The Theory and Practice of Housing Sector Development for Developing Countries, 1950-99

TLDR

Whole‑sector housing development has become a priority because earlier piecemeal policies failed to integrate land, finance, and social conditions, prompting the World Bank to adopt a comprehensive approach that later collapsed under managerial reforms. This paper explains the shift away from whole‑sector housing policy, critiques contemporary comprehensive approaches, and argues that future agendas must be grounded in the economic‑social‑political dialectic highlighted by leading theorists.

Abstract

In terms of welfare, development, and overall distributional impact, the study of whole sector housing development is more significant than attention to parts of a housing system. Housing policy development is increasingly taking the more comprehensive approach. The first phases of international housing policy, 1972-83, represented in sites and services (and related in situ slum upgrading) projects, could never become completely effective. These approaches had only fragmentary relationships to general land policies, to the development of housing finance systems, and to the broader economic, social and institutional conditions for enhancing the qualities and supplies of housing. In due time the theoretical and practical limitations became apparent and various international aid agencies, including the World Bank, adopted broader, more sophisticated thinking in housing, leading to a quest for whole sector housing development. But in the late 1990s, within managerial reforms in the World Bank, the specialist housing section was disbanded and the staff dispersed to other sections. This paper provides an historical explanation for the change, along with critical commentaries on the potential dilemmas with the modern, more comprehensive approaches. It is argued that policy and research agendas should be more evidently based upon understanding of the developmental dialectic between the economic, the social and the political. The developmental welfare of such a dialectic has authority and legitimacy from several Nobel prize winners in the 1990s. This paper reflects upon the relevance of their theoretical contributions.