INTERNATIONAL CASE

STUDIES IN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING

INTERNATIONAL CASE STUDIES IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING

For the first time in human history, more

than half of the worlds population
lives in urban areas, a share expected to climb to two-thirds by 2050. This
mass migration to cities presents untold
opportunity for economic advancement,
cultural exchange, artistic and scientific
exploration, and social progress. However, cities are struggling to accommodate this influx of new residents with
adequate, affordable shelter. As demand
for housing quickly outpaces its supply, the increasing commodification of
scarce urban space often excludes the
urban poor from accessing this most basic of human needs.
A closer look at efforts on the ground,
however, reveals a remarkable degree
of innovation and experimentation
in the drive to fulfill urban housing
needs. This report synthesizes a review
of such case studies from around the
world, categorized by six themes:
2

1. Infill development new housing

opportunities in established neighborhoods

tive solution for unlocking the social value of land to optimize its benefit for the
poor. While every community possesses a unique set of needs and desires,
2. New neighborhood creation new these cases may provide inspiration and
communities from the ground up.
thought-provoking discussions around
accommodating the diversity of people
3. Upgrading in-place improveseeking the manifold prosperities of city
ments to existing housing
life.
4. Innovation in design creative
Going forward, we aim to learn from the
physical solutions to address specific
ideas that are generated through dishousing needs
cussion of these case studies: which of
these themes and values matter most
5. Policy-based solutions governin the context of affordable housing in
ment intervention at a wider scale
Cape Town?
6. Financing mechanisms accumulation of capital for housing construction
and maintenance
In each case study presented herein, the
involved actorswhether members of a
government, a local community, or the
private sectorhave devised an inven-

INTRODUCTION: INTERNATIONAL CASE STUDIES

INTRODUCTION

INTERNATIONAL CASE STUDIES IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING

INFILL DEVELOPMENT

INNOVATION IN DESIGN

17

San Francisco, USA: Public Land for Housing Program

Bronx, USA: Affordable, Sustainable Design and Livability

Athens, Greece: Giving Life to an Abandoned Hotel

Iquique, Chile: Half a Good House

Paris, France: Publicly Funded Housing Integration

Toronto, Canada: Employment Within the Residence

Vancouver, Canada: Industrial Site into Garden City

POLICY-BASED SOLUTIONS

NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CREATION

New York City, USA: Rent Control

Bogot, Colombia: Access to Land - Public Development

Yonkers, USA: Court-Mandated Housing Integration

Payatas, Philippines: Community-Driven Land Acquisition

Amsterdam, Netherlands: De-commodifying Housing

El Salvador: Access to Land - Private Development

United States: People-Based Policy

United States: Place-Based Policy

UPGRADING IN-PLACE

13

Dublin, Ireland: Culture-Led Urban Regeneration

FINANCING MECHANISMS

Nairobi, Kenya: Community-Led Titling and Upgrading

United Kingdom: Shared Ownership

Denver, USA: Equitable Transit-Oriented Development

Thailand: Community Development Funds

United States: Public Subsidies for Private Developers

LEGEND

GOVERNMENT
PROGRAM
3

COMMUNITY
EMPOWERMENT

PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIP

21

27

INTRODUCTION: TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INFILL
DEVELOPMENT

1 INFILL DEVELOPMENT: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

SAN FRANCISCO, UNITED STATES:

PUBLIC LAND FOR HOUSING PROGRAM
WHAT IS IT?
In 2014, the Mayor of San Francisco called for the conversion of underutilized city-owned
properties into affordable housing. The Mayors Office will develop a city- and community-supported set of principles and criteria to guide this process.
Once sites are identified, and feedback is received, the city will then solicit requests for
qualifications from developers.

WHAT WORKS
Mixed-income neighborhoods: This plan will maintain affordable real estate within one
of the most expensive property markets in the United States.
Public benefits: Housing developments will aim to incorporate one or more public
benefitssuch as open space, green features, and ground-floor storefrontsidentified
through public engagement.
Wide applicability: The city will prioritize site-appropriate benefits that may be replicated to improve the Citys economy and livability for all San Franciscans.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Lengthy timeline: More than a decade will pass before the City can begin to integrate
these affordable housing projects.
Competing real estate interests: The City must commit to evaluating all of these public parcels of land for affordable housing and resist selling to the highest bidder for other
projects.

Source: SF Planning

1 INFILL DEVELOPMENT: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

ATHENS, GREECE:
GIVING LIFE TO AN ABANDONED HOTEL
WHAT IS IT?
The City Plaza Hotel demonstrates a citizen-driven response to a government struggling to
house refugees and asylum seekers. In April 2016, activists and refugees took up shelter in
City Plaza, an abandoned, seven-story hotel, forming a cooperative society complete with
many of the daily services and amenities residents need to survive.

WHAT WORKS
Self-sufficiency: Refugees and volunteers are assigned to duties that range from cleaning and healthcare to childcare and education.
Safety: Volunteers staff the entrance, screening people as they enter and leave.
Family cohesion: Each family lives in a separate room.
Health and wellness: Behind the reception desk on the ground floor is a small medical
clinic run by a volunteer pediatrician. Further, all residents are provided with breakfast,
lunch and dinner as well as with hygiene products

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Limited supply: With tenants able to stay as long as they like, the hotel has filled up
quickly, and more than 1,000 people are currently on a waiting list.
High-risk system: Some fear that city authorities may shut down the project in the
name of public health or safety issues.

Source: FFM Online

1 INFILL DEVELOPMENT: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

PARIS, FRANCE:
PUBLICLY FUNDED HOUSING INTEGRATION
WHAT IS IT?
The French capital is a city starkly segregated along socioeconomic lines, with poorer residents forced outward to fringe locations. Paris Habitat, the citys largest provider of social
housing, has recently launched a new strategy to develop thousands of units of affordable
housing in some of the citys wealthiest, most in-demand districts. Paris Habitat developed
an inventory of more than 250 such buildings and claimed a right of first-refusal to buy
them, meaning that should property owners wish to sell any of these buildings, they must
first offer them to the city before placing them on the general real estate market.

WHAT WORKS
Funding availability: The city has devoted 850 million euros (more than $1 billion USD)
for the purchase of privately owned properties in gentrifying and high-income areas to
convert into affordable housing.
Public mandate: The city is explicitly carving out property in space-constrained areas,
altering the landscape of residential segregation in central Paris to an extent unparalleled elsewhere in Europe.
Visible results: The city has already opened new affordable housing complexes in the
fashionable 16th Arrondissement and on swanky Rue du Faubourg Saint Honor, with
several more projects in the pipeline.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Limited reach: Paris Habitats budget for this infill program allows for the creation of
just a small fraction of the agencys total planned development of 7,000 units per year.
Impacts to market-rate real estate: Additionally, real estate brokers and higher-income residents worry about the impacts of government intervention on both housing
prices and future demand.

Source: CityLab

1 INFILL DEVELOPMENT: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

VANCOUVER, CANADA: TRANSFORMING AN

INDUSTRIAL SITE INTO A GARDEN CITY
WHAT IS IT?
To address Vancouvers present lack of affordable rentals, the province of British Columbia
provides incentives for developers to include affordable housing in new construction, such
as exceeding zoning-imposed floor area limits. For example, located on a publicly owned
former industrial site, Vancouvers False Creek Housing Co-Operative was designed to
support an income mix that is representative of the region. Prices for market-rate units
were set to help subsidize monthly costs for lower-income residents.

WHAT WORKS
Mixed-income neighborhood: The master plan called for a mix of one-third affordable
rental housing, co-ops, and condominiums in a Garden City landscaped setting.
Replicability: Influenced by the success of this development, the province required that
all new residential projects with over 200 units provide either 20% affordable units or
payment in lieu (deposits into a fund dedicated to affordable housing).
Human-focused design: False Creek South features low-to-mid-rise housing clustered
around gardens, plazas, walking and cycling paths, and waterfront green space.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Lack of regulation: Developers in Vancouver often negotiate fee and affordable housing requirements down, and False Creek is no exception. While the co-op remains more
affordable than nearby buildings, it has reduced its total share of affordable units over
time.
Social exclusion: While the goal of representing the income mix in the region has been
met, only the poorest, those making less than 10,000 Canadian dollars per year, were
not adequately represented.

Source: False Creek Co-op

NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CREATION

2 NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CREATION: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

BOGOT, COLOMBIA: ACCESS TO LAND

THROUGH PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT
WHAT IS IT?
To create safe and affordable housing that meets the diverse needs of the citys poor residents, Mayor Enrique Pealosa founded MetroVivienda, a public land-banking enterprise
whose mission is to provide adequate housing for the citys poor and reduce socio-spatial
segregation through the development of affordable, compact neighborhoods. To do so,
MetroVivienda purchases swathes of rural land, connects them municipal infrastructure,
develops comprehensive neighborhood masterplans, and opens the land to developers to
build affordable, mixed-use communities.

WHAT WORKS
Cost effectiveness: In acting as a land bank, not a housing developer, MetroVivienda
allows the government to pass much of the expense of housing construction to the private and nonprofit sectors.
Safe and legal settlements: MetroVivienda has redefined urban development in Bogot, transforming underutilized land around the city into new economically viable and
legal neighborhoods that take into account the needs of residents.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Social exclusion: Critics point out that, due to MetroViviendas over-reliance on the private sector for housing development, the citys poorest residents tend to have difficulty
accessing housing in MetroViviendas neigbhorhoods. As a result, informal, illegal slums
continue to form on the citys outskirts.
Geographic disconnect: Typically built on rural land, MetroVivienda projects may not
meet residents needs in terms of proximity to economic opportunities or municipal services.

10

Source: Secretara Distrital del H bitat

2 NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CREATION: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

PAYATAS, PHILIPPINES:
COMMUNITY-DRIVEN LAND ACQUISITION
WHAT IS IT?
To combat the frequent threat of displacement, informal settlement dwellers organized
to form the Homeless Peoples Federation of the Philippines. With a goal of securing legal land tenure for the countrys most vulnerable residents, the Federation is a community-based organization and social movement that, through collective finances, capacity, and
actions, brings poor households together to help them manage their own displacements
and find appropriate land for legal resettlement.

WHAT WORKS
Growing demand: Word of the Federation has spread, and it today counts 85,000
members in 14 different cities.
Diverse methodologies: The Federation acquires land through direct purchase, a Community Mortgage Program (CMP), and usufruct, which is a legal concept granting individuals the right to enjoy the full benefit of another persons land.
Collective action: The CMP has been most successful at reaching the poorest residents in the highest numbers, helping nearly 140,000 households attain tenure in fifteen
years.
Urgent response: Usufruct provides immediate and secure tenure and has proven to be
a particularly valuable tool for the acquisition of well-located, desirable land.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Legal inexperience: Many community members face challenges from dishonest landlords, government officials, and loan officers, delaying land acquisition processes.
Financial inexperience: Some members do not understand the concept of regular
amortization payments, at times making payment collection difficult for fund managers.
Inability to pay: Members are not always able to keep pace with their mortgage repayment terms and have faced retribution from landlords.

11

Source: Homeless Peoples Federation, Inc.

2 NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CREATION: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

EL SALVADOR: ACCESS TO LAND THROUGH

PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
WHAT IS IT?
ARGOZ, a private-sector developer in El Salvador, devised a creative, profit-turning real
estate model that seeks to prevent further slum growth by offering low- and moderate-income residents access to legal land ownership. ARGOZ purchases and sub-divides a
swathe of privately owned land and markets plots to low-income families who demonstrate
a capacity to pay.

WHAT WORKS
Minimal up-front investment: Instead of requiring a down payment, ARGOZ assesses
monthly installments until the purchaser officially owns the plot.
Incremental investments: Once they own the land, families start to build homes, typically beginning with a basic shelter and gradually improving quality over time as finances allow.
Social investment: ARGOZ channels nearly one-fifth of its profits back into the communities it has developed, helping to finance housing and infrastructure improvements and
making sizable loans to families to construct their own housing as well.
Visible results: In 23 years of operation, ARGOZ created access to legal land ownership
for nearly 2 million people (300,000 families), all while maintaining profitability.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Unprotected investments: Should residents become unable to pay, ARGOZ repossesses the lot and returns just half of previous payments.
Geographic disconnect: The locations of developments are not necessarily determined
by their existing or potential access to essential services and amenities, and residents of
some developments have experienced difficulty convincing local authorities to connect
them to municipal infrastructure.

12

Source: Compassion International

UPGRADING
IN-PLACE

3 UPGRADING IN-PLACE: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

DUBLIN, IRELAND:
CULTURE-LED URBAN REGENERATION
WHAT IS IT?
Culture-led regeneration refers to municipal initiatives designed to revitalize struggling
cities through the promotion of new arts and cultural facilities.
With the help of government funding, Ballymun and Fatima Mansions, two low-income
housing complexes in Dublin, developed arts programs intended to combat the negative
stigmas attributed to their communities through nuanced artistic portrayals of local lifestyles, as well as to foster high levels of participation in arts activities among local residents.

WHAT WORKS
Combating stigma: Internationally renowned choir and dance groups from across the
world have performed at Ballymuns Axis Centre, and works conceived by local Ballymun residents have toured the globe, many of which depict daily Ballymun life to counter negative misconceptions and media portrayals.
Widespread community participation: At Fatima Mansions, residents report extremely
high levels of local participation in arts programs, resulting in strong community cohesion, a deep sense of local pride, and locally sourced social capital.
Lifetime inspiration: Thanks to local arts programs, a number of Fatima Mansions residents have pursued careers in visual arts.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Potential for social exclusion: It is important that the social, economic, and cultural
gains of arts programs benefit the residents of the communities in which they develop,
rather than serving alternative goals of place-based branding in service of tourism and
gentrification.

14

Source: OnCurating

3 UPGRADING IN-PLACE: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

NAIROBI, KENYA: COMMUNITY-LED LAND

TITLING AND SLUM UPGRADING
WHAT IS IT?
In the face of mass eviction from slums, residents of Hurumas Ghetto village, located 7
kilometers northeast of Nairobi, formed New Muungano wa Ghetto, a community-based
organization with the aim of securing land title and constructing upgraded housing.

WHAT WORKS
Strong community participation: Residents conducted a slum enumeration and mapping effort to count the number of households in the village, as well as a house dreaming process to ascertain local housing needs and desires.
Collective financing: 300 members strong, New Muungano wa Ghetto has pooled
enough resources to access credit for housing construction. Debt payments are placed
in a revolving loan fund used to finance future construction phases.
Job creation: Unskilled labor has been sourced directly from the community.
Cost effectivesness: Local residents have constructed housing at a lower cost than
conventional contractors.
Visible Results: Dozens of families have moved from tenuous structures into newly
constructed homes equipped with bathrooms and toilets, and reblocking and additional
construction are planned.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Resistance to change: Some residents have resisted demolishing their homes and
relocating to temporary structures to make way for construction, as they fear being excluded from planning processes.
Inability to pay: Additionally, many residents do not earn enough income to contribute
to communal savings, risking unequal benefits for residents.
Difficulty accessing land title: Ghetto residents have still yet to gain legal title to their
land, though the city has recognized the communitys devotion to upgrading and has
indicated an appetite for titling informal settlements.
15

Source: UPFI

3 UPGRADING IN-PLACE: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

DENVER, UNITED STATES:

EQUITABLE TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
WHAT IS IT?
Some cities in the United States attempt to maintain affordability and prevent gentrification
and displacement on valuable land near public transit. In Denver, the Urban Land Conservancy (ULC), a nonprofit community land trust (CLT), purchases land near existing and
planned transit stations and offers long-term leases and development rights to partners
who commit to using the land for community benefit, including affordable housing.

WHAT WORKS
Preservation of affordability: ULC maintains ownership of the land but offers 99-year
leases to developers to ensure affordability over the long term.
Inclusive development: In contrast to other common strategies for creating and preserving affordable housing in the United States, ULCs model manages to provide for
some of Denvers lowest-income residents.
Visible results: Since its founding, ULC has purchased 19 properties in and around
Denver, most of which are located near transit, preserving the affordability of more than
250 rental homes and maintaining operation of schools and community centers.
Room to grow: ULCs current land holdings will make way for 750 additional affordable
units, as well as community amenities such as a library, a childrens center, and commercial space.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Auxiliary price inflation: The removal of property from the free market decreases the
total supply of developable land and, in turn, may cause inflations in other nearby properties.
Inequality in ownership: CLTs have been criticized for creating a second class of
homeowners, who, by owning homes but not land, do not enjoy the full benefit of market-rate appreciation.

16

Source: Confluence Denver

INNOVATION IN
DESIGN

4 INNOVATION IN DESIGN: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

BRONX, NEW YORK CITY, UNITED STATES:

LIVABILITY THROUGH SUSTAINABLE DESIGN
WHAT IS IT?
Home to nearly 1.5 million residents, the Bronx is the northernmost borough of New York
City and is the poorest urban county in the United States, with nearly 30% of its residents
living in poverty.
To solicit proposals for the development of an underutilized brownfield site in the South
Bronx, the City of New York launched its first-ever design competition for sustainable affordable housing. The winning project, Via Verde is a mixed-use, mixed-income community
that enables sustainable, healthy living through innovative design elements.

WHAT WORKS
Green space: Via Verde boasts 40,000 square feet of green roof space, providing gracious gathering spaces for outdoor activity and rooftop gardens to increase access to
fresh and healthy produce.
Sustainable energy: Solar panels power all common spaces.
Wellness: An in-house fitness facility and ground-floor medical center bring health and
wellness opportunities to residents doorsteps.
Public Realm: At the street level is an amphitheater, fruit tree orchard and ground-floor
retail, fostering a truly mixed-use neighborhood.
Diverse financing: Only costing 10% more than comparably sized buildings, Via Verde
was financed through a variety of public and private sources including grants, bonds,
and tax credits.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Challenging replicability: While the competition intended to create a replicable model
for affordable living, securing comparable levels of capital has proven to be difficult, particularly as the government has further limited funding for affordable housing since Via
Verdes construction.

18

Source: Urban Land Institute

4 INNOVATION IN DESIGN: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

IQUIQUE, CHILE:
HALF A GOOD HOUSE
WHAT IS IT?
Tasked with designing a new form of social housing, the architectural collective Elemental
built half a housing unit, containing most of its essential commodities, on well-located
land. Residents then complete their homes incrementally over time, customizing the remaining elements to suit their own particular needs and budgets.

WHAT WORKS
Participatory design: Through community engagement, this housing typology encourages ownership and self-development over time.
Cost effectiveness: Given the tight budget, the architects prioritized well-located land
over complete construction.
Context sensitivity: Elemental architects determined the most difficult half of the
house to build first, leaving the less expensive half for residents to complete.
Customizability: Some families have transformed the initial concrete frame structure
to create spaces from which they can run small businesses and practice their trades of
choice.
Profitability: This technique of incremental building, which has long been practiced in
Latin America, contributes to increases in land and property values.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Challenging political environments: Most governments still view incremental housing
settlements as an eyesore and visible reminders of poverty.
Challenging replicability: The ability to purchase affordable and well-located land becomes a limiting factor in this projects replicability.
Unforeseen burdens: Questions arise regarding other responsibilities of residents, such
as establishing infrastructure, transport connectivity, and telecommunications.

19

Source: Mother Jones

4 INNOVATION IN DESIGN: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

TORONTO, CANADA:
EMPLOYMENT WITHIN THE RESIDENCE
WHAT IS IT?
Completed in March 2010, 60 Richmond Street is an 11-story, 85-unit, mixed-use building designed for residents employed in Torontos restaurant and hospitality industry. It is a
sustainable urban infill project that juxtaposes the typical aesthetic of condo buildings and
defies stereotypes of what affordable housing should look like.

WHAT WORKS
Public realm enhancements: Its innovative, sculptural design animates the streetscape. A courtyard perforates the building and connects the center to the street.
Professional development: A resident-owned and operated restaurant and training
kitchen occupies the ground floor.
Cost effectiveness: 60 Richmond Street was built with re-claimed materials at just
$185 per square foot, yet it still looks sleek, modern, and elegant.
Sustainability: The organic waste created by the kitchen is used as compost for the
garden on the sixth floor of the building, where produce is grown to supply the restaurant with food.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Inefficiency: In many respects the building prioritizes its striking form over its function
of affordable housing. Its frequent cut-outs and irregular shape diminish its supply of
usable floor space, reducing the number of units it can accommodate.

20

Source: Architizer

POLICY-BASED
SOLUTIONS

5 POLICY-BASED SOLUTIONS: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

NEW YORK CITY, UNITED STATES:

RENT CONTROL AND REGULATION
WHAT IS IT?
Over 68% of New York Citys households are renters, and 54% of renters pay more than
30% of their income on housing. The City rent-regulates and rent-controls apartments in
an effort to maintain affordability and help those in most need.

WHAT WORKS
Inclusiveness: About one million rental units are covered by rent stabilization, which
limits how sharply a landlord can increase rent each year, and approximately 38,000
units are rent-controlled, which dictates the rent itself.
Widespread application: In total, some 1.3 million units61% of occupied New York
rentals, or 42% of all New York homesare price-regulated in one way or another.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Limited residential mobility: Those in rent-regulated apartments are reluctant to give
them up, even when they are no longer compatible with household size: 23% of people
in rent-stabilized units have lived in the unit for 20 years or more, compared to just 7%
of households in market-rate units.
Inefficiency: The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) estimates that more than
one-fifth of its apartments are under-occupied, with one or more empty bedrooms.
Meanwhile, 144,000 families, mostly single parents with young kids, languish on the
waiting list for public housing.
Locational disadvantages: There is evidence that rent-regulated households live in
neighborhoods with lower-performing schools than market-rate or voucher renters.

22

Source: DeDESIGN

5 POLICY-BASED SOLUTIONS: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

YONKERS, UNITED STATES:

COURT-MANDATED HOUSING INTEGRATION
WHAT IS IT?
The fourth-largest city in the State of New York, located immediately north of New York
City, Yonkers is divided by a dense series of highways into highly racially segregated quadrants. In 1980, a federal court case found substantial evidence of purposeful segregation
and ordered the city to create several hundred of units of affordable housing for low-income families on the citys mostly white, middle-class east side.

WHAT WORKS
Sensitivity to context: In contrast to existing affordable housing in Yonkers, designed in
the isolating tower-in-the-park model, the new units are detached, scattered-site townhouses, blending more seamlessly into the receiving community.
Positive integration: White residents greatest fears were largely unfounded, as concerns such as property value decline, rising crime, and deteriorating physical conditions
never materialized.
Satisfied residents: Interviews suggest that new residents generally had positive experiences in their new homes and neighborhoods.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Local opposition: Mandated integration led to severe tensions, reminiscent of darker
days in American history, and legal battles extended through the 2000s.
Limited impact: The new affordable housing fell short of galvanizing more a comprehensive residential integration across the city, a goal which requires far more than the
construction a few hundred units of housing.

23

Source: soyosunset.yuku.com

5 POLICY-BASED SOLUTIONS: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS:
DE-COMMODIFICATION OF HOUSING
WHAT IS IT?
Following World War II, a number of European countries established policies to de-commodification housing in order to inhibit the influence of market principles and mitigate
socio-spatial divisions, segregation, and exclusion. In Amsterdam, nonprofit housing associations, supported by comprehensive supply-side state subsidies, dominated housing
production. By removing the influence of market forces, this high degree of de-commodification generally kept housing costs affordable and accessible.

WHAT WORKS
Widespread application: By the 1980s, the social housing sector in Amsterdam accounted for 58% of all units, with tight regulations on 90% of the private rental market.
Preservation of affordability: Housing associations are still required to include at least
30% social housing in new construction, supported by a national capital guarantee fund
and a land provision agreement with the local government. Rent regulation and demand-side subsidies remain in effect to support poor renters.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Exclusionary access: Low-income households inside the system are protected, but
gaining access to it is becoming increasingly difficult, with the recent push towards neoliberal policy reforms.
Diminishing supply: Many residents who have broken into the middle-income segment
continue to live in social rental housing, resulting in a scarcity of supply and extremely
long wait lists.
Exclusion of the middle class: Households earning just above the salary cap typically
cannot afford market-rate properties, yet they earn slightly more than the allowable limit
to qualify for social housing.

24

Source: I Amsterdam

5 POLICY-BASED SOLUTIONS: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

UNITED STATES: MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY,

A PEOPLE-BASED POLICY
WHAT IS IT?
During the 1990s, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) introduced the Moving to Opportunity Program, which provided residents of public housing developments in high-poverty neighborhoods with housing vouchers and assistance to help
them move to low-poverty areas.

WHAT WORKS
Wellness improvements: Over the years, relocation to lower-poverty areas has been
shown to contribute to improvements in both physical and mental health.
Focus on youth: Child advocates are generally more favorable toward people-based
policies like Moving to Opportunity because human capital is more easily cultivated in
the young.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Limited economic impact: Results indicate little advancement in economic self-sufficiency or in the labor market. Evidence has also shown scant results in academic
achievement and behavioral indicators, as well as deterioration in behavior after moving
to lower-poverty neighborhoods.
Inequity in participation: As insufficient resources limit participation, the poorest members of the neighborhood are often left behind, as those with the greatest potential for
success tend to be prioritized for participation.

25

Source: Nautil.us

5 POLICY-BASED SOLUTIONS: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

UNITED STATES: CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS,

A PLACE-BASED POLICY
WHAT IS IT?
During the Obama Administration, the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) introduced Choice Neighborhoods, which is designed to transform neighborhoods of extreme poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income neighborhoods with
well-functioning services, schools, public assets, transportation, and access to jobs.

WHAT WORKS
Focus on adults: Place-based strategies tend to focus on increasing local job opportunities, having a more direct effect on adults.
Neighborhood effect: The goal is to galvanize a cultural shift that encompasses increased access to jobs, education, health, and other opportunities. By focusing on
adults, youth may be impacted by their elders behavior and granted these same opportunities as they grow.
Strengthening of community ties: As evidence has shown strong ties to neighborhoods and communities, loyalty to a place can be used to strengthen existing networks
and motivate residents to help build better environments.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Persistent segregation: Place-based policies can promote clustering of low-income
families and individuals, rather than encouraging mixed-income households and cause
higher-income families to relocate.

26

Source: Washington Post

FINANCING
MECHANISMS

6 FINANCING MECHANISMS: GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

UNITED KINGDOM:
SHARED OWNERSHIP
WHAT IS IT?
Under shared ownership (SO), home buyers initially purchase just a portion of the propertys total equity. They then stair-case up to full ownership, which involves buying additional portions of the propertys equity until they either transition out of the SO property or
buy all the equity.

WHAT WORKS
Access to ownership: By purchasing only a portion of the total housing equity upfront,
down payments become less of a hurdle to entering the housing market. For example, a
household may buy 25% of a unit upfront and agree to pay rent for the other 75%.
Affordable mortgage payments: The monthly mortgage payment component is also
lower on this smaller portion of the total house value.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Dissatisfaction: In the UK around a third of shared owners surveyed in 2008 stated that
they would prefer to live in social housing if they could. Factors could possibly include
size of SO units and the combined costs of mortgage, rent, and service charges.
Higher total costs: When taking into account the total cost of purchasing a home under
a shared ownership schemetypically consisting of an initial deposit, mortgage payment, rent, and service and management feesrenting may end up being more economically advantageous in the long run.

28

Source: First Wessex

6 FINANCING MECHANISMS: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

THAILAND:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
WHAT IS IT?
Community development funds (CDFs) involve organized communities pooling their resources together to manage their own funding for housing construction and maintenance,
as well as a number of non-housing expenses such as medical bills. In Thailand, the federal government established the Urban Community Development Office (UCDO) to promote
the development of local community-based financing.

WHAT WORKS
Clear organizational structure: At the local level, community CDF members contribute
both monthly savings, and welfare savings into a revolving loan fund. Representatives
from the community CDF hold leadership positions at the provincial, regional, and federal levels as well.
Collective action: The collective nature of CDFs helps members to strengthen and empower their organizations and build their capacity to develop new solutions to their own
housing struggles, as well as helps to bring communities together to help each other
pay debts.
Creative use of funds: In Chum Phae, Thailand, the local CDF purchased mutual rice
fields, providing livelihood opportunities and a greater degree of food security.
Visible results: In fifteen years, more than 377,000 families received more than 3.5 billion baht in loans, and community savings surpassed 500 million baht ($14 million USD).

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Social exclusion: The poorest slum dwellers may be left out of the process, as they are
not always able to make payments on a regular basis.
Over-reliance on government: Recent shifts in government stability signals that critical
government capacity and financing may not necessarily be sustainable going forward.

29

Source: Archinect

6 FINANCING MECHANISMS: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

UNITED STATES:
PUBLIC SUBSIDIES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPERS
WHAT IS IT?
The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) is the largest government-issued subsidy for
the construction of affordable housing in the United States. Developers may earn the credit
by building or rehabilitating a project with a minimum proportion of tenants earning below
the area median income (AMI). Rents for low-income units are then capped to maintain
affordability for poor residents.

WHAT WORKS
Spillover effects: LIHTC developments have been found generate investment in surrounding areas, potentially reducing poverty rates over time in receiving neighborhoods.
Visible results: Since the 1980s, the LIHTC has contributed funding for roughly a third
of all new multi-family units built in the United States, or a total of nearly three million
units nationwide.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Exacerbating segregation: Experts have criticized the LIHTC for more deeply concentrating poverty in low-income areas.
Lack of siting regulation: At present, no siting guidelines exist for LIHTC developments, so, more often than not, developers build them in high-poverty areas.

30

Source: Enterprise Community Partners

1 OF 2

Arch Daily. 2010. 60 Richmond Housing Cooperative/Teeple

Architects. November 2. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://
www.archdaily.com/85762/60-richmond-housing-cooperative-teeple-architects.

CODI. 2011. Results: Statistics January 2011. January. http://

www.codi.or.th/housing/results.html.
Connelly, Andrew. 2016. Welcome to the City Plaza: Greeces
Refugee Hotel. May 6. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://
www.irinnews.org/feature/2016/05/06/welcome-city-plaza-greece%E2%80%99s-refugee-hotel.

Association for Neighborhood Housing & Development. 2015.

NYC Inclusionary Zoning: A District-by-District Analysis of
What Was Lost, Gained, & What Remains. Association for
Neighborhood Housing & Development. July. http://www.anhd. Davidson, Adam. 2013. The Perverse Effects of Rent Regulaorg/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ANHD-Inclusionary-Zontion. July 23. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://www.nytimes.
ing-Rpt-7-15.pdf.
com/2013/07/28/magazine/the-perverse-effects-of-rent-regulation.html.
Bhaktal, Tanvi, and Paula Lucci. 2015. Community-driven
Development in the Slums: Thailands Experience. Overseas
de Souza Briggs, Xavier, Joe T. Darden, and Angela Aidala.
Development Institute. June. Accessed October 24, 2016.
1999. In the Wake of Desegregation: Early Impacts of Scathttps://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publicatered-Site Public Housing on Neighborhoods in Yonkers, New
tions-opinion-files/9668.pdf.
York. APA Journal 27-49.
Bozikovic, Alex. 2010. No Mean City: 60 Richmond, by Teeple Architects. August 24. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://
spacing.ca/toronto/2010/08/24/tour-60-richmond-by-teeplearchitects/.
Bramham, Daphne. 2014. Residents Worry About False Creek
Souths Future. June 22. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://
www.vancouversun.com/business/Daphne+Bramham+Residents+worry+about+False+Creek+South+future/9964481/
story.html.
Calavita, Nico, and Alan Mallach, . 2010. Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective: Affordable Housing, Social
Inclusion, and Land Value Recapture. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy.
Carnegie, Anna, and Michelle Norris. 2015. Strengthening
Communities, Building Capacity, Combating Stigma: Exploring
the Potential of Culture-Led Social Housing Regeneration.
International Journal of Housing Policy 15 (4): 495-508.

31

Design Indaba. 2011. The Good Half House. September 2.

Accessed October 24, 2016. http://www.designindaba.com/
articles/interviews/good-half-house.
E Teodoro, John Iremil, and Jason Christopher Rayos Co.
2009. Community-driven Land tenure Strategies: The Experiences of the Homeless Peoples Federation of the Philippines.
Environment & Urbanization 21 (2): 415-441.
Ellen, Ingrid Gould, Amy Ellen Schwartz, Ioan Voicu, and Michael H. Schill. 2007. Does Federally subsidized Rental Housing Depress Neighborhood Property Values? Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management 26 (2): 257-280.

Heritage Vancouver. 2016. False Creek South - The Ideal

Planning Community. May 5. Accessed October 24, 2016.
http://heritagevancouver.org/top10-watch-list/2016/10falsecreek-south/.
Hickey, Robert. 2013. The Role of Community Land Trusts
in Fostering Equitable, Transit-Oriented Development:
Case Studies from Atlanta, Denver, and the Twin Cities.
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. June. https://www.lincolninst.edu/publications/working-papers/role-community-land-trusts-fostering-equitable-transit-oriented.
Hong, Sukjong. 2016. Can Half a Good House Become a
Home? June 14. Accessed October 24, 2016. https://newrepublic.com/article/134223/can-half-good-house-becomehome.
Kadi, Justin, and Sako Musterd. 2014. Housing for the Poor
in a Neo-liberalising Just city: Still Affordable, but Increasingly Inaccessible. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale
Geografie 106 (3): 246-262.
Ludwig, Jens, Greg J. Duncan, Lisa A. Gennetian, Lawrence F. Katz, Ronald C. Kessler, Jeffrey R. Kling, and Lisa
Sanbonmatsu. 2013. Long-term Neighborhood Effects on
Low-income Families: Evidence from Moving to Opportunity. The National Bureau of Economic Research. May. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://www.nber.org/mtopublic//
final/MTO_AERPP_2013.pdf.

Madar, Josiah. 2015. Inclusionary Housing in New York

City: Assessing New Opportunities, Constraints, and TradeGlaeser, Edward L. 2000. Places, People, Policies: An Agenda offs. NYU Furman Center. March 25. http://furmancenter.
org/files/NYUFurmanCenter_InclusionaryZoningNYC_
for Americas urban Poor. Harvard Magazine, November-DeMarch2015.pdf.
cember: 34-35.
Gordy, Cynthia. 2015. Did the Famous Desegregation of Yonkers Actually Work? September 9. http://www.truth-out.org/
news/item/32699-did-the-famous-desegregation-of-yonkers-actually-work.

Masuda, Jeffrey R., and Sonia Bookman. 2016. Neighbourhood Branding and the Right to the City. Progress in Human Geography 1-18.

REFERENCES: 1 OF 2

REFERENCES

2 OF 2

Mbaka, Shadrack . 2015. Ghetto Housing Upgrade Project. March 13. https://muunganosupporttrust.wordpress.
com/2015/03/13/ghetto-housing-upgrading-project/.

Santos, Fernanda. 2007. After 27 Years, Yonkers Housing Desegregation Battle Ends Quietly in Manhattan Court. The New
York Times, May 2.

UN Habitat. 2009. community Development Fund in Thailand. UN Habitat: For a Better Urban Future. http://unhabitat.org/books/community-development-fund-in-thailand/.

Miles, Steven, and Roman Paddison. 2005. Introduction:

The Rise and Rise of Culture-led Urban Regeneration. Urban
Studies 42 (5/6): 833-839.

Sevilla, Manuel. 2000. El Salvador Private Development: The

Case of ARGOZ. May. http://web.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/upgrading/case-examples/ce-es-arg.html.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2010. The Community Land Trust Report. HUD. July
9. http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/conplan/foreclosure/pdf/austincommtrust.pdf.

Nanda, Anupam, and Gavin Parker. 2015. Shared Ownership

and Affordable Housing: A Political Solution in Search of a
Planning Justification? Planning, Practice & Research 30 (1):
101-113.

Smith, Alejandra Rangel. 2014. The Unintended Consequences of Rent Regulation. March 18. Accessed October 24, 2016.
http://marroninstitute.nyu.edu/content/blog/the-unintended-consequences-of-rent-regulation.

New York City Department of City Planning. n.d. Inclusionary

Housing. https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/zoning/districts-tools/inclusionary-housing.page.
NYU Furman Center. 2015. The Challenge of Rising Rents.
Research & Policy, New York City: NYU Furman Center.
OSullivan, Feargus. 2016. Paris Declares War on Ghettoes for
the Rich. May 17. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2016/05/
paris-declares-war-on-ghettoes-for-the-rich/483072/.

Solidarity2Refugees. 2016. Support the City Plaza Refugee

Accommodation and Solidarity Center in Athens, Greece.
June 13. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://solidarity2refugees.gr/support-city-plaza-refugee-accommodation-solidarity-center-athens-greece/.
Sripanich, Bussara, Vilas Nitivattananon, and Ranjith Perera.
2015. City Development Fund: A financial Mechanism to Support Housing and Livelihood Needs of Thailands Urban Poor.
Habitat International 49: 366-374.

. 2014. Paris Wants to Keep Central Neighborhoods From

Becoming Ghettos for the Rich. December 19. http://www.
citylab.com/housing/2014/12/paris-wants-to-keep-centralneighborhoods-from-becoming-ghettos-for-the-rich/383936/.

Strickland, Patrick. 2016. Greek leftists turn deserted hotel

into refugee homes. July 3. Accessed Octobe 24, 2016. http://
www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/06/greek-leftists-turn-deserted-hotel-refugee-homes-160629131217044.
html.

Ruiz, Alexander Nio. 2006. Formal and Informal Housing

Practices in Bogot, Colombia: The Experience of MetroVivienda and Juan XXIII. Redalyc. June. http://www.redalyc.
org/pdf/3600/360033184006.pdf.

The Tyee. 2013. False Creek South: An Experiment in Community. December 31. Accessed October 24, 2016. http://thetyee.
ca/Series/2013/12/31/False-Creek-South-Experiment/.

San Francisco Planning Department. n.d. Public Land for

Housing (formerly Public Sites Portfolio). Accessed October
24, 2016. http://sf-planning.org/public-land-housing-formerly-public-sites-portfolio.

32

Tshoi, Christopher. n.d. Racial Desegration in Yonkers: Black

and White Residents. http://www.uncoveringyonkers.com/desegregation.html.

Urban Land Institute. n.d. Via Verde. Urban Land Institute.

http://casestudies.uli.org/via-verde/.
Urban Poor Fund International. 2015. Ghetto Incremental
Housing - Phase I. November 12. http://upfi.info/projects/
ghetto-housing/.

REFERENCES: 2 OF 2

REFERENCES