The development of social housing in Brazil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X11637Abstract
This paper shows how the housing problems progressed in Brazil over the years from the beginning of urbanization to the present day, and which public policies implemented by the government to minimize this situation, especially for the popular housing deficit. The process of urbanization in the socioeconomic and historical context of the country was responsible for the deterioration of the housing problem reflecting the current conformation of Brazilian cities.The text is divided in three parts, where the first it is a historical social housing in Brazil and presents the historical process of development practices and public policies on housing. In the second part these are the main actors in determining the housing problem in the country, such as “Institutos de Aposentadoria e Pensão”, “Lei do Inquilinato”, “Fundação da Casa Popular”, and finally, “Banco Nacional de Habitação”, so important in the dealings of the Brazilian housing problem and in the last part, are covered housing programs conducted after the extinction of BNH and restructuring of Brazilian cities. From the 1990s, several programs were implemented to meet the housing deficit in the country and currently the largest example of the Brazilian housing policy is the “colocadaso ue programas implantados no Brasil, icssados deven tar o de diminMinha Casa Minha Vida” program, created in 2009. Finally, after analyzing the programs implemented in Brazil, it is noticed that housing policies implemented over the years only mask the problem and end up benefiting the private sector and the most influential classes in wealth of the country. A process that prevails long and must be set aside.Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
