Housing policies in Central America: Political and economic constraints

Abstract

This article summarises the results of a comparative study of housing policies in the Central American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador and Honduras.’ An attempt is made to relate policy performance to the strategies and intentions of decision-makers in different regimes in these countries over the past three decades, as well as to the significant constraints limiting housing policy choices and actions. The objective here is that of most comparative policy studies: to derive some generalisations about governmental problem-solving activity and policy innovation through a comparison of different national initiatives to deal with the same set of problems.2 By ‘housing policies’ we refer to that area of policy concerned with the provision of shelter and related essential services (water, sewage, electricity, and so forth). In recent years, however, housing policy has been more broadly conceived as a part of overall ‘human settlements’ concerns, which include urban planning and land use, transportation and communications, public health services and community development, as well as the provision of shelter.3 Such a conception is useful in that it draws attention to the wider policy environment, and those factors within it that may have an important bearing on housing policy. The distribution of incomes and income levels, for instance, may affect the limits on the kind of housing people can afford; national geography influences city size and locations, which in turn affects transportation costs and spatial arrangements. Urban growth rates and rural economic opportunities influence migration flows and housing demands; general economic policies affect money supply and interest rates on mortgages. In addition to these factors, external political variables shape policy choices in important ways. Human settlements, especially in an urbanising world, respond to powerful forces of specialised and sectoral interests. It would be hard to imagine any real consensus among landlords, tenants, transportation planners, real estate developers, and construction firms on what constitute ‘appropriate’ regulations for land use or building standards, for instance. Yet it would be impossible to imagine government policies in these housing areas emerging without consultation with representatives of such groups. Resulting policies inevitably will be influenced by political stratification patterns which affect exchange relationships between these groups and the regime.