Introduction
The scarcity of housing in Mexican cities has led to a surge in prices, driven by growing demand, particularly from young people. These individuals struggle to find affordable, dignified housing options within urban areas close to educational institutions and job centers. As rents skyrocket, numerous underutilized or neglected properties remain out of reach. Regulatory constraints prevent property owners from developing their land, often resulting in dilapidated buildings, including historically significant or valuable properties in central neighborhoods and historical centers (e.g., Mexico City, Veracruz, La Paz, and Tampico).
The Impact on Young People
Large, multi-bedroom mansions in former residential neighborhoods, built for wealthy, large families from a bygone era, now house only elderly individuals unable to maintain them. These neighborhoods lose population, streets and parks become empty, and there is a massive waste of urban land, infrastructure, and equipment. Young people, individually or in couples, rarely desire or can afford living in five- or six-bedroom houses with multiple rooms, studies, and gardens. Ironically, young people are forced to migrate to suburban areas, commuting tens of kilometers daily for work, study, and socializing.
The lack of affordable housing also affects the desire to start families and have children, contributing to declining fertility rates.
Consequences of the Housing Crisis
This housing crisis erodes social fabric and reduces productivity, promoting extensive suburbanization, excessive vehicle use, high energy consumption, and elevated pollution emissions. Sprawling cities with low density (one or two levels) have the largest ecological footprint and higher infrastructure costs for water, roads, and transportation.
In central colonias, properties or buildings languish amidst illegal activities, converted into informal vendors’ storage spaces or left in abandonment, inviting illegal occupation and public space degradation. Vacant lots or converted into atrocious parking lots multiply. Many properties are trapped in succession or ownership disputes, becoming dead hands’ assets.
This is a massive institutional and governance failure preventing efficient use of public resources and urban space. Short-sighted, populist, or demagogic urban policies cater to a stubborn neighborhood culture opposed to recycling buildings, densification, and affordable housing construction.
Barriers to Development
Residents, mostly elderly, vehemently oppose development in easily and efficiently accommodating multi-unit buildings (three to five levels on limited streets, and many more on major avenues near public transportation stations) due to supposed traffic increases and water supply issues. These concerns are solvable.
Some now oppose new housing construction, citing gentrification as a pretext. They want neighborhoods and colonias exclusively for themselves.
In patrimonial or historical neighborhoods, buildings can be designed to adapt to the surroundings or repurposed for apartments while preserving their character and architecture, with proper INAH (National Institute of Anthropology) and INBA (National Institute of Fine Arts) oversight that allows development without compromising the context.
However, governments succumb to NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) threats and display ostentatious populism, issuing development programs, regulations, and INAH-INBA norms that enforce single-family or two to three unit land use, with absurd height restrictions.
The predial tax structure rewards underutilization and abandonment. The predial tax should be based on the land’s potential value, not construction, to incentivize development rather than hinder it.
Call for Integrated Urban Development and Housing Policy
An integrated urban development and housing policy is urgently needed. Although urban development is a local responsibility (Article 115 of the Constitution), the federal government, through Sedatu (with unclear functions and leadership), could establish a national housing and urban densification policy.
In coordination with state and local governments, Infonavit, SHCP (Ministry of Finance), construction companies, banks, and mortgage institutions should promote changes in the predial tax structure, urban development programs, INAH-INBA norms, and construction permit processes. They should also offer tax incentives for developers.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the main issue? The scarcity of affordable housing in Mexican cities, driven by growing demand and regulatory constraints.
- Who is affected? Young people, who struggle to find affordable housing near job centers and educational institutions.
- What are the consequences? The housing crisis erodes social fabric, reduces productivity, and promotes unsustainable urban development patterns.
- What is the solution? Implement an integrated urban development and housing policy, addressing regulatory barriers and promoting efficient use of public resources.
