Evolução recente da propriedade domiciliar no Brasil

Q3 Social Sciences Investigaciones Geograficas Pub Date : 2016-12-01 DOI:10.14350/rig.47358
Ralfo Edmundo da Silva Matos , Carlos Fernando Ferreira Lobo , Aguirre Araújo Chaves
{"title":"Evolução recente da propriedade domiciliar no Brasil","authors":"Ralfo Edmundo da Silva Matos ,&nbsp;Carlos Fernando Ferreira Lobo ,&nbsp;Aguirre Araújo Chaves","doi":"10.14350/rig.47358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The issue of private property and its correlation with the expansion of modernity, with the affirmation of industrial capitalism, and with the consecration of laws and fundamental clauses is age-old and permeates the philosophical approaches from Plato and Aristotle to Morus, Hobbes, and Locke, reaching even authors from the Age of Enlightenment such as Rousseau and Voltaire, among others. The debate over private property is, therefore, a recurring subject that still captures the attention of many research scholars. In Brazil, given the historical record of the dispossessed, the late abolition of slavery (1888), and the sheer size of the country, it is a given fact that owning a household has always been the dream of millions of families. Even today, millions of precarious households shape the physiognomy of Brazilian cities. Nevertheless, recent census data have lead to the conclusion that changes in this scenario have occurred.</p><p>In urban Brazil, the growth rate of “owned” and “unowned” households has been greater than demographic growth, especially in the North, Midwest, and Northeast<span></span> regions of the country. The “unowned” / “owned” proportion has risen in all Sates of the Federal Union, and in many cases, this increase has been remarkable, in excess of 40%. The three regions where the growth rate of “owned” households proved to be higher (North, Northeast, and Midwest) also stand out among those that show the most noticeable increase in the ratio between “owned” and “unowned” households. The results also indicate a strong expansion of “unowned” and rented households in the country. The annual growth reached 3.79% from 2000 to 2010, significantly higher than the growth of the resident population in Brazil, and all states showed positive growth rates. The proportion of “owned” households by city, as compared to the average of “owned” households in Brazil, clearly shows that, in the vast majority of Brazilian cities, the percentage of “owned” households was high in both 2000 and 2010. As regards “unowned” households, it is important to highlight the amount of households managed as real estate for rent. The expansion of this type of real estate may well relativize the supposed advantages of the expansion of household real estate. What should also be noted is the increase in the proportion of rented urban households over this period in all States of the Federal Union. The most significant increases occurred in the North (8.2%), Northeast (6.2%), and Midwest (6.0%) regions of the country. To note, all the states in the North, Midwest, and Northeast regions (except for Ceará), and the states of Espírito Santo and Santa Catarina, are above the mean national growth rate (4.7%). Thus, it can be inferred that where there is an accelerated expansion of “owned” real estate, there is also a simultaneous acceleration of the supply of real estate for rent.</p><p>A decline in households deemed inappropriate is also evident. There are data indicating that until 2000, at least 80.7% of one-bedroom households were located in urban areas. In 2010, a sharp decline of 10 per cent points (67.2%) could be observed in this proportion, demonstrating that precarious housing still remains and is high in rural areas: 169,450 one-bedroom households in 2000 and 183,881 in 2010. In relative terms, these figures account for 32.6% of the total number of rural households in 2000 and 43.8% in 2010. Also important is that in urban Brazil, approximately 22% of households rented in 2010 were in fact occupied; this is due primarily to excessive rental prices, i.e. households in which low-income families spend more than 30% of their income. Even more relevant is that in the five major regions, this proportion is approximately 20%. The southeast, where the number of activities that produce jobs is much greater and the presence of “owned” and “unowned” households is larger, is also the area where excessive rents are more significant, directly influencing the Brazilian average: many families with an income of up to three minimum wages pay excessive rents (23.7%).</p><p>The data available indicate that private property in Brazil expanded markedly in the early twenty-first century. One-bedroom residential real estate experienced a sharp decline in urban areas, while the supply of “unowned” real estate for rent rose in all states. In general, “owned” and “unowned” households have become more “appropriate”, especially in the southeast, although nearly 22% of households were rented at excessively high prices in 2010.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39866,"journal":{"name":"Investigaciones Geograficas","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.14350/rig.47358","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigaciones Geograficas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188461117300092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The issue of private property and its correlation with the expansion of modernity, with the affirmation of industrial capitalism, and with the consecration of laws and fundamental clauses is age-old and permeates the philosophical approaches from Plato and Aristotle to Morus, Hobbes, and Locke, reaching even authors from the Age of Enlightenment such as Rousseau and Voltaire, among others. The debate over private property is, therefore, a recurring subject that still captures the attention of many research scholars. In Brazil, given the historical record of the dispossessed, the late abolition of slavery (1888), and the sheer size of the country, it is a given fact that owning a household has always been the dream of millions of families. Even today, millions of precarious households shape the physiognomy of Brazilian cities. Nevertheless, recent census data have lead to the conclusion that changes in this scenario have occurred.

In urban Brazil, the growth rate of “owned” and “unowned” households has been greater than demographic growth, especially in the North, Midwest, and Northeast regions of the country. The “unowned” / “owned” proportion has risen in all Sates of the Federal Union, and in many cases, this increase has been remarkable, in excess of 40%. The three regions where the growth rate of “owned” households proved to be higher (North, Northeast, and Midwest) also stand out among those that show the most noticeable increase in the ratio between “owned” and “unowned” households. The results also indicate a strong expansion of “unowned” and rented households in the country. The annual growth reached 3.79% from 2000 to 2010, significantly higher than the growth of the resident population in Brazil, and all states showed positive growth rates. The proportion of “owned” households by city, as compared to the average of “owned” households in Brazil, clearly shows that, in the vast majority of Brazilian cities, the percentage of “owned” households was high in both 2000 and 2010. As regards “unowned” households, it is important to highlight the amount of households managed as real estate for rent. The expansion of this type of real estate may well relativize the supposed advantages of the expansion of household real estate. What should also be noted is the increase in the proportion of rented urban households over this period in all States of the Federal Union. The most significant increases occurred in the North (8.2%), Northeast (6.2%), and Midwest (6.0%) regions of the country. To note, all the states in the North, Midwest, and Northeast regions (except for Ceará), and the states of Espírito Santo and Santa Catarina, are above the mean national growth rate (4.7%). Thus, it can be inferred that where there is an accelerated expansion of “owned” real estate, there is also a simultaneous acceleration of the supply of real estate for rent.

A decline in households deemed inappropriate is also evident. There are data indicating that until 2000, at least 80.7% of one-bedroom households were located in urban areas. In 2010, a sharp decline of 10 per cent points (67.2%) could be observed in this proportion, demonstrating that precarious housing still remains and is high in rural areas: 169,450 one-bedroom households in 2000 and 183,881 in 2010. In relative terms, these figures account for 32.6% of the total number of rural households in 2000 and 43.8% in 2010. Also important is that in urban Brazil, approximately 22% of households rented in 2010 were in fact occupied; this is due primarily to excessive rental prices, i.e. households in which low-income families spend more than 30% of their income. Even more relevant is that in the five major regions, this proportion is approximately 20%. The southeast, where the number of activities that produce jobs is much greater and the presence of “owned” and “unowned” households is larger, is also the area where excessive rents are more significant, directly influencing the Brazilian average: many families with an income of up to three minimum wages pay excessive rents (23.7%).

The data available indicate that private property in Brazil expanded markedly in the early twenty-first century. One-bedroom residential real estate experienced a sharp decline in urban areas, while the supply of “unowned” real estate for rent rose in all states. In general, “owned” and “unowned” households have become more “appropriate”, especially in the southeast, although nearly 22% of households were rented at excessively high prices in 2010.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
巴西房地产的最新发展
私有财产问题及其与现代性扩张的关联,与工业资本主义的肯定,与法律和基本条款的神圣化的关联是古老的,渗透在从柏拉图和亚里士多德到莫鲁斯、霍布斯和洛克的哲学方法中,甚至影响到启蒙时代的作家,如卢梭和伏尔泰等人。因此,关于私有财产的争论是一个反复出现的话题,仍然吸引着许多研究学者的注意。在巴西,考虑到被剥夺者的历史记录,奴隶制的废除较晚(1888年),以及这个国家的庞大规模,拥有一个家庭一直是数百万家庭的梦想,这是一个既定的事实。即使在今天,数以百万计不稳定的家庭仍在塑造着巴西城市的面貌。然而,最近的人口普查数据得出的结论是,这种情况已经发生了变化。在巴西城市,“自有”和“无主”家庭的增长率大于人口增长率,特别是在该国的北部、中西部和东北部地区。在联邦联盟的所有州,“无主”/“拥有”的比例都有所上升,在许多情况下,这种增长非常显著,超过了40%。“自有”家庭增长率较高的三个地区(北部、东北部和中西部)也在“自有”和“无主”家庭比例增长最显著的地区中脱颖而出。研究结果还表明,全国“无主”家庭和租赁家庭的扩张势头强劲。2000 - 2010年年均增长率达3.79%,明显高于巴西常住人口的增长率,各州均为正增长率。各城市“自有”家庭的比例与巴西“自有”家庭的平均比例相比,清楚地表明,在巴西绝大多数城市,“自有”家庭的比例在2000年和2010年都很高。至于“无主”家庭,重要的是要强调作为出租房地产管理的家庭数量。这类房地产的扩张可以很好地与家庭房地产扩张的预期优势相对化。还应该指出的是,在此期间,联邦联盟所有州的城市租房家庭比例都有所增加。涨幅最大的是北部(8.2%)、东北部(6.2%)和中西部(6.0%)地区。值得注意的是,北部、中西部和东北部地区的所有州(加州除外),以及Espírito圣州和圣卡塔琳娜州,都高于全国平均增长率(4.7%)。因此,可以推断,在“自有”房地产加速扩张的地方,租赁房地产的供应也会同时加速。被认为不合适的家庭数量明显减少。有数据显示,直到2000年,至少80.7%的一居室家庭位于城市地区。2010年,这一比例急剧下降了10个百分点(67.2%),表明农村地区的不稳定住房仍然存在,而且比例很高:2000年为169,450户一居室家庭,2010年为183,881户。相对而言,这些数字占2000年农村家庭总数的32.6%,2010年占43.8%。同样重要的是,在巴西的城市,2010年大约22%的租来的家庭实际上是有人住的;这主要是由于租金过高,即低收入家庭的支出超过其收入的30%。更重要的是,在五大地区,这一比例约为20%。在东南部,创造就业机会的活动数量要多得多,“自有”和“无主”家庭的数量也更多,也是租金过高的地区,这直接影响到巴西的平均水平:许多收入不超过三份最低工资的家庭支付了过高的租金(23.7%)。现有数据表明,巴西的私有财产在21世纪初显著扩大。一居室住宅房地产在城市地区急剧下降,而“无主”房地产的租金供应在所有州都有所增加。总体而言,“自有”和“无主”家庭变得更加“合适”,尤其是在东南部,尽管2010年有近22%的家庭以过高的价格租房。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Investigaciones Geograficas
Investigaciones Geograficas Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Investigaciones Geográficas, es una revista arbitrada y de circulación internacional, en donde se publican contribuciones de especialistas en geografía y disciplinas afines, con trabajos originales de investigación, ya sean avances teóricos, nuevas tecnologías o estudios de caso sobre la realidad geográfica mexicana y mundial.
期刊最新文献
Editorial María Teresa Gutierrez de McGregor (1927-2017) In Memoriam Trabajo de campo dendrocronológico para estudios de geografía física. Experiencias en los volcanes popocatépetl e iztaccíhuatl, 2006-2017
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1