Challenges and strategies in the
application of municipal regulations for social housing in Guayaquil
Juan Carlos Briones Macias
Docente Tiempo Completo e Investigador, Universidad de Guayaquil,
Facultad de Arquitectura y Urbanismo, Ecuador, juan.brionesmac@ug.edu.ec, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7838-7338
The article analyzes the
challenges of complying with municipal regulations and their contribution to
the design of social housing that promotes access to community housing in the
city of Guayaquil, Ecuador, with an emphasis on cadastral updating (building
regularization). It examines the effectiveness of regularizations as an urban
planning tool, identifying institutional limitations such as staff shortages,
procedural delays, excessive documentation requirements, and multiple
corrections. Through critical analysis, strategies and mechanisms are proposed
to optimize these processes, contributing to more efficient and equitable land
use planning in Ecuador's main port city. The study adopted a case study
design, focusing on the city of Guayaquil, which allowed for an in-depth
analysis of the institutional and territorial context. Content analysis
techniques were applied for document review, descriptive statistics for
quantitative data processing, and thematic analysis for qualitative
information. The triangulation of sources and methods ensured the validity of
the results and strengthened the consistency of the conclusions obtained. In
conclusion, the disparity between the formal and informal sectors continues to
widen, highlighting the urgent need for more flexible policies within the
municipal regulatory framework to include developments that promote the
adoption of a type of community housing that addresses the lack of access to
decent housing in Guayaquil.
Keywords: Urban planning, municipal regulations, social
housing, regularization
Resumen
Palabras clave: Planificación urbana, normativa municipal,
viviendas de interés social, regularizaciones
Introduction
In recent decades, the city
of Guayaquil has experienced rapid urban growth; according to the 2022 census,
it has a population of 2,772,896 (INEC, 2022). This has led to the construction
of new infrastructure, the reconfiguration of public spaces, and changes in
land use, posing significant challenges in terms of land use planning. Rapid
urban growth and internal migration have led to the proliferation of housing in
informal settlements that require cadastral updating (regularization of
buildings) for their integration into the formal urban fabric.
In many low-income and peripheral sectors of
Latin American cities, the implementation of municipal regulations is
restricted and complicated, as it becomes exclusive and does not allow for the
inclusion of more flexible proposals that promote true social and economic
inclusion within housing modalities. This is mainly the result of high levels
of informality in land occupation, unauthorized construction, and the absence
of effective control and supervision by local authorities (Galarza &
García, 2020; González & Ruiz, 2019).
However, although there are urban planning
regulations that seek to support safety and order in buildings, most are not
enforced due to a lack of technical resources, slow legalization processes, and
a lack of technical support for communities (Municipality of Guayaquil, 2022; Expreso, 2022).
As a result, most homes are poorly designed
and built with materials that fall below quality standards, posing a latent
risk to low-income families (García & Martínez, 2021). In addition,
institutional fragmentation and excessive enforcement of rules further
complicate urban standardization and progress (González & Ruiz, 2019).
The implementation of the “Special Ordinance
for the Cadastral Update of Completed Buildings that do not have a final
inspection and/or cadastral registration and with land use different from that
recorded in the Cadastral System” in the city of Santiago de Guayaquil
represents a significant effort by municipal authorities to improve the
accuracy and efficiency of real estate registration, which has a direct impact
on tax collection, urban planning, and the provision of public services.
However, it is crucial to assess whether this regulation has been effectively
applied in all sectors of the city, considering the particularities of each
one, from the central areas to the most peripheral ones, which may have
different socioeconomic and urban dynamics.
Studying the effectiveness of the regulations
is important because an accurate and well-managed cadastral update is essential
for the proper distribution of resources and services. The cadastral update is
linked to the city's ability to generate tax revenue, and its outdated nature
affects the quality of life of citizens, as resources for works and services
are limited. if tax collection does not reflect the reality of each sector,
this could limit the implementation of infrastructure and service projects, mainly
affecting the most vulnerable areas; therefore, an updated cadastre is
essential for efficient urban planning.
An accurate and up-to-date cadastral system
provides the basis for decision-making on land use, zoning, urban expansion,
and the distribution of public services. A realistic urban cadastre will allow
for increased revenues in favor of city planning and a better redistribution of
these revenues for the benefit of spatially segregated sectors.
Cadastres are instruments that exist in
different municipal administrations, but they generally need to be updated or
restructured, as the passage of time has rendered them obsolete. This is a
reality that characterizes a large part of the cadastres in Latin America. The
updating of cadastres must take into account the cost-benefit of this
operation, as very complex cadastres involve higher costs. In addition, a
simple cadastre that gathers the necessary data for urban planning is more
useful in terms of saving financial resources, time, and effort. It is
essential to preserve data quality by making rational use of available
technology.
The decision to update the cadastre stems
from the need to increase property tax revenue; it is important to be clear
about which variables will be updated, and when and how this will be done. The
updating of a cadastre should be a consequence of changes in the urban reality,
such as: expansion of the city, emergence of speculation bubbles in certain
neighborhoods, increase in the volume of property transfers, proliferation of
irregular settlements, among other unforeseeable factors.
A strategy for the continuous updating of the
cadastre is known as cadastral maintenance, which aims to ensure that cadastral
data is as close as possible to reality; this implies that such maintenance
must also include massive updates (of the entire city or of certain sectors) in
short periods. (Águila, M & Erba, D, 2007)
This legible scheme will allow the city of
Guayaquil to generate a true ordering of buildings in favor of sustainable
urban planning and the inclusion of social housing proposals. The present study
aims to analyze the challenges and strategies that should be implemented for
the comprehensive inclusion of social housing within public policies so that it
can be considered a typology within Guayaquil's urban planning.
Methodology
Land use planning is
defined as the process of organizing land use and occupation, aimed at
achieving balanced and sustainable development. According to Massiris (2005), it involves regulating and promoting the
location and development of human settlements, economic activities, facilities,
and infrastructure, taking into account environmental conditions, social
aspirations, and development possibilities.
In the Latin American context, land use
planning has evolved from technocratic approaches to more participatory and
comprehensive perspectives. Fernández (2010) points out that urban planning
must consider not only physical aspects, but also social, economic, and
environmental dimensions in order to achieve more inclusive and sustainable
cities.
The housing crisis in Ecuador, especially in
informal urban areas, has reached critical levels that affect access to decent
housing for a significant percentage of the population. According to data from
the National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC, 2020), 39% of Ecuadorian
households lack adequate housing and live in overcrowded conditions.
Land use and urban planning in the context of
Guayaquil for growth management, especially in the process of regularizing
informal settlements and the sustainable development of the city. Urban
planning must consider the integration of these settlements, ensuring access to
basic services and public spaces, as well as security and social cohesion.
2.2 Cadastral updating and
municipal regulations for housing management in Guayaquil
Cadastral updating (regularization) is
understood as the set of actions aimed at formalizing existing informal
constructions, providing them with legal security, basic services, and adequate
housing conditions. Fernandes (2011) distinguishes between legal cadastral
updating (titling) and urban cadastral updating (adaptation to urban
regulations). Approaches to cadastral updating (regularization) have evolved
from eradication programs to in situ improvement strategies. According to
UN-Habitat (2003), successful regularizations must combine legal, urban, and
social aspects, ensuring community participation and long-term sustainability.
The specialized literature identifies
multiple challenges in the implementation of cadastral updating
(regularization) processes. Smolka (2003) highlights bureaucratic complexity,
lack of inter-institutional coordination, and limited technical capacity as the
main obstacles.
An analysis of municipal policies within the
Municipality of Guayaquil reveals that there are no official annual and
comparable data published publicly that directly indicate the number of
dwellings that comply with municipal building regulations in Guayaquil.
However, data is available from the most important update from 2008 to 2025. No
explicit record has been published on the number of homes that “comply” vs. “do
not comply” with building standards year by year during that period.
What is available is data
indirectly related to construction, regularization, and building permits—which
are useful approximations, but not equivalent to strict regulatory compliance.
Below is a table with approximate data based on available statistics on
regularization applications and homes built/permits, along with notes
explaining the limitations of this data:
The study adopted a case study design,
focusing on the city of Guayaquil, which allowed for an in-depth analysis of
the institutional and territorial context. Content analysis techniques were
applied for document review, descriptive statistics for quantitative data
processing, and thematic analysis for qualitative information. The
triangulation of sources and methods ensured the validity of the results and
strengthened the consistency of the conclusions obtained.
The methodological analysis is based on
criteria and aspects of public policy within the cadastral update of
regularizations and their correlation with the main regulations of the
Municipality of Guayaquil that affect or regulate aspects related to social
housing:
Substitute Ordinance on
Land Subdivision and Urban Development
This is the main municipal ordinance
regulating land subdivision and urban development in the canton of Guayaquil,
including social housing projects and similar projects (serviced lots).
Its reforms and provisions establish
requirements and procedures for the approval and development of urban
developments that may include social housing.
The regulations define obligations and
conditions for social housing or similar residential developments, which must
comply with the provisions of this ordinance and other national land use
regulations.
Amendments to the
Replacement Ordinance (August 2023)
First amendment to the Replacement Ordinance
on Land Parceling and Urban Development, published in Municipal Gazette No. 5
(2023), which updates criteria for public or private urban development
projects, including the requirement for a prior technical report and municipal
approval for social housing projects.
Tax Incentive Ordinance for
Social Interest Housing Programs
Municipal ordinance establishing tax benefits
(e.g., municipal tax reductions) to encourage investment in social interest
housing programs in the canton of Guayaquil, seeking to promote the
construction of this type of housing.
General Ordinance on
Buildings and Construction in the Canton of Guayaquil
Although it is a general building regulation,
it contains specific sections and annexes that regulate the construction of
affordable housing developments and social housing programs, such as land use
types, densities, and associated technical requirements.
Urban Planning and Land Use
Regulations
Complementary regulations on land use and
occupation in Guayaquil—included in municipal plans and the Local Information
System—condition where and how residential projects, including social housing,
can be developed.
These policies are also integrated into
municipal regulatory plans and annexes to urban planning ordinances.
Results
Successful or approved
regularizations have provided legal certainty to families in Guayaquil who have
voluntarily agreed to comply with regulations, allowing access to basic
services such as drinking water, sewerage, and electricity in areas poorly served
by the local council.
One example is sectors such as Flor de Bastión and Monte Sinaí, where
cadastral updating (regularization) has facilitated investments in
infrastructure that significantly improve citizens' quality of life. In
addition, it will allow thousands of property owners to regularize their
property status, accessing the cadastral registry without the need for
demolitions or costly penalties.
Cadastral updating (regularization) processes
will contribute to the integration of certain informal settlements into the
general urban fabric, improving connectivity and access to urban facilities
necessary for the development of their basic activities. The opening of roads
and the implementation of public transportation systems have reduced the
isolation of these communities.
Formal recognition of property improves its
commercial value and allows for its incorporation into planned urban
development. Legalization also drives the progressive improvement of the
physical environment and housing, which allows for a revaluation of urban
heritage.
Formalization has stimulated the local
economy by increasing property values as buildings are incorporated into the
tax system. Local studies indicate increases of 40-60% in property values.
Regularized buildings will begin to be taxed fairly, which represents an
increase in the municipality's tax base and contributes to greater fiscal
equity and financing for public works. In addition, there is recognition of
neighborhood economic activities, as the most recent reforms included the
possibility of regularizing small family businesses (stores, bakeries,
hairdressers, workshops), especially in low-income areas, which facilitates
local economic development without resorting to closures or arbitrary
sanctions.
With updated deeds and cadastral
registration, many owners were able to access bank loans and formalize sales
transactions, which activates the real estate market in previously informal
sectors.
The shortcomings of the reforms to the
Special Ordinance for the Cadastral Update of Completed Buildings that do not
have a Final Inspection and/or Cadastral Registration, and that also have a
land use different from that recorded in the Cadastral System in Guayaquil,
according to the assessment of the documentation investigated, can be
classified as legal, technical, administrative, and social. The following
problems have been identified:
Lack of clarity in scope: it is not always
clear which buildings or activities are actually covered by the ordinance,
which creates legal uncertainty.
Regulatory uncertainty: constant reforms
(five in total since 2020) create confusion among citizens, technicians, and
officials.
Overlap with other regulations: it may
conflict with the Land Use and Management Plan (PUGS) or environmental and land
use regulations.
Limitations due to incomplete cadastral
updating: the cadastre continues to have deficiencies in peripheral or urban
expansion areas, limiting the effectiveness of the ordinance.
Incompatible informal land use: in many
cases, it allows for the legalization of buildings with land uses not permitted
by the PUGS, creating a technical contradiction with land use planning.
Lack of structural verification: it does not
require in-depth technical inspections, which jeopardizes the safety of
buildings regularized solely through documentary procedures.
Persistent bureaucracy: although the latest
reform (June 2025) seeks to simplify procedures, there are still cumbersome
processes such as plans, permits, deeds, or land use validation that are
difficult for vulnerable sectors. In extreme cases, the processes require
between 10 and 15 different documents, including topographic, environmental,
risk, and service feasibility studies. This documentation, with costs ranging
from $2,000 to $5,000, represents a significant barrier for low-income
communities. The average time to complete a cadastral update (regularization)
process ranges from approximately 9 to 12 months, sometimes exceeding 15
months, significantly exceeding the deadlines established by regulations.
Delays are concentrated in the phases of
inspector assignment (25%), technical evaluation (45% of the time), and final
approval (30% of the time). The need for approvals from multiple entities
(municipality, service companies, environmental entities) leads to duplication
of procedures and lack of coordination. Forty percent of delays are attributed
to this institutional fragmentation.
Limited capacity of the municipality: there
is not enough staff or technology to quickly process the thousands of
applications generated by the ordinance. The analysis revealed that the
municipality has only 32 specialized technicians to handle cadastral updating
(regularization) processes, resulting in a ratio of approximately 20
applications handled daily by each technician (data obtained through a random
survey of DUMCE staff). This work overload causes significant delays in the
evaluation and approval of the procedures submitted.
Lack of follow-up and oversight: once the
Regularization Certificate has been issued, there is no robust system for
subsequent control. According to data obtained from the control records of the
regularizations assigned to the CAE Guayas, 26% of regularization requests
require corrections, and in 18% of cases, the processes must be re-submitted,
unnecessarily prolonging the time it takes to resolve them. The most frequent
observations include: lack of supporting documentation (18%), non-compliance
with technical specifications (14%), and inconsistencies in limited schemes or
parameters (8%).
Unequal access: the benefits of the ordinance
do not easily reach those living in low-income or marginalized areas due to
technological, economic, or educational barriers.
Lack of socialization: many citizens are
unaware of the ordinance or do not understand how to apply it, which limits its
impact.
Possible incentive for irregular
construction: by opening up the possibility of regularizing illegal buildings,
it may be rewarding informality and discouraging regulatory compliance from the
outset.
A practical example could be a bakery built
without a license in a residential area, which could benefit from the ordinance
and regularize its commercial land use. However:
This may violate the PUGS if the area is
zoned exclusively for housing.
It may cause nuisance to neighbors (noise,
traffic).
It does not guarantee that the construction
complies with structural or health safety standards.
Although the ordinance has a laudable
objective—to formalize and update Guayaquil's urban cadastre—its
legal, technical, and social shortcomings limit its effectiveness.
Harmonization with the PUGS, better enforcement, and more transparent and
equitable processes are needed to prevent the regulation from becoming an open
door to informality or an inefficient instrument.
The text sets out a
comprehensive set of strategies aimed at improving urban regularization,
control, and management processes through institutional strengthening,
administrative modernization, inter-institutional coordination, community
participation, and adaptation of the regulatory framework. These actions seek
to respond structurally to the technical, bureaucratic, and legal constraints
that have historically hindered the formalization of buildings and efficient
land management.
First, institutional strengthening is
proposed as a fundamental axis for ensuring the quality and speed of processes.
It is recognized that the shortage of specialized technical personnel is one of
the main bottlenecks in the review, oversight, and approval of procedures.
Therefore, it is proposed to increase the number of professionals with specific
training, which would allow for the adequate distribution of the workload,
reduce response times, and improve the technical rigor of evaluations. This
strengthening is not limited to a quantitative increase in staff, but
emphasizes the need to form multidisciplinary teams composed of architects,
engineers, and lawyers capable of comprehensively addressing the technical,
legal, and urban planning dimensions of each case.
Complementarily, the importance of
implementing ongoing training programs aimed at both professionals involved in
administrative processes and the general public is underscored. Ongoing
training would make it possible to update regulatory knowledge, standardize
technical criteria, and reduce recurring errors in the submission of
applications. Likewise, citizen training would contribute to a greater
understanding of the requirements and responsibilities associated with
regularization, promoting a more collaborative relationship between the public
administration and users. In this context, there is a clear need to unify the
criteria used by inspectors through permanent technical instructions that
ensure consistency in the interpretation of regulations and avoid contradictory
decisions between different evaluators.
The second strategic axis focuses on the
simplification and modernization of administrative processes, with a special
emphasis on comprehensive digitization. The implementation of digital platforms
is proposed to enable the efficient management of corrections, reducing
dependence on in-person procedures and physical documentation. The mandatory
use of electronic signatures by the professional responsible for the procedure
is proposed as a key tool to ensure the traceability, authenticity, and
technical responsibility of the files, in addition to streamlining approval
flows.
Reducing the documentation required is
another essential component of modernization. It is suggested that redundant or
unnecessary documents that do not add real technical value to the process be
eliminated, and that sworn statements be accepted in place of more complex
legal procedures, such as effective possession, especially in contexts where
these requirements represent a significant barrier to regularization.
Additionally, the creation of reusable technical information banks is proposed,
which would allow for the systematization of recurring criteria and exceptions,
facilitating the evaluation of similar cases and reducing administrative
discretion.
The standardization of technical criteria
appears to be a cross-cutting element for improving the transparency and
predictability of processes. The development of standardized checklists would
allow applicants to clearly understand the requirements from the outset,
minimizing subsequent observations. Likewise, the implementation of automatic
pre-evaluation systems would help detect early inconsistencies in files,
optimizing technical review time. These mechanisms are complemented by the
establishment of clear and explicit approval criteria, which strengthens legal
certainty and reduces uncertainty for both professionals and citizens.
The third axis addresses inter-institutional
coordination, recognizing that urban regularization involves multiple public
and private actors. The creation of a permanent inter-institutional technical
committee, made up of all relevant entities, is proposed in order to coordinate
actions, share information, and jointly resolve problems that arise in the
approval processes. This committee would allow for the establishment of clear
coordination protocols, the definition of maximum response times, and the promotion
of the use of information-sharing systems that avoid duplication and
unnecessary delays. Likewise, the possibility of developing simultaneous
approval procedures is proposed, reducing the time associated with sequential
procedures between different institutions.
In this same vein, the importance of
formalizing collaboration agreements with public service companies is
highlighted, given their key role in the provision of basic infrastructure and
the validation of technical conditions. These agreements would make it possible
to establish prioritization protocols for areas subject to regularization and
cadastral updating processes, as well as to develop joint financing mechanisms
that facilitate the implementation of necessary interventions. In addition, it
is proposed to promote inter-institutional training programs that strengthen
common technical capacities and foster a shared vision of urban management.
The fourth strategic axis focuses on
community participation and technical assistance, recognizing that
regularization cannot depend exclusively on the individual capacity of property
owners. The creation of a free technical assistance program is proposed,
coordinated with professional associations of architects and engineers, to
provide specialized support to communities with fewer resources. This program
is complemented by the development of educational guides that explain
procedures and requirements in a simple manner, facilitating understanding and
regulatory compliance. It also proposes the creation of decentralized service
offices, bringing technical services closer to the territories and reducing
barriers to access.
Finally, the text addresses the regulatory
and legal framework as an essential component for making the proposed
strategies viable. It highlights the need to update and harmonize local
regulations with national laws, avoiding contradictions and legal loopholes
that hinder regularization. The simplification of legal procedures is proposed
as a key measure to reduce costs and time, especially in contexts of
consolidated informality. It also proposes the creation of specific legal
figures to deal with special cases, such as inheritances or irregular sales,
which currently represent significant obstacles.
As a complement, incentives for formalization
are proposed, such as temporary property tax exemptions and mechanisms to
facilitate regularization in municipalities within urban limits. These measures
seek to generate real incentives for owners to initiate cadastral updating
processes, understanding formalization not only as a legal obligation but also
as an opportunity to improve legal security, access to services, and
sustainable urban planning.
Conclusions
The processes of updating
municipal regulations are not focused on or address specific issues related to
improving the quality of social housing or implementing it as a type of housing
design that is fully approved in the city of Guayaquil. They present a complex
picture that combines significant achievements with important limitations that
affect their effectiveness as a land use planning tool.
Regularizations have proven to be fundamental
in improving the living conditions of thousands of families in Guayaquil,
providing legal security, access to basic services, and opportunities for
economic development. Successful cases demonstrate the potential of these
processes to transform informal settlements into neighborhoods integrated into
the formal urban fabric.
The limitations of the current system are
structural and require comprehensive interventions. Insufficient technical
staff, procedural delays, excessive documentation requirements, and a lack of
inter-institutional coordination create a scenario that significantly limits
the effectiveness of regularizations as a land use planning tool.
The results suggest the need to move from a
reactive approach to a preventive and proactive one in order to establish
designs and improvements within a community housing framework. This implies not
only improving existing processes, but also developing mechanisms to prevent
the formation of new informal settlements.
The proposed strategies are technically
viable and financially feasible, considering the municipal budget and the
possibilities for inter-institutional cooperation in the implementation of
public policies that contribute to the concrete development of resources and
pre-established design typologies to improve access to housing and reduce the
gap in the face of a housing deficit that already exceeds 40%.
It is recommended to conduct further studies
on the social and economic impact of regularizations, comparative analyses with
other Latin American cities, and assessments of the environmental
sustainability of these processes. It is also necessary to investigate
innovative mechanisms for financing and community participation.
In conclusion, regularizations are a
necessary but insufficient tool for land use planning in Guayaquil. Their
optimization, through the implementation of the proposed strategies, is
essential for building a more orderly, equitable, and sustainable city.
Reference
Avila Beneras, J., Fois Lugo, M., & Hechavarría
Hernández, J. R. (2020). Strategies
for accessibility to the teodoro maldonado hospital in guayaquil.
a design proposal focused on the human being. Advances in Intelligent Systems
and Computing, 1131, 1256–1262. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39512-4_192
Carrión, A. y Erazo, J.
(2012). La forma urbana de Quito: una historia de centros y periferias. Bulletin de l'Institut français d'études andines, 41(3),
503-522.
de Murzi, T. P., & Orejuela, G. (2022). Residential
tissues in Guayaquil: urban indicators relating to compactness and
functionality[Tejidos residenciales en Guayaquil: indicadores urbanos
relativos a la compacidad y la funcionalidad]. ZARCH, 19, 124–139.
https://doi.org/10.26754/OJS_ZARCH/ZARCH.2022196923
De Murzi, T. P., & Orejuela, G. (2023). The geography
of Urban fragmentation: Gated communities in the Urban expansion of
Guayaquil, Ecuador[Geografía de la fragmentación urbana: las urbanizaciones
cerradas en la expansión de Guayaquil, Ecuador]. Revista de Urbanismo, 48, 110–134.
https://doi.org/10.5354/0717-5051.2023.67778
Fernandes, E. (2011). Regularization of
informal settlements in Latin America. Policy Focus Report. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Fernández, R.
(2010). Planificación urbana en América Latina:
experiencias de gestión territorial. Editorial Universidad Nacional.
Hidalgo Silva, D.
(2025). Guayaquil: Management Model and Implementation of the Market City. In
Urban Book Series: Vol. Part F1152 (pp. 247–263). Springer Science and
Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-94235-8_10
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos - INEC. (2022). Censo de Población y Vivienda 2022. Quito: INEC.
Lopez, A. P., Vazquez, M. L., & Hernández, J. R. H.
(2021). Pedestrian traffic
planning with topsis: Case study urdesa norte, guayaquil, ecuador. Advances in
Intelligent Systems and Computing, 1253, 69–76.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55307-4_11
Massiris, Á. (2005). Fundamentos conceptuales y metodológicos del ordenamiento territorial.
Tunja: Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia.
Méndez-Vélez, F., Palomeque-Cantos, R., &
Borja-Pozo, C. (2022). Socio-economic
evolution of Ecuador: Main economic indicators and social phenomena in recent
years. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2574, 090006.
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0105186
Municipio de Guayaquil. (2023). Plan de Desarrollo y Ordenamiento Territorial 2021-2031. Guayaquil: Dirección de Planificación.
Municipio de Guayaquil. (2024). Informe de Gestión de
Regularizaciones 2015-2024. Guayaquil: Dirección
de Planificación Territorial.
Rico, M. S. O., Vergara-Romero, A., Subia, J. F. R.,
& del Río, J. A. J. (2022). Study of citizen satisfaction and loyalty in the
urban area of Guayaquil: Perspective of the quality of public services
applying structural equations. PLoS ONE, 17(2),
e0263331. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263331
Sánchez Padilla, M. L., Hechavarría Hernández, J. R.,
& Portilla Castell, Y. (2021). Systemic Analysis of the Territorial and Urban
Planning of Guayaquil. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 271, 411–417.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80624-8_51
Smolka, M. (2003). Informalidad, pobreza urbana y precios de la tierra. Land Lines, 15(1), 1-4.
Torres-Espinoza, J., & Delgado-Bohórquez, A.
(2023). Sustainability evaluation and densification proposals in the center
of Guayaquil city[Evaluación de sostenibilidad y propuestas de densificación
en el centro de la ciudad de Guayaquil]. Estoa, 12(24), 92–108.
https://doi.org/10.18537/est.v012.n024.a08
Vallejo-Robalino, D., Ríos-Rivera, I., & Plaza, G.
G. (2024). Social Cartographies in Contexts of Violence(s): (Re)mapping
Borders and Limits in the Peripheral Barrios of Guayaquil,
Ecuador[Cartografias sociais em contextos de violência(s): (des)desenhar
fronteiras e limites nos bairros populares de Guayaquil,
Equador][Cartografías sociales en contextos de violencia(s): (des)dibujar
fronteras y límites en los barrios populares de Guayaquil, Ecuador]. Revista
de Estudios Sociales, 2024(88), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.7440/res88.2024.03
UN-Habitat. (2003). The Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements 2003. London:
Earthscan.
UN-Habitat. (2020). World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization. Nairobi: UN- Habitat.
Universidad Casa Grande. (2023). Análisis de
asentamientos informales en Guayaquil: diagnóstico y propuestas. Guayaquil: Observatorio Urbano.
Zambrano, M. (2022). "Actualización catastral
(regularización) urbana en Ecuador: balance y perspectivas". Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Urbanos, 8(2), 45-62.
Zambrano-Monserrate, M. A., Ruano, M. A., Silva, C. A.,
Campoverde, R., Rosero, C., & Sanchez-Loor, D. A. (2023). Dynamism of the housing rental
market in Guayaquil, Ecuador: an empirical analysis. Empirical Economics, 64(2), 747–764.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-022-02271-z