Conceptualizing the urban economy in a dualistic framework generated debate since it was first introduced in the International Labor Organization (ILO) studies in the early 1970s (Moser 1978). The duality originally posed in these studies with reference to urban economic activities was later adopted in contexts as diverse as transportation and housing, gradually losing its differen­ tiating focus. Currently its use is quite ambiguous, and may even misguide public action unless its connotations are clarified at the· outset of policy formulation.

Historically, the 'informal' housing concept has been equated with self-built housing. Nonmonetary relationships in particular have been perceived as characterizing 'informal' housing production and transactions. In this paper, by highlighting the increased evidence of commercjalization of housing activi­ ties,2 I will illustrate the increasing ambiguity of the 'informal' housing con­ cept. If the empirical evidence shows that the distinction between formal and informal housing sectors is blurring, the justification for using these concepts to characterize housing activities would be untenable. This paper is an attempt to critically assess what we mean by the 'informal' housing sector, and to examine whether the distinction between formal and informal sectors as an analytical construct accurately depicts current housing activities in developing countries.

The premise of this paper is that immigrant homeownership patterns in global metropolitan housing markets are profoundly influenced by international migration dynamics and that homeownership for immigrants is realized in ethnic clusters in varying degrees and in unexpected locations of metropolitan regions. Research shows that ethnic clusters are increasingly emerging in different places -- particularly, in suburban areas of global metropolises as a result of some immigrants following networks of kin and friends along migration chains and bypassing inner cities altogether. In contrast to earlier theories on immigrant residential settlement patterns that view ethnic neighborhoods as disadvantaged “zones-in-transition,” some of these newer clusters have unexpectedly high homeownership rates.

A study of San Francisco Bay Area nonprofit housing devel­ opers shows that they have the organizational capability to be an agent of low-income ho using policy. They are relatively productive and serve predominantly very-low-income house­ holds. Their organizations tend to be well established, with significant staff levels, wide geographic service areas, and substantialgovernment support. Both the nonprofit housing developer organizations and their /ow-income housing pro­ jects depend heavily on government resources. Thus, non­ profit housing developers offer not an independent alterna­ tive to government, but rather represent a hardworking, dedicated partner.