The article linked below offers a view into public housing built in Colombia, South America. It is a part of the world that receives little coverage in the media about public housing and all the more interesting for that reason alone.
The article is written by Maria Atuesta, who is at the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University. Atuesta reports on two public housing projects that were built in Granada, Colombia. The projects were part of an 2012 initiative to build 100,000 homes called (in translation) 100,000 Free Housing. Eight million people have been forcibly displaced within the country and many others are struggling to pay for housing.
In four years, 110,545 units were built through 100,000 Free Housing. The new owners were selected through a complex process of list building, applications, and finally, a lottery. The program was unprecedented in Colombia’s history and there is considerable documentation about the program’s failings in terms of design and poor building quality.
Although Atuesta is in the School of Design, her research focused on social interactions. Specifically, she was interested in finding out how the new residents functioned as a community. She interviewed residents of the housing projects. She talked with politicians and government officials who were responsible for implementing 100,000 Free Housing. She also reviewed minutes of meetings of Granada’s city council.
Atuesta’s findings highlight sources of tension in the new neighbourhoods that can be traced to the process used to allocate units. The program was introduced to “help those who need it most,” an idea with a lot of scope for interpretation. Residents describe a climate of suspicion and envy within the new neighbourhoods. This is reinforced by some of the government’s benefit programs and by private charities that have provided aid.
It might come as a surprise to learn that despite her research findings, Atuesta supports public housing. Instead, she encourages policy makers and program planners to think about strategies to strengthen relations between neighbours.
This report is also timely because Atuesta’s observations provide context for tensions that are bubbling up in COVID. For example, she comments on the strengths of informal settlements, which could be considered in the context of encampments. She also explores how eligibility criteria opened divisions between neighbours, which we are seeing in the emergency financial support offered to people who have lost income during the pandemic. Her thoughts about strengthening community relations also apply.
Read more at the Joint Centre For Housing Studies: Public Housing, Public Aid, and Collective Reparations Neighborhood Formation in Makatoa and Sabana
