So-called Socialized Housing is not for the Poor -Towards workable solution concepts for securing a place in the

city Institute for Popular Democracy, 20101 Why Illegality is still the preferred mode of urban poor housing There has always been something missing in the defensive action of urban poor groups against demolitions and government resettlement plans that would push them out of Metro Manila. The same has to be said of the urban poor's advocacy for so-called presidential proclamations that would cause the reservation of particular sites for socialized housing projects and the regularization of previously illegal settlements into formal housing settlements. Legal encumbrances aside, urban poor advocates themselves are aware that nancing is the key challenge to the viability of securing a place in the city for poor people. Assembling the nancial resources for acquiring either private or government property that have been reserved for housing purposes by the president or by local governments is often the harder part. The ultimate source of funding for so-called socialized housing are typically the households themselves the Philippine public housing program is essentially market-based approach, with some unsystematic subsidies here and there. The market value of the land and the cost of land development or site preparation will be the binding constraint to housing poor people in the cities. On the other hand the prolem may also be seen as being an income problem rather than a housing problem. Perhaps if incomes have not stagnated for the past three decades, then the housing problem would not be as it is. Thus, it is not surprising that in Quezon city, where one-fourth of the country's informal settlements are found the preferred housing strategy is illegality. Commercial banks would not lend to people who do not have large and steady streams of incomei. As will be shown below, even the government's own nancing schemes do not appear to bring housing within the reach of the poorer half of the city. The result is that less than ten percent of the urban poor in this city participate in the government's housing programs. Records show that two-thirds of these people in Quezon city who managed to join the government's biggest housing nance program the Community Mortgage Program are in arrears or have been declared as being delinquent. These are in danger of being evicted from their homes. Certainly, regulations that designate particular places as being off-limits for purposes other than socialized housing will have a depressing effect on otherwise sky-rocketing land values in cities. But with a very few exceptions, local governments do not follow the requirement of the UDHA (Urban Development and Housing Act) that require that socialized housing sites be designated and acquired by local governments. It is easy to understand why local governments might not want to impose upon urban landowners for aside from the reduced property taxes that depressed land values would imply many local governments would also be imposing such regulations on their political allies, if not on their own families. It is also not rare for political families to have a direct interest in the business property development. The use of government funds to locate public facilities so that they directly raise the value of private properties appears to be quite prevalent. One 2010 presidential candidate has been charged by his colleagues in the Senate of diverting government projects so that these would
1 This paper was produced with the support of the Fredriech Ebert Stiftung, Manila Office. the different sections were the result of several project specific consultaitons and engagements with IPD's partners in NUPCO and urban poor leaders at SRTA-North Triangle. This draft will be subject to further critique by experts, policy makers as well as urban poor leaders.

be near properties he owns that are being developed for commercialization. So-called socialized housing is not for the poor In a discussion with urban poor leaders, former HGC president Gonzalo Bongolan laid out the following assertions: CMP programs appear to have gone beyond the reach of the urban poor because the cheapest incity land available for CMP programs now typically costs between P6,500 and 7,500 per square meter. At P7,000 a 25 square meter lot would cost P175,000. That is just for the land. On the other hand the maximum amount that can be borrowed from the CMP program is P120,000. This is probably why the CMP program has benetted only around 182,000 families since 1989. Medium-rise buildings are also beyond the reach of the urban poor households. Even if land were free the cost of a small unit would not be less that P400,000, monthly amortization would be around P3,300 pesos per month, based on a construction cost of P13,000 to P16,000 per square meter. The Family Incomes and Expenditures Surveys reveal that urban poor families are able to pay only P200 to P500 per month. The table below shows how families at different income-levels would spend for housing, given that there are other pressing needs. If the least cost CMP land and housing package is P150,000 the table below shows that only households in the 7th up could afford to join the CMP program. Sixty percent of the Philippine population would nd the CMP program to be beyond their reach

In Quezon city it has been estimated that only about 6 percent of the 200 thousand urban poor families participate in the government's housing programs. Of those associations that are in the CMP program 60 percent have past due and delinquent accounts. The affordability of this marketbased housing program is not the only problem. There have also been many difculties encountered in the enforcement of loan agreements even among those who can afford the monthly amortizations.

The President's promises to the urban poor

In his covenant with the stakeholders and urban housing advocates the presidential candidate Aquino said that the following goals and policies will be part of his agenda to build an inclusive urban society. (1) no illegal forced evictions and no evictions at all without decent relocation; (2) shift emphasis from off-city relocation to area upgrading (on-site) and in-city resettlement through the Community Mortgage Program and presidential land proclamations; (3) to extend health insurance coverage to the urban poor, put an end to (classroom) shifting in public schools, provide full set of quality textbooks to public school children, and provide easier access to water and electricity tot eh urban poor; (4) to provide the necessary funds for social housing and releasing the mandated budget under the Comprehensive and Integrated Shelter Financing Act (CISFA); (5) to create jobs for the urban poor and help them avail of social security; (6) to work with local government units for the full implementation of the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA); (7) to negotiate for peace in Mindanao and respond to the needs of people displaced by the conict; (8) to address the housing and livelihood needs of Ondoy-affected communities and look for appropriate solutions for residents of Manggahan Floodway and Lupang Arenda; (9) the appointment of reformminded persons to HUDCC and other shelter agencies; (10) the participation of all stakeholders in nding solutions and that the process through which the details of the plan will be provided will be consultative and transparent.ii It would appear that there is at present a continuing search for operational approaches that would implement the president's covenant with the urban poor. The aftermath of the clash in Quezon city between the authorities and urban poor groups in North Triangle, at the time that president Aquino was in the United States in September, saw the hastening of the search for solutions that could implement the president's agenda for the urban poor. As a result of that clash, the president asked other heads of government agencies (DILG, DSWD, NAPC) outside of the HUDCC grouping to initiate dialogues with urban poor groups to prepare implementation approaches. The next two sections briey narrate the ofcial and civil society discourse on addressing the matter of resource problem, which is the crux of the implementation challenge. Need for new strategies : Binay Vice President Jejomar Binay also heads the HUDCC (Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council vaguely talks about creative capitalism as a necessary element of the solution to housing nance. His predecessor, former vice-president Noli de Castro's main contribution to housing nance policy has been to extend loan terms and to bring down interest rates for those employed in the formal sector. Housing nance from the National Housing Authority under de Castro has been mainly rationed in favor of people who have had to be resettled as a result of North Rail and South Rail resettlement programs. The backlog in housing has continued to rise, and even more so in the aftermath of typhoon Ondoy and Pepeng, which added 200,000 households from around Laguna lake who need to be housed away from the ood-prone shores of the lake and from the channels emanating from it. According to Binay, the total housing need is around 3.6 million units of which only one-third is in the form of bankable projects that the private sector can support. To vice-president Binay the proposal to make use of creative capitalism entails talking to socialized housing developers in the private sector to hire prospective dwellers in house-for-work schemesiii. Citing carpenters, plumbers, and other poor Filipinos in the housing sector who cannot afford to buy a house of their own, Binay wants the private developers to stretch the reach of market forces in order to include in the business plan those who in fact cannot buy houses. Binay

wants to restudy loan requirements and repayment terms, saying that labor services of carpenters, plumbers and peons may be a good start for paying their housing loans.In terms of mechanisms the vice-president argues that the poor homebuyers can buy with their services, the government can pay the businessmen and the developers with tax incentives. Months after the post-election exhuberance that led him to make these bold proposals the vice president's main proposal at the end of 2010iv appears to be one of going around the country to convince mayors and governors to donate lands for socialized housing. He believes that if land is donated by local governments then people can build houses with a loan of less than one hundred thousand pesos (affordable to the fth decile up), instead of four hundred thousand which is the cost of a house and a lot. Need for new strategies: NUPCO-Kilos Maralita-IPD discussions NUPCO -- mobilizing City resources and regulations to secure the urban poor's claim This basically refers to the rather optimistic expectation of tapping the willingness of elected city ofcials to reserve ve percent of the city development fund (which is 20 percent of the annual internal revenue allotment from the national government) for the acquisition and development of lands for socialized housing, including those that will be created out of the local governments' exercise of their power to expropriate private lands for social housing purposes. While it is true that there are laws requiring local governments to identify areas that will be devoted to socialized housing, this is one of those legal mandates that does not identify resources that would be needed to realize its aims. Apart from pressures by urban poor groups and communities on city governments, the national government can probably push a national policy compelling local governments to pursue their housing mandates. But because housing is actually a devolved mandate all that the central government can do is to act rather obliquely. In recent months DILG secretary Jesse Robredo has issued orders for local governments to submit their inventory of socialized housing sites. However, there is nothing in the Urban development and Housing Act that species standards of adequacy and nancial support that LGUs need to convey to the urban por housing sector. There are also no penal provisions in the law. Together with the Secretary of Finance Secretary Robredo is also campaigning for local governments to impose the tax on idel lands. The nance secretary looks at local government revenue generation as the third revenue center of the country. Secretary Robredo is also looking at the underutilized tax on idle land as a policy instrument that could increase the supply and reduce the price of land for socialized housing. To support these initiatives it may be necessary for the central government to defer allocation of non-mandatory grants (such as the Internal Revenue Allotment) to those local governments that fail to utilize tax powers and tax bases that were handed over to them by the Local Government Code of 1991. The last section of this paper delves more deeply into the matter of increasing the supply and reducing the price of urban land. Local governments as nancial intermediaries Local legislation can authorize the tapping of credit lines for making the down payment on LGU-acquired properties that would then be paid by the urban poor communities over a

period of time. Local governments act as nancial intermediaries to allow poor urban communities to pay for socialized housing over an extended period of time. The local government takes on payment risks but does not award any subsidies. The poor urban households basically pay for the costs of lands and buildings, except that the presumed cost of lots go down once these are taken off the upscale property development market after being classied as sites for socialized housing for the urban poor. The urban poor as property developers Medium-rise dwellings for the urban poor can apply in locations where land values are high and where, even if longterm nancing were to be available, the costs would still be exorbitant. In such cases the lot subject to expropriation by the local government would be smaller. This points to a third approach that departs signicantly from the current approaches being contemplated and it draws inspiration from the state legislation in Mumbai, India. This third approach -- the "urban poor as property developers" or the urban poor as housing providers -- can work in both private and publicly-owned land and even in areas where property values are high and going up rapidly. The key idea is for the urban poor groups and their designated property developers to stake a claim on an entire property that they currently occupy. Having done that they would then build upwards in medium-rise dwellings in order to reduce the footprint of their dwellings. The space that is freed up is developed for a mix of commercial purposes and the income stream from the commercialized section of the property pays for the urban poor's place in the city, where the land values are really high (as in Dharavi in Mumbai) the housing for the urban poor may even be awarded for free. One supposes that the local government may share in the residual income after. This approach is bound to be important in areas such as North Triangle and East Triangle that will soon host the Quezon City Central Business District and from where 16 thousand families are expected to be displaced. The North Triangle communities clashed with the authorities and blocked Epifanio de los Santos Avenue in Septemebr 2010. North Triangle and East Triangle would be too expensive to be paid for by the city's urban poor, using the more familiar means. The San Roque Community Council North Triangle Alliance (SRCCNTA), the organization of the urban poor in North Triangle, has been proposing a mixed use scheme under which they will relocate to a 12 hectare lot within the site so that the rest of the 37 hectares of North Triangle can be used for the Central Business District commercial spaces. This research supported the elaboration of this new strategy for North Triangle, which will be presented in a subsequent section. Critical to the argument for this urban-poor- as-property-developers concept for North Triangle is the implicit argument that its proponents must make that the wealth created out of developing public lands in central locations must somehow be earmarked for the urban poor specically, that part of this new wealth needs to be earmarked for the urban poor who have been residing in North Triangle. On the day of the clash in North triangle in September 2010 the head of the National Housing Authority challenged this assumption on national television, saying that the revenues that NHA would be generating from commercializing the North Triangle property would serve as the fund that would increase housing supplies (for North triangle settlers and others) in less expensive localities. There are two necessary rebuttals to this argument against in-city and/or on-site resettlement and regularization:

First, as documented by ALMEC corporation (which developed a World Banknanced feasibility study for the commercialization of North and East Triangle for Quezon City) the proposal for off-city resettlement, such as in Montalban, Rzal, can be quite expensive. It will be signicantly cheaper to relocate people far from the city only if houses are substandrard, the new settlers compete with the locals for access to already congested public services and if there are no income-replacing provisions. This research has a developed an ordinance (Annex) that species resettlement standards that the National Housing Authority and Quezon city will need to nance out of the proceeds of property development. If these standards that implement ICESCR mandates (International Covenent on Economic Social and Cultural Rights) then the cost of off-city relocation would not seem too different to costs entailed by a combination of in-city and off-site but in-city relocation. The second, argument should also be addressed to the urban poor organizations that insist on staying in the more expensive central locations near the malls and the train stations, instead of, say, agreeing to move to other parts of Quezon city. As the previous sections have already shown the cost of land and housing, even in mediumrise buildings can be exhorbitant. Because there has yet been no generally applicable shift in the market-based philosophy of urban poor housing in the country it will be difcult to justify special treatment for those who would stay in the MRB's of north triangle. At best, what is already part of the practice (Marikina and Taguig experiences, see ALMEC) is that land can be granted on a usufruct or low-cost lease basis for housing purposes. But by denition, such leases and usufructs must also expire. We have also seen from previous sections that medium-rise buildings tend to be expensive and more costly that what the poor can afford, despite their economy in the use of land. This being the case, the poor who will stay in North Triangle will possess but will most likely not acquire ultimate ownership of North Triangle lots on which their MRBs (medium-rise buildings) will be built. They may stretch the limit of what they can manage to pay on a monthly basis and will probably only own shares in a public housing company on top of the right to live housing units in North Triangle, but those shares in the public housing company will, again, proably not be enough to acquire full ownership of the units. Such an accounting of public subsidies and private contributions is perhaps the fairest possible arrangement with those who will stay on-site being able to encash their accumulated shares at a later time. In effect, what is being purchased is the claim to a specic matrix of conveniences within the city (at the heart of North Triangle) and proximity to opportunities and public services, including ground-level businesses. This bring us closer to that idea that it is perhaps not the right to housing that is being secured, but the right to the city. This perspective is also consistent with the refusal of people to be located in places far from the city, even when the houses there might appear more adequate than those in urban slums. Next level housing As in the previous option, next-level or second oor rental housing (incremental densication of settlements) recognizes the scarcity and high cost of urban land. However, this option is also cognizant of the fact that most medium-rise housing initiatives of the government to date have ended up as commercial failuresv. Deeper study is needed to identify the causes of nancial failure, but what this approach suggests is for the urban poor

to build upwards at a pace and with associated costs that are of their own choosing. Houses can reach up to the second or third oor. The upper oors can be used as units for natural family splitters siblings setting up their own households, or they can be rental units for people working in cities who might otherwise have to travel long distances everyday (students and salesladies for instance), or the family relocates to the upper oors and make the ground oor available for commercial renters. Next-level incremental housing will mean either that there will be more adults or families paying for the same piece of expensive urban land, or that there will be income streams from rentals that can supplement family incomes of the intermittently employed urban poor. In contrast to high-rise or medium rise housing, the next-level housing option addresses the nancial viability of the urban poor households' continuing stay in the city without demanding too much by way of government subsidies. In CMP areas, the active promotion of urban settlement densication through next-level housing will increase the nancial viability of the CMP program itself and will increase the urban poors' interest in shifting towards formality. The estimate is that a grace period of two to three years before a CMP lot is amortize will allow a family to generate enough income to offset the cost of building the second oor. Organizational, legal and nancial innovations are needed to convey such income streams to the investors or creditors who nanced the second oor. But there are already working models that address these issues.
Barangay Luz in Cebu: Next-level housing proof of concept Barangay Luz in Cebu city features a multi-purpose cooperative located in the city center, near some of the biggest commercial establishments. The lot in barangay Luz was acquired thru the CMP as well as a local government nancing scheme. But just as in the experience of the majority of CMP beneciaries in Quezon city, many of the Barangay Luz residents were having trouble making the monthly payments on the lots. The cooperative went into different businesses, including water supply and electricity distribution. Waste segregation continues to be a big source of savings generation for the cooperative's members. However, the most important innovation of the cooperative is their second-oor housing business. In this business, the cooperative negotiates for a credit line with the Peace and Equity Foundaiton thru its Visayas subsidiary. The cooperative screens members' eligibility to loans that would nance second-oor housing improvements thru the requirement that members should have already paid-up their subscribed capital of P10,000 per household. The cooperative has been able to lend up to P70,000 to households. because of the brisk housing rental business for students and temporary workers it is common for the loan spent for building the rooms on the second oor to be completely paid within two years. Sweat equity is also part of the nancing scheme. Procurement and property management is done by the cooperative for two years. Until that time when the loans have been fully paid the income from the room rentals are paid directly to the cooperative and the cooperative also holds on to the keys. The cooperative also supplies the water and power to these rental units. If the cooperative's cash ow is healthy, a household may negotiate to earn some of the incomes before full payment has been made. This will be in exchange for a postponement of the hand-over of the key and of the incomes from the cooperative.

The next section narrates the detailed proposal for in-city housing inNorth Triangle. This proposal is consistent with both idea of next-level housing as well as the idea of letting the urban poor-as-property developers. It is only because of the rarity of the practice of cross-

subsidizing urban poor housing costs using incomes from the development of freed-up land that it does not seem quite straigtforward to award some of those incomes to the poor. The more general case ought to be one where the rise in property values (i.e., the outcome of property development) is routinely taxed by local authorities and used for increasing the supply of land that are serviced with drainage, electricity, water, health centers, schools and parks. The legal instrument for taxing unearned income arising from rising property values brought about by public projects is available in the Philippines (annex 2). One might also think of the 20 percent balanced housing requirement (annex 3) as a tax wherein new subdivision dwellers that increase the demand on urban infrastructure that must continually be nanced is obtained by the local government to cross-subsidize socialized housing.

Bringing it all together in North Triangle

This study supports the main elements of the proposal of the San Roque Community Council North Triangle Alliance (SRCC-NTA) for on-site housing development of areas in North and East Triangle currently used as housing settlements by residents with yet informal status. On-site housing for the informal settlers is an important economic and social component of the planned Quezon City Central Business District, which will cover the North Triangle and East Triangle areas. For the presentation purposes, the section focuses on North Triangle. However, the study applies as well to East Triangle, where associations of settlers have also adopted a vision of on-site housing development. North and East Triangle in Quezon City are sites of contention between poor urban informal residents defending a place in the city and planners for exclusive commercial use. Residents argue that under a policy of mixed and non-exclusive land use in North and East Triangle, lands can be freed for commercial uses under the Central Business District without the socially costly eviction and off-site relocation of residents that removes them from their sources of livelihood. The proposal has the following major features:

1. The allocation of land parcels out of the 37-hectare area currently occupied by residents. In North
Triangle, a land parcel of between 12 to 15 hectares can be carved out of the existing settled area to relocate the households. The government will make the land parcel available under a usufruct agreement with a legal entity representing the residents.

2. The allocated area will be used for 5-oor medium rise buildings (MRB) that accommodate dwelling

units at the upper oors and service and business units at the ground oor. Each building will have provisions for further upwards expansion to more than ve (5) oors. A total of 167 MRBs is needed to accommodate 8,000 households that are expected to participate in the redevelopment program. community organizations will engage in savings mobilization to enable each beneciary household to share their equity contribution in the form of labor to the housing project. Labor equity will be for the construction of the MRBs and the required public works. The labor equity per beneciary family is estimated at one-fourth the total value of each dwelling unit.

3. At the pre-implementation phase of the on-site MRB housing project, residents through their respective

4. The residents will re-organize themselves into appropriate structures for the governance and
management of each MRB. This proposal calls for the formation of a building or housing cooperative for each MRB, for each cluster of MRBs, or for all MRBs. In any case, the cooperative set-up entails a dual ownership system: each building or cluster of buildings or all buildings will be owned by the cooperative composed of the dwellers. At the same, each dweller will be the owner of their respective dwelling unit.

5. Commercial spaces at the ground oor of each MRB will be governed by the building or housing
cooperative as well. Since the cost of the commercial spaces will be included in the amortization of the entire building by the dwellers, the dwellers themselves as owners will have the rights to the income of the commercial spaces. This principle applies as well to utilities serving the dwelling units as much as possible, including water.

6. A building federation will be established, composed of all the MRB co-ops for continuing technical
support to all MRB co-ops and to realize scale and scope for certain economic activities, such as water, electricity, and the commercialization of ground oor spaces for small businesses. The proposal for on-site housing provision through MRBs in north and East Triangle are based on the following principles.

1. On-site development is more economic than other options. It is less costly for the government and the
residents to undertake housing provision on-site in North Triangle and East Triangle rather than to relocate the residents elsewhere.

2. On-site development is more consistent with the principles of participation and equity. It is the option

of choice of most residents of North and East Triangle. Current residents and citizens must be involved in the planning of the CBD and of the housing site. and social uses. The Central Business District and Quezon City as a whole will benet economically from the presence of a large community composed of diverse occupational skills. A policy of mixed use is supportive of economic sustainability.

3. On-site development brings more sustained benets arising from the diversity and mixture of economic

4. On-site development promotes social inclusion and solidarity. It creates conditions conducive to

intensive economic cooperation among the MRB residents. In the context of the Central Business District Project, it will also create conditions for economic synergy between the high-end and low-end establishments. It is an important component in achieving social inclusion and cohesion in the city.
Figure 1

Physical Aspects of the On-Site Plan The settled area in North Triangle, shown in the satellite photograph (Figure 1) is around 37 hectares. Under the proposal, the residents will move to a site of between 12 to 15 hectares within the existing site. This would be the land required for constructing 167 MRBs, each of which will accommodate 48

households, or 12 household per oor, to benet an estimated 8,000 families in North Triangle (Table 1).
Table 1 Total number of beneciary households Number of dwelling units per oor Number of oors for dwelling units Number of dwelling units per MRB Number of MRBs required Number of rows of dwelling units per oor Width dimension per dwelling unit (m) Length dimension per dwelling unit (m) Floor size per dwelling unit (sqm) Width per MRB, with 3-m corridor (m ) Length per MRB, with 3-m corridor (m) Area covered by open spaces and corridors (sqm) Ground size per MRB (sqm) Total lot size for all MRBs (sqm) Allotment (30%) for open space including streets (sqm) Total area required for on-site housing (sqm) Total area required for on-site housing (ha) Total area required for on-site housing, with allowance (ha) 8,000 12 4 48 167 2 6.40 6.40 40.96 15.80 41.40 171.60 654.12 109,020.00 32,706.00 141,726.00 14.17 14.2

The land requirement would be 14.2 hectares if the dwelling units were to measure 41 square meters each. Each MRB oor will be composed of two rows of dwelling units and a 3-meter corridor, for a size of 654.12 sqm. per oor. The total footprint of the 167 MRBs would be 109,020 sqm. Provision for streets and open spaces is computed at 32,706 sqm. or 30% of the total lot size occupied by all MRBs. The total land requirement of 14.2 hectares may be either contiguous or interspersed with land parcels designated for other uses. A policy of mixed land use of the North and East Triangle areas must imply mixture of both high-end and low-end commercial and residential uses to promote social and economic diversity as an essential feature to the growth and competitiveness of Quezon City.

Figure 2

Figure 2 (not to scale) shows a cluster of 36 MRBs around the intersections of three main streets. For the 167 MRBs under the plan, there would be ve clusters like this. The MRB site layout aims to maximize the access of dwellers to the streets within the housing project and to the rest of the CBD area, thereby ensuring their integration into the mainstream of social and economic life of the city. Costs and Financing Aspects Construction cost per dwelling unit can vary between P300,000 to P400,000. In this study, the assumed construction cost per dwelling unit is P320,000, or a total of P17.28 million for 48 housing units (Table 1). The cost for common areas is estimated at 20%, or P3.456 million. This means an adjusted cost of P432,000 per dwelling unit. However, the cost can be mitigated by the labor equity of each family, estimated to be at one fourth of the cost per dwelling unit, or P108,000 per dwelling unit. This means a net cost of P324,000 per dwelling unit per family with labor contributions. This also means that a beneciary household would have to contribute almost 22 days of labor per month over a year. Labor contribution valued at this amount is a realistic scenario, given the surplus of labor in the settlement. During the implementation or construction phase of the MRB housing project, other members of the family will continue to work elsewhere for the familys support. Savings mobilized during the preimplementation period will further enable each family to contribute their labor shares. Moreover, the labor requirement from beneciaries can be further mitigated by other sectors of society through Gawad Kalingatype of voluntary contributions of labor.

Table 2 Cost per dwelling unit (P) Total cost for 48 dwelling units (P) Additional cost (20%) for common areas (P) Total cost per MRB (P) Adjusted cost per dwelling unit (P) Value of labor contribution per dwelling unit (P) Net cost per dwelling unit (P) Value of land (P/ha) Value of land (P/sqm) Total value of land for on-site housing, incl. open space (P) Total value of lots for MRBs, excl. open space (P) Share in land value per dwelling unit (P) Total value per dwelling unit, incl. land and building costs (P) Total value per MRB, incl. land and building costs (P) Total value for all MRB, incl. land and building costs (P) Less: Value of lots for MRBs by usufruct (P) Net total cost of all MRBs (P) Net cost of dwelling unit per beneciary (P)

360,000.00 17,280,000.00 3,456,000.00 20,736,000.00 432,000.00 108,000.00 324,000.00 300,000,000.00 30,000.00 4,251,780,000.00 3,270,600,000.00 408,825.00 732,825.00 35,175,600.00 5,862,600,000.00 3,270,600,000.00 2,592,000,000.00 324,000.00

The rising cost of land per hectare in North Triangle is often used as an argument why the residents have to resettle off-site or off-city. However, it can also be used as an argument why allocating a piece of land for on-site housing development is viable and affordable by the government. At P30,000 per square meter, lots occupied by the MRBs would cost over P3.72 billion, net of the cost of land devoted to streets and open areas. The remaining 22.8 hectares (out of the original 37 hectares currently used by the residents) would generate more than P6.85 billion from commercial disposition for the government. The expected revenue more than compensates for the foregone revenue from the land allocated for on-site socialized housing. However, including the cost of land will more than double the cost per dwelling unit and bring the amortization amount per month beyond the affordability of the beneciaries. P3.72 billion translate into P408,825 per dwelling unit. This can be addressed by a usufruct agreement between the government and the beneciaries, under which the land remains under public ownership but leased over a long term (50 years) at zero rates. Without the cost of land, the nancing requirement would be P324,000 per dwelling unit. The lowest interest rate for available government nancing is 6% per annum. This means that if the repayment period is 25 years, the future amount for each dwelling unit is P810,000. This presupposes a simple interest method and equal installment per month of the loan principal. The resulting total payment per beneciary family would then be P2,700. However, the average affordability of families living in North Triangle is P1,000 per month or an affordable future amount of P300,000 in 25 years. Against the required nancing of P324,000, this means an affordable negative interest rate of 0.3%. A solution will be to extend the repayment period to 30 years, resulting in an affordable future amount of P360,000 and an affordable interest rate of positive 0.45%. Against the lowest available rate of 6% per annum, this will still be a highly subsidized rate. At the same time, this subsidy is a cost that Quezon City can still afford.
Table 3 Financing requirement per dwelling unit (P) Amortization period (years) Grace period (years) Repayment of loan principal per year (P) Repayment of loan principal per month (P) Interest amount at 6% per year (P) Interest amount per month (P) Amortization of principal and interest per month (P) 324,000.00 30 5 12,960.00 1,080.00 19,440.00 1,620.00 2,700.00

Future amount (P) Table 4 Total area settled (ha.) Total allocated for MRB housing (ha.) Proportion of MRB allocation to original area (%) Net area for commercial use (ha) Total expected proceeds from commercial disposition (P) Table 5 Affordable payment per month (P) Affordable future amount (P) Affordable interest rate (%)

810,000.00

37.0 14.2 38.3 22.8 6,848,220,000

1,000.00 300,000.00 -0.30

Mixed and Diverse Economic Uses of the MRBs To mitigate subsidy costs for the nancing of the housing project, and to enable beneciaries to afford the normal future amount, the entire on-site housing area must be a place of intensive economic activity that creates diverse opportunities for livelihoods and jobs. Each MRB would be a facility of mixed use, with the second to fth oors allotted for dwelling units and the ground oor for commercial activities and services. From the total oor area of 654.12 sqm., 30% can be allocated for open spaces and corridors, leaving 457.88 sqm. for shop units for different activities. This means that a ground oor shop of more than nine (9) sqm. each can be assigned to each of the 48 beneciary families residing in each MRB. The 48 shop units can accommodate a variety of activities. To identify a few, such activities may include industry workshops, machine shops, repair shops, eateries, bakeshops, barber shops, parlors, computer shops, appliance repair shops, cottage industry workshops, pawnshops, sari-sari stores, day care, and many others. These commercial establishments will constitute the low-end of the Central Business District, thereby making the CBD a non-exclusivist portal for a broader range of economic activities. Employees and workers of the high-end establishments that will soon locate at the CBD will greatly benet from low cost services located at the ground oor of each MRB. The high-end establishments will nd it also benecial to outsource some of their requirements to the low-cost businesses located at the MRBs.

Table 6 Width per MRB, with 3-m corridor (m) Length per MRB, with 3-m corridor (m) Ground oor size per MRB (sqm) Less: 30% for open spaces and corridors (sqm) Floor space available for shops (sqm) Average oor size of shops at ground level (sqm) Number of shops at ground oor

15.80 41.40 654.12 196.24 457.88 9.54 48

As a major effort in poverty reduction in Quezon City, it makes good sense to rst position the poor informal residents to take advantage of the incoming demand for labor and services from both the commercial developers and the public infrastructure projects under the CBD project. Developing the onsite MRB housing projects ahead of other developments will put the residents in a better position to meet their amortization obligations and become major stakeholders of the CBD project. There are alternative options for assigning ownership or user rights of the ground oor business spaces to the households. One is to assign ownership of a shop unit to each household. Each owner will be allowed to make use of the shop unit for any form of economic activity, within certain regulatory limits. One of the allowable uses will be for each owner to lease the unit to any operator, even to non-dwellers of the MRB. Another option is to assign user rights to the building or housing cooperative for each MRB. The cooperative can then make the spaces available for a rental fee to any commercial operator, including families dwelling within the MRB. This way, the co-op can consolidate the shops to accommodate larger economic activities or larger commercial renters. The co-op will then use the proceeds to compensate each family at a xed rate and pool the surplus to the co-ops common funds, one of which will be for covering the obligations of households that default in their amortization payments. Both arrangements are consistent with the principle of equity, since each household would be amortizing the adjusted cost of each dwelling unit that includes the cost of common areas. Both arrangement are also consistent with the statutory denition of a housing cooperative, under which the entire housing or building facility is owned by the cooperative association in which each dwelling family holds shares, and each dwelling family own rights to each dwelling unit. Organization, Governance and Management Ensuring the success of the on-site MRB housing project in the context of the CBD project requires the maximum participation and mobilization of the current residents. The SRCC-NTA, with the support from the NGO community and international humanitarian organizations, can contribute in a major way in ensuring the organization of the residents towards this end. SRCC-NTA is an alliance of 16 community associations (household groupings at neighborhood level) comprising 3,000 families residing in North Triangle. In East Triangle, community organizing is undertaken by the Claret Urban Poor Apostolate (CUPA), which has managed to assist the formation of a federation of community associations called the Pinag-isang Samahan ng Maralita (PASAMA). The community organizing experiences of these groups can be used to develop and establish the appropriate social and economic organizations to govern and manage the housing site with the support of the city government.

A POSTSCRIPT: Expanding the City The limited supply of serviced land can also be seen as an even more fundamental problem. If there is serviced land that is near or within the city then incremental housing (a la Barangay Luz) would be possible. This insight was articulated by Hardoy and Satterthwaite's (1989:113) insight that there is no 'housing gap' but rather a dearth of suitable and affordable land for self-help housing is

meanwhile accepted among experts and ofcials who agree that urban land is the 'essential ingredient' (Murphy 1993:42). In Latin America Smolkavi and Fernanda Furtada demonstrate that this is also the reason for the high cost of land. Smolka goes further, he argues that the way forward then is for there to be an increase in the amount of serviced land. This proposal nds implementation not only in Latin America but also in an example documented by Bernervii. Essentially Berner argues that all that the government has to do is to establish the most basic amenity of having a road, electricity and water. He cites an example where the poor select themselves into this program when they are asked to set up camp in the area while they build their homes in an incremental fashion. Berner lauds the CMP program in the Philippines as a model, in the sense that the improvements to the site, and to the housing structures happens over time. Smolka asks how the nancing for increasing the supply of serviced lands is to come about. He answers this question by saying that the nancing must come from taking the unearned income of the rich that increases whenever there are public works. Smolka is very critical of the regularization movement, such as the one supported by UNHABITAT because land is expensive, people will still be eased out in a process of gentrication because they will not be able to affor the monthly mortgages anyway. In terms of tools we already nd these tools for taxing unearned incomes in Taguig and Marikina, in the special levy and in a prospective approach that, as in the BLISSS concept, would socialize the increase in potential income streams from lands granted as usufruct to the urban poor or their association or corporation. This is actually part of the BLISS concept, but it was never implemented. Incremental housing improvements are critical because we know that this is actually how housing improvements have happened. By itself, this is bound to be an extremely slow process that is dependent on the presence of a splitter in the family or as a result of life-cycle related improvements in the welfare of urban households. The post-Ondoy plans saw the emergence of proposals -- e.g., from the MMDA and fom the World Bank for medium-rise buildings this is quite ill-informed. Vice president Jejomar Binay demonstrates more sense when he said that incomes need to be improved so that people can affor the housing projects. The CDA director, Toby Monsod and the PIDs have proposed the idea of rental housing The CDA director brings this farther, with the possibility that there will be rights to dwelling, rather than ownership of dwellings. One supposes that this is based on two realizations i) rst, that the urban poor cooperatives can be property developers ii) second, that there would be long-term capital that can be mobilized on the strength of the business models (e.g., local densication and commercialization of freed-up space) so that the urban poor can live in the city on the basis of their monthly payments, which will be a combnation of rentals and capital build-up in the cooperatives or in public corporations. It should be possible for the urban poor to capitalize the rights that they possess. In Pakistan, (siddique) it would seem that those who would be evicted would be given shares in a company that would build MRBs this kind of right needs to be articulated and capitalized by those who are being removed from places like North triangle. The shares would of course be tradable. And

beneciaries who cannot afford the additional costs of ultimately owning property in the area have the option of subsequently cashing in and selling shares to the more afuent urban poor families.

Annex A Resettlement Standards Ordinance

Republic of the Philippines SANGGUNIANG BAYAN Municipality of ______________________ Proposed Ordinance No. _______Series of 2011

AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ON RELOCATION SITES IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF _____________________ AND PROVIDING MECHANISMS TO ENSURE THEREOF WHEREAS, Article 11(1) of the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), mandates that the States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.; WHEREAS, the Commission on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its General Comment Number 4 (8) enumerated the requisites for adequate housing as follows: (a) Legal security of tenure. Tenure takes a variety of forms, including rental (public and private) accommodation, cooperative housing, lease, owner-occupation, emergency housing and informal settlements, including occupation of land or property. Notwithstanding the type of tenure, all persons should possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats. States parties should consequently take immediate measures aimed at conferring legal security of tenure upon those persons and households currently lacking such protection, in genuine consultation with affected persons and groups;(b) Availability of services, materials, facilities and infrastructure. An adequate house must contain certain facilities essential for health, security, comfort and nutrition. All beneciaries of the right to adequate housing should have sustainable access to natural and common resources, safe drinking water, energy for cooking, heating and lighting, sanitation and washing facilities, means of food storage, refuse disposal, site drainage and emergency services; (c) Affordability. Personal or household nancial costs associated with housing should be at such a level that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not threatened or compromised. Steps should be taken by States parties to ensure that the percentage of housing-related costs is, in general, commensurate with income levels. States parties should establish housing subsidies for those unable to obtain affordable housing, as well as forms and levels of housing nance which adequately reect housing needs. In accordance with the principle of affordability, tenants should be protected by appropriate means against unreasonable rent levels or rent increases. In societies where natural materials constitute the chief sources of building materials for housing, steps should be taken by States parties to ensure the availability of such materials;(d) Habitability. Adequate housing must be habitable, in terms of providing the inhabitants with adequate space and protecting them from cold, damp, heat, rain, wind or other threats to health, structural hazards, and disease vectors. The physical safety of occupants must be guaranteed as well. The Committee encourages States parties to comprehensively apply the Health Principles of Housing prepared by WHO which view housing as the environmental factor most frequently associated with conditions for disease in epidemiological analyses; i.e. inadequate and decient housing and living conditions are invariably associated with higher mortality and morbidity rates;(e) Accessibility. Adequate housing must be accessible to those entitled to it. Disadvantaged groups must be accorded full and sustainable access to adequate housing resources. Thus, such disadvantaged groups as the elderly, children, the physically disabled, the terminally ill, HIV-positive individuals, persons with persistent medical problems, the mentally ill, victims of natural disasters, people living in disaster-prone areas and other groups should be ensured some degree of priority consideration in the housing sphere. Both housing law and policy should take fully into account the special housing needs of these groups. Within many States parties increasing access to land by landless or impoverished segments of the society should constitute a central policy goal. Discernible governmental

obligations need to be developed aiming to substantiate the right of all to a secure place to live in peace and dignity, including access to land as an entitlement;(f) Location. Adequate housing must be in a location which allows access to employment options, health-care services, schools, child-care centres and other social facilities. This is true both in large cities and in rural areas where the temporal and nancial costs of getting to and from the place of work can place excessive demands upon the budgets of poor households. Similarly, housing should not be built on polluted sites nor in immediate proximity to pollution sources that threaten the right to health of the inhabitants;(g) Cultural adequacy. The way housing is constructed, the building materials used and the policies supporting these must appropriately enable the expression of cultural identity and diversity of housing. Activities geared towards development or modernization in the housing sphere should ensure that the cultural dimensions of housing are not sacriced, and that, inter alia, modern technological facilities, as appropriate are also ensured; WHEREAS, the Philippine Government is a signatory to the ICESCR thus is legally and duty-bound to enforce the provisions of the covenant in the country; WHEREAS, it is the declared policy of the State to promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all; WHEREAS, the 1987 Philippine Constitution mandates that the State to undertake a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make available, at affordable cost, decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas. WHEREAS, Section 9, Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution declares that the State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with the private sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and decent housing which will make available at affordable cost decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas; WHEREAS, Section 16 of Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, empowers local government units to enact and implement measures for the general well-being of their inhabitants, particularly to provide opportunity for the homeless and the underprivileged to own and develop their own houses and to assist them in achieving economic prosperity, life comfort and social convenience; WHEREAS, the General Welfare Clause of the Local Government Code, R.A 7160, is aimed at accelerating economic development and upgrading the quality of life of the people through local governance; WHEREAS, the Local Government Code provides the legal framework and process for the attainment of national and state policies within the capacity of local autonomous political subdivisions in provinces, cities and municipalities; WHEREAS, the relocation of informal settlers from Metro Manila to the Municipality of _______________ have caused adverse consequences not only to the relocatees and also to the residents of the Municipality. Congestion on income opportunity and available basic services due to the relocation has strong manifestations; WHEREAS, the Municipality of __________ is committed to ensure the welfare of its residents through progressive legislation in securing shelter and the delivery of basic services; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED, by the Sangguniang Bayan, in session duly assembled, that: SECTION 1. Declaration of Policy. The Municipality of _________________ joins the Philippine Government in promoting, protecting and fullling the Rights enshrined in the ICESCR. While there are existing laws enacted for the dispensation of

adequate housing for the people, there is still a wide gap in the realization of the ICESCR mandate. Existing relocation activities proved to be regressive to the relocatees and the people of _______________. The congestion to income opportunities and to the available basic services has caused unacceptable deterioration of the economic, social and cultural well-being of affected people. Thus is a violation of the covenant and worse, is pushing families both of the relocatees and receiving municipality deeper in poverty. It is the primary duty of the Municipal Government of _____________________ to ll-in the gaps of existing laws and practice by enacting local ordinances to protect its existing citizens and its future constituencies. The Municipal Government of _________________ adopts a policy of progressive realization of rights in adequate housing by enacting laws which would provide mechanisms that would guarantee that activities with regard to housing are benecial to both citizens of ________________ and the relocatees, the future citizens. SECTION 2. Minimum Standards and Requirements of Relocation Sites. 2.1 Location and Housing a. Relocation site should be in a location where it is not prone to natural disasters. a.1 Clearance from the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB-DENR) a.2 Clearance from the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) a.3 Compliance with all the requirements of B.P.220 b. Relocation site should have substantial site development. b.1 Compliance with all the requirement of B.P.220 c. Housing structure should be safe, habitable and addresses future housing need. c.1 Compliance with all the requirements of B.P.220 c.2 Structure Design and materials that provides 2nd oor option c.3 d. Relocation project should consider the housing need of the Municipality of _________. d.1 Allocation of 20% of the total housing units in the relocation site to the informal settlers of the Municipality of ________________________. 2.2 Education 2.3 Health 2.4 Electricity 2.5 Water 2.6 Employment 2.7 Transportation 2.8 Peace and Order 2.9 Social Infrastructure and Integration 3.0 Other Requirements 3.1 Proof that the sending city/municipality has no available land for resettlement of the affected families. 3.1.1 Land Inventory of sending city/municipality certied by the municipal/city council.

SECTION 3. Requirements, Roles, Functions and Responsibilities. 3.1 The Municipality of ________________

SECTION 4. Rules and Regulations. SECTION 5. Funding and Disbursements. SECTION 6. Repealing Clause. SECTION 7. Separability Clause. SECTION 8. Supplementary Clause. SECTION 9. Penal Clause. SECTION 10. Effectivity Clause. ____________________________ Author ____________________________ Co-Author ___________________________ Co-Author

Annex B Sample Ordinance on Ensuring Developers Compliance with Balanced housing requirement of UDHA (from Cebu Province)
Resolutions and Ordinances 8TH SB ORDINANCE NO.2007-04 -- JOINT VENTURE SOCIALIZED HOUSING Monday, January 01, 2007 ORDINANCE NO. 2007 04 Introduced by: Hon. Francisco C. Comendador III AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE GUIDELINES COVERING THE JOINT VENTURE SOCIALIZED HOUSING PROJECT BETWEEN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF LILO-AN AND SUBDIVISION DEVELOPERS IN THE MUNICIPALITY AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the provisions of Article III, Section 6 and Article V, Section 18 (Balanced Housing Development) of the Republic Act No. 7279, otherwise known as the Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992 (UDHA), residential subdivisions are subjected to 20% Socialized Housing requirement. WHEREAS, the socialized housing project equivalent to twenty percent (20%) of the total subdivision area or project cost may be also complied through a Joint-Venture Projects with the LGU of Lilo-an, whereby the Developer may enter into a joint project or agreement with the LGU of Lilo-an to develop a socialized housing project equivalent to 20% of the project area or 20% of the cost of the main subdivision project. WHEREAS, under such scheme, the developer shall abide by the implementing guidelines on the jointventure programs of the LGU of Lilo-an, which shall in turn certify the developers compliance to the 20% requirement; NOW THEREFORE: On motion of Hon. Jesse Dem P. Bantilan, duly seconded by Hon. Ferdinand C. Jumapao, the Sangguniang Bayan BE IT ORDAINED by the Sangguniang Bayan of Lilo-an in session assembled that: SECTION 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS For the purpose of these guidelines, the terms and words used herein shall, unless the context indicates otherwise, mean or be understood as follows: LGU Local Government Unit of Lilo-an MPDO Municipal Planning Development Ofce MEO Municipal Engineers Ofce DEVELOPER as dened under PD 957 IRR OF SECTION 18 OF RA 7279 Implementing Rules and Regulation to govern Section 18 of Republic Act No. 7279, otherwise known as the Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992. PROJECT AREA 1) for subdivision projects without housing component, the gross developed land area; 2) for subdivision projects with housing component, the gross developed land area and aggregate oor area of all housing units. SHP Socialized Housing Project/Program. SOCIALIZED HOUSING in addition to the denition of UDHA (RA 7279), it shall refer to projects intended for the underprivileged and homeless wherein the housing package selling price is within the lowest interest rate under the Unied Home Lending Program (UHLP) or any equivalent housing program of the Government, the private sector or non-government organization. SUBDIVISION PROJECT as dened in PD 957.

MAIN SUBDIVISION PROJECT shall refer to the proposed residential subdivision under BP 220 or PD 957 that shall be the basis for computing the 20% requirement for socialized housing. OFFSITE SOCIALIZED HOUSING PROJECT Shall mean any new, large-scale development, consisting of one or several subdivision projects planned to provide socialized housing with the provision of utilities and facilities. SECTION 2. COVERAGE These guidelines shall apply to residential subdivision and/or proposed expansion of existing residential subdivision in the Municipality of Lilo-an that may opt to enter into a jointventure project with the LGU as a manner of compliance with 20% requirement for socialized housing under Section 3, Paragraph (d)(4) of the IRR of Section 18 of RA 7279. SECTION 3. 20% SOCIALIZED HOUSING REQUIREMENT The 20% Socialized Housing Requirement shall be based on the IRR to govern Section 18 of Republic Act No. 7279 otherwise known as the Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992. SECTION 4. DEVELOPMENT PERMIT OF MAIN SUBDIVISION PROJECT No Development Permit application covered under Section 2 of this Ordinance shall be accepted unless the LGU through the MPDO and MEO evaluates to the compliance of the 20% Socialized Housing requirement these guidelines. \ SECTION 5. JOINT-VENTURE AGREEMENT The developers of residential subdivision and/or proposed expansion of existing residential subdivisions that opt to enter in a joint venture project under these guidelines shall submit their letter of intent for that purpose. Responsibilities of a Developer under these guidelines: Fund the development of the area of SHP equivalent to the 20% Socialized Housing requirement. The fund shall not be less than the development cost as mentioned in Section 6 and shall be conformed to by MPDO. Responsibilities of the Local Government Unit of Lilo-an: It shall be responsible of the land acquisition for the SHP. Through the MPDO, it shall determine the area and prepare the plan indicating the development plan and location of the SHP that is covered under the agreement. It shall credit the subject area to the developer as part of its 20% Socialized Hosing Compliance, and shall not assign nor credit the subject area to any other developers. It shall use properly the fund received from the developer as mentioned in Section 7 of these guidelines for the development of Socialized Housing Project. The Sangguniang Bayan of Lilo-an shall authorized the Municipal Mayor to enter into a SHP Joint- Venture Agreement with the developer that has complied with the provision of this Ordinance. SECTION 6. DEVELOPMENT COST The development cost shall include the cost of land preparation of the new off-site SHP and the establishment of its utilities like power, water, roads, drainage and sewerage. The total development cost under the SHP Joint-Venture shall be computed by the number of square meters equivalent to the 20% Socialized Housing requirement multiplied by the development cost per square meter as agreed by the Local Government Unit of Lilo-an. The prevailing development cost of the Municipality is P1,500 per square meter. SECTION 7. GENERATED FUND All funds collected under Section 4 of this Ordinance shall accrue to a Trust Fund for the LGUs Socialized Housing Program. SECTION 8. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE The provision of this Ordinance are hereby declared separable,

and in the event of any such provision/s is/are inconsistent to any laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines and declared null and void, the validity of all other provisions shall not be affected thereby. SECTION 9. EFFECTIVITY This Ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.

i ii iii iv v vi

The Bank of Philippine Islands and well as a number of smaller banks were invited by the government to participate in the CMP program. But they figured that the incomes of the poorest thirty percent of the households would not enable them to pay the amortizations for even the cheapest housing units available in the market. See Noynoy Aquino and Mar Roxas Covenant with the Urban Poor 2010. See also: Urban Poor Alliance, Urban Poor Agenda: Proposed Doables for the First Year and First 100 Days of President Aquino, 2010. Binay urges review of housing loan, pay schemes Manila Bulletin (23 August 2010) presentation at the cabinet cluster meeting on human development and poverty reduction. 09 December 2010. See for Instance Home Guarantee Crporation (2008) Assessment of BLISS projects in the National Capital Region (unpublished, availble at the IPD library) Smolka, Martin and Claudia Caesare (Property Taxation and Informality: Challenges for Latin America (Land Lines Article) Land Lines: July 2006, Volume 18, Number 3

vii Berner, Erhard (2000) Learning from Informal Markets: Innovative Approaches to Land and Housing Provision. UNRISD Paper