Housing Mexico City: 20th Century and Today

INFONAVIT stands for “Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la Vivienda para los Trabajadores” (the Mexican federal institute for worker’s housing) and the Mexican government website claims it is “the main Mexican state institution for ensuring that families can exercise their constitutional right to decent housing.” The Mexican government has made an effort to alleviate the housing crisis in Mexico City, but more importantly in all of Mexico, by funding public housing through INFONAVIT. In reality it has created more problems than solutions for the people that live in these settlements. It has also widened the wealth gap even further. It can also be said that the settlement resembles a dystopian society to the point where even the aerial photographs look unreal.

INFONAVIT Housing (Image source: Habitat D.F.)

INFONAVIT was founded in 1972, but didn’t commence with most of its projects until the late 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century. These housing developments are largely considered a failure for many reasons that other housing developments around the world fail. A notable example in the United States being Pruitt-Igoe, and just like Pruitt-Igoe, the lack of maintenance in these housing settlements led to them being dilapidated. As the urban metropolises around Mexico were growing in population, there became a lack of housing in the city. Eventually these settlements were erected, but a major problem is that people who used to live 20 minutes from their work, now lived 2 hours away. These are also people who couldn’t afford housing and much less the maintenance costs that come with owning a house. The Mexican government was actively working to erect more housing that maintenance was deferred and along with this the quality of life fell and necessities like water were becoming more difficult to obtain.

The deferred maintenance put the inhabitants in a similar situation that they were in, if not worse, considering the distance from their employment. As an article in the Los Angeles Times states, “Homeowners toting buckets scrounge for water delivered by trucks. Gutters run with raw sewage from burst pipes. Streets sink, sidewalks crumble, and broken-down water treatment plants rust. In some developments, blackouts hit for days at a time. Inside many homes, roofs leak, walls crack and electrical systems short circuit, blowing out appliances and in some cases sparking fires that send families fleeing.” Another reason why these settlements failed was because at times, the population in these residences would be greater than what they were built for. These settlements were also built on land that was either on weak soil or steep slopes. With the lack of maintenance, the over use of these spaces, and lack of emphasis on geological placement it is no wonder these projects failed to last a decade.

(Image Source: Los Angeles Times)

INFONAVIT was also a financial failure, because the Mexican government offered subsidies to private companies that helped fund these housing settlements. As these developers grew more wealthy from the subsidies, the program became bankrupt.

There are many elements that created the perfect storm when it came to housing. Now, the families are the ones that continually suffer the hardships and consequences of public programs.

When analyzing housing, one must look to the economy to find the faults that led to the current housing crisis in Mexico City. The wealth gap has created an incredible inequality between people with wealth and people in poverty. Carlos Slim, is one of the worlds richest people with a net worth of $53.9 billion and the richest man in Mexico. Additionally, the 1% owns 21% of the nations wealth, which is the highest percentage gap in the world. In contrast, there are the lower income housing areas, which house 1 to 2 million of Mexico City’s population. The most prominent and well known areas being Iztapalapa, Chimalhuacan, and Nezahualcoyotl. Mexico City also has impressive architecture and infrastructure with its high rises, tunnels, and highways, but somehow Mexico City is no closer to solving the housing crisis.

Photographer Johnny Miller took aerial photographs of this stark contrast in housing situations. People with wealth neighbor the communities in poverty, and are only separated by a wall or a street as shown:

The comparison in quality of housing (image source: unequalscenes.com/mexico-city-df)

Wealth separated by a road (image source: unequalscenes.com/mexico-city-df)

Efforts were made in the 1950’s and early 2000’s to alleviate the housing crisis and help people living in poverty. However, the housing programs ultimately failed and and the wealth gap widened. This can be attributed to the leniency of the Mexican government on the taxes for people of wealth. While the people of wealth get tax breaks, the people in poverty live in parts of the city that are filled with crime, drugs, and lack amenities. According to Johnny Miller, while in Mexico he noticed that people were reluctant to have their photographs taken. This might seem normal, but he mentions that in other parts of the world this is quite the opposite, because people want their picture taken and are attracted by the camera. One mother’s reasoning was kidnapping. She said that, “they take photos of the children and share it on social media. That’s how they know which ones to take. This is why we don’t like cameras.”

With one of the largest wealth gaps in the world, the people in poverty are ultimately the ones who pay the price. The quality of housing that people have affects every part of their lives. The way a neighborhood is planned can lower the crime rate, it can also increase the quality of living through its amenities, spaces, and light.

The growing economy and population make it increasingly difficult to acquire equal housing for people living in Mexico City. Just between 1970 and 1995, a revitalization program displaced 40% of its population from the historic center. This leads to the problem of gentrification in a place, which is rich in history through its people and its structures.  Additionally, the 30% to 50% rise in housing prices makes it difficult for people in poverty to afford to stay there.

There is a clear separation of wealth in Mexico City that is evident in aerial photographs, but even just by walking in the streets. Western and Southern Mexico City are the wealthy areas while the Northern and Eastern parts are living in poverty. Although there is an effort to alleviate this pressure through housing, residents find it difficult to commute to work since their housing is far from the city center. With the higher housing prices around central Mexico, only the wealthy can afford to live in close proximity of their employment.

In an attempt to control urban sprawl the Federal District Government implemented a policy called “Banda Dos”. This policy was meant to benefit the residents living in poverty by keeping them in existing infrastructure in the city center in an attempt to regulate the disproportionate growth. It was also meant to help replace deteriorated public housing projects and use other family owned plots of land to build on.

There are many different housing types, and an insurmountable amount of configurations. Because of this, it is important to understand the different types of settlements before analyzing or comparing.

Housing types in Mexico City:

Colonia Popular (Image Source: Indice Politico 2014)

Colonias populares (popular colonies): These are unregulated, unconsolidated settlements lead to irregular growth within the city. The infrastructure is solidly built, but are subject to dilapidation and fiscal problems. More than 60% of the population of Mexico City live in these settlements.

Vecindad in Mexico City (Image Source: Flickr.com/PHOTOS/ENEAS)

Vecindades (Inner-city slums): These dwellings are from the late 19th century and were once occupied by the wealthy, but used by people in poverty once they were abandoned. Vecindades account for 10% of housing in Mexico City.

Cartolandia, ciudad perdida (Image source: Fundación Luis Pasteur.)

Ciudades perdidas (Lost cities): These refer to a small-scale shanty housing on vacant land or undesirable urban locations as defined by the University College London.

Rooftop room in CDMX (Image source: Vivanuncios.com)

Cuartos de azotea (rooftop rooms): These rented rooms are servants’ quarters that are on the roofs of apartments or public housing. They provide 0.4% of of Mexico City’s housing units.

Public housing by INFONAVIT in CDMX (Image source: Animal Politico)

Deteriorated public housing projects: These housing projects are formally produced and subsidized housing projects. The main dilemma is that they are subject to overcrowding and deterioration as a consequence. According to the University College London, 15% of Mexico City’s Population live in said housing projects.

It is necessary to understand the housing of people living in poverty before looking at the different qualities each type of housing possesses. Housing is (especially in Mexico) not a single blueprint that can be reproduced. It varies depending on location, economic status, and social status among other factors.