Introduction

"It is undoubtedly one of the worst evils of our present system of land that in-stead of reaping the benefit of the common Endeavour of its citizens a community has always to pay a heavy penalty to its ground landlords for putting up the value of their land" – David Lloyd George, British Prime Minister, in 1909, introducing a land reclamation rate as part of the first national land use and planning law) (1).

This article presents the strategy developed during Fernando Haddad’s term as Mayor of Sao Paulo (2013-16) to place land policy at the forefront of urban development as an exercise in social promotion (2). A set of urban policies – such as land use regulation, and comprehensive plans and actions – was developed and agreed upon in the city during this period, contributing to a more socially balanced use of the land, thus leading to the promotion of social-territorial inclusion.

It is the advancement of social urbanism based on land policies, accomplished through long-term strategic, structural and systemic actions regarding land use in order to maximize its public and collective dimension.

In this regard, the new urban regulatory framework developed in that period – culminating with the award-winning Strategic Master Plan – PDE (3) – is a fundamental piece within a political vision of the city that favored mechanisms to enhance the public use of land. Other actions aimed at rescuing and valuing public spaces and sustainable mobility are inserted in the paradigm of land policy as a transforming structure, such as collective transportation and active mobility, and the adoption of urban planning instruments to foster the social function of the city, among others.

These actions raise the question of social urbanism’s capabilities and performance regarding its objective of transforming the status quo of the city, while directly depending on the available means to make public policies economically viable.

In other words, comprehensive and articulated strategies of social urban policies imply collective access to quality land, taking into account adequate support infrastructure, including all types of basic infrastructure as well as public transportation networks and public-use facilities.

Thus, from the recent experience in the largest city in the country, the discussion leads to the urgency in our society to perceive its territory as a collective asset as opposed to just a collection of private properties. This way, the notion that the use of land is public domain arises, and therefore, land policy must be regulated by public policies that apply urban planning instruments for social inclusion.

This article is organized into four parts:

• The first discusses the historical challenge of developing public urban policies oriented to collective interest and with a lasting vision;
• The second discusses the protagonist aspect of social-territorial inclusion and the fostering of social urbanism;
• The third discusses the question of served land for all;
• And the fourth brings out evidence of advances in land use policy as a promoter of social urbanism in Sao Paulo.

The historical challenge of developing public urban policies oriented to collective interest and with a lasting vision

Like in the great majority of Brazilian cities, Sao Paulo was developed through a combination of disordered and spontaneous actions coupled with a technocratic decision-making process devoid of a collective objective; thus, its negligence regarding a planning process geared towards a socially equitable use of land. This historical process, aggravated by the dramatic growth of the city during the 20th century, reveals an intense social-economic imbalance that generates an urgent demand for the introduction of a new pattern of urban culture in regard to urban land issues.

The city of Sao Paulo is shaped by a dynamic of irrational use of land, which leads it to a vicious cycle of social disintegration. The vast majority of the population, the poorest and most vulnerable, concentrates in peripheral and vulnerable areas that lack employment, whereas the minority of the population, composed of high-income class, resides in urban centers with consolidated infrastructure where most employment opportunities occur. This inheritance was the result of strong land value increment and consequent process of gentrification characterized by a deliberate geographical distance from the most vulnerable social classes, in a similar pattern of economic growth that has shaped Brazil. Population clusters with low purchasing power, located in areas far from the expanded center, contribute to the exclusionary scenario and to the precarious access to both employment offer, interaction with other social groups, and access to public services and facilities. The issue of territorial inequality contributes to perpetuate the continuous insufficiency of the public transport system, itself aggravated by unsustainable urban mobility, patent in the house-work daily commuting movement.

The collective dimension of city use is its essence. However, historically on the opposite direction, the city of São Paulo has been privatized – that is, denied as a city, starting with its land. Land in São Paulo is private. Bare land does not produce public parks or public facilities but rather, it is treated as a speculative stock of wealth (4).

This is obviously the tackling of an enormous historical challenge in Brazil, of overcoming a model of social segregation, archaic concentration of patrimony as well as vicious concentration of land and power – as already shown in the classic studies, for example, by Raimundo Faoro and Sergio Buarque de Hollanda (5) – expressed in the unequal use of urban land in the largest city in the country, epicenter of these contradictions.

At the moment of commemoration of thirty years of the Federal Constitution, it is necessary to produce effective advancements to overcome the current incomplete model of modernity in the cities. Brazilians have built a Federal Pact and a robust set of public urban policies that have resulted in an innovative and internationally recognized urban regulatory framework – the Statute of the City (6) – that placed the city as a leading player in contemporary society.

The obstacles are therefore possibly in the historical distance between discourse (legislation) and practice (application) in Brazil, where synthesis occurs: in the urban territory – constituted by the formal (exceptionally and excessively regulated) city versus the informal city (the rule, "no man's land"); in the exaggerated bureaucracy; in the challenge of governance; and also in the lack of application of urban planning instruments, as well as their implementation within the city.

At the same time, one must remember the contemporary moment of the planet, in view of the new challenges imposed on large cities, which concentrate population and increasing demands, even in the most developed countries. In such countries, "not only the inequity of our cities but the inequality of our geography in general" imposes what authors like Richard Florida see as in a new urban world crisis, in which the central question is the promotion of new forms of urbanism with greater social equity, necessarily adding more inclusive strategies of urban land use (7).

To mitigate the pattern of social segregation imprinted in the city, the compromise among different collective and private needs is essential, through application of continuous policies that foster urban development and social welfare.

In order to promote a framework for the construction of such inclusive public urban policies based on continued equitable access to land, it is fundamental, besides overcoming governmental disputes, to perpetuate the incorporation of collectively built and agreed upon strategies. The application of such strategies depends on the coherence they pose for the population on a daily basis, since its success depends on public participation both during elaboration of the policies and physical plans, as well as in the subsequent maintenance of urban actions. Community participation is only successful if the approach is not imposed from top to bottom, but developed under constant collaboration with society as a whole.

The protagonist aspect of social-territorial inclusion and the fostering of social urbanism

Social urbanism aims to promote the improvement of urban quality of life and social-territorial inclusion, especially by directing investments to more socially vulnerable areas, and dealing with large scale urban housing issues and its respective infrastructure through an integrated approach. In other words, it seeks to promote access to infrastructure by increasing density where there is already infrastructure installed, as well as by providing more and better urban infrastructure where there are greater needs and shortages and greater population density. In addition, the aim above all is to finance the city with resources generated by the urbanization process itself, with a socially equitable approach to redistribution of welfare.

A question then arises in the light of the discouraging scenario of a country that has good laws but does not apply them in the actual city: is it possible to plan urban development with the desired shift towards social promotion in the use of land, without adopting the instruments that induce it?

An aggressive induction in the production of a new city standard is indispensable and, for that, it is necessary to courageously promote the construction, implementation and physical application of key urban planning instruments. However, such an induction cannot be developed under the same logic that has been promoting the development of our city so far. Public policies must be integrated and applied to the urban setting; regulatory frameworks, specified within the urban space; land use management, democratized and shared.

Social urbanism demands the integration of public policies that act on the land, which include: plans and actions for integrated urban infrastructure, urban mobility, public services and facilities, as well as affordable housing. The essence of a more socially equitable and sustainable city can be expressed, for example, in the discussion of the link between public transportation and housing from the perspective of a more balanced use of the land.

Thus, social urbanism does not refer only to public housing and urbanization of shantytowns, or to the construction of public facilities in the peripheries, but rather to the promotion of a socially equitable city through served land. Such a process must take place through adequate housing and urban infrastructure, as well as collective use of land, accessible to all.

Recently, the mayors of London and Barcelona, Sadiq Khan and Ada Colau, led a symptomatic manifesto with a number of other cities – Cities for Housing, at the United Nations Forum on Local and Regional Governments – pointing out the urgency of cities to develop legal capability and financial resources to combat the growing and damaging processes of real estate speculation, gentrification and the treatment of urban land as commodity, as well as the rescue of the key role of cities: "Properties in the city must be homes for the people first, not investments" (8).

A more accessible use of land is a challenge to the city's various public policies and the healthy city agenda is of enormous relevance. As it has been said, populations living in less equipped and skilled areas are always the biggest victims, as recent studies by leading researchers such as David Tuller and Paulo Saldiva have shown. Tuller's study addresses the issue of integrated housing, health and inclusive zoning, while Saldiva stresses that unfortunately, not only the most common diseases but also "the rate of mental illness is also a good indicator to gauge inequality among urban dwellers" (9).

Social urbanism, through quality occupation of the city, provides transformation tools to the civil society which is currently captive of a discrepant logic of economic-territorial separation. The public sector, as a promoter of cultural exchange, plays an essential role in the process of interpersonal coexistence and in the building of connections at local level.

In recent years, changes have been observed in the civic behavior of the population, which now claims their right to the city, thus bringing about a clear transformation in the public space, shifting from its traditional character as a mere passage to become a destination. The act of walking and staying on the street assures benefits to its users, encourages the local economy and leverages free cultural expressions. Civic struggles accompanied by bold public actions are results of popular participation and demands on the public sector as well as in their involvement in the decision-making process of urban management.

Access to served land for all

The pricing system and the supply and demand dynamics are excellent for the functioning of real estate economic activity, but completely inefficient to achieve a socially equitable use of land, and even less to redistribute the wealth generated by the urban development process itself. Quite the contrary, the "free economic game" on the urban board increases inequality, concentrates wealth and impoverishes the city, as well as its urban conditions.

Land Policy (plans, public policies and increased public land management) is the main focus of many governments in the world, with special emphasis on the countries with the highest quality of life and urban development. Land Policy shapes the land market and imposes requirements, obligations while placing urbanization costs on the real estate sector (10).

Urban regulation focuses on basic aspects of social welfare in the city, such as the provision and financing of support infrastructure, protection of cultural and environmental assets, as well as an adequate supply of affordable and good condition housing especially for the low-income population.

However, how is it possible to achieve such desired and urgent objectives through urban regulation?

Funding social urbanism goes far beyond tax collection. The main source of urban financing is wealth, and added value generated by the actions of the community and the government in the city, which is reflected in the increment of land value. The public sector generates wealth through public investments in construction and actions, especially related to the urban realm. There is no individual action by isolated owners that can generate real estate value increment by itself.

Urban structuring regulates what is essentially public and of immense economic value: the urban attributes related to the use of land. For this reason, land issue is at the center of urban regulation and urban financing. Although the Statute of Cities allows municipalities to establish counterparts for the granting of land use and changes of use, this is unfortunately a very uncommon practice in Brazilian cities.

A great step towards the goal of social urbanism has been taken by the local government through the homogenization of the basic coefficient of free use in the city as part of the instrument of onerous concession of additional building rights (Outorga Onerosa do Direito de Construir – OODC). Giving owners different treatment regarding their right to build, which will be granted free of charge, reinforces social-territorial inequalities in the form of rights, besides treating public assets as though they were private.

OODC is a key instrument for transforming the culture of the city from an object of private appropriation towards a city guided by the collective interest and which understands the benefits of urban development as an important public agent. At the same time, and this is its most visible function, it allows for the materialization of social urbanism, as it captures funds derived from the municipality's normative decisions to finance the city – and, more specifically, to finance the city where it is most socially vulnerable and lacking of investments.

According to Article 26 of the Statute of Cities (11), resources should be used for redistribution purposes, favoring investments that reduce the social gap in the use of land and balance the city, for example, addressing precarious areas, promoting affordable housing, environmental protection, creation of public spaces, public transportation, etc.

Is OODC necessary? Yes. Enough? No. Moving towards social urbanism requires significant public sector efforts. Our cities accumulate the debt of centuries of social exclusion and huge deficits in infrastructure and urban supports. The Statute of the City offers public managers a fundamental tool for those who want to make a difference in the management of cities.

These efforts include the implementation of direct financing instruments, such as OODC, but also the management of real estate value increment, which, in an articulated way, can improve the conditions of urban development and increase the benefits in the use of the land for all. It is worth remembering that many of the problems that affect us today do not consider our economic condition or urban privileges, but fall to the less favored economically, because they have fewer options. This is the result of exclusionary policies that did not focus on urban financing. We live the problems of unbalanced use of land daily in various symptoms of imbalanced urban development: pollution, cost of living and housing, absence of nearby green and leisure areas, insufficient public facilities and service networks, congestion, lack of mobility, etc.

Just as the burden of this model of city exceeds its impact upon poor people, the benefits of a land policy geared to access to quality and collective served land bring general benefits to the entire population. Adequate policies and measures must focus efforts on land policy to correct imbalances and encourage behavior conducive to another model of urban planning.

A classic problem is that at the same time that some areas have underutilized infrastructure, other areas with less environmental and location importance are poorly supplied, being subject to constant land pressure. What to do? It is no use to simply "inflate" the normative possibilities in the areas already served by infrastructure. Even worse, exempt payment for such regulatory benefits – that is, exempt of OODC when OODC is neutral regarding the final price of the real estate product; this would only benefit the landowner, who will have an additional incentive to withhold it.

Joint and integrated measures must be taken, including financing and collective use of land. For example, construction and increased density can be regulated in areas better served by infrastructure and with idle supply capacity, promoting mixed-use developments linked to public transportation. At the same time, efforts should be made to ensure that market-ready landowners or real estate owners who withhold development of their properties modify their behavior and make them available to the market, either by themselves or by another interested party.

Financing and management mechanisms of land value increment, or land base tools, by their very nature, respond to the historical premise of the English economist Henry George (12), since they are the most just and equitable instruments from a social-economic perspective. Any and every increase in land value is unrelated to individually owned property (owners cannot, on their own, generate real estate value increment). The classic sources of land value increment are public works, decisions and government actions. In summary, there is a land value sharing when urban land taxation occurs to recover the costs of public works (betterment contribution taxes), as well as when demanding counterparts for the granting of urban benefits or when demanding counterparts for changes in land use.

Evidence of advances in the land issue as a promoter of social urbanism in São Paulo

The Haddad administration took advantage of a historic opportunity to carry out the difficult task of influencing the urban land use issue, thus bringing about the development of the city's new regulatory framework. It incorporated a series of policies, actions and tools into the PDE in order to induce a progressive transformation of the city towards social urbanism.

Through implementation of various urban planning instruments that induce urban transformation, the behaviors of the real estate sector and other urban actors are oriented towards collective wealth, and, above all, to the promotion of the use of land in a more socially equitable way.

A new paradigm of urban development arises by the regulation of land use to promote increases in urban density along the public transportation network, linking people and transport, housing and work, thus inducing a more compact and mixed-use city, prioritizing urban growth in areas already supplied by infrastructure, as well as emphasizing the use of the urban planning instruments that promote the social function of the city. Urban planning instruments that induce the desired transformation is key for the plan implementation. For example, a single citywide floor-area ratio and other planning tools induce growth in the desired areas, orienting the real estate sector as to where to develop with greater emphasis as well as where to operate with greater height or density standards, thus preserving the environment and the quality of life of the residents.

These actions are part of the central premise of reducing social inequalities through new paradigms of urban land use, which is due to:

• Linking housing and work, reducing the need for daily commuting;
• Increased use of qualified and valued public spaces;
• Improved urban mobility for high-capacity public transport and active mobility (cycle paths and walkability);
• Concrete implementation of a new land-based policy and land use regulation;
• Promotion of instruments for access to social housing throughout the city, especially in the central areas better supplied by urban infrastructure.

From diagnosis to public policies of reversion of social imbalances in the use of land in the largest city in the country: the challenge is to bring opportunities to residents and reduce vulnerabilities
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

Finding where and how the city should use areas best served by urban infrastructure: land management tools are a key strategy
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

The question of urban mobility was addressed as a means of access to collective use of land. Considering that more than 20% of urban land is public and destined to the road system, the option for its use through the construction of several bus corridors with segregated traffic lanes and of a network of bicycle lanes also in segregated lanes instead of parking spaces for cars, reveals a public land policy that favors redistribution. Public buses should not halt amid the flow of private cars; it's like toll-free. Paulo Saldiva reminds us that "the urban toll in immobility does not equally affect all urban dwellers, and, as always, the greatest burden lies on those who have less according to the concept of effective speed (or social velocity), as proposed by geographer Paul Tranter, where "people with lower wages spend a larger fraction of their day to pay for their commute" (13). This is not only about urban mobility, but also about promoting greater social equity.

The rescue of public spaces throughout the city was a fundamental component, either in the rescue of the use of potential public spaces (Open Center Program), or in the promotion of new uses (Open Streets Program), or even in the elaboration of integrated public action policies through networking in the peripheral areas (program Territories CEU – Unified Education Center).

The Centro Aberto program Utilizing the contemporary methodology of "tactical urbanism" which promotes public participation in workshops and pilot projects that quickly generate population adherence, rescued and revitalized several underused public areas in the city downtown area, giving them dynamic activities and uses; many of them focused on children and in opportunities for civic education (14).

The Ruas Abertas program has expanded the offer of leisure and public use areas within the city. The Paulista Avenue, exclusively open to pedestrians and cyclists on Sundays, is just one symbolic example among several others throughout the city – many of which located in the periphery.

The Territorio CEU program, based on the thesis that the collective use of land promotes social inclusion particularly in the periphery, has broadened the concept of CEUs, transforming them into public institutions that anchor an integrated space for public facilities and services. A network of connections and structuring including pedestrian flow among CEUs has been developed as well.

The program Bordas Urbanas (Urban Fringe) has promoted interconnected actions to the historically neglected areas in the fringes of the city and its metropolitan interfaces, such as policies for containing urban sprawl, encouragement of family agriculture, nutrition based on organic products in municipal schools, as well as a policies regarding recycling of solid waste. The Tax Incentive Program in the Eastern and Southern Zones equally rely on land as a strategic asset by exempting development-based taxes such as IPTU, ITBI, ISS as well as by reducing the rate of ISS to the legal minimum of 2% to companies that bring jobs to periphery regions which land use is predominantly for housing.

The capture of the public territory in its full scope and the promotion of public spaces in the peripheral regions
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

The capture of the public territory through instruments for the promotion of affordable housing: notification of idle real estate and land regularization gain prominence
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

The CEU Territories: integrated place-oriented public policies, and public network facilities in the periphery
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

Powerful urban planning instruments for transforming the city and changing the patterns of urban land use – and for this reason rarely applied in their full scope and strength in Brazilian cities (15) - were applied in the city's new regulatory milestone, such described below:

• Adoption of the Basic Unit Ratio (CA basic = 1) throughout the city: construction area above one time the area of the plot shall contribute OODC counterpart to Fundurb;
• New ZEIS (Special Zones of Social Interest): 107% increase within the area of the city destined to the production of affordable housing;
• 60% of HIS 1 (Social Interest Housing): creation of HIS 1 category for families of 0 to 3 minimum wages with a minimum allocation of 60%;
• Fundurb: 30% minimum mandatory allocation of resources for urban mobility and another 30% for development of affordable housing;
• Creation of the Solidarity Quota: properties larger than 20,000 m2 must donate the equivalent of 10% of the area built for development of affordable housing;
• Implementation of the social function of land through the application of fostering instruments to decrease the number of idle real estate: the Department of Control of the Social Function of Property – DCFSP was set up to structure and coordinate the application of the compulsory instruments of Land Allotment and Development, Construction and Use – PEUC as well as derivatives such as Progressive- in-Time IPTU,
• Expropriation, Sanction). 1,000 properties were notified in the period, representing the equivalent of 2.3 million m2 of land, 82% of which located in Zeis.
• Land regularization actions on a large scale: 230 thousand families benefited by regularization actions, 69 thousand families with regularization actions completed and 161 thousand regularizations still in process.

It should be remembered that the combination of several of these instruments acts directly in the promotion of affordable housing in quality land, a fundamental strategy in the immense challenge of overcoming the city's housing deficit, estimated at more than 500 thousand units.

The general strategy of PDE, by focusing on urban development oriented towards areas with greater supply of infrastructure and access to public transportation, is complemented by combating the idleness of hundreds of properties located in privileged and priority locations. The pressure on underutilized real estate leads to an increase in the supply of land and significantly improves access to served quality land; additionally, it prioritizes socially equitable and necessary uses of the city, such as affordable housing, which are directly impacted by speculative retention of land waiting for better future uses.

The OODC instrument is vigorously applied – with a new formula, adopting a reference base of market values and balanced planning and social factors – placing the city as a reference in the country and in Latin America regarding the use of the main instrument of land value increment. The tax collection in 2013 and the investment made in 2014 through Fundurb show the redistribution capacity of this instrument and attest that only vigorous and systemic actions like these are able to restructure the urban space in the long term. The collection of revenues is more intense in the most privileged neighborhoods branches of city hall, but this amount is spent in areas of greater social vulnerability.

The OODC maps reveal the redistribution function of the instrument in the city: figure 6 shows the largest revenues stemming from infrastructure-ready areas, while figure 7 shows the investments made in the most underprivileged neighborhoods
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

The OODC maps reveal the redistribution function of the instrument in the city: figure 6 shows the largest revenues stemming from infrastructure-ready areas, while figure 7 shows the investments made in the most underprivileged neighborhoods
Imagem divulgação/ Disclosure image [Secretaria Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano – SMDU, 2016]

It is about fostering the virtuous cycle process regarding the challenge of achieving a more balanced use of land. This involves supplying basic infrastructure where it is mostly needed; as well as increasing density where there is greater support (infrastructures, public transportation networks, public facilities) and land availability for the neediest. Managing and planning cities for the long run is, first and foremost, a discussion of access to land. If we do not start from the premise that access to land is a key factor in understanding cities, we will have many difficulties in correcting the imbalance produced by the market.

The market produces cities. Private sector real estate speculation produces cities. The challenge of urban planning is to correct distortions that the free market would generate if not for the counterpoint of urban laws that regulate access to land and its use. Land-based revenues is a key variable and regulating access is the key to enabling the city to function well. We can say that a city works well if it manages to accommodate the totality of its citizens, regardless of income. And that depends on this: access to land depends on the cost of land, and people's income is the key that opens up opportunities for those who choose to live in cities (16).

Public land policy with the objective of promoting social urbanism produces some disruptive behaviors for the construction of new paradigms of urban culture in Latin American cities. The key issue is the implementation of a new urban strategy, involving a set of systemic and structural actions capable of acting at the core of the problem, thus promoting social access to qualified urban land, so people can live in dignity.

notes

1
"It is undoubtedly one of the worst evils of our present system of land that instead of reaping the benefit of the common Endeavour of its citizens a community has always to pay a heavy penalty to its ground landlords for putting up the value of their land". ALTERMAN, Rachelle. Land-use regulations and property values: the “windfalls capture” idea revisited. In BROOKS, Nancy; DONANGHY, Kieran; KNAPP, Gerrit-Jan (Org.). The Oxford handbook on urban economics and planning. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012, p. 755-786.

2
Event took place in Mackenzie Presbiterian University in 5/3/2018. View: 3rdSeminar of Innovative Urban Instruments. Urban interventions: enabling instruments. Events, São Paulo, Vitruvius. 18 dez. 2017 <http://www.vitruvius.com.br/jornal/events/read/1850>; 3º Seminário Instrumentos Urbanos Inovadores. Esquina: Conversas sobre cidades. Available at: <https://bit.ly/2CrWBqk>.

3
The PDE received a UN – Habitat Award in 2017 for “making the city more humane, modern and balanced, through employment and housing, to address socio-territorial inequalities.” São Paulo City Master Plan wins UN agency award. United Nations in Brazil, Brasilia, 09 Jan 2017 <https://nacoesunidas.org/plano-diretor-da-cidade-de-sao-paulo-vence-premio-de-agencia-da-onu/>.

4
HADDAD, Fernando. A design for São Paulo. Folha de S. Paulo, São Paulo, 16 jul. 2014 <http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/opiniao/2014/07/1486491-fernando-haddad-um-desenho-para-sao-paulo.shtml>.

5
FAORO, Raimundo. The owners of power. Rio de Janeiro, Globo, 1989; HOLLANDA, Sergio Buarque de. Raízes do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, José Olympio, 1984.

6
BRASIL. City Statute – Law 10257/01. Available at: <https://presrepublica.jusbrasil.com.br/legislacao/101340/estatuto-da-cidade-lei-10257-01>.

7
FLORIDA, Richard. The new urban crisis. How our cities are increasing inequality, deepening segregation, and failing the middle class and what we can do about it. New York, Basic Books, 2017.

8
KHAN, Sadiq; COLAU, Ada. City properties should be homes for people first – not investments. The Guardian, London, 03 jul. 2018 <www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/03/city-properties-homes-people-first-london-barcelona>. On the same occasion, the important International Federation for Housing and Planning – IFHP, has recently launched its Social Cities program, with the challenge of building indicators of social sustainability assessment, an intangible concept that is currently neglected in international public policy. Introducing Social Cities. International Federation for Housing and Planning, Copenhagen <https://www.ifhp.org/ifhp-blog/introducing-social-cities>.

9
TULLER, David. Housing and health: the role of inclusionary zoning. Health Affairs Health Policy Brief. Berkeley, University of California, 2018; SALDIVA, Paulo. Vida urbana e saúde. São Paulo, Contexto, 2017, p. 53.

10
In this regard, Leonardo Benévolo makes a historical approach to the emergence of urban regulation and obligations in England and France during the 19th century. In his account, especially in the English case, the author exposes the process of opposition of the owners to the recommendations of the hygiene committee; The recommendations, in essence, withdrew constructive freedom and imposed the internalization of urbanization costs and reduced or set limits on real estate gain. Examples of this are the requirements of windows and interior ventilation patios, the introduction of water and sewage network infrastructures and the prohibition of renting basements and basements, which previously served as housing for groups of ten or even more people. BENÉVOLO, Leonardo. Origins of modern urbanism. Madrid, Celeste Edições, 1992.

11
BRASIL. City Statute – Law 10257/01. Op. cit.

12
"The tribute to the values ​​of the land is, therefore, the most just and equal of all the taxes. It lies only on those who receive from society a peculiar and valuable benefit, and on them in the proportion of the benefit that they receive. It is taken by the community, by the use of the community, of that value which is the creation of the community.". GEORGE, Henry (1879). Progress and Poverty. New York, Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, 2011.

13
SALDIVA, Paulo. Op. cit., p.75.

14
See especially the paradigmatic case of Largo Paissandú.

15
In the country of qualified and innovative but not applied laws, the question of the 13 instruments of induction of the social function of the city is particularly emblematic, unfortunately. The most recent MUNIC survey (data from 2015) reveals, with regard to the two instruments of land value appreciation in the country – OODC and OUCs / CEPACs (Urban Consortium Operations / Certificates of Additional Constructive Potential), that 1,946 municipalities in Brazil foresee OODC and 1,401 OUCs in specific or general plan legislation, but it is known that (i) very few municipalities actually apply them and (ii) even in these, the application is being carried out far below its real potential, when compared to the desired parameters. Search Profile of Brazilian Municipalities, IBGE (MUNIC): Rio de Janeiro, Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, 2006: Available at: <https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv95942.pdf>

16
HADDAD, Fernando. A cidade é o produto de uma ação coletiva. The City Fix Brazil, Porto Alegre, 24 nov. 2015 <http://thecityfixbrasil.com/2015/11/24/fernando-haddad-a-cidade-e-o-produto-de-uma-acao-coletiva/>.

about the authors

Carlos Leite is an architect and urbanist with a master's and doctorate degree from the University of São Paulo (1997 and 2002) and a postdoctoral degree from the Polytechnic University of California (CalPoly, 2004), where he was a visiting professor. He is an adjunct professor at the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism at Mackenzie Presbyterian University and a guest researcher at the Institute of Advanced Studies at USP.

Claudia Acosta is a lawyer (2001), with a master's degree in Urban Studies (El Colégio de México, 2005) and in Law and Development (FGV, 2015) and specialist in land policy for Latin America at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy (2007) where she is teacher; Professor at the Universidad del Rosario (Colombia) and researcher at the Center for Public Sector Policy and Economics at FGV, where she develops her doctorate.

Fernando Haddad holds a law degree from the University of São Paulo (1985), a master's degree in economics (USP, 1990) and a doctorate in philosophy (USP, 1996). He is Professor of the Department of Political Science of the Faculty of FFLCH-USP; Insper professor and guest researcher at the Institute of Advanced Studies at USP. He was the undersecretary of finance of São Paulo (2001-2003), special advisor to the Minister of Planning, Budget and Management (2003-2004), Executive Secretary of the Ministry of Education (2004-2005) and Minister of Education (2005-2012). He was Mayor of Sao Paulo (2013-2016).

Weber Sutti has a degree in Architecture and Urbanism from USP (2005) where he is a researcher and develops his master's degree; Specialist in Public Management from UPIS (2008), worked as chief of staff at the National Secretariat of Urban Programs of the Ministry of Cities (2006-2007), Iphan (2007-2012) and the Municipal Secretariat of Urban Development of the São Paulo City Hall. (2013-2015), was Assistant Secretary of Municipal Government of the City of São Paulo (2015-2016). He is a member of the IAB-SP Superior Council.