between both developed subsystems is a profoundly economic one. Mutual aid represented a resource granted without intervention by the labor force, considering the sectors with fewer resources and without the ability to save that the other subsystem required, destined towards the "middle" sectors.
Likewise, each cooperative could diversify according to the ownership model into “user” co- operatives - where ownership is undivided, the built housing com- plex belongs to the cooperative and gives the "right of use and enjoyment" to its members-; and "owner" cooperatives – where construction is undertaken col- lectively and then each member is assigned a home individually owned-. The model most used by cooperatives and driven by advi- sory institutions has historically
It was a complex project of organization, management, and construction that gave architects a substantial role in the possible resolution –formal, distributive, constructive– of the social housing “problem”.
been collective ownership, that is, user cooperatives, which states, “that the housing ownership belongs to the coop- erative […] but it cannot be mortgaged or transferred in the market”. For example, “if a member wishes to move, for whatever reasons, he/she has to ask the cooperative to select a substitute member from a waiting list from the same cooperative members who wish to move, due to an increase or decrease in the family or new members who wish enter" 7 . Although this new cooperative model implied certain confidence in popular self-management, it did not set production - its processes and products - adrift. The co- operative system intended to produce a new decentralized management model, entrusting its development to the re- lationship between cooperatives and Technical Assistance Institutes (IAT), a new figure created by the Law in order to provide advice at the different stages of housing complex production. These IATs, private non-governmental orga- nizations made up of multidisciplinary teams (engineers, architects, social workers, among others), were intended to provide technical services for project and construction management, cooperative education, financial, legal, and social advice, assisting the cooperatives throughout the housing production process. Each cooperative unit was obligated and had the right to contract an IAT, as well as the possibility to choose which one. It was a complex project of organization, management, and construction that gave ar- chitects a substantial role in the possible resolution –formal, distributive, constructive– of the social housing “problem”. Between 1968 and 1973, more than thirty IATs were formed and authorized to operate throughout the country, among which the CCU Institutes (Uruguayan Coopera- tive Center) and CEDAS (Center for Technical and Social Assistance) stood out due to the number of programs they assisted.
↤ Conjunto MESA 1 MESA 1 Complex
6 The work contributed by the cooperative members "mutual aid" was counted in working hours, however this work did not qualify for pension and social security contributions. 7 Di Paula, Jorge “The federation of mutual aid cooperatives of Uruguay as a social move- ment”, Urban Notebook 7: culture and society space. 2008.
↦ 23
Movimiento Moderno / Modern Movement
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online