• • - • - - • - • • - • • • • • • - • - • • - • • - • • • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • - • • • • • • - • - • - • - • • • • • • • • - • - • • • • • • • - • - • - • • - • - • • • - • - • • - • • • • - • - • - • • • • • • - • • • - • • • - • • - • - • - • • • • - • • - • - • - • • - • - • • - - • - • • • • • - • - • • • • • • - • • - • - • • - • • • - • - • - • • - • - • • - • • • • • • • • • - • • • • • • • • • • - • - • • - • • - • • • - - • - • - • • • - • • • • - • - • • - • - • - • - • • Recent Searches. University Of Nebraska LincolnMany attempts have been made to tackle poverty in the Philippines but lack of vision. New anti-poverty program. With fighting poverty at the center of the new. On the island of Samar, some of the most impoverished communities in the Philippines are getting cash grants through an ADB-supported livelihood program to meet their. Federal Programs For The Poor![]() Reforming housing for the poor in the Philippines 27 March 2010 Author: Marife Ballesteros, PIDS The enactment in the nineties of the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) of 1992 and the Comprehensive Shelter Finance Act (CISFA) of 1994, two pro-poor housing legislations, greatly changed the Philippines’ policy on housing the poor. From a highly centralised and heavily subsidised policy, the government moved to a market-oriented and participatory approach to housing. Despite these reforms, the problems with UDHA and CISFA have not delivered housing on the scale or of the quality that is required. The National Shelter Program (NSP), which regulates housing production, regulation and financing, is the Philippines’ banner program for low-income housing provision. MedicaidThe NSP divides housing into ‘socialized’ (valued at less than USD 6,000, targeted at households up to the 30 th income percentile) and ‘economic’ housing units (valued at up to USD 40,000, targeted at households up to the 50 th income percentile). How to open antique mosler safe. Current housing efforts remain inadequate, with figures showing an acute housing shortage estimated at over one million units – still probably a gross underestimate. On average, the NSP has only delivered 26 per cent of its target, or less than 10 per cent of total housing need. Moreover, the housing backlog is likely to worsen,, due to worsening poverty and increasing urbanisation. Several factors have contributed to hindering the outreach and sustainability of the NSP programs. First, following the Philippines’ general decentralisation trend, the UDHA makes local government units (LGUs) responsible for being the UDHA’s main implementer. But most LGUs lack the capacity and resources for shelter and urban management. Moreover, LGUs are not often keen to accept low-income migrants for relocation, due to limited social services and economic opportunities, and housing maintenance costs. Second, resettlement costs are increasing, increasing LGUs’ dependence on national subsidies. Lack of coordination between the lead national agency on resettlement – the National Housing Authority (NHA), LGUs and other national agencies further hinders the success of resettlement projects. Another problem is beneficiaries abandoning or transferring the home-lots they are awarded, due to a lack of opportunities and services. Third, identifying suitable beneficiaries of government housing programs is difficult. LGUs lack incentives to develop databases for beneficiary registration, so the awarding of home-lots is often ad hoc and politically dependent. Tracking down the awardees of housing units has also proven difficult, due to lack of a monitoring system. Fourth, under the UDHA, both the government and the community must eradicate professional squatters and squatting syndicates. But actual enforcement – arrests and prosecutions, has been sloppy, partly because of weak coordination between authorities and communities.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |