Rethinking Property and Belonging in Mexico City
Community land trusts as a possible solution to Mexico City's housing crisis
Mexico City faces two accelerating forces: global capital and local precarity. In neighborhoods like Roma Norte, Condesa, and Santa Maria la Ribera, a wave of gentrification has reshaped the social and physical landscape. Long-term tenants, artisans, and small developed vendors have been displaced by short-term rentals and speculative redevelopment catering to foreign digital nomads and upper-income professionals.
This process is not just economic; it is also cultural. When housing becomes a commodity, a city loses its social memory. Shared ownership could offer a structured response to this crisis because it redesigns who owns the land, who governs it, and who benefits from its appreciation. Rather than treating housing affordability as a market failure, shared ownership treats and corrects it through collective control.
Over the past decade, Mexico City has become one of Latin America’s most unequal housing markets. Rents in central neighborhoods have risen. Between 2019 and 2023, rent for one-bedroom apartments in central Mexico City neighborhoods such as Roma Norte, Condesa, and Hipódromo rose by approximately 30% according to a study of transnational gentrification. These numbers spiked during the COVID-19 pandemic that brought in lots of foreigners working remote jobs. Some districts also lost up to a third of their long-term residents. In Condesa alone, estimates suggest that as many as one in five homes is now a short-term let or a tourist dwelling. The rise of short term rental platforms, speculative investment funds, and dollarized property markets has compounded the problem.
One Solution: Shared Ownership Through Community Land Trusts
Mexico possesses a deep cultural memory of shared landholding, from the Ejido system to the cooperative urban settlements of Iztapalapa in the 1980s. How can we ensure that rising property values translate into community wealth that benefits those who built them?
Shared ownership, which directly addresses these drivers of gentrification by re-socializing capital, offers a way forward. As in other countries, community land trusts in Mexico could have these features:
The land would be held by a non-profit trust or cooperative, governed by residents and community representatives.
The buildings on the land would be individually owned, co-owned, etc.
Residents would elect a governing board, such as 1/3 of residents, 1/3 community, and so on.
Decisions about rent, maintenance, and future developments would be made collectively.
The trust for the land would be legally locked, not sellable for profit, and only leased for community use (housing, cultural spaces, etc.). Mexico City’s Article 12 of the Constitution aligns with this idea, which recognizes the social function of property and the right to the city.
This model is not hypothetical; it draws on an international movement of CLTs that has spread across the Global South, as documented in On Common Ground: International Perspectives on the Community Land Trust.
Open Questions
This current situation in Mexico City exposes the fragility of treating housing solely as a market commodity. Policies focused only on rent control or short term subsidies cannot outpace speculative investment and global real estate flows. Community land trusts provide a structural alternative option by redetermining ownership, the people who govern it, and the people who benefit from rising land values. It also offers a path into community wealth for the residents, rather than displacement.
This would come with at least the following challenges:
Mexico’s civil and property codes do not yet explicitly recognize community land trusts, making governance, taxation, and registration complex.
Shared ownership models tend to rely on cooperation between municipalities, housing agencies, and residents. The alignment here for Mexico is slow.
Acquiring land in gentrified districts like Roma Norte or Condesa would require substantial capital. Without public or philanthropic support, community groups may struggle to compete with private investors.
Although these challenges stand strong, they do not diminish the promise of shared ownership. If nurtured through intentional policy and civic partnerships, land trusts could turn the forces of gentrification that began to happen during COVID, into engines of inclusion, transforming Mexico City from a marketplace of extraction into a common good sustained by those who give it life.
Learn more about community land trusts (CLTs) and how Chilangos have responded to the gentrification:
Community Land Trusts, Then And Now - by The Sanders Institute
The battle against gentrification in Mexico City: Xenophobia or social justice?