Citation
An Urban reform mechanism proposal to implement the National Plan for Urban Development in Mexico

Material Information

Title:
An Urban reform mechanism proposal to implement the National Plan for Urban Development in Mexico
Creator:
Hernandez, Martin Careaga
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of urban and regional planning)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
College of Architecture and Planning, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Urban and regional planning

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright Martin Careaga Hernandez. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
AN URBAN REFORM MECHANISM PROPROSAL TO IMPLEMENT THE NATIONAL PLAN FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT
i * 1 •""» 1
IN MEXICO
A THESIS -------------
i
PRESENTED TO !
i
THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER
IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BY
MARTIN CAREAGA HERNANDEZ


6.4.1 State Level................................. 41
6.4.2 Urban Population Level...................... 46
VII. ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL.................................... 49
7.1 Generalities....................................... 49
7.2 UR Goals and Objectives............................ 50
7.3 Economic Aspects of the Urban Reform.............. 51
7.4 Political Administrative Land Control............. 52
7.5 Mechanisms for Public Land Acquisition............. 53
7.6 Conclusions........................................ 54
i. Footnotes
ii. Appendices
iii. Bibliography


Abstract
This thesis is an analysis of an alternative mechanism of urban reform. This mechanism is an ideal tool to implement Mexico's National Plan for Urban Development (NPUD). Urban Reform* (UR) suggests that State participation in urban and suburban land market areas would create incentives for investment in productive functions rather than speculative investment in land. Without such an incentive, the consequence would be a deterioation of urban and rural areas. Public control on land increases the participation of the State in physical matters and the provision of affordable land suitable for housing, industrial, commercial, recreational and conservation developments. Decentralization of economic activities and its multiplicative effects is imperative to the urban system.
The creation of a land bank would permit the State to coordinate at the national, State and local levels, assuring the meetings of quotas according to NPUD policies.
This study analytically exposes the impacts of political economy decisions in the configuration and structure of the regional system and spatial organization of cities, in terms ofthe spatial division of labor in capital-oriented economies. The analysis is structured to review
*The Urban Reform concept is the structural change of the socio-economic relations that have shaped the actual urban environment, starting by transforming the urban land tenure and exploitation, in order to guarantee a planned growth.


macroscopically the intervention of the State and the private sector in the characterization of the urbanization process, e.g. land use, housing, public facilities and services problems in Mexico's urban areas. The urban problem is analyzed as a counterpart of the more deteriorated rural areas within the nation.
It is shown that the Mexican government has been unable to control the national economy through conventional and conservative political economic policies. The effect has been the continuing failure to provide basic necessities in a comprehensive manner according to people's expectations generated by the nation's development.
On the other hand, it was not until 1976 when the federal government started to introduce the fact that economic development planning could not be achieved without the -integration of the spatial network as an important physical variable in economic development plans. However, one question arises: How is the federal government going to implement the NPUD, if it doesn't have the mechanisms to control the economy?
The only benefactor under current conditions has been the private sector utilizing government subsidies to enhance their own economical and political capital accumulation. The private sector has been manipulating all intents of comprehensive planning. Such private speculation is not limited to industrial, commercial or residential investment developments, but to all land itself. Land, urban, suburban and rural, has been the target of real estate developments by the private sector as a speculative mechanism designed to generate enough capital profits to satisfy rent investment in the capital's rotation process.
ii


The result has been a historic concentration of resources in the development of a few cities, while the whole country is lacking fundamental requirements of a developing nation. Cities are growing according to the expectations of the private sector in its attitude to generate growth where the sector finds propitious conditions. However, given the generalization of land cost and availability problems in developing programs, the land control mechanism is crucial towards developing a real alternative in inducing economic decentralization. This thesis also explores the Latin American approaches in dealing with economic and physical planning policies. Land use, control mechanisms, and subdivision regulations were reviewed to analyze its influence on the development of national planning programs. The experience of the Latin American countries is very helpful in solving common problems through cooperative procedures addressing poverty, food, education, health, housing, income, employment and other structural problems.
The analysis of the variables included in the study shows that the two extremes in the urban system in Mexico, the overconcentrated and the dispersed, have had a strong correlation with economic factors. Urban population concentration, population migration, housing construction, federal investment are concentrated in areas with more economic resources to participate in the formation of the Gross Internal Product. The application of the policies in the National Plan for Urban Development to reach its objectives must consider that land control would facilitate the control of the local economy. The land control mechanism
iii


is a feasible alternative for producing a strong, stable arid productive economy. Land tenure could then be centralized in public hands and directed towards affordable land cost in housing programs. This will assure an adequate supply of public facilities and services. Other types of developments, such as industrial, commercial, recreational and ecological protection, will be based on the NPUD and established according to State and local quotas. The State, through land control, would be able to introduce economic growth via investment allocation in local economies, and so enable local governments to introduce local measures for the land appropriation plans. Local State land control, on the other hand, will coordinate more effectively land distribution and/or status classification in rural areas according to the Agrarian Reform Law of 1926 and the constitutional rights granted to the State. This will impose upon private property the modalities required for an equitable society addressed in article 27 of the constitution of 1917.
The Urban Reform mechanism proposes that the State must control the land market through federal supervision, State coordination and local control, of all urban and suburban land suitable for local, State or federal needs based on development policies of national, regional or local plans. Land acquisition will be an initial problem before the lack of financial resources in many States and consequently local governments. The following could be a process to follow in generating financial resources for land purchases and acquisition: 1) a federal fund for land purchasing; 2) a State fund to assure future self-suffi-
iv


ciency; 3) public bond sales with a moderate interest rate, 4) taxation of local commercial activities and major employers and producers.
Land acquisition policies must be coordinated by a National Land Bank with federal supervision, State office coordination and municipal and/or local control. This public body would have the function of a multi-level coordination effort to guarantee all public and private organisms access to land in accomplishng the goals and objectives of othe Human Settlements Law (1976) and the National Plan for Urban Development (1978).
The Urban Reform objectve is to regulate land development in urban communities and complement the efforts realized by the Agrarian Reform in rural areas. Land acquisition by the State will regulate urban development and will have variable limitations. The State, through local governments, will have sale priority, e.g. between 5 and 1 kilometers around communities and along transportation lines. A vacant land policy will be introduced to make economically feasible the usage of already installed infrastructure for the provision of public services and facilities in all community sizes.
Under the UR policy, undesirable land subdivision will be banned and communities' growth planning policies will be consistent with a national planning effort and make urban growth affordable for all sectors of the population, mainly the low-income groups. Today these groups live in the most precarious conditions in squatter settlements dispersed in urban and rural areas.
v


State control upon the land market would not change land prices in the short run and their multiplier effects on housing programs, economic developments or the provision of public facilities. However, in the long run, cheap land can be guaranteed for any kind of urban developments and preserve for present and future generations the benefits of a planned environment.
vi


INTRODUCTION
Considering that in the last 40 years, under a market system, urban land exploitation has been concentrated due to the market-oriented criteria, resulting in economic and physical planning chaos. The present thesis proposes an Urban Reform mechanism which would allow for the implementation of the National Plan for Urban Development (NPUD). This reform mechanism will give the state land tenure rights, in urban and suburban lands, to apply the policies described in NPUD.
Mexico, as many Latin American countries, has experienced unbalanced economic growth and accelerated urbanization process characterized by a dependent* economic development and population growth pressures, where urban and regional systems reach progressively unbelievable differential inequalities.
Two major reasons for these conditions have been identified: 1) failures in the government's economic decisions, and 2) the opportunistic intervention of the private sector, acting as the main agent for industrial and real estate development in urban areas.
Mexico's economic system, based upon the capitalistic mode of production, must deal with several structural problems, such as chronic permanent poverty, high inflation rates, increasing wealth accumulation,
♦Dependency is a concept utilized to describe the relation between two or more things. In the case of a nation, dependency means a structural economic dependency on the economy(ies) of other country(ies) by financial, commercial, and/or technological ties, to a degree that everything is dependent on outside factors.


permanent unemployment, and investment speculation that inhibits the implementation of socio-economic and physical planning policies.
The capitalistic philosophy has caused serious problems in integrating the nation's delivery system for such basic elements as land, housing, public facilities and public services. A complete lack of integration exists for both regional and urban planning. In addition, the government and private sectors lack in realistic long and short term plans for solving many of Mexico's fundamental problems.
To solve Mexico's problems would require a political-economic structural solution on a national scale. Legislative changes and enforcement powers would be needed to guide the economic policies that would affect cities and regions within the spatial system. Strong legislation is required in transforming existing land tenure and its structure to address more equitable physical and economic planning. Under these considerations, the present thesis project will emphasize that a structural urban reform is needed for the state to directly control urban and regional growth.
Finally, it is hoped that this document will be an example for further and more detailed studies on this topic. Inhabitants of Mexico must play a direct role as activists in the formulation and implementation of policies and thus avoid the accumulation of wealth and benefits so commonly found in the capitalistic system.
Chapter I explains the goals and objectives pursued by the thesis study in regards to personal academic and professional concerns, focus-
-2-


ing on the urbanization process and the socio-economic and physical planning policies in Mexico.
Chapter II describes theoretical conceptualizations on which this thesis is based. First, a conceptual relationship between mode of production in capital-dependent oriented economies and the accompanying urbanization process, and second, the role of physical planning in the territorial division of labor in market economies.
Chapter III defines the urban problem in Mexico. It starts by
defining the planning issue, the urbanization process and the characteristics of the modern urban network in Mexico. Economic development is reviewed, and the government's revenues and its role in planning are explored. Also, the housing and land factors are analyzed in terms of national problems in the urban and rural interrelated environment.
Chapter IV focuses on recent Political Economy Policies contained in the enaction of the General Law of Human Settlements (1976) and the National Plan for Urban Development (1978). In this phase there is a description of weak points in the implementation of such policies.
Chapter V reviews some Latin American approaches in regard to economic development and physical planning. Land use control and subdivision regulations in regional and urban planning policies are shown. Urban reform concepts within Latin American countries are analyzed to review their potential application in other countries.
Chapter VI contains the analysis of data based on the methodology proposed and according to the lineaments and objectives of the thesis.
-3-


It consists of a factor analysis among economic, physical, social and demographic variables and studies the correlation among those variables. In addition, the state and private sectors' roles in the configuration of regional and urban problems are reviewed.
Chapter VII exposes the findings of data analysis and proposes the alternatives suggested for the application of Urban Reform. Land use control and subdivision regulations are fixed for the application of development policies in urban communities. Finally, recommendations to implement the land acquisition policy are established enabling the state to take control of the land market.
-4-


CHAPTER I
DECLARATION OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
This thesis will pursue the academic goal of obtaining a master's degree in urban planning and community development. However, it also has a political goal and much of the content stems from my worries about the oppressive economic system of Mexico and its influence on the formation of urban-rural structures and regional systems. As a planning major thesis, the actual document will emphasize that a radical change would improve Mexico's urban physical planning. But only through implementation of fundamental systemic changes can the Mexican people acquire real alternatives.
1.1 Goal
The most important goal is to propose an urban reform mechanism as an original and real alternative to the present system in order to enable the state to regain control of land within and around communities. This will encourage true equilibrium between physical and socioeconomic policies and thus give shape to a planned urban and regional environment in feasible political phases.
The scope of the proposed urban reform will encompass land tenure and the state's right in controlling and planning community's growth and development.


1.2 Objectives
1.2.1 Reduce the rate of economic growth in the main metropolitan centers, including the industrial, commercial, education and residential sectors.
1.2.2 Transfer land tenure domain within and around cities and towns to the state to allocate inductive growth and coordinate physical planning and thus improve local economies and development.
1.2.3 Establish a mechanism for control, regulation and allocation of urban and sub-urban land in the urban reform process in Mexico.
1.2.4 Explore the information gap and its track system in Mexico for future planning studies.
-6-


CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL CONCEPTUALIZATION
2.1 The Mode of Production and the Urbanization Process
For the purposes of this study it is necessary to define some concepts about the state, market-oriented economies, the accumulation process, and the planning issue and its relationship to the urbanization process. An analysis of the planning issue cannot, in any case, be at the margin of the economic, political and ideological concepts of the mode of production, as ignoring its influence would allow only partial comprehension of the problem and its relationship to the system itself.
Three factors characterize the mode of production: economic, political and ideological structures. An economic system is based upon the hegemony of one structure upon the others. In the Capitalistic Mode of Production (CMP), in which we are inserted, the hegemony of the economic system is unquestioned. Production in all sectors of the economy is oriented toward an accumulation process. Economic dominance is supported by a conditioned political base and ideological beliefs transferred within society.
The mode of production within capital-oriented societies is a process of accumulation. This accumulation takes place in many sectors of the economy and it nothing else but the rentability of capital through a rotation process in which capital reaches profits to satisfy capital investment needs. For this reason, speculation is a key factor in investment for development, and only those activities, goods and


services capable of guaranteeing high return rates receive attention from the capital sector.
The structure of the economic sector is structured around the factors of production, consumption, interchange and management. These factors give shape to a productive process surrounded by an interrelated network of regional systems with urban and rural communities operating according to spatial and social divisions of work.
2.2 Physical Planning at the Margin of Economic Develompent Polici es
Physical planning within a capital-oriented economy has a function within the productive process. It plays a role in the social and territorial division in the labor and production process.Physical planning and the accumulation process are related by the fact that development has traditionally been concentrated in areas where capital identifies optimal conditions. One result is the polarized growth of a few communities and the detrimental growth of many communities with a generalized lack of public facilities and services. Land speculation and the resultant scarcity of land affect a healthy and equitable physical development of communities.
What, how much and where to produce are determined, in a capital-oriented economy, based upon a systematic speculative function. Production is oriented on a capital needs basis and not for society's social needs. On the other hand, consumption has been socialized as the objective of the economy. In urban settings consumption is
-8-


the indiscriminate use of natural resources and land and products consumed on an agglomeration market basis. Interchange has the function of communication. It is involved in all instances of social interaction. Interchange is a mobilization of resources, products, persons, ideas, and information with the productive process.
In terms of the role of the management structure, it has a function of major importance. It is a reproductive function in every step of the economic process. Management manipulates public and private sectors in a society to the point that it regulates growth through public planning plans.
The conditioned political base of an economic system is based on the political hegemony of one party. The state is the political force with the economic capabilities to guide the direction of social formation. However, within the society, the state is not the coherent body of social formation. It represents a political ideology, a political party resulting from a combination of factors in the development of a society and the development of productive forces.
The ideological structure transmits ideas and beliefs and the development of behavioral patterns to the socio-economic system. Ideological values shape the acceptance of certain forms of production, consumption, interchange, and management within society.
-9-


CHAPTER III
PROBLEM DEFINITION
3.1 Mode of Production and the Planning Issue in Mexico
In capitalistic societies physical and economic planning are subject to the rules of the economic mode of production. Both are interrelated and show signs of the accumluation process that gives shape to the social and physical environment. The result of the influence of accumluation can be found in the existing precarious economic structure and its capacity to generate economic and social development.
The disassociation between regional and urban areas reduces the lives of millions of people to extremely depressed living conditions. Under such conditions, regions and urban centers lack control over the behavior of the local economy in coping with planning programs. Physical development, land use and subdivision regulations are influenced by the accumulation process, and the result is generalized chaos and scarcity of basic elements for equitable development. In addition, inability to control the local economy results in loss of population or concentration in a few regional centers. This prevents distribution of local land suitable for development, housing, public services and public facilities in a coordinated, comprehensive manner.
3.2 Political Economic Problems
Mexico's economy has been characterized by a mixed economy in which the state and the private sector continually conflict due to the


nature of each: public welfare versus private accumulation. In addition, the fundamental contradiction inherent in the Mexican economy is seen in the fact that the state and the private sector require increasing amounts of foreign capital to fund internal policies for growth and development.
Mexico's economy is financed through various sources: foreign investment of transnational corporations and borrowed capital from international banks, reinvestment of the gross national income, and products and revenues generated from local taxes and fees. The dependence on foreign capital and its utilization practices is the key issue in Mexico's development policies. Development in Mexico responds to the external influence of industrialied nations and their multinational corporations while ignoring internal domestic needs.
External debt is not a new problem in Mexico. In 1960 there was already an external debt calculated at $55 million, and in 1976 the figure was $5,459 million. But in the six years from 1976 to 1982 the debt grew from $20,000 million to $80,000 million.-'-
This debt policy was based on the belief that oil resources would be an alternative source for financing development. However, this appears to be in error due to shifts in the supply and demand in the international oil market. The result is well known: Mexico is experiencing the most serious crisis in its history. A great period of recession has occurred in which external debt payments have risen while internal growth declines, leading to more years of indebtedness. Mexico
-11-


has one of the highest inflation and unemployment rates coupled with low productivity levels, culminating in stagnation in its national growth policies. As a result of Mexico's foreign economic dependence, particularly in regard to its obligations to repay its foreign debt, severe cutbacks have taken place in domestic capital investment, national budget reductions, salary freezes and price liberations. Thus once again Mexico's plans to integrate regional and urban policies for development have been delayed through paralysis caused by external ties.
In its balance of payments Mexico has a increasingly negative balance, from $445 million in 1960 (equal to 3.6 percent of the GNP) to $4,864 million in 1979, or about 4.0 percent of the GNP. Generally speaking, the country is confronted with serious production problems in coping with its internal needs, resulting in an increase in imports and a high cost for technology when compared with the local capacity to provide it.2
3.3 Urbanization Process
Even in the pre-colonial period, Mexico showed signs of a differentiated urban network integrated by diverse ancient cultures. Before the Spanish conquest, central Mexico and Mesoamerica had important urban centers of between 100,000 and 300,000 inhabitants. Many of them formed and disappeared throughout the various periods. Teoti-huacan in the eleventh and Tenochtitlan in the sixteenth centuries were the latest expressions of those brilliant "urban" cultures.3
-12-


It was not until the colonial period (1521-1810) when the major characteristics of today's urban network began to take shape. Economic development and spatial configuration followed the political-administrative control and economic exploitation by the Spanish crown and its imperialist expansion. It can be said that almost all current state capital centers and other important economic centers have their roots in this period.
However, during the independent period (1810-1910), minimal changes occurred. The whole urban system began to evolve during this period as a result of the interaction of social, economic and technological factors. Industrialization began the process of change in urban and rural conditions when it was discovered that the agricultural mode of production was blocked, without optional diffusion channels.
But real problems in Mexico developed during the second phase, when the industrialization process began in other countries. It was the import substitution period with accelerated industrialization and its consequent urbanization which took place during the Second World War (1939-1945).
3.4 Characteristics of the Modern Urban Network
The configuration and differentiation of regions and the urban network has been the consequence of locational economic growth. At the same time it has bee influenced by pressures from the demographic sector. Mexican demographic growth is among the largest in the world. In 1900 Mexico had a total population of 13.5 million; in 1940 it was
-13-


19.6 million, and in 1980 the population reached 67.3 million, more than a threefold increase in four decades. A progressive mean increase rate of growth of 1.1 percent in the 1900's, 2.7 percent in the 1940's, 3.4 percent in the 1960's, and 3.3 percent in the 1970's.4
In terms of urban and rural population, it was not until the 1960's that the population began to develop urban supremacy. However, the differentiation between the urban and rural population growth is impressive. While the rural annual rate of growth was at a low 1.7 percent, urban population increased by an annual rate of 5.9 percent in the 1940's. Urban population continued to increase at a rate of 5.4 percent in the 1960's, and remained at around 5 percent in the 1970's.
The period during the Second World War around 1940 demonstrated two phases of the industrial revolution and its impact on the urbanization process. The volume growth and distribution of the population centers according to size show two relatively clear tendencies. 1970 can be qualified as the inflexion point in the manifestation of the urbanization process in Mexico.
With respect to locality size and amount changes, in 1900 Mexico had 52,749 localities of any size. In 1940 these had increased to 105,508, a creation of 52,759 new localities, most of them very small and with low population density. In 1950 it declined to 98,325 localities; in 1960, 89,005 localities, in 1970, 95,208 localities, and in 1980, 95,356.5
-14-


With respect to locality size, in 1900 only two urban centers contained more than 100,000 inhabitants. The first urban center of one million appeared during the 1920's. The supremacy of this center lasted three decades, until the appearance of two more major urban centers with at least one million inhabitants.
Growth of intermediate size cities of between a half million and a million inhabitants has been slow. It was not until the 19501 s when such centers reached a consolidated position within the structure of cities and later acquired metropolitan characteristics.
The next four categories of locality reached a growth of accelereated and disproportional dimensions. Communities with a size of between 100,000 inhabitants and fewer than a half a million increased from 5 cities in 1940 to 14 cities in 1960, 31 in 1970, and 43 in 1980.
Localities with a size of between 50,000 and 99,999 increased from 8 in 1940 to 20 in 1960 and 24 in 1970. In the category of cities in a range of from 20,000 to 49,999 inhabitants, there were a total of 23 units in 1940, 51 in 1960, and 72 communities in 1970. The last urban locality size, those between 15,000 and 19,999 inhabitants, increased from 8 in 1940 to 35 in 1960 and 47 in 1970.
On the other and, localities not considered properly urbanized, called mixed or clearly rural, also changed considerably. The number of those communities which can be considered neither urban nor rural increased from 195 units in 1940 to 342 in 1960 and 468 in 1970. Localities classified as predominantly rural numbered 105,258 in 1940, 88,540 in 1960, and 95,260 in 1970.6
-15-


This process demonstrates the progressive change in locality sizes which is the product of successive steps in the transformation of the urban system. It also modifies the configuration of economic and social conflicts that seriously affect the natural environment of millions of people.
3.5 Economic Development
The development of the economic structure has been the main factor in the configuration of the urban and regional spatial network. This configuration has modifed not only the relationships between communities but also the internal relationships of each one. The development of the productive forces, exploitation of natural resources and technological advances have had a great impact on the characterization of the spatial order.
The special growth in some urban centers has been a combination of several economic factors; however, its effects have modified the regional environment. Regional economy and its impact on the urbanization process is a major concern of many researchers in Mexico, since regional economic concentration also influences urban disparities.
According to Luis Unikel's studies,7 Mexico consists of 8 socio-economic regions which include its 32 states. In four regions there was a per-capita gross internal product in 1900 which was above the national average of 613 pesos, while the other regions has a similar
O
participation.
-16-


In 1970 the situation had not changed significantly: three regions had a per-capita gross internal product above the national level of 3,104 pesos. In urban population terms, in 1900 almost five out of eight regions had at least more than 10 percent of the nation's urban population. In 1970 only three regions had relatively more than 10 percent of the urban population, and one region concentrated 39.1 percent of the nation's total.^
The regional economic differentiation was/is marked by high economic infrastructure concentration and a specific labor supply and consumer markets developments.
Labor concentration is oriented and influenced by the degree of development of the local economy. The structure of the labor force has a function in the territorial and social division of production. In the case of the urbanization process, changes in a locality's size and functional structure is influenced by deep changes in the productive structure.
While participation by the agricultural sector in the gross internal product was 22.6 percent in 1940, it was reduced to 11.6 percent in 1970, and in 1979 it was only 8.7 percent. The other two major sectors, industrial and services, gained extraordinary, absolute importance in the labor force structure and in the formation of the gross national product. In the 1940 the industrial sector participated in the creation of 29.6 percent of the GNP, in 1970 34.4 percent, and in 1979 38.0. percent. The services sector generated 47.7 percent of the GNP in
-17-


1940, 55.1 percent in 1970, and 53.8 percent in 1979. This aspect of the economy has had a tremendous impact on the urban environment because it is there that most of these activities are located.10
In 1940 Mexico was predominantly rural, with agricultural predominance in the total labor force at 55.4 percent. It was reduced to 41.1 percent in 1970 and 31.9 percent in 1980. The relative change withn the labor structure gave rise to a growth in the industrial and services sectors. The industrial sector increased its participation from 14.1 percent in 1940 to 24.6 in 1970 and 25.9 in 1980. The services sector grew from 20.5 percent in 1940 to 34.2 in 1970 and 42.0 in 1980 in the labor structure.!!
Luis Unikel states that the disparities in the 6NP in per-capita terms have not changed at all. From 1940 to 1970 the GNP increased three times; however, the disparities among regions have not changed substantially.!^
In terms of income, in 1940 a total of 19.6 million of the population, 14.7 percent, had a per-capita GNP of half that of the nation. In 1970, of 49.1 million people, 11.1 million or 22.4 percent had attained a per-capital GNP of twice the nation, but 47.5 percent received a per-capita of half the nation's GNP.!-! Income distribution has been one of the important factors in explaining many socio-economic problems, such as access to land, housing, education, food, clothing and the provision of collective facilities and public services.
-18-


3.6 Revenue Structure and the Government's Role
The evolution of the productive structure and the labor force, along with location consideration, have produced a conflictive and insufficient public revenues allocation. Such misallocation has caused governmental problems in areas of physical growth planning, provision of infrastructure, public collective services, collective public facilities and adequate housing for many communities and population sectors.
The structure of the nation's revenues shows a great concentration on the federal government, causing great problems for self-determination and consolidation of a decentralized revenue resources on state and municipal governments. Since 1940 the federal government has collected over 70.0 percent of the nation's total revenues, a percentage that reached 87.9 in 1966 and 89.7 in 1980. The state government received 23.3 percent in 1940, 17.2 in 1950, 18.6 in 1960, 22.2 in 1970 and 23.2 in 1980. Revenue of municipal governments, the cellular unit of the nation's political-administrative territorial division, has been too low. In 1940 municipalities received 5.3 percent of the nation's revenues, in 1960 only 2.8 percent, in 1970 a ridiculous 1.5 percent, and in 1980 2.3 percent.
This process demonstrates a concentrated centralization of fiscal revenues in the federal government, leaving very limited financial resources for state and municipal governments. It is considered that the revenue system is based on an inefficient tax structure. In the last decades public financing has been too little to generate appro-wriate resources and create a reasonable public investment.
-19-


It was pointed out by Luis Unikel that the nation's revenues from 1940 to 1970 represented less than 20 percent of the GNP and federal revenues were in the same period slightly above ten percent of the GNP. In addition, tax participation within the nation's income ‘ represented less than 10.0 percent of total revenues.^
The significance of the tax structure in the nation's development programs has had a major impact on municipal governments. They depend largely on federal funds or state funds to implement some basic public works, provision of potable water systems, sewer systems, electrical power, street maintenance, and the provision of collective facilities. On the other hand, over 50 percent of municipal expenditures are for administrative functions and less than 30 percent are for public works; the rest is spent on public debt and transfer payments.^
3.7 The Housing Sector, a Structural Problem
The land factor is a key element in understanding the housing problem. Income and investment considerations are considered the major explanatory concepts of the housing problem, while land still influences its allocation and price.
Mexico is confronted with a critical housing problems which, although not new, is worsening due to extreme economic conditions. Accelerated inflation has driven away the capital necessary for its progressive minimization.
Mexico's housing is increasingly concentrated in urban areas but also in rural areas, where it represents deprived conditions. There are three major elements that compound the structure of the problem:
-20-


1) A great lack of housing resulting from a differential rate of increase between population and housing construction;
2) Lack of alternatives to alleviate the existing lack of housing seen in the high average number of persons per habitable room, and
3) The concentrated allocation of new housing stock in specific areas.
Another important element is the scarce resource allocation undertaken to minimize it. According to studies done by international organizations, among them the United Nations, it is suggested that in developing countries it is necessary to use at least five percent of the GNP to minimize - not to solve - the housing problem. If this is true, Mexico has been utilizing much less than the recommended amount.
The estimated lack of housing was about 3.5 million in 1975 and 4.2 million for 1982, derived from accumulated housing deficit, replacement of old stock, and pressures from demographic growth. Housing is traditionally financed through self-construction of some sectors of the population which have no access to private and public financing; capital-oriented private investment for massive housing construction, operating primarily in large urban centers; and public housing financing with public funds and through public financial institutions, oriented basically to public workers serving the state and the labor sector covered by the National Institute for the Development of Housing for Workers, INFONAVIT.
-21-


With the exception of the first, the groups are oriented along a discriminatory policy in which income and categorical employment rule in the configuration of housing policies. For this reason housing construction is concentrated in places with a strong economy where a market is created in the consolidation of an agglomeration and consumer markets to increase potential rentability for the capital sector. The following table shows housing growth.
3.8 The Land Factor and its Role in Regional-Urban Growth.
Land tenure in Latin America and mainly in Mexico has its origin in the colonial period. Land was distributed to nobility to
maintain the hegemony and exploitation by the Spanish crown. Land tenure distribution had various concepts. In the case of new settlements, each community received three types of land. Limits that defined a town were called Legal Property (Fundo Legal); "ejidal land' (tierra ejidal) defined as land dedicated to community activities; and common land (tierra comunal) belonging to common activities of the community.
The disposition of the "ejidal land" originated in 1573 and was ratified in 1713; however, the modern concept of the "tierra ejidal" was enacted in 1920 under the "ejidos" law. This law established bases for land distribution and the disappearances of "latifundos" (large tracts of privately owner land), according to the Agrarian Reform in rural areas.
Legislative efforts on land tenure and uses are concentrated in the 27th constitutional article. It is the most important legisla-
-22-


tive tool to regulate land property and water resources, and states as follows:
Article 27. The property of lands and waters comprehended within the limits of the national territory correspond originally to the nationa, which has had and has the right to trasnmit its domain to particulars giving origin to private property. Expropriations can be done only by reasons of public utility and thorough indemnization.
The nation will have, at any time, the right to impose or dictate on private property the modalities dictated by public interest, and so regulate the use of natural resources in order to appropriate a more equitable distribution of the public wealth and assure its conservation. With this objective, necessary measures will be dictated for the subdivision of latifundo land; development of small property; for the creation of new agricultural population centers and to avoid the destruction of natural elements and property damages against society.
3.9 Land Resources in Mexico.
Land resources in Mexico are calculated at 1.95 million square kilometers. The low use hypothesis, according to Angle Bassols Batalla, is as follows:
Agricultural lands 238.000 12.1%
Grassland 271,000 13.7%
Forests 290,000 14.7%
Waters 7,500 0.4%
Mineral land resources 26,000 1.3%
Urban not industrial 1,500 0.1%
Urban industrial 1,500 0.1%
Subtotal 835,500 42.4%
Not exploited or used land 1,137,046 57.6%
Total land Mexico 1,972,546 100.0%
-23-


According to these numbers, the agrarian reform (1916) granted in peasants possession a total of 96.78 million square "hectareas" or 967,880 square kilometers, 49 percent of the nation's total area.
In consideration of the above table, the urban extension consisted of about 3,000 square kilometers in 1970, from which the metropolitan area of Mexico City occupied 561 square kilometers, or 18.7% of the nation's total, while it had 21.4% of the total population, an approximate growth of 74% in respect to 1960, when it was nearer to 314 square kilometers.
The land problem in the metropolitan area of Mexico City in 1980 is grave. At this time the metro area reaches an extension of more than 900 sq. kilmeters. This urban growth was 50 percent on communcal and ejidal land classified as public land without any intervention of the government in such growth.*
Urban expansion and land distribution have occasioned statutory problems in areas where urban and suburban lands join. Ejidal and communal public lands are progressively transformed in urban uses via private appropriation or peasants' sales, which are both against the Agrarian Reform Law. Land status changes can be done through the mechanisms described in the Constitution and the Agrarian Reform Law. It is a fact that the state controls almost all land around communities, but it still needs to control the immediate area adjacent to the urban limits. Only thus is the state in the position to coordinate Agrarian and Urban Reform policies in regard to the use, regulation, and preservation of land and the social and natural environments.
*Schteingart, Martha. Se ha agudizado en la ultima decada el desmedido crecimiento metropolitano. Uno Mas Uno newpaper, October 11, 198, p. 17.


CHAPTER IV
MEXICO'S RECENT PHYSICAL PLANNING POLICIES
4.1 Political Economy Policies
The state has increasingly become involved in the process of formulation and implementation of planning and political economy policies. Such decisions transform the relations among spatial units within the environment.
In the last twenty years since 1960, four governmental administrations have worked on different strategies to reach constant levels of growth and development. In general terms, all were sectorial polices cases, giving varying importance to industrial, commercial or agricultural developments. In some cases economic policies were linked to physical planning, such as development poles implemented in the early 1970's.
During the federal administration (1970-1976), the idea predominated that all federal government decision during the last four decades have influenced the economic, political, educational and social concentration in a few regions. An idea of global economic and physical planning began to have a relevant importance and high priority in the government's decision-making and the future formulation and implementation of socio-economic polices.
It was not until the 1976-1982 governmental administration when a decentralization effort took place. Economic and physical planning were integrated in the enactment of the Human Settlements Law in 1976.


Reforms to articles 27,73 and 115 of the constitution occurred in the same year. These efforts had as an objective the creation of the state's development plans to solve the nation's developmental problems.
The Human Settlements Law established the following objectives:
1) Set adequate coordination of federal entities, municipalities and the federal government with the ultimate goal of regulating human settlements in the national territory.
2) Establish basic norms to regulate the public function, relative to the creation, preservation, improvement and growth of the population centers.
3) Define the principles in which the state executes its functions in determining the provisions, uses, reserves and ends of lands, waters and forests.
Reforms and additions to the constitution had a fundamental end in removing constitutional barriers for the expedition and application of the law. According to the constitution, all powers that are not granted by it to the federal government are granted to the states. For this reason article 73 of the constitution was modified, and it now grants to the Congress Union the power to enact laws to establish adequate coordinatio of federal entities (states), municipalities and the federal government in their respective spheres in human settlement matters.
Article 27 was also modifed to the extent that it ratifies the nation's right to dictate the right measures for human settlment plan-
-25-


ning. In respect to the additions to article 115 and its assurance that states and municipalities enact in their competency sphere laws, codes and administrative dispositions provided in the General Law of Human Settlements and the obligation of a coordinated action from the three levels of government in the case of conglomeration of municipal governments in an urban area. The law's enactment will provide for a national plan for urban development containing a macropolicy for urban planning that includes 31 state plans, specific plans for cornubated areas, municipal plans ( plans) and specific plans for each population center (96,912 communities over 2,500 inhabitants in 1970) within municipalities and a Director plan for the Federal District in the metropolitan area of Mexico City.
4.2 General Law of Human Settlements
Chapter I. General Dispositions. This points out the law's objective for the establishment of adequate coordination of the federal and state governments and the municipalities with the finality of organizing the human settlements. Fixing basic norms of the public action relative to the creation, conservation and improvement of population centers as well as defining state principles toward exercising the state's attributions for determining the provision, use reserve and destination of areas and lands.
It also defines the competency of all government levels to enact laws and codes for the regulation of human settlements and the urban plans comprehended in the national plan for urban development, NPUD,
-27-


state's plans for urban development, municipal plans and the special urban centers where different states or municipal governments must coordinate actions.
Chapter II. This establishes the convergence and coordination of the federal and state governments and the municipalities and its attributive competency of diverse federal organisms as well as state and municipal governments in urban matters.
Chapter III. This establishes the direct invervention of the federal government in the urban centers where there are plural regulatory actions by different state or municipal governments. In this case, a conurbation concept is applied and federal coordination is required.
Chapter IV. This regulates the relationship of private property in the population centers, and its objective is to organize the human settlements, their creation, conservation and improvement; the creation of a planning system through the establishment land's ends, uses, provision, and reserves to regulate private property, and it will be according to bills enacted by local authorities and withn national and state plans for urban development.
4.3 The National Plan for Urban Develoment, NPUD
The plan was enacted in 1978 according to the General Law of Human Settlements, and its describes federal participation in Human Settlements Planning works and urban development regulation in the national territory. At the same time it establishes the bases and lineaments of coordinaton, control, and execution of actions and invest-
-28-


ments programs of the federal government in the implementation process. The plan includes within its scope a national, regional, state and municipal population center, conurbated zones and priority zone policies.
The NPUD consideres four planning levels: 1) regulative, 2) strategic, 3) sectoral co-responsibility, and 4) legal instruments.
The long-term objectves of the NPUD in reaction to historic and current problems of regional and urban character are:
1) Rational distribution within the territory of economic activities and population to allocate them in areas with more potential in the country.
2) Promotion of an integral and equilibrated urban develompent in the population centers.
3) Propose and create favorable conditions for the population to solve its needs of urban land, housing, public services, infrastructure and urban facilities, and
4) Improvement and conservation of the human settlement environment.
In the same plan and according to the precise objectives, the following policies were declared:
1) Territorial planning policies to attend the inter-urban problems with national and regional character.
2) Urban development policies in the population centers and applied to the internal situation of each locality.
-29-


3) Polices related to the elements, components, and actions to supply and satisfy human settlement needs.
The policies established for the territorial planning policies are: avoiding growth of the metropolitan area of Mexico City, decentralization of industry, public services and diverse activities in the private sector to allocate them to proposed zones; inducing development in cities with regional services and medium-sized cities with economic and social development potential; development and promotion of transportation systems and inter-urban communication as orderly national territory elements; stimulation of the integration and development of support centers to the rural population and dispersed rural population settlements.
In terms of centers of population and urban development, the policies propose the following: promotion policies; strengthening policies; and planning and control policies. These polices are oriented toward the coordination of urban planning activities concerning federal, state, and municipal spheres.
Concerning policies related to elements, components and actions of the human settlements sector, here the plan establishes promotional actions relative to: territorial reserves for human settlements; urban land; housing; facilites, infrastructure, urban services; urban ecology; provision and attention to urban emergencies; and participation of the community in the urban development process.
-30-


Under this policy is established a promotion action for the acquisition, in terms of the law, of the territorial reserves for federal use according to programs and actions of the federal government in medium and long-range terms.
Technical support to the states to revitalize studies to fix their territorial reserve needs. Widening alternatives to urban land access for low-income and no-salaried population.
-31-


CHAPTER V
LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES' APPROACHES TO PHYSICAL PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
5.1 Economic Development and Its Physical Expression in Latin America
It is not the intention of the present thesis to do an extensive analysis of the Latin American urbanization process. However, given the generalization of the socio-economic and spatial problems, it is necessary to objectively explore the gravity of those problems and the existing alternatives to solve them.
Latin American social problems characterizd by scarcity and poverty have been the result of historically determined dependence on economical and political foreign forces. The philosophy of "laissez faire" has caused Latin American countries to develop a position of dependency upon developed countries, resulting in the determination of policies with limited expectation of growth. Industrialization, the most important economic force in the modern era, has been concentrated in a few regions and correspondent urban centers. Such concentration is the effect of a limited and sectorial economic planning, resulting in a polarization of economic and social forces among regions, communities and population sectors.
In terms of economic development and physical planning a few countries have tried to integrate the physical variable as a fundamental element in implementing policies of policical economy. Conversely,


political and capital pressures have driven, modified or eliminated all alternativaes for planning purposes, in order that capital and private interest keep hegemony on the economy system. Thus, the configuration and development of regions and cities is directed by capitalistic interests.
The accelerated urbanization process experienced in Latin America is not new, it was increased in the last four decades due to the breakdown caused by the Second World War. A period of importation substitution gave rise to an incipient and locational industrialization process in most Latin American countries. Limited industrialized economic development offers no alternatives to the increasing pressures from growth of the demographic sector. Its physical expression is the emergence of squatter settlements and a generalized poverty level with increasing levels of environmental degradation.
The incipient industrialization period has put great pressure on the land market in urban and suburban areas of selected urban centers, including the accumulation process. Speculative actions in land by landlords has taken effect in many ways and progressive negative effects are felt in communities to supply the provision of public services and facilities. The differential balance between supply-demand for land, and the lack of an effective regulation on land use and subdivision regulations is causing its progressive deterioration. All these considerations go against a reasonable economic cost feasibility which would provide effective policies in housing, public services and facilities.
-33-


Legislative efforts to support economic and physical policies show signs of procedural weakness. Law enforcements in civil codes in the Latin American legislations are far behind the modern social needs. Fundamental concepts in land legislation must be reviewed in order to accomplish a modern social collective environment.
5.2 Urban and Regional Policies in Regard to Land Use and Subdivision Procedures in Latin America
The physical variable has had little importance in the formulation of political economic decisions and the configuration of regional
*
economies and urban centers. Recently some countries have started to give to the physical factor the importance that it deserves in the transformation and configuration of spatial systems and their economies.
Land use polices are oriented to solve problems of local character, mainly in metropolitan areas and other important cities. They are not oriented to approach strategically a global planning concept and solve its problems. Land use policies have been directed to complement industrial and commercial developments based on sectorial plans and the consequently residential development required in such plans. Concerning subdivision regulations, they regulate in different approaches to land developments according to standards established with cost concepts and a rentability ideology of the private sector.
-34-


5.3 Typologies in Land Use and Subdivision Regulations and
Policies in Latin America
National plans for urban planning and economic development are few in number. Most of the urban planning programs are based on regulatory policies called "pianos reguladores" (regulatory plans) or "planes maestros de desarrollo" (master plans of development) that are a partial attempt to direct a planned growth on a local basis.
Other important policies concerned with sectorial policies in regard to industrial, commercial, agricultural, housing, health, and education, etc. are implemented to participate partially in the development plans. Their application is limited in scope and offers no attempt to integrate economic-physical planning for a whole spatial system as a unit.
An important planning mechanism minimally explored and politically dangersous is the application of an Urban Reform concept, which together with a national plan for urban and economic development could improve the deteriorated relations of the regional and urban system in Latin America.
Only Cuba among the Latin American countries has implemented radical transformations dealing with land use policies and national planning. The intention is the structural transformation of the economy and its spatial distribution to cope with planning and development issues. The basic objective pursued by the Cuban policies is the equitable distribution of activites and opportunities in the spatial
-35-


system. However, the transformations go far beyond the ideological conceptions of the space in market economy-oriented countries. A real integration of the rural-urban dichotomy is implemented and a progressive elimination of the "natural barriers" that have separated them since time immemorial. The allocation of public facilities and public services plays an important role in the consolidation of the rural environment, where many people live to support productively many consumer functions in urban areas. Rural planning policies are getting an important impulse.
Planned planning programs in Cuba have transformed the environment radically. Not only economic aspects have changed, but also administrative barriers were transformed to integrate geographical-economic and social factors in the development of a planned environment. Political administrative limits of the capitalistic era have been eliminated and a new approach to fulfilling economic and social programs has been instituted. However, it does not mean that this development pattern is firmly fixed. The configuration of the environment, urban and rural, in today's Cuba is based on a dialectical process to carry out its socialistic development.
5.4 Urban Reform Types in Latin America
The urban reform types have followed two clear tendencies, an integral approach and a sectoral approach. If it is considered that the concept of an Urban Reform is to transform the political, economical and social conditions existent in the relations of the urban structure, only the first one fulfills its basic objectives.
-36-


The sectoral UR transforms the relation of tenant to owner in function of the fluctuation of rent payments or land polices in regard to subdivision regulations. On the contrary, the integral approach establishes a new kind of relationship. First, the relations between the city and the country eliminate all possible extreme differentation making one more attractive than the other. Second, internal reorganization of urban functions according to the needs of the conglomeration, changing the land tenure relations and the application of development and conservation policies of the natural and social resources. This approach has as an objective deep transformation of social and economic character and having the natural environment as a scenario.
On the contrary, the Sectoral UR founded in Bolivia (1954) and Colombia (1969) has as priority objectives to alleviate need problems, expensiveness, and speculation that they are objected to by landlords and developers. This approach has had little success because many interests are involved which through politcal and economic alliances impede its development and implementation.
-37-


CHAPTER VI
METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS
6.1 Methodological Approach
The method applied is completely related to the goal of the present thesis. First, two levels of analysis are fixed: 1) the state, and 2) locality size level. The state level includes the of analysis of selected variables in the 32 states in Mexico. At the locality size level, a similar approach is taken to demonstrate the relationships transferred from state to local levels.
The time frame utilized for the analysis varies for different scopes in comprehending the urbanization process it comprises since 1940. For the main analysis at the two levels it has been fixed from 1960 to 1980.
Fourteen variables were chosen to analyze through a factor analysis and a scattergram procedure the correlation that exists between growth and its multiplicative effects and locational distribution. An important inference about the governmental role in the formation and consolidation of regional environments in these 20 years is reviewed.
6.2 Variable/Definition
The selection of the variables includes economic, demographic, political, social and physical conditions. These variables are the following:
Gross Internal Product, GNP, explains the state participation in
the gross national product.


Total Urban Population, TUP, explains the state participation in the total urban population.
Total Population, TP, represents the state population in terms of the nation's total.
Urbanization Rate, UR, shows the intensity of the urbanization rate by state.
Fiscal Revenues, FR, explain the state's fiscal revenues capabilities.
Total Housing Stock, THS, identifies the total participation of the state in the national stock.
Total Housing Stock Without Potable Water, HWW, describes the state's stock that is not provided directly by potable water.
Total Housing Stock Without Sewer Service, HWS, identifies the total stock in state without sewer service.
Mean Increase of Urban Population, MIUP, explains mean increase in the rate of urban population in the state.
Density, D, identifies the state's density in persons per square kilometers.
Totel Housing Stock Rented, THSE, is the total stock not owned by its inhabitants.
Federal Investment In State, FIS, shows the investment structure by state.
Percentage of Area, PA, shows the state's participation in the nation's area.
-39-


Number of Localities, NL, shows the total number of localities in the state.
Income Per Capita, IPC, shows the state's per capita income.
6.3 Generalities
It is not the intention of this thesis to present a scientific detailed analysis of the macroelements that caused Mexico's current urban and rural problems. Instead, it will introduce some important outcomes to find explanations for the major issues and their consequences in the formation of the urban environment and its rural influence.
The objective of the present methodology is to prove that at the regional and state level a global approach is urgently needed to transfer to the communities the necessary incentives to adequately utilize resources for planning and development. It is believed that a national legislation on land availability and locational distribution is necessary to induce capital investment for economic and urban developments.
There is no question regarding the structural relation of the urbanization process with regards to intensity and locational distribution concerns. Mexico's urban and regional systems are faced with deep failures in physical growth, economic development, capital resources, and legislative measures to give an adequate and firm response to the critical urban and rural issues.
So structured is the current urbanization process that the analysis of a single region or city is very limited and isolated. A
-40-


global aplproach is necessary to confront the various issues at one time. The attempt to justify the thesis's scope is that a global approach is needed and its application in the future will depend on each community's needs.
The method for the present thesis will be focused on three levels of analysis. First, exploration of some macro economic variables that at the national level influence the urbanization process. Second, review at the state level the impact produced by national policies. Third, measure the impact and its known periodical conditions at the locality size level.
6.4 Findings of the Analysis
6.4.1 State level.
The research and analysis are focused on the interrelation among economic, demographic, physical and social varibles exploring in terms of cause and effect the political economy policies during the last three decades. But the most important is to explore and define the most important factors in the configuration of the regional sytem and urban centers differentiation. It is hoped that such an approach shows both political economic bodies as policy-makers, the state and the private sector.
Within economic variables, at the state level, the gross internal product serves as a measurement of economic development, economic structure and economic capabilities to generate expectations in local sectors. However, two other variables are combined to show its
-41-


relationship and interdependence, such as fiscal revenues and federal investmnt.
Demographic variables show the participation of each state in the total population, mean increass in total population, population density, percentage of urban population and urbanization rate. At this stage it is proposed that these variables describe the characteristics of each state and measure them with the rest of the economic and physical variables.
Physical variables represent basically the housing sector as one of the most severe problems. It contains several variables, total housing stock in state, housing without sewer services, housing without potable water inside, and the most descriptive element of the housing problem, its tenure.
The time frame for this analysis has been fixed to three census dates from 1960 to 1980. Such a consideration has as an objective to find the co-relationship among the variables and their changes with time and to determine the variations observed and the possible influence dictated by the policy-makers in the configuration of regional socio-economic conditions and their physical expressions, mainly in the housing sector in urban centers.
A factor analysis through all variables were exposed to which it is possible to get correlation coefficients and necessary measures to compare and contrast the socio-economic variables among all the states of the country. The states are classified within a numerical order in alphabetical terms as follows:
-42-


No. State No. State
01 Aguascalientes 21 Puebla
02 Baja California Norte 22 Queretaro
03 Baja California Sur 23 Qui ntana Roo
04 Campeche 24 San Luis Potosi
05 Coahuila 25 Sinaloa
06 Colima 26 Sonora
07 Chiapas 27 Tabasco
08 Chihuahua 28 Tamualipas
09 Durango 29 Tlaxcala
10 Federal District 30 Veracruz
11 Guanajuato 31 Yucatan
12 Guerrero 32 Zacatecas
13 Hidalgo
14 Jalisco
15 Mexico
16 Michoacan
17 Morelos
18 Nayarit
19 Nuevo Leon
20 Oaxaca
The mean participation among states in terms of its intervention in the formation of the gross internal product has increased from 1960 to 1980, but the standard deviation is still without significant changes, from 6.52 to 6.34 in the same period.
Correlation coefficients show a remarkable relation among GIP, urban population, density, federal revenues and federal expenditures. It means that economic development is concentrated in a few states and its structure has not changed substantially. States which produce more are in a better condition to increase expectations; however, this does not mean that such states are out of trouble. Their problems are of other dimensions even more. Later, in the second phase of the analysis, this will be explored in more detail.
-43-


In terms of total population within states, the mean continues to be stable from 1960 to 1980, but in terms of the stadnard deviation it has changed in the decade of the 70's, indicating an overconcentration of population in some states. The correlation coefficient shows that GIP, urban population, fiscal revenues, and federal investment have a relevant importance and a tied relation in those states that contain a considerable population.
Urban population concentration seems to have a better distribution since 1960. Only the federal district still has the highest concentration. The standard deviation, in general terms, has been reduced as a consequence of rapid growth and attraction by other minor but important urban centers. Urban population correlations indicate that a great relationship exists with GIP, fiscal revenues, federal investment, density, housing stock growth and total population.
Urbanization rate, although it seems not to be related to any variable, has a strong relationship with housing tenure. The most rapid urbanization rate occurs with a population with a low percentage of housing tenure. If it is supposed that the urbanization rate is accompanied by a high grade of economic expectations, there is, however, an
increasing number of families with no housing tenure.
Fiscal revenues have a strong impact on those states that
demonstrate a GIP potential derived from a diversified economy. The revenue mean among states is still almost the same from 1960 to 1980. However, it seems to be that the standard deviation is being reduced by
-44-


the fact that other big urban centers besides Mexico City havea relevant importance and then reducing the revenue gap, among the other states, it is believed still the same. In terms of the correlation among fiscal revenues and the other variables, there is a strong relation with population density, urban population and total population. Federal investment, however, has had an increasing importance in states where such revenue has been generated.
Housing variables are classifed in four: total housing stock, housing without potable water, housing without sewer service, and housing tenure. Total housing stock mean shows stable changes but slight growth. However, the standard deviation is being incremented as construction is concentrated in major cities. Correlation coefficients again are strongly tied to GIP, urban population, and federal investment.
Housing without potable water has changed substantially from 1960 to 1980. The mean state participation has been reduced dramatically since 1960; however, it is still a problem. About 30 percent of all housing stock, state average, is without the service in 1980. There is a clear correlation between housing stock with water problems and housing with sewer problems.
Housing tenure mean among states has decreased since 1960. The clear relationship between urbanization rate and housing tenure defines tha urbanization is having a contrary effect on it. The standard deviation is being reduced at the national level, supposing that it is dispersing everywhere.
-45-


Sumnary
The fundamental factor in this step of the analysis shows that economic factors are determinig the distribution and intensity of the regional problems and their effects in urban areas. Participation in
the Gross Internal Product is very related with toal population concentration, urban population, urbanization rate, fiscal revenues and federal investment.
Changes occurring during the last twenty years have been slow and do not respond to the high pressure given by the accelerated population growth rate. Most of the pressures are occurring in states with big urban population centers and leaving without expectations smaller cities and people in rural areas.
6.4.2 Urban Population Level
This phase of the analysis considers the housing element as the unit for measurement of growth in the different state entities. The housing sector, in Mexico, grew at a rate of 3.1% during the 60's, 3.9% during the 70's, and 3.1% during the 1980's. It was a good rate of growth; however, the Federal District participated with 13.9%, 14.2% and 14.0% of the total housing construction in the same period. The state of Mexico, which includes part of the metropolitan are of Mexico City, increased from 5.4%, 7.9% and 11.2% in the same period, while in the other extreme, 6 states from 1960 to 1980 received increases of less than one percent of the total housing construction in the nation.
-46-


In measuring changes, 15 variables were established from which it is hoped to show the conditions of physical growth in states and then localities in the national territory. The variables have the following characteristics:
Demographic: Total population, population rate of growth, mean
increase of urban population, and total urban popula-
tion.
Economic: Per capita gross internal product, labor force, per
capita state revenue, and per capita federal investment.
Physical: Total housing stock, rented housing, housing without
water, housing without sewer, housing tenure, average persons per unit, decade housing change, percentage of housing nation's growth.
The purpose of the analysis is to correlate the relationship among these variables and find out the possible explanations for current patterns. This tool will help in the formulation of alternatives,
strategy definition and recommendatios for the Urban Reform proposal.
The most important element here is the total housing change occurring in all the states and the other variables will work as supportive elements to understand such changes.
The results of the correlation analysis convey that in the last three decades there has not been substantial change in terms of the variable means in the nation. However, there is a generalized increase
-47-


-in the standard deviation among variables. This has as a consequence that if socio-economic disparities existed in 1960 for 1980 the conditions in urban and rural sectors are increasing dangerously and maintain fundamental relations that support are being questions.
Total population standard deviation is increasing due to major attractions offered by the big metropolitan urban centers. This variable has a strong relationship with states with big total housing growth, making an extraordinary concentration of housing construction in marketable areas.
The housing sector growth diminished in the last decade compared with the increases experienced in the 1970's and even the standard deviation decreased also as a consequence of a lack of interest to
minimize this critical problem. It is considered that since 1960 the mean average persons/housing has not changed at all from 5.47 to 5.57 in 1980. Total housing growth on the other hand shows a tied correlation between it and housing tenure status. There is a remarkable increase of rented housing in areas with more potential to grow in the housing
sector.11
The most important aspect of all is the fact that factors of
economic character are shaping the way in which the space is organ-
ized. Gross internal product generation as well as labor concentration remarks that housing growth is being deeply influenced by economic development.
-48-


CHAPTER VII ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL
7.1 Generalities
The Mexican state has two clear alternatives in order to minimize grave chronic socio-economic problems and their effects in rural ares and urban centers of any dimension. First, a radical change in the formulation/implementation of physical and economical planning policies, and second, leave market conditions, with their periodical speculative crises, still regulating-manipulating growth and people's expectations. The effects produced for such practices have been clearly defined.
Enough reasons exist to formulate a thesis of an Urban Reform (UR) mechanism as a public instrument to implement Human Settlements (HS) and the National Plan for Urban Development Policies as a complementary step to the Agrarian Reform, and the configuration of a national economic and physical planning policy in Mexico. The Urban Reform pursues the state's constitutional rights, granted in the 27th article, to control urban and suburban land and thus local economies to satisfy urgent people's needs. Only in this manner is the state in a position to implement promotional, strengthening, control and planning policies in regions or cities within the nation's political-administrative limits, according to the General Law of Human Settlements. The Urban Reform proposal has objectives of character economic, political, administrative, and social to integrate the territory as a unit.


7.2 UR Goals and Objectives
Goal: State rights for the acquisition of urban and suburban land for the implementation of public policies pointed out in the General Law of Human Settlements.
Objectives:
1) Decentralization and strengthening of local economies, through the state intervention and control of land market supply for industrial, commercial and residential quotas established in the NPUD.
2) Induce decentralized local administrative control upon land policies, subdivision regulations and planning through a self-financed state, municipal or local governments and so finance public facilities and services.
3) Encourage housing investment to supply new housing, improvement of the old stock, and replacement of deteriorated ones through cooperative renewal programs. Also, promotion of self-construction housing with technical and material government help.
4) Induce public control and awareness of environmental pollution and environment conservation.
5) Regularization of land status in regard to federal, ejidal, and communal public lands transformed into private land through illegal transactions, pursuing a public lawsuit in favor of damages against the state and public welfare.
-50-


7.3 Economic Aspects of the Urban Reform
The UR is a legislative mechanism, that in local terms will allow the control of the local economy through national or regional lineaments. The pretended control will allow a comprehensive distribution of growth and its functions of production, consumption, interchange and planning among communities and so increas their economic expectations and income levels, provoked by the multiplier effect of development itself.
The theory behind this is that through public intervention on land it is going to induce capital investment in productive functions, and this will avoid passive/speculative capital invested in land also.
In economic activity terms industrial and commercial decentralization and an indiscriminative support to primary agricultural activities are required promptly. Rapidly reduce industry allocation in the major industrial-commercial urban centers, giving priorty to undesirable industry. It is recommended that environmental control measures be enacted through laws to cope with industrial emissions.
In respect to the services sector, decentralization of the government's organisms, higher education institutions, commercial enterprises and businesses from important urban centers and increase expectations in smaller communities. Creation of tax incentives or tax charges mechanisms to induce or stop allocation of such activities in determined communities.
-51-


The agricultural sector must receive ^discriminative allocation of resources deviated from urban centers minimizing socio-economic barriers that separate them and implementation of a coordination between "ejidal" and urban social lands.
7.4 Political Administrative Land Control
The goal in the application of the Urban Reform in political administrative terms is to transfer land tenure domain to the state and so implement the National Plan for Urban Development, giving land the needed social character granted by constitutional right.
Public land in state hands will comprise the land supply market and its behavior according to lineaments and objectives of national, regional, state or local planning policies. However, public land supply market will be directed to social housing programs, construction of public facilities and preservation of natural resources.
For such purposes the state must enact national legislation on state's priority for the acquisition of urban and suburban lands within and around cities to protect and implement plans and policies with public character. Establishment of a Land Bank (LB) coordinated at the state level through federal supervision and local control, for land distributional allocation. To minimize local growth problems concerned with infrastructure, public services and facilities, a decentralization of tax revenues to the state and municipal governments is extremely necessary. A we 11-structured taxation system and civil participation in community matters are required.
-52-


7.5 Mechanisms for Public Land Acquisition
Enact an Urban Reform Law considering that there is a public concern in fully implementing the socio economic policies described in the General Law of Human Settlements through the National Plan for Urban Development
This mechanism will gradually regulate all land tracts, defining their classificatory status within the expropriation process and thus allowing the determination of compensation according to constitutional rights. It will be based on analyzing the real land value without the added value caused by public investment and so increasing its rent value.
The state, through state and local governments, reserves its right to the first option of buying urban and suburban land, expropriation of ejidal and communal lands to preserve, develop- or regulate communities' growth and implement planning policies of public interest.
This right is limited within a tract of 5 kilometers around metropolitan cities and along communication networks; a tract of land 3 kilometers around state capitals or intermediate sized cities and along communication networks; a tract of land 2 kilometers around small cities and 1 kilometer around rural communities.
From the enaction on, all subdivisions above 10,000 square meters are prohibited. Subdivisions on tracts under 10,000 square meters would be allowed according to communities' needs and the lineaments of local planning policies.
-53-


Public revenues to pay for expropriated land will be raised through local taxes or sales of public bonds at 5, 10 or 20 years with an interest fixed by an economic study. Public bonds must be backed by the federal and state governments.
7.6 Conclusions
Before the analytical description of the socio-economic and physical facts of the reality of the Mexican urban conditions, it can be concluded that the economic factor is the engine that moves the whole system. The economic policies that have shaped the origin and strengthening of the economic structure are being questioned. The delay in the provision of basic elements, jobs, housing, public services and facilities evidence the contradiction in which capital-oriented economies work.
If the Mexican government has failed to introduce equitable development policies, it is because it has tried to induce and control investment via alliances with the private sector. To this point agreement on investment policies have been set to capital investment on diverse activities to create expectations in local economies in the national territory. But capitals have other objectives and can easily be translated to other functions and accomplish the needs of the carriers.
Governmental incapacity to fulfill the goals and objectives of national plans coupled with elusive investment agreements provoke periodical crisis in the national economy and preventing the accomplishment
-54-


of development goals. For such reason, the state has an alternative, the control of land, through which almost all development programs must go.
Effective development policies as described in the National Plan for Urban Development can be carried out through strong land tenure control policies. State land market control would allow to it growth coordination capabilities in the implementation of the NPUD.
The Urban Reform policy is the ideal instrument to fulfill the participation of the state in the land market and be able to guarantee land resources in the demands set for local, state or federal plans. The land policy must be focused to allow low-income people and salaried workers the access to land. Housing programs will have priority to minimize this critical problem. Reducing its deficit and increasing people's expectations in ownership programs and support for self-construction efforts.
Land market control means the regulation of the only element in which the state can have direct contact. Land control means a direct implementation effort by the state in the strengthening, decentralization and support policies fixed in the National Plan for Urban Development. This will induce a rapid urban and regional planned system and so minimize in the medium period the critical problems that affect the people.
-55-


F0ITN0TES
CHAPTER III.
1 NACIONAL FIN AN Cl ERA. MEXICO EN CIFRASs 1980. 0BL1GACI0 NES DEL SECTOR PUBLICS Y PRIVAB0. P.273. AND TIME MAGAZINE NOVEMBER IF 1982. EXTERNAL DEBT 0F THE THRIRD U0RLB. P.56.
2 NACI0NAL FINANCIERA. MEXICO EN CIFRAS: 1980. BALANZA BE PAGOS DEL SECT0R EXTERN0. P.280.
3 UNIKEL, LUIS. EL DESARR0LL0 URBAN0 BE HEX ICS. ANTECEDENTES HIST 0 -RIC0S BE LA URBANIZACI0N. P.17.
4 UNIKEL, UIS. EL BESARROLLO URBANS DE MEXICO. URBAN IZACTIN EN EL SIGL0 XX. P.27. AND DIRECCI0N GENERAL DE ESTADISTICA, CENS0 GENERAL DE POBLA-CI0 N Y VIVI END A 1960,1970,1 980.
5 IBID. NUMER0 DE L0CALIDADES . P.30-31.
6 IBID. NUMER0 DE L0CALIDADES . P.31 . *
7 IBID. DESARR0LLO ECONOMIC! REGIONAL Y URBANIZAC ION
8 IBID. DESARR0LL0 ECONOMICS REGIONAL T URBANIZACION
9 IBID. DESARROLL0 ECONOMICS REGIONAL Y URBANIZA Cl ON
10 NACI0NAL FINANCIERA. MEXICO EN CIFRAS 1980. ESTRUC
BLACI0N ECONOMICAHENTE ACTIVA P0R SECT0RES DE ACTIVIDAD. P.79.
11 UNIKEL, LUIS. EL DESARR0LL0 URBANO DE MEXICO. DESARR0LLO ECONOMICS REGIONAL Y URBANIZACION. P.180.
12 IBID. DISTRIBUCI0N DEL INORE SO Y URBANIZACIIN. P.201.
13 IBID. FINANZAS FUBLICAS Y URBANIZACIIN. P.275-279.
14 IBID. FINANZAS PUBLICAS Y URBANIZACI0N. P.275.
15 0CH0A, CAMP0S. LA REF0RMA MUNICIPAL. ESTRUCTURA DE LOS INGRES0S Y GAST0S DE LOS G0BIERN0S, FEDERAL, ESTATAL Y MUNICIPAL. P.424-4-47.


GRAPHIC NO. 1 MEXICO: STATE'S CLASIFICATION.
GRAPHIC: NO. 2 MEXICO: POPULATION GROWTH 1930-1980.
GRAPHIC NO. MEXICO: POPULATION GRAOWTH 1900-2000.
GRAPHIC NO. 4 MEXICO AND OTHER COUNTRIES: URBAN STRUCTURE 1900-1970.
GRAPHIC NO. 5 MEXICO: LOCALITIES WITH MORE THAN 15,000 INHABITANTS IN 1970.
GRAPHIC NO. 6 MEXICO: MUNICIPALITIES OF MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS 1970.
GRAPHIC NO. 7 MEXICO: GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT 1950-1980 BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY.
GRAPHIC NO. 8 MEXICO: GROSS INVESTMENT,TOTAL INVESTMENT, IN CONSTRUCTION, AND IN HOUSING 1966-1980.
GRAPHIC: NO. 9 MEXICO: FANILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION 1950,1958,1963,1969.
GRAPHIC NO. 10 MEXICO: CITY'S SIZE AND RATE OF GROWTH AND DETERIORATION OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT.
GRAPHIC: NO. 11 MEXICO: CITY'S SIZE AND RATE OF GROWTH AND DETERIORATION OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT, SEWER SERVICE.
GRAPHIC: NO. 12 MEXICO: CITY'S SIZE AND RATE OF GROWTH AND DETERIORATION OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT, HOUSING FLOOR.
GRAPH ir NO. 13 MEXICO: CITY'S SIZE AND AVAILABILITY OF T.V. IN HOUSING.
GRAPHIC: NO. 14 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM OF THE CORRELATION BETWEEN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT AND URBAN POPULATION AT THE STATE LEVEL IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
GRAPHIC NO. 15 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN FISCAL REVENUES AND GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN 1960,1970 AND 1980.
GRAPHIC NO. 16 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL HOUSING IN 1960,1970,AND 1980.
GRAPHIC: NO. 17 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL HOUSING GROWTH IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
GRAPHIC NO. 18 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM OF THE CORRELATION BETWWEN CHANGES IN TOTAL HOUSING IN STATE AND HOUSING GROWTH IN DECADE 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
GRAPHIC: NO. 19 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL HOUSING AND TOTAL GROWTH IN HOUSING 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
GRAPHIC: NO. 20 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN 1960,1970,AND 1980.
GRAPHIC NO. 21 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL HOUSING WITH NO POTABLE WATER.
GRAPHIC: NO. 22 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL HOUSING AND TOTAL RENTED HOUSING.
GRAPHIC: NO. 23 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL HOUSING CHANGE AND TOTAL HOUSING WITH NO POTABLE WATER.
GRAPHIC: NO. 24 MEXICO: SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL HOUSING CHANGE AND TOTAL HOUSING WITH NO SEWER SERVICE.


APPENDIX B
TABLE NO. 1
TABLE NO. 2
TABLE NO. 3
TABLE NO. 4
TABLE NO. 5
TABLE NO. 6
TABLE NO. 7
TABE NO. 8
TABLE NO. 9
TABLE NO. 10
TABLE NO. 11
TABLE NO. 12
TABLE NO. 13
TABLE NO. 14
fABLE NO. 15
MEXICO:
MEXICO:
MEXICO:
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
VARIABLES AT THE VARIABLES AT THE VARIABLES AT THE
STATE LEVEL 1960. STATE LEVEL 1970. STATE LEVEL 1980.
MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES CHANGES AT THE STATE
LEVEL 1960.
MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES CHANGES AT THE STATE
LEVEL 1970.
MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIALES CHANGES LEVEL 1980.
VARIABLES MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
VARIABLES CORRELATION COEFICIENT MATRIX IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
VARIABLES INVERSE CORRELATION MATRIX AT IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
VARIABLES MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
VARIABLES CORRELATION COEFICIENT MATRIX IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
VARIABLES INVERSE CORRELATION MATRIX AT IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980.
MEXICO: HOUSING DEFICIT 1970.
AT STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL HTE STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL THE STATE LEVEL
MEXICO: HOUSING DEFICIT IN URBAN AND RURAL AREAS. MEXICO: HOUSING,PROYECTION OF BEHAVOIR 1976-1990.


graphic no. 1
aguascaLientes
CALIFORNIA
BAJA C
campec
N.
alifornia
HE
COAHUILA
COLIMA CHIAPAS CHIHUAHUA DURANGO
federal
DISTRICT
1 GUANAJUATO
2 GUERRERO .3 HIDALGO
L4 JALISCO L5 MEXICO
1A MlCHOACAN 7 MORELOS 3 MAVARIT 5 NUEVO LEON
21
|22 231
24
25
PUEBLA QUERETARO _ pill NT ANA ROU SAN LUIS POTOSI SINALOA
26 SONORA
27 TABASCO 28. T AMAUL1P AS
29 TLAXCALA
30 VERACRUZ
j
31 YUCATAN
32 ZACATECAS


GRAPHIC NO.7
SOURCE: NACIONAL FINANCIERS, MEXICO EN CIFRAS, 1980


X I'l I M•_* I I \«_• I A •_*» i
MEXICO! GKUSS 1 NVtb mtiN I , iuihl nHvconicm HOUSING, 1966-1982.
BILLION OF PESOS


PERCENTAGE OF INCOME
GRAPHIC NO.?
MEXICO: FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION(LORENZ'S CURVE) IN 1950,1958,1963,AND 1969.
0 10 10 30 40 » *0 TO 10 *0 IOO
PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES
OURCE: IJNIKEL, LUIS. EL DESARROLLO URBANO DE MEXICO. P.252


GRAPHIC NO.10
MEXICO: CITIES OVER 50,000 INHABITANTS ACCORDING TO ANNUAL RATE OF DEMOORAHIC GROWTH AND HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN 1970.
cc
LU
f—
3
LU
-I
ill
o
0.
i i
X
n 2 i—i
to
o
X
RATE OF GROWTH
GRAPHIC NO.11
MEXICO: CITIES OVER 50,000 INHABITANTS ACCORDING TO ANNUAL RATE OF DEMOGRAPHIC GROWTH AND HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN 1970.
LU
O
>
lC
LU
CO
X
LU
2
Ul
CO
H
_i
2
CO
_i
Q
X
7 .8 9 14
RATE OF GROWTH
CITIES FROM 100,000 TO 450 000 INHABITANTS. CITIES FROM 50,000 TO 99,000 INHABITANTS.
E: HERRERA, LIGIA. TASA DE CRECIM1ENT0 Y DETER10R0 DEL MEDIO U R B A NO EN ME XIC0. REVISTA DEM0GRAFIA Y EC0NOMIA,1977.P,26?
-2 AS


GRAPHIC: NO. 12
MEXICO: CITIES OVER 50,000 INHABITANTS ACCORDING TO ANNUAL RATE OF GROWTH AND HOUSING WITH NO ARTIFICIAL SURFACE ON GROUND,1970.
a
z
0
x
o
_l
x
i
h-
z
X
3
o
z
I—I
CO
“l
o
GRAPHIC NO.13
MEXICO! CITIES OVER 50,000 INHABITANTS ACCORDING TO CITY SIZE AND AVAILABI.LITY OF TELEVISION IN THE HOUSING, 1970.
>
â– 
I-
h-
z>
0
X
I-
z
rn
100 ; 90 80 70 .60 H 50 40 H 30 20 i o H
l%)
—T-
50
4+
T++
+
+
+ +
+
+
THOUSAND OF INHABITANTS
—i----1----
T
“T
T
100 150 200 250 300
-—r
350 400 450
CITY SIZE


GRAPHIC NO.14
' “ 40.00 1 FILS OTATOO 1 1 | 1 1 UT5T
. I #OATTERO*AM 0F I i | 1 • 1
1 (ACROM) URPOTUl | 1 1
90.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 90.00
38.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 38.00
20.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20.00
*4.00 i r ♦ i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i ♦ i i i i 24.00
20.00 i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i i i i 20.00
10.00 i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i ♦ i i i ; 10.00
18.00 1 i 1 1 I i i i ♦ i i 18.00
i i â–  1 1 i I
0.00 ♦ 1 ♦ 0.00
â–  \ i 1 1 a | i i i i i i
4.00 ♦ a ■ 1 i ♦ 4.00
1 ■ » 1 i i
| a aa aa 1 i i
1 3*8 â–  1 23 1 1 i i i i
0 ♦ 322 1 * ♦ 0
0 4.00 0.00 12.00 10.00 20.00 24.00 20.00 32.00 30.00 40.00
90.00 Jff VI LB 8TAT70 i 1 1 1 a ♦ 90.00
[ OOATTCTOHAW OF t (DOWN) 3ROINFO (ACROM) UftPOFVL 1 1 1 1 1 |
98.00 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 | ♦ 1 1 98.00
80.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20.00
. 84.00 i i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 | ♦ 1 1 1 1 24.00
20.00 l i i i i i 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20.00
10.00 i i j 1 1 1 1 1 1 | ♦ 1 1 1 1 10.00
• 18.00 i i 1 1 1 1 i i i i i i 18.00
0.00 i ! 1 1 i i i i 0.00
1 • i i
1 â–  1 1 1 1 i i i i i i
4.00 ♦ a a 1 i ♦ 4.00
1 2 • 1 i i
1 ... 1 i i
1 «a a 1 i i
1 384 1 i i
0 ♦■8 • ♦ 0
0 4.00 0.00 12.00 10.00 20.00 24.00 20.00 38.00 30.00 40.00
30.00 * PILE STATOO 1 « ♦ 30.00
| 9CATTEH80AW OF (DOWN) OROINFO (ACROM) URPOPUL 1 1 1 1
1-
38.00 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 38.00
20.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ♦ 1 1 20.00
24.00 i i i i 1 1 1 1 I i i i i i i i i 84.00
20.00 i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i i i i 20.00
10.00 i i i j 1 1 1 I I i i i i i i i i 10.00
18.00 i 1 1 1 i i 18.00
i 1 a a 1 1 1 1 i i i i i i
0.00 ♦ 1 8.00
1 a 1 i i
1 a 1 i i
1 2 1 1 i i i i
4.00 ♦ 1 4.00
12a aa a 1 i i
1 aa 1 i t
1 a 2 I i i
1« 20« » 1 i
0 ♦ aa 1 0
0 4.00 0.00 18.00 10.00 20.00 24.00 20.00 38.00 90.00 40.00


GRAPHIC: NO. 15
49.00 *FIL£ STAT60 I I I I ♦ I 49.00
40.00 ! SCATTERSRAM OF I ♦ 1 I (DOWN) FISREVE (ACROSS) GROINPO I I I I I I I I a I I I I I 40. 00
39. 00 I I ♦ I i I I I I I I I 1 I I ♦ I 39. 00
20.00 I I ♦ I I i i i i i i i i i i I I ♦ I I 20. 00
19.00 I ♦ I I i i i i i i i i I ♦ I I 13. 00
10.00 1 I ♦ » I I i i r i i i i i i i I I ♦ I I 10.00
3.00 0 30.00 I I ♦ 1 i« I a aa a l 3 '3*« 1*223 **3« 0 4.00 I FILE STAT70 i i i a I I 1 8.00 12.00 I I 16.00 20.00 24.00 i i i i i i i i 28.00 I I 32.00 36.00 I I ♦ I I I ♦ 40.00 ♦ I 3.00 0 30. 00
43.00 I I SCATTERGRAM OF I ♦ I I (DOWN) FISREVE, (ACROSS) GROINFO, I I I I I I I I a I I I ♦ I I 49.00
40. 00 I I ♦ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I I 40. 00
33.00 I I ♦ I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I 39.00
20.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I I 20.00
13.00 I ♦ I I I I l I I I I I i ♦ i i 19. 00
10.00 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I i i ♦ i i 10. 00
3.00 0 1 I ♦ I a a 1 *2 a I aaaa a I 264 a ♦ *4 0 4.00 I I 1 I I I 8.00 12.00 16.00 20. 00 24.00 I I I 1 I I I I 28.00 32. 00 36.00 i i ♦ i i i i 40.00 3. 00 0
30.00 * FILE STAT80 I I I I a I 30.00
27.00 ! SCATTERGRAM OF I I I (DOWN) FISREVE 1 (ACROSS) GROINPO I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I I 27.00
24.00 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I I 24.00
21.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I 21.00
12. 00 !----------—--- I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 12.00
9.00 I ♦ i l I I I I I I ♦ I 9. 00
6.00 I i I 1 a I I I I I 1 I I I I 6.00
3.00 0 i I a 2 2 * 1 5 * 1**4 « 2 ♦ 0 4.00 I I I I I I 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 1 1 I I 1 I I I 28.00 32.00 36. 00 I 1 ♦ I I I I 40. 00 3.00 0


' GRAPHIC NO.16
2HANQ60 (CREATION DATE â–  03/04/27.1
OF (DOWN) TOPOPU (ACROSS) TOHOUS
■FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE • 03/04/27.)
â–  FILE
ISCATTERQRAH OF (DOWN) TOPOPU
l—__ (ACROSS) TOHOUS
lFILE CHANOOO (CREATION DATE â–  03/04/27.)
!
1.00 3.00 0.00 7.00
IFILE
Iscatterorah of (down) topopu
I (ACROSS) TOHOUS
9.00 11.00 13.00 10J
7.00 9.00 11.00 13.i
a 14.00
0.00 10.00 12.00 14.00
1 1 1 1 20.00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 | 1 1 1 19.00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 i';." 19,00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 9 1 1 14.00 « 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 t 1 l 1 l 4 1 1 12.00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a | 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10.00 « 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 la a 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 * 9.00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a | 1 1
1 1 ! | 1 9.00 f a | 1 1 1
1 ■ 1 ■ • 1 • 1 a 1 3a 1 aa 1 2a ♦ 3 1 2 1 a 2 1 aa 1 as 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 ■ | } 1 1 | a 1 • ■ 4.00 ♦ 1 •* i a . i • a l a* 2.00 ♦ a l sa l a 1 3 1 3 0 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 2.00 4.00 0.00 9.00 10.00 12.00- 14.00 0 2.00 4.00 9.00 9.00 10.00 12.00


GRAPHIC NO.17
16.00 I FILE CHAN06O I I I I
I SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU I
I (ACROSS) TOHOGR I
14.00 ♦ I I I I I a
12.00 I I ♦ I I I I I I I I I I I I
10.00 I 1 ♦ I I I l I I I I I I I
8.00 I I I I I a I I I
I a I
6.00 I ♦ I I I I
I a a I I
I a I I
I a a I I
4.00 ♦ I I
I 2 a I I
I * i I I
I a a a I I
I aa a a I I
2.00 ♦ I I
I »a a I I
I 2** I I
! a I I
I 2* I I
0 ♦ a I I

0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20
16.00 ♦ I FILE CHANQ70 I I I I
I SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU I
I (ACROSS) TOHOGR I
14.00 ♦ I I I I I a
12.00 I I ♦ I I I I I I I I I I I I
10.00 I I ♦ I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1
8.00 I 1 I I I I I I I a I I I I I a

6.00 * I I
I a I I
I aa I 1
I a I
4.00 ♦ I I
I a I I
I aa a a I I
I a a I 1
I a a a I I
2.00 ♦ a a a I I
I a a I I
I a a a l I
I aa I I
I 3a I I
0 ♦ I I
. ♦
0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10. 00 12. 00 14.00 16.00
16.00 ♦ l FILE CHANG80 I I I I
I SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU I
I I (ACROSS) TOHOGR I
14.00 ♦ I i i I I a
12.00 I 1 ♦ i i i I I I
I I i i I 1 a
10.00 1 I I i i i i I I I !
8.00 1 I I l i i i i I I I l I
I i I
6.00 1 i i I I
1 I i i I I
I a a i I
4.00 ♦ i I
I a a i I
I a a i I
I a aa i I
1 a a aa i 1
2.00 ♦ a i 1
I aa a 2 i I
I a a i I
I a a a i I
I «2 i I
0 i I
0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.


GRAPHIC NO.18
16.00 J FILE CHAN060 (CREATION DATE • 83/04/27.) I I ♦ I 16.00
t SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS 1 I
I (ACROSS) DEHOCH I I
14.00 ♦ a I I I I I ' ♦ I 14.00
12.00 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I I 12.00
10.00 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I ♦ I I 10.00
8.00 I I ♦ ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8. 00
6.00 I # ♦" 1 I I I I ♦ 8.00
I * a I I I
I i â–  I I I
I i I I I
4.00 ♦ I I I ♦ 4.00
I a a a | I I
I a a | I I
I â–  2 I 1 I
I a a | I I
2. 00 ♦ XX I a I ♦ 2. 00
I I I a I
I «** * I I I
I * X I I I
a a I a I a I
0 * I I ♦ 0

13.00 29.00 37.00 49.00 61.00 73.00 89.00 97.00 109.00 121.00 133.00
16.00 ♦ I ♦ 16.00
I FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE * 83/04/28.) I I
I SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS a I I
I (ACROSS) DEHOCH 1
14.00 I I I I I ♦ 1 14.00
12.00 I I ♦ I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I i i ♦ i i 12.00
10.00 I I ♦ I 1 I I I 1 l I I I i i ♦ i 10. 00
I I I I I i i
8.00 ♦ I I ♦ 8.00
I I I I I I a I I
I a I I I
6.00 ♦ I I ♦ 6.00
I a | I I
I I I
I * * I I I
4.00 ♦ I I ♦ 4.00
I a I a I I
I a a | a I I
I I I
a a | a I a I
2. 00 ♦ a a I I a ♦ 2.00
I * a I I I
I | a a I I
I a * * I I I
I I * a a I 1
0 ♦ I a | ♦ 0

3.00 11.00 19.00 27.00 39.00 43.00 91.00 59.00 67.00 79.00 83.00
16.00 I I ♦ 16.00
| FILE CHANG80 1 I I
| SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS! 1 I
1 (ACROSS) DEHOCH! a I I
14.00 ♦ I I I 1 1 I 14.00
12.00 I - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I ♦ I I 12.00
I 1 a I I 1 I 1
10.00 I I I I 1 I 1 I ♦ I I 10.00
8.00 I I ♦ 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I ♦ I I 8.00
6.00 I -------- I * a 1 1 1 1 1 I I i i 6.00
I I « 1 I 1 I i i
1 I I a i
4.00 a I ♦ 4.00
I a I I i
1 i i
a a | a I a i
2.00 | a I ♦ 2.00
a a a | 1 i
[ a 1 i
I 2 I i
I a a I a i
0 ♦ I I ♦ 0

18.00 28.00 38.00 48.00 58.00 68.00 78.00 88.00 98.00 108.00 118.00


FIL£ CHAN06O i I GRAPHIC NO „ 19 1 I ♦ I 16.00
I SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TQH0U3 I I I I
1 (ACROSS) TOHOGR 1 I
14.00 ♦ I I I I I a ♦ I 14.00
12.00 I I ♦ I I I I I I I I I I I I ••••*■•1 I I ♦ I I 12.00
10.00 1 I ♦ 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I ♦ I I 10.00
8.00 I I ♦ 1 1 I I I a I I 1 I I I I I I I I 8.00
6.00 I I I I I •••••••1 I ♦ 6. 00
I a a I I I
I a a I 1 I
I * I I I
4.00 ♦ I I I ♦ 4.00
I 2 a | I I
I 2 I I I
1 i ii I I I
I * a I I I
2.00 ♦ in I 1 ♦ 2. 00
I a I I I
I *2» I I I
I a a I I I
I 3* I I I
0 ♦ I I ♦ 0
* ♦
0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18. 00 20.00
16.00 ♦ 1 I ♦ 16.00
I FILE CHAN07O I I I
1 SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) T0H0US I a I
I (ACROSS) TOHOGR I I
14.00 I I I I I I 14.00
12. 00 I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I ♦ I I 12.00
10.00 I I ♦ I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I ♦ I 10.00
I I I I a I I I I
8.00 ♦ I I ♦ 8.00
1 I I I I I a I I
I a I I I
6.00 ♦ I 1 ♦ 8.00
1 I I
I a I I I
1 a a I I I
4.00 ♦ I I ♦ 4.00
l a a | I l
l aa a I I I
I a 1 I I
I a a a a | I I
2.00 ♦ a a a I 1 ♦ 2.00
I a a I I I
I a a I 1 l
I *2 I I I
1 2« 1 I I
0 ♦ a 1 I ♦ 0
. ♦
0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12. 00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00
16.00 ♦ I I ♦ 16.00
I FILE CHANG80 I 1 I
I I SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS I 1 I I
1 (ACROSS) TOHOGR 1 a I
14.00 I I I I I ♦ I 14.00
ro o o I I I I I I I I I I I I I ♦ I 12. 00
I 1 I I I 1 I I
o o o 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I 10.00
8.00 I I ♦ 1 I I I I I I a 1 I I I I I I I I 8.00
6.00 I I I a | I I I I I 6. 00
1 I 1 I 1 I I I
I I I
4.00 ♦ a a I 1 ♦ 4.00
1 1 I
I a 2 a I I I j
I a a a 2 1 I I
2.00 ♦ a I 1 ♦ 2.00
I a a «2 I I I
I a a I I I
I a a a I I I
! *2 I I I
0 ♦ 1 I ♦ 0
+
0 2.00 4.00 6.00 3.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00


GRAPHIC NO.20
,SCATTERORAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU (ACROSS) TOURPO
« « * *2«
4.00 S.00 12.00
16.00 20.00 24.00 26.00 32.00 36.00
[file CHANG70 I I
!SCATTERORAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU l
(ACROSS) TOURPO |
♦ I I X
♦ I I i I I
♦ I I I I
* X I I x ( I I
♦ X I I I I
X X I
I « I
♦ M I I
I 2 2 I
l * * I
I x XX I
♦ x x X I
I * x I t
I 2* I
I >x I
I *2* I
♦ I
♦
0 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32
[ FILE CHANQ80 I I
1 SCATTERORAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU
(ACROSS) TOURPO
l I X
' I I 1 I I I X
* I I I I
♦ X I I I I I

X I I I I
( x X I
♦ I
I x X I
I * X I
I * XX I
1 « XX X I
♦ X I
1 **2* I
I 2 I
I 2* I
I *2 I
♦ I

0 4.00 O o C\J o o <0 16.00 20.00 24.00 21


GRAPHIC: NO. 21
63/04/27. 10.83
CHANG60 (CREATION DATE = 63/04/27.)
*GRAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU (ACROSS) TONOWA
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.00
FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE = 63/04/27.)
SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU (ACROSS) TONOWA
9. 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.00 9.00 11.00
4----4----4----4----4----4-----♦----4----4----4-----4----4---
CHANG80 (CREATION DATE * 63/04/27.)
TERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOPOPU (ACROSS) TONOWA
1.00 3.00 8.00 7.00 9.00 11.00 13.00 18.00
18.00
14.00
* 8.00
s «
« * s
« *
* * *
• a a
** « *
-4-----4 -
2.00 4 00 6.00
-4----4---
8.00
---4----4-----'
10.00 12.
. 4----4-----4----4-----4----
O 2.00 4.00
-♦----4----♦----4-----4----4----4-----4----4----4-----
6 00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.


GRAPHIC NO
FILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE « 83/04/27.)
FILE CHAN070 (CREATION DATE « 83/04/27.)
FILE CHANG80 (CREATION DATE * 83/04/27.)
SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS
(ACROSS) TORENO (ACROSS) TORENO (ACROSS) TORENO
2.00 6.00 10.00 14.00 18.00 22.00 26 2.00 6.00 10.00 14.00 18.00 22.00 26.00 1.00 3.00 9.00 7.00
. ♦ + ♦ ♦ ♦
20.00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 20.00 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20.00 ♦ 1 1 I 1 1
18.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
16.00 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 16.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I a 1 16.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a
14.00 ♦ 1 1 1 a 14.00 ♦ 1 | 1 1 1 14.00 ♦ 1 1 1
12.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ; 1 1 1 12.00 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10.00 1 1 1 10.00 1 | 1 1 1 1 10.00 ♦ 1 1 1
1 1 | 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 i 1 1 1 1
8 00 ♦ * 1 8.00 ♦ 1 1 8.00 ♦ a 1
1 1 1 1 I a 1 | 1 1 * 1 1 1 1
| 1 1 a 1 1 1 I
6.00 1 6.00 ♦ 1 1 6.00 ♦ a 1
1 * * 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 •» 1 I a 1 1 1 1
| a 1 I a 1 1 a 1
| 1 1 a a 1 1 1 a 1
o o 1 4 . OO ♦ 1 1 4.00 ♦ a a 1
| a a a 1 1 *« 1 1 1 a 1
1 | a a a 1 1 1 22 1
1 a a a 1 | a 1 1 1 1
1 * * 1 | a a a a 1 1 1 4 a 1
2.00 ♦ 3 1 2.00 ♦ a* a 1 1 2.00 ♦ a 1
1 1 2 1 1 1 0 1
1 2a a 1 1 * • 1 1 1 2 1
1 2 1 1 • 2 1 1 1 2a 1
1*3 1 |a a a 1 1 1 3 1
0 1 0 ♦ a 1 1 0 ♦ 1
. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ . ♦
0 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 0 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28 0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00


GRfil 'iilC NO. 23
FILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE * 83/04/27.1
FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE = 63/04/27.)
FILE CHANG80 (CREATION DATE » 83/04/27.)
SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS (ACROSS) TONOWA
SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS (ACROSS) TONOWA
SCATTERGRAM OF
(DOWN) TOHOUS (ACROSS) TONOWA
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.00
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.00 9.00 11.00 13.00 15.00

-♦-----♦-----
00 10.00
----- ♦----♦------------------ ♦----♦-----♦------♦-----♦-----+>-----+------
4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16


NO. 24
GRAPH1C
FILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/27.)
SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS (ACROSS) TONOSE
FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/27.)
FILE CHANG80 (CREATION DATE â–  83/04/27.)
SCATTERGRAM OF (DOWN) TOHOUS (ACROSS) TONOSE
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.00 9.00
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.00
-----♦-------♦-------♦------♦-------♦------♦-------
18.00 ♦
a 2
* â– 
a 2
• 2*
* a
22
♦ ---------*- -
-♦----
14.00 ♦
----------------------------------------- - - - * — ------------------------
2 aa mm a
a 2 2a
O ♦ a
- - ♦--♦----♦-----♦----♦----♦----- . ----------------♦----♦----♦-----♦----♦----
4.00 6.00 8.00 10 o 2.00 4.00 6.00
8.00 10.
a 2 *a
.♦----♦----♦-----♦----♦-----♦----♦----
O 2.00 4.00 6.00
—-<
8.00 10.


HOUWSEW,ME INPO,DENPOPU,HOUOWNE,FEDINVE, PERCARE,NULOCAL INPUT MEDIUM CARD N OF CASES 32
INPUT FORMAT FIXEDCF2.0,13X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,
IX,F4.2,IX,F4.2,1X,F3.1,IX,F5.1,IX,F3.1,IX,F3.1,IX,F3.1,IX,F4.0)
READ INPUT DATA
01 AGUASCAL. 003 007 010 520 030 007 4721 5540 032 00444 504 003 003 0755
02 B.CAL.N. 027 015 029 679 342 015 4971 6790 088 00074 770 027 035 0437
03 B.CAL.S. 002 002 002 148 005 002 6979 7933 060 0001 1 563 004 037 1202
04 CAMPECHE 003 005 005 193 002 005 7646 8022 041 00033 568 006 026 0488
05 CHIAPAS 032 026 038 386 019 026 5836 7000 036 00060 462 025 077 2229
06 CHIHUAHUA 003 005 006 200 005 005 5853 6776 046 00316 506 016 003 0458
07 COAHUILA 013 035 009 047 016 035 8500 8615 032 00163 682 01 1 034 6717
08 COLIMA 043 035 042 383 104 035 5824 6595 060 00050 482 053 126 4264
09 DURANGO 013 022 014 176 010 021 81 50 6238 038 00061 610 013 061 2468
10 DIST.FED. 373 139 369 993 407 141 2452 2655 046 32933 208 201 001 0105
1 1 GUANAJUATO 025 049 043 236 015 049 7559 791 7 043 00569 569 027 016 4792
12 GUERRERO 014 034 007 036 016 035 9046 8906 043 001 84 733 021 032 3239
13 HIDALGO 01 1 028 007 064 009 028 8348 8549 017 00477 689 009 01 1 2613
14 JALISCO 045 070 076 358 028 067 6215 6686 059 00302 495 034 041 8636
15 E.MEXICO 038 054 025 158 035 054 8330 8717 096 00888 630 027 01 1 2402
16 MICHOACAN 017 053 025 109 025 053 7834 8135 044 00309 668 027 030 5543
17 MORELOS 007 01 1 009 195 008 01 1 6027 7014 036 00780 489 006 003 0279
18 NAYARIT 006 01 1 004 104 002 010 7834 8323 075 00144 673 054 014 1399
19 NUEVO LEON 063 031 055 648 027 030 4658 5471 063 00166 421 069 033 3052
20 OAXACA 012 049 007 035 010 053 9261 9235 00183 705 019 048 3256
21 PUEBLA 023 056 032 175 024 057 8041 8081 019 00583 612 037 017 2701
22 QUERETARO 004 010 006 146 003 01 0 8265 8339 027 00318 599 006 006 1062
23 QUINTANA R 001 001 005 002 9555 9420 00009 657 004 025 0462
24 S.L.P0T0SI 013 030 017 180 015 029 8298 8330 032 00166 631 010 032 3400
25 SINALOA 025 024 017 172 015 020 7794 8037 034 00143 580 046 029 2897
26 SONORA 031 022 027 258 043 023 6247 701 1 039 00043 516 025 094 4324
27 TABASCO 010 014 004 084 012 013 8514 8190 028 00196 604 055 013 1 867
28 TAMAULI PAS 027 029 042 418 022 031 5575 6576 033 00129 509 088 040 4482
29 TLAXCALA 003 010 001 01 1 004 009 8646 8784 029 00863 696 003 002 0574
30 VERACRUZ 085 078 053 152 041 079 7381 7698 023 00380 628 104 037 7639
31 YUCATAN 014 017 015 287 031 01 8 8356 8235 025 00159 589 006 020 2282
32 ZACATECAS 009 023 006 046 007 023 8945 9102 037 001 1 1 647 005 038 2982
GROINPO; =PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT.
TOTAPOL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN TOTAL POPULATION.
URPOPUL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE CLASSIFIED AS URBAN POPULATION. urbraVe=rate OF URBAN POPULATION GROWTH IN STATE.
FISREVE=PERCENTAGE OF FISCAL REVENUES OF THE STATE’S TOTAL. HOUTOTA=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S HOUSING STOCK.
HOUWWAT = PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN STATE. HOUWSEW=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN STATE. MEINPO =MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN STATE. DENP0PU=POPULATION DENSITY IN THE STATE.
H0U0WNE=PERCENTAGE OF OWNED HOUSING IN STATE.
FED INVE = PERCENTAGE OF FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE.
PERCARE=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S AREA IN STATE.
NULOCAL = NUMBER OF LOCAL ITIES/COMMUNITIES IN STATE.
FINISH


i roru
r um’irt
o/\ , r o . i
i /\ j r o .
j r o . i
i r i /\c.u v r c. . , i
1X,F4.2,1X.F4.2, IX,F3.1 F4.0)
J I Aj TM . C, I A, rx> . Ij I A j r O . Ij
IX, F5.1,IX,F3.1,IX,F3.1,1X,F3.1,IX,
READ INPUT DATA
01 AGUASCAL 004 007 008 5361 003 006 2444 4893 037 00605 587 003 003 0889
02 B.CAL.N. 032 01 8 031 7563 027 019 3327 5661 060 00124 583 029 037 0676
03 B.CAL.S. 002 003 002 1797 005 002 3595 7299 064 00017 714 008 036 1536
04 CAMPECHE 005 005 005 2761 005 005 5223 7446 048 00048 745 005 026 0643
05 CHIAPAS 032 023 032 4936 013 022 2649 5638 030 00074 590 047 077 2005
06 CHI HUAHU, 004 005 006 3219 004 005 2190 5814 038 00442 599 004 003 0588
07 COAHUILA 01 1 033 01 1 0884 01 1 033 6213 771 7 042 00212 775 01 1 034 7740
08 COLIMA 033 033 041 4906 028 035 3415 5340 045 00065 591 028 126 5403
09 DURANGO 01 1 019 012 2703 008 018 4701 6956 035 00079 721 015 061 3097
10 DI ST.FED. 359 142 309 9712 460 147 0435 2146 035 45858 375 290 001 0084
1 1 GUANAJUA1 023 047 042 3154 020 043 4378 6414 043 00742 701 026 016 4820
12 GUERRERO 008 025 006 0688 005 025 5197 7431 027 00569 812 021 01 1 2408
13 HIDALGO 049 068 076 4471 036 065 3402 4756 049 00411 582 026 041 9710
14 JALISCO 071 079 078 4285 053 075 371 1 6016 126 01786 725 041 01 1 2773
15 E.MEXICO 016 048 027 1 702 019 047 4754 6807 049 00388 763 028 030 6097
16 MICHOACAN 008 01 3 01 1 3324 010 013 3029 6330 064 01247 614 009 003 0330
17 MORELOS 006 01 1 006 1473 007 012 5329 7789 053 00197 749 004 014 1442
18 NAYARIT 068 035 052 6447 037 035 1 874 4317 045 00263 554 003 033 4527
19 NUEVO LEO 009 042 010 0735 009 045 6529 8349 020 0021 1 849 019 048 2967
20 OAXACA 021 052 032 2341 020 054 5176 6818 048 00739 725 016 017 2981
21 PUEBLA 005 010 006 2412 001 010 4842 7584 051 00412 761 007 006 1121
22 QUERETARO 001 002 001 1343 004 002 5834 8423 010 00018 762 008 025 0547
23 QUINTANA 1 012 026 016 2305 01 1 026 6218 7136 040 00204 753 010 032 3637
24 S.L.POTOS 027 026 019 2878 029 025 4862 7383 060 00218 753 024 029 3753
25 SINALOA 039 023 028 4209 032 022 3165 5709 051 00059 669 026 094 4928
26 SONORA 01 1 016 005 1359 009 015 6578 7438 068 00312 757 055 013 1 140
27 TABASCO 039 030 041 5629 024 032 3321 5295 047 00183 624 082 040 5253
28 TAMAULIPA5 002 009 003 0453 003 009 5074 7913 054 01075 820 002 002 0612
29 TLAXCALA 062 079 051 2342 044 083 4902 6456 045 00524 736 105 037 5759
30 VERACRUZ 009 016 012 2495 010 015 5829 7034 024 001 93 784 010 020 2708
31 YUCATAN 006 020 005 0737 008 018 5694 7944 035 00127 765 006 038 3298
32 ZACATECAS 012 033 013 1432 017 033 6173 7817 094 00250 821 016 032 3434
GROINPO=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT. T0TAPOL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN TOTAL POPULATION.
URPOPUL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE CLASSIFIED AS URBAN POPULATION. URBRATE=RATE OF URBAN POPULATION GROWTH IN STATE.
FISREVE=PERCENTAGE OF FISCAL REVENUES OF THE STATE'S TOTAL. HOUTOTA=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S HOUSING STOCK.
HOUWWAT = PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN STATE. HOUWSEW=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN STATE. MEINPO = MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN STATE. DENPOPU=POPULATI ON DENSITY IN THE STATE.
HOU0WNE=PERCENTAGE OF OWNED HOUSING IN STATE.
FEDINVE=PERCENTAGE OF FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE.
PERCARE=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S AREA IN STATE.
NULOCAL = NUMBER OF LOCAL IT1ES/COMMUNITIES IN STATE.
FINISH


HOUWSEW,ME INPO,DENPOPU,HOUWNE,FED INVE,PERCARE INPUT MEDIUM CARD N OF CASES 32
INPUT FORMAT FIXED(F2.0,13X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1, IX, F4.2,IX,F4.2,IX,F3.1,IX,F5.1,IX,F3.1,1X,F3.1 , IX, F3.1 )
READ INPUT DATA
01 AGUASCAL. 006 008 007 61 1 004 007 0920 4120 039 00920 523 004 003
02 B.CAL.N. 034 018 003 850 033 019 1950 2170 034 00175 643 027 035
03 B.CAL.S. 032 003 002 317 003 003 1860 4190 054 00030 677 012 037
04 CAMPECHE 056 006 005 454 003 005 3280 6050 039 00073 770 030 026
05 CHIAPAS 029 023 026 760 026 023 1450 7360 033 00104 567 046 077
06 CHIHUAHUA 058 005 005 603 003 052 1320 3580 034 00653 543 012 003
07 COAHUILA 014 031 010 160 024 033 5530 3840 028 00283 760 048 037
08 COLIMA 019 029 038 732 026 031 2250 7760 018 00079 653 019 125
09 DURANGO 009 017 010 369 012 015 2460 1 160 021 00094 727 012 061
10 DIST.FED. 354 140 265 980 291 152 0570 7280 030 63376 462 214 001
1 1 GUANAJUATO 019 045 038 477 022 039 910 5130 029 00998 663 020 015
12 GUERRERO 098 032 019 173 014 032 5630 7430 030 00338 747 019 032
13 HIDALGO 092 022 004 141 007 021 3070 7790 023 00729 806 018 01 1
14 JALISCO 048 064 074 610 057 061 1840 2950 026 00531 557 024 041
15 E.MEXI CO 086 112 156 268 125 106 1660 3470 068 03533 703 034 01 1
16 MICHOACAN 022 045 026 295 015 043 4270 6870 027 00509 777 027 030
17 MORELOS 008 014 012 367 006 014 2140 5630 041 01882 605 006 003
18 NAYARIT 007 01 1 005 245 007 012 2960 5490 029 00271 760 009 014
19 NUEVO LEON 070 036 049 743 067 036 1120 3820 037 00379 646 026 033
20 OAXACA 009 037 121 01 1 039 5360 8480 022 00268 798 023 048
21 PUEBLA 023 049 030 332 013 047 3750 7060 026 00967 759 016 017
22 QUERETARO 006 01 1 006 272 013 010 3240 6510 040 00634 774 008 006
23 QUINTANA R 001 003 007 003 4840 6780 087 00042 652 007 025
24 S.L.POTOSI 010 025 015 344 010 023 4890 7050 026 00265 786 013 032
25 SINALOA 029 028 013 338 025 025 4270 6780 039 00325 798 029 029
26 SONORA 035 022 027 631 026 023 2080 6350 030 00082 765 019 094
27 TABASCO 009 017 006 149 035 015 6490 6980 040 00455 752 074 012
28 TAMAULIPAS 034 029 039 722 031 031 2650 4950 027 00242 629 053 040
29 TLAXCALA 003 008 003 129 005 007 21 10 7170 026 01363 823 004 002
30 VERACRUZ 065 078 048 321 058 081 4900 6600 032 00734 696 127 037
31 YUCATAN 009 015 008 423 013 016 4500 6930 030 00269 776 010 020
32 ZACATECAS 007 017 005 172 008 015 4680 6930 018 00156 769 010 038
GROl INPO- ^PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT.
TOTAPOL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN TOTAL POPULATION.
URP0PUL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE CLASSIFIED AS URBAN POPULATION. URBRATE=RATE OF URBAN POPULATION GROWTH IN STATE.
FlSREVE=PERCENTAGE OF FISCAL REVENUES OF THE STATE'S TOTAL. HOUTOTA=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S HOUSING STOCK.
HOUWWAT=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN STATE. H0UWSEW=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN STATE. MEINPO =MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN STATE. DENPOPU=P0PULATI ON DENSITY IN THE STATE.
H0UOWNE=PERCENTAGE OF OWNED HOUSING IN STATE.-FED INVE = PERCENTAGE OF FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE.
PERCARE=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S AREA IN STATE.
NUL0CAL = NUMBER OF LOCAL ITIES/COMMUNJTIES IN STATE.
FINISH


PCGRIP,DEHOCH,TOLAFO,TPORGR,PECSTR,PECFEl,TOHOGR,ME IUPO INPUT MEDIUM CARDS N OF CASES 32
INPUT FORMAT FIXED(F2.0, 12X,F3 .1,IX,F3.1,IX.F2 â– 1, IX,F3.1, IX,F2.1, IX,
F3. 1 , IX j F2. 1,F5.0 , IX, F2. 0, IX, F3. 1 , IX, , F2. 1 , IX ,F4. 0, IX,
F3. 1 , 1X ,F3. 1 , IX,F2.1)
NO STATE TP TH HR HW HS TL I PH 1 PCIP HC TLF PG PSTR PFI HG IU
01 AGUASCAL. 07 07 07 05 05 09 58 1033 13 06 25 45 14 03 30
02 B.CAL.N. 15 15 18 1 1 15 29 53 3900 132 14 72 233 47 31 88
03 B.CAL.S, 02 02 02 02 02 02 57 1966 61 02 39 21 83 03 59
04 CAMPECHE 05 05 04 05 05 05 55 1617 42 05 33 52 38 05 41
05 CHIAPAS 26 26 30 22 25 38 55 2614 28 25 22 73 29 20 36
06 CHIHUAHUA 05 05 05 04 05 06 53 1319 50 04 26 98 1 1 1 06 46
07 COAHUILA 35 35 24 44 43 09 54 821 35 34 30 46 27 33 33
06 COLIMA 35 35 04 03 33 42 54 2612 44 33 41 303 53 38 60
09 DURANGO 22 21 18 25 24 14 56 5688 65 02 27 46 37 15 38
10 DIST.FED. 139 141 243 51 53 369 54 1265 25 155 46 296 31 195 46
11 GUANAJUATO 49 49 45 54 54 43 56 1068 19 46 31 32 24 27 43
12 GUERRERO 34 35 20 46 43 07 53 879 38 33 33 49 48 33 43
13 HIDALGO 28 28 19 35 34 07 54 849 19 28 16 33 26 16 17
14 JALISCO 70 67 74 62 63 76 56 1 380 39 66 38 41 17 68 59
15 E.MEXICO 54 54 43 66 66 25 55 1493 38 51 58 66 26 53 96
16 MICHOACAN 53 53 38 61 60 25 54 675 37 50 33 39 25 51 44
17 MORELOS 1 1 1 1 12 10 1 1 09 53 1472 47 1 1 35 72 19 13 36
16 NAYARIT 1 1 10 08 13 1 3 04 54 1202 34 1 1 49 21 23 10 75
19 NUEVO LEON 31 30 38 21 23 54 55 4388 48 32 32 89 64 35 63
20 OAXACA k 49 53 34 72 69 07 51 527 26 55 1 6 20 32 38 17
21 PUEBLA 56 57 48 68 65 31 54 865 26 58 23 43 36 41 19
22 QUERETARO 10 10 20 13 12 05 52 850 35 09 25 31 42 09 27
23 QUINTANA R. 01 02 01 02 02 01 51 1036 93 01 16 340 163 03 1 7
24 S.L.POTOSI 30 29 24 37 35 17 54 953 28 28 23 51 21 23 32
25 SINALOA 24 20 18 24 23 1 7 64 2184 29 22 38 62 102 16 34
26 SONORA 22 23 22 20 21 27 57 2916 53 22 46 193 39 26 39
27 TABASCO 14 13 10 15 14 04 64 1538 32 1 2 36 85 86 10 28
28 TAMAULIPAS 29 31 33 25 28 42 52 2005 45 29 35 77 103 34 33
29 TLAXCALA 10 09 07 13 12 01 53 616 32 09 20 38 14 09 29
30 VERACRUZ 78 79 64 86 86 46 54 2036 34 78 31 53 68 72 23
31 YUCATAN 17 1 8 16 23 21 1 5 52 1663 24 17 1 8 180 12 13 25
32 ZACATECAS 23 23 18 31 29 06 55 798 34 22 22 32 14 21 37
T0POPU= TOTAL I POPULATION IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TOH0US=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TORENO=TOTAL RENTED HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TONOWA=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER.
TONOSE=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE.
TOURP0=TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN THE STATE IN THAT YEAR.
AVPEHO=AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT .
PCGRIP=PER CAPITA GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN THAT YEAR.
DEHOCH=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK CHANGE IN A DECADE TOLAFO=TOTAL LABOR FORCE CONCENTRATED IN THAT STATE.
TPORGR=TOTAL POPULATION GROWTH IN A DECADE.
PECSTR=PER CAPITA STATE REVENUES IN THAT YEAR.
PECFEl=PER CAPITA STATE (FEDERAL GOVERMENT. INVESTMENT IN STA TOH0GR=TOTAL HOUSING GROWTH IN PERCENTAGES OF THAT OF THE NATION. ME IUP0 = MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN A DECADE.


PCGRIP,DEH0CH,TOLAF0,TPORGR,PECSTR,PECFEI,T0HOGR,ME IUPO INPUT MEDIUM CARDS N OF CASES 32
INPUT FORMAT FIXED(F2.0,12X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3. 1 , 1X, F3.1,1X,F2.1,1X,
F3. F3. READ INPUT DATA 1 , IX 1 , 1X , F2. ,F3. 1 , 1 X, F4 1,2X,F3 .0,IX,F2.0,IX,F3.1 . . 1 ) IX, F2. 1 , 1X, F3.0 , IX.
NO. STATE TP TH HR HW HS TU PH PCI P HC TLF PG PSTR PFI HG IU
01 AGUASCAL. 07 06 07 03 05 08 64 1874 25 07 35 67 14 06 37
02 B.CAL.N. 18 18 23 16 18 31 56 5380 58 17 56 226 58 30 60
03 B.CAL.S. 03 03 02 02 03 02 60 3530 47 03 48 310 1 14 03 64
04 CAMPECHE 05 05 38 07 06 05 59 2744 38 05 43 137 34 06 48
05 CHIAPAS 23 22 27 15 22 32 59 4317 13 22 22 85 73 1 1 30
06 CHIHUAHUA 05 05 59 03 05 06 57 2689 35 05 41 1 15 32 05 38
07 COAHUILA 32 33 22 53 44 1 1 57 1076 22 31 27 53 12 26 42
08 COLIMA 33 34 41 30 32 41 56 3036 27 32 29 126 25 32 44
09 DURANGO 19 18 15 22 21 12 56 1740 10 17 22 05 21 07 36
10 DIST.FED. 142 147 270 1 6 54 310 63 7804 35 1 72 36 58 45 169 35
1 1 GUANAJUATO 47 43 38 48 47 42 63 1491 15 43 28 64 20 25 43
12 GUERRERO 33 33 17 53 45 13 63 1 126 24 29 31 78 18 28 94
13 HIDALGO 25 25 14 34 32 05 58 1021 15 23 19 29 31 14 27
14 JALISCO 68 65 79 56 53 76 56 2223 24 69 32 80 14 55 49
15 E.MEXICO 79 75 61 71 77 78 61 2728 82 76 76 102 18 150 126
16 MICHOACAN 48 47 33 57 55 27 61 1031 15 42 24 61 22 27 49
17 MORELOS 13 13 15 10 14 1 1 56 1901 48 13 50 119 21 18 64
18 NAYAR1T 1 1 1 2 08 16 15 06 56 1687 35 1 1 35 87 10 13 53
19 NUEVO LEON 35 35 46 17 26 52 58 6008 50 38 48 160 24 51 45
20 OAXACA 42 45 20 76 65 10 54 661 1 1 40 16 32 17 19 23
21 PUEBLA 52 53 43 71 62 32 56 1276 20 52 25 58 07 39 46
22 QUERETARO 10 09 07 12 13 06 59 1655 19 09 33 20 27 07 51
23 QUINTANA R. 02 01 01 03 03 01 57 1 772 55 02 60 33 150 03 23
24 S.L.POTOSI 26 26 19 36 32 16 59 1423 12 25 21 63 14 13 40
25 SINALOA 26 25 18 31 31 19 61 3219 57 27 44 165 33 39 60
26 SONORA 23 22 22 18 22 27 59 5352 35 22 36 21 1 42 25 51
27 TABASCO 16 15 10 26 19 05 61 2168 24 15 47 86 120 26 68
28 TAMAULIPAS 30 32 35 27 29 41 55 4021 35 29 37 120 98 36 47
29 TLAXCALA 09 08 05 1 1 12 02 58 874 1 1 08 20 45 10 04 54
30 VERACRUZ 79 83 64 104 92 51 55 2432 36 77 35 85 48 96 45
31 YUCATAN 16 15 10 23 18 12 58 1 906 10 15 22 96 24 06 24
32 ZACATECAS 19 18 13 27 25 05 62 1010 3 17 34 59 10 02 35
TOP0PU=TOTAL POPULATION IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TOHOUS=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TORENO=TOTAL RENTED HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TONOWA=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER.
TONOSE=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE.
TOURPO=TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN THE STATE IN THAT YEAR.
AVPEH0=AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT .
PCGRIP=PER CAPITA GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN THAT YEAR.
DEH0CH=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK CHANGE IN A DECADE TOLAF0=TOTAL LABOR FORCE CONCENTRATED IN THAT STATE.
TPORGR=TOTAL POPULATION GROWTH IN A DECADE.
PECSTR=PER CAPITA STATE REVENUES IN THAT YEAR.
PECFEI=PER CAPITA STATE (FEDERAL GOVERMENT. INVESTMENT IN STATE.


PCGRIP,DEHOCH,T0LAF0,TPORGR,PECSTR,PECFEI,TOHOGR,ME IUP0 INPUT MEDIUM CARD N OF CASES 32
INPUT FORMAT FIXEDCF2.0,12X,F3. 1 , 1X, F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F2.1,1X,F2.1,1X, F3.1,1X,F2.I,F5.O,IX,F2.0,1X,F3.1,1X,F2.1,1X, F4.0,IX, F3.1,IX,F3.1,IX,F2.1)
READ INPUT DATA
NO. STATE TP TH HR HW HS TU PH 1 PC IP HC TLF PG i PSTR PFI HG IU
01 AGUASCAL. 08 07 03 05 05 07 59 5187 61 07 39 1204 42 08 39
02 B.CAL.N. 18 19 07 19 01 33 51 12898 53 19 33 3563 105 02 34
03 B.CAL.S 03 03 01 03 01 02 53 7499 97 03 54 1876 255 05 54
04 CAMPECHE 06 06 01 04 07 05 55 71 75 61 05 38 1091 387 06 39
05 CHIAPAS 23 23 10 1 1 22 26 54 8630 55 23 33 2331 144 26 33
06 CHIHUAHUA 05 05 02 02 04 05 53 7942 54 05 35 1 62 169 06 34
07 C0AHU1LA 31 33 08 49 49 10 52 3033 48 31 28 1581 112 33 28
08 COLIMA 29 31 1 1 26 32 38 51 4206 32 29 17 1793 47 23 18
09 DURANGO 17 15 04 14 27 01 63 3371 24 16 20 325 47 09 21
10 DIST.FED. 140 143 82 82 55 265 5017338 53 149 30 4018 1 1 1 164 30
1 1 GUANAJUATO 45 40 1 3 32 37 38 63 2831 24 43 28 1500 33 32 29
12 GUERRERO 32 32 08 70 48 19 55 2065 36 31 30 893 42 29 30
13 HIDALGO 22 22 04 25 01 04 57 2684 43 22 23 620 57 14 23
14 JALISCO 64 61 27 43 43 74 57 4998 26 63 25 865 27 54 26
15 E.MEXI CO 112 106 31 69 80 156 58 6302 40 108 67 2386 22 171 68
16 MICHOACAN 45 44 09 43 90 26 57 3233 99 44 26 709 44 36 27
17 MORELOS 14 14 05 14 19 12 55 1728 36 14 40 921 34 15 41
18 NAYARIT 1 1 1 1 02 07 12 06 53 3627 55 1 1 28 1278 57 23 29
19 NUEVO LEON 36 36 13 12 27 49 5613443 42 37 36 3747 51 38 37
20 OAXACA 37 39 08 66 76 01 53 1598 52 37 21 603 45 26 22
21 PUEBLA 49 47 1 1 67 29 31 56 3477 27 47 26 551 4 3 6
22 QUERETARO 1 1 10 02 07 17 06 59 4294 31 10 40 2737 53 1 1 40
23 QUINTANA R. 03 03 01 04 04 01 49 3500 52 03 87 4924 154 07 87
24 S.L.POTOSI 25 24 05 33 33 16 58 1805 99 24 25 809 39 18 26
25 SINALOA 28 25 05 25 01 13 61 7380 33 27 39 1947 75 26 39
26 SONORA 22 23 05 13 01 27 5411184 49 23 30 2360 63 24 30
27 TABASCO 17 16 04 27 1 8 06 60 4146 51 16 39 4453 314 16 40
28 TAMAULI PAS 29 31 1 1 21 33 39 51 7973 42 29 27 2210 133 28 27
29 TLAXCALA 08 07 01 04 01 03 62 2610 22 08 26 1320 34 04 26
30 VERACRUZ 78 81 24 151 03 48 53 5535 44 79 31 1502 1 17 77 32
31 YUCATAN 15 16 03 21 13 09 54 4261 49 16 30 1730 47 16 30
32 ZACATECAS 17 15 03 10 28 05 63 2551 18 16 18 953 42 07 18
T0P0PU =TOTAL POPULATION IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
T0H0US =TOTAL HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
T0REN0=TOTAL RENTED HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR.
TONOWA=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER.
TONOSE=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE.
TOURPO=TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN THE STATE IN THAT YEAR.
AVPEH0=AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT .
PCGRIP=PER CAPITA GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN THAT YEAR.
DEHOCH=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK CHANGE IN A DECADE TOLAFO=TOTAL LABOR FORCE CONCENTRATED IN THAT STATE.
TPORGR=TOTAL POPULATION GROWTH IN A DECADE.
PECSTR=PER CAPITA STATE REVENUES IN THAT YEAR.
PECFEI=PER CAPITA STATE (FEDERAL GOVERMENT. INVESTMENT IN STATE. TOHOGR=TOTAL HOUSING GROWTH IN PERCENTAGES OF THAT OF THE NATION.


VAR I ABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES
GRO1NPO 3.0812 6.5298 32
TOTAPOL 3.0375 2.8405 32
URPOPUL 3.1125 6.4502 32
URBRATE 23.5969 22.1988 32
FISREVE 4.1563 8.9822 32
H0UT0TA 3.0406 2.8761 32
HOUWWAT 69.5988 20.4571 32
HOUWSEW 73.6931 18.8974 32
ME INPO 3.8875 2.2327 32
DENPOPU 128.5500 578.0259 32
HOU0WNE 56.4000 14.9773 32
FED INVE 3.2375 3.9944 32
PERCARE 2.9906 2.7966 32
NULOCAL 2688.2500 2227.6123 32
FACTOR ANALYSIS
FILE STAT70 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/19. )
VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES
GROINPO 3.1156 6.2981 32
TOTAPOL 3.1187 2.8811 32
URPOPUL 3.1156 5.4756 32
URBRATE 31.2675 21.5970 32
FI SREVE 3.0375 7.9508 32
HOUTOTA 3.1125 2.9479 32
HOUWWAT 43.7697 15.1938 32
HOUWSEW 65.6466 13.5872 32
ME INPO 4.8031 2.1199 32
DENPOPU 180.1625 804.8855 32
HOUOWNE 69.8719 10.2279 32
FED INVE 3.0750 5.2595 32
PERCARE 3.1125 2.7462 32
NULOCAL 3028.3125 2326.3043 32
FILE STAT80 (CREATION DATE = 83/03/28.)
VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES
GRO1NPO 4.0656 6.3413 32
TOTAPOL 3.1250 3.0493 32
URPOPUL 2.9813 5.2398 32
URBRATE 40.9656 24.6770 32
FISREVE 3.1250 5.3507 32
HOUTOTA 3.2469 3.1391 32
HOUWWAT 30.9219 16.3256 32
HOUWSEW 57.7063 18.2672 32
ME I NPO 3.3844 1.3940 32
DENPOPU 252.3719 1112.5234 32
HOUWNE 69.8937 9.4656 32
FED INVE 3.1250 4.1208 32
PERCARE 3.1094 2.7402 32
83/04/19. 10.07.18.
PAGE 3


V M r\ 1 HDLt rib.nn 1 nnunnu l-»4— v
T0P0PU 3.1094 2.7898 32
TOHOUS 3.1125 2.8260 32
TORENO 3.0219 4.2664 32
TONOWA 3.0281 2.3843 32
TONOSE 3.1062 2.2840 32
TOURPO 3.1000 6.4350 32
AVPEHO 5.4750 . 2940 32
PCGR1P 1694.6250 1167.9657 32
DEHOCH 40.7813 22.6783 32
TOLAFO 3.0312 3.0390 32
TPORGR 3.2344 1.2479 32
PECSTR 89.3750 88.2426 32
PECFEI 4.6062 3.5098 32
TOHOGR 3.0313 3.5117 32
ME!UPO 4.1031 1.9435 32
FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/22.)
VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES
TOPOPU 3.1125 2.8823 32
TOHOUS 3.0969 2.9514 32
TORENO 3.3813 4.7352 32
TONOWA 3.1062 2.5155 32
TONOSE 3.1156 2.2540 32
TOURPO 3.1094 5.4954 32
AVPEHO 5.6625 1.0673 32
PCGRIP 2503.4063 1706.7109 32
DEHOCH 30.9375 19 1983 32
TOLAFO 5.0562 11.2359 32
TPORGR 3.4375 1.3713 32
PECSTR 106.8438 92.5227 32
PECFEI 6.0813 14.9371 32
TOHOGR 3.6406 4.9121 32
ME IUPO 4.5156 1.4833 32
FILE CHA80 (CREATION DATE = 83/05/03.)
!VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES
TOPOPU 3. '1 250 3.0493 32
TOHOUS 3.0875 3.0437 32
TORENO 10.1250 15.0521 32
TONOWA 2.7469 2.3353 32
TONOSE 2.5531 2.4457 32
TOURPO 3.0656 5.2235 32
;AVPEHO 5.5781 . 3965 32
!PCGRIP 5578.2500 3785.1244 32
DEHOCH 47.1250 20.5030 32
!TOLAFO 3.1094 3.1265 32
TPORGR 3.3406 1.3995 32
j PECSTR 1808.1875 1200.5887 32
j PECFEI 9.0812 8.6752 32
|TOHOGR 3.0750 3.9145 32
83/04/22. 08.42.58.
PAGE
83/05/03.
00.53.02.
PAGE


FACTOR ANALYSIS
FILE STAT60 (CREATION DATE = 03/03/10.)
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS..
GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE F1SREVE HOUTOTA
GROINPO 1.00000 .81836 .98750 .69759 .76076 .81924
TOTAPOL 81036 1.00000 .81776 .45714 .53510 .99887
URPOPUL .98750 .81776 1.00000 .73187 .76045 .81739
URBRATE .69759 .45714 .73187 1.00000 .77478 .45485
FISREVE .76076 .53510 .76045 .77478 1.00000 .53848
HOUTOTA 81924 .99887 81739 .45485 .53848 1.00000
HOUWWAT - 41798 -.13283 -.44474 -.58252 -.44413 -.13181
HOUWSEW - 45402 - 18090 -.47527 -.49776 -.39810 -.17993
HEINPO .14363 .12154 .15329 .42417 .35933 .10447
DENPOPU .95601 .70620 .95551 .61694 .73752 .70983
HOUOWNE -.42272 -.15702 -.44798 -.36575 -.18342 -.15518
FED1NVE .87899 .77147 .85386 .63465 .62917 .77113
PERCARE -.05732 .03753 -.05827 .10588 .02454 .04007
NULOCAL -.01512 .43914 .00013 -.09199 -.18438 .42861
TacYSK analysi IS 83/04/19
FILE STAT70 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/19.)
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS..
GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE HOUTOTA
GROINPO 1.00000 .83252 .98824 .68492 .98617 .84269
TOTAPOL .83252 1.00000 .87322 .46183 .78697 .99802
URPOPUL .98824 .87322 1.00000 .69676 .97002 .87829
URBRATE .68492 .46183 .69676 1.00000 .61953 .46611
FISREVE 98617 .78697 .97002 .61953 1.00000 .79939
HOUTOTA .84269 .99802 .87829 .46611 .79939 1.00000
HOUWWAT -.57180 -.33062 -.58058 -.84384 -.51500 -.33028
HOUWSEW -.72838 -.57918 -.75468 -.92279 -.65896 -.57890
ME 1NPO .00867 .15368 .03448 .05943 -.03185 .12920
DENPOPU .95245 71481 .93106 .55546 .98712 .72913
HOUOWNE -.66294 - .41158 -.67861 -.91644 -.61521 - .41662
FEDINVE .93322 .80425 .91595 .58021 .92718 .82139
PERCARE -.09414 -.04304 -.08617 .13253 -.14599 -.03783
NULOCAL -.06174 .31340 .01168 -.05015 -.13641 .29480
FACTOR ANALYSIS 83/03/28
FILE STAT80 (CREATION DATE = 83/03/28 )
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS..
GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE HOUTOTA
GROINPO 1.00000 .73999 .85797 .43471 .89572 .79394
TOTAPOL .73999 1.00000 .91831 .28239 .87121 .95908
URPOPUL .85797 .91831 1.00000 .45007 .96790 .91123
URBRATE •.43471 .28239 .45007 1.00000 .46103 .35119
FISREVE .89572 .87121 .96790 .46103 1.00000 .87518
HOUTOTA .79394 .95908 .91123 .35119 .87518 1.00000
HOUWWAT -.31209 -.18518 -.39266 -.69532 -.32559 -.23867
HOUWSEW .09033 .02162 -.02717 .-.29477 -.01145 -.01454
ME 1NPO -.01616 -.00324 .08634 -.22190 .07829 -.01885
DENPOPU .90671 .67676 .84102 .41195 .89995 .71827
HOUWNE -.44549 -.30969 -.48651 -.70460 -.47654 - .41567
FEDINVE .80161 .73778 .75424 .36468 .84220 .76140
PERCARE -.19127 -.08743 -.11551 .28553 -.13972 -.12542
21.27.30
PAGE
HOUWWAT HOUWSEW ME1NPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE FEDINVE PERCARE NULOCAL
-.41798 -.45402 .14363 .95601 -.42272 .87899 -.05732 -.01512
-.13283 -.18090 .12154 .70620 -.15702 .77147 .03753 .43914
-.44474 -.47527 .15329 .95551 -.44798 .85386 -.05827 .00013
-.58252 -.49776 .42417 .61694 -.36575 .63465 .10588 -.09199
-.44413 -.39810 .35933 .73752 -.18342 .62917 .02454 - .18438
-.13181 -.17993 .10447 .70983 -.15518 .77113 .04007 .42861
1.00000 .97408 - .10399 -.39365 86812 -.35082 .04441 .23073
.97408 1.00000 .02891 -.44676 .92287 -.36808 .11698 .22673
-.10399 .02891 1.00000 .06279 .14486 .18101 .14040 .04396
-.39365 -.44676 .06279 1.00000 -.42571 .76767 -.20923 -.21210
.86812 .92287 .14486 -.42571 1.00000 -.32166 .07184 .21544
-.35082 -.36808 .18101 .76767 -.32166 1.00000 .02712 .15303
.04441 .11698 .14040 -.20923 .07184 .02712 1.00000 .42499
.23073 .22673 .04396 -.21210 .21544 .15303 .42499 1.00000
10.07.18. PAGE 4
HOUWWAT HOUWSEW ME 1NPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE FEOINVE PERCARE NULOCAL
-.57180 -.72838 .00867 .95245 -.66294 .93322 -.09414 -.06174
-.33062 -.57918 .15368 .71481 -.41158 .80425 -.04304 .31340
-.58058 -.76468 .03448 .93106 -.67861 .91595 -.08617 .01168
-.84384 -.92279 .05943 .55546 -.91644 .58021 .13253 -.05015
-.51500 -.65896 -.03185 .98712 -.61521 .92718 -.14599 - .13641
-.33028 -.57890 .12920 .72913 -.41662 .82139 -.03783 .29480
1.00000 .89183 -.03954 -.47962 .91443 -.44593 -.05778 .10857
.89183 1.00000 -.02169 -.59737 .93808 -.62555 -.10087 -.10720
-.03954 -.02169 1.00000 -.08593 .06004 -.03324 -.13820 .00950
-.47962 -.59737 -.08593 1.00000 -.57604 .89955 -.22445 -.23659
.91443 .93808 .06004 -.57604 1.00000 -.56098 -.10826 .05011
-.44593 -.62555 -.03324 .89955 -.56098 1.00000 -.07801 -.06094
-.05778 -.10087 -.13820 -.22445 -.10826 -.07801 1.00000 .44881
.10857 -.10720 .00950 -.23659 .05011 -.06094 44881 1.00000
15.14.36. PAGE 4
HOUWWAT HOUWSEW ME INPO DENPOPU HOUWNE FEDINVE PERCARE
-.31209 .09033 -.01616 .90671 -.44549 .80161 -.19127
-.18518 .02162 -.00324 .67676 -.30969 .73778 -.08743
-.39266 -.02717 .08634 .84102 -.48651 .75424 -.11551
-.69532 -.29477 -.22190 .41195 -.70460 .36468 .28553
-.32559 -.01145 .07829 .89995 -.47654 .84220 -.13972
-.23867 -.01454 -.01885 .71827 -.41567 .76140 -.12542
1.00000 .44607 -.02880 -.29772 .64667 -.04543 .00665
.44607 1.00000 -'. 14730 .14159 .36268 .15552 .07015
-.02880 -.14730 1.00000 -.03107 -.17710 -.05844 -.28016
-.29772 .14159 -.03107 1.00000 -.46037 .80770 -.22772
.64667 .36268 -.17710 -.46037 1.00000 -.38406 .03220
-.04543 .15552 -.05844 .80770 -.38406 1.00000 -.08641
.00665 .07015 -.28016 -.22772 .03220 -.08641 1.00000


FACTOR ANALYSIS
83/03/10.
FILE STAT60 (CREATION DATE = 63/03/10.)
INVERSE OF CORRELATION MATRIX..
OROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE
OROINPO 81.24663 -35.43857 -16.53868 -3.13376 -5.84293
TOTAPOL -35.43857 898.27696 -154.42034 22.70320 7.28904
URPOPUL -16.53868 -154.42034 209.73906 -34.67098 -17.45258
URBRATE -3.13376 22.70320 -34.67098 10.90570 1.39878
FISREVE -5.84293 7.28904 -17.45258 1.39878 13.02714
HOUTOTA 23.29204 -837.80286 123.65377 -16.54271 -5.61245
HOUWWAT -3.93555 -68.69098 17.47137 5.46735 .42591
HOUWSEW -1.63612 76.57273 -54.51471 1.27508 15.63704
ME 1NPO * -.08338 -23.39596 3.45535 -.64816 -.73909
DENPOPU -34.93562 111.16077 -121.93638 22.70749 8.23766
HOUOWNE 8.00133 -16.40219 49 62729 -7.81456 -18.09131
FEDINVE -14.92043 16.57649 -9.88886 1.89935 2.96551
PERCARE -3.03257 13.63827 .58783 .11720 -2.49224
NULOCAL 1.16547 -14.16979 -18.98509 2.97596 4.28819
FACTOR ANALYSIS
FILE STAT70 (CREATI ION DATE * 83/04/19.)
INVERSE OF CORRELATION MATRIX..
GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE
GROINPO 236.01464 89.02587 -108.04584 12.77944 -308.80069
TOTAPOL 89.02587 667.07600 -224.71599 29.49290 -29.16355
URPOPUL -108.04584 -224.71599 207 94310 -24.68132 61.45835
URBRATE 12.77944 29.49290 -24.68132 18.17844 -41.75306
FISREVE -308.80069 -29.16355 61.45835 -41.75306 703.99705
HOUTOTA -71.65511 -602.60159 169.87373 -19.84095 5.27945
HOUWWAT 9.19320 5.12101 -2.80025 -3.27057 -5.64427
HOUWSEW 21.47962 21.91627 -12.48196 12.80929 -45.31048
ME 1NPO 4.32053 -9.07065 - .92325 .10010 -13.04476
DENPOPU 181 96891 86.30572 -104.37515 43.68702 -454.30667
HOUOWNE -18.29485 -26.59701 19.43013 2.80475 10.42068
FEDINVE -10.46469 14.60483 3.96913 .56358 3.23002
PERCARE 3 92652 7.78968 -2.75816 .22699 -12.85206
NULOCAL 10.40454 -4.76694 -6.81909 4-75428 -24.41941
FACTOR ANALYSIS
FILE STAT80 (CREATION DATE = 83/03/28.)
INVERSE OF CORRELATION MATRIX..
GROINPO TOTAPOL
GROINPO 8.26002 3.44694
TOTAPOL 3.44694 33.66081
URPOPUL -1.17032 -24.37749
URBRATE -.52781 2.64937
FISREVE -1.43354 -2.19660
HOUTOTA -4.20882 -16.69981
HOUWWAT .53271 -.80247
HOUWSEW -.33861 -.57422
ME 1NPO -.14465 2.43012
DENPOPU -3.72633 9 95496
HOUWNE -.96109 -1.88683
FEDINVE -.94675 -4.15422
PERCARE .24889 .32379
URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE
- 1 . 17032 -.52781 -1.43354
-24 37749 2.64937 -2.19660
60.34409 .74650 -35.72482
.74650 5.66167 -6.02673
-35.72482 -6.02673 56.46164
-.91973 .11304 2.87817
5.28290 2.17727 -3.29763
-1.98998 -.19898 4.24820
-2.23558 1.85969 -3.63460
-6.82561 3.20669 -13 64678
2.29586 2.34278 -4.97928
10.57052 -.71769 -9.74254
-1.94163 -1.11430 .21042
HOUTOTA
23.29204 837.80286 123.65377 -16.54271 -5.61245 793.58671 62.59749 -66.36634 22.00213 -89.95952 9.29593 -13.43970 -11.93916 11.23946
83/04/19.
HOUTOTA
-71.65511 -602.60159 169.87373 -19.84095 5.27945 563.10664 -5.88472 -14.42829 8.68587 -47.94759 19.53537 -17.46139 -5.94683 4.45968
83/03/28.
HOUTOTA
-4.20882 -16.69981 -.91973 .11304 2.87817 19 52559 -.85208 .51088 .84417 .76382 2.71546 -.52655 .69471
HOUWWAT HOUWSEW ME 1NPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE FEDINVE PERCARE NULOCAL
-3.93555 -1.63612 -.08338 -34.93562 8.00133 -14.92043 -3.03257 1 . 16547
-68.69098 76.57273 -23.39596 111.16077 -16.40219 16.57649 13.63827 -14.16979
17.47137 -54.51471 3.45535 -121.93636 49 62729 -9.88886 .58783 -18.98509
5.46735 1.27508 -.64816 22.70749 -7.81456 1.89935 .11720 2.97596
.42591 15.63704 -.73909 8.23766 -18.09131 2.96551 -2.49224 4.28819
62.59749 -66.36634 22.00213 -89.95952 9.29593 -13.43970 -11.93916 11.23946
62.00840 -62.89598 5.68781 -14.43898 4.43309 -.28397 1.12581 - .89424
-62 89598 94.43855 -6.36684 33.28176 -37.30540 4 69490 -5.13762 7.74243
5.68781 -6.36664 2 40539 -1.51622 .64688 -.37186 -.04062 . 28491
-14.43898 33.28176 -1.51622 107.99178 -27.42715 12.29174 2 77366 14.44371
4.43309 -37.30540 .64688 -27.42715 37.80714 -5.51667 4.11272 -8.18057
-.28397 4.69490 -.37186 12.29174 -5.51667 7.45855 .26427 .53743
1.12581 -5.13762 -.04062 2.77366 4.11272 .26427 2.50103 - 1.86078
-.89424 7.74243 .28491 14.44371 -8.18057 .53743 -1.86078 7.46255
10,07.18 PAGE 6
HOUWWAT HOUWSEW ME1NPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE FEDINVE PERCARE NULOCAL
9.19320 5.12101 -2.80025 -3.27057 -5.64427 -5.88472 10.06550 -7.65434 .61017 .46364 -5.37042 -1.97014 .41426 -2.05015 21.47962 21.91627 -12.46196 12.80929 -45.31048 -14.428^9 -7.65434 29.97183 .14898 32.60950 -9.35048 1.26478 -.60621 5.89362 4.32053 -9.07065 -.92325 .10010 -13.04476 6.68587 .61017 .14898 1.64269 10.23335 -.79811 -.12346 .41074 .96662 181.96891 86.30572 -104.37515 43.68702 -454.30667 -47.94759 .46364 32.60950 10.23335 350.16728 -5.93778 -3.60922 10.82552 21.16986 -18.29485 -26 59701 19.43013 2.80475 10.42068 19 53537 -5.37042 -9.35048 -.79811 -5.93778 19.23709 1.20724 17825 -.00475 -10.46469 14.60483 3.96913 .56358 3.23002 -17.46139 -1.97014 1.26478 -.12346 -3.60922 1.20724 10.24058 -.43193 .60114 3.92652 7.78968 -2 75816 22699 -12 85206 -5.94683 .41426 -.60621 .41074 10.82552 17825 - .43193 2.07334 -.67381 10.40454 -4 76694 -6 81909 4.75428 -24.41941 4.45968 -2 05015 5.89362 .98662 21.16986 -.00475 .60114 -.67381 5.00136
15.14.36. PAGE 6
HOUWWAT HOUWSEW ME1NPO DENPOPU HOUWNE FEDINVE PERCARE
.53271 -.80247 5.28290 2.17727 -3.29763 -.85208 4.10503 -.70232 -.04542 .47813 -.60148 -1.55874 -.54454 -.33861 -.57422 -1.98998 -.19898 4.24820 .51088 -.70232 1.94126 -.26368 -2.12611 -.70705 -.63214 -.35177 -.14465 2.43012 -2.23558 1.85969 -3.93460 .84417 -.04542 -.26368 2.36413 3.30841 1.48329 .10659 .34765 -3.72633 9.95496 -6.82561 3.20669 -13.64678 .76382 .47813 -2.12611 3.30841 17.19158 2.41827 -1.75720 1.40062 -.96109 - 1.88683 2.29586 2.34278 -4.97928 2.71546 -.60148 -.70705 1.48329 2.41827 4 10687 1.48791 -.09152 -.94675 -4.15422 10 57052 -.71769 -9.74254 -.52655 -1.55874 -.63214 .10659 -1.75720 1.48791 7.72245 -.24186 .24889 .32379 -1.94163 -1.11430 .21042 .69471 -.54454 -.35177 .34765 1.40062 -.09152 -.24186 1.71302


83/04/18
00.48.56.
FILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/18.)
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS..
TOPOPU TOHOUS TORENO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO
TOPOPU 1.00000 .99884 .91065 .76030 .80342 .81478
TOHOUS .99884 1.00000 .91047 .76246 .80526 .81420
TORENO .91065 .91047 1.00000 49398 .50654 .96364
TONOWA .76030 .76246 .49398 1.00000 .97209 .26960
TONOSE .80342 .80526 .50654 .97209 1.00000 .31462
TOURPO .81478 .81420 .96364 .26960 .31462 1.00000
AVPEHO -.07167 -.10094 -.06255 -.11584 -.13330 -.03700
PCGRIP -.10698 -.11628 -.06293 -.25229 -.19446 .03366
DEHOCH -.29875 -.29496 -.20936 -.36476 -.33988 -.12104
TOLAFO .98948 .99132 .92767 .72127 .76171 .84204
TPORGR .17958 .16883 .20750 -.03557 .03240 .26481
PECSTR .14963 .15927 .27158 -.29124 -.17327 .43427
PECFEI -.23971 -.23625 -.17067 -.30764 -.29710 -.09835
TOHOGR .94880 .94956 .96565 .55407 .60381 .92959
ME 1UPO .06366 .04951 .06644 -.08217 -.00902 .12652
83/04/22
FILE CHANG70 (CREATION DATE * 83/04/22.)
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS..
TOPOPU TOHOUS TORENO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO
TOPOPU 1.00000 99819 .85746 .56259 .79709 .87367
TOHOUS 99819 1.00000 86550 .55860 .79291 .87803
TORENO .85746 .86550 1.00000 .11833 41188 .97051
TONOWA .56259 .55860 . 11833 1.00000 .94143 .09840
TONOSE .79709 .79291 .41188 94143 1.00000 .40992
TOURPO .87367 .87803 .97051 .09840 .40992 1.00000
AVPEHO .13207 .12868 13868 -.00712 .08231 .14746
PCGRIP .37894 .38862 60220 -.30887 -.05226 .64984
DEHOCH 06560 .05835 09778 -.10373 -.03330 .13243
TOLAFO 19328 .19083 .17436 .09633 .11045 .18405
TPORGR .04330 03040 .10344 -.17616 -.07565 .13419
PECSTR -.19848 -.19852 -.11778 -.22454 -.25545 -.09669
PECFEI -.12831 -.12865 -.09586 -.10658 -.16021 -.08122
TOHOGR 66113 .65563 .57737 .31962 .47903 .60747
ME 1UPO -.15827 -.15473 -.15634 -.05475 -.11489 -.14744
... 63/£)4/22
FILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/22.)
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS..
TOPOPU TOHOUS TORENO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO AVPEHO PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR PECSTR PECFEI TOHOGR ME IUPO
TOPOPU
1.00000 .99884 91065 .76030 .80342 81478 -.07167 10698 -.29875 .98948 .17958 .14963 -.23971 94880 .06366
TOHOUS
.99884 1.00000 91047 .76246 80526 81420 -.10094 -.11628 -.29496 .99132 .16883 .15927 -.23625 .94956 .04951
TORENO
.91065 .91047 1 00000 .49398 .50654 .96364 -.06255 -.06293 -.20936 .92767 .20750 .27158 -.17067 96565 .06644
TONOWA
76030 .76246 49398 1.00000 97209 .26960 -.11584 -.25229 -.36476 .72127 -.03557 -.29124 -.30764 .55407 -.08217
TONOSE
.80342 .80526 .50654 .97209 1.00000 .31462 - . 13330 -. 19446 -.33988 .76171 .03240 -.17327 -.29710 .60381 -.00902
TOURPO
.81478 .81420 .96364 .26960 .31462 1.00000 -.03700 .03366 -.12104 .84204 .26481 .43427 -.09835 .92959 .12652
AVPEHO
-.07167 -.10094 -.06255 -.11584 -.13330 -.03700 1.00000 .19348 - . 19484 -.10018 .21079 -.18015 .12050 -.10669 .04982
08.42.58
AVPEHO
.13207 .12868 .13868 -.00712 .08231 .14746 1.00000 .16837 -.34488 -.91400 .27340 -.69078 -.95179 -.5551 I -.14205
08.50.45
AVPEHO
-.07167 -.10094 -.06255 -.11584 -.13330 -.03700 1.00000 .19348 - . 19484 -.10018 .21079 -.18015 .12050 -.10669 .04982
PAGE 4
PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR
-.10698 -.29875 .98948 .17958
-.11628 -.29496 .99132 .16883
-.06293 -.20936 .92767 .20750
-.25229 -.36476 .72127 -.03557
-.19446 -.33988 .76171 .03240
.03366 -.12104 .64204 .26481
.19348 19484 -.10018 .21079
1.00000 .50790 -.17501 .35307
.50790 1.00000 -.30820 .47002
-.17501 -.30820 1.00000 .17417
.35307 .47002 .17417 1.00000
.23230 .48155 .18696 .26330
.14838 .43649 -.21786 -.01404
-.03989 -.14160 .95920 .30458
.34960 .40117 .04439 .83634
PAGE 4
PECSTR PECFEI TOHOGR ME 1UPO
.14963 -.23971 .94880 .06366
.15927 -.23625 .94956 .04951
.27158 -.17067 .96565 .06644
-.29124 -.30764 .55407 -.08217
-.17327 -.29710 .60381 -.00902
.43427 -.09835 .92959 .12652
- . 18015 .12050 -.10669 .04982
.23230 .14838 -.03989 .34960
.48155 .43649 -.14160 .40117
.18696 -.21786 .95920 .04439
.26330 -.01404 .30458 .83634
1 00000 .36939 .32963 1 1 906
36939 1.00000 -.16477 -.11582
.32963 - . 16477 1.00000 .15870
.11906 -.11582 .15870 1.00000
PCGRIP DEHOCH
.37694 .06560
.38862 .05835
.60220 .09778
-.30887 -.10373
-.05226 -.03330
.64984 .13243
.16837 -.34488
1.00000 .38349
.38349 1.00000
-.01709 .36954
.40745 .75156
.26997 .61545
-.07207 .42157
.29934 .54982
.00687 .21425
PAGE 4
TOLAFO TPORGR
.19328 .04330
.19083 .03040
.17436 .10344
.09633 -.17616
.11045 -.07565
.18405 .13419
-.91400 .27340
-.01709 .40745
.36954 .75156
1.00000 -.23770
-.23770 1.00000
.65218 .14207
.92678 -.16850
.79020 .12241
.13267 .05140
PECSTR PECFEI
-.19848 -.12831
-.19852 -.12865
-.11778 - 09586
-.22454 -.10658
-.25545 - 16021
-.09689 -.08122
-.69078 -.95179
.26997 -.07207
.61545 .42157
.65218 92678
.14207 -.16850
1.00000 .75302
.75302 1.00000
.43424 .58331
.41757 16068
TOHOGR ME 1UPO
.66113 -.15827
65563 -.15473
.57737 - 15634
.31962 -.05475
.47903 -.11489
.60747 -.14744
-.55511 -.14205
.29934 00687
54982 .21425
.79020 1 3267
.12241 .05140
.43424 .41757
58331 .16068
1.00000 .02360
.02360 1.00000
PCGRIP
-.10698 -.11628 -.06293 -.25229 -.19446 .03366 .19348 1.00000 .50790 -.17501 .35307 .23230 .14838 -.03989 .34960
DEHOCH
-.29875 -.29496 -.20936 -.36476 -.33988 -.12104 -.19484 .50790 1.00000 -.30820 .47002 .48155 .43649 -.14160 .40117
TOLAFO
.98948 .99132 .92767 .72127 .76171 .84204 -. 10018 -.17501 -.30820 1.00000 .17417 .18696 -.21786 .95920 .04439
TPORGR
.17958 16883 .20750 -.03557 .03240 : .26481
! .21079
1 .35307
.47002 .17417 1.00000 .26330 -.01404 .30458 .83634
PECSTR
14963 .15927 .27158 -.29124 - 17327 .43427 -.18015 .23230 .48155 .16696 .26330 1.00000 .36939 .32963 .11906
PECFEI
-.23971
- 23625 -.17067 -.30764 -.29710 -.09835
.12050 .14838 .43649 -.21786 -.01404 .36939 1.00000 -.16477
- . 1 1,582
TOHOGR
.94880 .94956 .96565 .55407 .60381 92959 - . 10669 -.03989 -.14160 .95920 .30458 .32963 -.16477 1.00000 .15870
MEIUPO
.06366 .04951 .06644 -.08217 -.00902 .12652 .04982 .34960 401 17 .04439 .83634 .11906 - . 11582 .15870 1.00000


03/04/16.
00.46.56
FILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE = 03/04/22.)
INVERSE OF CORRELATION MATRIX.
TOPOPU TOHOUS TORENO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO AVPEHO
TOPOPU 1069.00196 -793.63119 -147.89701 116.34788 -251.97743 -18.12537 -46.98478
TOHOUS -793 63119 1085.82486 93.10481 -51.95856 -527.15237 -560.35668 22.60975
TORENO -147 89701 93.18401 335.74431 -184.19321 141.15358 -201.27746 9.65615
TONOWA 116 34788 -51.95856 -184.19321 141.42198 -134.20208 133.94386 -8.51607
TONOSE -251 97743 -527.15237 141.15358 - 134 20288 556.95901 204.40766 20.12339
TOURPO -18.12537 -560.35668 -281.27746 133.94386 284.40766 600.44834 2.56433
AVPEHO -46 90470 22.60975 9 65615 -8.51607 20.12339 2.56433 4.44663
PCGRIP 8.82524 .06004 4.72089 .72532 -13.17936 -17.55452 -1.24739
DEHOCH -13.21433 22.13757 -3.70823 -4 92036 -.07075 1.50308 2.30641
TOLAFO 53 46325 -37.74467 6 96406 -3.66127 -77.46954 -90.03702 -2.34333
TPORGR 38.27072 -18.45162 -9.40160 7.93755 -13.19129 4.87185 -4.09752
PECSTR 8.03843 7.07449 13.24833 1.32195 -11.38746 -21.39886 -.24436
PECFEI 5 68694 -10.07984 -1.69959 1.71497 3.19684 5.88470 -.98896
TOHOGR -80.33611 -224.94770 -3.41437 -5.24813 163.67000 113.33041 7.83579
ME 1UPO -26.72929 53.51942 9.89690 -2.50961 -15.37435 -24.24359 1.07847
FILE CHANG70 (CREATI ION DATE s 83/04/20.) —
1NVERSE OF CORRELATION MATRIX..
TOPOPU TOHOUS TORENO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO AVPEHO
TOPOPU 553.59954 -285.43535 20.00109 44 49996 - 118.74320 -36.90731 -6.71130
TOHOUS -285.43535 1511 76249 -71.78689 59 61353 -364.27897 -162.50800 25.39061
TORENO 20.08109 -71.78689 25.32758 -9.64853 29.83124 -4.95232 -.12480
TONOWA 44 49996 59.61353 -9.64853 151.50406 -169.31451 75.99462 6.59764
TONOSE - 118.74320 -384.27097 29.83124 -169.31451 332.34297 49.77201 -10.45916
TOURPO -36.90731 - 162 50800 -4.95232 75.99462 49.77201 241.63934 -.92266
AVPEHO -6.71138 25.39061 -.12480 6.59764 -10.45916 -.92286 2.28310
PCGRIP 5.64818 12.02837 -.87389 8.41739 -16.30023 - 14.86864 1.11930
DEHOCH 22 42285 23.22658 -.25261 15.70855 -26.57246 1.03204 2.47822
TOLAFO - 190 30700 -732.63690 12.50666 -124.68942 279.37483 -60 80123 -13.26855
TPORGR -27.92395 23.49217 -3 24305 -8.01676 10.72051 -1.17459 -1.11576
PECSTR -4.83034 -12.88400 .37735 -5 56903 10.03436 4.09443 -.82679
PECFEI 5 60375 -23 74092 2.57807 -6.03688 10.66159 -1.22094 -.35576
TOHOGR 2.76246 -46.24627 5.02907 2.67924 2.99211 4.10980 -1.43313
ME 1UPO FILE INVERSE 2.70711 -16.18513 1.10770 CHANG0O (CREATION DATE = 03/05/03.) OF CORRELATION MATRIX.. -5.55586 8.90290 -1.11435 -.73453
TOPOPU TOHOUS TORENO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO AVPEHO
TOPOPU 2458 00103 -634.63009 357.27035 18.80792 -34.68902 -190.21951 -50.41034
TOHOUS -634.63089 2873.35425 49.54307 -3.19533 2.41704 162.85570 108.80522
TOftENO 357.27035 49 54307 112.62867 4.37263 -2.41725 -69.45040 .03553
TONOWA 10.00792 -3.19533 4.37263 0.12995 -2.37229 .79673 .92857
TONOSE -34.68902 241704 -2.41725 -2.37229 3.60152 -1.14677 .39376
TOURPO -198.21951 162 05570 -69.45040 .79673 -1.14677 77.70655 5.79748
AVPEHO -50.41034 108 80522 .83553 92857 .39376 5.79740 6.16535
PCGRIP 21.67986 16.46114 9.58576 2.04233 .62105 -8.08025 1.23940
DEHOCH 24.76160 3.75148 4.85902 .24310 -1.00940 -2.06742 .28459
TOLAFO -2064.09029 -2322.04867 -494.98563 -28.95191 36.17118 76.26015 -61.80688
TPORGR -80.47635 86 15793 1.86591 -5.48572 4.06781 -1.90766 4.63936
PECSTR 37.64433 -22.26093 5.30055 -.24923 -.64087 -5.30880 -1.09236
PECFEI -25.03015 -21 49467 -8.58594 -.70620 .65562 4.03709 -.66100
TOHOGR 96.04922 -106 53293 41.25418 2.87704 -.87413 -44.16790 -3.32391
ME1UPO 35.25537 -18.39620 -6.53474 5.98733 -3.05855 9.10137 -1.32963
PAGE
PCGRIP
6.62524 .06004 4.72089 .72532 -13.17936 -17.55452 -1.24739 3.30122 -1.67780 13.08914 .49680 .92664 .04984 -2.37972 .14109
DEHOCH
-13.21433 22.13757 -3.70823 -4.92036 -.07075 1.50308 2.30641 -1.67780 6.30587 5.71969 -3.02645 -2.45733 -1.62661 -6.60303 .76783
TOLAFO
53.46325 -37.74467 6.96406 -3.66127 -77.46954 -90.03702 -2.34333 13.06914 5.71969 158.43066 -3.87505 .07656 -3.79951 -40.05928 3.75790
TPORGR
38 27072 -18.45162 -9 40160 7.93755 -13.19129 4 87185 -4.09752 .49660 -3.02645 -3.87505 8 50321 09441 1.05033 -9 44618 -5.06660
PECSTR
8.03043 7.07449 13.24833 1.32195 -11.38746 -21.39806 -.24436 .92664 -2.45733 .07656 .09441 4.74814 -.30134 -3.40654 1.49398
PECFEI
5.66694 -10.87984 -1.69959 1.71497 3.19684 5 88478 -.98896 04984 -1.62661 -3.79951 1.05033 -.38134 1.95490 1.71347 -.31079
TOHOGR
-00.33611 224 94770 -3.41437 -5 24013 163 67008 113 33041 7 83579 -2.37972 -6.60303 -40 05920 -9.44618 -3.40654 1.71347 136.16854 -5 05470
PCGRIP
5.64816 12.02837 -.07389 6.41739 -16.30623 -14.66064 1.11930 7.79957 .05480 3.06191 .79652 -3.77327 -1.08423 -3.02875 .03922
DEHOCH
22.42265 23.22658 -.25261 15.70055 -26.57246 1.03204 2.47822 .85480 13.65441 -32.14981 -9 03055 -2.92471 -.06095 -5.43514 -.74181
TOLAFO
-190.30700 -732.63698 12.50666 -124.80942 279.37483 -60.80123 -13.26855 3.08191 -32.14981 045.16603 10.67011 9.17122 11.04784 9.61450 9.52639
TPORGR
27 92395 23.49217 -3.24305 -8.01676 10.72851 -1 . 17459 -1.11576 .79652 -9.03055 10.67011 12.02729 .57861 -1.87179 -6.33385 .00345
PECSTR
-4.83034 -12.88400 .37735 5.56903 10.03436 4 09443 -.82679 -3.77327 -2.92471 9. 17122 .57861 4.05716 .41415 2.67527 -.49681
PECFEI
5 60375 -23.74092 2.57807 -6 03688 10.68159 -1.22894 -.35576 -1.08423 - 06095 11.04704 -1 07179 .41415 2. 19103 2. 12554 .47566
TOHOGR
2.76246 46.24627 5 02907 2.67924 2.99211 4.10980 - 1 .43313 -3.02875 -5.43514 9.61450 -6.33385 2.67527 2.12554 27.56351 .56366
PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR PECSTR PECFEI TOHOGR
'21.87986 24.76160 -2004.09029 -88.47C35 37.64433 -25.03815 96.04922
16.46114 3.75140 -2322.04867 86.15793 -22.26093 -21.49467 -106.53293
9.58576 4.05902 -494.98563 1.06591 5.30055 -8.58594 41.25418
2.04233 .24318 -28.95191 -5.48572 -.24923 -.70620 2.87704
.62165 -1.00940 36.17118 4.06781 -.64807 .65562 -.87413
-8.08025 -2.06742 76.26015 -1.90766 -5.30880 4.03789 -44.16790
1.23940 .28459 -61.00688 4.63936 -1.09236 -.66100 -3.32391
4.76905 -.18788 -46.89382 .39394 -1.11561 -1.104U4 3.54095
-.18788 1.89137 -32.63049 -.10161 1.01567 -.87094 1.89064
-46.09382 -32.63049 4656.52964 3.27699 -19.89851 54.275(8 -39.44464
.39394 10161 3.27699 27.96827 -1.22047 -.00224 1.55133
-1.11561 1.01567 -19.89851 -1.22047 3.70765 -.59897 4.84863
-1.10494 -.87094 54.27588 -.00224 - 59897 2.34175 -2.54675
3.54095 1.89064 -39.44464 1.55133 4 84863 -2.54675 49.41130
.87096 -.91255 -11.38903 -25.05226 -1 99179 -.16620 -11.18891
ME IUPO
-26 72929
53.51942 9.89698 -2.58961 -15 37435 -24.24359 1 87847 .14109 .76783 3.75790 -5.06660 1.49398 - 31079 -5.05470 6.31826
ME IUPO
2.70711 16.18513 1.10770 -5.55586 8.90298 -1.11435 -.73453 .03922 -.74181 9.52639 .00345 -.49681 47566 .56366 1.68009
ME IUPO
35.25537 -18.39620 -6.53474 5.90733 -3.05855 9.10137 -1.32963 .87096 -.91255 -11.38983 -25.05226 -1.99179 -.16620 -II.18891 28.05751


TABLE NO - ) : •
MEXICO: HOUSING DEFIC IT, 1.970. < THOUSAND OF UNITS)
' • (I) (ID (HI) ' (IV) (V)
AREA • DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT STOCK III x 100
QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE TOTAL EXISTENT IV
URBAN ; 1 397.8 1 0-14.7 2 442.5 5 323.6 45.9
RURAL 1 737. 3 859.1 1 596.4 3 436. 3 46.5 $
TOTAL 2,135.i I 905.6 4 038.9 8 759. 9 46.1
SOURCE: GARZA, GUSTAVO AND SCHTEINGART, MARTHA. ET. AL~. EL PROBLEM A
DE LA VIVIENDA EN MEXICO. EL COLEGIO DE MEXICO, 1976.
TABLE NO.14
MEXICO: HOUSING DEFICIT, 1969. (THOUSAND OF UNITS)
Deficit t
NATIONAL
URBAN ----- RURAL ‘
TOTAL 7. TOTAL 7. TOT. • cr
Total 0 5 105 100.0 1 578 100.0 3 527 100.0
AMILIES WITHOUT HOUSING 843 16.5 63-1 40.2 209 6.0
ETERIRAT ION 2 494 48. 9 516 32.7 1 978 56.0
ROWDING 1 768 34.6 ' 428 27.1 1 340 38.0
( Porcientcs hori •i rv-t t •> 1 ^
Total 5 105 100.0 1 578 ' 30.9 3 527 69.1
AMILIES WITHOUT HOUSING 843 100.0 634 75.2 . 209 24. 8
ETERI ORATION 2 494 100.0 5! 6 20.7 1 978 79.3
Ai l'1 ' [NG 1 768 100.0 428 24.2 1 340 75. 8
SOURCE: PUENTE LEYVA, JESUS. "EL PROBLEMA HABITAC IONAL" IN:EL PERFIL
DE MEXICO EN L980, VOL.II. SIGLO XXI, 1972.
*THE URBAN DEFICIT REPRESENTS 60.87. OF 1 HE TOTAL AND RURAL IS 39.27..
TABLE NO.15
_PRuJECEPIJJN_JJj^_E^EhIAVCC[JR_JjF>>j3BSE^^
1960 1970 Jy76 1980 1990
BEDR00MAVEWAtf-PER ’HOIJSI NG 1JN i'r 2.95 2.29 1.96 1.77 1.38
• NUMBER OF !MHABI T AW'i s BY HOUSING UNIT 5.45 5.82 6.03 6.18 6.56
NIJMBER OF PERSONS PER FAMILY UNI !' 5.15 4.91 4.76 " CO vO 4.44
SOURCE: DIRECCION GENERAL DE PROGRAMAf 31 ON, S.P.P. ESTUDIO PRELIMINAR
DE MINIMOS DE VIVI ENDA.


'..'I \n» ! ! I I Ma a:-


GRAPHIC NO
MEXICO: POPULATION GROWTH PROTECTIONS.
----- TOTAL POPULATION
----- URBAN POPULATION
----- RURAL POPULATION SOURCE: POPULAT ION:CENSUS.
...__ TOTAL HOUSING STOCK HOUSING: CENSUS.


CUMULATED PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION IN LOCALITIES OF 10,000 AND MORE INHABITANTS.
GRAPHIC NO.4
MEXICO AND OTHER COUNTRIES: URBAN STRUCTURE, 1900-1970.
LOCALITY SIZE IN NUMBER OF INHABITANTS.
SOURCE: UIMIKEL LUIS, EL DESARROLLO IJRBANO DE MEXICO. P.40
CO 10


GRAPH I 0 NU
MEXICO: LOCALITIES WITH MORE THAN 15,000 INHABITANTS IN 1970.
LEGEND:
• 15,000- 50,000 INHABITANTS
4 50,000- 100,000 "
â–  100,000- 500,000 "
• 500,000-1000,000 "
« 1,000,000 OR MORE "


Full Text

PAGE 1

AN URBAN REFORM MECHANISM PROPROSAL TO IMPLEMENT THE NATIONAL PLAN FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT _f ' ..,..,....,. • .,. I F , ----.. --..... ._ .. "1 IN MEXICO t a Due " :] =: .: ==j l I I -i A THESIS PRESENTED TO I THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER IN CANDIDACY FOR.THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BY MARTIN CAREAGA HERNANDEZ MAY, 1983

PAGE 2

6.4.1 State Level ..............................• 41 6.4.2 Urban Population Level •.••••••••••.••••••• 46 VII. ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 49 7.1 Generalities •••••••••••..•••••••••••••••.•• .•••• 49 7.2 UR Goals and Objectives .•••••••••••.••••••••••••• 50 7.3 Economic Aspects of the Urban Reform •••••••••.••• 51 7.4 Political Administrative Land Control •••••••••••• 52 7.5 Mechanisms for Public Land Acquisition •.••••••••• 53 7.6 Conclusions •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 54 i. Footnotes ii. Appendices iii. Bibliography

PAGE 3

Abstract This thesis is an analysis of an alternative mechanism of urban reform. This mechanism is an ideal tool to implement Mexico•s National Plan for Urban DeveloJlllent (NPUD). Urban Reform* (UR) suggests State participation in urban and suburban land market areas would create incentives for investment in productive functions rather than speculative investment in land. Without such an incentive, the consequence would be a deterioation of urban and rural areas. Public control on 1 and increases the participation of the State in physi ca 1 matters and the provision of affordable land suitable for housing, industrial, co1110ercial, recreational and conservation developments. Decentralization of economic activities and its multiplicative effects is imperative to the urban system. The creation of a land bank would permit the State to coordinate at the national, State and local levels, assuring the meetings of quotas according to NPUD policies. This study analytically exposes the impacts of political economy decisions in the configuration and structure of the region a 1 system and spatial organization of cities, in terms ofthe spatial division of labor . in capital-oriented economies. The analysis is structured to review *The Urban Reform concept is the structural change of the socio-economic relations that have shaped the actual urban environment, starting by transforming the urban land tenure and exploitation, in order to guarantee a planned growth.

PAGE 4

macroscopically the intervention of the State and the private sector in the characterization of the urbanization process, e.g. land use, hous ing, public facilities and services problems in Mexico's urban areas. The urban problem is analyzed as a counterpart of the more deteriorated rural areas within the nation. It is shown that the Mexican government has been unable to control the national economy through conventional and conservative political economic policies. The effect has been the continuing failure to pro vide basic in a comprehensive manner according to people's expectations generated by the nation's development. On the other hand, it was not until 1976 when the federal government started to introduce the fact that economic development planning could not be achieved without the of the spatial network as an important physical variable in economic development plans. However, one question arises: How is the federal government going to implement the NPUD, if it doesn't have the mechanisms to control the economy? The only benefactor under current conditions has been the private sector utilizing government subsidies to enhance their own economical and political capital accumulation. The private sector has been manipulating all intents of comprehensive planning. Such private speculation is not limited to industrial, commercial or residential investment developments, but to all land itself. Land, urban, suburban and rural, has been the target of real estate developments by the private sector as a speculative mechanism designed to generate enough capital profits to satisfy rent investment in the capital's rotation process. i i

PAGE 5

The result has been a historic concentration of resources in the development of a few cities, while the whole country is lacking funda mental requirements of a developing nation. Cities are growing accord ing to the expectations of the private sector in its attitude to generate growth where the sector finds propitious conditions. However, given the generalization of land cost and availability problems in developing programs, the land control mechanism is crucial towards developing a real alternative in inducing economic decentralization. This thesis also explores the Latin American approaches in dealing with economic and physical planning policies. Land use, control mechanisms, and subdivision regulations were reviewed to analyze its influence on the development of national planning programs. The experience of the Latin American countries is very helpful in solving conmon problems through cooperative procedures addressing poverty, food, education, health, housing, income,' employment and other structural problems. The analysis of the variables included in the study shows that the two extremes in the urban system in Me xi co, the overconcentrated and the dispersed, have had a strong correlation with economic factors. Urban population concentration, population migration, housing construction, federal investment are concentrated in areas with more economic resources to participate in the formation of the Gross Internal Product. The application of the policies in the National Plan for Urban Development to reach its objectives must consider that land control would facilitate the control of the local economy. The land control mechanism i i i

PAGE 6

is a feasible alternative for producing a strong, stable and productive economy. Land tenure could then be centralized in public hands and directed towards affordable land cost in housing programs. This will assure an adequate supply of public facilities and services. Other types of developments, such as industrial, commercial, recreational and ecological protection, will be based on the NPUD and established accord ; ng to State and 1 oca 1 quotas. The State, through 1 and contra 1, wou 1 d be able to introduce economic growth via investment allocation in local economies, and so enable local governments to introduce local measures for the 1 appropriation p 1 ans. Lac a 1 State 1 and contra 1, on the other hand, will coordinate more effectively land distribution and/or status classification in rural areas according to the Agrarian Reform Law of 1926 and the constitutional rights granted to the State. This will impose upon private property the modalities required for an equitable society addressed in article 27 of the constitution of 1917. The Urban Reform mechanism proposes that the State must control the land market through federal supervision, State coordination and local control of all urban and suburban land suitable for local, State or federal needs based on development policies of national, regional or local plans. Land acquisition will be an initial problem before the lack of financial resources in many States and consequently local governments. The following could be a process to follow in generating financial resources for land purchases and acquisition: 1) a federal fund for land purchasing; 2) a State fund to assure future self-suffi-iv

PAGE 7

ciency; 3) public bond sales with a moderate interest rate, 4) taxation of local commercial activities and major employers and producers. Land acquisition policies must be coordinated by a National Land Bank with federal supervision, State office coordination and municipal and/or local control. This public body would have the function of a multi-level coordination effort to guarantee all public and private organisms access to land in accomplishng the goals and objectives of othe Human Settlements Law (1976) and the National Plan for Urban Development (1978). The Urban Reform objectve is to regulate land development in urban corm1unities and complement the efforts realized by the Agrarian Ref.orm in rura 1 areas. Land acquisition by the State will regu 1 ate urban development and will have variable limitations. The State, through local governments, will have sale priority, e.g. between 5 and 1 kilometers aro .und corm1unities and along transportation lines. A vacant land policy will be introduced to make economically feasible the usage of already installed infrastructure for the provision of public services and facilities in all community sizes. Under the UR policy, undesirable land subdivision will be banned and conmunities• growth planning policies will be consistent with a national planning effort and make urban growth affordable for all sectors of the population, mainly the low-income groups. Today these groups live in the most precarious conditions in squatter settlements dispersed in urban and rural areas. v

PAGE 8

State contra 1 upon the 1 and market wou 1 d not change 1 and prices in the short run and their multiplier effects on housing programs, economic deve 1 opments or the provision of pub 1 i c f ac i 1 it i es. However, in the long run, cheap land can be guaranteed for any kind of urban developments and preserve for present and future generations the benefits of a planned environment. vi

PAGE 9

INTRODUCTION Considering that in the last 40 years, under a market system, urban land exploitation has been concentrated due to the market-oriented criteria, resulting in economic and physical planning chaos. The present thesis proposes an Urban Reform mechanism which would allow for the implementation of the National Plan for Urban Development {NPUD). This reform mechanism will give the state land tenure rights, in urban and suburban lands, to apply the policies described in NPUD. Mexico, as many Latin American countries, has experienced un-balanced economic growth and accelerated urbanization process character ized by a dependent* economic development and population growth pressures, where urban and regional systems . reach progressively unbelievable differential inequalities. Two major reasons for these conditions have been identified: 1) failures in the government's economic decisions, and 2) the opportunistic intervention of _ the private sector, acting as the main agent for industrial and real estate development in urban areas. Mexico's economic system, based upon the capitalistic mode of production, must deal with several structural problems, such as chronic permanent poverty, high inflation rates, increasing wealth accumulation, *Dependency is a concept utilized to describe the relation between two or more things. In the case of a nation, dependency means a structural economic dependency on the economy(ies) of other country(ies) by financial, commercial, and/or technological ties, to a degree that everything is dependent on outside factors.

PAGE 10

permanent unemploj111ent, and investment speculation that inhibits the implementation of socio-economic and physical planning policies. The capitalistic philosophy has caused serious problems in integrating the nation's delivery system for such basic elements as land, housing, public facilities and public services. A complete lack of integration exists for both regional and urban planning. In addition, the government and private sectors lack in realistic long and short term plans for solving many of Mexico's fundamental problems. To solve Mexico's problems would require a political-economic structural solution on a national scale. Legislative changes and en forcement powers wou 1 d be needed to guide the economic po 1 i ci es that would affect cities and regions within the spatial system. Strong legislation is required in transforming existing land tenure and its structure to address more equitable physical and economic _ planning. Under these considerations, the present thesis project will emphasize that a structural urban reform is needed for the state to directly control urban and regional growth. Finally, it is hoped that this document will be an example for further and more detailed studies on this topic. Inhabitants of Mexico must play a direct role as activists in the formulation and implementation of policies and thus avoid the accumulation of wealth and benefits so commonly found in the capitalistic system. Chapter I explains the goals and objectives pursued by the thesis study in regards to personal academic and professional concerns, focus--2-

PAGE 11

ing on the urbanization process and the socio-economic and physical planning policies in Mexico. Chapter II describes theoretical conceptualizations on which this thesis is based. First, a conceptual relationship between mode of production in capita 1-dependent oriented economies and the accompanying urbanization process, and second, the role of physical planning in the territorial division of labor in market economies. Chapter III defines the urban problem in Mexico. It starts by defining the planning issue, the urbanization process and the characteristics of the modern urban network in Mexico. Economic development is reviewed, and the government's revenues and its role in planning are explored. Also, the housing and land factors are analyzed in terms of national problems in the urban and rural interrelated environment. Chapter IV focuses on recent Political Economy Policies contained in the enaction of the General Law of Human Settlements (1976) and the National Plan for Urban Development (1978). In this phase there is a description of weak points in the implementation of such policies. Chapter V reviews some Latin American approaches in regard to economic development and physical planning. Land use control and subdivision regulations in regional and urban planning policies are shown. Urban reform concepts within Latin American countries are analyzed to review their potential application in other countries. Chapter VI contains the analysis of data based on the methodology proposed and according to the lineaments and objectives of the thesis. -3-

PAGE 12

It consists of a factor analysis among economic, physical, soc -ial and demographic variables and studies the correlation among those variables. In addition, the state and private sectors• roles in the configuration of regional and urban problems are reviewed. VII exposes the findings of data analysis and proposes the alternatives suggested for the application of Urban Reform. Land use control and subdivision regulations are fixed for the application of development policies in urban corrmunities. Finally, recorrmendations to implement the land acquisition policy are established enabling the state to take control of the land market. -4-

PAGE 13

CHAPTER I DECLARATION OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES This thesis will pursue the academic goal of obtaining a master's degree in urban planning and cormnunity development. However, it also has a political goal and much of the content stems from my worries about the oppressive economic system of Mexico and its influence on the formation of urban-rural structures and regional systems. As a planning major thesis, the actual document will emphasize that a radical change would improve Mexico's urban physical planning. But only through imple mentation of fundamental systemic changes can the Mexican people acquire real alternatives. 1.1 Goal The most important goa 1 is to propose an urban reform mechanism as an original and real alternative to the present system in order to enable the state to regain control of land within and around colllnuni ties. This will encourage true equilibrium between physical and socio economic policies and thus give shape to a plannec;i urban and regional environment in feasible political phases. The scope of the proposed urban reform wi 11 encompass 1 and tenure and the state's right in controlling and planning community's growth and deve 1 opment.

PAGE 14

1.2 Objectives 1. 2.1 Reduce the rate of economic growth in the main metropolitan centers, including the industrial, co11111ercial, education and residential sectors. 1.2.2 Transfer land tenure domain within and around cities and towns to the state to allocate inductive growth and coordinate physical planning and thus improve local economies and development. 1.2.3 Establish a mechanism for control, regulation and allocation of urban and sub-urban land in the urban reform process in Mexico. 1.2.4 Explore the information gap and its track system in Mexico for future planning studies. -6-

PAGE 15

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL CONCEPTUALIZATION 2.1 The Mode of Production and the Urbanization Process For the purposes of this study it is necessary to define some concepts about the state, market-oriented economies, the accumulation process, and the planning issue and its relationship to the urbanization process. An analysis of the planning issue cannot, in any case, be at the margin of the economic, po 1 it i ca 1 and ideo 1 ogi ca 1 concepts of the mode of production, as ignoring its influence would allow only partial comprehension of the problem and its relationship to the system itself. Three factors characterize the mode of production: economic, political and ideological structures. An economic system is based upon the hegemony of one structure upon the others. In the Capitalistic Mode of Production ( CMP), in which we are inserted, the hegemony of the economic system is unquestioned. Production in a 11 sectors of the economy is oriented toward an accumulation process. Economic dominance is supported by a conditioned political base and ideological beliefs transferred within society. The mode of production within capital-oriented societies is a process of accumulation. This accumulation takes place in many sectors of the economy and it nothing else but the rentability of capital through a rotation process in which capital reaches profits to satisfy capital investment needs. For this reason, speculation is a key factor in investment for development, and only those activities, goods and

PAGE 16

services capable of guaranteeing high return rates receive attention from the capital sector. The structure of the economic sector is structured around the factors of production, consumption, interchange and management. These factors give shape to a productive process surrounded by an interrelated network of region a 1 systems with urban and rura 1 communities operating according to spatial and social divisions of work. 2.2 Physical Planning at the Margin of Economic Develompent Policies Physical planning within a capital-oriented economy has a function within the productive process. It plays a role in the social and territorial division in the labor and production process.Physical planning and the accumulation process are related by the fact that development has traditionally been concentrated in areas where capital identifies optimal conditions. One result is the polarized growth o( a few conrnunities and the detrimental growth of many conrnunities with a generalized lack of public facilities and services. Land speculation and the resultant scarcity of land affect a healthy and equitable physical development of communities. What, how much and where to produce are determined, in a capital-oriented economy, based upon a systematic speculative function. Production is oriented on a capital needs basis and not for society's social needs. On the other hand, consumption has been socialized as the objective of the economy. In urban settings consumption is -8-

PAGE 17

the indiscriminate use of natural resources and land and products consumed on an agglomeration market basis. Interchange has the function of corrmunication. It is involved in all instances of social interaction. Interchange is a mobilization of resources, products, persons, ideas, and information with the productive process. In terms of the role of the management structure, it has a function of major importance. It is a reproductive function in every step of the economic process. Management manipulates public and private sectors in a society to the point that it regu 1 ates growth through public planning plans. The conditioned political base of an economic system is based on the political hegemony of one party. The state is the political force with the economic capabilities to guide the direction of social fonnation. However, within the society, the state is not the coherent body of social formation. It represents a political ideology, a political party resulting from a combination of factors in the development of a society and the development of productive forces. The ideological structure transmits ideas qnd beliefs and the deve 1 opment of behavi ora 1 patterns to the socio-economic system. Ideo logical values shape the acceptance of certain forms of production, consumption, interchange, and management within society. -9-

PAGE 18

CHAPTER II I PROBLEM DEFINITION 3.1 Mode of Production and the Planning Issue in Mexico In capitalistic societies physical and economic planning are subject to the rules of the economic mode of production. Both are interrelated and show signs of the accumluation process that gives shape to the social and physical environment. The result of the influence of accumluation can be found in the existing precarious economic structure and its capacity to generate economic and social development. The disassociation between regional and urban areas reduces the lives of millions of people to extremely depressed living conditions. Under such conditions, regions and urban centers lack control over the behavior of the local economy in coping with planning pro grams. Physical development, land use and subdivision regulations are influenced by the accumulation process, and the result is generalized chaos and scarcity of basic elements for equitable development. In addition, inability to control the local economy results in loss of population or concentration in a few regional centers. This prevents distribution of local land suitable for development, housing, public services and public faciliti_ es in a coordinated, comprehensive manner. 3.2 Political Economic Problems Mexico•s economy has been characterized by a mixed economy in which the state and the private sector continually conflict due to the

PAGE 19

nature of each: public welfare versus private accumulation. In addi tion, the fundamental contradiction inherent in the Mexican economy is seen in the fact that the state and the private sector require increas ing amounts of foreign capital to fund internal policies for growth and development. Mexico•s economy is financed through various sources: foreign investment of transnational corporations and borrowed capital from international banks, reinvestment of the gross national income, and products and revenues generated from local taxes and fees. The dependence on foreign capital and its utilization practices is the key issue in Mexico•s development policies. Development in Mexico responds to the external influence of industrialied nations and their multinational corporations while ignoring internal domestic needs. External debt is not a new problem in Mexico. In 1960 there was already an external debt calculated at $55 million, and in . l976 the figure was $5,459 million. But in the six years from 1976 to 1982 the debt grew from $20,000 million to $80,000 million.! This debt policy was based on the belief that oil resources would be an alternative source for financing development. However, this appears to be in error due to shifts in the supply and demand in the international oil market. The result is well known: Mexico is ex periencing the most serious crisis in its history. A great period of recession has occurred in which external debt payments have risen while internal growth declines, leading to more years of indebtedness. Mexico -11-

PAGE 20

has one of the highest inflation and unemployment rates coupled with low productivity levels, culminating in stagnation in its national growth policies. As a result of Mexico's foreign economic dependence, particularly in regard to its obligations to repay its foreign debt, severe cutbacks have taken place in domestic capital investment, national budget reductions, salary freezes and price liberations. Thus once again Mexico's plans to integrate regional and urban policies for development have been delayed through paralysis caused by external ties. In its balance of payments Mexico has a increasingly negative balance, from $445 million in 1960 (equal to 3.6 percent of the GNP) to $4,864 million in 1979, or about percent of the GNP. Generally speaking, the country is confronted with serious production problems in coping with its internal needs, resulting in an increase in imports and a high cost for technology when compared with the local capacity to provide it.2 3.3 Urbanization Process Even in the pre-colonial period, Mexico showed signs of a differentiated urban network integrated by diverse ancient cultures. Before the Span ish conquest, centra 1 Me xi co and Mesoamerica had important urban centers of between 100,000 and 300,000 inhabitants. Many of them formed and disappeared throughout the various periods. Teotihuacan in the eleventh and Tenochtitlan in the sixteenth centuries were the latest expressions of those brilliant "urban" cultures.3 -12-

PAGE 21

It was not until the colonial period (1521-1810) when the major characteristics of today• s urban network began to take shape. Economic development and spatial configuration followed the politicaladministrative control and economic exploitation by the Spanish crown and its imperialist expansion. It can be said that almost all current state capital centers and other important economic centers have their roots in this period. However, during the independent period (1810-1910), minimal changes occurred. The whole urban system began to evolve during this period as a result of the interaction of social, economic and technological factors. Industrialization began the process of change in urban and rural conditions when it was discovered that the agricultural mode of production was blocked, without optional diffusion channels • . But real problems in Mexico developed during the second phase, .when the industrialization process began in other countries. It was the import substitution period with accelerated industrialization and its consequent urbanization which took place during the Second World War (1939-1945). 3.4 Characteristics of the Modern Urban Network The configuration and differentiation of regions and the urban network has been the consequence of locational economic growth. At the same time it has bee influenced by pressures from the demographic sector. Mexican demographic growth is among the largest in the world. In 1900 Mexico had a total population of 13.6 million; in 1940 it was -13-

PAGE 22

19.6 million, and in 1980 the population reached 67.3 million, more than a threefold increase in four decades. A progressive mean increase rate of growth of 1.1 percent in the 1900•s, 2.7 percent in the 1940•s, 3.4 percent in the 19601s, and 3.3 percent in the 1970•s.4 In terms of urban and rural population, it was not until the 196o•s that the population began to develop urban supremacy. However, the differentiation between the urban and rura 1 popu 1 at ion growth is impressive. While the rural annual -rate of growth was at a low 1.7 percent, urban popu 1 at ion increased by an annua 1 rate of 5. 9 percent in the 194o•s. Urban population continued to increase at a rate of 5.4 percent in the 1960•s, and remained at around 5 percent in the 1970•s. The period during the Second World War around 1940 demonstrated two phases of the industrial revolution and its impact on the urbanization process. The volume growth and distribution of the population centers according to size show two relatively clear tendencies. 1970 can be qualified as the inflexion point in the manifestation of the urbanization process in Mexico. With respect to locality size and amount changes, in 1900 Mexico had 52,749 localities of any size. In 1940 these had increased to 105,508, a creation of 52,759 new localities, most of them very small and with low population den.sity. In 1950 it declined to 98,325 localities; in 1960, 89,005 localities, in 1970, 95,208 localities, and in 5 1980, 95,356. -14-

PAGE 23

With respect to locality size, in 1900 only two urban centers contained more than 100,000 inhabitants. The first urban center of one million appeared during the 192Q•s. The supremacy of this center lasted three decades, until the appearance of two more major urban centers with at least one million inhabitants. Growth of intermediate size cities of between a half mi 11 ion and a million inhabitants has been slow. It was not until the 19501s when such centers reached a consolidated position within the structure of cities and later acquired metropolitan characteristics. The next four categories of locality reached a growth of accelereated and disproportional dimensions. Communities with a size of between 100,000 inhabitants and fewer than a half a million increased from 5 cities in 1940 to 14 cities in 1960, 31 in 1970, and 43 in 1980. Localities with a size of between 50,000 and 99,999 increased from 8 in 1940 to 20 in 1960 and 24 in 1970. In the category of cities in a range of from 20,000 to 49,999 inhabitants, there were a total of 23 units in 1940, 51 in 1960, and 72 communities in 1970. The last urban locality size, those between 15,000 and 19,999 inhabitants, in creased from 8 in 1940 to 35 in 1960 and 47 in 1970. On the other and, localities not considered properly urban ized, called mixed or clearly rural, also changed considerably. The number of those conmuniti es which can be considered neither urban nor rural increased from 195 units in 1940 to 342 in 1960 and 468 in 1970. Localities classified as predominantly rural numbered 105,258 in 1940, 88,540 in 1960, and 95,260 in 1970.6 -15-

PAGE 24

This process demonstrates the progressive change in locality sizes which is the product of successive steps in the transformation of the urban system. It also modifies the configuration of economic and social conflicts that seriously affect the natural environment of millions of people. 3.5 Economic Development The development of the economic structure has been the main factor in the configuration of the urban and regional spatial network. This configuration has modifed not only the relationships between communities but also the internal relationships of each one. The development of the productive forces, exp 1 oitat ion of natura 1 resources and technological advances have had a great impact on the characterization of the spatial order. The spec i a 1 growth in some urban centers has been a comb ina tion of several economic factors; however, its effects have modified the regional environment. Regional economy and its impact on the urbaniza tion process is a major concern of many researchers in Mexico, since regional economic concentration also influences urban disparities. According to Luis Unikel's studies,? Mexico consists of 8 socio-economic regions which include its 32 states. In four regions there was a per-capita gross internal product in 1900 which was above the national average of 613 pesos, while the other regions has a similar participation. 8 -16-

PAGE 25

In 1970 the situation had not changed significantly: three regions had a per-capita gross internal product above the national level of 3,104 pesos. In urban population terms, in 1900 almost five out of eight regions had at least more than 10 percent of the nation's urban population. In 1970 only three regions had relatively more than 10 percent of the urban population, and one region concentrated 39.1 percent of the nation's tota1.9 The regional economic differentiation was/is marked by high economic infrastructure concentration and a specific labor supply and consumer markets developments. Labor concentration is oriented and influenced by the .. degree of development of the local economy. The structure of the labor force has a function in the territorial and social division of production. In the case of the urbanization process, changes in a locality's size and functional structure is influenced by deep changes in the productive structure. While participation by the agricultural sector in the gross internal product was 22.6 percent in 1940, it was reduced to 11.6 percent in 1970, and in 1979 it was only 8.7 percent. The other two major sectors, industrial and services, gained extraordinary, absolute importance in the labor force structure and in the formation of the gross national product. rn the 1940 the industrial sector participated in the creation of 29.6 percent of the GNP, in 1970 34.4 percent, and in 1979 38.0. percent. The services sector generated 47.7 percent of the GNP in -17-

PAGE 26

1940, 55.1 percent in 1970, and 53.8 percent in 1979. This aspect of the economy has had a tremendous impact on the urban environment because it is there that most of these activities are located.10 In 1940 Mexico was predominantly rural, with agricultural predominance in the total labor force at 65.4 percent. It was reduced to 41.1 percent in 1970 and 31.9 percent in 1980. The relative change withn the labor structure gave rise to a growth in the industrial and services sectors. The industrial sector increased its participation from 14.1 percent in 1940 to 24.6 in 1970 and 25.9 in 1980. The services sector grew from 20.5 percent in 1940 to 34.2 in 1970 and 42.0 in 1980 in the labor structure.11 Luis Unikel states that the disparities in the GNP in percapita terms have not changed at a 11. From 1940 to 1970 the GNP increased three times; however, the disparities among regions have not changed substantially.12 In terms of income, in 1940 a tot a 1 of 19.6 mi 11 ion of the population, 14.7 percent, had a per-capita GNP of half that of the nation. In 1970, of. 49.1 million people, 11.1 million or 22.4 percent had attained a per-capital of twice the nationt but 47.5 percent received a per-capita of half the nation's GNP.13 Income distribution has been one of the important factors in explaining many socio-economic problems, such as access to land, housing, education, food, clothing and the provision of collective facilities public services. -18-

PAGE 27

3.6 Revenue Structure and the Government's Role The evolution of the productive structure and the labor force, along with location consideration, have produced a conflictive and insufficient public revenues allocation. Such misallocation has caused governmental problems in areas of physical growth planning, provision of infrastructure, public collective services, collective public facilities and adequate housing for many communities and population sectors. The structure of the nation's revenues shows a great concentration on the federal government, causing great problems for selfdetermination and con so 1 i dati on of a de centra 1 i zed revenue resources on state and municipal governments. Since 1940 the federal government has collected over 70.0 percent of the nation's total revenues, a percentage that reached 87.9 in 1966 and 89.7 in 1980. The state government received 23.3 percent in 1940, 17.2 in 1950, 18.6 in 1960, 22.2 in 1970 and 23.2 in 1980. Revenue of municipal governments, the cellular unit of the nation's political-administrative territorial division, has been too low. In 1940 municipalities received 5.3 percent of the nation's revenues, in 1960 only 2.8 percent, in 1970 a ridiculous 1.5 percent, and in 1980 2.3 percent.1 4 This process demonstrates a concentrated centralization of fiscal revenues in the federal government, leaving very limited financial resources for state and municipal governments. It is considered that the revenue system is on an. inefficient tax structure. In the last decades public financing has been too little to generate appro wriate resources and create a reasonable public investment. -19-

PAGE 28

It was pointed out by Luis Unikel that the nation's revenues from 1940 to 1970 represented less than 20 percent of the GNP and federal revenues were in the same period slightly above ten percent of the GNP. In addition, tax participation within the nation's income represented less than 10.0 percent of total revenues.l5 The significance of the tax structure in the nation's development programs has had a major impact on municipal governments. They depend largely on federal funds or state funds to implement some basic public works, provision of potable water systems, sewer systems, electrical power, street maintenance, and the provision of collective facilities. On the other hand, over 50 percent of municipal expenditures are for administrative functions and less than 30 percent are for public works; the rest is spent on public debt and transfer payments.16 3.7 The Housing Sector, a Structural Problem The land factor is a key element in understanding the housing problem. Income and investment considerations are considered the major explanatory concepts of the housing problem, while land still influences its allocation and price. Mexico is confronted with a critical housing problems which, although not new, is worsening due to extreme economic conditions. Accelerated inflation has driven away the capital necessary for its progressive minimization. Me xi co's housing is increasingly concentrated in urban areas but also in rural areas, where it represents deprived conditions. There are three major elements that compound the structure of the problem: -20-

PAGE 29

1) A great lack of housing resulting from a differential rate of increase between population and housing construction; 2) Lack of alternatives to alleviate the existing lack of housing seen in the high average number of persons per habitable room, and 3) The concentrated allocation of new housing stock in specific areas. Another important element is the scarce resource allocation undertaken to minimize it. According to studies done by international organizations, among them the United Nations, it is suggested that in developing countries it is necessary to use at least five percent of the GNP to minimize not to solve the housing problem. If this is true, Mexico has been utilizing much less than the recommended amount. The estimated lack of housing was about 3.5 million in 1976 and 4.2 million for 1982, derived from accumulated housing deficit, replacement of old stock, and pressures from demographic growth. Housing is traditionally financed through self-construction of some sectors of the popu 1 at ion which have no access to private and pub 1 i c financing; capital-oriented private investment for massive housing construction, operating primarily in large urban centers; and public housing financing with public funds and through public financial institutions, oriented basically to public workers serving the state and the labor sector covered by the National Institute for the Development of Housing for Workers, INFONAVIT. -21-

PAGE 30

With the exception of the first, the groups are oriented along a discriminatory policy in which income and categorical employment rule in the configuration of housing policies. For this reason housing construction is concentrated in places with a strong economy where a market is created in the consolidation of an agglomeration and consumer markets to increase potential rentability for the capital sector. The following table shows housing growth. 3.8 The Land Factor and its Role in Regional-Urban Growth. Land tenure in Latin America and mainly in Mexico has its origin in the colonial period. Land was distributed to nobility to maintain the hegemony and exploitation by the Spanish crown. Land tenure distribution had various concepts. In the case of new settlements, each community received three types of land. Limits that defined a town were ca 11 ed Leg a 1 Property (Fun do Leg a 1 ) ; 11ej ida 1 land • (tierra ejidal} defined as land dedicated to community activities; and common land (tierra comunal} belonging to common activities of the community. The disposition of the 11ejidal land11 originated in 1573 and was ratified in 1713; however, the modern concept of the 11tierra ejidal11 was. enacted in 1920 under the 11ejidos11 law. This law established bases for land distribution and the disappearances of 11latifundos11 (large tracts of privately owner land}, according to the Agrarian Reform in rura 1 areas. Legis 1 at i ve eff arts on 1 and tenure and uses are concentrated in the 27th constitutional article. It is the most important legisla-. -22-

PAGE 31

tive tool to regulate land property and water resources, and states as fa 11 ows: Article 27. The property of lands and waters comprehended within the limits of the national territory correspond originally to the nationa, which has had and has the right to trasnmit its domain to particulars giving origin to private property. Expropriations can be done only by reasons of public utility and thorough indemnization. The nation wi 11 have, at any time, the right to impose or dictate on private property the modalities dictated by public interest, and so regulate the use of natural resources in order to appropriate a .. more equitable distribution of the public wealth and assure its con servation. With objective, necessary measures will be for the subdivision of latifundo land; development of small prope,rty; for the creation of new agri cu ltura 1 popu 1 at ion centers and to avoid the destruction of natural elements and property damages against society. 3.9 Land Resources in Mexico. Land resources in Mexico are calculated at 1.95 million square kilometers. The low use hypothesis, according to Angle Bassols Batalla, i s as f o 11 ows : Agricultural lands Grassland Forests Waters Mineral land resources Urban not industrial Urban industrial Subtotal Not exploited or used land Total land Mexico 238.000 271,000 290,000 7,500 26,000 1,500 1,500 835,500 1,137,046 1,972,546 -23-12.1% 13.7% 14.7% 0.4% 1.3% 0.1% 0.1% 42.4% 57.6% 100.0%

PAGE 32

According to these numbers, the agrarian reform (1916) granted in peasants possession a total of 96.78 million square 11hectareas11 or 967,880 square kilometers, 49 percent of the nation's total area. In consideration of the above table, the urban extension consisted of about 3,000 square kilometers in 1970, from which the metropolitan area of Mexico City occupied 561 square kilometers, or 18.7% of the nation's total, while it had 21.4% of the total population, an approximate growth of 74% in respect to 1960, when it was nearer to 314 square kilometers. The land problem in the metropolitan area of Mexico City in 1980 is grave. At this time the metro area reaches an extension of more than 900 sq. kilmeters. This urban growth was 50 percent on conmuncal and ejidal land classified as public land without any intervention of the government in such growth.* Urban expansion and land distribution have occasioned statutory problems in areas where urban and suburban lands join. Ejidal and conmunal public lands are progressively transformed in urban uses via private appropriation or peasants• sales, which are both against the Agrarian Reform Law. Land status changes can be done through the mechanisms described in the Constitution and the Agrarian Reform Law. It is a fact that the state controls almost all land around conmunities, but it st i 11 needs to contra 1 the inmedi ate area adjacent to the urban limits. Only thus is the state in the position to coordinate Agrarian and Urban Reform policies in regard to the use, regulation, and preservation of land and the social and natural environments. *Schteingart, Martha. Se ha agudizado en la ultima decada el desmedido metropolitano. Uno Mas Uno newpaper, October 11, 198, p. 17.

PAGE 33

CHAPTER IV MEXICO'S RECENT PHYSICAL PLANNING POLICIES 4.1 Political Economy Policies The state has increasingly become involved in the process of formulation and implementation of planning and political economy policies. Such decisions transform the relations among spatial units within the environment. In the last twenty years since 1960, four governmental administrations have worked on different strategies to reach constant levels of growth and development. In general terms, all were sectori_ al polices cases, giving varying importance to industrial, corrmercial or agricultural developments. In some cases economic policies were linked to physical planning, such as development poles implemented in the early 1970's. During the federal administration (1970-1976), the idea predom inated that all federal government decision during the last four decades have influenced the economic, political, educational and social concentration in a few regions. An idea of global economic and physical planning began to have a relevant importance and high priority in the government's decision-making and the future formulation and implementation of socio-economic polices. It was not until the 1976-1982 governmental administration when a decentralization effort took place. Economic and physical planning were integrated in the enactment of the Human Settlements Law in 1976.

PAGE 34

Reforms to articles 27,73 and 115 of the constitution occurred in the same year. These efforts had as an objective the creation of the state•s development plans to solve the nation•s developmental problems. The Human Settlements Law established the following objectives: 1) Set adequate coordination of federal entities, municipalities and the federal government with the ultimate goal of regulating human settlements in the national territory. 2) Establish basic norms to regulate the public function, relative to the creation, preservation, improvement and growth of the population centers. 3) Define the principles in which the state executes its functions in determining the provisions, uses, reserves and ends of lands, waters and forests. Reforms and additions to the constitution had a fundamental end in removing constitutional barriers for the expedition and application of the 1 aw. According to the canst it uti on, a 11 powers that are not granted by it to the federal government are granted to the states. For this reason article 73 of the constitution was modified, and it now grants to the Congress Union the power to enact 1 aws to estab 1 ish ade quate coordinatio of federal entities (states), municipalities and the federal government in their respective spheres in human settlement matters. Article 27 was also modifed to the extent that it ratifies the nation•s right to dictate the right measures for human settlment plan--26-

PAGE 35

ning. In respect to the additions to article 115 and its assurance that states and municipalities enact in their competency sphere laws, codes and administrative dispositions provided in the General Law of Human Settlements and the obligation of a coordinated action from the three levels of government in the case of conglomeration of municipal governments in an urban area. The law's enactment will provide for a national plan for urban development containing a macropolicy for urban planning that includes 31 state plans, specific plans for cornubated areas, municipal plans ( plans) and specific plans for each population center (96,912 communities over 2,500 inhabitants in 1970) within municipalities and a Director plan for the Federal District in the metro politan area of Mexico City. 4.2 General Law of Human Settlements Chapter I. General Dispositions. This points out the law's objective for the establishment of adequate coordination of the federal and state governments and the municipalities with the finality of organ izing the human settlements. Fixing basic norms of the public action relative to the creation, conservation and improvement of population centers as well as defining state principles toward exercising the state's attributions for determining the provision, use reserve and destination of areas and lands. It also defines the competency of all government levels to enact laws and codes for the regulation of human settlements and the urban plans comprehended in the national plan for urban development, NPUD, -27-

PAGE 36

state's plans for urban development, municipal plans and the special urban centers where different states or municipal governments must coordinate actions. Chapter II. This establishes the convergence and coordination of the federa1 and state governments and the municipalities and its attributive competency of diverse federal organisms as well as state and municipal governments in urban matters. Chapter III. This establishes the direct invervention of the federal government in the urban centers where there are plural regula tory actions by different state or municipal governments. In this case, a conurbation concept is applied and federal coordination is required. Chapter IV. This regulates the relationship of private property in the population centers, and its objective is to organize the human settlements, their creation, conservation and improvement; the creation of a p 1 anni ng system through the estab 1 i shment 1 and's ends, uses, pro vision, and reserves to regulate private property, and it will be according to bills enacted by local authorities and withn national and state plans for urban development. 4.3 The National Plan for Urban Develoment, NPUD The plan was enacted in 1978 according to the General Law of Human Settlements, and its describes federal participation in Human Settlements Planning works and urban development regulation in the national territory. At the same time it establis.hes the bases and lineaments of coordinaton, control, and_ execution of actions and invest--28-

PAGE 37

ments programs of the federal government in the implementation process. The plan includes within its scope a national, regional, state and municipal population center, conurbated zones and priority zone po 1 i ci es. The NPUD consideres four planning levels: 1) regulative, 2) strategic, 3) sectoral co-responsibility, and 4) legal instruments. The long-term objectves of the NPUD in reaction to historic and current problems of regional and urban character are: 1) Rational distribution within the territory of economic activities and population to allocate them in areas with more potential _ in the country. 2) Promotion of an integral and equilibrated urban develompent in the population centers. 3) Propose and create favorable conditions for the population to solve its needs of urban land, housing, public services, infrastructure and urban facilities, and 4) Improvement and conservation of the human settlement environ-ment. in the same plan and according to the precise objectives, the f o 11 owing po 1 i ci"es were dec 1 a red: 1) Territorial planning policies to attend the inter-urban problems with national and regional character. 2) Urban development policies in the population centers .and applied to the internal situation of each locality. -29-

PAGE 38

3) Polices related to the elements, components, and actions to supply and satisfy human settlement needs. The policies established for the territorial planning policies are: avoiding growth of the metropolitan area of Mexico City, decentralization of industry, pubJic services and diverse activities in the private sector to allocate them to proposed zones; inducing development in cities with regional services and medium-sized cities with economic and social development potential; development and promotion of transportation systems and inter-urban corrmunication as orderly national territory elements; stimulation of the integration and development of support centers to the rural population and dispersed rural population settlements. In terms of centers of popu 1 at ion and urban deve 1 opment, the polici.es propose the following: promotion policies; strengthening policies; and planning and control policies. These polices are oriented toward the coordination of urban planning activities concerning federal, state, and municipal spheres. Concerning policies related to elements, components and actions of the human settlements sector, here the plan establishes promotional actions relative to: territorial reserves for human settlements; urban land; housing; facilites, infrastructure, urban services; urban ecology; provision and attention to urban emergertcies; and participation of the corrmunity in the urban development process. -30-

PAGE 39

Under this policy is established a promotion action for the acquisition, in terms of the law, of the territorial reserves for federal use according to programs and actions of the federal government in med i urn and. 1 ong-range terms. Technical support to the states to revitalize studies to fix their territorial reserve needs. Widening alternatives to urban land access for low-income and no-salaried population. -31-

PAGE 40

CHAPTER V LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES• APPROACHES TO PHYSICAL PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 5.1 Economic Development and Its Physical Expression in Latin America It is not the intention of the present thesis to do an extensive analysis of the Latin American urbanization process. However, given the generalization of the socio-economic and spatial problems, it is neces sary to objectively explore the gravity of those problems and the existing alternatives to solve them. Latin American social problems characterizd by scarcity and poverty have been the result of hi stori ca lly determined dependence on economical and political foreign forces. The philosophy of 11laissez faire11 has caused Latin American countries to develop a position of dependency upon deve 1 oped countries, res u 1 t i ng in the determination of policies with limited expectation of growth. Industrialization, the most important economic force in the modern era, has been concentrated in a few regions and correspondent urban centers. Such concentration is the effect of a limited and sectorial economic planning, resulting in a polar.ization of economic and social forces among regions, communities and population sectors. In terms of economic development and physical planning a few countries have tried to integrate the physical variable as a fundamental element in imp 1 ement i ng po 1 i ci es of po 1 i ci ca 1 economy. Conversely,

PAGE 41

political and capital pressures have driven, modified or eliminated all alternativaes for planning purposes, in order that capital and private interest keep hegemony on the economy system. Thus, the configuration and development of regions and cities is directed by capitalistic interests. The accelerated urbanization process experienced in Latin America is not new, it was increased in the last four decades due to the breakdown caused by the Second World War. A period of importation substitution gave rise to an incipient and locational industrialization process in most Latin American countries. Limited industrialized economic development offers no alternatives to the increasing pressures from growth of the demographic sector. Its physical expression is the emergence of squatter settlements and a generalized poverty level with increasing levels of environmental degradation. The incipient industrialization period has put great pressure on the land market in urban . and suburban areas of se 1 ected urban centers, including the accumulation process. Speculative attions in land by landlords has taken effect in many ways and progressive negative effects are felt in coiTIIlunities to supply the provision of public services and facilities. The differential balance between supply-demand for land, and the lack of an effective regulation on land use and subdivision regulations is causing its progressive deterioration. All these considerations go against a reasonable economic cost feasi bi 1 ity which would provide effective policies in housing, public services and facilities. -33-

PAGE 42

Legislative efforts to support economic and physical policies show signs of procedural weakness. Law enforcements in civil codes in the Latin American legislations are far behind the modern social needs. Fundamental concepts in land legislation must be reviewed in order to accomplish a modern social collective environment. 5.2 Urban and Regional Policies in Regard to Land Use and Sub-division Procedures in Latin America The physical variable has had little importance in the formulation of political economic decisions and the configuration of regional , economies and urban centers. Recently some countries have started to give to the physical factor the importance that it deserves in the transformation and configuration of spatial systems and their economies. Land use polices are oriented to solve problems of local char-acter, mainly in metropolitan areas and other important cities. They are not oriented to approach strategically a global planning concept and solve its problems. Land use policies have been directed to complement industrial and commercial developments based on sectorial plans and the consequently residential development required in such plans. Concerning subdivision regulations, they regulate in different approaches to land deve 1 opments according to standards estab 1 i shed with cost concepts and a rentability ideology of the private sector. -34-

PAGE 43

5.3 Typologies in Land Use and Subdivision Regulations and Policies in Latin America National plans for urban planning and economic development are few in number. Most of the urban planning programs are based on regulatory policies called 11planos reguladores11 (regulatory plans) or 11planes maestros de desarrollo .. (master plans of development) that are a partial attempt to direct a planned growth on a local basis. Other important policies concerned with sectorial policies in regard to industrial, corrmercial, agricultural, housing, health, and education, etc. are implemented to participate partially in the development plans. Their application is limited in scope and offers no. attempt to integrate economic-physical planning for a whole spatial system as a unit. An important planning mechanism minimally explored and politically dangersous is the application of an Urban Reform concept; which together with a national plan for urban and economic development could improve the deteriorated relations of the regional and urban system in Latin America. Only Cuba among the Latin American countries has implemented radical transfonnations dealing with land use policies and national planning. The intention is the structural transformation of the economy and its spatial distribution to cope with planning and development issues. The basic objective pursued by the Cuban policies is the equitable distribution of activites and opportunities in the spatial -35-\

PAGE 44

system. However, the transformations go far beyond the ideological conceptions of the space in market economy-oriented countries. A real integration of the rural-urban dichotomy is implemented and a pro gressive e 1 imi nation of the 11natura 1 barriers 11 that have separated them since time irrmemorial. The allocation of public facilities and public services plays an important role in the consolidation of the rural environment, where many peop 1 e 1 i ve to support prodLicti ve ly many consumer functions in urban areas. Rural planning policies are getting an important impulse. Planned planning programs in Cuba have transformed the environment radically. Not only economic aspects have changed, but also administrative barriers were transformed to integrate geographical-economic and social factors in the deyelopment of a planned environment. Political administrative limits of the capitalistic era have been eliminated and a new approach to fulfilling economic and social programs has been instituted. However, it does not mean that this development pattern is firmly fixed. The configuration of the environment, urban and rural, in today's Cuba is based on a dialectical process to carry out its socialistic development. 5.4 Urban Reform Types in Latin America The urban reform types have followed two clear tendencies, an integral approach and a sectoral approach. If it is considered that the concept of an Urban Reform is to transform the political, economical and social conditions existent in the relations of the urban structure, only the first one fulfills its basic objectives. -36-

PAGE 45

The sectoral UR transforms the relation of tenant to owner in function of the fluctuation of rent payments or land polices in regard to subdivision regulations. On the contrary, the integral approach establishes a new kind of relationship. First, the relations between the city and the country eliminate all possible extreme differentation making one more attractive than the other. Second, internal reorganization of urban functions according to the needs of the conglomeration, changing the 1 and tenure re 1 ati ons and the app 1 i cation of development and conservation policies of the natural and social resources. This approach has as an objective deep transformation of social and economic character and having the natural environment as a scenario. On the contrary, the Sectoral UR founded in Bolivia (1954) and Colombia (1969) has as priority objectives to alleviate need problems, expensiveness, and speculation that they are objected to by landlords and developers. This approach has had little success because many interests are involved which through politcal and economic alliances impede its development and implementation. -37-

PAGE 46

CHAPTER VI METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS 6.1 Methodological Approach The method app 1 i ed is camp 1 ete ly re 1 a ted to the goa 1 of the present thesis. First, two levels of analysis are fixed: 1) the state, and 2) locality size level. The state level includes the of analysis of selected variables in the 32 states in Mexico. At the locality size level, a similar approach is taken to demonstrate the relationships transferred from state to local levels. The time frame utilized for the analysis varies for different scopes in comprehending the urbanization process it comprises since 1940. For the main analysis at the two levels it has been fixed from 1960 to 1980. Fourteen variables were chosen to analyze through a factor analysis and a scattergram procedure the correlation that exists between growth and its multiplicative effects and locational distribution. An important inference about the governmental role in the formation and consolidation of regional environments in these 20 years is reviewed. 6.2 Variable/Definition The se 1 ecti on of the var i ab 1 es inc 1 udes economic, demographic, political, social and physical conditions. These variables are the fa 11 owing: Gross Internal Product, GNP, explains the state participation in the gross national product.

PAGE 47

Total Urban Population, TUP, explains the state participation in the total urban population. Total Population, TP, represents the state population in terms of the nation's total. Urbanization Rate, UR, shows the i nteris ity of the urbanization rate by state. Fiscal Revenues, FR, explain the state's fiscal revenues capa-bil iti es. Total Housing Stock, THS, identifies the total participation of the state in the national stock. Total Housing Stock Without Potable Water, HWW, describes the state's stock that is not provided directly by potable water. Total Housing Stock Without Sewer Service, HWS, identifies the total stock in state without sewer service. Mean Increase of Urban Population, MIUP, explains mean increase in the rate of urban population in the state. Density, D, identifies the state's density in persons per square kilometers. Tote 1 Housing Stock Rented, THSE, is the tot a 1 stock not owned by its inhabitants. Federal Investment In State, FIS, shows the investment structure . by state. Percentage of Area, PA, shows the state's participation in the nation's area. -39-

PAGE 48

Number of Localities, NL, shows the total number of localities in the state. Income Per Capita, IPC, shows the state's per capita income. 6.3 Generalities It is not the intention of this thesis to present a scientific detailed analysis of the macroelements that caused Mexico's current urban and rura 1 prob 1 ems. Instead, it wi 11 introduce some important outcomes to find explanations for the major issues and their consequences in the formation of the urban environment and its rural influence. The objective of the present methodology is to prove that at the regional and state level a global approach is urgently needed to transfer to the co11111unities the necessary incentives to adequately utilize resources for planning and development. It is believed that a national legislation on land availability and locational distribution is necessary to induce capital investment for economic and urban developments. There is no question regarding the structural relation of the urbanization process with regards to intensity and locational distribution concerns. Mexico's urban and regional systems are faced with deep failures in physical growth, economic development, capital resources, and legislative measures to give an adequate and firm response to the critical urban and rural issues. So structured is the current urbanization process that the analysis of a single region or city is very limited and isolated. A -40-

PAGE 49

global aplproach is necessary to confront the various issues at one time. The attempt to justify the thesis's scope is that a global approach is needed and its application in the future will depend on each community's needs. The method for the present thesis will be focused on three levels of analysis. First, exploration of some macro economic variables that at the national level influence the urbanization process. Second, review at the state level the impact produced by national policies. Third, measure the impact and its known periodical conditions at the locality size level. 6.4 Findings of the Analysis 6.4.1 State level. The research and analysis are focused on the i nterre 1 at ion among economic, demographic, physical and social varibles exploring in terms of cause and effect the political economy policies during the last three decades. But the most important is to explore and define the most important factors in the configuration of the regional sytem and urban centers differentiation. It is hoped that such an approach shows both political economic bodies as policy-makers, the state and the private sector. Within economic variables, at the state level, the gross internal product serves as a measurement of economic development, economic structure and economic capabilities to generate expectations in local sectors. However, two other variables are combined to show its -41-

PAGE 50

relationship and interdependence, such as fiscal revenues and federal investmnt. Demographic variables show the participation of each state in the total population, mean increass in total population, population density, percentage of urban population and urbanization rate. At this stage it is proposed that these variables describe the characteristics of each state and measure them with the rest of the economic and physical v ari ab l es. Physical variables represent basically the housing sector as one of the most severe problems. It contains several variables, total housing stock in state, housing without sewer services, housing without potable water inside, and the most descriptive element of the housing problem, its tenure. The. time frame for this analysis has been fixed to three census dates from 1960 to 1980. Such a consideration has as an objective to find the co-relationship among the variables and their changes with time and to determine the variations observed and the possible influence dictated by the policy-makers in the. configuration of regional socio-economic conditions and their expressions, mainly in the housing sector in urban centers. A factor analysis through all variables were exposed to which it is possible to get correlation coefficients and necessary measures to compare and contrast the socio-economic variables among all the states of the country. The states are classified within a numerical order in alphabetical terms as follows: -42-

PAGE 51

No. State No. State 01 Aguascalientes 21 Puebla 02 Baja California Norte 22 Queretaro 03 Baja California Sur 23 Quintana Roo 04 Campeche 24 San Luis Potosi 05 Coahu i 1 a 25 Sinaloa 06 Co 1 ima 26 Sonora 07 Chiapas 27 Tab as co 08 Chihuahua 28 Tamualipas 09 Durango 29 Tlaxca la 10 Federal District 30 Veracruz 11 Guanaj uato 31 Yucatan 12 Guerrero 32 Zacatecas 13 Hidalgo 14 Ja 1 i sea 15 Me xi co 16 Michoacan 17 Morel os 18 Nayarit 19 Nuevo Leon 20 Oaxaca The mean part i c i pat i on among states in terms of its interven-ti on in the f onnati on of the gross i nterna 1 product has increased from 1960 to 1980, but the standard deviation is st i 11 without significant changes, from 6.52 to 6.34 in the same period. Correlation coefficients show a remarkable relation among GIP, urban population, density, federal revenues and federal expenditures. It means that economic development is concentrated in a few states and its structure has not changed substantially. States which produce more are in a better condition to increase expectations; however, this does not mean that such states are out of trouble. Their problems are of other dimensions even more. Later, in the second phase of the analysis, this will be explored in more detail. -43-

PAGE 52

In terms of total population within states, the mean continues to be stable from 1960 to 1980, but in terms of the stadnard deviation it has changed in the decade of the 70's, indicating an overconcentration of population in some states. The correlation coefficient shows that GIP, urban population, fiscal revenues, and federal investment have a relevant importance and a tied relation in those states that contain a considerable population. Urban population concentration seems to have a better distri-bution since 1960. Only the federal district still has the highest concentration. The standard deviation, in general terms, has been reduced as a consequence of rapid growth and attraction by other minor but important urban centers. Urban population correlations indicate that a great relationship exists with GIP, fiscal revenues, federal investment, density, housing stock growth and total population. Urbanization rate, although it seems not to be related to any variable, has a strong relationship with housing tenure. The most rapid urbanization rate occurs with a population with a low percentage of housing tenure. If it is supposed that the urbanization rate is accom panied by a high grade of economic expectations, there is, however, an increasing number of families with no housing tenure. Fiscal revenues have a strong impact on those states that demonstrate a GIP potential derived from a diversified economy. The revenue mean among states is still almost the same from 1960 to 1980. However, it seems to be that the standard deviation is being reduced by -44-

PAGE 53

the fact that other big urban centers besides Mexico City havea relevant importance and then reducing the revenue gap, among the other states, it is believed still the same. In terms of the correlation among fiscal revenues .and the other variables, there is a strong relation with population density, urban population and total population. Federal investment, however, has had an increasing importance in states where such revenue has been generated. Housing variables are classifed in four: total housing stock, housing without potable water, housing without sewer service, and hous ing tenure. Total housing stock mean shows stable changes but slight growth. However, the standard deviation is being incremented as construction is concentrated in major cities. Correlation coefficients again are strongly tied to GIP, urban population, and federal investment. Housing without potable water has changed substantially from 1960 to 1980. The mean state participation has been reduced dramatically since 1960; however, it is still a problem. About 30 percent of all housing stock, state average, is without the service in 1980. There is a clear correlation between housing stock with water problems and housing with sewer problems. Housing tenure mean among states has decreased si nee 1960. The clear relationship between urbanization rate and housing tenure defines tha urbanization is having a contrary effect on it. The standard deviation is being reduced at the national level, supposing that it is dispersing everywhere. . -45-

PAGE 54

Sumnary The fundamental factor in this step of the analysis shows that economic factors are determinig the distribution and intensity of the regional problems and their effects in urban areas. Participation in the Gross Internal Product is very related with toal population concentration, urban population, urbanization rate, fiscal revenues and federal investment. Changes occurring during the last twenty years have been slow and do not respond to the high pressure given by the acce 1 era ted popu-1 at ion growth rate. Most of the pressures are occurring in states with big urban population centers and leaving without expectations smaller cities and people in rural areas. 6.4.2 Urban Population Level This phase of the analysis considers the housing element as the unit for measurement of growth in the different state entities. The housing sector, in Mexico, grew at a rate of 3.1% during the 60•s, 3.9% during the 70•s, and 3.1% during the 19ao•s. It was a good rate of growth; however, the Federal District participated with 13.9%, 14.2% and 14.0% of the total housing construction in the same period. The state of Mexico, which includes part of the metropolitan are of Mexico City, increased from 5.4%, 7.9% and 11.2% in the same period, while in the other extreme, 6 states from 1960 to 1980 received increases of less than one percent of the total housing construction in the nation. -46-

PAGE 55

In measuring changes, 15 variables were established from which it is hoped to show the conditions of physical growth in states and then localities in the national territory. The variables have the following characteristics: Demographic: Total population, population rate of growth, mean increase of urban population, and total urban population. Economic: Physical: Per capita gross internal product, labor force, per capita state revenue, and per capita federal invest ment. Tot a 1 housing stock, rented housing, housing without water, housing without sewer, housing tenure, average persons per unit, decade housing change, of housing nation's growth. The purpose of the analysis is to correlate the relationship among these variables and find out the possible explanations for current patterns. This tool will help in the formulation of alternatives, strategy definition and recommendatios for the Urban Reform proposal. The most important element here is the total housing change occurring in all the states and the other variables will work as sup portive elements to understand such changes. The results of the correlation analysis convey that in the last three decades there has not been substantial change in terms of the variable means in the nation. However, there is a generalized increase -47-

PAGE 56

the standard deviation among variables. This has as a consequence that if socio-economic disparities existed in 1960 for 1980 the condi tions in urban and rural sectors are increasing dangerously and maintain fundamental relations that support are being questions. Total population standard deviation is increasing due to major attractions offered by the big metropolitan urban centers. This variable has a strong relationship with states with big total housing growth, making an extraordinary concentration of housing construction in marketable areas. The housing sector growth diminished in the last decade compared with the increases experienced in the 197o•s and even the standard deviation decreased also as a consequence of a lack of interest to minimize this critical problem. It is considered that since 1960 the mean average persons/housing has not changed at all from 5.47 to 5.57 in 1980. Total housing growth on the other hand shows a tied correlation between it and housing tenure status. There is a remarkable increase of rented housing in areas with more potential to grow in the housing sector .11 The most important aspect of a 11 is the fact that factors of economic character are shaping the way in which the space is organ ized. Gross internal product generation as well as labor concentration remarks that housing growth is being deeply influenced by economic deve 1 opment. -48-

PAGE 57

7.1 Generalities CHAPTER VII ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL The Mexican state has two clear alternatives in order to minimize grave chronic socio-economic problems and their effects in rural ares and urban centers of any dimension. First, a radical change in the formulation/implementation of physical and economical planning policies, and second, leave market conditions, with their periodical speculative crises, still regulating-manipulating growth and people's expectations. The effects produced for such practi. ces have been clearly defined. Enough reasons exist to formulate a thesis of an Urban Reform (U.R) mechanism as a public instrument to implement Human Settlements (HS) and the National Plan for Urban Development Policies as a comple mentary step to the Agrarian Reform, and the configuration of a national economic and physical p 1 ann i ng po 1 icy in Me xi co. The Urban Reform pursues the state's constitutional rights, granted in the 27th article, to control urban and suburban land and thus local economies to satisfy urgent people's needs. Only in this manner is the state in a position to implement promotional, ,strengthening, control and planning policies in regions or cities within the nation's political-administrative limits, according to the General Law of Human Settlements. The Urban Reform proposal has objectives of character economic, political, administrative, and social to integrate the territory as a unit.

PAGE 58

7.2 UR Goals and Objectives Goal: State rights for the acquisition of urban and suburban land for the implementation of public policies pointed out in the General Law of Human Settlements. Objectives: 1) Decentralization and strengthening of local economies, through the state intervention and control of land market supply for industrial, commercial and residential quotas established in the NPUD. 2) Induce decentralized local administrative control upon land policies, subdivision regulations and planning through a self-financed state; municipal or local governments and so finance public facilities and services. 3) Encourage housing investment to supply new housing, improvement of the old stock, and replacement of deteriorated ones through cooperative renew a 1 programs. A 1 so, promotion of self -constructi on housing with technical and material government help. 4) Induce public control and awareness of environmental pollu tion and environment conservation. 5) Regularization of land status in regard to federal, ejidal, and communal public lands transformed into private land through illegal transactions, pursuing a public lawsuit in favor of damages against the state and public welfare. -50-

PAGE 59

7.3 Economic Aspects of the Urban Reform The UR is a legislative mechanism, that in local terms will allow the control of the local economy through national or regional lineaments. The pretended control will allow a comprehensive distribution of growth and its functions of production, consumption, interchange and planning among communities and so increas their economic expecta tions and income levels, provoked by the multiplier effect of development itself. The theory behind this is that through public intervention on land it is going to induce capital investment in productive functions, and this will avoid passive/speculative capital invested in land also. In economic activity terms industrial and commercial decentralization and an indiscriminative support to primary agricultural activities are required promptly. Rapidly reduce industry allocation in the major industrial-commercial urban centers, giving priorty to undesirable industry. It is recommended that environmental control measures be enacted through laws to cope with industrial emissions. In respect to the services sector, decentralization of the government's organisms, higher education institutions, commercial enter prises and businesses from important urban centers and increase expecta tions in smaller communities. Creation of tax incentives or tax charges mechanisms to induce or stop allocation of such activities in determined communities. -51-

PAGE 60

The agricultural sector must receive indiscriminative allocation of resources deviated from urban centers minimizing socio-economic barriers that separate them and implementation of a coordination between 11ejidal11 and urban social lands. 7.4 Polit1cal Administrative Land Control The goal in the application of the Urban Reform in political administrative terms is to transfer land tenure domain to the state and so implement the National Plan for Urban Development, giving land the needed social character granted by constitutional right. Public land in state hands will comprise the land supply market and its behavior according to lineaments and objectives of national, regional, state or local planning policies. However, public land supply market will be directed to social housing programs, construction of public facilities and preservation of natural resources. For such purposes the state must enact national legislation on state•s priority for the acquisition of urban and suburban lands within and around cities to protect and implement plans and policies with public character. Establishment of a Land Bank (LB) coordinated at the state level through federal supervision and local control, for land distributional allocation. To minimize local growth problems concerned with infrastructure, public services and facilities, a decentralization of tax revenues to the state and municipal governments is extremely necessary. A well-structured taxation system and civil participation in community matters are required. -52-

PAGE 61

7.5 Mechanisms for Public Land Acquisition Enact an Urban Reform Law considering that there is a public concern in fully implementing the socio economic policies described in the General Law of Human Settlements through the National Plan for Urban Development This mechanism will gradually regulate all land tracts, defining their classificatory status within the expropriation process and thus allowing the determination of compensation according to constitutional rights. It will be based on analyzing the real land value with out the added value caused by public investment and so increasing its rent value. The state, through state and 1 oca 1 governments, reserves its right to the first option of buying urban and suburban land, expropriation of ejidal and communal lands to preserve, develop or regulate communities' growth and implement planning policies of public interest. This right is limited within a tract of 5 kilometers around metropolitan cities and along communication networks; a tract of land 3 kilometers around state capitals or intermediate sized cities and along communication networks; a tract of land 2 kilometers around small cities and 1 kilometer around rural communities. From the enaction on, all subdivisions above 10,000 square meters are prohibited. Subdivisions on tracts under 10,000 square meters would be allowed according to communities' needs and the lineaments of local planning policies. -53-

PAGE 62

Public revenues to pay for expropriated land will be raised through local taxes or sales of public bonds at 5, 10 or 20 years with an interest fixed by an economic study. Pub 1 i c bonds must be backed by the federal and state governments. 7.6 Conclusions Before the analytical description of the socio-economic and physical facts of the reality of the Mexican urban conditions, it can be concluded that the economic factor is the engine that moves the whole system. The economic policies that have shaped the origin and strengthening of the economic structure are being questioned. The -delay in the provision of basic elements, jobs, housing, public services and facilities evidence the contradiction in which capital-oriented economies work. If the Mexican government has failed to introduce equitable development policies, it is because it has tried to induce and control investment via alliances with the private sector. To this point agreement on investment policies have been set to capital investment on diverse activities to create expectations in local economies in the national territory. But capitals have other objectives and can easily be trans 1 ated to otherfunctj ons and accomp 1 ish the needs of the carriers. Governmental incapacity to fulfill the goals and objectives of national plans coupled with elusive investment agreements provoke periodical crisis in the national economy and preventing the accomplishment -54-

PAGE 63

of deve 1 opment goa 1 s. For such reason, the state has an alternative, the control of land, through which almost all development programs must go. Effective development policies as described in the National Plan for Urban Development can be carried out through strong land tenure control policies. State land market control would allow to it growth coordination capabilities in the implementation of the NPUD. The Urban Reform policy is the ideal instrument to fulfill the participation of the state in the land market and be able to guarantee land resources in the demands set for local, state or federal plans. The land policy must be focused to allow low-income people and salaried workers the access to land. Housing programs wil1 have priority to minimize this critical problem. Reducing its deficit and increasing people's expectations in ownership programs and support for self-construction efforts. Land market contra 1 means the regu 1 ati on of the only element in which the state can have direct contact. Land control means a direct implementation effort by the state in the strengthening, tion and support policies fixed in the National Plan for Urban Develop ment. This will induce a rapid urban and regional planned system and so minimize in the medium period the critical problems that affect the people. -55-

PAGE 64

CHAP TEF\ I II. 1 NACWNAL HEXIC0 EN C IFRrH: 1lJ80. DEL SECT0R PUBLICS Y PRIVAD0. P.27 3 . AND TIME MAGAZINE N0VEMBER S F 1982. EXTERNAL DEBT 0F THE THRIRD U0RLD. P.56. 2 NACI0NAL FINANCIERA. MEXIC0 EN CIFRAS: 1980. BALAHZA DE PAG0S DEL SECTOR EXTERN0. P.280. 3 UNIKEL, LUIS. EL DESARR0LL0 URBAN0 DE MEXIC0. H1ST9-RIC0S DE LA URBANIZACI0N. P .17. 4 UNIKEL, UIS. EL DESARR0LL0 URBAN0 DE MEXIC0. UFWANIZACHN EN EL SIGLS XX. P.27. AND DIRECCISN GENERAL DE ESTADISTICA, CENS0 GENERAL DE P0BLACI0H Y VIVIENDA 1960,1970,1980. 5 IBID. NUMER0 DE LSCALIDADES. P.J0-31. 6 IBID. NUHER0 DE LBCALIDADES. P.31. 7 IBID. DESARR0LL0 EWN'-HHC6 REGHNM Y URBtlNIZACWN. P.1?9. 8 I B I D • DES A R R 0 L L 0 E C 0 N 0 M I C 0 REG ISN A L Y Uti BMG Z A C 10 H • P . 8 / . 9 IBID. DESARF:OLL0 EC0N0MIC0 REGHNAL Y UR:BrWlZr;CHN. P . . 12. 1 0 NACiilNAL FINANCIERA. MEXIC6 EN CIFRr;S 1980. ESli{UCTURr; D E U PeBLACI0N ECilN0MICAMENTE ACTIVA P0R SECT0RES DE ACTIUIDAD. P.79. 11 UNif( EL, LUIS. EL DESARR0LL0 DE 11EXIC0. E:C0iMMIC0 REGI0NAL Y P.180. 12 IBID. DISTRIBUCiilN DEL INGRE S 0 Y URBANIZACISN. P.251 • . 13 IBID. FINANZAS f'UBLICAS Y URBANI D HHN. P.2?5 -2/9. 14 IBID. FINANZAS PUBLICAS Y URBriNIZACH?N. 15 0CH0A, CAMP0S. LA REF0RMA MUNICIPAL. E STRUCTURA DE L0S Y GASTilS DE LBS G0BIERN0S, FEDERAL, ESTATAL Y MUNICIPAL. P.4 24447.

PAGE 65

GRAPHIC NO. 1 MEXICO: STATE'S CLASIFICATION. GRAPHIC NO. 2 MEXICO: POPULATION GROWTH 1930-1980. GRAPHIC NO. 3 MEXICO: POPULATION GRAOWTH 1900-2000. GRAPHIC NO. 4 MEXICO AND OTHER COUNTRIES: URBAN STRUCTURE 1900-1970. GRAPHIC NO. 5 MEXICO: LOCALITIES WITH MORE THAN 15,000 INHABITANT S IN 1970. GRAPHIC NO. 6 MEXICO: MUNICIPALITIES OF MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS 1 970. GRAPHIC NO. 7 MEXICO: GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT 1950-1980 BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. GRAPHIC NO. 8 MEXICO: GROSS INVESTMENT,TOTAL INVESTMENT, IN CONSTRUC TION, AND IN HOUSING 1966-1980. GRAPHIC NO. 9 MEXICO: FANILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION 1950,1958,1963,19 6 9 . GRAPHIC N0.10 MEXICO: CITY'S SIZE AND OF GROWTH AND DETERIORATION GRAPHIC N0.11 GRAPHIC N0.12 GRAPHTr N0.13 GRAPHIC N0.14 GRAPHIC N0.15 GRAPHIC N0.16 GRAPHIC N0.17 GRAPHIC N0.18 GRAPHIC N0.19 GRAPHIC N0.20 GRAPHIC N0.21 GRAPHIC N0.22 GRAPHIC N0.23 GRAPHIC N0.24 MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: MEXICO: OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT. CITY ' S SIZE AND RATE OF GROWTH AND DETERIORAT IO N OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT, SEWER SERVICE. CITY'S SIZE AND RATE OF GROWTH AND DETERIO R ATION OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT, HOUSING FLOOR. CITY ' S SIZE AND AVAILABILITY OF T.V. IN HOUSIN G . SCATTERGRAM OF THE CORRELATION BETWEEN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT AND URBAN POPULATION AT THE STATE LEVEL IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN FISCAL REVENUES AND GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN 1960,1970 AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL HOUSING IN 1960,1970,AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL HOUSING GROWTH IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM OF THE CORRELATION BETWWEN CHANGES IN TOTAL HOUSING IN STATE AND HOUSING GROWTH I N DECADE 1960, 1970 AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL HOUSING AND TOTAL GROWTH IN HOUSING 1960, 1970 AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL POPULATION AND TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN 1960,1970,AND 1980. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL POP ULATION AND TOTAL HOUSING WITH NO POTABLE WATER. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN CHANGES IN TOTAL HOUSING AND TOTAL RENTED HOUS ING. S CATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL HOUSING CHANGE AND TOTAL HOUSING WITH NO POTABLE WATER. SCATTERGRAM BETWEEN TOTAL HOUSING CHANGE AND TOTAL HOUSING WITH NO SEWER SERVICE.

PAGE 66

APPENDIX B. TABLE NO. 1 TABLE NO. 0 L TABLE NO. TABLE NO. 4 TABLE NO. 5 TABLE NO. 6 TABLE NO. 7 TABE NO. 0 u TABLE NO. 9 TABLE N0.10 TABLE N0.11 TABLE N0.12 TABLE N0.13 TABLE N0.14 rABLE N0.15 MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES AT THE MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES AT THE MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES AT THE MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES CHANGES LEVEL 1960. MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES CHANGES LEVEL 1970. MEXICO: SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIALES CHANGES LEVEL 1980. VARIABLES MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. VARIABLES CORRELATION COEFICIENT MATRIX IN 1960,. 1970 AND 1980. VARIABLES INVERSE CORRELATION MATRIX AT IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. VARIABLES MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. VARIABLES CORRELATION COEFICIENT MATRIX IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. STATE LEVEL 1960. STATE LEVEL 1970. STATE LEVEL 1980. AT THE STATE AT THE STATE AT STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL HTE STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL AT THE STATE LEVEL VARIABLES INVERSE CORRELATION MATRIX AT THE STATE LEVEL IN 1960, 1970 AND 1980. MEXICO: HOUSING DEFICIT 1970. MEXICO: HOUSING DEFICIT IN URBAN AND RURAL AREAS. MEXICO: HOUSING,PROYECTION OF BEHAVOIR 1976-1990.

PAGE 67

GF\'AF' H J C. NC • 1 ; o 1 AGUASCAL I ENTES 102 BA.JA CAL I FCtRN I A N. 03 BA.JA CAL I FCtRN I A S. 4 CAMF'ECHE 5 C :OAHUILA 6 1 C:OLIMA l7 CHIAPA:;:; 81 CHIHUAHUA 9 DURANGO 10.FEDERAL DISTRIC T I 11' GUANA.JUATO 121 t 3 UERRERO 1 ::;:/ HI 14 ,JAL I ='-U 15 MEXICO I 16. M I C HOACAN 17 MORELOS 18 NAYARIT 191 NUEVCt LEON 20 OAXACA 21 PUEBLA 122 ':1 -= OUINTANA ROO 24 :3AN LUI:; Pcno:; I 125 :3INALOA 26' SONCtR?' 271 TABA:3CO 28 TAMAULlF'AS 29 TL .. AXCALA 301 VEF;:ACRUZ I 311 YUCATAN 32 ZACATEC A:3

PAGE 68

CiRAPHlC N0.7 ----!'300 MEXICQ:GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT 1950-1980.
PAGE 69

ME X I CO: GHU:::>:::; 1 NVt:.:::i I l"lt:.l'll I • IIJ I HL .L 1'4 v t:.::" nt:.l't • ... '" ._ .• _., , . _. ",.._ •• _. • ... _,., ... , -" HOUSING, 1966-1982. BILLION OF PESOS TOTAL INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN HOUSING PUBL c : 1966-70 I 1971-75 1 1976-80 1 1981-82

PAGE 70

C iRAPH l c : NCJ. 9 MEXICO: FAMILY INCOME DISTRIBUTION IN 1950,1958,1963,AND 1969. 'II. ,... 100 to • •••••••••••• 1150 .,.--1111 10 -----1111 --lltt UJ L: 70 = 1:.:1 z -10 IJ.. 0 UJ so :=
PAGE 71

MEXICO: CITIES OVER INHABITANTS ACCORDING TO ANNUAL RATE OF DEMOGRAHIC GROWTH AND HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN 1970. 60 l%. l 50-40-30 + C(l wl ........ "0 I ..... . c: .. -t!l '' 000 (%) 9 1 4 GROWTH INHABITANTS. INHABITANTS. I.IRCE: HERRERA, LIGTA. l'ASA DE CREClMlENTO Y DETERlURO DEL MFDIO IJRBANO EN MEXICO. REVISTA DEMOGRAFlA Y ECUNOMIA,

PAGE 72

CiF 1000 (%) . 1-1-Ct :I: 1-,_. 3 10 ( "') z 060 ,_. u : e , 50 J: 40 0 . . . • • . • . •• 50 • + + + + + + + + + + THOUSAND OF INHABITANTS 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 <4,0 CITY SIZE

PAGE 73

,. GRAPHIC: N0.14 o . 01" '....-: I I ... oo oa.oo 11.00 1 rtU ITATeG I I_TT-...., I I I I CDGIM) CMDI ... I I I' ____ IACNIUI : I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , ............................................................................................. --.............................. ---------................................................................... , I I I I I I I I ... 00 • I I I I I I I I I I 10.00 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 .00 • I I I I I I I I I I I ......... • • • • • • • • • ........ • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .... •• • • .... • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••• • • • • • • • • • • • • •I 1 I I I 1 1 .00 I I I I I I I I I I 1 .00 • I I I I I I I I I I • . 00 I I I I •• I I :S•R • I I II 1 I a •au 1 t ........... ....................... ... -............................................. -........ -..... ---.. ................... ----.................................... .. -..... -..... . o 4 .00__t_.oo_ t a .oo __.1_1 !00 eo.oo u .oo 11.!.00 n .oo •.oo 4a.oo M .OO !v "t.a ITAT70 • L : RATTIMMff tiP ,_,.., GMI... : I _ I I I ta .oo • 1 ' I I I I I I I I n .oo • 1 I I I I I ........... .. "' ... • ..... "' .................... "' ... • .......................... • ...................................................................... • ....... • .............. •"' ......... "' • ............................ "' .... •I I I I I I I I I U ,OO • I I I I I I I I I I 10.00 • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .............................................. •••••-•••••• ............................................................... •••• • ................................................................ , I I 11.00 • • e .oo 4 ,00 • . . .. I I I 1 ... 0 ••I I ... oo ... 00 28.00 .... -......... -..................................................... -.. --.. .. -.. -.................. .. -................................. --.. -.--......... -... . 4i :-T':Tao 1 .00 1 1 .00 1 1 ,00 10.00_ 2 .. . 00 U .OO U.OO • . OO_ 40•00 I• I ' I ' I ' IDGWff) ...,, .. ( ACMIIUI . I I I I I I I I I I I I I , ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... , I I I I I I I I Z ... OO • I I I I I I I I I I zo.oo I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 .00 I I I I I I I I , ........................................................................... ........................................................ .. I I I I .. ............................................................. , lo 1 1 .00 • I e .oo • . oo I I I I I I a ' I I • , .••.. i:l ••• ... .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . ................. ...... . . ..... . .. .......... ..... .. .. ... .. .. .......... ...... .. . .... .... ........................... ..... -........................................................... . .. . 00 1 .00 1 1 .00 11,00 10.00 14.00 11.00 M .OO 40.00 ao.aa ... oo ... oo H .OO ... oo 10.00 1 1 .00 1 1 .00 o .oo • . oo M ,OO :11 .00 11.00 ... oo 10.00 1 1 .00 1 1 .00 o .oo • • 00 :18.00 oa.oo ZI.OO 1 ... 00 10.00 11.00 1 1 .00 e .oo • . 00

PAGE 74

411.00 40.00 311.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5 .00 0 ; I'll.!! STATIIO :sCATTEIIO'"" 01' I (oai/Nl f"ISIII!:VE ( ACIIOSS l OliO 1..., GRAF 'HIC NO. 15 I I I I I I I I I I I + I I I I I I I I J-----------------------------,-------------------------------,------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t 3 /3•• I I 1 I I •• l I + . •------------------------l----------------------------------------------------• . 0 4 .00 8 ,00 12.00 18.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 38.00 40.00 50.00 I I I FILE 5TAT70 1 1 I I I 1 SCA TTI!:RG'"" 01' ( DOWN l f' l SIII!:VI!: 1 1 1 tACIIOSSl 01101 NP0 1 1 411.00 I I I I I I I I I I 40.00 I I I I I I I I I I 311.00 I I I I I I J----c---cI I I I I I I I 20.00 I I 15.00 1 0 .00 s.oo 30.00 27.00 24.00 21 .00 1 2 .00 9 .00 6 .00 3.00 0 I I I I I I 1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I 284 0 4 .00 8 .00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 38.00 40.00 ; FILE STAT80 : SCA TTEIIORAI1 OF I I I t llO\INl FISIII!:VE I ( ACIIOSS l ORe I NI'O : I I I I I I I I I I I I r ----------------------------------r-----------------------------r----------------------------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . -... -------.... --.-----------------------------------.. -------------------------. 0 4 .00 8 .00 12.00 1 6 . 0 0 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 38.00 40.00 411.00 40.00 311,00 20.00 111.00 10.00 5.00 0 50.00 48.00 40.00 35.00 20.00 15.00 1 0 .00 5 .00 0 30.00 27.00 24.00 21 .00 12.00 9 .00 8 .00 3 .00 0

PAGE 75

-------------------------------r 8 • ' .. : : i : : , 8: i : . ! .. : : :8 I I + , T : : e g : : : ti1 : 1 ! : i T : l,. 8: : • ,.,: ! ---..---------------: --------------------------------I : i : l g . t : . I • 8 : : : . : : t D I I . I • • • . ' : : :8 t i : ' • . ii ' , . ' 8 : : . .... l I i .;1 : : i i • A 18' I ii T ! = :• i_ 8! 8: : : u ..:! : • r .. i ti ---: L:----i I I :8 t t. I • I I I -l--------------:.--: :..":"" __ ., __________ ! ----------------1 ftl I I I -: : : ! 8 + I I + • : : : : 8 : : : : • + I I + -1 I f I I I I : : : :8 + I I + • : : : :!! 8 : : : : • + I I + . : : : : : : : :8 + I I + • : : : : . 8: : : : • + I I + : : 8 + I + • : , : : • 8 : : : • + I + C.) . : : : : : : 8 • I + • . : : :"' .. i ; l Q ft : : • : r l i • l -: " : .. s 8 ' I • I • I .;f : == t I I I fit I 0 I f I • I o ! :! ! ! ! • • "' ... :.: !:,-l : l : 8 •, ' . . ! + i : : : g + I + • I ! : ! : .. ::, ' ' I :• l ------------------------------i .::,. " : l i I : . l ft.. : " : : • = i r':: " •. ;: : '=!0 -------------------------------------8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 ..:

PAGE 76

18.00 14 .00 I"IL!: CHANG80 SCA TTERIJRA/1 Cll" CiFi:AF'H I C NO. 1 7 I I ( OCI\IN) I IACftCSSJ TCIHCIQR I I I I I I I I 1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I 12.00 I I I I I I I I I I 10.00 I I I I I I I I I I 8.00 I • I I I I I • I 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 .00 4 .00 2 2 .00 2• 0 . •-------------------------------------------------------------------------------o 2 .oo 4 .oo 8 .oo a.oo 1o.oo 12.00 14.oo 18.oo 18.00 20 16.00 14.00 FILE CHANG70 SCA TttRGRA/1 Cll" ( OCIWN J IACftCSSJ TCIHCIQIII I I I I I I I I I 1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I 12.00 I I I I I I I I I I 1 0 .00 I I I I I I I I I I 8 .00 I I I I I I 1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I 6 .00 I I I I I 4 .00 I I I I I 2 .00 I I I I 3• I 0 I 0 2 .00 4 .00 6,00 8 .00 1 0 .00 12.00 l 6 .00 FILE CHANGSO I I SCA TT!:RGRA/1 Cll" ( OCIWN J I ( ACRCIS8 l TCIHCIQIII I I 14 .00 I I I I 14.00 18.00 1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I 12.00 I I I I I 10.00 I I I I I 8.00 I I I I I I------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. I I I 6.00 I I I I I I 4.00 I I 2.00 0 . ---.... --------...... ----.. ------...... -... --..... -........ -.. ----................. ------------0 2.00 4 .00 6 .00 8 .00 10.00 12.00 14.00 18.00 18.

PAGE 77

1 8 .00 12.00 1 0.00 8 .00 8 .00 2 .00 0 I"ILE 01" C CRATI OM DATE • C OCIWN l TOHOUS CACROSSl DEHOCH ORAF'H I C NO. 1 ::;: 83/CW/27. l 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 :----------------------------------i----------------------------;-----------------------------: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------l I I I I I I ' I I . . I • I. 13.00. 2 211.00 37.00 411.00 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •I I I I I I I I I I I I• I I 81 .00 73.00 815.00 i7.00 1011.00 121.00 . • I I I I 133.00 1 8 .00 I F'ILE CHANQ70 C CREATION DATE • 83/CW/28. l I I SCA 01" C OCIWN l TOHOUS I C ACROSS J DEHOCH I I I I I I I 1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I I I 12.00 I ( I I I 1 0 .00 I I ( I I 8 .00 I I • I I C I 1-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------l I I I I 8 .00 I I I I I I I I I I 4 .00 I I I I I I I I I I • 2 .00 I I I I I I I I I I 0 I •I 3 .00 11.00 19.00 27.00 311.00 43.00 111.00 67.00 711.00 83.00 16.00 I FILE CHAN080 I I I SCA TTERIMN1 01" C OCIWN l T OHOUSI I C ACROSS l DEHOCit • I 14 .00 I I I I I I 1-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I I I 12 .00 I I I • 1 I 1 0 .00 I I I I I 8 .00 I I I 1 I I 1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------l I I 1 6 .00 1 4 .00 2 .00 a 1 . I I I I I 1 I I • • •I 1 I 2 ------------------------+------------------------------------. 1 S .O O 28.00 38.00 48.00 S8.00 68.00 78.00 8 8 .00 98.00 108.00 118.00 1 8 .00 1•.o o 12.00 10.00 8.00 8.00 ... 00 2.00 0 18.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 8.00 4 .00 2 .00 0 18.00 12.00 10.00 8 .00 6.00 4 .00 2 .00 0

PAGE 78

14.00 . 1 2 .00 10.00 8 .00 8.00 4 .00 2.00 0 18.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 4.00 2.00 0 18.00 1 4 .00 12.00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0 FILE CHANGIIO CiRAPHIC N0.19 : I SCATTE-.vl Ofl' IDeWNI TOHCUS 1 IACftOSSI TOHOGft 1 I I I I I I l-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I l----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I 2 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---------------------------• : 0 2.00 4 .00 8 .00 8.00 10.00 1 2 .00 14.00 18.00 1 8 .00 20.00 I I' I LE CHAIG70 I I 01' IDeWNI TOHCU4 I I ACRaSS I TOHOII,_ I I I 1 I I I 1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I l -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2• I I 0 2 .00 FILE CHAIG80 SCA TTEROIIA11 01' 4 .00 s .oo I I 8 .00 10.00 12.00 I 1 I I OCIWN I T OHCU4 I C A CReSS I TOHOII,_ I I I 14.00 18.00 11.00 20.00 I I I I 1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- • •• • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • -I I I I I I 2 • 0 2 .00 ;.:. 4 .00 6.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a .oo 10.00 1 2 .00 14.00 16.00 1 8 .00 20.00 18.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 11.00 4 .00 2 .00 0 111.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 11.00 11.00 4.00 2 .00 0 111.00 14.00 1 2 .00 1 0 .00 8 .00 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0

PAGE 79

14.00 12.00 10.00 1.00 8,00 4 .00 2.00 0 18.00 14,00 12.00 1 0 .00 8.00 s .oo 4 .00 2.00 0 1 8 .00 14.00 1 2 .00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 4.00 2 .00 0 : SCA TTI!:IIGRAII 01" I NU. :20 I I I I I I 1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .. I I . 0 4 .00 8 .00 12.00 18.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 38.00 ; I" I Ll!: CHANC1170 :aCATTI!:IIGRNI 01" I I I I . ( llCIWN l TOI'CII"'J 1 TOURPO 1 I I I I 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1----------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I • 2 2 2• 0 4 .00 F I LE CHANG80 SCA TTI!:JIIGMI'O 01" 8.00 12.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 18.00 20.00 24.00 I I I I I I I I I ( OCIWN l TOI'CII'U I ACRCSS l TOURI'CI I 21.00 I I 1-------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • ------------•• --.••• -------.-----•••• -••••• ---•• -.----.--••••• . I I • I I I • I 2• 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . -----------.... ----------... --------------------....... ------0 4 .00 8.00 1 2 .00 1 6 .00 2 0 .00 2 4 .00 21 32

PAGE 80

.. l I C NO. 1 83/04/27. 10.53 CHANG60 (CREATION DATE • 8 3 /04/27. I FILE CHAN07 0 tCREATION D ATE • 8 3 /04/27. ) CHANG80 ICRE A T ION DAT E • 83/04/27. 1 :tGR A M O f (DOWN) T O P O P U I ACROSS l TONOWA SCATTER GRAH O F tOOWN) T O P O P U I ACROSS l TONOWA rERORAH OF IDOWNl TOPOPU lACROSS ) TONOWA ) .00 8 . 0 0 6 .00 4 . 0 0 2 .00 0 .00 8 .00 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0 1 ,00 3 . 0 0 7 .00 Q , +---... ---... ----.. ---.. ----.. ----.----+-------i . I W .OO I 1 -----------------------------1 I I I I I I I l--------------------------------------1 I I I I . I I I I I . 2 I I I • 3 I I I I 18.00 1 6 .00 1 4 .00 1 2 .00 10.00 8 .oo 6 . 0 0 4 . 0 0 2 .00 0 +-----+ -----.. -----------.. ---. 0 2 . 0 0 4 . 0 0 6 . 0 0 8 .00 1 .00 3 . 0 0 !1.00 7 .00 Q .OO 11.00 . •----------+----+---------------------------I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1-------------------------------------------------------I I I• I I . . 1---------------------------• ------------• ---------r I I . . . . •2• 2 I I I• I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 0 .00 18.00 18.00 14.00 )2.00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0 . +------------------------------+ --J 0 2 .00 4 .00 6 . 0 0 8 .00 1 0 .00 12. 1 .00 3 .00 G .OO 7 .00 8 .00 11.00 13.00 IG .OO . •-------------------------------------------+-------+ + I I---------------------------------------------------------------.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I I I •I I I I I I •I I I• I • •• I I • I I I I • 2 I I 2 I I 3 I 1 I I I I . ----+ ---t----+ ----+----+ -----------+ ----+ -------+ -----0 2 .00 4 .00 6 .00 8 .00 10.00 1 2 .00 14.00 18.

PAGE 81

( J f:.:APH I c:: NO. FILE CHANG60 ICREATION DATE • 83/04/27.1 FILE CHAN070 (CREATION OAT • 83/04/27. ) FILE CHANG80 I CREATION DATE • 83/04/27. I SCA TTERGRAM OF IDOIIN I TOHOUS IACROSSI TORENO SCATTERGRAM OF I DOliN I TOHOUS lACROSS) TORENO SCATTERORAM OF I DOliN I TOHOUS 2 .00 6 .00 10.00 14.00 18.00 22.00 26 .. -------.----.---+------+----+ ----+----+----+----+----+--20.00 I 20.00 I I I I 18.00 I 18.00 I I I I 16.00 I 16.00 I I I I 14.00 I 14.00 I I 1 --------------------------------------------------------------I I I I 12.00 I 12.00 I I I I 10.00 I 10.00 I I I I 8 .00 I 8 .00 I I I I 1 ----------------------------------------------------I I 6 .00 I 6 .00 I I I I 4 .00 I 4 .00 I • I I I I I I I 2 .00 3 I 2 .00 I 2 • • I 2 I 1 I 0 + 1 0 -----------------------------------------------i . 0 4 .00 8 .00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 2 .00 6 .00 10.00 14.00 18.00 22.00 26.00 . +----.-------.---+--------------------------+--------• 20.00 I I I I I• I 18.00 16.00 I 14.00 : ---------------------------------------------------------I I I I I I 12.00 I 10.00 I I 8 .00 : : I I-------------------------------------------------------------------I I .. .. . . ----------------------0 4 .00 8 .00 12.00 1 & . oo I 1 4 .00 2 .00 0 ------------------------i 18.00 20.00 24.00 28 lACROSS) TORENO 1.00 3 .00 11.00 7 .00 .+--------------------------------• I 1 -------------------------------• I I 1-------------------------------I II 2 2• 3 . . . 22 .+------------------------+----+-o 2 . oo 4 . oo e . oo a . oo

PAGE 82

CJF(!'d. 'l IIC NO. -:.r::r . .. F ILE CHANG60 (CREATION DATE s 83/04/27 . J FILE CHANG70 I CREATION DATE • 83/04127. l FILE CHANG80 !CREATION DATE • 83/04/27. 1 SCA TTERGRAH OF (DOWN l TOHOUS I ACROSS l TONOWA SCA TTERGRAH OF IDOWNI TOHOUS lACROSS) TONOWA SCA TTERGRAH OF I DOWN l TOHOUS IACROSSI TONOWA 20.00 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0 l. 00 3 .00 5 .00 7 .00 II. . +------------------------------------1 I 1 -----------------------------------------1 I 20 00 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8 .00 1-------------------------------------------I I I I • I I I I I I I • 2 I I I • I I • • I ' I I 22 I :. . ---; +--1 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0 1 .00 3 .oo 5 .oo 1 .oo Sl.qo 11. . -----------+----+------------------------. • 18.00 16.00 14.00 I 1----------------------------------------------------. I I I I I 12.00 I I I I I 10.00 I I I I I 8.00 I• I I 1-----------------------------------------------------I I I 6.00 .. . . 2 I I• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . ... ---------------------------------------4 0 2 .00 4 .00 6 .00 8 .00 10.00 4.00 2 .00 0 1 .00 3 .00 5 .00 7.00 8 .00 11.00 13.00 15.00 .•---------------------------------------------------------+ • I 1-------------------------------------------------------------------------1 I I I 1---------------------------------------------------------------I I 2 3 • 2 I I I •I I •I I I• I I I I I I I I . ---+------+------+-----------------+----.-----+---------. 0 2 .00 4 .00 8.00 8 .00 10.00 12.00 14.00 1,.

PAGE 83

l C NO. 2 4 F ILE CHAN060 lCREATION OATE • 83/04/27. ) FILE CHANG70 !CREATION DATE • 83/04/27. 1 FILE CHANG80 I CREATION DATE • 83/0./27. l SCATTERGRAM OF IDOWNl TOHOUS I ACROSSl TONOSE SCATTERGRAM OF I DOWN l TOHOUS lACROSS> TONOSE SCA TTERGRAI'I OF I DOWN l TOHOUS IACROSSl TONOSE 1 .00 3 .00 !1.00 7 .00 8 .00 I. 00 3 .00 7 .00 8 .00 1 .00 3 .00 11.00 7 .00 8 .00 . + ----+ ---+---+ ---+--+ ---+ ----+--------+--. +----+ ----+----+------+----------------. --+-----------------------+ -2 0 .00 20.00 20.00 18.00 16.00 14 .00 1 2 .00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 4 .00 2 .00 0 I 1-------------------------------1 I 1 -------------------------------------------I I I 2 2 22 . + ---------+------+----+--+----+ -------0 2 .00 4.00 6 .00 8 .00 10. 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8 .00 6 .00 • . oo 2 .00 0 I I I I I---------------------------------1 I I I I I I I--------------------------------------------------I 2 • 2 2• 2 2 2 . +---+ ----+------+---------0 2 .00 •. oo 6 .00 +----+----+---.. 8 .00 10. 18.00 16.00 1•.oo 12.00 . I 1 -------------------------------------------------1 I 10.00 + I I I I a .oo . . + • . I I l ------------------------------------------------1 I & .00 I I I I I • . 00 I I I I 2 2 I I I I 3 I 2 .00 I 2 I o • I ••• I I 0 I p 2 .00 • . 00 & .00 8 .00 10.

PAGE 84

HOUWSEW,MEINPO,DENPOPU,HOUOWNE,FEDINVE,PERCARE,NULOCAL INPUT MEDIUM CARD N OF CASES 32 INPUT FORMAT FIXEDCF2. 0, 13X , F3. 1, 1X, F3. 1 , 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F3. 1, 1 X, F4. 2, 1 X, F4. 2, 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F5. 1, 1 X, F3. 1, 1 X, F3. 1, 1 X, F3. 1, 1 X, F4. 0) READ INPUT DATA 01 AGUASCAL. 003 007 010 520 030 007 4721 5540 032 00444 504 003 003 0755 02 B . CAL. N. 027 015 029 679 342 015 4971 6790 088 00074 770 027 035 0437 03 B .CAL. S . 002 002 002 148 005 002 6979 7933 060 00011 563 004 037 1202 04 CAMPECHE 003 005 005 193 002 005 7646 8022 041 00033 568 006 026 0486 05 CHIAPAS 032 026 038 386 019 026 5836 7000 036 00060 462 025 077 2229 06 CHIHUAHUA 003 005 006 200 005 005 5853 6776 046 00316 506 016 003 0456 07 COAHUILA 013 035 009 047 016 035 8500 8615 032 00163 682 011 034 6717 08 COLIMA 043 035 042 383 104 035 5824 6595 060 00050 053 126 4264 09 DURANGO 013 022 014 176 010 021 8150 8238 038 00061 610 013 061 2468 10 DIST.FED. 373 139 369 993 407 141 2452 2655 046 32933 208 201 001 0105 1 1 GUANAJUATO 025 049 043 236 015 049 7559 7917 043 00569 569 027 016 4792 12 GUERRERO 014 034 007 036 016 035 9046 8906 043 00184 733 021 032 3239 13 HIDALGO 011 028 007 064 009 028 8348 8549 017 00477 689 009 011 2613 14 JALISCO 045 070 076 358 028 067 6215 6686 059 00302 495 034 041 8636 15 E. MEXICO 038 054 025 158 035 054 8330 8717 096 00888 630 027 011 2402 16 MICHOACAN 017 053 025 109 025 053 7834 8135 044 00309 668 027 030 5543 17 MORE LOS 007 011 009 195 008 011 6027 7014 036 00780 489 006 003 0279 18 NAYARIT 006 011 004 104 002 010 7834 8323 075 00144 673 054 014 1399 19 NUEVO LEON 063 031 055 648 027 030 4658 5471 063 00166 421 069 033 3052 20 OAXACA 012 049 007 035 010 053 9261 9235 00183 705 019 048 3256 21 PUEBLA 023 056 032 175 024 057 8041 8081 019 00583 612 037 017 2701 22 QUERETARO 004 010 006 146 003 010 8265 8339 027 00318 599 006 006 1062 23 QUINTANA R 001 001 005 002 9555 9420 00009 657 004 025 0462 24 S.L. POTOSI 013 030 017 180 015 029 8298 8330 032 00166 631 010 032 3400 25 SINALOA 025 024 017 172 015 020 7794 8037 034 00143 580 046 029 2897 26 SONORA 031 022 027 258 043 023 6247 7011 039 00043 516 025 094 4324 27 TABASCO 010 014 004 084 012 013 8514 8190 028 00196 604 055 013 1867 28 TAMAULI PAS 027 029 042 418 022 031 5575 6576 033 00129 509 088 040 4482 29 TLAXCALA 003 010 001 011 004 009 8646 8784 029 00863 696 003 002 0574 30 VERACRUZ 085 078 053 152 041 079 7381 7698 023 00380 628 104 037 7639 31 YUCATAN 014 017 015 287 031 018 8356 8235 025 00159 589 006 020 2282 32 ZACATECAS 009 023 006 046 007 023 8945 9102 037 00111 647 005 038 2982 GROINPO=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT. TOTAPOL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN TOTAL POPULATION. OF STATE CLASSIFIED AS URBAN POPULATION. URBRA E=RATE OF URBAN POPULATION GROWTH IN STATE. FISREVE=PERCENTAGE OF FISCAL REVENUES OF THE STATE'S TOTAL. HOUTOTA=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S HOUSING STOCK. HOUWWAT=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN STATE. HOUWSEW=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN STATE. MEINPO =MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN STATE. DENPOPU=POPULATION DENSITY IN THE STATE . HOUOWNE=PERCENTAGE OF OWNED HOUSING IN STATE. FEOINVE=PERCENTAGE OF FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE. PERCARE=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S AREA IN STATE. NULOCAL=NUMBER OF LOCALITIES/COMMUNITIES IN STATE. FINISH

PAGE 85

II'II"'"U I rUI"I'II"\1 r 1 1\I:.U \ r t::.. U J I J r .,), I J I/\ J r ..J , I J I 1\ J r ..:1, I J I 1\ J r 4f , C:. J I 1\ • r .:I. I J 1/\ J r..,. I J 1X, F4. 2 , 1X, F4. 2 , 1X, F3. 1 , 1X, F5. 1 , 1X, F3. 1 , 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F3. 1 , 1X, F4.0) READ INPUT DATA 01 AGUASCAL 004 007 008 5361 003 006 2444 4893 037 00605 587 003 003 0889 02 B.CAL' . N . 032 018 031 7563 027 019 3327 5661 060 00124 583 029 037 0676 03 B .CAL . S . 002 003 002 1797 005 002 3595 7299 064 00017 714 008 036 1536 04 CAMPECHE 005 005 005 2 7 61 005 005 5223 7446 048 00048 745 005 026 0643 05 CHIAPAS 032 023 032 4936 013 022 2649 5638 030 00074 590 047 077 2005 06 CHI HUAHU1 004 005 006 3219 004 005 2190 5814 038 00442 599 004 003 0588 07 COAHUILA 011 033 011 0884 011 033 6213 7717 042 00212 775 011 034 7740 08 COLIMA 033 033 041 4906 028 035 3415 5340 045 00065 591 028 126 5403 09 DURANGO 011 019 012 2703 008 018 4701 6956 035 00079 721 015 061 3097 10 DIST.FED. 359 142 309 9712 460 147 0435 2146 035 45858 375 290 001 0084 11 GUANAJUAl 023 047 042 3154 020 043 4378 6414 043 00742 701 026 016 4820 12 GUERRERO 008 025 006 0688 005 025 5197 7431 027 00569 812 021 011 2408 13 HIDALGO i 049 068 076 4471 036 065 3402 4756 049 00411 582 026 041 9710 14 JALISCO 071 079 078 4285 053 075 3711 6016 126 01786 725 041 011 2773 15 E . M EXICO I 016 048 027 1702 019 047 4754 6807 049 00388 763 028 030 6097 16 MICHOACAN 008 013 011 3324 010 013 3029 6330 064 01247 614 009 003 0330 17 MORE LOS 006 011 006 1473 007 012 5329 7789 053 00197 749 004 014 1442 18 NAYARIT 068 035 052 6447 037 035 1874 4317 045 00263 554 003 033 4527 19 NUEVO LEO 009 042 010 0735 009 045 6529 8349 020 00211 849 019 048 2967 20 OAXACA I 021 052 032 2341 020 054 5176 6818 048 00739 725 016 017 2981 21 PUEBLA 005 010 006 2412 001 010 4842 7584 051 00412 761 007 006 1121 22 QUERETARO 001 002 001 1343 004 002 5834 8423 010 00018 762 008 025 0547 23 QUINTANA I 012 026 016 2305 011 026 6218 7136 040 00204 753 010 032 3637 24 S . L . POTOS 027 026 019 2878 029 025 4862 7383 060 00218 753 024 029 3753 25 SINALOA 039 023 028 4209 032 022 3165 5709 051 00059 669 026 094 4926 26 SONORA 011 016 005 1359 009 015 6578 7438 068 00312 757 055 013 1140 27 TABASCO 039 030 041 5629 024 032 3321 5295 047 00183 624 082 040 5253 28 TAMAULI 002 009 003 0453 003 009 5074 7913 054 01075 820 002 002 0612 29 TLAXCALA 062 079 051 2342 044 083 4902 6456 045 00524 736 105 037 5759 30 VERACRUZ 009 016 012 2495 010 015 5829 7034 024 00,193 784 010 020 2708 31 YUC A TAN 006 020 005 0737 008 018 5694 7944 035 00127 765 006 038 32 ZACATECAS 012 033 013 1432 017 033 6173 7817 094 00250 821 016 032 3434 GROINPO = PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT. TOTAPOL=PERCENJAGE OF STATE IN TOTAL POPULATION. URPOPUL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE CLASSIFIED AS URBAN POPULATION. URBRATE=RATE OF URBAN POPULATION GROWTH IN STATE . FISREVE= PERC ENTAGE OF FISCAL REVENUES OF THE STATE'S TOTAL. HOUTOTA= PERCENTAGE OF .THE NATION ' S HOUSING STOCK . HOUWWAT=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN STATE . HOUWSEW= PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN STATE . MEINPO =MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN STATE . DENPOPU=POPULATION DENSITY IN THE STATE . HOUOWNE=PERCENTAGE OF OWNED HOUSING IN STATE. FEDINVE = PERCENTAGE OF FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE. PERCARE=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S AREA IN STATE. NULOCAL=NUMBER OF LOCALITIES/COMMUNITIES IN STATE . FINISH

PAGE 86

HOUWSEW,MEINPO,DENPOPU,HOUWNE,FEDINVE,PERCARE INPUT MEDIUM CARD N OF CASES 32 INPUT FORMAT FIXEDCF2 . 0, 13X , F3. 1 , 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F3. 1 , 1X, F3.1, 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F3.1, 1 X, F 4 . 2, 1 X, F 4 . 2, 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F5. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1 ) READ INPUT DATA 01 AGUASCAL. 006 008 007 611 004 007 0920 4120 039 00920 523 004 003 02 B .CAL. N . 034 018 003 850 033 019 1950 2170 034 00175 643 027 035 03 B .CAL. S . 032 003 002 317 003 003 1660 4190 054 00030 677 012 037 04 CAMPECHE 056 006 005 454 003 005 3280 6050 039 00073 770 030 026 05 CHIAPAS 029 023 026 760 026 023 1450 7360 033 00104 567 046 077 06 CHIHUAHUA 056 005 005 603 003 052 1320 3580 034 00653 543 012 003 07 COAHUILA 014 031 010 160 024 033 5530 3640 028 00283 760 046 037 08 COLIMA 019 029 038 732 026 031 2250 7760 018 00079 653 019 125 09 DURANGO 009 017 010 369 012 015 2460 1160 021 00094 727 012 061 10 DIST. FED. 354 140 265 980 291 152 0570 7260 030 63376 462 214 001 11 GUANAJUATO 019 045 038 477 022 039 910 5130 029 00996 663 020 015 12 GUERRERO 096 032 019 173 014 032 5630 7430 030 00338 747 019 032 13 HIDALGO 092 022 004 141 007 021 3070 7790 023 00729 606 016 011 14 JALISCO 046 064 074 610 057 061 1640 2950 026 00531 557 024 041 15 E.MEXICO 086 112 156 266 125 106 1660 3470 066 03533 703 034 011 16 MICHOACAN 022 045 026 295 015 043 4270 6870 027 00509 777 027 030 17 MORELOS 006 014 012 367 006 014 2140 5630 041 01682 605 006 003 18 NAYARIT 007 011 005 245 007 012 2960 5490 029 00271 760 009 014 19 NUEVO LEON 070 036 049 743 067 036 1120 3820 037 00379 p46 026 033 20 OAXACA 009 037 121 011 039 5360 8480 022 00266 798 023 048 21 PUEBLA 023 049 030 332 013 047 3750 7060 026 00967 759 016 017 22 QUERETARO 006 011 006 272 013 010 3240 6510 040 00634 774 006 006 23 QUINTANA R 001 003 007 003 4640 6780 087 00042 652 007 025 24 S . L . POTOSI 010 025 015 344 010 023 4890 7050 026 00265 786 013 032 25 SINALOA 029 028 013 338 025 025 4270 6780 039 00325 798 029 029 26 SONORA 035 022 027 631 026 023 2060 6350 030 00062 765 019 094 27 TABASCO 009 017 006 149 035 015 6490 6980 040 00455 752 074 012 26 TAMAULI PAS 034 029 039 722 031 031 2650 4950 027 00242 629 053 040 29 TLAXCALA 003 008 003 129 005 007 2110 7170 026 01363 623 004 002 30 VERACRUZ 065 078 048 321 058 081 4900 6600 032 00734 696 127 037 31 YUCATAN 009 015 006 423 013 016 4500 6930 030 00269 776 010 020 32 ZACATECAS 007 017 005 172 008 015 4660 6930 016 00156 769 010 036 GROINPO=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT. TOTAPOL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE IN TOTAL POPULATION. URPOPUL=PERCENTAGE OF STATE CLASSIFIED AS URBAN POPULATION. URBRATE=RATE OF URBAN POPULATION GROWTH IN STATE . FISREVE=PERCENTAGE OF FISCAL REVENUES OF THE STATE'S TOTAL. HOUTOTA=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S HOUSING STOCK. HOUWWAT=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT POTABLE WATER IN STATE. HOUWSEW=PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE IN STATE . MEINPO =MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN STATE. DENPOPU=POPULATION DENSITY IN THE STATE. HOUOWNE=PERCENTAGE OF OWNED HOUSING IN STATE . FEDINVE=PERCENTAGE OF FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN STATE. PERCARE=PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S AREA IN STATE. NULOCAL=NUMBER OF LOCALITIES/COMMUNITIES IN STATE . FINISH

PAGE 87

y . . ..... ---_,-. ---• •-.J • - • - • .. •-••--- • - • • . .. .. •-•---.) •--• • • .. •••• PCGRIP,DEHOCH , TOLAFO,TPORGR,PECSTR,PECFEI,TOHOGR,MEIUPO INPUT MEDIUM CARDS N OF CASES 32 INPUT FORMAT FIXEDCF2 . 0, 12X, F3. 1, 1X, F3.1, 1X, F2. 1 , 1X, F3. 1, 1X, F2. 1, 1X, F3. 1 , 1X, F2. 1, F5. 0, 1X, F2. 0, 1X, F3.1, 1X, F2.1, 1X, F4. 0, lX, F3. 1, 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F2. 1 ) NO. STATE TP TH HR HW HS TU PH PCIP HC TLF PG PSTR PFI HG IU 01 AGUASCAL. 07 07 07 05 05 09 58 1033 13 06 25 45 14 03 30 02 B . CAL.N . 15 15 1 8 11 15 29 53 3900 132 14 72 233 47 31 88 03 B.CAL. S . 02 02 02 02 02 02 57 1966 61 02 39 21 83 03 59 04 CAMPECHE 05 05 04 05 05 05 55 1617 42 05 33 52 38 05 41 05 CHIAPAS 26 26 30 22 25 38 55 2614 28 25 22 73 29 20 36 06 CHIHUAHUA 05 05 05 04 05 06 53 1319 50 04 26 98 111 06 46 07 COAHUILA 35 35 24 44 43 09 54 821 35 34 30 46 27 33 33 08 COLIMA 35 35 04 03 33 42 54 2612 44 33 41 303 53 38 60 09 DURANGO 22 21 18 25 24 14 56 5688 65 02 27 46 37 15 38 10 DIST.FED. 1139 141 243 51 53 369 54 1<:!65 25 155 46 296 31 195 46 1.1 GUANAJUATOI 49 49 45 54 54 43 56 1068 19 46 31 32 24 27 43 12 GUERRERO 34 35 20 46 43 07 53 879 38 33 33 49 48 33 43 13 HIDALGO 28 28 19 35 34 07 54 849 19 28 16 33 26 16 17 14 JALISCO 70 67 74 62 63 76 56 1380 39 66 38 41 17 68 59 15 E .MEXICO 54 54 43 66 66 25 55 1493 38 51 58 66 26 53 96 16 MICHOACAN 53 53 38 61 60 25 54 675 37 50 33 39 25 51 44 17 MORELOS 11 11 12 10 1 1 09 53 1472 47 11 35 72 19 13 36 18 NAYARIT 11 10 08 13 13 04 54 1202 34 11 49 21 23 10 75 19 NUEVO LEON 31 30 38 21 23 54 55 4388 48 32 32 89 64 35 63 20 OAXACA 49 53 34 72 69 07 51 527 26 55 16 20 32 38 17 21 PUEBLA 56 57 48 68 65 31 54 865 26 58 23 43 36 41 19 22 QUERETARO 10 10 20 13 12 05 52 850 35 09 25 31 42 09 27 23 QUIN TANA R . 01 02 01 02 02 01 51 1036 93 01 16 340 163 03 17 24 S.L. POTOSI 30 29 24 37 35 17 54 953 28 28 23 51 21 23 32 25 SINALOA 24 20 18 24 23 17 64 2184 29 22 38 62 102 16 34 26 SONORA 22 23 22 20 21 27 57 2916 53 22 46 193 39 26 39 27 TABASCO 14 13 10 15 14 04 64 1538 32 12 36 85 86 10 28 28 TAMAULI PAS 29 31 33 25 28 42 52 2005 45 29 35 77 103 34 33 29 TLAXCALA 10 09 07 13 12 01 53 616 32 09 20 38 14 09 29 30 VERACRUZ 78 79 64 86 86 46 54 2036 34 78 31 53 68 72 23 31 YUCATAN 17 18 16 23 21 15 52 1663 24 17 18 180 12 13 25 32 ZACATECAS 23 23 18 31 29 06 55 798 34 22 22 32 14 21 37 TOPOPU=TOTAL POPULATION IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TOHOUS=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TORENO=TOTAL RENTED HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TONOWA=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER. TONOSE=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE. TOURPO=TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN THE STATE IN THAT YEAR. AVPEHO=AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT PCGRIP=PER CAPITA GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN THAT YEAR. DEHOCH=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK CHANGE IN A DECADE TOLAFO=TOTAL LABOR FORCE CONCENTRATED IN THAT STATE. TPORGR=TOTAL POPULATION GROWTH IN A DECADE. PECSTR=PER CAPITA STATE REVENUES IN THAT YEAR. PECFEI = PER CAPITA STATE CFEDERAL GOVERMENT. INVESTMENT IN S T ATE. TOHOGR=TOTAL HOUSING GROWTH IN PERCENTAGES OF THAT OF THE NATION . MEIUPO =MEAN INCREASE IN URBAN POPULATION IN A DECADE.

PAGE 88

VI""\ I' 11""\L.IL-L-L-IV I --I'll I J l V I V I v, IVIIVV'""J JVI,._I'IV, IVI'I!Vni""\J IVI'tVV._J IVVI'I VJr\YI ._IIVJ PCGRIP,DEHOCH ,TOLAFO, TPORGR,PECSTR,PECFEI , TOHOGR,MEIUPO INPUT MEDIUM CARDS N OF CASES 32 INPUT FORMAT FIXED C F2. 0 , 1 2X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X , F3. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F2. 1 , 1 X, F3.1, 1X, F2. 1 , lX, F4 . 0, lX, F2. 0 , lX, F3.1, lX, F2. 1, lX, F3. 0, 1X, F3. 1, 1 X, F3. 1, 2X, F3. 1) READ INPUT DATA NO. STATE TP TH HR HW HS TU PH PCIP HC TLF PG PSTR PFI HG IU 01 AGUASCAL. 07 06 07 03 05 08 64 1874 25 07 35 67 14 06 37 02 B . CAL.N . 18 18 23 16 18 31 56 5380 58 17 56 226 58 30 60 03 B .CAL.S. 03 03 02 02 03 02 60 3530 47 03 48 310 114 03 64 04 CAMPECHE 05 05 38 07 06 05 59 2744 38 05 43 137 34 06 48 05 CHIAPAS 23 22 27 15 22 32 59 4317 13 22 22 85 73 11 30 06 CHIHUAHUA 05 05 59 03 05 06 57 2689 35 05 41 115 32 05 38 07 COAHUILA 32 33 22 53 44 11 57 1076 22 31 27 53 12 26 42 08 COLIMA 33 34 41 30 32 41 56 3036 27 32 29 126 25 32 44 09 DURANGO 19 18 15 22 21 12 56 1740 10 17 22 05 21 07 36 10 DIST.FED. 142 147 270 16 54 310 63 7804 35 172 36 58 45 169 35 11 GUANAJUATO 47 43 38 48 47 42 63 1491 15 43 28 64 20 25 43 12 GUERRERO 33 33 17 53 45 13 63 1126 24 29 31 78 18 28 94 13 HIDALGO 25 25 14 34 32 05 58 1021 15 23 19 29 31 14 27 14 JALI SCO 68 65 79 56 53 76 56 2223 24 69 32 80 14 55 49 15 E .MEXICO 79 75 61 71 77 78 61 2728 82 76 76 102 18 150 126 16 MICHOACAN 48 47 33 57 55 27 61 1031 15 42 24 61 22 27 49 17 MORELOS 13 13 15 10 14 11 56 1901 48 13 50 119 21 18 64 18 NAYARIT 11 12 08 16 15 06 56 1687 35 11 35 87 10 13 53 19 NUEVO LEON 35 35 46 17 26 52 58 6008 50 38 48 160 24 51 45 20 OAXACA 42 45 20 76 65 10 54 661 11 40 16 32 17 19 23 21 PUEBLA 52 53 43 71 62 32 56 1276 20 52 25 58 07 39 48 22 QUERETARO 10 09 07 12 13 06 59 1655 19 09 33 20 27 07 51 23 QUINTANA R. 02 01 01 03 03 01 57 1772 55 02 60 33 150 03 23 24 S . L . POTOS I 26 26 19 36 32 16 59 1423 12 25 21 63 14 13 40 25 SINALOA 26 25 18 31 31 19 61 3219 57 27 44 165 33 39 60 26 SONORA 23 22 22 18 22 27 59 5352 35 22 36 211 42 25 51 27 TABASCO 16 15 10 26 19 05 61 2168 24 15 47 86 120 26 68 28 TAMAULI PAS 30 32 35 27 29 41 55 4021 35 29 37 120 98 36 47 29 TLAXCALA 09 08 05 1 1 12 02 58 874 11 08 20 45 10 04 54 30 VERACRUZ 79 83 64 104 92 51 55 2432 36 77 35 85 48 96 45 31 YUCATAN 16 15 10 23 18 12 58 1906 10 15 22 96 24 06 24 32 ZACATECAS 19 18 13 27 25 05 62 1010 3 17 34 59 10 02 35 TOPOPU=TOTAL POPULATION IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TOHOUS=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TORENO=TOTAL RENTED HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TONOWA=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER. TONOSE=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE. TOURPO=TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN THE STATE IN THAT YEAR. AVPEHO=AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT PCGRIP=PER CAPITA GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN THAT YEAR. DEHOCH=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK CHANGE IN A DECADE TOLAFO=TOTAL LABOR FORCE CONCENTRATED IN THAT STATE. TPORGR=TOTAL POPULATION GROWTH IN A DECADE. PECSTR = PER CAPITA STATE REVENUES IN THAT YEAR. PECFEI = PER CAPITA STATE CFEDERAL GOVERMENT. INVESTMENT IN STATE.

PAGE 89

PCGRIP,DEHOCH,TOLAFO,TPORGR,PECSTR,PECFEI,TOHOGR,MEIUPO INPUT MEDIUM CARD N OF CASES 32 INPUT FORMAT FIXED ( F2. 0, 12X, F3. 1, 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1, 1 X, F2. 1, 1 X, F2. 1, 1 X, F3. 1, 1 X, F2. 1, F5. 0, 1 X, F2. 0, 1 X, F3. 1, 1 X, F2. 1, 1 X, F4. 0, 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F3. 1 , 1 X, F2. 1 > READ INPUT DATA NO. STATE TP TH HR HW HS TU PH PCIP HC TLF PG PSTR PFI HG IU 01 AGUASCAL. 08 07 03 05 05 07 59 5187 61 07 39 1204 42 08 39 02 B.CAL.N. 18 19 07 19 01 33 5112898 53 19 33 3563 105 02 34 03 B.CAL.S. 03 03 01 03 01 02 53 7499 97 03 54 1876 255 05 54 04 CAMPECHE 06 06 01 04 07 05 55 7175 61 05 38 1091 387 06 39 05 CHIAPAS 23 23 10 11 22 26 54 8630 55 23 33 2331 144 26 33 06 CHIHUAHUA 05 05 02 02 04 05 53 7942 54 05 35 1 62 169 06 34 07 COAHUILA 31 33 08 49 49 10 52 3033 48 31 28 1581 112 33 28 08 COLIMA 29 31 1 1 26 32 38 51 4206 32 29 17 1793 47 23 18 09 DURANGO 17 15 04 14 27 01 63 3371 24 16 20 325 47 09 21 10 DIST.FED. 140 143 82 82 55 265 5017338 53 149 30 4018 111 164 30 11 GUANAJUATO 45 40 13 32 37 38 63 2831 24 43 28 1500 33 32 29 12 GUERRERO 32 32 08 70 48 19 55 2065 36 31 30 893 42 29 30 13 HIDALGO 22 22 04 25 01 04 57 2684 43 22 23 620 57 14 23 14 JALISCO 64 61 27 43 43 74 57 4998 26 63 25 865 27 54 26 15 E .MEXICO 112 106 31 69 80 156 58 6302 40 108 67 2386 22 171 68 16 MICHOACAN 45 44 09 43 90 26 57 3233 99 44 26 709 44 36 27 17 MORELOS 14 14 05 14 19 12 55 1728 36 14 40 921 34 15 41 18 NAYARIT 1 1 11 02 07 12 06 53 3627 55 11 28 1278 57 23 29 19 NUEVO LEON 36 36 13 12 27 49 5613443 42 37 36 3747 51 38 37 20 OAXACA 37 39 08 66 76 01 53 1598 52 37 21 603 45 26 22 21 PUEBLA 49 47 11 67 29 31 56 3477 27 47 26 551 4 3 6 22 QUERETARO 11 10 02 07 17 06 59 4294 31 10 40 2737 53 1 1 40 23 QUINTANA R. 03 03 01 04 04 01 49 3500 52 03 87 4924 154 07 87 24 S . L.POTOSJ 25 24 05 33 33 16 58 1805 99 24 25 809 39 18 26 25 SINALOA 28 25 05 25 01 13 61 7380 33 27 39 1947 75 26 39 26 SONORA 22 23 05 13 01 27 5411184 49 23 30 2360 63 24 30 27 TABASCO 17 16 04 27 18 06 60 4146 51 16 39 4453 314 16 40 28 TAMAULI PAS 29 31 1 1 21 33 39 51 7973 42 29 27 2210 133 28 27 29 TLAXCALA 08 07 01 04 01 03 62 2610 22 08 26 1320 34 04 26 30 VERACRUZ 78 81 24 151 03 48 53 5535 44 79 31 1502 117 77 32 31 YUCATAN 15 16 03 21 13 09 54 4261 49 16 30 1730 47 16 30 32 ZACATECAS 17 15 03 10 28 05 63 2551 18 16 18 953 42 07 18 TOPOPU=TOTAL POPULATION IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TOHOUS=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TORENO=TOTAL RENTED HOUSING STOCK IN STATE IN THAT YEAR. TONOWA=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT POTABLE WATER. TONOSE=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHOUT SEWER SERVICE. TOURPO=TOTAL URBAN POPULATION IN THE STATE IN THAT YEAR. AVPEHO=AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT PCGRIP=PER CAPITA GROSS INTERNAL PRODUCT IN THAT YEAR. DEHOCH=TOTAL HOUSING STOCK CHANGE IN A DECADE TOLAFO=TOTAL LABOR FORCE CONCENTRATED IN THAT STATE. TPORGR=TOTAL POPULATION GROWTH IN A DECADE. PECSTR=PER CAPITA STATE REVENUES IN THAT YEAR. PECFEI=PER CAPITA STATE
PAGE 90

Vf:.RIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES GROINPO 3.0812 6 .5298 32 TOTAPOL 3.0375 2 .8405 32 URPOPUL 3. 1125 6.4502 32 URBRATE 23.5969 22. 1988 32 FISREVE 4 . 1563 8 .9822 32 HOUTOTA 3 .0406 2.8761 32 69.5988 20.4571 32 HOUWSEW 73.6931 18.8974 32' MEINPO 3.8875 2.2327 32 DENPOPU 128.5500 578.0259 32 HOUOWNE 56.4000 14.9773 32 FEDINVE 3 .2375 3 .9944 32 PERCARE 2 .9906 2 .7966 32 NULOCAL 2688.2500 2227.6123 32 FACTOR ANALYSIS 83/04/19. 10.07.18. PAGE 3 FILE STAT70 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/19. ) VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES GROINPO 3.1156 6 .2981 32 TOTAPOL 3.1187 2.8811 32 lJRP O PUL 3. 1156 5 .4756 32 URBRATE 31.2675 21 . 5970 32 FISREVE 3 .0375 7 .9508 32 HOUTOTA 3 .1125 2 .9479 32 HOUWWAT 43.7697 15. 1938 32 65.6466 13.5872 32 MEINPO 4.8031 2. 1199 32 DENPOPU 180. 1625 804.6855 32 HOUOWNE 69.8719 10.2279 32 FEDINVE 3 .0750 5.2595 32 PERCARE 3 .1125 2 .7462 32 NULOCAL 3028.3125 2326.3043 32 FILE STAT80 (CREATION DATE = 83/03/28. ) VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEV CASES GROINPO 4 .0656 6.3413 32 TOTAPOL 3 . 1250 3 .0493 32 URPOPUL 2 .9813 5 .2398 32 U R BRATE 40.9656 24.6770 32 FISREVE 3 . 1250 5 .3507 32 HOUTOTA 3 .2469 3 . 1391 32 HOUWWAT 30.9219 16.3256 32 HCiUWSEW 57.7063 18.2672 32 MEINPO 3.3844 1. 3940 32 DENPOPU 252.3719 1112. 5234 32 HOUWNE 69.8937 9 .4656 32 FEDINVE 3 . 1250 4 . 1208 32 PER CARE 3 . 1094 2.7402 32

PAGE 92

I' ACTOR ANALYSIS 83/03/10. 21 .27.38. PAGE 4 f'ILE STAT60 (CREATION DATE = 83/03110. ) CORRELATION COEI'f'ICIENTS .. GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE f'ISREVE HOUTOTA HOUWWAT HOUWSEW MEINPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE f'EDINVE PERCARE NULOCAL GROINPO I . 00000 .81836 .987:10 .69759 .76076 .81924 .41798 -.45402 . 14363 .95601 . 42272 .87899 -.05732 .01512 TOTJIPOL .81836 1 . 00000 .81776 .45714 .53510 . 99887 .13283 -. 18D90 .12154 .70620 . . 15702 .77147 .03753 .43914 URPOPUL .98750 .81776 I . 00000 .73187 .76045 .81739 .44474 -.47527 .1:1329 .95551 -.44798 .85386 .0:1827 .00013 URBRATE . 6!1759 .45714 .73187 1 .00000 .77478 .45485 .58252 -.49776 .42417 . 616!14 .36575 .63465 .10588 -.09199 f'ISREVE .76076 .53510 .76045 .77478 I . 00000 .53848 -.44413 . 39810 . 35933 .73752 .18342 .62917 . 02454 . 18438 HOUTOTA .81924 .99887 . 817351 .45485 . 53848 1 .00000 -.13181 . 175193 .10447 .70983 . 15518 . 77113 .04007 .42861 HOUWWAT -.41798 -. 13283 . 44474 .58252 -.44413 -.13181 I . 00000 . 97408 .10311!1 -.39365 .86812 -.35082 .04441 .23073 HOUWSEW .45402 .18090 .47527 .49776 -.39810 -.17993 .97408 1 .00000 .02891 .44678 .92287 -.36808 .11698 .22673 MEINPO .14363 . 12154 .15329 .42417 .35933 .10447 -.103951 . 028511 1 .00000 .06279 . 14486 .18101 .14040 . 04396 DENPOPU .95601 .70620 . 95551 .61694 .73752 .70983 .39365 -.44676 .06279 1 .00000 -. 42571 .76767 . 20923 .21210 HOUOWNE . 42272 .15702 .44798 -.36575 .18342 -.15518 .86812 . 112287 .14486 -.42571 I . 00000 -.32166 .07184 .21544 f'EDINVE .87899 . 77147 .85386 .63465 .62917 .77113 .35082 .36808 .18101 .76767 .32166 I. 00000 .02712 .15303 PER CARE -.05732 .03753 .05827 .10588 .02454 .04007 .04441 . 11698 .14040 .20923 .07184 .02712 1 .00000 .42499 NULOCAL .01512 .43914 .00013 -.09199 .18438 .42861 .23073 .22673 . 04396 -.21210 . 21544 .15303 . 42499 1 .00000 F'AC'Yl>k ANAL YsYs 83/04/19. 10.07.18. PAQE 4 f'ILE STAT70 ( CREA Tl ON DATE 83/04/19.) CORRELATION COEI'f'ICIENTS .. QROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE f'ISREVE HOUTOTA HOUWWAT HOUWSEW MEINPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE f'EDINVE PERCARE NULOCAL QROINPO 1 .00000 .83252 .98824 .68492 .98617 .84269 -.57180 .72838 .00867 . 95245 -.66294 .93322 -.09414 .06174 TOTAPOL .83252 I. 00000 .87322 .46183 .786!17 . 11!1802 .33062 . 575118 .15368 .71481 -. 41158 .80425 -. 04304 . 31340 URPOPUL .98824 .87322 ) .00000 .69676 .!17002 . 878211 . 58058 .75468 .03448 . 113106 .67861 .915115 .08617 . 01168 URBRATE .68492 .46183 .69676 I . 00000 . 615153 . 46611 .84384 . 922711 .05943 .55546 .91644 .58021 .13253 -.05015 f'ISREVE .98617 . 786!17 . 117D02 .81953 1 .00000 .7119311 . 51500 -.658116 .D3185 .98712 -.61521 .92718 . 14599 . 13641 HOUTOTA .84269 .99802 .87829 .46611 .791139 I ' . 00000 .33028 . 578110 .12920 .72913 . 41662 . 821311 .D3783 .29480 HOUWWAT -.57180 -.33D62 .58058 -. 84384 . 511100 .33028 1 .00000 .89183 . 03954 -.471162 . 111443 -.44593 .05778 .10857 HOUWSEW -.72838 -.571118 -.75468 . 11227!1 .65896 . 578110 . 811183 1 .00000 -.02169 -. 5!1737 .93808 .62555 -. 10087 . 10720 MEINPO .00867 .15368. . 03448 .05943 .03185 .12920 . 03954 -.02169 1 .00000 . 08593 .06004 ;_03324 . 13820 .00950. DENPOPU .95245 71481 .93106 . 55546 .98712 .72913 .47962 .59737 .08593 1 .00000 . 57604 .89955 .22445 -.23659 HOUOWNE -.66294 -.41158 -.67861 -. 91644 .61521 -.41662 .91443 .93808 .06004 -.57604 I . 00000 .56098 -. 10826 .05011 f'EDINVE .93322 .80425 .91595 .58021 .il2718 .82139 . 445113 -.62555 -.03324 .89955 -.56098 I . 00000 -. 07801 -.06094 PER CARE .09414 . 04304 -.08617 .13253 -. 1459!1 -. 03783 .05778 -. 10087 .13820 .22445 -. 10826 .07801 I . 00000 .44881 NULOCAL -.06174 .31340 . 01168 .05015 .13641 .29480 .10857 -. ID720 .00950 . 23659 .05011 . 06094 .44881 I .00000 F ACTOt-c ANALYSIS 83/03/28. 15. 14. 36. PAQE 4 f'ILE STAT80 I C R E ATION DATE 83/03/28 . ) CORREL ATION COEI'f'IC IENTS . . GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE f'ISREVE HOUTOTA HOUWWAT HOUWSEW MEINPO DENPOPU HOUWNE f'EDINVE PER CARE GROINPO 1 . 00000 .73999 .85797 .43471 .89572 .79394 . 31209 .Oll033 -.01616 .90671 -. 44549 .80161 -. 19127 TOTAPOL . 739 9 9 1 . 00000 .91831 . 28239 . 87121 . 115908 .18518 .02162 -.00324 .67676 .30969 .73778 .08743 URPOPUL .85797 .91831 1. 00000 .45007 .96790 . 91123 -. 39266 .02717 .08634 .84102 .48651 .75424 . 11:151 URBRATE .. 43471 .28239 .45007 ) . 00000 .46103 . 35119 . 69532 . 29477 -.22190 .41195 .70460 .36468 .28553 f'ISREVE . 89572 .87121 .96790 .46103 I. 00000 .87518 . 32559 .01145 .07829 .89995 .47654 .84220 .13972 HOUTOTA .79394 .95908 . 91123 .35119 .87518 I . 00000 . 23867 -.01454 .01885 .71827 .41567 .76140 .-.12542 HOUWWAT .31209 .18518 -.39266 -.69532 -.32559 .23867 1 .00000 .44607 .02880 .29772 .64667 . 04543 .00665 HOUWSEW .09033 .02162 .02717 . . 29477 .01145 -.01454 .44607 1 .00000 . 14730 .14159 .36268 .15552 .07015 MEINPO -.01616 .00324 . 08634 .22190 .0782!1 -.01885 . 02880 . 14730 1 .00000 .03107 -.17710 . 05844 .28016 DENPOPU . 90671 .67676 .84102 .41195 .89995 .71827 . 29772 .141:19 -.03107 1 .00000 .46037 .80770 -.22772 HOUWNE -.44549 .30969 .48651 . 70460 .47654 .41567 .64667 .36268 .17710 .46037 I . 00000 -.38406 .0322 0 f'EDINVE .80161 . 73778 .75424 .36468 .84220 .76140 . 04543 .15552 . 05844 .80770 -.38406 I . 00000 -.08641 PERCARE -.19127 . 08743 . 115 51 .28553 . 13!172 .12542 .00665 .07015 -. 28016 -.22772 .03220 .08641 I . 00000

PAGE 93

FACTOR ANALYSIS 83/ 0 3/10. 21 .27.38. PAGE 6 FILE STAT60 !CREATION OATE = 83/03/10. 1 INVERSE OF CORRELA Tl ON MATRIX . . URBRATE FISREVE HOUTOTA HOUIIIIAT HOUIISEII MEINPO DENPOPU HOUOIINE FEDINVE PER C ARE NUL O CAL GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL -15.84293 23.29204 -3.9315515 1 .63612 . D8338 -34.93562 8 .00133 -14. 9 2043 -3.03257 I . 16547 GROINPO 81 .24663 -35.43857 -16.53868 3 .13376 -16.40219 16.57649 13.63827 -14.16979 22.70320 7 .28904 -837.80286 -68.69098 76.!17273 -23.39596 111 .16077 TOTAPOL -35.43857 898.27696 -154.42034 3 .45535 -121.93638 49.62729 9 .88886 .58783 -18.98509 -154.42034 209.73906 -34.67098 -17.45258 123.65377 17.47137 -54.51471 URPOPUL -16.53868 22.70749 7 .81456 1 . 89935 .11720 2 .97596 3 .13376 22.70320 -34.67098 10.90570 1 . 39878 -16.54271 5 .46735 1 . 27508 .64816 UR8RATE 1 .39878 13.02714 -5.61245 .42591 15.63704 .73909 8.23766 -18.09131 2 .96551 2 .49224 . 4. 28819 FISREVE 5 .84293 7 .28904 -17.45258 '22. 00213 -89.95952 9 .29593 -13.43970 -11.93916 II. 23946 -16.54271 -5.61245 793.58671 62.59749 -66.36634 HOUTOTA 23.29204 -837.80286 123.65377 62.00840 -62.89598 5.68781 -14.43898 4 .43309 .28397 1 .12581 . 89424 HOUWWAT -3.93555 -68.69098 17.47137 5 .46735 .42591 62. 597411 -37.30540 4 .69490 5 .13762 7 .74243 -66.36634 -62.89598 94.43855 -6.36684 33.28176 1 .63612 76.57273 -54.51471 1 . 27508 15.63704 HOUWSEW .64816 -.73909 22.00213 5 .68781 -6.36684 2 .40539 1 .51622 . 64688 -.37186 -.04062 .28491 MEINPO . .08338 -23.39596 3 .45535 107.99178 -27.42715 12.29174 2 .77366 14.44371 22.70749 8 .23766 -89.95952 -14. 438118 33.28176 -1.51622 DENPOPU -34.93562 111 .16077 121 .93638 -37.30540 .64688 -27.42715 37.80714 5 .51667 4 .11272 8 .18057 8 .00133 -16.40219 49.62729 -7.81456 -18.09131 9 .29593 4 . 433011 HOUOWNE 1 . 89935 2 .96551 -13.43970 .28397 4.69490 .37186 12.29174 -5.51667 7 .45855 .2642 7 . 53743 FEDINVE -14.92043 16.57649 -9.88886 -5.13762 . 04062 2 .77366 4 .11272 .26427 2 .50103 1 .86078 .11720 2 .49224 -11.93916 1 .12581 PERCARE 3 .03257 13.63827 .58783 7 . 74243 .28491 14.44371 -8.18057 . 53743 1 .8607 8 7.46255 NULOCAL 1 .16547 -14.16979 -18.98509 2 .97596 4 .28819 11.23946 .89424 FACTOR ANALYSIS 83/ 041111 . 10,07.18. PAGE 6 FILE STAT70 (CREATION DATE = 83/04/19. ) INVERSE OF CORRELATION MATRIX .. GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE HOUTOTA HOUWWAT HOUWSEW MEINPO DENPOPU HOUOWNE FEDINVE PERCARE NULOCAL GROINPO 236.01464 851.02587 I 08.04584 12.77944 -308.80069 -71.65511 II. 111320 21 .47962 4 .32053 181 .96891 -18.29485 -10.46469 3.92652 10.40454 TOTAPOL 89.02587 667.07600 -224.71599 29.49290 -29.16355 -602. 601511 5 .12101 21.111627 -11.07065 86.30572 -26.59701 14.60483 7 .78968 4 .76694 URPOPUL -108.04584 -224.71599 207.94310 -24.68132 61.45835 169.87373 2 .8002:5 -12. 481116 . 112325 -104.37515 19.43013 3 .96913 2 .75816 6 .81909 URBRATE 12.77944 211.49290 -24.68132 18.17844 -41.75306 -19.84095 -3.27057 12.80929 .10010 43.68702 2.80475 .56358 .22699 4 .75428 FISREVE -308.80069 -29.16355 61 .45835 -41.75306 703.99705 5 .27945 5 .64427 -45.31048 -13.04476 -4:54.30667 10.42068 3 .23002 -12.85206 -24.41941 HOUTOTA -71.65511 -602. 601511 169.87373 -19.84095 5 .27945 :563 . 10664 -!1.88472 -14.4281!9 8 .68587 -47.94759 19.53537 -17.46139 5 .94683 4.45968 HOUIIWAT 9 .19320 5 . 121D1 -2.80025 -3.27057 -5.64427 5 .88472 1D.06550 -7.65434 .61017 .46364 5 .37042 -1.97014 .41426 2 .05015 HOUWSEW 21 .47962 21.111627 -12.48196 12.80929 -45.31048 -14.42829 -7.65434 29.97183 .14898 32.60950 -9.35048 I. 26478 .60621 5 .89362 MEINPO 4 .32053 -11.0706:5 .9232:5 .10010 -13.04476 8 .68587 .61017 .14898 1 . 84269 1D.23335 . 79811 .12346 .41074 .98662 DENPOPU 181.96891 86.30572 -104.37515 43.68702 -454.30667 -47.1147511 .46364 32.60950 10.23335 350. 16728 -5.93778 -3.60922 10.82552 21 .16986 HOUOIINE -18.29485 -26.59701 19.43013 2 .80475 10.42068 111.53537 5 .37042 -11.35048 -.79811 5 .93778 19.23709 1 . 20724 .17825 -. 00475 FEDINVE -10.46469 14.60483 3 . 116913 .56358 3 .23002 -17.46139 -1.117014 1 . 26478 -. 12346 -3.60922 1 . 20724 10.24058 -.43193 .60114 PERCARE 3 .92652 7 .78968 2 .75816 .22699 -12.8:5206 -5. 114683 .4i426 -.60621 .41074 10.82552 .17825 .43193 2.07334 -.67381 NULOCAL 10.40454 4 .76694 -6.81909 4 .75428 -24.41941 4 .45968 2 .05015 5 .89362 .98662 21 :.16986 . 00475 .60114 .67381 5 .00136 FACTOR ANALYSIS 83/03/28. 15.14.36. PAGE 6 FILE STAT80 I CREATION DATE 83/03/28. I INVER SE OF CORRELATION MATRIX .. GROINPO TOTAPOL URPOPUL URBRATE FISREVE HOUTOTA HOUWWAT HOUWSEW MEINPO DENPOPU HOUIINE FEDINVE PERCARE GROINPO 8 . 26002 3 .44694 1 . 17032 .52781 . 1 .43354 -4.20882 . :53271 .33861 -. 14465 3 .72633 -.96109 .94675 TOTAPOL 3 . 44694 33.66081 -24. 37749 2 .64937 . 24889 -2.19660 -16.69981 . 80247 -. 57422 2 .43012 11.95496 1 .88683 4 .15422 URPOPUL 1 .17032 -24.37749 60.34409 . 746:50 -35.72482 . 3 2 3 7 9 .91973 5 .28290 -1.118998 2 .23:558 6 . 82:561 2 .29586 10.57052 URBRATE .52781 2 .64937 .74650 5 .66167 6 .02673 -I. 94163 .11304 2.17727 -. 19898 1 . 85969 3 .20669 2 .34278 -.71769 I . 11430 FISREVE I .43354 2 . 19660 -35.72482 -6.02673 56.46164 2 .87817 -3. 211763 4 .24820 -3.93460 -13.64678 4 .97928 -11.74254 HOUTOTA 4 .20882 -16.69981 -.91973 .11304 2 .87817 .2104 2 111.52559 .85208 .51088 .84417 .76382 2 .71546 -. 52655 HOUWIIAT .53271 -.80247 5 .28290 2.17727 3 .29763 . 69471 .85208 4. 10503 .70232 . 04542 .47813 .60148 HOUWSEW .33861 -. 57422 -1.98998 -.19898 4. 24820 1 .55874 -.54454 .!11088 -.70232 1.114126 . 26368 -2.12611 -.70705 MEINPO .14465 2 .43012 -2.23558 1 . 85969 -3.93460 .84417 -. 04542 .63214 .35177 .26368 2 .36413 3.30841 1 . 48329 DENPOPU 3 .72633 9 .95496 -6.82561 3 .20669 -13.64678 .76382 . 10659 . 34765 .47813 -2.12611 3 .30841 17. 111158 2 .41827 HOUWNE .96109 -1.88683 2 .25586 2. 34278 -4.97928 1 .75720 1 . 40062 2 .71546 .60148 .70705 1 .48329 2 .41827 4. 10687 FEDINVE -.94675 4 .15422 10.57052 .71769 -II. 74254 1 .48791 -. 09152 .52655 1 .55874 -.63214 .10659 1 .75720 1.48791 PERCARE . 24889 .32379 I . 94163 -1. 11430 .21042 .69471 7 .72245 -.24186 .54454 -.35177 .34765 1 .40062 .D9152 .24186 I . 71302

PAGE 94

83/04118. 00.48.56. PAGE 4 FILE CHANG60 (CREATION OATE 83/04118. ) CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS. TOPOPU TOHOUS TORE NO TONOWA TONOSE TOUR PO AVPEHO PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR PECSTR PECFEI TOHOGR MEIUPO .80342 .81478 .07167 -.10698 -.29875 .98948 .17958 .14963 -.23971 .94880 .06366 I . 00000 .99884 .91065 .76030 .04951 TOPOPU .80526 .8142 0 .10094 .11628 -. 29496 .99132 . 16883 . 15927 -.23625 . 94956 .99884 I . 00000 .91047 . 76246 . 06644 TOHOUS .50654 .96364 -.06255 -. 06293 .20936 .92767 .20750 .27158 -.17067 .96565 TORENO .91065 . 91047 I . 00000 .49398 .30764 ,5:1407 -. 08217 . 117209 .26960 . 11584 -.25229 -.36476 .72127 -. 03557 -.29124 TONOWA .76030 .76246 .49398 1 .00000 -.33988 .76171 . 03240 -. 17327 -.29710 ,60381 -. 00902 TONOSE .80342 .80526 .50654 .97209 1.00000 .31462 -.13330 .19446 .92959 . 12652. .31462 1.00000 -. 03700 .03366 -.12104 .84204 .26481 .43427 -. 09835 TOUR PO .81478 .81420 .96364 .26960 -.I 0669 . 04982 -.19484 .10018 .21079 -.18015 .12050 -.07167 -. 10094 -.06255 -. 11584 -.13330 .03700 I .00000 .19348 . 34960 AVPEHO .03366 .19348 1 .00000 ,50790 -.17501 .35307 .23230 .14838 . 03989 -. 11628 -. 06293 .25229 .19446 PCGRIP .10698 . 111484 .50790 1 .00000 -.30820 .47002 .48155 .43649 -.14160 .40117 -.29496 -.20936 -. 36476 -.33988 -.12104 DEHOCH -.29875 -.30820 I . 00000 . 17417 .18696 -.21786 .95920 .04439 .99132 .92767 .72127 .76171 .84204 -.10018 -.17501 TOLAFO .98948 . 210711 .35307 .47002 .17417 I . 00000 .26330 -.01404 .30458 .83634 TPORGR .17958 .16883 .20750 -.035157 . 03240 .26481 .36939 .32963 .11906 .15927 .27158 -.29124 -. 17327 .43427 .18015 .23230 .48155 .18696 .26330 1 .00000 PECSTR .14963 . 43649 -.21786 -.01404 .36939 I . 00000 -.16477 -. 11582 .23625 .17067 -.30764 .29710 . 098315 .12050 .14838 PECFEI .23971 .95920 ,30458 .32963 .16477 I .00000 . 15870 . 949156 .96565 . 155407 ,60381 .92959 -. 10669 .03989 . 14160 TOHOGR .94880 .12652 . 04982 .34960 .40117 .04439 .83634 .11906 .11582 .15870 I .00000 MEIUPO .06366 .04951 .06644 .08217 -.00902 83/04/22. 08.42.58. PAGE 4 FILE CHANG7 0 !CREATION DATE • 83/04/22. ) CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS . . TOPOPU TOHOUS TORE NO TO NOW A TONOSE TOURPO AVPEHO PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR PECSTR PECFEI TOHOGR MEIUPO TOPOPU I . 00000 .99819 .85746 .156259 .79709 .87367 . 13207 . 37894 . 061560 .19328 .0433 0 . 19648 .12831 .66113 . 15827 TOHOUS .99819 I . 00000 .86550 . 515860 . 711291 .87803 . 12868 .38862 .0118315 . 111083 .03040 -.19852 . 12865 .6151563 -.15473 TORENO . 815746 .86550 I . 00000 .11833 . 41188 . 117051 . 13868 .60220 .09778 .17436 .10344 -.11778 -.09586 . 57737 . 15634 TONOWA . 156259 .55860 . 11833 I .00000 . 114143 .09840 -. 00712 .30887 .10373 . 011633 -.17616 -. 22454 -. 10658 .31962 -. 054715 TO NOSE .79709 .79291 .41188 . 94143 I . 00000 .40992 .08231 . 015226 -. 03330 . 110415 -.07565 -.25545 -. 16021 .47903 -.11489 TOUR PO . 87367 .87803 . 970151 . 09840 .40992 I . 00000 .14746 . 64984 .13243 . 184015 . 13419 .09689 -.08122 .60747 -. 14744 AVPEfiO .13207 .12868 .13868 .00712 .08231 .14746 I . 00000 .16837 -.34488 -.91400 . 27340 -.69078 -.95179 -.55511 -. 14205 PCGRIP . 37894 .38862 .60220 -.30887 .05226 . 64984 .16837 1 .00000 .3834!1 .01709 . 40745 .26997 .07207 .29934 .00687 DEHOCH .06560 .05835 .09778 . 10373 . 03330 .13243 .34488 .38349 I . 00000 .36954 .75156 .61545 .42157 .54982 . 21425 TOLAFO .19328 .19083 . 17436 .09633 .11045 . 18405 -.111400 -.017011 .36954 I . 00000 .23770 .65218 .92678 .7902 0 . 13267 TPORGR .'04330 .03040 .10344 -. 17616 . 071165 .1341!1 .27340 .40745 .7111116 -.23770 1 .00000 . 14207 . 16850 . 12241 .05140 PECSTR -. 19848 . 19852 .11778 -.22454 .25545 -.096811 .69078 .2611117 .6111411 .65218 .14207 I . 00000 .75302 . 43424 .41757 PECFEI . 12831 -.12865 .09586 . 10658 .16021 -.08122 " .1151711 -. 07207 .42157 . 112678 . 1685 0 .75302 1 . 00000 .58331 .16068 TOHOGR .66113 .65563 .57737 . 311162 . 471103 .60747 .55511 . 291134 .54982 .79020 . 12241 . 43424 .58331 1 . 00000 .02360 MEIUPO -.15827 -.15473 .15634 -. 05475 . 11489 -.14744 -.14205 .00687 .21425 .13267 .05140 .41757 .16068 .02360 1 .00000 U /04/2::!. PAGE 4 FILE CHANG60 !CREAT ION DATE 83/04/22. CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS .. TOPOPU TOHOUS TORE NO TO NOW A TONOSE TOURPO PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR PECSTR PECFEI TOHOGR MEIUPO TOPOPU I . 00000 .99884 .91065 .76030 .80342 .81478 -. 07167 -. 10698 -.29875 . 118948 . 17958 . 14963 . 23971 .94080 . 06366 TOHOUS .99884 1 . 00000 .91047 .76246 .80526 .81420 -.10094 .11628 .29496 .99132 .16883 . 15927 -.23625 .94956 .04951 TORE NO .91065 .91047 1 00000 .49398 .50654 .96364 -.06255 .06293 -.20936 . 112767 .20750 .27158 .17067 .96565 .06644 TO NOW A .76030 .76246 .49398 I . 00000 .97209 .26960 -. 11584 . 215229 -. 36478 .72127 I .03557 -.29124 -.30764 .55407 -. 08217 TO NOSE .80342 .80526 .50654 .97209 I . 00000 .31462 . 13330 -. 19446 -.33988 .76171 . 03240 .17327 -.29710 .60381 . 00902 TOUR PO .81478 .81420 . 116364 .26960 .31462 1 . 00000 -. 03700 .03366 -.12104 .84204 .26481 .43427 -.09835 .92959 .12652 AVPEHO -.07167 . 10094 .06255 . 11584 .13330 . 03700 1 .00000 . 111348 . 19484 -.10018 .21079 -.18015 . 12050 -.10669 .04982 PC GRIP .10698 . 11628 .06293 -.25229 -.19446 .03366 .19348 I. 00000 .50790 . 17501 .35307 .23230 . 14838 -.03989 . 34960 DEHOCH -.29875 -.29496 .20936 -. 36476 -.33988 -.12104 -.19484 .50790 1 . 00000 .30820 .47002 .48155 . 43649 .14160 .40117 TOLAFO .98948 .99132 .92767 .72127 . 76171 . 84204 .10018 -. 17501 -.30820 1 .00000 .17417 . 18696 -.21786 .95920 .04439 TPORGR .1795 8 .16883 .20750 -.03557 . 03240 .26481 . 210711 .315307 .47002 .17417 1 .00000 .26330 .01404 .30458 .83634 PECSTR .14963 .15927 .27158 -.29124 . 17327 . 43427 -.180U5 .23230 . 481511 .18696 .26330 1 .00000 .36939 .32963 .11906 PECFEI -.23971 .23625 -.17067 -.30764 .29710 -. 098315 .12050 .14838 .4364!1 -. 21786 . 01404 .3693!1 1 . 00000 . 16477 -. 11582 TOfiOGR .94880 .94956 .9615611 , 155407 .60381 .92!115!1 -.1066!1 -.03989 .14160 :95920 .30458 .32963 -.16477 1 . 00000 .15870 MEIUPO .06366 .04951 .06644 -. 08217 -. 00902 .12652 .04982 .34960 .40117 .04439 .83634 .11906 -. 11,582 . 115870 I . 00000

PAGE 95

83/ 0 4 /18. 00.48.56. PAGE 6 FILE CHANG60 < C REATION DATE • 83/04/22.) IN V ERSE OF C O RREL ATION M A TRIX .. TOPOPU TOHOUS TORE NO TONOWA TONOSE TOURPO AVPEHO PCGRIP DEHOCH TOLAFO TPORGR PE C STR PEC F EI TOHOG R MEIUPO TOPOPU 1069.0819 6 -793 .63119 -147.89701 116.34788 -251.97743 -18. 1 2537 -46.98478 8.82524 -13.21433 53.46325 38. 2 7072 8 .03843 eo . 3 3611 -26 . 72929 TOHOUS -793.63119 1885.82486 93.18481 -51.958:56 -527.15237 -560.3:5668 22.6097:5 . 06004 22.137:57 -37.74467 -18.4:5162 7. 07449 -10.87984 224.94770 53.5194;! TORENO -147.89701 93.18481 335.74431 -184.19321 141.1:5358 -281.27746 9 .6:5615 4 .72089 -3.70823 6 .96406 9 .40160 13.24833 -1.69959 -3.41437 9 .89698 TONOWA 116.34788 -:51. 9:58:56 -184. 19321 141 .42198 -134.20288 133.94386 8 .:51607 .72:532 -4.92036 -3.66127 7 . 937:5:5 I. 3219:5 I . 71497 -:5.24813 2 . :58961 TONOS E -251.97743 527.1:5237 141 . 1:53:58 -134.20288 :5:56.9:5981 284.40766 20.12339 -13.17936 . 0707:5 -77.469:54 -13.19129 11 .38746 3.19684 163.67008 -15.37435 TOURPO -18. 1 2537 -560.35668 -281.27746 133.94386 284.40766 600.44834 2 .56433 -17. 15:5452 I . :50308 -90.03702 4 .8718:5 21 .39886 :5.88478 113.3304 1 -24.24359 AVPEHO -46.98478 22.6097:5 9 . 6:561:5 -8.:51607 20.12339 2 . 156433 4.44663 -1.24739 2 .30641 -2.34333 4 .09752 . 24436 .98896 7 .83579 I . 87847 PCGRIP 8 .82524 .06004 4 .72089 .72:532 -13.17936 -17.5:54:52 1 . 247311 3 .30122 1 .67780 13.08914 . 49680 . 92664 . 04984 2 .3797 2 . 14109 DEHOCH -13.21433 22.13757 -3.70823 4 .92036 -.0707:5 1 .:50308 2 .306'!1 -1.67780 6 .30587 :5.71969 3 .02645 2 .45733 1 .62661 6 .60303 .76783 TOLAFO 53.4632:5 -37.74467 6 .96406 3 .66127 -77.4695 4 -90.03702 2 .34333 13.08914 :5.71969 158.43066 .07656 3 . 799:51 -40.0592 8 3 . 75790 TPORGR 38.27072 -18.4:5162 -9.40160 7 .93755 -13.19129 4 .8718:5 4 .097:52 .49680 -3.02645 -3. 87:50:5 8 .503 21 . 09441 1 . 05033 9 .44618 5 .06660 PECSTR 8 .03843 7 .07449 13.24833 1 . 32195 11 .38746 21 .39886 .92664 2 .4:5733 .07656 .09441 4 .74814 .38134 3 .40654 1 . 49398 PECFEI 5 .68694 -10.87984 1 .69959 1 . 71497 3 . 19684 5 .88478 . 04984 -1.62661 -3.79951 1 . 05033 .38134 I . 95490 1 . 71347 .31079 TOHOGR -80.33611 -224.94770 -3 41437 5 .24813 163.67008 113.33041 -2.37972 6 .60303 -40.0:5928 9 .44618 3 .406:14 1 . 71347 1 3 6 .16854 5 .05470 MEIUPO -26.7292 9 :53 .:51942 9 .89698 2 . :58961 -15.3743:5 -24.24359 1 . 87847 . 14109 .76783 3 .75790 5 .06660 1 . 49398 .31079 5 .0:5470 6 .31826 FILE CHANG7 0
PAGE 96

TAB LE N,-,-l. MEXICO: HOI..ISIN ( ; UE-.FIC I T , 1970. ( ' I HOUSAND OF (I) (II) (111) (IV) (V) AREA DEFICIT DEFICIT DEFICIT :::TOCf< Ill X 100 G!UANT I TAT I VE I:;.UALITATIVE TOTAL EX I : ; TEN T --1..,..--URI\AN; 1 397. s 1 0. 7 2 442. 5 5 323. 6 4S.9 RUHAL' 737.3 . 859.1 1 596. 4 3 436. 3 46.5 TOTAL 2,1 35. i . l 905. 6 4 038, 9 s 759. 9 46.1 OAR Z A, GU::n AVO AND :::CHTE I NOART, MARTHA. ET. AL. EL PROBLEMA DE LA VIVIENDA EN MEXICO. EL COLEGIO DE MEXICO,1976. ----------TABLE NO. 14 MEXICO: HOUSING 19A9, Deficit , . NATIONAL TOTAL I. Total 5 lOS 100.0 I. r. : : : : WI "iHOU"f HOlY:: t 1\il _ i S43 16.S ETEF\' 101\1 2 494 4 f'. 9 RmJDINCi 1 768 34.6 Total S lOS 100.0 H .lF::: l..J I "IHUUT HUI_I ::; I I\!Ci 843 10'J.O ::TER [ ( IHI:Yf l (IN 2 494 100.0 'If 11 1 ' ' U\JO 1 76S 100.0 URBAN RURAL-TOTAL I. IOT, . S --1 SiS 100.0 63-S 1.0.2 516 32. 7 428 27.1 I 578 30.9 634 75.2 5!6 20. 7 428 --3 " 527 209 1 978 1 3.;0 3 527 209 1 978 1 340 . 100.0 6.0 56. 0 0 69.1 24.8 79.3 iS.B SOURCE: PUENTE LEYVA, ._tE:3US. "EL PROBLEMA HABI TACIONAL" IN: EL PERFIL DE MEXICO EN L980, VOL.II. SIGLO XXI, 1972. *THE URBAN DEFICIT REPRE:3ENT:3 60. :::t. OF 1 HE TOTAL AND RURAL I : ; 39. 21.. -. --.. -------T ABLE N0.15 PROJECTION OF BEHAVOIR OF OBSERVED ASPECTS OF HOUSING 1976.1980,1990. E
PAGE 97

'-' I \ r tt I I I. 1 ••• • I '-t • ..t: •• 70 60 MEXICO: POPULATION GROWTH 1930-1980. z •:;:) .J .J ... I: 1.7 1921 1930 1940 1960 . ! _ ... ' ! . . ' ' . ' 1980

PAGE 98

100 I 80 40 20 1900 MEXICO: POPULATION GROWTH PROYECTIONS. I TOTAL POPULATI/ L 11 t--t--+--f---t-i--t-+---t-/--1-. .... v / MILLION OF INHABITANTS ! i URBAN POPULATION/ I I -----4 I ./ , ... , v / 28. , / , , , , / , l .l . 1 , _ . / / / / POPULATION 2 2 • 8 1 2 0 • 3 ' ..... , , .... __,.fo ..... ---lio. 8 '"--.,.., I • ------t----J..--___ .. , 1 ... l l l 0 -... ,,' '"""--l 0 • ./ ... .. _., .. ,,. .. ,..,.-: .. 2 0. 1 __ .,_.,_...... HOUSING STOCK -----f------5 s _ ........... -------.. -s 2 s 20 40 TOTAL POPULATION ------URBAN POPULATION -----RURAL POPULAT ION TOTAL HOU: ::ING ::HOCK 60 so 2000 SOURCE: POPULATION:CENSUS. HOU: 3 INC;: CENSUS.

PAGE 99

.=,eo WC = <[ .. ..JO = .-4 1 C 1\10. 4 MEXICO AND OTHER COUNifRIES: URBAN STRUCTURE, 1900-1970. UNITED STATES(1950) ==--=GUATEMALA< 1',50 > MEXICO .. .. -fK*'OA .. .... .... . ........ .... • .... . . . .,LA ,_....._ • lecell._ ... M ' IOCXD' ... ••Wt••• ••Ut•t• % .. ,.. .. _ ,.. -.. ......... ..... .. . --E =1 lL. -----uo LOCALITY SIZE IN NUMBER OF INHABITANT S . SOURCE: UNIKEL LUIS,EL DESARROLLO URBANO DE MEXICO. P.40.

PAGE 100

. ) MEXICO: LOCALITIES WITH MORE THAN 15,000 INHABITANTS IN 1970 . LEGEND: • 15,000-50,000 • 50,000-1(1(1,000 • 100,000-500,(100 • 5(1(1,(1(10-1000,000 II 1,000,000 OR MORE ... ••• • INHABITANTS . .. .. II ..

PAGE 101

BIBLIOGRAPHY Alarcon, Segovia Andres, and Alberto Rebora Togno, Hacia un Derecho Urbanistico: El Caso de Mexico. Mexico, Revista de Comercio Exterior, December 1976, p. 1388-1398. Barkin, David, Cuba: Evolucion de las Relaciones entre el Campo y la Cuidad. Mexico, Revista de Comercio Exterior, February 1978, p. 135-143. Barlowe, Raleigh, Land Resource Economics. Prentice Hall, Inc., 1972. 1st Ed. Bassols, Batalla Angel, Mexico: Formacion de Resiones Economicas. Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mex1co, 1979. 1st Ed. Butterworth, Douglas, and John K. Chance, Lat. in American Urbanization. Massachusetts, Cambridge University Press, 1981. 1st Ed. Campos, Ochoa, La Reforma Municipal. Mexico, Editorial Purrua, S.A., 1979. 3rd ed. Castells, Manuel, Aauntes para un Analtsis de Clase de la Politica Urbana del Esta o Mex1cano. Rev1s a Mex1cana de Sociologia, ONAM. Castells, Manuel, La Question Urbana. Mexico, Siglo Vientuino, 1976. 2nd Ed. Castells, Manuel, Problemas de Investigacion en Sociologia Urbana. Mexico, Siglo Veintuino, 1976. 6th Ed. Cornelious, Wayne A., and Felicity M. Trueblood. Latin America Urban Research. Vol. 4, Sage Publications Inc., 1974. 1st Ed. Cornelious, Wayne, and Robert V. Kemper, Latin American Urban Research. Vol. 6, Sage Publications Inc.,-1978. 1st Ed. Direccion General de Estadistica, X Censo Nacional de Poblacion y Vivienda. Mexico, 1980. Direccion General de Estadistica, IX Censo Nacional de Poblacion y Vivienda. Mexico, 1970. Direccion General de Estadistica, XIII Censo Nacional de Poblacion y Vivienda. Mexico, 1960.

PAGE 102

Hardoy, Jorge E., Latin American Urbanization. United Nations Publications, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. New York, 1970. Hauser, Philip M., Urbanization in Latin America. International Documents Service, Columbia University Press, 1961. Herrera, Ligia. Tasa de Crecimiento a Deterioro del Media Urbano en Mexico. Un intento exploratorio e las Relaciones Ex1stentes. Revista Demografia y Economia, Vol. XI, no. 3., 1977. El Colegio de Mexico, p. 259-272. Lojkine, Jean, El Marxismo, el Estado y la Cuestion Urbana. Mexico, Siglo Veintuino, 1979. 1st Ed. en Espanol. Lopez, Rosado Felipe, El Regimen Constitucional Mexicano. Mexico, Editorial Purrua, S.A., 1955. Nacional Financiera, S.A., La Economia Mexicana en Cifras: 1980. Mexico. Nie, Normen H., C. Hadlai Hull, Jean G. Jenkins, Karin Steinbrenner and Dale H. Bent, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. McGrawHill Book Co., 1975. 2nd Ed. Olmedo, Raul. Desafio Municipal. Seccion Financiera Periodico Excelsior. Mexico, Excelsior, June 17-July 1, 1982. Ovalle, Favela Jose, La Nueva Legislacion Sabre Desarrollo Urbano. Mexico, Revista de Comercio Exterior, October 1976, p. 1157-1163. Paz, Pedro and Octavia Rodriguez, Cinco Modelos de Crecimiento Economico. Santiago de Chile, Cuadernos del Institute Latino Americana de Planificacion Economica, ILPES, 1973. Pedrao, Fernando, La ExMeriencia del Proyecto de Desarrollo Regional y Urbano de Mexico. ex1co, Rev1sta de Comercio Exterior, December 1976, p. 1399-1406. Partes, Alejandro, and John Walton, Urban Latin America. University of Texas Press, 1976. Rabinovitz, Francine F. and Felicity M. Trueblood. Latin American Urban Research. Vol. 1, Sage Publications Inc., 1971. 1st Ed. Rabinovitz, Francine F., Felicity M. Trueblood, Guillermo Geisse and Jorge E. Hardoy, Latin America Urban Research. Vol. 2, Sage Publications Inc., 1972. 1st Ed.

PAGE 103

Rabinovitz, Francine F., and Felicity M. Trueblood, Latin American Urban Research. Vol. 3, Sage Publications Inc., 1973. 1st Ed. " Richardson, Harry W., Economia del Urbanismo. Madrid, Penguin Alianza Universidad, 1975. Schteingart, Martha, Sector Inmobiliario Capitalista y Formas de Apropiacion del Suelo Urbano: El Caso de Mexico. Revista Demografia y Economia, Vol. XIII, no. 4., 1979. El Colegio de Mexico, p. 449-446. Scott, Ian, Urban and Spatial DeveloJ?I!lent in Mexico. Baltimore and .London, The Johns Hopkins Onivers1ty Press, 1982. Secretaria de Asentamientos Humanos y Obras Publicas, Programa Nacional de Vivienda, Mexico, SAHOP, 1979. Secretaria de Asentamientos Humanos y Obras Publicas, Comision Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano and Secretaria de Programacion y Presupuesto, Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano. Mexico, Version Abrevi ada, 1978. Secretaria de Programacion y Presupuesto, Plan Gobal de Desarrollo 19801982. Mexico. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, Poder Ejecutivo Federal, , nmr. Topalov, Christian, La Urbanizac .ion Capitalista. Mexico, Editorial . Edicol, 1979. 1st Ed. Torres, Federico A., El Debate en Torno a la Let General de Asentamientos Humanos. Mexico, Revista deomercio Exterior, Seccion Nacional. Abril de 1976, p._ 416-420. Torres, Federico A., Legislacion sabre Desarrollo Urbano. Mexico, Revista de Comercio Exterior, Seccion Nacional. Marzo de 1976, p. 280-285. Unikel, Luis, El Desarrallo Urbano en Mexico. Mexico, Centro de Estudios Economocios y Demograficos. El Colegio de Mexico. 2nd Ed. Villareal, Munoz Antonioa, Restitucion y Dotacion de Ejidos. El problema agrario en Mexico. Mexico, 1921. 1st Ed.

PAGE 104

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................... 1 I. DECLARATION OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES................... 5 1.1 Goa 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • 5 1.2 Objectives....................................... 6 II. THEORETICAL CONCEPTUALIZATION......................... 7 2.1 The Mode of Production and the Urbanization Process............................. 7 2.2 Physical Planning at the Margin of Economic Development Policies............................. 8 III. PROBLEM DEFINITION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••..••••••• 10 3.1 Mode of Production and the Planning Issue in Mexico........................................... 10 3.2 Political Economic Problems •••••••••••••••••••••• 10 3.3 Urbanization Process •.•••••••••••••••••••••••••.•• 12 3.4 Characteristics of the Modern Urban Network .••• •• 13 3.5 Economic Development •••••••••••••••••••••••.••••• 16 3.6 Revenue Structure and the Government's Role •••••• 19 3.7 The Housing Sector, a Structural Problem ••••••••• 20 3.8 The Land Factor and its Role in Regional-Urban Growth........................................... 22 3.9 Land Resources in Mexico •••••••••••••••••••••.••• 23 IV. MEXICO'S RECENT PHYSICAL PLANNING POLICIES •.•••••••••• 25 4.1 Political Economy Policies ••••••••.•••••.•••••••• 25 4.2 General Law of Human Settlements ••••••••••••••••• 27 4.3 The National Plan for Urban Development, NPUD •••• 28 V. LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES' APPROACHES TO PHYSICAL PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ••••••••••••••••••••• 32 5.1 Economic Development and Its Physical Expression in Latin J\rnerica................................. 32 5.2 Urban and Regional Policies in Regard to Land Use and Subdivision Procedures in Latin America.. 34 5.3 Typologies in Land Use and Subdivision Regulations and Policies in Latin America •••••••••••••.•••••• 35 5.4 Urban Reform Types in Latin America •••••••••••••• 36 VI. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 38 6.1 Methodological Approach •.••••••••••••.••••••••••• 38 6.2 Variable/Definition •••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••• 38 6.3 Generalities •••.•••••••.••••.•••••. ••••••••••••• 40 6.4 Findings of the Analysis ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 41