THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The expression 'security' conveys the idea of trust, guarantee, invariability, and invulnerability.
against danger, damage, loss, failure or evil. The expression "social" relates to the
"society", a social organism or group of beings that coexist and relate to each other.
Both words are derived from the Latin word "socius", meaning partner or companion.

In this way, the scholar Ángel Ruiz, while scrutinizing the philosophical foundations, expresses
that social security is an imperative of social justice and it presupposes a link between
the idea of justice and the idea of law that involves social security. The author in question,
after extensively developing the topic in his text, Challenges and Challenges of Security
contemporary social: between reality and utopia, concludes:

The right to social security helps a person regain personality and dignity and
to ensure freedom or independence to continue being a conscious member of the
political community in which one lives. Then social security is a value derived from Justice
Social and through this it becomes tangible as generic value since it manages to ensure,
in this aspect and under these circumstances, a series of basic values of man
(personality, dignity, freedom, independence), whose power contributes to the
well-being of the individual and to the cohesion and survival of society.

It follows then that certain basic values, such as dignity, become tangible.
thanks to the right to social security, whose main objective is the well-being of
citizen. Now, within the framework proposed on social security, it is necessary
It is relevant to note that the right to housing, as is generally the case with all
economic, social and cultural rights have been the subject of multiple criticisms and,
latest, from a lack of knowledge on the part of many sectors of politics or disciplines
different from the law. These criticisms range from theoretical or political considerations to
practical problems. Against them, many defend a legal dogma of the
social rights with full effects, which include their judicial enforceability.

To these general controversies regarding economic, social and cultural rights,

other specific discussions about the right to housing are added. First of all, the
the right to housing was not included as an independent right in the International Covenant
of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but as a component of the right to
an adequate standard of living.

Thus, in Bolivia, it has been widely recognized that the creation of housing is a factor
crucial for economic development: it is an activity that drives and pulls other sectors.
productive in itself due to the income generated from the rent and is an important source of
employment, especially for the benefit of the poorest and least educated classes. This
conception of the housing problem, which essentially has an economic perspective,
it can directly oppose an understanding of the matter as a right
dissatisfied and susceptible to being protected through judicial means.

Social interest housing refers to those that are developed to guarantee the
right to housing for low-income households. According to the aforementioned,
the right to housing is associated with the concept of social interest housing, intended for
low-income households and that integrates a series of elements related to the
sources of financing and government programs.

A systematization attempt of the definitions of housing is presented below.

specialized jobs. The breakdown of the terms to which housing is assimilated, gives
place to six approaches:

Housing as a social value

—Housing as an object—Housing as a satisfier of needs

Housing as a process

Housing as a system

Housing as a way of life

As social value.

If one wanted to trace back to an early indication of concern for the housing of the poorest.
perhaps we can recall here Ledoux's proposals around 1770 - his 'architecture
"speaker", the "moralizing" role of the architect, the Salinas de Chaux, etc.-. At the same time, the
Industrial Revolution - which had one of its effects in the emergence of the working class - gave
place to the concern about the unhealthy conditions in which they lived, overcrowded, those who
they migrated from the fields to the cities, from the rural to the industrial. Entities of
charity, more or less utopian proposals from architects and urban planners, and visions
radical sociopolitical, are nineteenth-century precedents of the importance that
acquired the housing issue in the 20th century. In this century, two phenomena emerged.
new: the demographic explosion, which sharpens the problem in terms of 'demand', and the
growing moral awareness, societal, that Sepúlveda presents in the following terms:
"Social housing interprets and carries an implicit sense of solidarity."
hopes that the principles of equity and opportunity for all are fulfilled; and this, as a
natural attribute of life in society and not as a gift that diminishes the dignity of the
affected.
Thus, the definition of housing as a problem, which 'depends so much on the conditions of
life of the population as well as the prevailing cultural guidelines in a specific society and
time, has come to constitute itself as 'social value'. Since the 1950s, and in every
more imperative, 'having access to acceptable housing tends to be as valid as
the right not to go hungry, to preserve health, and to be educated" (Id. ant.). At the level of

international, Pérez de Cuellar states: "Housing constitutes a human right and a

basic needs." And this right "implies a moral imperative: if decent housing
it is beyond the individual possibilities of many people, society has (...) the
duty to arbitrate the means at their disposal.

Now then; the guideline that defines what adequate housing is serves as a reference point for

comparison to measure housing needs, and "it is always above

minimum conditions involved in the very concept of housing." This statement
it deserves a couple of observations. Although what is presented in this bibliographic discussion
it can be endorsed as an 'ideal', since the middle of the century and given the magnitude and seriousness of

The problem has tended to set the standard of what is 'adequate' in the minimums of the concept of
housing. On the other hand, by the mid-80s this statement loses validity,
precisely due to changes in the criteria, linked to the epochal. Indeed, Laquian comes to
to argue that "basic housing for the poor in urban centers in countries in
development might not consist of a house but rather of a piece of land with a tap and a
pit latrine

The drama that makes evident such an abrupt fall of the guideline on what is appropriate restricts.
a categorical rejection; and, sharpening the gaze, it can be detected where it occurs
change of the concepts in play. To begin with, it is no longer about 'housing' but about
housing solutions, a construct that has recently emerged, which according to Quintana 'encompasses
all the range of alternatives for families of all socioeconomic levels that
"require a solution to their housing problem." With the best willingness, it can
to understand the inclusion of 'everyone' as a bet on 'equity'; and the 'range of
alternatives', like a sequentiality embedded in a new 'processualism' -or
'progressivity'-. Thus, the diversification of standards could even be hopeful -not
Not just about housing, as already mentioned, but about solutions - according to phases of 'evolution' of

housing organism

As an object.

The objectual dimension of housing is as evident as to claim, without fear of

to make a mistake, as mentioning 'housing' immediately evokes a representation in everyone, for
schematic or abstract as it may be. Therefore, it is striking that it appears only in
some authors, and in such cases, subordinate to other attributes or requirements, or well,
with a negative burden on its importance. Merton points out that, for the sociology of the
housing, this matters in terms of "material aspect of culture," but from the perspective of
its consequences on social life." While elsewhere it defines housing as "a
"shelter from the elements", then clarifies that it is "a physical structure that meets
biological needs and social needs of the family group.' This not only broadens
the basis of the 'minimum content' of the concept, but to this must also be applied,
Ideal guideline on what constitutes adequate housing for a specific society. While in
we conceived a protected space from the outside - room or enclosure - in the non-requirement of
satisfaction of 'all' needs -it would be enough with 'some'-, is confined within what
something that tends to be utopian.

From the field of economics, Strub presents housing along with urban equipment.
as "the material support of human activity," and it is in its capacity as such - 'support' and
'material'-, which is
'sustenance' of the human -the 'activity', which leads to 'use'-. And for being inserted in the
economic, it is a 'good', tradable but also 'produced'.

Sepúlveda, 0., et al. (1991) refer to the object as 'included' in the concept of housing.
but this transcends it, and they suggest that the object is often 'designated by the term 'house'.
This 'object-house' assimilation is also present in Salas (1992) who sees the house as only
clear formal connotations, however, a house is more than just a dwelling, still
when, stripped of the formal, understands reduced to 'spaces where one lives'
physiologically." For these authors, as well as for Arditi et al., the 'housing-home' is
"my" object. This adjective, presumably 'reactive' in the face of a situation in which
the valuation of the 'object' prevailed, it seems aimed -in Arditi et al.- at including in the concept
housing to the 'man in relation to space' and/or 'satisfaction of needs
existential needs' (Max Neef) (the primary needs would be covered by the 'mere object').
It should be noted here a reductionism of the concept 'house' which by definition is, yes, a
building
"the family of a house", and that retains the noble connotation -in a strict sense-, of the
'house' as 'descent or lineage that has the same surname and comes from the same
origin
The recurrence -at least in the last decade- of describing the housing object as 'mere',
it affects the valuation of 'the substance' - the being of 'housing', the substantive, what denotes it
concept-, and implies the predominance of qualities, of the adjective -what connotes the
term

As a satisfier of needs.

To the previously mentioned positions - of the sociologist Merton, of the architects Arditi et al. - that make

reference to the needs that housing must meet, is also subscribed to the
architect Haramoto who, although in more recent works and in relation to the subject of the
quality, quoting Max Neef taking ownership of the concern for existential needs
and the axiological ones that the latter breaks down. Let us specify here that Arditi et al., although with

same reference source, they only adopt the so-called 'existential' needs.
Needs are variously designated as: basic or primary; fundamental;
biological and social; human or family group. 'Human' usually refers to aspects
psychological -personal development, identity, privacy, intimacy-, while the 'social'
involve the family, but also the neighborhood, the community, -in aspects such as
the sense of belonging, interrelation, etc.-. In general, it is not specified which
needs are being included, frequently citing the need for 'protection' as
unique example of basic need. Only in Max Neef is there a breakdown that aims to
exhaustive and an attempt to particularize them; in any case, this is a proposal
about the development -economic and political-social-, which is described as 'on a human scale', in
which does not consider housing as satisfactory for all existential needs -
axiological-, nor of a representative set of them. It is explicitly understood that the
housing as 'singular satisfaction' -along with others-, of a single need: that of
subsistence
It seems worthwhile to pause on the importance and influence attributed to 'needs'.
both for the materialization of housing as 'satisfactory' and for the decisive role that
they would have in determining the shortcomings of the housing interventions. Without a doubt,
the one who raises 'other needs' - besides the basic ones - responds and 'combats' a
juncture in which these latter are satisfied. Where does this arise from?
'understood'? Nothing less than the acceptance of the economic component of
housing problem.

Indeed, 'human needs' have a close relationship with the economy, they are
its focus of concern, an aspect that most authors do not make explicit -
It should be emphasized here that Max Neef is an economist. It could be argued that by adopting this

from the perspective of the authors, they subscribe -whether intentionally or not- to the 'economic' nature of

housing problem. In such a case, it should be understood as natural and logical that the
social housing is 'that intended for low-income groups', and that the
recipients are characterized by their "low income level". In a similar way,
Given such definitions, it should not be surprising that the solutions differ.
in terms of financing and cost postponing other external considerations or
secondary to the economic point of view.

It could be seen, then, in the debate on 'other needs' an implicit search.

of interdisciplinary balances. In any case, to expect that the delivered housing is the
'Global satisfaction' of all needs does not consider that -as Merton argues-, "the
the problem of the reciprocal adaptability of housing and family life actually arises in
each family and in each home." The process that would lead to this adaptation is
considered by Sepúlveda, R., et al. who, from a systemic perspective, argue:
the house, which is the significant space for family interaction, transforms into
housing based on a localization process ..."; and later: "the family system (of
greater stability) usually arises before housing, allowing (the family) to change
many times of residence" although it involves -every time-, "a new dynamic of
adaptation to space.

Pérez de Cuellar offers a couple of observations that seem relevant to this.

approach: 1) that for the poor housing has always been a problem; and 2) that for the
Man, housing is, in itself, a necessity. Ortega (1963) is emphatic about it.
when it states that man inhabits different environments and regions of the planet
just because it lacks a "proper habitat", which is why it needs to build its room.
The need for housing thus becomes fully evident.
As I process.

References to the term 'process' are very common in the specialized literature, but
they are not always directly associated with housing. A paradigmatic case of the
preference for the 'procedural' is found in Rapaport. After stating that the house is 'the
most typical vernacular construction", argues that the most appropriate way to define it
vernacular "it seems to be in terms of process: how it is designed and how it is built". The
the focus is, without a doubt, professional (Merton, 1963) and refers to the 'way' before
that to the product. Thus, the vernacular would respond to a 'mode' of design generation.
and of constructive-technological dynamics, linked to tradition, and capable of characterizing it. But
there is also 'another modality': that of the 'institutionalized' which also pertains to the process
of design and construction, and which also imposes itself on tradition through a 'process'. And
finally, the 'process of institutionalization' consists, fundamentally, of a 'process
of differentiation' -which occurs in the types and spaces of the built environment, in the construction
and in the involved professions.

It is in the philosophical realm where interesting references can be found to understand the
origins and implications of this stance. Ferrater informs: "In contemporary times, the
the concept of 'process' has been used rather as a concept opposed to that of
'substance'. There has been talk about a 'processualism' equivalent to a
'functionalism'. It is not surprising then that this approach emphasizes the
consideration of actions and activities, and which takes on prominence, concurrently, the 'subject-
agent' - that is, the 'actors' - aspects also present in the 'functionalism' made
own by Modern architecture.

In light of the above, Haramoto's statement about 'housing' can be understood

as a process', responds to a 'professional' approach, and - so to speak - 'philosophical-
Functionalist. The breakdown of phases and components - where the first are "prospection,
planning, ... etc."-; and the second, the "various agents (...) public sector, the private,
the users' evidence shows that it is an 'institutionalized process' - in terms of
Rapaport.

Now then; from a philosophical point of view, 'the process has been considered 'superior' to the
substance that is merely a part of becoming, and therefore, something less valuable.
This priority is present in Haramoto: "housing as an object does not mean that it is a
finished product, comparable to a living organism in that it is in
continuous process of evolution". This replaces "the metaphysics of substance with the
metaphysics of fluency" (Ferrater op.cit.) and, moreover, the direct relationship between is updated
the 'philosophy of process' and the 'philosophy of organism' according to which 'each actual entity
results itself describable only as an organic process" (Ib.ant.).
Valdés (1996) talks about the 'wide range of instances' whose breakdown corresponds to
housing process, but reserves the term for the formula 'social housing process'.
It seems appropriate to mention that the professional approach, when adhering to 'proceduralism' does not
it would not only focus on design and construction but would also play a 'reconciliatory' role in two
relevant areas within social housing: the educational and the governmental. This,
taking into account what Sheldon stated regarding the fact that 'the mission of the principle of
the process is to eliminate the clash and conflict between polar opposites ... The process
intervenes to help the polarity, and in doing so, helps oneself." In the field of the
Teaching, the poles would be the teacher and the student; and in the governmental realm, the State.
and the target groups of the solutions.

As a way of life.

In the authors who support this approach, it is evident that the 'object' housing does not meet
sufficient content to exhaust the concept; they underline the idiosyncratic, the affections and
values, and the expression of all of it, whether in acts, or in works and objects.
Although this is more evident in Sepúlveda, O. et al. (1991), Arditi et al.
(1991) also highlight the subjective - though channeled through needs
existential (Max Neef, 1986) -, and to the value-related, through the relationship 'man-space in
a specific context'—which can be understood as 'cultural, social, and historical'.
The importance of 'territorial dominance' is the corollary of the spatial, and comprehensive satisfaction.
of the needs the way to avoid an abstract conception of man. Just as the
'territoriality' would favor the expression of affection and values, housing as a satisfier
should do the same regarding identity, group belonging, the sense of
rootedness, and the shared historical consciousness with society.