Informal housing in the XXI century. Characteristics of the informal land and housing supply in Bogota during the first decade of the XXI century

This article characterizes the conditions of the informal land and housing supply during the first decade of the xxi century in Bogota, regarding magnitude and location of the informal urban growth (new occupations in the periphery and informal densification of consolidated areas), housing  conditions in recent occupations and the characteristics of the land market. The situation of the  last decade has been reconstructed based in aerial photography analysis, census data quantification  and data analysis from planning and control public entities. Results suggest that due to the relative  land scarcity in Bogotá, among other aspects, the informal market dynamics have experimented changes compared to previous decades, because the growth in consolidated urban areas becomes  more important than the informal urbanization of the peripheries, but at the same time informality  transcends the municipal perimeter to the neighboring municipalities.

The Bureaucratic Impact of the mobilization for Land. Lessons from the Liberal Republic

The State-building process must be understood through the study of the agencies in charge of each of its regulatory functions. One such function is the regulation of property rights. During the Liberal Republic, as a reaction to the massive mobilization,new tools to better regulate property rights were promoted: colonization, parceling, the award of public lands and, at the end, a new legal framework. In spite of its purposes, they faced and failed to solve the challenges every organization experiences when growing: resource scarcity, controlling its agents, and keeping technical simplicity.

The project of land restitution in Colombia: an illustration of the civilizing force of hypocrisy?

This article offers a theoretical interpretation of the dispositions on land restitution contained in the famous “Victims’ Bill”, which was debated in the Colombian Congress during the year 2008. The bill included specific mechanisms aimed at guaranteeing the restitution of land to victims of the Colombian armed conflict. At the time, the bill was endorsed by all the main political actors in the country –notably the government and the elites that support it, on the one hand, and victims’ and human rights organizations and other opposition groups, on the other–. The fact that the restitution of land to victims of the Colombian armed conflict was being considered as a serious possibility by all political actors in the country seemed to indicate the existence of a consensus among actors whose positions are ordinarily opposed, on an issue that has traditionally led to high levels of polarization. This consensus is quite puzzling, because it seems to be at odds with the interests and/or the conceptions of justice advocated by these political actors, and because the restitution of land faces enormous difficulties both from a factual and a normative point of view, which indicates that it may not necessarily be the best alternative for dealing with the issue of land distribution in Colombia. This article offers an interpretation of said consensus, arguing that it is only an apparent consensus in which the actors are actually misrepresenting their interests and conceptions of justice, while at the same time adopting divergent strategies of implementation aimed at fulfilling their true interests. Nevertheless, the article concludes that the common adherence by all actors to the principle of restorative justice might bring about its actual realization, and thus produce an outcome that, in spite (and perhaps even because) of being unintended, might substantively contribute to solving the problem of unequal land distribution in Colombia. Even though the article focuses in some detail on the specificities of the 2008 Bill, it attempts to make a general argument about the state of the discussion on how to deal with the issue of land distribution in the country. Consequently, it may still be relevant today, especially considering that a new Bill on land restitution is currently being discussed in Congress, which includes the same restitution goals as the Victims’ Bill and many of its procedural and substantive details, and which therefore seems to reflect a similar consensus to the one analyzed in the article.

A Modest Proposal to Clarify the Status of Coca in the United Nations Conventions

The implementation of anti-drug policies that focus on illicit crops in the Andean countries faces many significant obstacles, one of which is the cultural clash it generates between the main stakeholders. On the one hand one finds the governments and agencies that attempt to implement crop substitution and eradication policies and on the other the peasant and natives communities that have traditionally grown and used coca or those peasants who have found in coca an instrument of power and political leverage that they never had before. The confrontation about coca eradication, alternative development and other anti-drug policies in coca growing areas transcends drug related issues and is part of a wider and deeper confrontation that reflects the long-term unsolved conflicts of the Andean societies. All Andean countries have stratified and fragmented societies in which peasants and Indians have been excluded from power. In Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru most peasants belong to native communities many of which have remained segregated from “white” society. The mixing of the races (mestizaje) in Colombia occurred early during the Conquest and Colony. Those of Indian descent became subservient to the Spanish and Creoles. The society that evolved was (and still is) highly hierarchical, authoritarian, and has subjacent racist values. The resulting political system has been exclusionary of large portions of the population. Among Indian communities coca has been used for millennia and its use has become an identity symbol of their resistance against what may be looked at as foreign invasion. “The Andean Indian chews coca because that way he affirms his identity as son and owner of the land that yesterday the Spaniard took away and today the landowner keeps away from him. To chew coca is to be Indian...and to quietly and obstinately challenge the contemporary lords that descend from the old encomenderos and the older conquistadors” (Vidart, 1991: 61, author’s translation). In Andean literature on illegal drugs as well as in seminars, colloquia and other meetings where drug policies are debated, complaints are frequently expressed about the treatment of coca in the same category as cocaine, heroin, morphine amphetamines and other “hard” drugs. The complainants assert that “coca is not cocaine” and that it is unfair to classify coca, a nature given plant which has been used for millennia in the Andes without significant negative effects on users, in the same category as man made psychotropic drugs. They also argue that coca has manifold social and religious meanings in indigenous cultures, that coca is sacred and that the requirement of the1961 Single Convention demanding that Bolivia and Peru completely eradicate coca within 25 years is limiting Indigenous communities in their freedom to practice their religions. In most debates about drug interdiction, the views of those who oppose that approach are not accepted as legitimate. Indeed, “prohibitionists” demonize drugs and those who oppose drug policies in Latin America frequently demonize the United States as the imperialist power that imposes them. This dual polarization is a main obstacle to establish a meaningful policy debate aimed at broadening the policy consensus necessary for successful policy implementation. This essay surveys the status of coca in the United Nations Conventions, explains why it is confusing, and how a few changes would eliminate some of the sources of conflict and help organize and control licit coca markets in the Andes. The current disorganized and weakly controlled legal coca market in Peru has been analyzed to demonstrate its deficiencies and to illustrate possible improvements in international drug control policies.

Transfer of knowledge of the structural components of the model Q400 and Global Express: the case of Aerospace Bombardier, Querétaro

The aim of this paper is to analyze the knowledge transfer in the production of structural components of two aircraft:Q400 and Global Express of Bombardier Aerospace Company, Querétaro. Bombardier Aerospace is a pioneer company in the aviation sector in Mexico, and the third largest civil aircraft manufacturer. In 2005, Bombardier decided to invest in Mexico, creating Bombardier Aerospace de Mexico S. A. C. V. and transferring production lines from Japan and Toronto to Queretaro. The relocation strategy of both plants aims to reduce modular and general production costs facing other competitors. The relocation has been supported by the State Government funds, through a trust and the creation of Queretaro aerospace cluster. Among various benefits, the State of Queretaro donated seventy-eight acres of land where the Queretaro International Airport (QIA) and a training centre will be built to promote the development of this sector. The interest in this research is to analyze and describe the transfer of knowledge to the production of structural components of both aircraft models, thanks to the results of productivity and internal and external factors which have contributed along with this transfer