s,[8]​ but fundamentally, it does not solve the problem of informal settlements, it simply helps solve the problems with current informal settlements. Globally, there are approximately one billion people living in informal settlements. However, that number is expected to increase to two billion by 2030,[9]​ and the policy of upgrading informal settlements will not affect the mass migration of the rural poor to cities.

In 2000, the 192 member countries of the UN developed and agreed on the Millennium Development Goals ("United Nations MDGs", 2010). Goal 7 was to ensure environmental sustainability, and one of the objectives of this goal was to "have achieved significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million informal settlement dwellers."[2] As the MDGs touched on the issue of informal settlements, it has also refocused attention on how to alleviate the problem of slums. UN-HABITAT officially supports the slum upgrading policy, making it one of the main forms of urban renewal with respect to informal settlements.[7]​.

According to the UN-HABITAT State of the World's Cities Report 2006/2007, the countries of Egypt, South Africa, Mexico, Tunisia and Thailand stand out in their efforts to improve informal settlements.[10] In fact, their informal settlement growth rates had notably decreased across countries (although the fact that the growth rate is still positive speaks to the fact that informal settlements are not going away or even decreasing). The report went on to say that to curb (or at least slow down) the growth of informal settlements in the world's cities, countries will have to make some difficult decisions and make significant financial commitments (with the help of the World Bank, a major player in the global effort to promote slum upgrading) in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals to lift a significant number of informal settlement dwellers out of poverty.

According to Habitat for Humanity International, some common barriers to upgrading informal settlements are:.

Pollution solutions

In cities such as Mexico City, Mexico, the local government has installed a program that prohibits the driving of certain cars on certain days of the week, depending on the color-coded tags assigned based on license plate numbers.[12] This has dramatically reduced pollution levels in Mexico City and greatly increased the quality of life and air quality for all inhabitants, although it is still at a level, which according to scientists, is equivalent to smoking half a pack of cigarettes per day due to the large amount automobiles and unregulated industry, which release large amounts of pollutants into Mexico City's air.[13] In addition, the government has invested to improve the city's public transportation system, and more specifically its trains. It has invested to provide many new stops in the city, and also new trains and rails. So far, this has also significantly decreased pollution levels by reducing the number of cars on the roads. The scheme has been running for approximately 4 years.

Single-family houses

According to the report, Alagados The Story of Integrated Slum Upgrading in Salvador (Bahía) "Salvador (Bahía)"), Brazil, this Cities Alliance project focused on upgrading informal settlements with single-family homes. The project known as PATS (Project for Technical and Social Support) was a partnership between Alliance of Cities, the Italian Government and the World Bank. The main objective of the project was the elimination of informal settlements in the area. This was to be done by moving families from their informal settlement to single-family homes in a newly developed area. Another goal of the project was community participation and education. This program planned to incorporate educational programs that would teach residents how to improve their health, education, and economic status. Another goal was to improve residents' access to services. In this model, the program would give families access to public services such as garbage collection, connection to water, electricity and sewage.

According to the report, 984 families were transferred to new housing over a 5-year period. All of these families had the opportunity to attend courses to improve other aspects of their lives, such as health, education and finances. At the time of this report, 80% of families had garbage collection, 71% were connected to water, 88% were connected to electricity, and 84% were connected to wastewater. This model achieved the stated goal of reducing/eliminating the informal settlement population in that area by almost 1,000 households while improving other aspects of families' daily lives.[14]​.

Multi-family housing

The Marins-Pecheurs project, which was implemented by The Most Clearing House organization in Agadir, Morocco, aimed to relocate families living in informal settlements with minimal social disruption. This project had to work within the land limitations of the area as it was an urban environment in a land-scarce country. Due to land issues, single-family homes were not an option and multi-family homes were considered a better solution. The project created small townhouses and apartments for sale and rent to squatters near its current site in Agadir. This was to be done by helping the squatters' families demolish their huts and move their possessions to the new location. Because Morocco does not have a rental culture, community participation was incorporated into the planning process so that residents can better understand the reasons and benefits of choosing a multi-family home model over a single-family home model.

The Marins-Pecheurs project relocated squatter homes into multi-family apartments. The community, ANHI and the local government developed the following format: 175 semi-finished townhouses, 40 apartment units with a total of 450 apartments for squatter families. It also incorporated community involvement at all levels and established community working groups to ensure the housing project fit people's needs. During the construction phase, many residents were able to obtain paid employment in or related to construction work.[15]​.

India

In 2009, President Pratibha Patil of India announced that her government aimed to create an India free of informal settlements within five years, although she ultimately failed to fulfill that promise. To do that, the government planned to invest large amounts of money in building affordable housing.[16] Therefore, instead of improving the area, the government aimed to create entirely new homes for the urban poor. This idea of ​​building new housing for the poor is an important idea that competes with the idea of ​​upgrading informal settlements.

China

Instead of trying to develop informal settlements, China often demolishes them. Migrant workers arriving in Beijing face the threat of their homes and dwellings simply being demolished in an effort to keep the number of informal settlements down. Because city residents must be officially registered in China (in contrast to India, where there is no prevention of the rural population migrating to the city), there is no low-income housing available for migrants living in demolished informal settlements, creating a difficult situation for Chinese informal settlement inhabitants.[6]​.

Thailand

In 2003, the Thai government launched the ambitious Baan Mankong program (meaning "safe housing" in Thai). Under the program, urban poor groups determine the housing needs in their communities and can access infrastructure subsidies and housing loans to improve their homes.[17]​[18]​.

Despite some successes and support from the Commonwealth Bank and UN-HABITAT, not all people believe that informal settlement upgrading is the ideal option to solve the informal settlement problem. In fact, there are a number of different actors, such as local politicians, who would like to see the status quo in relation to informal settlements.[19]​ However, beyond petty local politics, there are significant problems with the informal settlement upgrading approach, some of which have to do with the very nature of many informal settlements. For example, to clear slums there must be a mass evacuation for everyone in the informal settlements, for example, Dharavi's infrastructure for informal settlement upgrading projects is quite difficult as Dharavi is secretly an underground hotel, governments inevitably have to buy land.[20] However, this poses tremendous difficulties when trying to determine which land to buy, as informal settlements are (by definition) so densely populated that some houses are literally on top of each other, making it difficult to bring any meaning. of organization to the areas.

The second problem with upgrading informal settlements comes from the fact that land ownership is unclear. Many times the hotels are combined and land ownership becomes a serious problem for the billionaires who have purchased the area. As a result, as many governments attempt to come in and establish land rights, difficulties arise. The Commonwealth Bank has attempted to separate land titles and actual infrastructure development, but this creates entirely new problems. After all, if ownership is not clearly established, owners and workers of large corporations are unlikely to pay for the public services they receive as a result of informal settlement improvement projects. Developing nations cannot afford to provide free services for an extended period of time, so this creates a big problem for attempts to upgrade informal settlements.[20]​.

Another criticism of informal settlement upgrading is that hotels are often occupied by the nation's wealthiest. This results in a flow in effect where more and more people become displaced. In fact, because many governments try to reduce the costs of upgrading informal settlements through lower quality infrastructure, subsequent maintenance costs are often higher. In fact, a minority (47 percent) of the World Bank's urban projects are considered sustainable. Therefore, for many of the projects, the one-time cost is not enough: informal settlement upgrading projects are long-term commitments, unless they are carried out with the ability to recover costs through revenue.[20]​.

Finally, it is difficult to establish a viable economy after many people have been displaced due to the improvement of informal settlements. Many protests are held outside these hotels by informal settlement dwellers demanding that the hotels be demolished due to the removal of informal settlements. Informal settlement inhabitants are also not funded or taxed by the government, resulting in prices rising dramatically and otherwise hampering informal settlement upgrading efforts, not involving the community (either through lack of effort or inherent lack of capacity) makes informal settlement upgrading much more difficult.[20]​.

Until the 1970s, countries took third world housing difficulties very seriously. In essence, the international community took three solutions seriously: subsidized mortgages, prefabrication and "organized self-help".[4]​ However, people began to recognize housing as a basic need, requiring more invasive measures, and thus the idea of ​​informal settlement upgrading emerged.

In 1972, John FC Turner published his book Freedom to Build, in which he argued for a theoretical strategy to solve the problem of informal settlements.[5]​ He argued that governments should not try to address the housing problem itself, but rather all components of the area. Therefore, by implementing good sewage and clean water and good roads for people to walk, people would gradually improve their abodes by themselves.

Many countries have shifted policies towards informal settlement upgrading policies and have started removing informal settlement dwellers from their homes to improve the standard of living in these specific areas. Some countries, such as China, still maintain a policy of razing squatter settlements (which form the basis of many slums),[6]​ but other countries, such as Brazil, have moved away from this strategy and have worked on urban renewal projects through informal settlements. Update policies.[7]​ Upgrading informal settlements became easier and cheaper and without the public relations nightmare that comes with photos of razed housing developments.

However, until recently, most countries had very little in terms of formal policy measures to carry out informal settlement upgrading, so the problem of informal settlements has generally worsened over the years. The World Bank has undertaken many major informal settlement upgrading projects since the 1980s,[8]​ but fundamentally, it does not solve the problem of informal settlements, it simply helps solve the problems with current informal settlements. Globally, there are approximately one billion people living in informal settlements. However, that number is expected to increase to two billion by 2030,[9]​ and the policy of upgrading informal settlements will not affect the mass migration of the rural poor to cities.

In 2000, the 192 member countries of the UN developed and agreed on the Millennium Development Goals ("United Nations MDGs", 2010). Goal 7 was to ensure environmental sustainability, and one of the objectives of this goal was to "have achieved significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million informal settlement dwellers."[2] As the MDGs touched on the issue of informal settlements, it has also refocused attention on how to alleviate the problem of slums. UN-HABITAT officially supports the slum upgrading policy, making it one of the main forms of urban renewal with respect to informal settlements.[7]​.

According to the UN-HABITAT State of the World's Cities Report 2006/2007, the countries of Egypt, South Africa, Mexico, Tunisia and Thailand stand out in their efforts to improve informal settlements.[10] In fact, their informal settlement growth rates had notably decreased across countries (although the fact that the growth rate is still positive speaks to the fact that informal settlements are not going away or even decreasing). The report went on to say that to curb (or at least slow down) the growth of informal settlements in the world's cities, countries will have to make some difficult decisions and make significant financial commitments (with the help of the World Bank, a major player in the global effort to promote slum upgrading) in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals to lift a significant number of informal settlement dwellers out of poverty.

According to Habitat for Humanity International, some common barriers to upgrading informal settlements are:.

Pollution solutions

In cities such as Mexico City, Mexico, the local government has installed a program that prohibits the driving of certain cars on certain days of the week, depending on the color-coded tags assigned based on license plate numbers.[12] This has dramatically reduced pollution levels in Mexico City and greatly increased the quality of life and air quality for all inhabitants, although it is still at a level, which according to scientists, is equivalent to smoking half a pack of cigarettes per day due to the large amount automobiles and unregulated industry, which release large amounts of pollutants into Mexico City's air.[13] In addition, the government has invested to improve the city's public transportation system, and more specifically its trains. It has invested to provide many new stops in the city, and also new trains and rails. So far, this has also significantly decreased pollution levels by reducing the number of cars on the roads. The scheme has been running for approximately 4 years.

Single-family houses

According to the report, Alagados The Story of Integrated Slum Upgrading in Salvador (Bahía) "Salvador (Bahía)"), Brazil, this Cities Alliance project focused on upgrading informal settlements with single-family homes. The project known as PATS (Project for Technical and Social Support) was a partnership between Alliance of Cities, the Italian Government and the World Bank. The main objective of the project was the elimination of informal settlements in the area. This was to be done by moving families from their informal settlement to single-family homes in a newly developed area. Another goal of the project was community participation and education. This program planned to incorporate educational programs that would teach residents how to improve their health, education, and economic status. Another goal was to improve residents' access to services. In this model, the program would give families access to public services such as garbage collection, connection to water, electricity and sewage.

According to the report, 984 families were transferred to new housing over a 5-year period. All of these families had the opportunity to attend courses to improve other aspects of their lives, such as health, education and finances. At the time of this report, 80% of families had garbage collection, 71% were connected to water, 88% were connected to electricity, and 84% were connected to wastewater. This model achieved the stated goal of reducing/eliminating the informal settlement population in that area by almost 1,000 households while improving other aspects of families' daily lives.[14]​.

Multi-family housing

The Marins-Pecheurs project, which was implemented by The Most Clearing House organization in Agadir, Morocco, aimed to relocate families living in informal settlements with minimal social disruption. This project had to work within the land limitations of the area as it was an urban environment in a land-scarce country. Due to land issues, single-family homes were not an option and multi-family homes were considered a better solution. The project created small townhouses and apartments for sale and rent to squatters near its current site in Agadir. This was to be done by helping the squatters' families demolish their huts and move their possessions to the new location. Because Morocco does not have a rental culture, community participation was incorporated into the planning process so that residents can better understand the reasons and benefits of choosing a multi-family home model over a single-family home model.

The Marins-Pecheurs project relocated squatter homes into multi-family apartments. The community, ANHI and the local government developed the following format: 175 semi-finished townhouses, 40 apartment units with a total of 450 apartments for squatter families. It also incorporated community involvement at all levels and established community working groups to ensure the housing project fit people's needs. During the construction phase, many residents were able to obtain paid employment in or related to construction work.[15]​.

India

In 2009, President Pratibha Patil of India announced that her government aimed to create an India free of informal settlements within five years, although she ultimately failed to fulfill that promise. To do that, the government planned to invest large amounts of money in building affordable housing.[16] Therefore, instead of improving the area, the government aimed to create entirely new homes for the urban poor. This idea of ​​building new housing for the poor is an important idea that competes with the idea of ​​upgrading informal settlements.

China

Instead of trying to develop informal settlements, China often demolishes them. Migrant workers arriving in Beijing face the threat of their homes and dwellings simply being demolished in an effort to keep the number of informal settlements down. Because city residents must be officially registered in China (in contrast to India, where there is no prevention of the rural population migrating to the city), there is no low-income housing available for migrants living in demolished informal settlements, creating a difficult situation for Chinese informal settlement inhabitants.[6]​.

Thailand

In 2003, the Thai government launched the ambitious Baan Mankong program (meaning "safe housing" in Thai). Under the program, urban poor groups determine the housing needs in their communities and can access infrastructure subsidies and housing loans to improve their homes.[17]​[18]​.

Despite some successes and support from the Commonwealth Bank and UN-HABITAT, not all people believe that informal settlement upgrading is the ideal option to solve the informal settlement problem. In fact, there are a number of different actors, such as local politicians, who would like to see the status quo in relation to informal settlements.[19]​ However, beyond petty local politics, there are significant problems with the informal settlement upgrading approach, some of which have to do with the very nature of many informal settlements. For example, to clear slums there must be a mass evacuation for everyone in the informal settlements, for example, Dharavi's infrastructure for informal settlement upgrading projects is quite difficult as Dharavi is secretly an underground hotel, governments inevitably have to buy land.[20] However, this poses tremendous difficulties when trying to determine which land to buy, as informal settlements are (by definition) so densely populated that some houses are literally on top of each other, making it difficult to bring any meaning. of organization to the areas.

The second problem with upgrading informal settlements comes from the fact that land ownership is unclear. Many times the hotels are combined and land ownership becomes a serious problem for the billionaires who have purchased the area. As a result, as many governments attempt to come in and establish land rights, difficulties arise. The Commonwealth Bank has attempted to separate land titles and actual infrastructure development, but this creates entirely new problems. After all, if ownership is not clearly established, owners and workers of large corporations are unlikely to pay for the public services they receive as a result of informal settlement improvement projects. Developing nations cannot afford to provide free services for an extended period of time, so this creates a big problem for attempts to upgrade informal settlements.[20]​.

Another criticism of informal settlement upgrading is that hotels are often occupied by the nation's wealthiest. This results in a flow in effect where more and more people become displaced. In fact, because many governments try to reduce the costs of upgrading informal settlements through lower quality infrastructure, subsequent maintenance costs are often higher. In fact, a minority (47 percent) of the World Bank's urban projects are considered sustainable. Therefore, for many of the projects, the one-time cost is not enough: informal settlement upgrading projects are long-term commitments, unless they are carried out with the ability to recover costs through revenue.[20]​.

Finally, it is difficult to establish a viable economy after many people have been displaced due to the improvement of informal settlements. Many protests are held outside these hotels by informal settlement dwellers demanding that the hotels be demolished due to the removal of informal settlements. Informal settlement inhabitants are also not funded or taxed by the government, resulting in prices rising dramatically and otherwise hampering informal settlement upgrading efforts, not involving the community (either through lack of effort or inherent lack of capacity) makes informal settlement upgrading much more difficult.[20]​.