Sustainability is based on three pillars: social, economic, and environmental. However, the main systems of evaluation of the sustainable building, such as Building Research Establishment Assessment Method (BREEAM) and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), have a strong burden towards the environmental aspect, neglecting the social and economic, and underestimating the effects of the building projects on reducing poverty and inequity. The purpose of this research was to identify socioeconomic criteria for the reality of developing countries, specifically México, and systematize them in a conceptual framework for the stages of planning, design, and construction of buildings with a focus on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and human rights. Through semi-structured interviews with experts and surveys, 12 criteria were identified and ranked for the planning stage, 19 for the design stage, and 15 for the construction stage, being especially relevant the contribution to the Sustainable cities and communities (SDG11), Decent work and economic growth (SDG8) and Reduced inequalities (SDG10) goals. It was found that projects considered sustainable were required to have clear policies on the issues of labor rights, social inclusion, zero tolerance for corruption, gender perspective, and prevention of damage to community environmental assets. The criteria identified contribute to the knowledge of social and economic sustainability in developing countries and aim to make those involved aware of the significance of their decisions in the different stages of the life cycle of construction projects.

ResumenEl uso de prefabricados en la construcción aparentemente no es una alternativa económica si se le compara con métodos constructivos que hacen uso de mano de obra de manera intensiva en países en vías de desarrollo. En este trabajo se presentan un estudio comparativo de dos alternativas de construcción de techumbre en construcción de vivienda masiva en el sureste de México. El sistema tradicional de construcción, que usa mano de obra intensiva y el sistema de losas prefabricadas L-18 fueron modeladas utilizando el sistema de simulaciones computarizadas EzStrobe. Se realizó un estudio técnico-económico entre ambos sistemas, comparando la relación entre sus insumos, los costos directos e indirectos de administración. En lo que se refiere al costo directo se observó que el método prefabricado es mayor que el método tradicional, sin embargo, el sistema prefabricado es capaz de ajustar y adaptar su precio de venta en la planta, en función de un volumen determinado de obra.Palabras Clave: Simulación computarizada, costo directo, costos indirectos, análisis comparativo AbstractThe use of prefabrication in construction apparently is not a economic alternative if compared with more labor intensive construction methods in developing countries. This work presents a comparison study between two choices of roofing systems for massively housing construction in southeast Mexico. The traditional labor intensive roofing construction and the prefabricated roofing construction system coded L-18 were modeled using the computer program EzStrobe simulation software. A technical and economical analysis was performed on both construction methods, comparing the relationship between resources, direct cost, and indirect administrative cost. In reference to the direct cost, the prefabricated construction method cost was higher than the traditional method; however, the prefabricated system is capable of adjusting its selling price in the production factory according to a given construction volume.Keywords: Computer-assisted simulation, direct cost, indirect cost, comparative analysis El sistema actual de fabricación de losas para vivienda en el contexto del sureste de México, ha sido desde años atrás el concepto de obra con el mayor porcentaje del costo dentro del costo directo total de una vivienda de acuerdo con el estudio realizado por Silvia Campos (Campos, 1985). En lo que se refiere al tiempo de ejecución y la calidad de este concepto de obra se han podido identificar algunos defectos que se presentan debido a que en la mayoría de las veces no se cuenta con una supervisión adecuada de los recursos materiales suministrados por el proveedor,

Collins spells out many of the underlying subtexts of recent welfare reform. The authors address many of the theoretical issues overlooked or simplified in the debate over welfare reform in the 1990s.The articles in Lost Ground probe deeper into the meaning of welfare reform from the perspective of authors who are critical of the institutions of race, patriarchy, and capitalism. Linda Gordon's essay on the contradictions of who "deserves" (or not) public assistance or aid in times of "political crisis" peels away one aspect of the political construction of welfare. Historically, males have been on the receiving end of relief whether in the form of war pensions, job creation, or unemployment insurance. But public policy has both expanded to include women and mothers and also retracted, penalizing their participation. These policy swings, and in particular the present consensus of welfare reform, "could not have been achieved without both the negative and the (allegedly) positive discourses about women and mothers" that limit poverty policy debates (20). Combined with the racialized discourse about welfare (ch. 8 by Neubeck), welfare reform obfuscates any serious reform for living wages, job creation, and limits on capital accumulation by the wealthy class. Whether welfare recipients by opportunity or time limits in the recent welfare law become employed, the merits of welfare reform are extolled irrespective of job quality (ch. 5 by Schram and Soss). Studies concluded before the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) was signed into law found the poor and welfare recipients with high degrees of ambition to locate living wage jobs. The essays in this collection examine why this discontinuity persists.Chapters by Burnham, Neubeck, and Jennings further illustrate how welfare reform compounds disparities manifest in racism. That welfare use reflects a higher rate for women of color than Euro-American women is an indicator of income, education, and wealth inequality levels in the United States, not the availability of public assistance that was frequently echoed by conservative pundits (chapter 4 by Burnham). Women of color and immigrant women are especially economically vulnerable to policy that transfers ever