Emerging concerns about climate change impacts along with changing preferences for housing options are shaping the debate over growth patterns and sustainability. Climate modeling experts expect Arizona’s Sun Corridor to become hotter, drier, and more prone to extreme weather events. In a region where summer temperatures top 110°, annual precipitation is only 9 to 10 inches, and flood events already can be extreme, adaptation to and mitigation of climate change impacts will be of paramount importance. The response will require significantly changing prevalent land use planning and development patterns in the region.

How do the perceptions of informal settlement dwellers on tenure security translate into investment in housing improvement? Is a property title necessary to establish security or increase investment? And how are income and credit related to investment? Does the average dweller actually aspire to legalization of tenure, and if so, what is expected? Based on research conducted in two land invasions in Buenos Aires, Argentina, this article addresses these questions, focusing on two issues in particular: the concept of tenure security and the empirical measurement of perceptions of security related to investment in housing improvement (Van Gelder 2009b).

Tenure Security as a Tripartite Concept

In the face of rapidly increasing urban informality in the 1970s, organizations such as the World Bank started experimenting with programs that provided basic services to settlements and granted property titles to dwellers. The assumption was that with secure tenure dwellers would mobilize resources for housing construction more efficiently than they would under public housing programs. Self-help housing, thus, was viewed as a source of economic security and upward social mobility.

In the early 1990s, the economic dimensions of tenure legalization took on new importance in some policy circles (Bromley 1990; World Bank 1993). The mere provision of private property rights was believed to be both a sufficient and necessary condition for settlement development. It was assumed that by providing both the incentive to invest and the possibility to do so by making formal credit accessible, property rights would function as leverage for development.

Critics of this idea argued that, with respect to establishing tenure security and investment, one could better focus on the actual situation on the ground. Factors such as the official recognition of a settlement, introduction of infrastructure and services, and other factors that could strengthen de facto security of tenure were considered more fundamental than holding a legal document for a plot (e.g., Gilbert 2002).

A third point of view on investment in housing claims that security as perceived by the dwellers is the most important factor. Rather than legal security, as embodied by titling, perception is the actual driving mechanism behind investment. It is argued that residents invest in their dwellings regardless of legal status, as long as they think they will not be evicted and will be allowed by the authorities to remain in their homes (Broegaard 2005; Varley 1987).

The concept of tenure security thus can be viewed in three different ways: as a legal construct that often takes the form of title to property; as de facto security based on the actual situation; and as it is perceived by dwellers. However, these views are often confused or simply equated in the research literature and by policy makers, so it is important to distinguish among them in order to answer the questions posed earlier.

Legal tenure security is a formal concept that refers to authoritative documents that identify the owner of an asset recognized by state power, but de facto and perceived tenure security are empirical concepts. To understand the de facto situation, we need to study the facts on the ground and answer such questions as: Have forced evictions been rare or frequent occurrences in a certain city or area? Has the general attitude towards illegal occupation by authorities been lenient or strict? Perceived tenure security, on the other hand, resides in the mind of the dweller, and its measurement requires fine-tuned methods.

The different types of tenure security may overlap. For example, having a title may imply that a dweller also has de facto security and he may perceive his situation to be secure, but there is no necessary connection among these types. Property rights do not always have a bearing on any kind of empirical fact, nor do they have to be recognized as something meaningful in the eyes of dwellers (Van Gelder 2010). Rather, cities with extensive informality are characterized precisely by an absence of such correlations.

One problem with the titling approach is that it equates property rights with tenure security. This makes sense in situations where the facts on the ground reflect the norms of the legal system, but not necessarily when this is not the case. Furthermore, it is important to remember that if tenure security, whether legal or de facto in nature, influences investment, it must operate through psychological pathways.

The Psychological Side of Tenure Security

The literature reveals three critical issues with respect to measuring tenure security. First, whether it is considered legal, de facto, or perceived, tenure security is often seen as a yes–no issue; either you have it or you do not. Second, and related to the first issue, studies only rarely provide an indication of the degree to which tenure security contributes to (more) investment in housing, compared to other factors likely to influence investment, such as income level or the availability of credit. Third, perceived tenure security is nearly always operationalized as a dweller’s perceived probability of eviction.

These three issues expose a number of important limitations related to each point. First, the idea of viewing tenure security as a dichotomy does not fit the reality of developing countries, where tenure security is better conceived as a matter of degree. Most low-income settlements fall somewhere between being completely insecure and entirely secure. Second, to understand the strength of tenure security as a factor influencing investment, this relationship needs to be quantified and examined along with other factors likely to influence investment, such as household income.

With regard to the third point, social psychological research increasingly shows that people’s decisions are often influenced by what they feel about a situation, instead of or in addition to how they think about it (Hsee and Rottenstreich 2004; Kahneman 2003; Van Gelder, De Vries, and Van der Pligt 2009). These insights can be applied to the study of informal housing if we consider a dweller’s investment as a form of decision making under uncertainty. That is, besides operationalizing perceived security only as the perceived probability of eviction, which refers to a cognitive or thinking state, we can also examine the feelings or worry, insecurity, and fear that dwellers experience. We term this component of tenure security fear of eviction.

Does examining feelings add to understanding estimates of the probability of eviction? In the context of informal tenure, it is often suggested that dwellers think that the probability of a forced eviction is very low, in particular when a settlement is relatively consolidated. In these cases, using only perceived probability of eviction as an indicator of tenure security limits its predictive value because it is invariably low. Yet, the possibility of eviction, however small, may still generate intense feelings of worry and stress in dwellers whose decisions are influenced regardless of whether this probability is perceived as likely or not (Van Gelder 2007; 2009a).

To avoid considering (perceptions of) tenure security as a dichotomy, we can operationalize probability and fear of eviction using psychometric scaling techniques. In my research, dwellers were presented various statements about their tenure situation and asked to indicate to what extent they agreed with each statement using five-point scales that ranged from completely disagree to completely agree. For example: “The possibility of an eviction worries me sometimes,” or “The possibility that we could be evicted from this neighborhood is always present.” Both items refer to the possibility of eviction, but the second item, which measures perceived probability of eviction, refers to a chance estimate—a thinking state—whereas the first item inquires about feelings.

Separate composite scales consisting of multiple items measured the perceived probability of eviction and fear of eviction. Respondents, all of whom were heads of household, were also asked about their household income and whether they had taken out a loan in the previous years. To measure investment in housing improvement, surveyors scored participants’ dwellings on three defining elements: the floor, the walls, and the roof. The scores were subsequently combined into a housing improvement or consolidation index, the dependent variable. To isolate the effects of perceived tenure security on investment, the survey included only those heads of household who had lived in the settlement since its origin and were responsible for their home construction.

Case Study Settlements

A land invasion typically involves a few hundred people who gain access to land by collectively invading and immediately building on the site. Residents attempt to comply with land use legislation and other requirements that render the legal and technical subdivision of the land possible at a later stage. This active resident participation makes these settlements different from more irregular slums (e.g., villas miserias).

The study consisted of a structured survey as well as semi-structured interviews and focus groups with dwellers in two different land invasions in the southern cone of Greater Buenos Aires, which is known for its large-scale popular urbanization and high concentrations of poverty (table 1).

The settlements were similar in size, but differed in age and hence degree of consolidation. El Tala was one of the first invasions in the city, while San Cayetano had existed for only two years prior to the survey in 2008. Only half of the dwellers in El Tala had received legal title, creating the conditions for a valid comparison of titled and nontitled households in this settlement.

Results of Analysis

Regression and correlational analysis were employed to examine the strength of both perceived probability of eviction and fear of eviction as predictors of housing improvement. To obtain a better idea of their comparative strength, we also looked at household income. Table 2 shows that both probability and fear were significantly correlated with improvement in both settlements. In other words, both thinking about the probability of an eviction and the feelings evoked by it influence the extent to which people are willing to invest in their dwelling. The higher the perceived probability and fear of an eviction, the less improved their dwelling.

Household income was quite strongly correlated with housing improvement in San Cayetano, but not in El Tala. One likely explanation for these findings is that the most visible investment in housing occurs in the early years of settlement development. Recall that San Cayetano was only two years old at the time of the survey, while El Tala dates to the early 1980s. Another related explanation is that the current income of households, as measured in the survey, does not necessarily reflect income in preceding decades. That income fluctuation makes it more difficult to assess the valid relationship between income and investment for older settlements like El Tala.

The regression analysis in table 3 simultaneously tests probability, fear, and income as predictors of investment by looking at their unique contribution. The strength of the relationship for each separate variable is indicated by the β symbol, which can range from -1 to +1 (indicating a perfect linear negative and positive relationship respectively).

In El Tala the effect of probability of eviction is largely explained by fear of eviction. This appears to confirm the assumption discussed earlier that in cases where eviction is very unlikely, such as in consolidated settlements, fear of eviction is the better predictor of housing improvement. Stated differently, when deciding on whether and how much to invest in their dwellings, individuals are actually more influenced by how they feel about their situation and the risks involved than how they think about it. These results make a strong case for altering our view on perceived tenure security as merely consisting of perceptions of the probability of eviction. If we want to be able to predict behavior, we also need to understand how people feel.

In San Cayetano, however, a different picture emerges. Even though both perceived probability and fear of eviction are negatively correlated with investment in housing improvement, the results of the regression analysis show that household income explains most of the variance. In other words, household income dictated the investment more than perceptions of security, whether perceived probability of eviction or fear of eviction. My (speculative) assumption is that again these results can be attributed to the young age of the settlement, because financial abilities more than anything else dictate to what extent people can invest in their housing in the earliest phase of settlement consolidation.

Virtually all residents surveyed and interviewed in both settlements indicated that having a property title was important to them, and they expressed a strong desire to be legalized. This result presents an intriguing paradox: Even though forced eviction is rarely regarded as likely or even possible by residents, about half of them still gave security of tenure as the most important reason for wanting to have a title to their property. One resident of El Tala commented on different motivations for investment: “I think that there are two moments. One is in the beginning when constructing is a way of ensuring yourself that no one will kick you out. Nowadays, I think the situation is rather reversed. I don’t believe that it is worth putting money in your house if you do not have a title.”

This means that even in situations with very high de facto security of tenure, such as El Tala, property titles are still desired by residents, principally for additional security. This finding corresponds with the point made earlier about the importance of including fear of eviction alongside probability estimates as an indicator of perceived tenure security. The possibility of an eviction, however small, may still elicit strong feelings of worry and fear that can influence residents’ decisions, almost regardless of perceived probability (Van Gelder 2007)

Other frequently mentioned motivations for wanting a property title were expressed as “leaving something to my children” and ”being or feeling that I am the owner of my house.” Surprisingly few dwellers in either settlement mentioned commercial reasons (e.g., increased value of their dwelling or access to credit) for their desire to be an owner. In both settlements, more than 80 percent of the respondents thought that having title would further increase security. More than half of the residents thought they would invest more after having title, and more than half of the residents that had title indicated that they had in fact invested more after their tenure was legalized.

With respect to accessing credit, titled owners did not take out a bank loan more frequently than residents who lacked title. In El Tala only three people with a property title had taken out a mortgage loan in the previous five years versus two people in the untitled part of that settlement. More people—eight in the titled and five in the untitled areas—had taken out loans at lending institutions that charge high interest rates but do not require property as collateral. In other words, the owners did not pledge their dwellings as collateral to obtain the loans.

The majority of the respondents who had taken a loan had done so to improve or repair their dwellings. The small amounts of money borrowed and the very few loans intended for business investments raise doubts about the extent to which increasing access to credit will function as an engine for economic growth, as is sometimes suggested as a rationale for land titling programs.

Conclusions

These results shed some new light on the debate over tenure security and the discussion between advocates and critics of legalization. For example, even though legal title is not a necessary condition for investment in housing improvement, it is likely to be a contributing factor in some situations. Furthermore, nearly without exception, all dwellers aspire to be the legal owner of their home. However, the social and psychological effects seem to be much greater than economic factors in valuing legal tenure.

While policy increasingly has stressed mercantilist arguments in support of titling (e.g., credit and land markets), respondents tend to stress social reasons. Besides tenure security, the ability to leave something “safe” for offspring and the simple feeling that one is the (legal) owner of one’s dwelling were cited as more fundamental motivations for the desire to be a homeowner. Formal ownership is seen by many, realistically or not, as a way of escaping marginality and as a substitute for a largely deficient social security system.

One way to improve policy and more accurately anticipate the consequences of specific interventions, which all too often take straightforward top-down approaches, is to pay more attention to the perspectives of dwellers and to borrow methods and insights from disciplines such as psychology and sociology. These disciplines offer fine-tuned measures of varied constructs that development scholars, policy makers, and land experts should consider in future research and on-the-ground programs for informal developments.

About the Author

Jean-Louis van Gelder is a researcher at the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement. He studied both organizational psychology and law at the University of Amsterdam and combined them into a Ph.D. on tenure security and informality in Buenos Aires. Other research interests include the role of affect and personality in risky and criminal decision making.

References

Broegaard, R.J. 2005. Land tenure insecurity and inequality in Nicaragua. Development and Change 36: 845–864.

Bromley, D.W. 1990. A new path to development? The significance of Hernando De Soto’s ideas on underdevelopment, production, and reproduction. Economic Geography 66: 328–348.

Gilbert, A.G. 2002. On the mystery of capital and the myths of Hernando De Soto: What difference does legal title make? International Development Planning Review 26: 1–19.

Hsee, C.K. and Y. Rottenstreich. 2004. Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology 113: 23–30.

Kahneman, D. 2003. Perspectives on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist 58: 697–720.

Van Gelder, J-L. 2007. Feeling and thinking: quantifying the relationship between perceived tenure security and housing improvement in an informal neighborhood in Buenos Aires. Habitat International 31: 219–231.

———. 2009a. Legal tenure security, perceived tenure security and housing improvement in Buenos Aires: An attempt towards integration. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33: 126–146.

———. 2009b. Assessing fit: Perceptions of informality and expectations of legality. Working Paper. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

———. 2010. What tenure security? The case for a tripartite view. Land Use Policy 27: 449–456.

Van Gelder, J-L., R.E. de Vries, and J. Van der Pligt. 2009. Evaluating a dual-process model of risk: Affect and cognition as determinants of risky choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 22: 45–61.

Varley, A. 1987. The relationship between tenure legalization and housing improvements: Evidence from Mexico City. Development and Change 18: 463–481.

World Bank. 1993. Housing: Enabling markets to work. World Bank Policy Paper. Washington DC: World Bank.

Alan Mallach is a nonresident senior fellow at the Metropolitan Policy Program of the Brookings Institution and a senior fellow at the Center for Community Progress, both in Washington, DC; and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. He has been engaged as a practitioner, advocate, and scholar in the fields of housing, planning, and community development for nearly 40 years, during which time he has made contributions in many areas including affordable and mixed-income housing development, neighborhood revitalization, and urban regeneration. In 2003 he was named a member of the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Certified Planners in recognition of his lifetime achievements as a leader in the city planning profession.

Mallach is also a visiting professor in the graduate city planning program at Pratt Institute, in New York, and has taught at Rutgers University and the New Jersey School of Architecture. He has published numerous books and articles on housing, community development, and land use; his book Bringing Buildings Back: From Abandoned Properties to Community Assets is recognized as the standard work on the subject. His most recent book, Rebuilding America’s Legacy Cities: New Directions for the Industrial Heartland, was published in 2012 by the American Assembly at Columbia University. He is a resident of Roosevelt, New Jersey, and holds a B.A. degree from Yale College.

Land Lines: How did you become involved with the Lincoln Institute?

Alan Mallach: I have known about the Lincoln Institute for many years, and initially became involved in the 1990s through my work on brownfields redevelopment. Since then, I have served as faculty in a number of training sessions sponsored by the Institute and participated in meetings and conferences at Lincoln House. About seven years ago, Nico Calavita, professor emeritus in the Graduate Program in City Planning at San Diego State University, and I undertook research on inclusionary housing. This project led to the Institute’s 2010 publication of our co-edited book, Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective: Affordable Housing, Social Inclusion, and Land Value Recapture. Most recently, I have been working with Lavea Brachman, executive director of the Greater Ohio Policy Center, on a policy focus report that looks at the issues associated with regenerating America’s legacy cities.

Land Lines: What do you mean by legacy cities?

Alan Mallach: “Legacy cities” is a term that has come into use increasingly to replace “shrinking cities” as a way to describe the nation’s older industrial cities that have lost a significant share of their population and jobs over the past 50 or more years. Iconic American cities such as Pittsburgh, Detroit, and Cleveland are typically mentioned in this context, but the category also includes many smaller cities like Flint, Michigan; Utica, New York; and Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Land Lines: How do the issues of legacy cities engage the Lincoln Institute’s central policy concerns?

Alan Mallach: They do so in many different respects, but I think the strongest connection is around the question of how land is to be used in these cities. All of these cities have had a significant oversupply of both residential and nonresidential buildings relative to demand, at least since the 1960s. As a result of extensive demolition over decades, they have accumulated large inventories of vacant or underutilized land. Detroit alone contains over 100,000 separate vacant land parcels and another 40,000 to 50,000 vacant buildings. While this inventory is a burden, it could also become an enormous asset for the city’s future. How to develop effective strategies to use this land in ways that both benefit the public and stimulate economic growth and market demand is one of the central issues facing these legacy cities.

Land Lines: How would you compare this challenge to your work on inclusionary housing?

Alan Mallach: From an economic standpoint, it’s the other side of the coin. Inclusionary housing is a way of using the planning approval process to channel strong market demand in ways that create public benefit in the form of affordable housing—either directly, by incorporating some number of affordable housing units into the development gaining the approval, or indirectly, through off-site development or cash contributions by the developer. As such, it involves explicitly or implicitly recapturing the incremental land value being created by the planning approval process. Inclusionary housing presupposes the presence of strong market demand and cannot happen without it.

Land reuse strategies in legacy cities seek to create demand where it doesn’t currently exist or alternatively find ways to use the land that benefit the public and can be implemented even under conditions where market demand cannot be induced, at least for the foreseeable future. These approaches are often called “green” land uses, such as urban agriculture, open space, wetlands restoration, or stormwater management. It can be difficult to get local officials and citizens to recognize that the traditional forms of redevelopment, including building new houses, shopping centers, and so forth, require the existence of a market for those products. However, the demand simply does not exist in many of these devastated areas. Moreover, the demand cannot be induced artificially by massive public subsidies, even though public funds can, under certain conditions, act as a stimulus to build demand.

Land Lines: Is lack of demand evident everywhere in legacy cities?

Alan Mallach: No, and that’s one of the most interesting things about these cities. Some cities are seeing demand grow far more than others, but in most cases the revitalization is limited to certain parts of the city. One noticeable trend is that downtown and near-downtown areas, particularly those with strong walkable urban character, such as the Washington Avenue corridor in St. Louis or Cleveland’s Warehouse District, are showing great dynamism, even while many other parts of those two cities are continuing to see population loss and housing abandonment.

Part of this dynamism is driven by walkability and strong urban form (see the new Lincoln Institute book by Julie Campoli, Made for Walking: Density and Neighborhood Form (2012), which examines 12 such walkable neighborhoods and the forces behind their recent popularity). A second important factor is that these areas appeal to a particular demographic—young single individuals and couples. This group is not only increasingly urbanoriented, but is growing in terms of its share of the overall American population.

Land Lines: What other issues are you exploring in your work on legacy cities?

Alan Mallach:I am focusing on two research areas, one more quantitative and one more qualitative. In the first area, I am looking at how many of these cities are going through a pronounced spatial and demographic reconfiguration—a process that is exacerbating the economic disparities between different geographic areas and populations within these cities. While many older city downtowns, such as those of St. Louis, Cleveland, Baltimore, and even Detroit, are becoming increasingly attractive, particularly to young adults, and are gaining population and economic activity, many other neighborhoods in these cities are losing ground at an increasing rate. In many places these trends are accentuating already problematic racial divides.

My second area of research revolves around the question of what it takes to foster successful, sustained regeneration. Lavea Brachman and I touch on this challenge in our policy focus report, but I am hoping to delve into it much more deeply, including looking at some European cities that have found themselves in situations similar to those of American legacy cities. I think the experiences of cities in northern England, for example, or Germany’s Ruhr Valley, parallel changes in our own former industrial cities quite closely.

Land Lines: What do you mean by successful regeneration?

Alan Mallach: That’s a very important question. I think there’s often a tendency to see a particular event—the Olympics in Barcelona or a major building like the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, for example—as evidence of regeneration, rather than, at best, a discrete spur to more substantial change. I believe that regeneration has to be a function of change in three fundamental areas: first, the well-being of the population, reflected in such measures as higher educational attainment and income or lower unemployment; second, a stronger housing market and greater neighborhood strength; and third, the creation of new export-oriented economic sectors to replace the lost industrial sector. Population growth alone (that is, reversal of historic population decline) may or may not be evidence of regeneration. It is more likely to follow these three changes rather than lead them.

Land Lines: What do you see as the future of America’s legacy cities?

Alan Mallach: I see a very mixed picture. As shown in the policy focus report, certain cities are doing far better than others. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are showing strong signs of revival, while Cleveland, Detroit, and Buffalo are still losing ground. I think legacy cities are facing two daunting challenges as they look to the future.

The first issue is what the new economic engines of these cities will be. The cities that have been more successful up to now tend to have the most significant clusters of major national research universities and medical centers. These institutions tend to dominate their cities’ economies. While they have helped cities like Pittsburgh and Baltimore rebuild in the post-industrial era, I think a lot of questions remain about their sustainability as long-term economic engines.

The second question is demographic. Downtowns may be drawing young, single people and couples, but many of these cities’ residential neighborhoods were built around 100 years ago as communities mainly for married couples to raise children. Now they are falling apart, including many neighborhoods that have remained stable until relatively recently. This demographic of married couples with children is shrinking across the country and even more so in our older cities. Today, only 8 percent of the households in Baltimore, for example, fit this description. I believe that the future of these neighborhoods is very important to the future of their cities, and I am very concerned about their prospects.

Land Lines: In spite of these challenges, how do you think your work is making a difference?

Alan Mallach: The fact is, many cities are making progress. Pittsburgh has done an excellent job building on its assets to develop new economic engines, while Baltimore and Philadelphia are making impressive strides in reorganizing many of their governmental functions to better deal with their vacant and problem property challenges. Baltimore, for example, has initiated a program called Vacants to Value, which integrates code enforcement and problem property work with larger market-building strategies. I have been fortunate to be directly involved in this work in some cities, including Philadelphia and Detroit; elsewhere, I’m always gratified when local officials or community leaders tell me that they use my work, or that they have been influenced by my thinking. It makes all the effort very much worthwhile.

David Vetter (Ph.D., University of California) has worked for more than four decades on urban finance and economics issues in Latin America. He taught and conducted urban research in Brazil for 17 years at the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), the Graduate Engineering Program (COPPE), the Institute of Urban and Regional Planning and Studies (IPPUR), and the Fundação Getúlio Vargas. In 1990, he joined the World Bank, where he developed subnational investment and reform programs for Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Ecuador. To push for greater private-sector participation in urban financing, he joined Dexia Credit Local in 1998 as vice president and established lending programs in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico. Since returning to Brazil in 2004, he has worked as a consultant and researcher for various clients, including the Inter-American Development Bank and the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, where he has been a visiting fellow since July 2014. He recently authored two articles for Land Lines: “Residential Wealth Distribution in Rio de Janeiro” (January 2014) and “Land-Based Financing for Brazil’s Municipalities” (October 2011).

Land Lines: How did you become involved with the Lincoln Institute?

David Vetter: For many years—whether I was doing research, consulting, or working at the World Bank or in the private sector—I quite often found solid information to help me from the Lincoln Institute. More recently, the Institute financed my research on residential wealth and municipal finance in Brazil.

Land Lines: What will you research as a visiting fellow and why?

David Vetter: I will focus on strategies for financing urban infrastructure in Brazil. Like other Latin American countries, Brazil continually needs to make substantial investments to keep pace with the rapidly growing number of new households and to reduce the number of them without access to urban infrastructure. From 2000 to 2010, the number of households grew by more than 12 million—an increase nearly 7 times the 1.8 million households in the Boston-Cambridge Metro Area in 2010. Given this demographic pressure, the absolute number of Brazilian households without access to urban infrastructure remained high in 2010, despite sizeable investments over the previous decade. And the deficits of some types of infrastructure actually increased. From 2000 to 2010, for instance, the number of Brazilian urban households without adequate sewage systems rose by nearly 2 million—more than the total number of housing units in Metropolitan Boston in 2010.

Brazil’s Ministry of Cities estimated that basic sanitation (potable water, waste water, solid waste, and drainage) would cost more than US$80 billion just for 2014 to 2018. Highways, street paving, public security, health, and education demand similarly high investments, and the amounts required often greatly exceed existing sources of financing.

Land Lines: How could value captured by these infrastructure investments help to finance them?

David Vetter: The benefits of infrastructure investments are capitalized into land and building prices. The Lincoln Institute’s 2013 forums on Notable Instruments for Urban Intervention showed that many governments in Latin America are effectively using a wide variety of tools to capture value created by their infrastructure investments, as detailed in Martim O. Smolka’s comprehensive review of the literature (2013): sale of development rights; betterment levies for street paving, drainage, and other improvements; and public-private partnerships (PPPs) involving value capture, as in the financial structure of Rio’s massive port renovation (Porto Maravilha). More efficient collection of the real estate property and transfer taxes help as well.

Value capture can generate positive feedback, creating a virtuous circle that generates additional resources for further investments. For example, the increases in value generated would increase the base for the property tax if real estate assessments were conducted in a timely manner, and the resulting revenue could be used to finance further investment.

Land Lines: To what extent could Brazilian municipalities increase the use of value capture?

David Vetter: According to economic theory, the value generated by infrastructure investments should roughly equal their cost. Because the supply of infrastructure would seem to be inelastic due to public finance constraints, the market value generated can actually exceed the cost of the investments.

For example, Brazilian municipalities invested more than US$82 billion in infrastructure and equipment from 2006 to 2010 (about US$16 billion per year). But in 2010 alone, state and national governments also invested more than US$50 billion. Capture of even a relatively small percentage of the value created could provide significant resources for investment. For example, the Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region is receiving massive infrastructure investments from national, state, and municipal governments, as well as from private sector partners, for various projects including the new Arco Metropolitano beltway and a new Metro line. Some are concessions or PPPs with significant financing at below-market interest rates from the public development banks (BNDES and CAIXA).

Land Lines: What role could value capture play in housing policy?

David Vetter: Infrastructure investment creates residential wealth, as its value is capitalized into housing value. Residential structures represent about one third of Brazil’s total net fixed capital in the national wealth accounts, as is typical for other countries around the world. Given this importance, we ask in our own work on the Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region: What generates residential wealth? How much residential wealth exists? Who holds it? We found that there are winners and losers. For example, the increase in value generated by infrastructure investment increases the residential wealth of homeowners, but it raises prices for renters in the benefitted area and housing cost for homebuyers wishing to locate there.

Land Lines: Would a housing policy focused on generating residential wealth and the equity of its distribution differ from most low-income housing programs?

David Vetter: It would be quite different. Most low-income housing programs keep unit costs down by building on low-cost land. Land price is low when it lacks access to employment and basic urban services, so affordable units often end up in these poorly serviced areas. A housing policy focused on residential wealth would emphasize access to employment and basic services, as they are among the key determinants of housing value.

Land Lines: But isn’t this utopian? How could value capture help to increase the residential wealth of lower-income families?

David Vetter: The challenge is certainly great. But value capture from higher-income families could allow cross subsidies to lower-income ones, especially renters who wish to locate in the areas benefiting from infrastructure investments.

Let me illustrate. The number of households in the Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region increased by more than 600,000 from 2000 to 2010 (that’s twice the number of households in Washington, DC, in 2010). As a result, the region’s urban infrastructure deficits remain high despite high investments. A recent impact study of metropolitan Rio de Janeiro’s new beltway (Pontual et al. 2011) explored the possibility of developing whole new socially integrated and fully serviced neighborhoods to hold the huge expected increase in the number of households along the beltway. This development could be financed in part by capturing value generated by the massive infrastructure investments planned and being implemented. Part of the value captured from higher-income families could be used to finance lower-income ones.

This impact study analyzed where such neighborhoods might best be located. Which value capture instruments might work best in this case? It is interesting that the private sector is already developing what they describe as “green neighborhoods” in the outlying regions of metropolitan Rio. Does it make sense to plan individual housing projects when such large increases in households are involved?

Land Lines: Would lower-income families be able to pay for infrastructure?

David Vetter: In Latin America, the eligibility criteria for value capture programs almost always include a test for capacity to pay. Of course, value capture should only be applied to families who can afford it.

Land Lines: How do you respond to the Brazilian professionals working on urban issues who argue that it is impossible to capture value for legal or cultural reasons?

David Vetter: Although Brazil’s constitution provides broad powers for value capture, only the largest municipalities, such as São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, appear to be using them. Other sub-national and national governments are doing much less to capture the value of considerable public investments.

This failure is probably due in part to resistance by some who think that value capture is legally impossible. Yet while betterment levies meet with similar resistance, Silva and Pereira (2013) estimate that total revenue from them exceeded US$300 million among municipalities in the states of São Paulo, Paraná, and Santa Catarina from 2000 to 2010, even though relatively few municipalities employed them. This amount is not very significant for states of this size, but it does show that betterment levies are feasible.

One reason why betterment levies were successful in Paraná and Santa Catarina was that the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank have required cost recovery in their municipal development projects since the 1980s. This success supports the idea that incentives of a national or state program can encourage use of value capture at the municipal level.

In addition, many cases of value capture seem to go unnoticed. In the City of Rio de Janeiro, for example, the sale of excess land from the existing subway system partly financed the expansion of a whole new line, and developers provide water and sewerage trunk lines as a condition for project approval in a higher-income neighborhood, Barra da Tijuca.

Land Lines: How might national or state government programs encourage greater use of value capture?

David Vetter: One way would be to provide access to financing as an incentive for the municipalities that use value capture. Ecuador’s development bank (Banco del Estado) uses such access to encourage municipalities to employ betterment levies. Access to financing could be used to provide access to a broader range of value capture instruments, such as the sale of development rights and impact fees, as well as betterment levies.

Land Lines: How can the Lincoln Institute encourage infrastructure financing through value capture?

David Vetter: Lincoln has done an excellent job of generating knowledge about value capture through its research, forums, training program, and publications. The Institute could scale up its excellent work on value capture in the region through more forums and publications, and by directly advising policy makers regarding program design and implementation.

The potential for sharp and unpredictable assessment increases is an important source of dissatisfaction with the property tax. Rapid price rises that are accurately and promptly reflected in assessed valuations can leave homeowners responsible for cash payments on paper gains that are unexpected, uncontrollable, and possibly short-lived. Two decades ago, this situation paved the way for adoption of California’s Proposition 13, which rejected fair market value as a basis for assessment.

Increasing valuations do not necessarily produce a corresponding rise in property tax bills, since a higher assessment base could raise equivalent revenue with a smaller tax rate. This solution is not feasible, however, when prices increase disproportionately only in particular neighborhoods or for particular types of property.

What other means are available to address price volatility and its impact on property tax rates? A number of states have recently introduced limitations on annual valuation increases. These measures avoid extreme assessment increases but may still allow assessments to match fair market values at some point in the future. They substitute a non-market value basis for assessment and diminish uniformity by distinguishing between those properties that are assessed on the basis of current values and those that are not.

Assessment Limitations in Washington and Texas

In the November 1997 elections, voters in Washington state approved a referendum generally limiting increases in assessed valuation to 15 percent a year on all classes of taxable property. If a property’s market value rises more than 60 percent, one year’s assessment may reflect no more than one-quarter of that increase. A similar measure strongly supported by business representatives was passed by the Republican legislature but vetoed by Gov. Gary Locke (D), who would have limited it to homeowners.

This case raises an important point concerning uniformity and distribution of the tax burden. Phase-in provisions ease the burden on owners of rapidly appreciating property but correspondingly increase the relative share of the tax borne by owners experiencing slower growth, or no growth, in property value. While tax limitations are generally promoted as protection for homeowners, residential benefits may pale in comparison to commercial gains.

Supporters of the Washington referendum urged passage “to soften a tax blow that could be devastating to a homeowner on a fixed income.” Yet major funding for the campaign came from industrial giants, including Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett Packard, Boeing and Weyerhaeuser. Opponents, including King County assessor Scott Noble, argued that the tax benefits “will go disproportionately to the large corporations that are bankrolling the campaign because of their much higher property values.” On the other hand, restricting such provisions to residential property introduces another level of non-uniformity to the tax.

Texas voters chose this split valuation alternative in November, approving a measure that limits increases in assessed values of residential homestead property, but not business property, to 10 percent a year. The president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association said this provision will “keep a terribly hot neighborhood from getting sort of a sticker shock.”

Critics saw the irony of this action. One wrote, “If the Texas Legislature had offered voters a chance to cap appraisal increases on their homes a few years ago, lawmakers would have been lauded as heroes. Angry homeowners were storming the offices of appraisal districts in the early and mid-1990s, demanding relief from double-digit increases in the appraised value of their homes and the prospect of significant property tax hikes. . . Nothing happened. Now that appraisal increases have fallen to three percent or so, the Legislature is offering voters a chance to cap the increases by changing the state Constitution. . . .” Ironically, before the price rises of the 1990s, Texas tax protests centered on whether assessments reflected falling property values quickly enough in the regional recession of the 1980s. For example, Harris County, which includes Houston, saw challenges to one-quarter of all its tax valuations in 1984 and 1985.

A Legislative Approach in Montana

Annual increases of 10 or 15 percent do not necessarily prevent assessed valuations from reaching full market levels. However, Montana lawmakers responded this year to dramatic value increases with an even more drastic measure. After studies reported that residential and commercial property values had increased by an average of 43 percent statewide since the last reassessment, the legislature required this change to be phased in at a rate of only two percent annually-taking 50 years to enter the tax rolls completely. Court challenges to this provision could raise an interesting question as to how long a phase-in period is compatible with state constitutional provisions requiring uniformity in assessment.

Assessment Reform in Ontario

Large valuation increases may be due to assessment lags as well as to price rises. One of the most startling examples of outdated tax valuation is found in Toronto-a surprise to U.S. observers who normally expect a high level of administrative efficiency from their northern neighbor. At the September conference of the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) in Toronto, a panel of speakers brought together by the Lincoln Institute explored this situation. The potential for huge valuation increases stems not so much from extraordinary market activity as from extraordinary assessment inactivity. Metropolitan Toronto has not had a full-scale reassessment since1954-and that was based on 1940 market values.

Attorney Jack Walker described the public as generally supportive of current tax reform efforts, which encompass the entire province of Ontario. By contrast, a 1992 reassessment proposal for Metropolitan Toronto alone sparked such protest from residential and small business taxpayers that the proposal was abandoned. As a result, the 1997 measure explicitly addresses the concerns of many taxpayers groups. Professor David Amborski of Ryerson Polytechnic University explained that it would ensure current value assessments and regular updates. In addition, it will eliminate the business occupancy tax, permit different tax rates for different classes of property, provide special treatment for senior citizens and disabled taxpayers, and reduce taxes on agricultural and open space lands.

Thus, Toronto has also chosen to soften the impact of large assessment increases at the expense of uniformity. In this case, where municipal valuations were so out of date, the net effect may be judged an improvement in assessment equity. It will be important to evaluate the experiences of other jurisdictions struggling with the challenge of balancing uniformity and acceptability to see if they can make the same claim.

Joan Youngman is senior fellow and director of the Institute’s Program in the Taxation of Land and Buildings. An attorney specializing in property tax issues, she also writes a column for State Tax Notes, published by Tax Analysts.

Notes

Joseph Turner, “Ref. 47 Debate: Do Tax Savings Justify Change?” Takoma News-Tribune, October 23, 1997, p. A1 (quoting Rep. Brian Thomas (R-Renton))

2 Tom Brown, “Big Guns Back Property-Tax Lid,” Seattle Times, October 24, 1997, p. B3.

3Clay Robison, “Measure Would Cap Hike in Residential Appraisals,” The Houston Chronicle, November 2, 1997, p.2.

4Michele Kay, “Tax Appraisal Cap on Ballot,” Austin American-Statesman, October 20, 1997, p. A1.

When Jim Brown joined the Lincoln Institute as president and CEO in May 1996, he had served on the faculty of Harvard University for 26 years and headed the Joint Center for Housing Studies at the Kennedy School, considered the most prestigious research center on U.S. housing issues. As he prepares for retirement from the Institute after nearly nine years, he says that the most surprising aspect of his tenure has been his role in expanding the organization’s international programs, especially in Latin America and China.

“The Institute’s programs on U.S. land use and tax policy were well-established and ably directed by senior fellows on the staff,” Brown noted, “but the need and demand for training and research on these topics remain critical in the new market economies that have emerged over the past few decades. Public officials, policy makers, academics and stakeholders in the private sector all have been very receptive to and eager for our educational programs, and we have developed a lively exchange of knowledge and mutual respect.”

Brown expanded and reorganized the Institute’s academic agenda by integrating research and educational programs into three academic departments: Planning and Development; Valuation and Taxation; and International Studies. This structure encouraged each department chair to develop a curriculum, sponsor research, offer educational programs and disseminate information to fit the needs of various constituencies.

“I wanted to empower others to do their work in their own program areas, and I think the results have been very positive,” Brown commented. “The Institute is more widely known today because of our enhanced commitment to curriculum development and special demonstration projects, as well as varied outreach efforts to share the results of our work. We are fortunate to have the financial resources to be able to develop programs and offer them to those who need and can benefit from this information.”

The Institute offers more than 75 courses, conferences and seminars annually at Lincoln House and at locations around the globe to public officials, practitioners and private citizens. In addition, the Institute’s research and graduate student fellowship programs have been greatly expanded over the past five years.

“I’m very pleased with how the staff has developed numerous ways to disseminate our sponsored research and information about our programs,” Brown added. “These include the Land Lines newsletter; books, working papers and other academic publications; our annual catalog; and our Web site. Advances in online communication have challenged us to continue to find ways to reach new audiences.”

As the Institute board, staff and faculty prepare for the next generation of presidential leadership, we offer our sincere thanks to Jim Brown for reinvigorating the organization’s academic mission, the scope of research and educational programs, and approaches to learning and communicating information about the many facets of land policy.

As the U.S. housing market experiences its largest contraction since the Great Depression, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and the Urban–Brookings Tax Policy Center took a closer look at the consequences of this crisis for state and local governments in a May 2010 conference. A major theme of the discussion was the fallibility of conventional wisdom. For example, some participants questioned whether easy credit was in fact the cause of the housing bubble and thus to blame for the subsequent loss of state and local tax revenues. Papers presented at the conference document the complexities researchers face in determining the causes and lessons of this crisis.

• While easy credit did motivate homebuyers, its effect was not sufficiently strong to fully account for the housing boom.
• The housing market downturn was largely predictable, but only by looking at state-level rather than national data.
• Although state budgets have been battered by fallout from the recession in the form of lower income and sales tax revenue, these declines have been triggered more by the broader economic downturn than by the collapse in housing markets.
• Local governments seem to have been largely spared the severe budget shortfalls plaguing many states. While housing prices have fallen, property taxes have held up fairly well—supporting city budgets while other revenue sources have shrunk. However, there is great geographic variation in these results.

The Housing Market Boom and Bust

According to Byron Lutz, Raven Molloy, and Hui Shan, house prices at the national level increased by 64 percent from 2002 to 2006, before falling nearly 30 percent over the following four years. From 2006 to 2009, existing home sales dropped 36 percent and the number of newly constructed homes fell 75 percent. Could we have seen it coming? Was the housing market bust predictable? Yes, according to Yolanda K. Kodrzycki and Robert K. Triest, but only by looking at state-level data.

Conventional wisdom held that while house prices could fall in specific markets, national housing prices would not decline. This had been the historical pattern, although some markets, for example the Boston and Los Angeles metropolitan areas, experienced declines in the 1990s after strong increases in housing prices. Other areas, such as Detroit, had been declining or stagnant even when the country as a whole experienced consistent upward movement in house prices.

Much of the modeling and analysis of the housing crisis has used national-level data, which provided insufficient evidence to measure the peak of the housing bubble. Since economic cycles are more apparent at the state level and can act as early warning signs of housing trouble on a national scale, analyzing state data collectively can improve national forecasts.

Nevertheless, even the ability to recognize a housing bubble does not provide an easy prescription for preventing a crisis. Previous episodes of state-level housing price declines show that booms do not necessarily end in busts, Kodrzycki said. Rather, downturns are closely related to economic cycles. In most cases housing prices did not fall until after a recession had begun within a region—a pattern that is different from the current crisis.

The cause of the housing bubble is a crucial and unsettled question. Many economists have argued that easy credit was responsible, but Edward L. Glaeser disputed that view in a paper written with Joshua Gottlieb and Joseph Gyourko. Widely available credit and low interest rates do encourage more people to buy homes, increasing demand and raising housing prices. “This goes along with an older view,” Glaeser said, “that interest rates are very powerful in determining housing prices. There is some truth to that, but I think…those claims are overblown. Certainly the changes in the credit market can’t explain what we went through.”

Between 1996 and 2006, real housing prices rose by 42 percent, according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency price index. Glaeser and his colleagues found that low interest rates can likely explain only one-fifth of that increase. Other factors, including an elastic housing supply and credit-constrained homebuyers, can mute the effect of interest rates on prices. Buyers contemplating future moves or refinancing can take those factors into account when deciding how much to pay for a home. If the link between interest rates and house prices is smaller than expected, that knowledge can inform future federal housing policies and estimates of their effects on the housing market.

Impacts on State Revenues

State revenues plummeted in the recession, leading to record-high budget shortfalls just as demand for public services was growing. Inflation-adjusted state tax revenue fell nearly 15 percent during the downturn—the biggest drop in more than 50 years.

Donald Boyd noted that many of the first states to see their tax revenues decline also had been hit hard and early by the housing downturn. Arizona experienced its revenue peak in 2005, and by 2009 its real per capita tax revenue fell by 23.5 percent. Meanwhile, housing prices in Arizona tumbled 19.7 percent from 2006 to 2008.

States that were spared the worst of the housing crisis did not see revenue losses until the recession was in full swing. Texas had a 7.4 percent increase in housing prices from 2006 to 2008. Its tax revenues did not peak until late in 2008; roughly a year later, however, Texas saw its revenue drop by 17.5 percent.

Steven Craig and Edward Hoang examined how state government expenditures and taxes fluctuate with changes in underlying economic activity. They found that in general state responses initially tend to lag behind changes in gross state product, but in the long run states tended to overadjust to economic shocks.

Boyd found that in response to their budget gaps states cut spending in 2009 and 2010 primarily through furloughs and layoffs, and by stretching out payments of obligations into the future. States also cut grants to local governments, according to Howard Chernick and Andrew Reschovsky, who examined whether state budget crises lead to greater tax competition between states and their large cities. They find that in the long run cities with diversified revenue will be in a stronger fiscal position, but in the short run own-source revenue has declined more in cities with a diversified tax base (due in part to the strength of property tax). They also find that state aid is highly stimulative, but that increases in states sales tax rates will make it more difficult for cities to increase their sales taxes. The authors conclude that the current economic downturn will force significant public service reductions for large central cities.

Rachana Bhatt, Jonathan Rork, and Mary Beth Walker examined how higher education fared during the recession. While there have been highly publicized cuts in funding for higher education from general revenues, the overall level of expenditures for higher education has increased from 1996 to 2008. The authors find that across the business cycle states tend to substitute earmarked support for higher education (whether in the form of federal grants, lottery revenues, or other special accounts) for general fund support.

Federal stimulus spending in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) helped boost state budgets and mitigate cuts in state aid to local governments, but those funds are set to expire in 2011. Boyd examined earlier recessions and found that the declines in state revenues have been more extreme this time. The good news, Boyd said, is that state tax revenue declines are showing signs of slowing and local revenues have not yet declined in aggregate.

“We might be stabilizing,” Boyd said. But, “it’s going to be a long ways before states are likely to have the capacity to finance the kinds of spending programs they have had…which means a lot of budgetary pain ahead still.” Indeed, the stabilization of state revenues on average was due in large part to tax increases in only two states, New York and California. Boyd predicts that it will be some time before other state revenues return to prerecession levels.

But, was this damage caused by the housing crisis? The recession may have been sparked by failing subprime mortgages, but it was fueled by overleveraged financial institutions—turning a housing slump into a global economic downturn. Lutz, Molloy, and Shan sought to separate the effects of the housing downturn on state and local tax revenues from the broader impact of the recession. They identified five main revenue streams that are influenced by the housing market: property tax revenues; transfer tax revenues; personal income tax revenues (related to construction and real estate jobs); direct sales tax revenues (through construction materials); and indirect sales tax revenues (when homeowners adjust their overall spending in response to changes in property value).

Property tax revenues remained high, and even grew in some states. The other four revenue streams declined, but had only a modest effect on overall state and local tax revenues. Lutz, Molloy, and Shan estimated that the combined decreases from these four revenue streams reduced total state and local tax revenues by $15 billion from 2005 to 2009, which is about 2 percent of state and local tax revenues in 2005. They found that in aggregate housing-related declines are responsible for only a fraction of the overall decline. Widespread unemployment and shrinking family incomes are more significant in cutting personal income and sales tax revenue. Thus, while the housing market and the economy are closely intertwined, the severe drop in state tax revenues can largely be attributed to the broader economic downturn, not the housing crisis specifically.

Local Governments and Property Taxes

As state revenues fell, local government revenues as a whole continued to grow because property tax revenue, which stayed strong in the recession, supported municipal budgets. States typically rely on income and sales taxes, which are more volatile than the property taxes that largely fund local governments. From 2007 to 2009, corporate and individual income tax revenue declined rapidly and sales tax revenue fell—but property taxes grew (figure 1).

In most states, housing price declines are not immediately reflected in assessed property values, and that lag makes property taxes a fairly resilient source of revenue. Also, policy makers tend to offset declines by raising tax rates (figure 2). James Alm and David L. Sjoquist backed these findings with their study of national trends in property tax collections. Although experiences varied among cities, they noted that local governments’ reliance on property taxes has been an advantage, allowing them to avoid some of the more severe effects of the recession.

Variable Effects in Selected States

While the conference focused on national trends, a recurrent theme was the dramatically variable experience of specific states and regions. Bruce Wallin and Jeff Zabel examined the effects of an earlier decline in Massachusetts house prices in the aftermath of a tax limit. Proposition 2½, passed in 1980, is a voter initiative that limits property tax levies (to 2½ percent of assessed values) and limits revenue growth to 2½ percent per year. There are exceptions for new growth, and Proposition 2½ does allow local voters to pass overrides to increase the growth percentage. Wallin and Zabel found property tax revenues overall did grow 4.58 percent between fiscal year 1981 and fiscal year 2009, largely due to these exceptions. A maximum of 547 overrides were proposed in 1991, but as few as 51 in 1999. However, poorer towns have been less likely to approve tax increases, relying instead on spending cuts, and leading to a growing gap between poor and wealthy towns over time.

Michigan, already struggling with the loss of manufacturing jobs, provides another striking case study. Poverty and unemployment rates there are higher than the U.S. average. In Detroit, housing prices plummeted—the average home cost $97,850 in 2003, but dropped to a remarkable low of $11,533 by 2009. Mark Skidmore and Eric Scorsone found that in the recession Michigan cut spending on recreation programs and delayed capital projects and infrastructure maintenance. That strategy may be effective in the short run, Skidmore said, but will likely result in higher costs down the road. He suggested that a similar fate might be in store for Las Vegas or cities in Arizona, which also experienced severe housing price declines.

Local governments in Florida and Georgia have remained fairly stable, so far. Florida experienced a tremendous increase in house prices from 1994 to 2006, before the housing market decline caused prices to fall across the state. William M. Doerner and Keith Ihlanfeldt found that city revenues in Florida rose during the housing boom, but not solely as a result of increased property values, and those revenues have stayed fairly strong following the drop in house prices. Alm and Sjoquist reported that property tax revenues in Georgia rose slightly between 2008 and 2009, while property values declined. Local governments, in many cases, maintained collections by increasing the tax rate.

What the Housing Crisis Means for Children

The housing crisis inflicted enormous costs on individuals, communities, and governments. Residents have been hurt by foreclosures and tremendous losses in property values (box 1). Vacant, deteriorating homes have weakened neighborhoods. The children caught up in the housing crisis face uncertain living situations and may have to transfer from school to school. Although researchers know these changes can harm children, they do not yet fully understand how this crisis is affecting students and schools.

David Figlio, Ashlyn Aiko Nelson, and Stephen Ross are studying how foreclosures hurt children’s educational outcomes. Their preliminary analysis indicates that schools serving neighborhoods with high foreclosure rates may experience declines in enrollment or community resources, with spillover effects on students whose families have not lost their homes.

Box 1. Foreclosure Statistics

• Nationwide, 1 in 33 homeowners are facing foreclosure.
• In 2004, before the crisis, the national foreclosure rate was 1.1 percent.
• In 2009, 2.21 percent of all homes in the United States were foreclosed.
• Foreclosure rates hit double digits in some markets: Las Vegas, NV (12.04 percent), Fort Myers, FL (11.87 percent), and Merced, CA (10.10 percent).

Source: Figlio, Nelson, and Ross (2010).

The effects of the housing crisis on children, schools, and neighborhoods are also being examined by Jennifer Comey and her colleagues. The first stage of their work in New York, Baltimore, and the District of Columbia identified areas with high rates of foreclosures. They have found that foreclosures of multifamily and rental units can lead to displacement of renters, causing many families to be harmed by the upheaval in the real estate market. The second phase will track student transfers after foreclosures, comparing their former neighborhoods and schools with their new ones.

Comey and her colleagues will also analyze these students’ school performance through attendance, test scores, and dropout rates. They stressed the importance of coordinating housing and education services. Housing counselors need to know how students are affected by foreclosure and to understand relevant local school policies. A better understanding of these issues can help schools ease the burden on displaced and homeless students.

Looking Abroad . . . and Ahead

Government responses to the global housing crisis also vary around the world, and some countries may offer lessons for the United States. For example, Christian Hilber examined whether central government grants can help maintain housing prices and found that most such grants seemed to translate into increased property values.

Joyce Yanyun Man reported that local governments in China were encouraged to invest in real estate and infrastructure to stimulate economic growth. Rather than using property taxes, they turned to land leasing fees and borrowing to finance urban development. China’s GDP growth rate is rising, but local governments are heavily in debt. Given what we are learning about the stability of property taxes in the United States, China may need to consider a similar policy instead of relying on one-time leasing fees to generate extra revenue.

Although local governments have not suffered the same fate as states, at some point assessed values will catch up to housing price declines. Indeed, recent survey results from the National League of Cities indicate that cities are beginning to see their revenues soften. John E. Anderson warned that local governments are in a precarious position—the property tax base has shrunk and ARRA funding will end, which could create a delayed blow to revenue. If these forces cause local governments to raise rates, this could cause homeowners to push for property tax limits and other initiatives to reduce property tax rates. Anderson investigated the potential adjustments local governments may have to make as they reduce reliance on the property tax in favor of alternative taxes.

Hui Shan stated, “Historical data and case studies suggest that it’s quite unlikely for property tax collections to fall steeply in the next few years.” The delay between the housing downturn and a drop in property taxes may give the national economy time to recover, making up for the loss of stimulus funds and property tax revenue through higher income and sales tax revenue. The forecast is not clear, but state and local governments should be prepared for what the conference participants agreed will be a slow economic recovery ahead.

About the Authors

Kim Rueben is a senior fellow at the Urban Institute and leads the state and local research program at the Urban–Brookings Tax Policy Center.

Serena Lei is a research writer and editor at the Urban Institute.

Acknowledgments

We thank Ritadhi Chakravarti of the Urban Institute, Tracy Gordon of the University of Maryland, and Semida Munteanu and Joan Youngman of the Lincoln Institute for assistance in writing this summary. We also thank the authors and other participants at the conference for engaging in a stimulating discussion. All mistakes and errors are our own.

Conference Authors and Papers

Alm, James, Tulane University; and David Sjoquist, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University: Rethinking Local Government Reliance on the Property Tax

Anderson, John E., University of Nebraska–Lincoln: Shocks to the Tax Base and Implications for Local Public Finance

Bhatt, Rachana, Georgia State University; Jonathan Rork, Reed College; and Mary Beth Walker, Georgia State University: Earmarking and the Business Cycle: The Case of Higher Education Spending

Boyd, Donald J., The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York at Albany: Recession, Recovery and State and Local Finances

Chernick, Howard A., Hunter College and the City University of New York; and Andrew Reschovsky, University of Wisconsin–Madison: The Impact of State Government Fiscal Crises on Vertical Fiscal Competition Between States and Local Governments

Comey, Jennifer, The Urban Institute; Vicki Been, NYU/School of Law and Furman Center; Ingrid Gould Ellen, NYU/Wagner and Furman Center; Matthew Kachura, The Jacob France Institute, University of Baltimore; Amy Ellen Schwartz, NYU/Wagner-Steinhardt/IESP; and Leanna Stiefel, NYU/Wagner-Steinhardt/IESP: The Foreclosure Crisis in Three Cities: Children, Schools and Neighborhoods

Craig, Steven G., University of Houston; and Edward Hoang, University of Memphis: State Government Response to Income Fluctuations: Consumption, Insurance and Capital Expenses

Doerner, William M., and Keith R. Ihlanfeldt, Florida State University: House Prices and Local Government Revenues

Figlio, David, Northwestern University; Ashlyn Akio Nelson, Indiana University; and Stephen L. Ross, University of Connecticut: Do Children Lose More than a Home? The Effects of Foreclosure on Children’s Education Outcomes

Glaeser, Edward L., and Joshua Gottlieb, Harvard University; and Joseph Gyourko, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania: Can Easy Credit Explain the Housing Bubble?

Hilber, Christian A.L., and Teemu Lyytikainen, London School of Economics and Spatial Economics Research Center (SERC); and Wouter Vermeulen, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, VU University and SERC: Capitalization of Central Government Grants into Local House Prices: Panel Data Evidence from England

Kodrzycki, Yolanda, and Robert K. Triest, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston: Forecasting House Prices at the State and National Level: Was the Housing Bust Predictable?

Lutz, Bryon, Raven Molloy, and Hui Shan, Federal Reserve Board of Governors: The Housing Crisis and State and Local Government Tax Revenue: Five Channels

Man, Joyce Yanyun, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy: Extra-Budget Spending, Infrastructure Investment, and Effects on City Revenue Structure: Evidence from China

Skidmore, Mark, Michigan State University; and Eric Scorsone, Michigan Senate Fiscal Agency: Causes and Consequences of Fiscal Stress in Michigan Municipal Governments

Wallin, Bruce, Northeastern University; and Jeffrey Zabel, Tufts University: Property Tax Limitations and Local Fiscal Conditions: The Impact of Proposition 2½ in Massachusetts

The complete conference papers are available for free downloading on the Lincoln Institute Web site at www.lincolninst.edu/education/education-coursedetail.asp?id=720

Tao Ran es profesor en la Escuela de Economía de la Universidad de Renmin en China, y director del Centro Chino de Economía y Gobierno Público de dicha universidad. También es senior fellow no residente del Instituto Brookings. Su campo de especialización se centra en la urbanización de China y en la economía política de la transición económica, la reforma del sistema de registro de suelo y hogares, y los gobiernos locales y las finanzas públicas en la zona rural de China. Sus varias investigaciones han aparecido en las revistas academicas Journal of Comparative Economics, Journal of Development Studies, Land Economics, Urban Studies, Political Studies, China Quarterly y Land Use Policy.

El Dr. Tao recibió su PhD en economía en la Universidad de Chicago en 2002. Desde hace tiempo es fellow de investigación en el Centro de Desarrollo Urbano y Política del Suelo de la Universidad de Pekín (PKU)-Instituto Lincoln, y fue previamente un fellow Shaw de investigación en economía china del Instituto de Estudios Chinos de la Universidad de Oxford. Con fondos de PKU-Instituto Lincoln y de otras agencias, como la Fundación Nacional de Ciencias de China, lideró un equipo de investigación y comenzó una encuesta amplia sobre los migrantes urbanos y agricultores desposeídos en 12 ciudades de cuatro áreas urbanizadas principales de China: el delta del río Yangtzé (provincias de Jiangsu y Zhejiang), del delta del río Perla (provincia de Guangdong), la región de Chengdu-Chongqing (provincia de Sichuan y municipalidad de Chongqing) y el área de la bahía de Bohai (provincias de Hebei y Shandong). También está trabajando en un proyecto piloto de modelos de revitalización de pueblos urbanos en la municipalidad de Shenzhen y el delta del río Perla.

Land Lines: ¿Por qué es tan importante el estudio de economía política en China y su transición para el futuro del país?

Tao Ran: Como consecuencia de un crecimiento de casi el diez por ciento en las últimas tres décadas, China se ha convertido en la estrella brillante de la economía global del siglo XXI. La gente se maravilla de la transformación exitosa de un país del tercer mundo en la base manufacturera más grande del mundo y la segunda economía global, una evolución que sacó de la pobreza a 450 millones de personas. Sin embargo, a medida que China crece, enfrenta una brecha cada vez mayor de desigualdad de ingresos, corrupción y contaminación graves, e injusticia social que ha dejado a cientos de millones de migrantes temporales sin acceso a servicios públicos aceptables, y decenas de millones de agricultores desposeídos y mal pagados en transición a una economía urbana industrializada.

Mi investigación explora las fuentes institucionales del crecimiento rápido de China en las últimas décadas, así como las implicaciones, tanto negativas como positivas, de China —una autocracia efectiva y orientada al crecimiento, con grandes inversiones en infraestructura e industrias, exportaciones masivas de bienes manufacturados y políticas selectivas de intervención gubernamental e industrial— como un modelo alternativo para el mundo en vías de desarrollo. Creo que es esencial poder predecir lo que va a ocurrir en China en un futuro cercano, porque tendrá consecuencias importantes para el mundo en vías de desarrollo.

Land Lines: ¿Por qué cree que es importante estudiar el registro de suelo y hogares? ¿Qué nos dicen estos estudios sobre el estado actual de la estructura socioeconómica de China?

Tao Ran: China se encuentra inmersa en una revolución urbana, con un volumen masivo de migración del campo a la ciudad cada año de las últimas tres décadas. Alrededor de 200 millones de migrantes rurales están trabajando y viviendo en ciudades chinas. No obstante, bajo el persistente sistema hukou (registro de hogares), una mayoría de migrantes que están registrados en su lugar de origen se consideran “foráneos” o “población temporal” en sus nuevas ciudades de residencia. No tienen acceso a beneficios de asistencia social, viviendas públicas subsidiadas o escuelas públicas urbanas.

Sus dificultades se agravan por los patrones altamente distorsionados del uso del suelo. Normalmente, cuando los países se urbanizan, menos del 20 por ciento de los suelos de utilización nueva se usan para manufactura, dejando la mayoría del territorio para viviendas de la población migrante. Bajo el sistema actual de requisa y arriendo de suelo en China, los gobiernos locales arriendan todos los años alrededor del 40 por ciento de los suelos de utilización nueva para construir parques industriales, dejando sólo entre el 30 y 40 por ciento del área para fines residenciales.

Los sistemas vigentes del uso del suelo y del registro de hogares en China contribuyen asimismo a generar varias estructuras socioeconómicas duales. Además de la dicotomía sobradamente conocida ciudad-campo, también hay una estructura dual de residentes urbanos permanentes versus migrantes. Otra dualidad separa a los propietarios de los inquilinos urbanos, que han acumulado mucha menos riqueza. Como un 90 por ciento de los propietarios son residentes permanentes, y el 95 por ciento de los inquilinos son migrantes, estas estructuras duales crean una sociedad muy dividida.

Land Lines: ¿Qué problemas del uso del suelo enfrentará China en las próximas décadas?

Tao Ran: Muchas ciudades han construido parques industriales, o “fábricas estilo jardín”, que hacen un uso muy ineficiente del suelo. Las empresas industriales arriendan suelo a un precio extremadamente bajo y usan sólo una parte del mismo, dejando otras áreas sin desarrollar o asignadas para proyectos verdes a gran escala. Los gobiernos locales ofrecen poco suelo residencial y comercial, para poder maximizar sus ganancias, lo que produce mercados de suelo comercial/residencial con poca oferta, generando burbujas de precios en el sector inmobiliario. El rápido aumento de los precios de las viviendas urbanas y la formación de burbujas inmobiliarias a lo largo de la última década ha hecho imposible para la vasta mayoría de las poblaciones rurales migrantes poder acceder al inventario de viviendas en las ciudades. De hecho, incluso las personas que ingresan en la fuerza laboral con títulos universitarios descubren que actualmente los precios de las viviendas están fuera de su alcance. Claramente, el acceso económico a la vivienda se ha convertido en el principal desafío que hoy día enfrenta China.

Las consecuencias de la crisis financiera mundial de 2008 tuvieron un enorme impacto en China. El paquete de estímulo fiscal y financiero implementado por el gobierno central benefició principalmente a los gobiernos locales, que continuaron invirtiendo en todavía más parques industriales. Por lo tanto, la economía china ha experimentado un exceso de capacidad en infraestructura industrial y bienes de manufactura, como también burbujas más grandes en los precios de las viviendas en todos los niveles urbanos. Esta trayectoria es menos sustentable aún si se considera que China ya tiene un exceso de capacidad manufacturera y ha sufrido burbujas inmobiliarias antes de 2008. Dada la prác-tica éticamente dudosa de pedir dinero prestado a bancos del estado, y la ilusión fiscal de que la burbuja inmobiliaria continuará para siempre, las deudas de los gobiernos locales han llegado al nivel sin precedentes de 10 billones de RMB, la mitad de los cuales se acumuló después de 2009. Si no se reforman los sistemas de gobierno del suelo, el registro hukou y el financiamiento público local, la economía china se desacelerará de forma muy significativa. En el peor de los casos, la burbuja inmobiliaria explotará, lo que causará una crisis financiera y económica a gran escala.

Land Lines: ¿Cuáles son algunas de las consecuencias políticas de su investigación sobre gobiernos locales y finanzas públicas en las zonas rurales de China?

Tao Ran: China tiene que reformar sus sistemas de registro de suelo y hogares, para que los migrantes puedan acceder a viviendas económicas y servicios aceptables de educación pública en las ciudades. El suelo ha jugado un papel preponderante en el modelo de crecimiento de China en los últimos 15 años, pero también es responsable de los problemas económicos actuales. Desde mi punto de vista, un paquete de reformas centrado en el suelo y la urbanización es la mejor opción para crear un equilibrio entre las tasas de importación y exportación del país, para generar una enorme demanda interna y aliviar al mismo tiempo el problema de exceso de capacidad que aflige a muchas industrias chinas.

Yo propongo una estrategia gradual, que apunte a construir un sistema dual más equitativo. Bajo el sistema de regulación del suelo actual, la propiedad del suelo se divide entre urbana y rural; y mientras que los gobiernos urbanos tienen la autoridad para asignar áreas rurales para desarrollo urbano, los gobiernos rurales no tienen los derechos recíprocos. Esta discriminación ha privado a los residentes rurales de sus derechos de desarrollo inmobiliario, y ha llevado a la economía china por una trayectoria destructiva.

Una liberalización total, sin embargo, puede hacer explotar las burbujas inmobiliarias existentes, al ofrecer al mercado un gran volumen de suelo rural. Para reducir esta preocupación por parte de los gobiernos locales y de los propietarios de viviendas urbanas, es posible que China tenga que crear un mercado de propiedades en alquiler para los 200 millones de migrantes rurales que ya viven y trabajan en las ciudades. La mitad de ellos vive actualmente en dormitorios provistos por sus empleadores, y la otra mitad reside en viviendas construidas ilegalmente en pueblos urbanos sin buena infraestructura o acceso a servicios públicos, como educación para los hijos de los migrantes. Propongo una reforma que permitiría a las comunidades rurales en pueblos suburbanos de las ciudades que reciben a los migrantes que conviertan su suelo no agrícola en un mercado de vivienda urbano, bajo una condición: En los primeros 10 a 15 años, sólo podrían construir propiedades para ofrecer en régimen de alquiler. Después del período de transición, estas viviendas obtendrían derechos plenos y se podrían vender directamente en el mercado inmobiliario.

Land Lines: ¿Cuáles son las ventajas de este diseño?

Tao Ran: Al confinar inicialmente el suelo rural desarrollable al mercado de alquiler, se crea un colchón para el mercado inmobiliario existente y se evitan los pánicos bursátiles y que explote la burbuja inmobiliaria. La fusión posterior de estos dos mercados, sin embargo, enviaría a los especuladores una señal confiable de que los precios de las viviendas residenciales no crecerán más, y el gobierno central podría ir eliminando las regulaciones estrictas sobre el mercado inmobiliario impuestas desde 2010 para controlar la burbuja inmobiliaria. Este paquete de reformas contribuiría a un crecimiento saludable del mercado de vivienda. Más aún, el otorgamiento de derechos de desarrollo inmobiliario a las comunidades rurales –si bien restringidos durante el período de transición– abriría un canal legal para solicitar préstamos para el desarrollo inmobiliario.

Esta oportunidad generaría un auge en la construcción de viviendas en pueblos urbanos y áreas suburbanas, y estimularía la industria de la construcción, que tiene un exceso importante de capacidad. A diferencia de la burbuja de vivienda actual, este tipo de desarrollo inmobiliario es más beneficioso socialmente y económicamente sustentable. Los residentes rurales, particularmente aquellos que viven cerca de los centros urbanos, se beneficiarían directamente. Este crecimiento en el mercado de propiedades de alquiler también proporcionará viviendas asequibles para cientos de millones de trabajadores migrantes, lo que les permitiría que se asentaran en las ciudades de forma permanente. La urbanización tiene el potencial de distanciar la economía china del modelo impulsado por inversión.

Land Lines: ¿Cuál es la clave para el éxito de esta reforma?

Tao Ran: La actitud de los gobiernos locales es fundamental. Su preocupación sobre cómo generar ingresos es perfectamente legítima, y el paquete de reformas tiene que resolverla. Bajo el sistema actual, los gobiernos locales tienen demasiadas gastos, y no cuentan con ingresos adecuadas. Después de la reforma, tendrían un poder limitado de requisa de suelo, y se desharían de la gran cantidad de aranceles por arriendo de suelo y préstamos bancarios asociados con dicho poder. A largo plazo, las municipalidades deberían recaudar impuestos sobre la propiedad para generar una fuente estable de ingresos para el financiamiento público local. Dada la fuerte resistencia de los residentes adinerados y políticamente poderosos de las ciudades que han introducido programas piloto de impuestos sobre la propiedad, no es práctico esperar que este nuevo impuesto entre en vigor en poco tiempo.

Creo que otra fuente no explotada por los gobiernos locales es el suelo industrial subutilizado. De acuerdo con varios informes, el coeficiente de edificabilidad en los parques industriales es sólo de 0,3 a 0,4, aun en áreas desarrolladas de China. Si se negocia una reorganización, es posible duplicar el desarrollo del suelo y convertir parte del suelo industrial para uso residencial y comercial. Nuestras estimaciones muestran que los gobiernos locales saldrían beneficiados al renunciar a la potestad de requisa del suelo, y podrían usar estos ingresos para pagar deudas y evitar una crisis financiera.

En la etapa actual de desarrollo, ninguna reforma de la economía china será fácil. Nadie se debería hacer ilusiones sobre una solución rápida. Pero el paquete de reformas de mercado dual propuesto brinda una esperanza de alentar el consumo interno y aliviar el problema de exceso de capacidad en muchos sectores. Un factor particularmente favorable para esta reforma es el énfasis que ha puesto el nuevo gobierno en la urbanización. El primer ministro Li Keniana ha invertido muchos años en este tema y parece tener un interés genuino en lograr soluciones. Esta propuesta puede proporcionar una hoja de ruta realista para dichas reformas.

Land Lines: ¿Qué lecciones puede darnos China?

Tao Ran: El modelo chino genera crecimiento de forma efectiva. También produce varias consecuencias negativas, como el endeudamiento excesivo por el uso del suelo, los conflictos sociales debido a la requisa de suelo, daños medioambientales y burbujas inmobiliarias que suponen una carga para la población urbana. La lección china es que el gobierno es esencial para que un país crezca, pero ese mismo gobierno puede exagerar las cosas y, a largo plazo, generar distorsiones que dañan en última instancia la sostenibilidad de la economía y la sociedad.

Hoy en día, cerca de un millón de personas vive en apartamentos subterráneos en Beijing, donde, para los 23 millones de habitantes de la gran ciudad, las viviendas sociales cercanas a los lugares de trabajo son muy escasas (Xing 2011). Estas unidades habitacionales por lo general son subdivisiones sin ventanas en sótanos y en refugios antiaéreos, cuyo tamaño promedio es de 9,75 metros cuadrados.

En agosto de 2010, Beijing estableció un plan de tres años para evacuar a los inquilinos de estas viviendas subterráneas. Los desalojos comenzaron en 2011, especialmente en los distritos urbanos más céntricos con valores de suelo caros, pero la demanda continúa siendo alta. En algunas áreas de la ciudad, particularmente en los distritos periféricos, pueden verse en la calle anuncios de alquileres subterráneos y, en Internet, también existen miles de avisos de alquiler de unidades subterráneas.

El presente artículo está basado en el análisis de este fenómeno llevado a cabo por la autora en los años 2012 y 2013, cuando los avisos en Internet de apartamentos subterráneos eran una actividad dinámica y creciente. Los listados de alquiler analizados contienen suficiente información sobre las unidades en particular, tales como ubicación, precio, tamaño, comodidades y nivel de subsuelo, para evaluar la dinámica de este submercado de alquiler de viviendas para personas de bajos recursos.

Escasez de viviendas de alquiler accesible

Tal como ocurre en la mayoría de las ciudades chinas, Beijing sufre una grave escasez de viviendas de alquiler accesible, a consecuencia de la migración masiva hacia los centros urbanos (Liu y otros 2013; Xie y Zhou 2012). La ciudad también tiene una gran cantidad de espacio subterráneo, derivada de una política del año 1950 que establece que todos los edificios nuevos deben tener un subsuelo común y refugios antiaéreos. Los códigos de edificación especifican las pautas de construcción, inclusive la provisión de infraestructura, como electricidad, agua y alcantarillado. Esta disponibilidad de espacio subterráneo ha crecido de forma exponencial en medio del extraordinario boom de la construcción que se ha producido en China en las últimas décadas. Algunos complejos constan de hasta 600 unidades por debajo del nivel del suelo.

Como forma de abordar el déficit de vivienda, las políticas oficiales promovieron, durante 24 años en época de paz, la utilización “económica” de este espacio subterráneo, y uno de los usos establecidos por dicha política fue el residencial (BMBCAD 1986). Sin embargo, en 2010 Beijing cesó de otorgar nuevos permisos de uso de apartamentos subterráneos e instituyó el plan de tres años mencionado anteriormente con el fin de evacuar a los residentes. En vista de la cantidad de personas involucradas y la falta de alternativas de vivienda social, este proceso ha presentado diferentes desafíos, como el hecho de que los propietarios de estas unidades están demandando una compensación por derechos de ocupación que habían adquirido cuando las unidades eran legales.

Viviendas financiadas por el Estado

Desde que China hizo la transición a un mercado privado desde una economía de planificación centralizada, en la que el estado proporcionaba todas las viviendas, el sector inmobiliario ha crecido de forma explosiva. Consideradas principalmente como un vehículo de inversión, las nuevas unidades privadas son accesibles únicamente a aquellos que poseen suficientes ahorros para comprar una vivienda con poco financiamiento.

Las restricciones en la oferta de terrenos constituyen otro obstáculo para la provisión privada de vivienda. Debido a que la intención del Estado, propietario de todos los terrenos del país, es proteger el suelo agrícola fértil, ha prohibido el desarrollo en las áreas rurales de la periferia urbana. Aun así, dichas zonas han experimentado una rápida construcción de proyectos de vivienda por parte de personas que se asientan informalmente. Estos “pueblos urbanos” proporcionan viviendas privadas a una cantidad de entre 5 y 6 millones de personas de bajos ingresos que no pueden acceder a viviendas cercanas al centro de la ciudad, pero el gobierno ha estado intentando demoler estas viviendas.

El Estado chino ofrece cuatro tipos de proyectos de vivienda social, especialmente para empleados públicos con bajos ingresos (ver tabla 1). Los primeros tipos de asistencia fueron el programa lian zu fang, que ofrecía viviendas de alquiler a las familias más pobres, y el programa jing ji shi yong fang, que proporcionaba oportunidades de acceder a la propiedad de una vivienda con subsidio.

En 2011, el gobierno lanzó un programa para construir más viviendas de alquiler (gong zu fang) para personas recientemente graduadas de la universidad y trabajadores cualificados en sectores clave, como la industria de alta tecnología. No obstante, debido a que este programa es algo reciente, la cantidad de unidades de alquiler accesible todavía es relativamente baja. Por otro lado, los proyectos de vivienda xian jia fang están dirigidos a la población desplazada. A pesar de la gran cantidad de unidades que se han construido para residentes de bajos ingresos a lo largo de los años, la demanda supera con creces la oferta, produciéndose una larga lista de espera.

La barrera del hukou

En Beijing, el hukou o permiso de registro de familias, es un requisito previo para acceder a cualquiera de los cuatro tipos de viviendas sociales mencionados. A modo de una retención de la planificación central, el hukou otorga a las familias el derecho a los servicios públicos en el lugar de residencia que el gobierno les ha asignado, pero les restringe recibir dichos servicios en otros lugares. Las personas que nacieron dentro de un hukou en grandes ciudades son elegibles para recibir mejores servicios educativos, de salud y de infraestructura. A no ser que un empleador patrocinado por el Estado solicite un cambio en el hukou de un trabajador, las personas que no poseen un hukou en las principales ciudades siguen enfrentándose a una barrera importante para acceder a las oportunidades económicas.

La figura 1 muestra la ubicación actual de los programas públicos de vivienda para las personas que poseen un hukou en Beijing. Al igual que ocurre en otros lugares del mundo, los proyectos de vivienda social se encuentran, como ya se ha mencionado, en las áreas más apartadas de la ciudad, donde los terrenos son menos caros pero, también, menos demandados. El subalquiler, otra de las características típicas de los proyectos de vivienda social, se encuentra muy difundido, pues los beneficiarios del programa cobran un alquiler a sus inquilinos por los apartamentos que les proporcionó el Estado.

Análisis del mercado subterráneo

En nuestro estudio hicimos uso de los listados detallados de viviendas subterráneas en alquiler que se encuentran disponibles en Ganji.com. Estos listados resultaron muy útiles para llevar a cabo el análisis, ya que el sitio estaba bien organizado y tenía la mayor cantidad de avisos. Utilizamos el término de búsqueda “地下室” o “unidad subterránea”, con lo que obtuvimos el alquiler mensual, la superficie en metros cuadrados, la ubicación específica, las comodidades y otras características de los apartamentos subterráneos, tales como el nivel de subsuelo. De los 7.312 anuncios que recabamos desde octubre de 2012 hasta septiembre de 2013, seleccionamos 3.677 entradas singulares con información completa. Tal como muestra la figura 1, estas unidades se encuentran bien distribuidas por toda la ciudad, lo que refleja el requisito de que todos los edificios de nueva construcción en Beijing posean un espacio subterráneo.

Resulta importante destacar que estos anuncios representan lo que probablemente es el sector de mayor poder adquisitivo del mercado inmobiliario subterráneo. Los propietarios que publican sus anuncios en Internet suelen tener un mayor nivel de educación y más recursos. Los anuncios normalmente vienen acompañados de fotografías, para demostrar la calidad relativamente alta de la vivienda. Además, la intención de los propietarios de publicar los anuncios sugiere que se sienten relativamente seguros en cuanto a la tenencia de las unidades.

La tabla 2 contiene estadísticas descriptivas de las 3.677 unidades habitacionales subterráneas estudiadas. La mediana de tamaño de las unidades es de 9,75 metros cuadrados, levemente menor que el mínimo de 10 metros cuadrados de Beijing y que la superficie habitacional general promedio per cápita (28,8 metros cuadrados por persona). Aun así, los apartamentos son por lo general más grandes que un dormitorio promedio para trabajadores, que sólo llega a 6,2 metros cuadrados (Xie y Zhou 2012).

El alquiler promedio mensual de 436 RMB (US$70) confirma que los apartamentos se encuentran en el sector de mayor poder adquisitivo de las viviendas para trabajadores migrantes. Según un estudio llevado a cabo por el gobierno en 2012, cerca del 48 por ciento de los trabajadores migrantes en Beijing paga menos de 300 RMB (US$48) por mes, un 27 por ciento paga entre 301 RMB y 500 RMB (US$48–US$80) y un 17 por ciento paga más de 1.000 RMB (US$160) (Xie y Zhou 2012). Es decir que estas unidades subterráneas en alquiler representan, por lo general, un tipo de vivienda con más valor para los trabajadores migrantes que los dormitorios comunes para trabajadores o las viviendas en pueblos urbanos.

En promedio, las unidades subterráneas se encuentran a menos de 11 kilómetros del centro de la ciudad, con una desviación estándar de 6,2 kilómetros, lo que las ubica definitivamente dentro de la Quinta Autopista de Circunvalación. Con estas ventajas de ubicación, los apartamentos ofrecen potencialmente costos más bajos de traslado ida y vuelta al trabajo, así como mejores oportunidades económicas. De manera similar, la distancia promedio a la estación de metro más cercana es de poco más de 1 kilómetro, lo que se considera una distancia caminable.

Cerca de un 50 por ciento de las unidades anunciadas se encuentran a uno o dos pisos por debajo del nivel del suelo. El 50 por ciento restante son semisubterráneas, como los denominados “apartamentos jardín” de los Estados Unidos, que tienen una pequeña ventana cerca del cielorraso de la habitación. Según nuestro análisis preliminar, el hecho de que la unidad estuviera a uno o dos niveles por debajo del suelo no presentaba ninguna diferencia estadística en cuanto al precio, habiendo considerado otras variables. Con respecto a las comodidades, cerca del 25 por ciento de los anuncios de las unidades indicaba que tenían calefacción, más de la mitad mencionaba la conectividad a Internet, aproximadamente el 25 por ciento señalaba la presencia de cámaras de vigilancia y menos de un 12,5 por ciento indicaba la existencia de guardias de seguridad.

Análisis de la dinámica de mercado

En nuestro estudio analizamos si la demanda en este submercado inusual de viviendas subterráneas es similar al mercado convencional sobre el suelo. En particular, la desventaja de vivir por debajo del nivel del suelo puede ser muy grande; además, este tipo de viviendas es, por lo general, tan pequeña que las demás variables estándar en los modelos de precios hedónicos pueden llegar a ser más pronunciadas o diferenciarse de alguna otra manera.

Nuestro análisis estadístico consistió en una progresión escalonada en la que se intentó ajustar las variables de la prueba a un modelo base que incluye las variables que la bibliografía ya considera significativas. Los resultados del análisis resultaron ser los previstos, ya que todas las variables fueron significativas y apuntaban en la misma dirección. Por ejemplo, el alquiler aumenta cerca del 3,3 por ciento por cada metro cuadrado en que se incrementa el tamaño de la unidad, y un 3,6 por ciento por cada kilómetro en que se reduce la distancia hasta el centro de la ciudad. El acceso al transporte también es significativo. La cercanía a una estación de metro aumenta el alquiler en 1,8 por ciento por kilómetro; y para cada estación de línea de metro en un radio de 800 metros, el alquiler aumenta un 2,8 por ciento.

Debido a que el desempeño de nuestro modelo de precios hedónicos fue el mismo que el de otros modelos, con las mismas variables principales significativas y en la misma dirección, el fenómeno de la vivienda subterránea es, evidentemente, un mercado. El surgimiento de este mercado sugiere que existe una fuerte demanda de viviendas en alquiler –especialmente entre las familias de bajos ingresos– que ni el mercado formal ni los programas públicos de vivienda pueden satisfacer. Este es un hecho evidente, en vista de que las normas sobre hukou no permiten a los trabajadores migrantes presentar solicitudes a los programas públicos de vivienda, y que se sabe que incluso los residentes de bajos ingresos de Beijing que poseen un hukou ocupan viviendas subterráneas.

Los resultados de nuestro análisis sugieren que la máxima prioridad de la población de bajos ingresos y a menudo migrante de Beijing es la proximidad al lugar de trabajo y al transporte. Vivir en habitaciones subterráneas merece la pena cuando la contrapartida es su ubicación céntrica. Además, al comparar los alquileres de estas unidades con los de las viviendas públicas, tal como muestra la tabla 1, observamos que, aunque los costos por metro cuadrado sean mayores, el alquiler total de la unidad subterránea es mucho menor (Hu y Hu 2012). Así, el mercado subterráneo satisface la demanda de aquellas personas con ingresos por debajo de los niveles a los que apuntan los programas de vivienda social.

Conclusiones

Las viviendas subterráneas representan un fenómeno de grandes proporciones en Beijing. En Internet encontramos miles de avisos de alquiler de apartamentos subterráneos, y esa cantidad seguía creciendo en el año 2013, a pesar de los desalojos. No obstante, el tamaño de este submercado no significa que deba ser incorporado a las políticas públicas.

Existen historias extraordinarias de personas que habitaban en tejados y en pozos de alcantarillado para poder vivir en el área central de Beijing. Las viviendas subterráneas son, con frecuencia, sólo otra alternativa desesperada a la que recurren los pobres en los centros urbanos para poder vivir y trabajar en las áreas urbanas donde no poseen hukou y, por ende, no tienen acceso a los servicios.

¿Cuánto puede una sociedad reducir el espacio habitable para que las ubicaciones urbanas sean accesibles? Esta pregunta ejercerá una presión cada vez mayor a medida que las densidades de las megaciudades asiáticas excedan los niveles aceptables de dignidad humana, lo que obligará a los responsables de elaborar políticas y a los diseñadores a pensar de manera más creativa sobre las reformas urbanas. Aunque las unidades subterráneas son, de hecho, más espaciosas que los dormitorios para trabajadores o estudiantes, el extraordinario desarrollo económico de China ha elevado las aspiraciones y expectativas de sus ciudadanos para obtener mejores condiciones de habitabilidad.

Debido a que la mayoría de los inquilinos son solteros o parejas sin hijos, y a que la tenencia es temporal (ya que no se prolonga por muchos años), en las políticas de vivienda debería tenerse en cuenta la necesidad de tener una vivienda para toda la vida, tanto para las personas que recién comienzan a desarrollarse en esta ciudad tan cara como para aquellas que sólo requieren una estancia temporal por motivos de salud, educación y otros.

———————–

Únase a la conversación. Deje sus comentarios en www.lincolninst.edu/news-events/at-lincoln-house-blog.

———————–

Sobre el autor

Annette M. Kim, Ph.D., es profesora asociada en la Escuela de Políticas Públicas Sol Price de la Universidad del Sur de California. Además, es directora de SLAB, el laboratorio de análisis espacial de la Escuela Price recientemente creado, dedicado a promover la visualización de las ciencias sociales para el servicio público por medio de la enseñanza, la investigación y la participación pública.

Referencias

BMBCAD (Oficina Municipal de Defensa Civil Aérea de Beijing). 15 de mayo de 1986. “关于改变结合民用建筑修建防空地下室规定的通知》的实施细则” (Cambios en las normas de implementación para construir refugios antiaéreos mediante su combinación con edificios civiles).

Hu, Hai-feng y Ji-ya Hu. 2012. “Overall Evaluation and Future Development Planning of Beijing Affordable Housing System During the Eleventh Five-Year Plan”. Beijing Social Science 1: 7–14.

Liu, Xiang, Maojun Wang, Jiabin Cai y Mengchen He. 2013. “An Analysis on the Spatial Structure of Non-Native Permanent Population of Beijing Metropolitan Area in 2000–2010”. Urban Development Studies 20(10): 86–93.

Xie, Xinmei y Le Zhou. 2012. “Study on Housing Demands of Migrant Workers in Key Industries in Beijing”. Documento presentado en las ponencias de la Conferencia Anual de Planificación Urbana de China, Beijing.

Xing, Fan. 2011. “北京清理地下空间提速 百万北漂可能无处寄居” (Beijing limpiará el espacio subterráneo. Un millón de personas tal vez no tengan adónde ir). Beijing Times, 14 de enero. http://news.qq.com/a/20110114/000529.htm