Abstract Little is known about the struggle for housing in rural areas or whether rural housing standards and aspirations resemble those of urban areas. This article, based on field research in Venezuela, analyzes housing ideology as expressed in public policy and housing programs, and in interviews with and actions of rural leaders, employers, government officials, and citizens. Competing housing ideologies co‐exist but one—the cement‐block house—dominates; although international and urban in origin, the cement‐block model is diffused through rural housing agencies and political agendas. Housing practices are neither consistent with nor weaken the dominant ideology; and some aspects of rural housing conflicts are similar to those in urban settings. These findings support the need for further research to better understand the conditions under which rural and urban housing issues differ.
Focusing on the impacts of two state-planned industries in Venezuela, a steel complex, studied in 1979-1981, and a forestry industry, studied in 1989-1992, the author systematically explores the multiple factors that contribute to women's control over their decisions and influence on others. Rates of workforce participation, types of self-employment, variation in incomes, and migration and marriage patterns support her conclusion that attitudes and social-cultural factors, as well as economic opportunities, favor women's greater relative power in the forestry zone, a power that is in good part understood in terms of women's ability to act apart from their traditionally defined roles in the private sphere. (Lat Am Perspect/DÜI)