Topic: Housing

A man and woman stand on the porch of a manufactured home. The home is light blue with white trim and a peaked roof. Two large bushes stand in the foreground.

Manufactured Housing at a Crossroads

By Daniel Janzow, October 17, 2025

This fall in Atlanta, policymakers, lenders, and practitioners gathered with housing advocates, homeowners, developers, and researchers for the twentieth anniversary of the Innovations in Manufactured Housing (I’m HOME) Network conference. What began two decades ago as an experiment in reframing manufactured housing—from a problem to be eliminated into a solution to be scaled—has matured into one of the most diverse and influential gatherings in the housing field. The conference reflected how far manufactured housing has come and set the stage for the immense work that needs to be done to address the affordability crisis in the housing sector.

After days of critical discussion on concrete steps that can be taken to advance affordable and attainable housing solutions through off-site built housing, one resounding message emerged: manufactured housing is “just housing.” While it has long been stigmatized, 22 million people in the United States live in manufactured housing, and it now stands at the center of conversations about how to address the nation’s affordability crisis. However, policy and regulatory barriers to greater usage, often rooted in outdated myths, remain.  

Owners of manufactured homes spoke candidly about the challenges of converting titles from personal property—a category often used for manufactured housing that is more akin to a vehicle than a house—to real estate, a bureaucratic hurdle that locks too many into costly, less-protected financing. Advocates highlighted how community loan funds in places like New Hampshire have created a path to mortgages and loans for home improvement, leading to housing and community stability. Researchers pointed out that as real estate market assessments have climbed, manufactured homeowners face the same tax pressures as their site-built neighbors—a reminder that manufactured housing owners are navigating the same housing market, only with fewer protections and options. 

What is clear, participants agreed, is that the value proposition of manufactured housing has never been stronger. Manufactured housing remains one of the few naturally occurring sources of affordable housing. The homes themselves have changed: new models are more energy efficient, climate resilient, and designed with the same durability as their traditional counterparts. Manufactured homes are capable of being produced at a cost that site-built homes cannot match. According to the US Census Bureau manufactured homes can be built for a fraction of the cost of site-built homes, about $85 per square foot compared to $167, offering 30–50 percent savings and making them one of the most efficient sources of unsubsidized affordable housing in the country. Community preservation strategies such as Right of First Refusal laws have showed that resident ownership of mobile home communities can stabilize neighborhoods and protect affordability, while new financing products from Fannie Mae and others point toward more inclusive mortgage markets. 

The Urban Institute has documented the wealth-building potential of manufactured homes when titled as real estate, while Pew Charitable Trusts has shed light on the risks facing the half-million families who turn to contracts for deed or rent-to-own arrangements, often without the consumer protections that mortgages provide. Both research and the lived experience converge to show that manufactured housing works, but its promise will only be realized with more consistent policy and financing support. 

As our future Manufactured Housing Industry Benchmark will show, six manufactured housing factories closed in 2024, even as demand for homes grew. Production must expand just as preservation efforts intensify, and financing must adapt to reach buyers who are otherwise steered into predatory alternatives. Off-site housing has always been about more than homes; it is about gentle density, resilient communities, and a pathway into ownership. Given the urgency of the affordability crisis, the time has come for the broader housing field to embrace manufactured housing as a cornerstone rather than a sideline. 

No Time Like the Present 

Momentum is building in Washington. The recently introduced Bipartisan Road to Housing Act reflects a new federal willingness to consider factory-built housing as part of the affordability solution. Provisions in that bill that would streamline environmental reviews, encourage local zoning reforms, and develop model codes all point toward easier entry for manufactured homes in places where they are desperately needed. The bill could also unlock new financing streams, though gaps remain, notably the absence of any mention of CDFIs, which have proven to be vital intermediaries in serving lower-income buyers. Even as federal policy opens doors, participants in Atlanta underscored that the real work still happens locally. Zoning ordinances, community acceptance, and financing practices at the ground level will determine whether manufactured housing expands or stalls. 

Looking ahead, off-site construction is poised to play an important role. Modular homes—which also begin in factories, but are not built on a chassis like manufactured homes—can meet missing-middle demand, provide urban infill solutions, and normalize factory-built housing for policymakers and consumers alike. For the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, which has long invested in the innovations that make manufactured housing a viable part of the affordable housing ecosystem, the next step is clear: modular housing must be part of the I’m HOME Network. By linking modular with manufactured, the field can move beyond old distinctions and work toward a shared goal: housing that is affordable, resilient, and accessible to all. 

The story of manufactured housing has always been one of persistence against stigma, financing gaps, and policy neglect. But the I’m HOME 2025 conference showed that it is also a story of resilience, innovation, and community. With the right mix of research, policy change, and coalition building, the next twenty years can ensure that manufactured and modular housing are recognized as central pillars of the American housing system. 


Daniel Janzow is a policy analyst at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

Lead image: Manufactured home owners in Vancouver, Washington. Credit: timnewman via E+/Getty Images.

Requests for Proposals

Building for the Future: Research on Modernizing Building Codes to Advance Housing Affordability and Climate Resilience

Submission Deadline: November 5, 2025 at 11:59 PM

Building codes and standards are critical levers for shaping housing supply, safety, and resilience. Yet they remain less studied than other land use and housing policies.

The Lincoln Institute invites proposals for applied research on how modernizing, aligning, and improving the adoption and enforcement of building codes and standards can address two of the nation’s most pressing challenges: the shortage of affordable housing and the growing risks of climate change and natural hazards. We seek research that examines how codes and standards influence housing supply, quality, and affordability; resilience to climate-related risks; governance and enforcement; and equity for vulnerable communities. This request for proposals (RFP) will support short-term projects that produce actionable evidence for policymakers, practitioners, and advocates. Awards will range from $20,000 to $50,000 for one year.

This RFP is open to researchers and research teams based at universities or nonprofit organizations, including think tanks and advocacy organizations. The application form will open on October 8, 2025, and the deadline to submit a proposal is November 5, 2025, 11:59 p.m., ET.  Awards will be announced by December 3, 2025, via email.


Details

Submission Deadline
November 5, 2025 at 11:59 PM

Keywords

Housing

A inspiração fiscal que vem de São Paulo

Por Jon Gorey, August 2, 2025

Em São Paulo, encravado entre arranha-céus de escritórios, lojas de luxo e hotéis sofisticados do bairro Vila Olímpia, está um conjunto habitacional de interesse social com 272 unidades. Construído no local da antiga favela Coliseu, o edifício de condomínio residencial não é apenas um novo e mais seguro lar para centenas de famílias de baixa renda que viveram na ocupação informal por décadas, enfrentando incêndios, enchentes e ratos. Segundo os defensores, essa iniciativa prova que o investimento em um bairro não precisa causar o deslocamento de seus moradores e que é possível construir moradias populares mesmo nas áreas mais valorizadas de uma cidade.

Em março, o Lincoln Institute of Land Policy convidou um grupo diverso de pesquisadores e profissionais de diferentes países para participar de uma excursão de estudo de quatro dias junto a membros da sua equipe. Combinando aulas teóricas e visitas a campo, o estudo permitiu que os participantes conhecessem de perto esse exemplo bem conhecido de captura do valor da terra. Também conhecida como retorno do valor da terra, a captura do valor da terra diz respeito a um conjunto de políticas que permite à comunidade recuperar e reinvestir o aumento do valor da terra decorrente de investimentos públicos ou outras ações governamentais, como a construção de uma nova estação de transporte ou mudanças nas normas de zoneamento.

“Em São Paulo, temos pelo menos dois exemplos importantes de favelas que foram melhoradas em áreas em que o valor da terra é muito alto”, explica Paulo Sandroni, economista que desenvolveu o curso junto com a urbanista Camila Maleronka. “Nossa ideia foi explicar e apresentar às pessoas os instrumentos que utilizamos, primeiro, para capturar o incremento do valor da terra, e segundo, para manter as pessoas que viviam nas favelas no mesmo lugar em que estavam, mas agora em apartamentos muito bons”.

O processo funciona assim: a cidade escolhe uma área para receber alguma intervenção pública como parte de uma “Operação Urbana”. Incorporadores que desejam construir edificações maiores do que o permitido naquela zona podem comprar Certificados de Potencial Adicional de Construção, ou CEPACs, que são vendidos na bolsa de valores, o que significa que o setor privado acaba definindo seu preço. A receita gerada com esses leilões de CEPACs financia obras públicas e habitação social no mesmo bairro.

Mas o fato de ser possível capturar e reinvestir o aumento do valor da terra em habitação social não significa que isso aconteça automaticamente, especialmente em bairros de alto valor imobiliário. “A comunidade do Coliseu teve que lutar contra muitas adversidades e diversas forças de incorporadores e vizinhos que não queriam que eles permanecessem ali, incluindo algumas pessoas da própria administração”, diz Sandroni. “Mas as lideranças desse movimento disseram: ‘Temos o direito de estar aqui. A legislação nos deu as ferramentas para permanecermos aqui, e há recursos para construir esses prédios’. Foi um exemplo maravilhoso de desenvolvimento urbano inclusivo”.

Moradora do Coliseu com a chave da sua casa nova. Crédito: Marcelo Pereira/SECOM via Cidade de São Paulo.

As ferramentas de captura de valor em São Paulo já foram tema de muitos estudos de caso, mas ver os resultados de perto, no local, ajudou a dar vida ao conceito para muitos dos participantes, vindos de organizações como a Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Econômico (OECD), o Banco Europeu para a Reconstrução e o Desenvolvimento (BERD) e o Centre for Affordable Housing Finance in Africa, entre outros.

“Fiquei realmente impressionada com o que vi em São Paul”, disse Line Algoed, antropóloga urbana da Vrije Universiteit Brussel. “Eu conhecia o conceito de captura do valor da terra, mas nunca tinha visto os resultados pessoalmente. Eu não conhecia os CEPACs nem os outros instrumentos usados em São Paulo. Isso coloca a cidade na vanguarda do urbanismo inovado”.

Os resultados em São Paulo não foram perfeitos, acrescentou Algoed, “mas é muito positivo ver que o governo local está tentando mitigar as consequências da especulação imobiliária desenfreada”.

Hiro Ito participou do curso movido pela curiosidade sobre mecanismos financeiros que possam ajudar as cidades a financiarem infraestruturas voltadas ao enfrentamento das mudanças climáticas. Ito é gerente de programa do Green City Action Plan do BERD, onde trabalha com governos municipais para identificar investimentos e políticas capazes de prepará-los para desafios ambientais e para as mudanças climáticas. “Já desenvolvemos planos de ação com 47 cidades”, disse Ito. “Mas muitas dessas ações, especialmente as relacionadas à natureza ou à adaptação climática, acabam não sendo implementadas”, muitas vezes por falta de financiamento.

“Soluções baseadas na natureza, proteção contra enchentes, mitigação do efeito de ilha de calor urbana, esses projetos, tradicionalmente, não geram receita”, explicou Ito. “Espero que esse tipo de ferramenta seja uma nova forma de fortalecer as finanças municipais para que cidades ao redor do mundo possam fazer muito mais nesses espaços”.

Durante uma caminhada que incluiu tanto o edifício Coliseu quanto a icônica ponte Octavio Frias de Oliveira, Ito ficou impressionado com a escala e o alcance dos investimentos da cidade e se perguntou se uma ferramenta de captura do valor da terra semelhante poderia funcionar em Ancara, na Turquia, onde o BERD está ajudando a financiar a construção de uma nova linha de metrô. Logo após a viagem, Ito e seus colegas começaram a estudar “como poderíamos, potencialmente, implementar um instrumento de financiamento baseado na terra para a Prefeitura Metropolitana de Ancar”, disse ele, já que há diversos terrenos públicos nas proximidades que poderiam ser desenvolvidos. “Será que poderíamos introduzir mecanismos como os CEPACs para arrecadar recursos a partir desse processo de reurbanização? No fim das contas, o objetivo é cobrir os custos das extensões do metrô, mas esses espaços de regeneração urbana também poderiam incorporar benefícios sociais e ambientais”.

Participantes da excursão de estudo do Lincoln Institute em São Paulo ouvem a líder comunitária do Coliseu, Rosana Maria dos Santos. Crédito: Lincoln Institute.

Ito valorizou o fato de os instrutores do curso, Sandroni e Maleronka, também terem apresentado as limitações, fragilidades e desafios da abordagem adotada em São Paulo. Ele reconhece que o sucesso de uma iniciativa semelhante depende de certas condições.

“Estamos testando isso na Turquia, porque a população urbana está crescendo, então há uma forte demanda por mais moradias e faz sentido para alguns incorporadores comprarem direitos adicionais”, disse Ito. “Mas nem todos os países em que o BERD atua têm essa mesma tendência demográfica”, ele acrescentou, observando que os mercados imobiliários de cidades menores da Bulgária ou da Romênia, por exemplo, podem não ser fortes o suficiente para sustentar um modelo de financiamento baseado na valorização da terra. “Mas gostamos muito da ideia de uma abordagem baseada no mercado para definir o preço… Acho que foi uma forma muito inteligente de aproveitar ao máximo o espaço”.

O que mais marcou Kecia Rust, fundadora e diretora executiva do Centre for Affordable Housing Finance in Africa, foi a ideia de que o direito de construir no espaço aéreo é um bem público.

“A abordagem geral que tornou possível o investimento no Coliseu e em outros projetos de habitação social, assim como a entrega da icônica ponte de São Paulo, do monotrilho, das vias, ciclovias e de outras obras públicas, é oriunda de uma filosofia fundamental de que o direito à propriedade privada pode se estender em termos de longitude e latitude, mas não em altura”, escreveu Rust em uma postagem no blog refletindo sobre o curso. “Os direitos de construir no espaço aéreo são um bem público, que o setor público vende para gerar receita e investir em obras públicas e habitação social”, continuou ela. “A cidade não precisa se endividar quando investe na construção de vias, pontes e moradias sociais”.

“Acho que o grande desafio que enfrentamos no contexto africano é que não temos, de fato, os dados nem a capacidade de gestão no nível das cidades locais para fazer algo da magnitude do que vimos sendo feito em São Paulo”, disse Rust. “Mas o que vi e compreendi foi muito inspirador”.

Vários membros da equipe do Lincoln Institute também participaram do curso. Muitos deles, fora da equipe da América Latina, nunca haviam tido a oportunidade de ver presencialmente esse importante exemplo global de captura do valor da terra. “Essa ideia de desenvolvimento sem deslocamento, de como proteger ou reduzir os riscos de remoção forçada quando se investe em comunidades, esse é um tema central em muito do que fazemos no instituto”, diz Enrique Silva, diretor de programas do Lincoln Institute. Silva fez questão de convidar integrantes de diferentes áreas da organização: “Essa ideia de aprender juntos, de compartilhar, aprender e trocar experiências, é algo que eu adoraria ver acontecer com mais frequência”.


Jon Gorey é redator da equipe do Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 

Imagem principal: O conjunto habitacional social Coliseu, com 272 unidades, cercado pelos prédios mais altos do bairro Vila Olímpia em São Paulo, é um exemplo de captura do valor da terra. Crédito: Cidade de São Paulo.

Coming to Terms with Density: An Urban Planning Concept in the Spotlight 

September 15, 2025

By Anthony Flint, September 15, 2025
 

It’s an urban planning concept that sounds extra wonky, but it is critical in any discussion of affordable housing, land use, and real estate development: density.

In this episode of the Land Matters podcast, two practitioners in architecture and urban design shed some light on what density is all about, on the ground, in cities and towns trying to add more housing supply. 

The occasion is the revival of a Lincoln Institute resource called Visualizing Density, which was pushed live this month at lincolninst.edu after extensive renovations and updates. It’s a visual guide to density based on a library of aerial images of buildings, blocks, and neighborhoods taken by photographer Alex Maclean, originally published (and still available) as a book by Julie Campoli. 

It’s a very timely clearinghouse, as communities across the country work to address affordable housing, primarily by reforming zoning and land use regulations to allow more multifamily housing development—generally less pricey than the detached single-family homes that have dominated the landscape. 

Residential density is understood to be the number of homes within a defined area of land, in the US most often expressed as dwelling units per acre. A typical suburban single-family subdivision might be just two units per acre; a more urban neighborhood, like Boston’s Back Bay, has a density of about 60 units per acre. 

Demographic trends suggest that future homeowners and renters will prefer greater density in the form of multifamily housing and mixed-use development, said David Dixon, a vice president at Stantec, a global professional services firm providing sustainable engineering, architecture, and environmental consulting services. Over the next 20 years, the vast majority of households will continue to be professionals without kids, he said, and will not be interested in big detached single-family homes.  

Instead they seek “places to walk to, places to find amenity, places to run into friends, places to enjoy community,” he said. “The number one correlation that you find for folks under the age of 35, which is when most of us move for a job, is not wanting to be auto-dependent. They are flocking to the same mixed-use, walkable, higher-density, amenitized, community-rich places that the housing market wants to build … Demand and imperative have come together. It’s a perfect storm to support density going forward.” 

Tensions often arise, however, when new, higher density is proposed for existing neighborhoods, on vacant lots or other redevelopment sites. Tim Love, principal and founder of the architecture firm Utile, and a professor at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design, said he’s seen the wariness from established residents as he helps cities and towns comply with the MBTA Communities Act, a Massachusetts state law that requires districts near transit stations with an allowable density of 15 units per acre. 

Some towns have rebelled against the law, which is one of several state zoning reform initiatives across the US designed to increase housing supply, ultimately to help bring prices down. 

Many neighbors are skeptical because they associate multifamily density with large apartment buildings of 100 or 200 units, Love said. But most don’t realize there is an array of so-called “gentle density” development opportunities for buildings of 12 to 20 units, that have the potential to blend in more seamlessly with many streetscapes. 

“If we look at the logic of the real estate market, discovering over the last 15, 20 years that the corridor-accessed apartment building at 120 and 200 units-plus optimizes the building code to maximize returns, there is a smaller ‘missing middle’ type that I’ve become maybe a little bit obsessed about, which is the 12-unit single-stair building,” said Love, who conducted a geospatial analysis that revealed 5,000 sites in the Boston area that were perfect for a 12-unit building. 

“Five thousand times twelve is a lot of housing,” Love said. “If we came up with 5,000 sites within walking distance of a transit stop, that’s a pretty good story to get out and a good place to start.” 

Another dilemma of density is that while big increases in multifamily housing supply theoretically should have a downward impact on prices, many individual dense development projects in hot housing markets are often quite expensive. Dixon, who is currently writing a book about density and Main Streets, said the way to combat gentrification associated with density is to require a portion of units to be affordable, and to capture increases in the value of urban land to create more affordability. 

“If we have policies in place so that value doesn’t all go to the [owners of the] underlying land and we can tap those premiums, that is a way to finance affordable housing,” he said. “In other words, when we use density to create places that are more valuable because they can be walkable, mixed-use, lively, community-rich, amenitized, all these good things, we … owe it to ourselves to tap some of that value to create affordability so that everybody can live there.” 

Visualizing Density can be found at the Lincoln Institute website at https://www.lincolninst.edu/data/visualizing-density/. 

Listen to the show here or subscribe to Land Matters on  Apple Podcasts, Spotify,  Stitcher, YouTube, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

 


Further reading 

Visualizing Density | Lincoln Institute

What Does 15 Units Per Acre Look Like? A StoryMap Exploring Street-Level Density | Land Lines

Why We Need Walkable Density for Cities to Thrive | Public Square

The Density Conundrum: Bringing the 15-Minute City to Texas | Urban Land

The Density Dilemma: Appeal and Obstacles for Compact and Transit Oriented Development | Anthony Flint

 


Anthony Flint is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, host of the Land Matters podcast, and a contributing editor of Land Lines. 

Photo of the exterior of a row of buildings on a street in the Back Bay neighborhood of Boston.

Lincoln Institute Unveils Updated Visualizing Density Database

By Kristina McGeehan, September 16, 2025

The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy launched an updated iteration of Visualizing Density, a database containing hundreds of aerial photographs of neighborhoods each measured by housing density in units per acre. Intended for planners, designers, public officials, policymakers, practitioners, journalists, and citizens, the tool helps communities manage misperceptions about density as they consider residential development. By illustrating, for example, what four units per acre looks like, compared to greater or lesser concentrations of housing, the tool helps users envision more realistically how different degrees of density will fit into the context of their cities and towns. 

As communities across the country work to address affordable housing, a common tactic has been to reform local zoning to allow more multi-family housing development, particularly at infill locations and near transit. That increase in housing supply, including four-plexes or so-called “missing middle” complexes of 20 units per acre or more, is by definition more dense than the single-family homes that have dominated the landscape. The public understanding of greater density in this context has become a central flashpoint in the effort to create more affordable housing.

CAMBRIDGE, MA – Despite wariness by established neighborhood residents, higher density development that is well-designed can fit in with the character of many neighborhoods, and has been the historic development pattern in many places for more than a century, the website shows. Visualizing Density also explains how higher density can improve the health of communities by saving land, conserving energy, and decreasing costs. 

“Visualizing Density is an extremely helpful tool to inform planning development for a community, especially with the intention of improving affordability,” said George W. McCarthy, president and CEO of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 

The database includes links to relevant resources, including interactive storymaps, case studies, and articles, as well as a link to the 2007 book Visualizing Density by Julie Campoli and Alex MacLean, which this subcenter was originally based upon.

Explore the Visualizing Density database.

Course

Gestión del Suelo para la Vivienda Social Integrada

October 27, 2025 - December 14, 2025

Online

Offered in Spanish


El curso aborda un problema compartido por muchas ciudades: la separación de los más pobres en barrios alejados y con menos oportunidades frente al cual hay alternativas de política pública. Comprenderemos la segregación, los factores que la causan, sus efectos nocivos y las oportunidades que ofrecen las políticas de suelo para la vivienda social integrada. Exploraremos ideas comunes pero equivocadas, tales como pensar que solo la vivienda formal merece atención, o creer que mezclar distintos grupos sociales siempre desvaloriza las propiedades. También conoceremos como los ciudadanos, empresas y gobierno pueden participar en políticas de vivienda qué promuevan la integración social a través de ejemplos de diversos países y locales.

Relevancia:

Las políticas tradicionales de vivienda social restan importancia a la segregación y privilegian exclusivamente el acceso a la vivienda formal. Sin embargo, la segregación espacial reduce las oportunidades de familias y grupos vulnerables, y suele agravar problemas sociales como la violencia, la deserción escolar y el tráfico de drogas. Una buena localización trae oportunidades, mientras que una mala conlleva obstáculos. Ambas suelen ser el resultado de distintas acciones y políticas públicas, por lo que estudiar y conocer la importancia que tiene una localización no segregada puede ser crucial para mejorar las políticas de suelo y de vivienda social.

La fecha límite para postular es el 12 de octubre de 2025.

Ver detalles de la convocatoria.


Details

Date
October 27, 2025 - December 14, 2025
Application Deadline
October 12, 2025 at 11:59 PM
Location
Online
Language
Spanish

Keywords

Housing, Inequality, Poverty

Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and Land Trust Alliance Present Hudson Valley’s Steve Rosenberg with Kingsbury Browne Distinguished Practitioner Award

By Corey Himrod, September 8, 2025

CLEVELAND, OH – The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Land Trust Alliance are pleased to announce that Steve Rosenberg has been presented with the 2025 Kingsbury Browne Distinguished Practitioner Award at the Alliance’s annual national land conservation conference, held this year in Cleveland, Ohio.

The Kingsbury Browne Distinguished Practitioner award—named for Kingsbury Browne, a lawyer and conservationist who was a Lincoln Institute Fellow in 1980 and inspired the Alliance’s founding in 1982—is presented annually and honors those who have enriched the conservation community through their outstanding leadership, innovation, and creativity in land conservation. Rosenberg will serve as the Kingsbury Browne distinguished practitioner for the Lincoln Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, for 2025–2026.

Rosenberg is currently the co-convener of the Hudson Valley Alliance for Housing and Conservation, which brings together organizations to strengthen biodiversity and climate resilience in New York’s Hudson Valley while creating affordable places where people can live. His work there follows more than three decades as the senior vice president of Scenic Hudson and the executive director of the Scenic Hudson Land Trust, where he led many efforts bringing land, equity, and conservation together at the regional scale, including authoring the NYC/Hudson Valley Foodshed Conservation Plan, launching Scenic Hudson’s River Cities Program, and transforming postindustrial Hudson River waterfronts into inviting public places. Rosenberg served on the board of the Land Trust Alliance for nine years.

“Steve has been a driving force in putting conservation to work for communities—safeguarding local food systems, expanding land access, and advancing economic opportunity,” said Chandni Navalkha, director of conservation and stewardship at the Lincoln Institute. “His leadership in uniting the land conservation and affordable housing sectors in the Hudson Valley sets a powerful example for collaborative solutions that benefit people and places, nationwide and beyond.”

“I have witnessed firsthand Steve’s passion and tireless dedication to land conservation and the mutually reinforcing benefits to people and communities,” said Ashley Demosthenes, CEO of the Land Trust Alliance. “The acreage protected and parks that were created during his tenure at Scenic Hudson are tremendous assets for communities and the entire Hudson Valley. And his bringing together of the affordable housing community and the land preservation community has made it possible to address critical community issues in new and collaborative ways. It is my honor to recognize Steve Rosenberg as the recipient of the 2025 Kingsbury Brown Distinguished Practitioner award.”

About the Land Trust Alliance

Founded in 1982, the Land Trust Alliance is a national land conservation organization working to save the places people need and love by empowering and mobilizing land trusts in communities across America to conserve land for the benefit of all. The Alliance represents approximately 1,000 member land trusts and affiliates supported by more than 250,000 volunteers and 6.3 million members nationwide. The Alliance is based in Washington DC, with staff in communities across the United States.

About the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy 

The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy seeks to improve quality of life through the effective use, taxation, and stewardship of land. A nonprofit private operating foundation whose origins date to 1946, the Lincoln Institute researches and recommends creative approaches to land as a solution to economic, social, and environmental challenges. Through education, training, publications and events, we integrate theory and practice to inform public policy decisions worldwide.

Lead image: Steve Rosenberg (center) accepts the Kingsbury Browne award alongside Land Trust Alliance CEO Ashley Demosthenes (right) and board chair David Calle (left). Credit: DJ Glisson II/Firefly Imageworks.

Inspiración fiscal en São Paulo

Por Jon Gorey, August 2, 2025

En São Paulo, Brasil, entre rascacielos corporativos, tiendas de lujo y hoteles de alta gama del barrio Vila Olímpia, se encuentra un complejo de viviendas de interés social de 272 unidades. Construido en el terreno de la antigua favela Coliseu, el altísimo edificio de condominios no es solo un hogar nuevo y más seguro para cientos de familias de bajos ingresos que vivieron en el asentamiento informal durante décadas, en medio de incendios, inundaciones y ratas. También es, según sus promotores, una prueba de que la inversión en un vecindario no necesariamente significa el desplazamiento de los residentes, y de que las viviendas de interés social se pueden construir incluso en la zona más cara de una ciudad.

En marzo, el Instituto Lincoln de Políticas de Suelo invitó a un grupo diverso de investigadores y profesionales de todo el mundo a participar en un viaje de estudio de cuatro días junto con algunos miembros del personal del instituto. El viaje de estudio, que combinó sesiones en el aula con visitas de campo, permitió a los participantes explorar de primera mano este reconocido ejemplo de recuperación de plusvalías. También llamada captación de la plusvalía, la recuperación de plusvalías se refiere a un conjunto de políticas que le permiten a una comunidad recuperar y reinvertir las plusvalías del suelo generadas por la inversión pública u otras acciones gubernamentales, como una nueva estación de transporte o un cambio en los requisitos de zonificación.

“En São Paulo, tenemos al menos dos buenos ejemplos de asentamientos informales que se mejoraron en lugares donde el suelo es muy caro”, explica Paulo Sandroni, un economista que desarrolló el curso en conjunto con la urbanista Camila Maleronka. “Tuvimos la idea de presentarles y explicarles a los demás los instrumentos que usamos; primero, para recuperar las plusvalías, y, segundo, para garantizar que las personas de asentamientos informales sigan viviendo en el mismo lugar, pero ahora en cómodos apartamentos”.

El proceso funciona de la siguiente manera: La ciudad elige un área para realizar una intervención pública como parte de una “Operación Urbana”. Los emprendedores inmobiliarios que deseen construir estructuras más grandes de lo permitido en esa zona pueden comprar Certificados de Potencial Adicional de Construcción, o CEPAC, que se venden en el mercado público de valores. Por ende, es el sector privado quien determina el precio en última instancia. Los ingresos de esas subastas de CEPAC luego financian obras públicas y viviendas de interés social en el mismo vecindario.

Sin embargo, el hecho de que sea posible recuperar las plusvalías y reinvertirlas en viviendas de interés social no significa que suceda inevitablemente, en especial, en vecindarios caros. “La comunidad de Coliseu tuvo que luchar contra muchas adversidades y muchas fuerzas, ya sea de emprendedores inmobiliarios, de vecinos que no querían que se quedaran allí e incluso de algunos miembros del gobierno”, dice Sandroni. “Pero los líderes de este movimiento dijeron: ‘Tenemos derecho a estar aquí. La legislación nos dio las herramientas para quedarnos aquí, y hay dinero para construir estos edificios’. Fue un maravilloso ejemplo de desarrollo urbano inclusivo”.

Un retrato de una mujer que sostiene un llavero. El enfoque está en el llavero, que tiene un colgante metálico con forma de casa. Las palabras en el llavero están en portugués y la traducción es ‘Ciudad de São Paulo. Vivienda’.
Una residente de Coliseu con la llave de su nuevo hogar. Crédito: Marcelo Pereira/SECOM vía Ciudad de São Paulo.

Las herramientas de recuperación de plusvalías de São Paulo han sido el foco de muchos estudios de casos; pero ver los resultados en persona, in situ, ayudó a materializar el concepto para muchos participantes de organizaciones como la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE), el Banco Europeo de Reconstrucción y Desarrollo (BERD) y el Centro para el Financiamiento de Viviendas Asequibles en África, entre otros.

“Lo que vi en São Paulo me sorprendió mucho”, dice Line Algoed, una antropóloga urbana de la Vrije Universiteit Brussel. “Sabía sobre la recuperación de plusvalías, pero nunca había visto los resultados en persona. No sabía nada sobre los CEPAC y los otros instrumentos utilizados en São Paulo, que posicionan a esta ciudad como referente del urbanismo innovador”.

Los resultados en São Paulo no fueron perfectos, agrega Algoed, “pero es muy bueno ver que el gobierno local está tratando de mitigar las consecuencias de la especulación inmobiliaria desenfrenada”.

Hiro Ito se unió al curso interesado por los mecanismos financieros que podrían ayudar a las ciudades a pagar infraestructura climática. Ito es el gerente de programa del Plan de Acción para Ciudades Verdes del BERD, donde trabaja con gobiernos municipales para identificar inversiones y políticas que puedan ayudarlos a prepararse para desafíos ambientales y el cambio climático. “Hemos desarrollado planes de acción con 47 ciudades”, indica Ito. “Pero muchas de esas acciones, sobre todo las relacionadas con la naturaleza o la adaptación al clima, no se están implementando”, muchas veces por falta de fondos.

“Las soluciones basadas en la naturaleza, la protección contra inundaciones y la mitigación del efecto isla de calor urbano no son proyectos que usualmente generen ingresos”, explica Ito. “Esperamos que esta sea otra forma de fortalecer las finanzas municipales para que las ciudades de todo el mundo puedan aprovechar en mayor medida esos espacios”.

En un recorrido a pie que incluyó tanto el edificio Coliseu como el icónico puente Octavio Frias de Oliveira de São Paulo, Ito quedó impresionado con el alcance y la escala de las inversiones de la ciudad, y se preguntó si un método similar de recuperación de plusvalías podría funcionar en Ankara, Turquía, donde el BERD ayuda a financiar la construcción de una nueva línea de metro. Al regresar del viaje, Ito y sus colegas comenzaron a estudiar cómo implementar una herramienta de financiamiento con base en el suelo para la Municipalidad Metropolitana de Ankara, ya que hay varios terrenos de propiedad pública que podrían urbanizarse en la zona. “¿Podríamos introducir mecanismos como los CEPAC para recaudar a partir de esa reurbanización? En última instancia, es para cubrir el costo de las ampliaciones del metro, pero potencialmente las áreas de regeneración urbana podrían traer otros beneficios sociales y medioambientales”.

Rosana Maria dos Santos habla a un grupo de oyentes reunidos en un sendero de ladrillo al aire libre con árboles detrás de ellos.
Los participantes del viaje de estudio del Instituto Lincoln de São Paulo escuchan a la líder de la comunidad de Coliseu, Rosana Maria dos Santos. Crédito: Instituto Lincoln.

Ito valoró que los instructores del curso, Sandroni y Maleronka, también explicaran algunas de las deficiencias, limitaciones y desafíos del enfoque de São Paulo. Reconoce que alcanzar un éxito similar depende de ciertas condiciones.

“La idea de aplicar este método en Turquía surge porque la población urbana está creciendo y hay una fuerte demanda de viviendas adicionales. Tiene sentido para algunos emprendedores inmobiliarios comprar derechos adicionales”, dice Ito. “Pero no todos los países donde opera el BERD tienen una tendencia demográfica similar”, agrega, y señala que los mercados inmobiliarios de las ciudades más pequeñas de Bulgaria o Rumanía, por ejemplo, pueden no ser lo suficientemente fuertes como para sostener el financiamiento con base en el suelo. “Pero nos gustó mucho este enfoque basado en el mercado para determinar el precio… me pareció una forma muy inteligente de aprovechar al máximo el espacio”.

Lo que más llamó la atención de Kecia Rust, fundadora y directora ejecutiva del Centro para el Financiamiento de Viviendas Asequibles en África, fue la afirmación del Estado de que los derechos de aire son un bien público.

“El enfoque general que hizo que sean posibles Coliseu y otras inversiones en viviendas de interés social, así como también la entrega del icónico puente de São Paulo, el monorraíl, las carreteras, los carriles para bicicletas y otras inversiones en obras públicas proviene de una filosofía subyacente de que los derechos de propiedad privada pueden extenderse en términos de longitud y latitud, pero no en altura”, escribió Rust en una entrada de blog que reflexiona sobre el curso. “Los derechos de aire son un bien público, que el sector público vende para generar ingresos para invertir en obras públicas y viviendas de interés social”, continuó. “La ciudad no tiene que endeudarse cuando invierte en la construcción de carreteras, puentes y viviendas de interés social”.

“Creo que el desafío clave que enfrentamos en el contexto africano es que realmente no tenemos los datos o la capacidad de gestión a nivel local para llegar a hacer lo que se está haciendo en São Paulo”, dice Rust. “Pero lo que vi y entendí fue muy inspirador”.

Varios miembros del personal del Instituto Lincoln también se unieron al curso, muchos de los cuales, fuera del equipo de América Latina, nunca habían tenido la oportunidad de ver en persona este prominente ejemplo global de recuperación de plusvalías. “Esta idea de desarrollo sin desplazamiento, de cómo salvaguardar o reducir el riesgo de desplazamiento cuando se invierte en las comunidades, es un tema que está en primer plano en gran parte del trabajo que estamos realizando en el instituto”, dice Enrique Silva, director de programas del Instituto Lincoln. Silva invitó intencionalmente a miembros del personal de todos los sectores de la organización: “Esta idea de aprender juntos, compartir y aprender e intercambiar, es algo que me encantaría que sucediera con mayor frecuencia”.


Jon Gorey es redactor del Instituto Lincoln de Políticas de Suelo.

Imagen principal: El complejo de viviendas de interés social Coliseu, de 272 unidades, rodeado por los edificios más altos del distrito Vila Olímpia de São Paulo, es un ejemplo de recuperación de plusvalías.Crédito: Ciudad de São Paulo. 

Events

On Common Ground: Land Policy for Housing and Climate Solutions 

October 7, 2025 - October 9, 2025

Cambridge, MA

Offered in English

Cities across the US and the world are grappling with a compounding housing and climate crisis. On October 7–9, 2025, the Lincoln Institute will host a convening to build momentum and foster collaboration between a group of key housing and climate leaders who generally do not work together, but are especially influential on policy and land use reform at different levels of government. The discussion will focus on policy recommendations, collaboration, and opportunities for local, regional, and state action. At the convening, we will share the findings of our initial research, preview a working paper draft, and begin to build a collaborative community of housing and climate leaders who can support local, regional, and state action by helping governments access all levers at their disposal to address housing supply, resiliency and insurability, and climate change.

This event is by invitation only.


Details

Date
October 7, 2025 - October 9, 2025
Location
Cambridge, MA
Language
English

Keywords

Climate Mitigation, Housing