doi 10.4067/S0718-83582015000200001
Orlando Sepulveda Mellado1
1 Chile. PhD. in Architecture, Technical University of Madrid. Director, Housing Institute, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of Chile.
In most countries social housing measures come from the State and tend to be large scale. Within such a context the designer orientates his ideas and formalizes his proposals through the prioritization of the needs of individuals according to the necessities and lifestyles of the inhabitants, the size of the household, and the characteristics of each of its members such as age, gender and occupation. This exercise also includes the structure of families and the combination of the roles played by each household member, which are expressed in terms of hierarchy, assignment of home-based activities, forms of relationship and traditional factors found within social, economic, geographic, historical and technical contexts, among others.
The above characteristics are generally associated with data collected from fieldwork —which is conducted in the domain of human sciences— and the work of project architects who gather this information through the use of methodological and architectonical techniques that are distinct from the systemic approach to scientific epistemology, bearing in mind that most of the time they are more committed to the resources of the client, which often comes from the state. At the same time —and due to political commitments— the State feels compelled to support profitability, productivity and economy-oriented principles in order to meet massive social demands.
State resources are generally limited and subject to economic-administrative restrictions derived from the implicit (ethical) or explicit (regulatory and/or legal) socio-political commitments involved in the management of public assets. Such a circumstance forces public and private actors engaged in the construction of residential habitat to minimize as much as possible the necessary requirements intended to ensure living conditions, although they might be precarious, both at the interior family level and neighborhood level. This situation becomes critical when those involved in the planning and/or design of social housing, who are motivated almost exclusively by the desire of increasing the number of housing units, reduce the restricted levels below minimum acceptable standards, thus crossing the pathological threshold of habitability. This decision entails the sacrifice of the adequate living standards required by every human being to attain a decent life and a positive attitude and behavior within the context of civic life.
Such a civic life is not subject to the negative emotions that reverse the family paradigm, which is seen as a place of refuge and understanding and the space where emotions and moods are restored through affectionate relationships at an intimate and safe level. In this sense human beings may emerge emboldened to face public life through positive behavior and civic and collective contribution.
The above is somewhat difficult to achieve in the social construction of residential habitat, where habitability levels stand below acceptable standards and become destructive satisfiers2 within the context of the needs and residential expectations of households. This routinized situation stigmatizes the concept of “social housing”, where nobody is in any doubt about the architectural incompleteness and insufficient dimensional standards of dwellings which, in turn, are precarious, diffuse and poor in material terms. The latter implies uncertainty about tenure security and restrictions in relation to the regular use of housing units.
It is unfortunate to see in certain cases the error in increasing the number of housing units, to meet the needs of as many applicants as possible, by sacrificing quality. In this way the principles underlying public housing measures and the achievement of a better quality of life for those in need are forgotten and distorted.
The act of inhabiting demands multiple satisfiers, especially in deprived sectors, where the need to earn extra income becomes an essential condition for the financial sustainability of households. In this sense the spatial flexibility offered by the housing structure facilitates the adaptation of these units to the different needs of dwellers.
The paper co-authored by Barreto, Benitez and Puntel is properly oriented towards the above issue, which, despite being known as survival skills, offers favorable habitability options for families living under poor socioeconomic conditions. The study of the cases offered by this research is a representation of real-life examples of residential modification recorded during fieldwork, thus becoming a contribution that satisfactorily meets the needs of these forms of living. According to the authors of this study, a social housing unit with attributes capable of sustaining life facilitates the existence of households in need of a productive habitat. We suggest not only reading, but conducting an analytical study of this case in order to understand the realities described by this research.
In view of the diversity and complexity of the social housing issue, it is useful to review some old and successful modalities that became extinct as the result of the evolutionary dynamic of this phenomenon. However, it is surprising to see how past measures evolved into success and recognition due to their management, design or the provision of proper living conditions.
For the sake of the current situation there is a need to conduct retrospective studies and identify and record past successes. They will be useful both for the recognition of the creative proliferation on this topic and the contribution of historical data, which provides a better understanding of the life conditions of societies and families living under past socio-political circumstances.
In the same vein as Alfonso Raposo —who conducted valuable research focused on the Housing Corporation3 and its key impact on the Chilean housing system— this issue of Revista INVI offers two papers centered on the public agencies of two Latin American countries: the National Institute of Savings and Housing (INAV) (Cuba), written by Muñoz and Gonzalez and the Land Loans Institute (ICT) (Colombia), co-authored by Goossens and Gomez. The first of these entities introduced important architectonic innovations within the context of spatial habitat and cluster systems over 1959-1962, thus achieving a residential environment that invited dwellers to use the space through pathways and contemplation. Likewise, the ICT —whose production reached its peak during the 1964-1973 period, especially in the field of the organizational structure of housing developments— promoted fluent relationships between housing units and public spaces and lifted some restrictions in the design of dwellings.
On the other hand, the paper written by Vieyra and Garibay focuses on the experiences of dwellers when it comes to inhabiting a new housing unit and the relationships that emerge among neighbors in relation to the use of public spaces; in this sense it is interesting to know the accounts provided by the protagonists of these experiences. It is also worth noting that these narratives are collected from primary sources, that is, from the subjects who are directly affected by housing measures.
These narratives provide some important impressions that should be considered within the context of the architectonic design of residential habitat, especially when taking into account that they refer to the proper use of building techniques. These methods are the result of the authentic, deep and motivating impressions of dwellers and are not drawn by the consultations, questions and enquiries made by the interviewer, who expects a specific and satisfactory answer and does not pay attention to what dwellers want to really explain; in this sense answers are intervened and non-spontaneous.
This issue of Revista INVI also includes a study conducted by Ivana Socoloff, which is centered on the funding of shopping centers in Buenos Aires, Argentina. This contribution reveals an interesting aspect of this phenomenon through the analysis of the concentration of wealth and serves as a complement to other papers that refer to these spaces as the expression of globalization and capital flow and criticize the type of sociability and urbanity they generate. In this sense, and considering that this phenomenon is not restricted to the residential sphere, this research provides insights into the allocation of funds that allow the emergence of these new expressions of the free market system and financial globalization, which are fatally undermining traditional supply chains at neighborhood level.
Following on from this issue of Revista INVI also offers the opinion Sonia Elizabeth Jimenez, who draws up a global balance of the country by using statistical data obtained from the 2001 and 2012 censuses conducted in Bolivia.
There is also a bibliographic review written by Dr. Silverio Hernandez Moreno of “Housing Density” —co-authored by Maria Weizig and Gerhard Steixner. Here, Dr. Moreno identifies two essential parts: while the first one is centered on interviews with two Austrian architects famous for their theories and projects on social housing conducted and materialized after WWII, the second part focuses on a series of projects developed by students engaged in the areas of structure and modularity, the use of terraces and open spaces, the intervention of common areas, the interior design of housing with the inclusion of flexible amenities and sustainability. There are also references to the passive use of solar energy, the coordination with local regulations, the prioritization given to the pedestrian nature of housing developments, the harmonization with the urban essence of the city and the rationalization in the use of urban land. The author of this review highlights that interviews are the central element of the book and the references to projects are only intended to reveal the opinion of these two architects about the most important aspects of that time.
While it is true that the retrospective view to the past brings along important lessons that should be considered within the context of social housing, there exist however current perspectives that are essential for the improvement and adaptation of this dynamic and changing process. Such a process is the result of other evolutionary actions experienced by society, which are always moving since human life is involved in an ongoing dynamic process.
If this process expresses the characteristics of human nature and its idiosyncrasy and identity, intervention in the field of social housing may continue forever. Such an intervention should constantly be adapted and kept up with the evolution of society at a global scale, on the understanding that breakthroughs in media communications have spread across the planet and the information and international influence surround us as soon as they unfold.
Notes
2Max Neef, et al., 1986.
3Raposo, 1999.
Bibliografía
MAX NEEF, Manfred, et al. Desarrollo a escala humana: una opción para el futuro. Suecia, Dag Hammarskjöld, 1986.
RAPOSO, Alfonso. La vivienda social de la CORVI. Otro patrimonio. Revista INVI. 14(37): 41-73, agosto 1999. ISSN 0716-5668.