A falta de acesso a moradias dignas pode perpetuar desigualdades que persistem ao longo de gerações. E, nesse sentido, países de toda a América Latina e Caribe estão enfrentando crises habitacionais. No entanto, cada um enfrenta esses desafios de maneira única. Nas cidades que estão se urbanizando rapidamente, por exemplo, em que os custos de terrenos e da construção são altos, a demanda por moradias acessíveis supera a oferta. Em outros lugares, pode ser difícil ou caro demais para os compradores de imóveis obterem um financiamento habitacional.

Esses desafios relacionados, que se manifestam em contextos distintos, exigem soluções políticas únicas e bem elaboradas. E agora, um novo relatório que “harmoniza” dados habitacionais díspares de uma dúzia de países da América Latina coloca o panorama habitacional da região em uma perspectiva mais clara para os formuladores de políticas.

O 2024 LAC Housing Yearbook, uma colaboração entre o Lincoln Institute of Land Policy e o CAF (Banco de Desenvolvimento da América Latina e do Caribe) catalogou mais de 250 indicadores habitacionais e financeiros em 12 países (Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colômbia, Costa Rica, República Dominicana, Equador, El Salvador, México, Panamá, Peru e Uruguai) para permitir comparações entre os países da região. O relatório já está disponível em espanhol, com traduções para inglês e português em breve.

“Ao coletar e padronizar esse amplo conjunto de informações, o projeto busca preencher lacunas de conhecimento, permitir comparações entre países e apoiar a formulação de políticas eficientes e direcionadas que reduzam os déficits habitacionais, melhorem a acessibilidade e promovam o desenvolvimento sustentável”, afirmou Pablo López, coordenador executivo sênior de habitação no CAF.

“Os dados revelam realidades marcantes”, continuou López, cuja equipe apresentou o relatório inaugural à Assembleia Geral do Fórum de Ministros e Altas Autoridades em Habitação e Desenvolvimento Urbano da América Latina e do Caribe (MINURVI) em dezembro. “Os déficits habitacionais são significativos, a penetração de hipotecas continua baixa e a acessibilidade é constantemente prejudicada pelo aumento dos custos em um ritmo mais acelerado que o dos rendimentos.”

Os tipos de indicadores monitorados nos 12 países incluem taxas de inflação e de hipoteca, taxas de participação no mercado de trabalho formal e informal, custos de construção por metro quadrado, além de medidas quantitativas e qualitativas do déficit habitacional de um país, sendo que as primeiras se referem ao número de casas adicionais necessárias para atender à demanda, e as últimas contabilizam o número de famílias que vivem em moradias precárias. Além de um almanaque de informações estatísticas, o relatório inclui uma visão geral regional e perfis detalhados do mercado habitacional de cada país.

“É um projeto bastante ambicioso devido à ampla variedade de categorias de dados que ele tenta consolidar”, disse Luis Quintanilla, analista sênior de políticas do Lincoln Institute. A esperança é atualizar o anuário anualmente, o que permitirá comparações ano a ano, além de expandir a lista de países ao longo do tempo. “Achamos que é um recurso muito valioso”, acrescentou. ““Esperamos que seja útil para os ministros de habitação e secretários de desenvolvimento urbano, bem como para profissionais, desenvolvedores, instituições bancárias e financeiras e outros pesquisadores.”

Reunir alguns dos dados apresentou um “desafio formidável”, disse López, já que estavam dispersos em várias bases de dados públicas e privadas, exigindo uma meticulosa verificação cruzada, quando estavam disponíveis. Por exemplo, as informações sobre microfinanciamentos (pequenos empréstimos não hipotecários que as famílias podem usar para fazer melhorias graduais em suas casas) eram inconsistentes e fragmentadas. E números confiáveis sobre a produção de habitação informal e o acesso ao crédito para trabalhadores informais eram difíceis ou impossíveis de encontrar.

O processo também revelou algumas lacunas de informações que pesquisadores ou agências públicas poderiam abordar no futuro, bem como algumas ineficiências nos subsídios habitacionais. “Contrariamente à intuição, alguns mecanismos de apoio habitacional de países carecem de foco social, [o que faz com que] beneficiem grupos de maior renda, minando seus objetivos de equidade social”, explicou López.

Os países estudados não estão apenas enfrentando a crise habitacional de maneiras diferentes, mas também estão tomando medidas distintas para enfrentá-la. “Embora os países compartilhem desafios fundamentais relacionados à habitação, suas abordagens variam significativamente”, disse López. “A pesquisa revelou bolsões de inovação e progresso em toda a região—cada nação demonstrou pontos fortes únicos que oferecem insights para possíveis soluções.”

O Chile, por exemplo, desenvolveu um mercado hipotecário sofisticado “complementado por programas inovadores de subsídios para aluguel que abordam a acessibilidade habitacional de múltiplas perspectivas”, afirmou López. O Panamá pode se orgulhar de taxas de hipoteca relativamente baixas e de um mercado de crédito que alcança quase um quarto (23,1%) do PIB, “um feito notável em uma região muitas vezes caracterizada pela inclusão financeira limitada”, acrescentou. “Enquanto isso, o Equador e o Peru estão rompendo barreiras com instrumentos inovadores de financiamento verde, incluindo títulos verdes e hipotecas que demonstram uma abordagem progressista para o desenvolvimento sustentável da habitação.”

Ainda assim, os dados deixam claro que nenhum país solucionou de modo abrangente os desafios habitacionais, disse López. “Em vez disso, a região exibe um mosaico de inovações direcionadas, cada uma abordando dimensões específicas de um panorama habitacional complexo.”
Quintanilla espera que essa nova coleção de dados confiáveis e comparáveis ajude os formuladores de políticas a se conectarem e aprenderem uns com os outros. “Se algum país em particular encontrar um contexto semelhante, mas com resultados diferentes, esperamos que, ao destacar essas discrepâncias, seja possível gerar um intercâmbio de ideias e lições transferíveis”, afirmou.

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

Crédito da imagem principal: CAF – Banco de Desenvolvimento da América Latina e Caribe. 

La falta de acceso a una vivienda digna puede perpetuar la desigualdad que persiste de generación en generación. En ese sentido, países de toda América Latina y el Caribe tienen crisis de vivienda, pero cada uno se enfrenta a desafíos únicos. Por ejemplo, en las ciudades que se urbanizan rápidamente, donde los costos del terreno y la construcción son altos, la demanda de viviendas asequibles supera la oferta. En otros lugares, puede ser difícil o demasiado costoso para los compradores obtener una hipoteca.

Esos desafíos relacionados, que se dan en contextos distintos, exigen soluciones de políticas únicas y sensatas. Ahora, el panorama de la vivienda de la región es más claro para los gestores de políticas gracias a un nuevo informe en el que se “armonizan” datos dispares sobre la vivienda de una decena de países latinoamericanos.

En el Anuario de Vivienda de ALC de 2024, una colaboración entre el Instituto Lincoln de Políticas de Suelo y CAF (Banco de Desarrollo de América Latina y el Caribe), se catalogan más de 250 indicadores de vivienda y financieros en 12 países (Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, México, Panamá, Perú, República Dominicana y Uruguay) para propiciar comparaciones en toda la región. El informe ya está disponible en español, próximamente con traducciones al inglés y portugués.

“Al recopilar y estandarizar este amplio conjunto de información, el proyecto busca abordar las brechas de conocimiento, permitir hacer comparaciones entre países y apoyar la formulación de políticas eficientes y específicas que reduzcan los déficits de vivienda, mejoren la accesibilidad y promuevan el desarrollo sostenible”, explica Pablo López, coordinador ejecutivo sénior de vivienda de CAF.

“Los datos revelan realidades crudas”, continúa López, cuyo equipo presentó el informe inaugural a la Asamblea General del Foro de Ministros y Autoridades Máximas de la Vivienda y el Urbanismo de América Latina y el Caribe (MINURVI) en diciembre. “Los déficits de vivienda son significativos, la penetración hipotecaria sigue siendo baja y la asequibilidad se ve erosionada continuamente por el aumento de los costos a tasas más altas que los ingresos”.

Los tipos de indicadores analizados en los 12 países incluyen tasas de inflación e hipotecas, tasas de participación en el mercado laboral formal e informal, costos de construcción por metro cuadrado, y medidas cuantitativas y cualitativas del déficit de vivienda de un país (la primera se refiere al número de viviendas adicionales necesarias para satisfacer la demanda, mientras que la segunda indica el número de familias que viven en viviendas en malas condiciones). Además de un almanaque de información estadística, en el informe se incluye información general regional y perfiles detallados del negocio inmobiliario de cada país.

“Es un proyecto bastante ambicioso, debido a la amplia gama de categorías de datos que se intenta consolidar”, expresa Luis Quintanilla, analista sénior de políticas del Instituto Lincoln. La meta es actualizar el anuario cada año, lo que permitirá hacer comparaciones año tras año y ampliar la lista de países a lo largo del tiempo. “Creemos que es un recurso muy valioso”, agrega. “Esperamos que sea útil para los ministros de vivienda y los secretarios de desarrollo urbano, así como para los profesionales, los emprendedores inmobiliarios, las instituciones bancarias y financieras y otros investigadores”.

La recopilación de algunos de los datos presentó un “desafío formidable”, dice López, ya que estaban dispersos en varias bases de datos públicas y privadas y requerían referencias cruzadas verificadas, si es que estaban disponibles. Por ejemplo, la información sobre microfinanciación (pequeños préstamos no hipotecarios que las familias pueden utilizar para realizar mejoras graduales en sus hogares) era inconsistente y estaba fragmentada. Además, fue difícil o imposible encontrar cifras confiables sobre la fabricación de viviendas informales y el acceso al crédito para los trabajadores informales,

El proceso también reveló algunas brechas de información que los investigadores o los organismos públicos podrían abordar en el futuro, así como algunas ineficiencias en los subsidios de vivienda. “Contrario a la lógica, los mecanismos de apoyo a la vivienda de algunos países carecen de consideración social, [por lo que] benefician a los grupos de mayores ingresos y socavan sus objetivos de equidad social”, explica López.

Los países estudiados no solo están experimentando la crisis de la vivienda de diferentes maneras, sino que también están tomando distintas medidas para abordarla. “Si bien los países comparten desafíos fundamentales en materia de vivienda, sus enfoques varían de manera significativa”, dice López. “Según la investigación, existen focos de innovación y progreso en toda la región: cada nación demostró fortalezas únicas que ofrecen información valiosa sobre posibles soluciones”.

Por ejemplo, Chile ha desarrollado un sofisticado mercado hipotecario “complementado por programas innovadores de subsidios de alquiler que abordan la asequibilidad de la vivienda desde varios ángulos”, indica López. Panamá puede presumir tasas hipotecarias relativamente bajas y un mercado crediticio que alcanza casi una cuarta parte (23,1 %) del PIB, “un logro notable en una región que a menudo se caracteriza por una inclusión financiera limitada”, agrega. “Mientras tanto, Ecuador y Perú están ampliando los límites a través de instrumentos pioneros de financiamiento verde, incluidos bonos e hipotecas verdes innovadores que señalan un enfoque con visión de futuro para el desarrollo de viviendas sostenibles”.

Aun así, López explica que los datos dejan en claro que ningún país ha resuelto de manera integral sus desafíos de vivienda. “En cambio, la región demuestra una variedad de innovaciones específicas, cada una de las cuales aborda dimensiones particulares de un panorama de vivienda complejo”.

Quintanilla espera que esta nueva recopilación de datos confiables y comparables ayude a los gestores de políticas de políticas a comunicarse y aprender unos de otros. “Si un país en particular encuentra un contexto similar al suyo, pero resultados diferentes, esperamos que resaltar algunas de esas discrepancias pueda ser la chispa para un intercambio de ideas y lecciones transferibles”, dice.

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

Crédito de la imagen principal: Banco de Desarrollo de América Latina y el Caribe (CAF)

This article is reprinted with permission from Bloomberg CityLab, where it originally appeared.

Not far from the pyramids of Giza, symbols of the endurance of civilization, a global group of urban planners and scholars recently gathered to confront the myriad threats afflicting the physical city.

Calamity associated with climate change continued to be top of mind at UN-Habitat’s World Urban Forum 12, a summit to promote equitable and sustainable global cities held in Cairo in November. But another driver of urban devastation loomed especially large: intensifying military conflict.

In Gaza and Ukraine, entire neighborhoods have been reduced to rubble, following on the vast destruction seen in Syria, Iraq, and the former Yugoslavia in the last nearly half-century. While attacking human settlement is hardly new—from the sacking of Rome to the London blitz to Hiroshima and Nagasaki—the razing of cities has grown in intensity and scope, researchers say, thanks to shifts in military strategy and advances in missile, bomb, and drone technology.

Accordingly, conflict-driven destruction—and the vastly complicated associated questions of humanitarian triage, refugees, and ultimately, rebuilding—played a prominent role in policy discussions at WUF12. With urban ruination occurring in real time not far away, one of the forum’s six major “dialogues” confronted the issue directly: In a session called “The Loss of Home,” delegates addressed “displacement caused by global crises, with a focus on rebuilding resilient communities and strengthening urban responses to protect the idea of home.”

The forum’s concluding resolution acknowledged the toll, citing “the need for resilient urban systems that can adapt and respond to the needs of all residents, fostering social cohesion and the reconstruction of homes” and noting that “local governments play a key role in driving solutions and integrating the forcibly displaced into urban development strategies.”

“Those of us brought up as architects or urban planners, we know that the home is not just about the provision of shelter,” but is inextricably bound up with family, community, culture and identity, said Sultan Barakat, professor of public policy at Qatar Foundation’s Hamad Bin Khalifa University and one of the speakers at the dialogue.

Any plans for accommodating displaced peoples, or in the longer term, reconstruction—a politically fraught exercise that will depend on who is doing the rebuilding, and paying for it—must acknowledge these powerful associations, Barakat said.

While there is no single metric, researchers and international aid organizations agree that urban destruction driven by conflict has intensified in the first quarter of the 21st century. Since 2002, approximately 432,000 civilians have been killed, and 38 million forcibly displaced, according to the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University. Most were city dwellers, partly a reflection of continuing global rural-to-urban migration.

Over the last several decades, the battlefield has shifted to dense urban areas, military scholars say, often because insurgent or paramilitary forces have embedded themselves into the civilian population. In other cases, armies are simply seeking to make territorial gains city by city—an established military tactic that is today playing out in an excruciatingly drawn-out process.

“Evacuation and exile appear to be the main objective: depopulation lowers the human capital of countries and depresses their economies,” writes University of Glasgow professor Josef Konvitz in his 2023 article “People Are the Target: Urban Destruction in the 21st Century.” “Moreover, the increased number of refugees can be turned into an instrument to exert leverage on other countries, destabilizing regions far removed from the war zone.”

Advances in weaponry also play a role. While modern weapons systems can hit with great accuracy—and in some cases civilians are forewarned of an attack—the sheer volume and intensity of today’s urban bombardments has brought shocking devastation. By some measures, the campaign on Gaza has outpaced Allied bombings of Germany during World War II. Human rights groups have decried the use of weapons like ground-penetrating bunker buster ordnance, air-launched glide bombs and “barrel bombs”—oil barrels filled with explosives—on the populations of cities like Kharkiv in Ukraine and Aleppo in Syria. This carnage has brought into the discourse the concept of urbicide, referring to the deliberate destruction of cities, their iconic architecture, and their identity.

The end result, as listed by United Nations Under-Secretary Anacláudia Rossbach, executive director of UN-Habitat, which organizes the World Urban Forum: 1.4 million homes damaged or destroyed and 3.7 million people displaced in Ukraine; 227,000 homes destroyed and 2 million forced to flee in Gaza; and 6,700 residential buildings destroyed and 1.2 million people displaced in Lebanon.

“The situation is huge and urgent. The sense of emergency—we need to bring that to the table,” she said before a hushed audience at the event, offering to work with other parts of the UN, especially with regard to building safe housing. “My view on that is that we can support in looking at the long term. While all the agencies are very well equipped to provide immediate humanitarian support, we can help look beyond the humanitarian crisis. We can work with communities, with local governments, with local stakeholders, with the civil society, because we do have these entry points naturally throughout our work.”

Beyond near-term measures geared toward humanitarian relief and accepting refugees—an estimated 9 million are expected in Egypt alone—the broader discussion of reconstruction from these current conflicts is so politically fraught that it’s hard to envision a way back from all the destruction. The rebuilding of Europe under the Marshall Plan appears straightforward by comparison. As the journal article author Konvitz wrote: “Cities destroyed in world wars were rebuilt; cities destroyed in today’s urban battles, often in fragile, unstable states, may be left in ruins for years.”

Nevertheless, there are tools and methodologies available to facilitate rebuilding, these experts said in Cairo, from post-disaster land readjustment strategies to geospatial mapping, which can instantly assess the damage and define the land use parameters of reconstruction.

At WUF12, those with experience with the devastation of warfare on cities talked about the importance of neighborhood-scale planning. Mona Fawaz, professor in urban studies and planning at the American University of Beirut, warned against a focus on rebuilding individual buildings, which can engender competition. Instead, she envisioned building a “collective” that would have “custody over the neighborhood and the space of negotiation with public authorities. Once we don’t focus on the collective and we don’t put the public at the center of our attention, what happens is that people don’t come back.”

Another challenge, she said, is the regulatory framework. Consider that cities and villages in southern Lebanon, for example, were built before modern building codes: “So the framework allows only for reconstruction not as it used to be before, which destroys heritage and the sense of identity in these collectives, or then to build illegally.”

Ammar Azzouz, a research fellow at the School of Geography and the Environment at the University of Oxford, agreed that if cities can ever recover from the horrors of conflict over recent years, rebuilding will need to be informed by more basic elements of urbanism. There is too much emphasis on the destruction of “cultural heritage and monuments and the ancient and the classical antiquity sites, but less often there is a focus on the everyday, on the mundane, on the bakery shops on the streets, the neighborhood, the schools,” he said.

Azzouz, the author of Domicide: Architecture, War, and the Destruction of Home in Syria, left his hometown of Homs, Syria, in 2011, and has not been able to return.

“These power dynamics are so important, and I feel like we have to to move from our obsession in academia and journalism and international organizations of focusing on one mosque or one church or a bridge, to celebrate the success of reconstruction,” Azzouz said, asserting that master plans formulated by aggressors do not constitute genuine rebuilding at all. “We need to think about the wider question of what reconstruction means for the local people, and how can we listen to their voices.”

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

Lead image: A residential building in Odesa, Ukraine, damaged by a Russian drone strike in 2024. Credit: Office of the President of Ukraine via Flickr/CC0 1.0 Universal.

Urban planners, elected officials, representatives of nonprofit organizations, and others came together in the historic metropolis of Cairo in late 2024 to confront the relentless pressures that global cities are facing, at the World Urban Forum 12 convened by the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). The theme of the summit was “It all starts at home.”

Growing populations, a continuing housing crisis, and climate change–triggered disasters including floods, droughts, and fires—as well as vast destruction associated with military conflict—have brought new intensity to efforts to support burgeoning urban areas across the globe, particularly in the developing world.

At the closing ceremony, UN-Habitat Executive Director Anaclaudia Rossbach, noting that two-thirds of the world’s population resides in urban areas, highlighted the pivotal role of local governments in shaping cities and human settlements. Rossbach, previously the director of the Latin America and the Caribbean program at the Lincoln Institute, said the conference set new records of engagement, with 24,000 participants from 182 countries.

“The World Urban Forum is a uniquely relevant event for those concerned about the quality and promise of human settlements large and small,” said Enrique R. Silva, chief program officer at the Lincoln Institute. “It’s an event that tackles the complex nature of urban issues by embracing a diversity of voices, techniques, and tools. For the Lincoln Institute, the World Urban Forum is a key space in which we can demonstrate how land and land policy can provide effective solutions to address housing, climate, and public health concerns, among other global, national, and local policy priorities.”

At the summit’s Dialogue 4: Localizing Finance and Financing Localization, Silva lauded local government efforts to boost own-source revenues, especially revenues that can be generated through the property tax or land value capture. “A local government’s capacity to leverage and manage own-source revenue not only strengthens its local finances, but also demonstrates to national and multilateral funders that it has the ability to plan, finance, and deliver projects,” he said. “This capacity can help local governments access larger sources of funding for much-needed projects.”

Representatives from the Lincoln Institute delegation participated in panels and training sessions focused on financing local development, climate mitigation and resilience, land value capture, and affordable housing. They also took part in an open house presented by the Center for Geospatial Solutions and a special Urban Library event featuring municipal leaders and the Lincoln Institute book Mayor’s Desk: 20 Conversations with Local Leaders Solving Global Problems. That event included the governor of Cairo, Ibrahim Saber Khalil, who will be the next local leader interviewed in the ongoing Mayor’s Desk series. Other municipal leaders who participated in the panel, Mayors and Innovators: Replicable Strategies for Local Political and Technological Change, included Manuel de Araujo, mayor of Quelimane, Mozambique; Kostas Bakoyannis, former mayor of Athens; and Marvin Rees, former mayor of Bristol, England.

The issue of climate change remains prominent in any consideration of global cities and their future, said Amy Cotter, director of urban sustainability at the Lincoln Institute.

“In this unparalleled global conversation about all things urban, the context of a changing climate is ever present,” she said. “City leaders are very aware of their dual roles—both agent and victim of climate change impacts—and eager for levers of change that they can control. I was impressed with their level of engagement in our sessions on land-based climate finance and on preparing for a potential climate-induced population influx, and their commitment to putting ideas and approaches into practice back home.”

At the Urban Planning & City Solutions for Climate Mobility panel, Cotter acknowledged “the increasing difficulty of people to remain in precarious places” and offered ways that communities anticipating a potential influx of climate change–induced relocation can plan and prepare for that future, drawing from the recent working paper “Insights for Receiving Communities in Planning Equitable and Positive Outcomes Under Climate Migration.”

The Lincoln Institute continued to expand the knowledge base and create new resources on the topic of land-based climate finance. Economist Cynthia Goytia, lead author of the recently published working paper “Examining Opportunities and Challenges for Implementing Land-Based Financing Instruments for Funding Climate Action: A Study of Land Markets and Flood Risk Pricing in Different Contexts,” explored the ways cities can recoup the costs of resilience through value capture, at the session Financing Strategies and Smart Solutions for Cities Worldwide.

Luis Quintanilla, program analyst at the Lincoln Institute, led a training workshop on value capture and participated in Financing Urban Infrastructure: Innovative Options to Attract Investors. In collaboration with the Cities Forward initiative, the session Overcoming the Project Implementation Gap to Address Urban Sustainability and Resilience revealed the opportunity and benefit of land value capture for climate action.

Housing inadequacy—affecting an estimated 2.8 billion people worldwide—was the weighty topic at Meeting the Moment: Innovations in Housing Supply to Address Inequality in Cities, where Darla Munroe, director of Research and Cross-Cutting Initiatives at the Lincoln Institute, discussed the affordability of manufactured homes, as well as zoning reform efforts in the US aimed at increasing housing supply.

The Lincoln Institute has been engaged in UN-Habitat’s World Urban Forum summits for nearly 20 years.

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.

Lead image: Anthony Flint of the Lincoln Institute, center, meets with Cairo Governor Ibrahim Saber Khalil, left, at the World Urban Forum. Khalil will be the next local leader profiled in the ongoing Mayor’s Desk series. Credit: Lincoln Institute.

A lack of access to decent housing can perpetuate inequality that persists across generations. And in that sense, countries all across Latin America and the Caribbean are facing housing crises—but each experiences those challenges in unique ways. In rapidly urbanizing cities, for example, where land and construction costs are high, demand for affordable housing outstrips supply. In other places, it can be difficult or too expensive for homebuyers to obtain a mortgage.   

Those related challenges, playing out in distinct contexts, demand unique, thoughtful policy solutions. And now, a new report that “harmonizes” disparate housing data from a dozen Latin American countries puts the region’s housing landscape in clearer perspective for policymakers.    

The 2024 LAC Housing Yearbook, a collaboration between the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and CAF—Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean, catalogs more than 250 housing and financial indicators across 12 countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Uruguay) to allow comparisons across the region. The report is now available in Spanish, with English and Portuguese translations coming soon.   

“By collecting and standardizing this broad set of information, the project aims to address knowledge gaps, enable cross-country comparisons, and support the formulation of efficient and targeted policies that reduce housing deficits, improve accessibility, and promote sustainable development,” says Pablo López, senior executive housing coordinator at CAF.   

“The data reveal stark realities,” continues López, whose team presented the inaugural report to the General Assembly of the Ministers and High Authorities of Housing and Urban Development of Latin America and the Caribbean (MINURVI) in December. “Housing deficits are significant, mortgage penetration remains low, and affordability is continually eroded by costs rising at higher rates than incomes.”   

The types of indicators tracked across the 12 countries include inflation and mortgage rates, formal and informal labor market participation rates, construction costs per square meter, and both quantitative and qualitative measures of a country’s housing deficit—the former referring to the number of additional homes needed to meet demand, the latter tabulating the number of families living in substandard housing. In addition to an almanac of statistical information, the report includes a regional overview and in-depth profiles of each country’s housing market.   

 “It’s quite an ambitious project, because of the wide range of data categories it attempts to consolidate,” says Luis Quintanilla, senior policy analyst at the Lincoln Institute. The hope is to update the yearbook annually, which will allow for year-over-year comparisons, and to expand the list of countries over time. “We think it’s a very valuable resource,” he adds. “We hope it will be helpful for housing ministers and urban development secretaries, as well as practitioners, developers, banking and financial institutions, and other researchers.”   

Gathering some of the data presented a “formidable challenge,” López says, scattered as it was across various public and private databases, and required meticulous cross-referencing, if it was available at all. For example, information on microfinancing—small, non-mortgage loans that families can use to make incremental improvements to their homes—was inconsistent and fragmented. And reliable figures on informal housing production and credit access for informal workers were difficult or impossible to find.   

The process also revealed some information gaps that researchers or public agencies could address in the future, as well as some inefficiencies in housing subsidies. “Counterintuitively, some countries’ housing support mechanisms lack social targeting, [so they’re] benefiting higher-income groups, undermining their intended social equity objectives,” López explains.   

The countries studied aren’t just experiencing the housing crisis in different ways, they’re also taking different steps to address it. “While countries share fundamental housing challenges, their approaches vary significantly,” López says. “The research revealed pockets of innovation and progress across the region—each nation demonstrated unique strengths that offer insights into potential solutions.”   

Chile, for example, has developed a sophisticated mortgage market “complemented by innovative rental subsidy programs that address housing affordability from multiple angles,” López says. Panama can boast relatively low mortgage rates and a credit market that reaches almost a quarter (23.1 percent) of GDP, “a notable achievement in a region often characterized by limited financial inclusion,” he adds. “Meanwhile, Ecuador and Peru are pushing boundaries through pioneering green financing instruments, including innovative green bonds and mortgages that signal a forward-thinking approach to sustainable housing development.”   

Still, the data make clear that no country has comprehensively solved its housing challenges, López says. “Instead, the region demonstrates a mosaic of targeted innovations, each addressing specific dimensions of a complex housing landscape.”   

Quintanilla hopes this new collection of reliable, comparable data will help policymakers reach out and learn from each other. “If some particular country finds a similar context, but different outcomes, we hope that highlighting some of those discrepancies may be the spark for an exchange of ideas and transferable lessons,” he says.   

Jon Gorey is a staff writer at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

Lead image credit: CAF—Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean.