El Análisis Multiresolución (MRA)

The first housing policy in Brazil dates back to the period 1964–1985. In 1964 the federal government enacted the National Housing Act which, inter alia, provided for the establishment of the National Housing Bank (BNH) The BNH had been created to solve the housing problem by encouraging ownership and supporting the production of large numbers of low-income projects (Malta, 2006). The bank‘s main purposes were to stimulate savings to finance home construction through lending institutions, to coordinate the activities of both the public and private sectors, and to introduce financial incentives. The BNH could raise funds through bonds issued and could also receive deposits from governmental agencies, public co-operatives and mixed companies. This was the first time that the federal government had taken the lead in an attempt to resolve the shortage of social housing.

Through the provision of necessary resources and the establishment of nationwide housing programmes, the federal government produced a record number of social housing units in the country approximated at 5 million in just over two decades (Moraes Valença & Fialho Bonates, 2009; Lewis, 2010).

In the 1980s Brazil experienced an economic crisis which led to the rise in unemployment and inflation. This rise in the unemployment rate reduced the guarantee fund for employees (FGTS) source of finance as workers withdrew from the FGTS and saving accounts, and consequently diminished the BNH‘s ability to fund social housing, as the FGTS was one of the main contributors to the BNH fund. The high inflation rate fuelled the woes of the BNH as mortgage payments made by

customers towards their houses were readjusted once or twice a year, whereas their debt was readjusted quarterly. As the readjustments required by the bank from customers became higher than their salary adjustments, inevitably customers failed to pay the new rates and defaulted, and the bank consequently became bankrupt and closed down in November 1986 (Moraes Valença & Fialho Bonates, 2009; Lewis, 2010). Another public bank, the Federal/Public Saving Bank (CAIXA), took over many of the BNH‘s functions.

The closure of the BNH in 1986 placed the future social housing programmes and construction in jeopardy as all national programmes for social housing were suspended. Housing projects lacked a continuous, consistent and structured national programme (Lewis, 2010; Magalhaes, 2010). The bank‘s demise meant a period of state absence from the field of housing policies, including urban policies (Cardoso, 2009).

In 1987 the government launched and implemented the following two new approaches to financing and supporting the improvement of housing for low-income earners: (i) the communicades programme which primarily supported the development of new homes, settlements and income generating activities of low-income earners through mutirao, mutual self-help as the participants collectively built and also managed the building process; and (ii) the casa melhor (meaning ‗better house‘) programme, which provided loans, subsidies and technical support to households living in squatter settlements and other poor-quality settlements, to improve, rebuild and expand their homes.

The programmes were stopped in 1990 as it became clear that targets set were not going to be met (Cabannes, 1997; Moraes Valença & Fialho Bonates, 2009).

According to Moraes Valença and Fialho Bonates (2009), the absence of a well-defined direction by the federal government due to the closure of the BNH in 1986, some state and municipality housing initiatives gained visibility and most of the other initiatives were short lived. The inconsistency of the housing policy was, to some extent, attributed to the institutional vacuum left by the dismantling of the BNH. In an attempt to close the institutional vacuum left by the demise of the BNH, Brazilian experts and social leaders came together under the auspices of the Citizenship Institute in 2000 to develop and propose solutions to address the housing challenge. The team moved from the premise that ‗a decent home is the one located in urbanised land, with access to the whole essential public services by part of the population that must be covered with programmes that generate employment and income‘ (Magalhaes, 2010:11). They recommended, amongst other things, the creation of the Ministry of Cities and the Council of Cities, which was subsequently created later in 2003. The ministry covers the following functions: housing, environmental sanitation, urban mobility and transportation, and urban programmes, and each function becoming a Secretariat in this ministry. The Ministry of the Cities therefore brought housing, sanitation, public transportation and land

restructuring together. The four National Secretariats were together assigned the following responsibilities:

 Urban development policy

 Sectoral policies for housing, environmental sanitation, urban transport and traffic

 Promotion of programmes regarding upgrading, housing, environmental sanitation, urban transport and traffic and urban development, in conjunction with various spheres of government, the private sector and NGOs

 Subsidy policy for social housing, sanitation and urban transportation

 Planning, regulation, standardisation and management of resources on upgrading, housing, environmental sanitation, urban transportation, traffic and urban development

 Participation in the formulation of general guidelines for conservation of urban water systems and the adoption of watersheds as basic units of planning and management of sanitation.

In 2004 the Ministry of Cities through its National Housing Secretariat (NHS) introduced a new National Housing Policy (NHP), after nearly two decades of absence of housing policies in the housing sector since the demise of the BNH in 1986 (Magalhaes, 2010). As part of an integrated urban development approach, the new NHP became the main housing instrument and served to

 inform housing strategies and actions for implementation by the federal government;

 provide a conceptual framework to structure all housing related actions and interventions; and

 coordinate relevant stakeholders in the implementation of the policy.

Through the NHS, the Ministry of Cities focused on two main areas: (i) the institutional and legal restructuring of the housing sector; and (ii) the review of the existing housing programmes and increasing investment in housing.

Housing policy objectives by the Brazilian government, to a very large extent, pursued home ownership rather than rental housing. Rental housing was provided for in the housing policy to a much lesser extent than ownership (Piedade Morais, 2007; Piza et al., 2011).

In Brazil the home ownership ratio was 74, 4 per cent (IBGE, 2000), very close to Argentina (74, 9 per cent), Mexico (75, 3 per cent) and Belgium (74 per cent), and just slightly above the numbers for the US (66, 2 per cent), but behind Spain, where roughly 83 per cent of households are home owners (Piedade Morais, 2007). According to Piza et al. (2011), rental and sharing arrangements increase the number of choices for those who cannot buy and for those who are in search of job opportunities.

Renting also provides a means of income generation or financing for poor owners. Rental

arrangements must be considered as part of the policy mix to enhance the effectiveness of the housing policy. National housing systems and plans to ensure the delivery of housing are discussed below.