Download measurement of the urban housing deficit

MEASUREMENT OF THE URBAN HOUSING DEFICIT:
STRATEGIES, TOOLS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Carolina Ramírez Pérez1
e-mail: [email protected]
Juan Cristóbal Moreno Crossley2
e-mail: [email protected]
Studies and Evaluation Team, Housing and Urban Studies Commission (CEHU), Ministry of
Housing and Urban Development - Chile
ABSTRACT
In 2009, the Chilean Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MINVU) began an internal
debate in order to review the concepts, methodologies and indicators conventionally used to
diagnose and measure urban and housing deficiencies. The main result of this process was the
development of a new approach to this diagnosis, based on the concept of Urban Housing Deficit,
understood as the “integrated set of urban and housing deficiencies that have a significant effect on
the residential habitat and quality of life of the population” (MINVU, 2009a: p. 19).
Using this approach poses the challenge of comprehensively measuring and analyzing four complex
components of urban environment (housing, infrastructure, services and public space) from a
quantitative, qualitative and accessibility perspective (MINVU, 2009a). It is also important to raise
general awareness of social, economic and environmental sustainability principles, understood as
the search for equity and integration, economic development and environmental equilibrium in
order to improve the quality of life in our cities (MINVU, 2009b).
This paper shall outline MINVU’s proposed approach to the Urban Housing Deficit, incorporating
the perspective of sustainability and presenting the current alternatives for the complementary
measurement and analysis of deficiencies in housing, infrastructure, services and public space.
Keywords: urban housing deficit, infrastructure, services, public space, quality of life
INTRODUCTION
In 2009, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MINVU) created and directed the
Ministerial Working Group on Urban Housing Deficit. This group examined and discussed
concepts, methodologies, instruments and indicators for dealing with urban housing deficiencies, in
Architect and M. Sc. in Urban Development, Pontificia Universidad Católica. Professional of the Studies and
Evaluation Team, Housing and Urban Studies Commission (CEHU), Ministry of Housing and Urban Development,
Chile.
2
Sociologist and Masters© in Geography, Universidad de Chile. Professional of the Studies and Evaluation Team,
Housing and Urban Studies Commission (CEHU), Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Chile.
1
the context of the strategic goals required for a sector-based public policy in this field (MINVU,
2009a).
This new perspective requires a comprehensive approach to diagnosis, based on the pertinence of a
simultaneous analysis of all urban and housing needs in Chile. Housing must be analyzed in the
context of adequate public space, services and infrastructure, and in accordance with urban
standards of quality of life. This Working Group has stressed the need to complement housing and
urban development perspectives by establishing standards and indicators for measuring
deficiencies.
The first round of activities of the Working Group on Urban Housing Deficit was concluded in
October 2009. This process established the main definitions, as well as a methodology for the
treatment of variables and indicators. It also identified sources of information, measuring and
monitoring instruments, and estimated data at the national level. The result of this work is
summarized in a document called “Urban Housing Deficit: an integral perspective on quality of life
and the residential habitat in Chile” (MINVU, 2009a).
The current phase of this work –in the context of a new government administration (2010-2014)–
shall require validation of this methodology in cities throughout the country. For this purpose, it
shall seek to develop applications and adapt them to the specific conditions of the Chile’s main
cities, while promoting the participation of a diverse group of civil society actors in this process.
Along with a summary of the previous discussion, this document shall present the potential for
expanding and improving this approach to the Urban Housing Deficit by considering the
perspective of sustainability (economic, social and environmental) and discussing the current
alternatives for a complementary measurement and analysis of deficiencies in housing,
infrastructure, services and public space.
1.
DEFINITIONS
The concept of Urban Housing Deficit is understood as “the integral set of urban and housing
deficiencies that significantly affect the residential habitat and quality of life of the population”
(MINVU, 2009a). Although this approach is consistent with the way the housing deficit and urban
deficiencies have traditionally been diagnosed by MINVU, the innovation lies in establishing a
multidimensional perspective, which seeks to understand urban housing deficiencies involving
“scarcity, insufficient quality or inaccessibility of material goods, services and spaces necessary to
satisfy essential needs and improve the quality of life of the population, as it assumes the challenge
of producing a sustainable residential habitat” (MINVU, 2009a).
In order to determine the specific dimensions or levels of analysis, this perspective considers three
significant issues. First, the quantitative dimension, which attempt to establish a sufficient amount,
availability or coverage of its components; second, the qualitative dimension, which establishes the
criteria for quality, maintenance and conservation (according to objective and subjective criteria);
and finally, the dimension of accessibility, which analyzes the limitations in the access to goods,
services and spaces that allow people to satisfy their housing and urban needs. These limitations are
caused by lack of economic access, physical-spatial inaccessibility –such as distance, physical
obstacles or transportation deficiencies– and the exclusion of specific population groups that require
guarantees and adequately designed participation mechanisms (women, children, the elderly,
indigenous peoples, sexual minorities, the disabled or foreign immigrants).
This integral perspective also considers the location of housing within the urban context. For this
purpose, it was necessary to study the components that express urban housing requirements. These
components are:
a. Housing: lodging or dwelling requirements that provide access to adequate, independent and
well-located housing solutions –whether temporary or permanent– for individuals and groups.
Housing must be analyzed in the context of its urban environment, location and interrelation
with other components.
b. Infrastructure: urban infrastructure requirements that facilitate pedestrian and vehicular
circulation, the supply of basic services and the protection of the population against risks of
natural and manmade origin. The following elements were defined as sub-components
associated to this deficit: basic services networks; road networks and environment, connectivity
and transportation; and infrastructure for protecting and mitigating natural and manmade risks.
c. Services: this component includes the demand for social services that are necessary for
subsistence, security and access to opportunities for the general population. The following
elements were defined as sub-components: health services; education; emergency and security
services; culture and recreation; and private services such as commerce.
d. Public space: this refers to the demand for public areas, spaces and places –either open or
closed– destined to promote recreation, entertainment, social integration and exchanges, the
preservation of historical and cultural heritage, as well as contact with nature. These subcomponents include green areas and spaces with landscape value; public sports and recreational
areas; facilities with educational, historical and cultural value; and public space adjacent to
roads, streets, walkways, cycle paths and pedestrian walks.
2.
URBAN HOUSING DEFICIT AND SUSTAINABILITY
The diagnosis, measurement and analysis of deficiencies in housing, infrastructure, services and
public space must be responsive to the principles of sustainability, from a quantitative, qualitative
and accessibility perspective.
According to the “Proposed National Urban Development Policy,” the principles of social,
economic and environmental sustainability are understood as the search for “equity and integration,
economic development and environmental equilibrium in order to improve the quality of life in our
cities” (MINVU, 2009b).
Therefore, fundamental mechanisms for measuring urban housing deficiencies have been
established, in a systemic approach that considers economic, social and environmental
dimensions—which have been labeled “strategic variables” (MINVU, 2009a). From the perspective
of urban sustainability, these are important to measure performance of cities, municipalities and
neighborhoods, facilitating informed decision-making processes and the creation of policies at
different levels of government.
The economic dimension
In analyzing this dimension, it is important to study the land variable as an essential strategic
element. This variable must be considered dynamically to calculate urban housing deficiencies,
since it is not a neutral factor in urban development, On the contrary, it is determined by location
and economic valuation. Efficient and sustainable management requires a number of correct
diagnoses of land availability, adequacy and conditions; at the same time, housing and urban uses
compete for urbanized land, a pressure which is sensitive to political and economic interests.
Therefore, measuring the Urban Housing Deficit requires quantifying and following the dynamics
of production and reproduction of urban land as the context for this analysis. In analytical terms, it
requires considering factors such as the availability or existence of urban land in different
submarkets and socio-economic segments; value by submarket; property; size of sites; location
attributes; construction regulations; and potential modification of uses.
The social dimension
In analyzing the social dimension, it is important to study how public and private actors help
diagnose urban housing deficiencies. This has led to the inclusion of fundamental measuring factors
such as private administration and citizen participation.
In terms of private administration, it is necessary to establish alliances with the private sector,
which has been very active in urban development in recent years. Even though this type of
investment has generated more competition and innovation, in some cases it has produced a
negative impact on neighborhoods and cities, due to a lack of coordination between private
decisions and government actions. This has made it necessary to establish frameworks for
developing public-private cooperation and clearly-defined roles and guidelines.
In terms of public administration, it is necessary to carry out a clear diagnosis of government
actions from a territorial perspective, which is capable of integrating administration at the national,
regional and municipal levels (mainly through regional governments and municipalities), in order to
identify opportunities for learning from or replicating experiences, thus collaborating to reduce
urban housing deficiencies. This also implies acknowledging the different sectors and synergies that
are present in urban life, such as health, education, transportation, among others, and analyzing their
influence within the territory.
Citizen participation, on the other hand, is strengthened depending to how often and how much it is
exercised, how it is organized and how it relates with the State and the community, in order to
identify opportunities and examples that may be replicated or emulated. Based on their experiences
and representations, citizens at the local level may establish what constitutes a “good
neighborhood,” acknowledging their essential role as city, neighborhood and housing residents.
Technical studies and diagnoses may begin transferring decision-making responsibilities to
neighbors themselves, insofar as they are the residents and direct beneficiaries and, therefore,
capable of deciding on the continuity of investments.
The environmental dimension
It is indispensable to consider environmental aspects when identifying deficiencies in housing,
infrastructure, services and public space. From the perspective of urban sustainability, these
deficiencies may be measured according to indicators that evaluate the performance of urban
investments, in terms of their capacity to preserve and adapt urban and rural territory as a whole,
which according to Acselrad (1999) may be described as “urban resilience.”
Developing indicators shall require a consideration of certain fundamental elements of analysis,
including aspects such as the conditions of conservation and maintenance of urban investment, in
terms of: (a) biodiversity, conservation of natural heritage and coherence with the regional context;
(b) environmental impact of the actions carried out through this investment; (c) efficiency in the use
of energy and human and natural resources; and (d) protection of ecosystems (such as protected
forest areas, parks and natural reserves), among other aspects.
3.
PERSPECTIVES FOR MEASURING THE URBAN HOUSING DEFICIT
According to these basic guidelines, it is necessary to consider the possibilities that have been
designed –from the perspective of the Chilean experience– to consolidate a comprehensive
measurement of the Urban Housing Deficit considering its diverse components and dimensions.
A pilot exercise applied in the city of Chillán3 (MINVU, 2009a), provoked discussion on a series of
aspects of the use of Urban Housing Deficit indicators. The discussion was especially interesting for
creating exhaustive methodological designs that are coherent and responsive to public policies at
different levels and in different sectors.
The work surrounding this experience –as well as the subsequent discussion in participatory
workshops with local actors– required geo-referenced indicators at different territorial levels,
organized by function according to the components of housing, infrastructure, services and public
space.
In this sense, one of the problems was how to complement the measuring instruments and tools
used to describe diverse components. The indicators proposed for each component are often
provided by different sources and, although the information is pertinent, it is produced using
different schemes of analysis.
Since there are no registries that store transversal information on the four components of the Urban
Housing Deficit approach, the simultaneous use of several information sources is a natural
condition of the process of calculating deficiencies.
For this reason, it is crucial to establish strategic criteria for the selection of the information that
best describes each of the components in its different dimensions. In this sense, it is important to
identify alternative information sources based on their current relevance, pertinence, universality
and potential for a more detailed analysis.
Since it provides a complete cadastre of the characteristics of houses, homes and population, census
data is valuable in terms of these last two characteristics. By including all measurable units, the
estimates made at different scales do not present sample errors, and it is therefore possible to break
down information to its basic units (blocks or rural addresses). However, the long period of time
between each census (every ten years) causes large information gaps, during which it is essential to
obtain information from sample surveys or projections (MINVU, 2009c).
These types of records, on the other hand, are particularly limited in terms of territorial break-down.
Therefore, it seems appropriate to suggest using this data from surveys and projections to constantly
produce more general information, especially at the national, regional, municipal and city levels. On
the other hand, when diagnosing the lower levels of analysis (sectors, neighborhoods or city areas
and rural territories), it is important to evaluate the pertinence of using census data and/or
complementing this data with information obtained through cadastres or administrative and private
records developed by government institutions, businesses, citizens’ organizations or others.
Another problem is the lack of specific information on certain components and dimensions of the
Urban Housing Deficit. Currently, the information report on housing and infrastructure deficiencies
is included extensively in census modules and the main household surveys. Meanwhile, information
on services and public space is normally more limited, more fragmented, and less accessible. The
3
City located in the Bio-Bío Region in Chile.
sources available for these components tend to be localized and sector-based, with difficulties in
articulating comprehensive and integral measurements (MINVU, 2009c). In this sense, the ability to
generate diagnoses at the local level –cities or municipalities– is incompatible with the limited
availability of comparable information at other levels, which leads to a lack of appropriate
parameters or standards at the national and regional levels.
In conclusion, selecting sources and indicators is an inherent challenge when defining the territorial
level of analysis. The study performed in the city of Chillán confirmed the potential for generating
diagnoses that may subsequently include an examination of indicators from different levels, which
are capable of obtaining information from diverse sources. First, this study produced and analyzed
descriptive information at the city level. This information, obtained from conventional sources
(census and national surveys) allowed for a comparison between Chillán and cities of similar size
and characteristics, in terms of their housing, infrastructure, services and public space indicators.
Second, using these indicators as a reference point, a territorial diagnosis was generated with data
from the neighborhood level (neighborhood councils), facilitating the analysis of the distribution
and existence of deficiencies at the intra-city level. In this case, local governments were used as
sources of data, which –along with specifying the previous diagnosis– facilitated the inclusion of
specific aspects that have a large impact on the city but were overlooked in the inter-city diagnosis
(MINVU, 2009a).
Another issue to discuss is the combined use of objectively well-founded indicators –based on
contrasting observations, or instrument registries regarding a technical standard, or the total or
partial reduction of a deficiency– and indicators capable that may help to detect the subjective
perspectives of residents, derived from their perceptions, opinions and valuations. The experience
accumulated in the case of Chillán helped reveal subtle differences between the evaluation
produced by objective indicators and others that deal with more subjective perspectives.
On the other hand, this complex contrast between objective and subjective indicators is interrelated
with the tension between deficit measures based on quantity, quality and accessibility. MINVU’s
experience has shown that overcoming the quantitative deficiencies of a specific component does
not necessarily guarantee the elimination of the qualitative deficiencies and accessibility
deficiencies of that same component. The demand for quality public goods and services –especially
when analyzed from a subjective perspective– involves very complicated factors that are difficult to
synthesize in a conventional rule or standard. Meanwhile, the accessibility deficiencies for a
specific factor may be measured using the same subjective quality evaluation or may require a more
complex diagnosis.
In light of these observations, it may be suggested that the objective indicators of quantity, quality
and accessibility are sufficient to evaluate the fulfillment of administrative goals. However, when
these indicators approach optimal levels of fulfillment, it is important to review subjective
evaluations in greater detail, since they reveal the actual degree of satisfaction (in regards to quality)
and inclusion (in terms of access). In the first case, a lack of correspondence between the objective
and subjective evaluations of quality would suggest the need to include new factors in order to
improve technical regulations or standards. In the second case, the difference between such
evaluations shall reflect the identities and experiences surrounding processes that affect access to
goods and services that are not available in the same quantity and quality for the entire population.
Finally, another very important question has to do with the potential application of partial and
comprehensive indicators of Urban Housing Deficit. As we have mentioned, the imperative of
conducting a comprehensive analysis of urban housing deficiencies supposes the need to implement
comprehensive measures. However, there are serious difficulties for creating this type of indicator,
due to the diverse measures implemented and units used to express the demand for housing,
infrastructure, services and public space. Also, the benefits of using comprehensive indicators are
uncertain, especially in situations where the individual quantification of deficiencies in each of the
components of Urban Housing Deficit may respond more adequately to the demand of the public
and private sectors.
In spite of all this, the experience with Chillán reveals that it is possible to implement
comprehensive deficit measures based on standardized information gathered for its different
components. This way, the sum of deficiencies in housing, infrastructure, services and public space
would result in the identification of areas or units with lesser and greater deficits (MINVU, 2009a).
However, this must be spelled out: such an indicator should be used strictly for classification
purposes, establishing priorities and focusing resources according to territorial criteria. This first
approximation may be substantially improved if the partial indicators for each component are
selected through systematic procedures. It is also possible to refine these results by defining scores
for each component, since the model implemented in this pilot experience weighed all variables
equally.
4.
CONCLUSION
The Urban Housing Deficit approach, as developed by the MINVU, appears promising in terms of
generating comprehensive diagnoses with tremendous strategic value for designing, planning,
implementing and evaluating urban and housing public policies.
In the current debate, one of the main challenges involves the possibility of producing
complementary tools for estimating urban housing requirements, according to the principles of
economic, social and environmental sustainability. In this sense, the measuring tools of the Urban
Housing Deficit must not only be used to describe the complexity of urban environment: their
actual design must be based on such concepts of sustainability.
Although there exist significant operational limitations, some of the proposals contained in this
paper may help create a methodological design that may be useful for identifying deficiencies in a
comprehensive and multi-level scheme.
In this perspective, future tasks must consider the identification and classification of the available
data sources and the strategic selection of urban housing requirement indicators that are appropriate
for different levels of analysis.
REFERENCES
Acselrad, H. (1999). “Sustentabilidad y ciudad”. Revista EURE, Vol XXV, N° 74, abril 1999, pp.
35-46.
Ministerio de Vivienda y Urbanismo, MINVU (2009a): Déficit Urbano-Habitacional. Una mirada
integral a la calidad de vida y el hábitat residencial en Chile. Gobierno de Chile, MINVU,
Santiago: 99 pgs.
Ministerio de Vivienda y Urbanismo, MINVU (2009b): “Propuesta de política nacional de
desarrollo urbano” [resumen ejecutivo]. Gobierno de Chile, MINVU, Santiago: 9 pgs.
Ministerio de Vivienda y Urbanismo, MINVU (2009c): “¿Cómo medir el Déficit UrbanoHabitacional?: Fuentes, instrumentos, dimensiones e indicadores”. [Documento de Trabajo] Mesa
de Trabajo Ministerial sobre Déficit Urbano-Habitacional, Documento N° 6. Gobierno de Chile,
MINVU, Santiago: 4 pgs.