In 2019 many Caribbean nations are seeing strong growth in their economies. This is unquestionably a good thing overall, but presents new problems. Just as the faster a car drives, the more important a seatbelt is in the event of an accident, so too do regional nations need to consider new plans for their urban futures in light of their economic growth. A central consideration for the future is the challenge of addressing unplanned communities within urban centres.
Insufficient housing stock for growing populations
While the Caribbean and Latin American region has, in recent years, been the most urbanised region in the developing world, a change in this trend has occurred (by urban planning standards) relatively rapidly. Within the Dominican Republic, 100 years ago 80 per cent of the population lived in rural areas; between 1920 and 1970 the advance of industry saw the population skyrocket and, by the mid-1980s, it was held that the cities of the Dominican Republic had a deficit of 400,000 homes.
In Trinidad in 2017, some 200,000 people were said to be occupying empty or abandoned properties to which they did not have legal title, and Jamaica saw the UN claim that 25% of its approximately 3 million residents were living in homes that were not legally theirs. This issue is one many nations around the world must contend with.
Given the unique nature of the Caribbean — with its painful memories of slavery and entrenched inequality; unique geographical nature as a region, with many island nations but a comparatively small population; and the rapid growth that many nations’ economies are seeing today — failure to pursue real and enduring answers to the issue of insufficient housing stock could have particularly damaging consequences.
But Caribbean nations are by no means the only ones that must reflect on their history to seek solutions for the future.
The Experience Abroad
Once upon a time many nations pursued public housing policies that, in hindsight, look like afterthoughts; for while public housing was provided, it was often done with a focus on putting roofs over heads, with little consideration of the wider causes and effects of doing so. Though nobody could fairly champion the results today as examples of inspiring social policy, as with many challenges that have long been with us, ignorance has diminished and understanding has grown over time.
Today the thinking has changed. For example, recognition has grown that it is not beneficial for residents of public housing, nor a city as a whole, to create clusters and pockets of public housing. Instead there has often been a shift towards the creation of public housing across a number of different areas within a city. This way, residents in public housing do not have to suffer under de facto segregation policies that, at one time, consigned them to isolated pockets in a city; instead they can more easily live and work within the wider community. What’s more, some of the broader social challenges that can be present within the public housing sector can be more effectively combatted.
In diversifying where public housing is placed, public authorities and not-for-profit groups can better address issues like substance abuse and crime, knowing their presence can be localised to a smaller footprint (such as one apartment or home) rather than contending with them in a huge city block with hundreds of residences.
As well as this, the diversification of public housing has allowed for a reduction in the stigma that surrounded it in years prior, and enables those who have the need to utilise public housing to form stronger and more enduring relationships with the community around them. By every measure this outcome is a win-win.
Private Markets and Public Housing
The relationship between the expense of property — whether buying or renting — and public housing has long been known. While few adults would opt for public housing over the purchase of a home or private rental of one, many people across the world, who in years prior were able to afford a private residence, have found themselves priced out due to the rising cost of living and other factors.
Key among the other factors has been the increasing globalisation of national property markets and, in turn, the post-GFC aftershocks that have seen many who would once have looked to stocks and other investments for growth in wealth, mainline into property, given its traditional perception as more secure in a number of markets. With the global nature of this trend, there are no quick or easy answers to reducing house prices.
Many homeowners cite their property as their biggest investment, and accordingly a sharp drop in the value of homes can hurt one part of a nation, even if it benefits another group, like first-time buyers. Nonetheless, the disadvantage in that circumstance remains greater for those who don’t have a home compared to those who do.
Governments seeking to address the public housing issue must look not only to the creation of more housing for public use, but policies that shift course and increase access to private property, be it by buying or renting.
A View to the Future
Getting the approach right in urban planning could bring immense benefits for a nation, not just in the area of public housing, but across the board, with a drop in unemployment, a rise in education levels, a growth in the quality of life among citizens, and accordingly less and less money required over time for social safety net services, given those who once needed them may no longer require them.
It also addresses more immediate day to day concerns. When urban planning is done properly the strain on essential resources, like a community’s water supply, is diminished. So too do broader quality of life factors — like traffic congestion, air pollution and crime — usually decline when overcrowding is reduced. But this all begins with proper planning of where to lay the bricks and mortar, and how to plan public housing and communities around them for the benefit of all.
