Mérida expands. It is enough to drive a few minutes in any direction to come across new subdivisions, private and developments that promise modernity and well-being. However, it is clear that growth does not always equate to building a better city.
In the last two decades, the urban sprawl of Mérida has doubled, from just over 21 thousand hectares in 2000 to more than 42 thousand in 2020, according to information recently released by UNAM Global magazine. This territorial advance exceeds the rate of population growth, according to the same source, which shows a dispersed and inefficient pattern.
The city devours more land, but it does not necessarily improve the lives of those who inhabit it. Herein lies the first governance challenge: who decides how and where Mérida grows? Although there are plans and rules, the actual decisions respond more to the pressure of the real estate market than to a strategic vision. Land-use changes and authorizations are approved in a piecemeal manner, without assessing cumulative impacts or prioritizing the public interest.
Effective governance could reverse this through participatory and transparent processes, in which municipal, state, and federal bodies coordinate with civil society to align development with collective goals of sustainability and equity.
Expansion generates high costs. Each new subdivision demands streets, lighting, water, drainage, garbage collection, transportation and security. Although the developments are private, their operating costs fall on the treasury, making the city more expensive for everyone. The greater the distance, the greater the government spending and the worse the services. Robust governance mitigates these risks by requiring proportionate contributions from developers and by investing in efficient infrastructure that optimises resources.
In addition, it encourages dependence on the car. Homes far from jobs, schools, hospitals and leisure spaces lengthen transfers, saturate roads and pollute the air. Mérida suffers more congestion, stress and the outlay of families increases, along with the loss of green areas and urban overheating. Governance promotes alternatives such as integrated public transport and smart densification, reducing emissions and improving mobility.
Metropolization aggravates socio-territorial segregation. High-value developments are concentrated in the north of Mérida, while the south and west are home to vulnerable populations with precarious services, reproducing historical inequalities. Inclusive governance counters this through redistributive policies, such as incentives for mixed housing and equitable access to services.
Metropolization aggravates socio-territorial segregation. High-value developments are concentrated in the north of Mérida, while the south and west are home to vulnerable populations with precarious services, reproducing historical inequalities. Inclusive governance counters this through redistributive policies, such as incentives for mixed housing and equitable access to services.
All of the above is aggravated by the lack of metropolitan coordination and long-term planning. Mérida transcends its municipal boundaries, involving complex environmental and social dynamics in neighboring territories. Here, metropolitan governance emerges as a solution: collaborative institutions that integrate inter-municipal visions, with mechanisms of accountability and citizen participation.
Rethinking the expansion of Mérida is not a minor technicality, but a political decision that cannot be postponed. Strong governance allows you to choose between a city without limits or a consolidated, densified and livable one. Because, when growing up involves more traffic, heat, and distance, we need to ask ourselves if we’re progressing or just expanding.
Source: La jornada Maya
