Islands of decay in seas of renewal: Housing policy and the resurgence of gentrification

Abstract

For many observers, the recession of the early 1990s signaled the end of what Berry called islands of renewal in seas of decay. In the past decade, however, shifts in mortgage finance have intersected with developments in assisted housing to alter the links between gentrification and housing policy. In this article, we use field observation, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data, and HOPE VI plans to analyze the resurgence of gentrification in eight U.S. cities.

Between 1992 and 1997, gentrified neighborhoods attracted conventional homepurchase mortgage capital at a rate that grew at more than 2.3 times the suburban rate. Logit models confirm that mortgage capital favors gentrified neighborhoods even after controlling for applicant and loan characteristics, suggesting a new relationship between mortgage lending and neighborhood change. In some cities, gentrification has surrounded islands of decay and poverty with landscapes of renewal     

From seaside to Southside: New urbanism's quest to save the inner city

Abstract

In this article, we use a random sample of urban community development corporations (CDCs) to determine whether distinct types exist and, if so, to estimate their prevalence in the industry. The typical urban CDC has a diversified portfolio of economic and social development activities, including community organizing, and is likely to have a housing development program, although not necessarily a large one because relatively few are high producers.

Large‐scale housing producers, defined in the study as having produced at least 500 units during the previous 10 years, comprise 18 percent of CDCs. A large organizational capacity, an affiliation with national intermediaries, the training of staff and the adoption of computers, the length of executive directors’ tenure, and the share of funding devoted to housing programs are the most important factors increasing the odds that a CDC will belong to the group of high producers.     

Comment on Chester Hartman's “The case for a right to housing”: The right to “poverty with a roof"—a response to hartman

Abstract

While the goal of establishing a right to decent, affordable housing is noble, a right to housing alone ignores the variety of underlying processes that concentrate certain types of households in conditions of poverty. A right that simply makes surviving poverty marginally more bearable is a troubling notion. That approach to problem solving addresses the symptom and not the cause. Rather, government should focus on enforcing existing individual rights and creating opportunities where possible and feasible so as to aid every American to achieve his or her full productive potential as a human being.     

Revitalizing inner‐city neighborhoods: New York city's Ten‐Year Plan

Abstract

This article examines the impact of New York City's Ten‐Year Plan on the sale prices of homes in surrounding neighborhoods. Beginning in the mid‐1980s, New York City invested $5.1 billion in constructing or rehabilitating over 180,000 units of housing in many of the city's most distressed neighborhoods. One of the main purposes was to spur neighborhood revitalization.

In this article, we describe the origins of the Ten‐Year Plan, as well as the various programs the city used to implement it, and estimate whether housing built or rehabilitated under the Ten‐Year Plan affected the prices of nearby homes. The prices of homes within 500 feet of Ten‐Year Plan units rose relative to those located beyond 500 feet, but still within the same census tract. These findings are consistent with the proposition that well‐planned project‐based housing programs can generate positive spillover effects and contribute to efforts to revitalize inner‐city neighborhoods.     

The low‐income housing tax credit program goes mainstream and moves to the suburbs

Abstract

The Low‐Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program is now 20 years old. With the maturing of the program, the use of tax credits has become commonplace in the development of rental housing across the nation. This article examines how the program has changed both financially and spatially. Specifically, the article asks whether it provides a mechanism that can help deconcentrate impoverished renters by providing access to low‐poverty neighborhoods.

This research finds that as the price for tax credits rises, the program becomes increasingly popular with developers who are helping it make inroads in low‐poverty suburbs. By entering the suburbs, the LIHTC program is meeting and even exceeding the performance of the Housing Choice Voucher Program in terms of offering opportunities to live in low‐poverty settings.     

Local response to federal changes in the housing voucher program: A case study of intraregional cooperation

Abstract

The desire to increase residential choice for Section 8 voucher clients resulted in the adoption of portability by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Portability allows voucher holders to move between the jurisdictions of local housing authorities (HAs). InterHA cooperation could ease the administrative and financial burdens imposed by portability and improve service to voucher recipients. However, voluntary regional cooperation is rare.

This article presents a case study of a successful, voluntary, intraregional cooperative agreement among HAs. Theoretical and empirical analyses suggest that a cooperative agreement is more likely to develop voluntarily if two conditions are present: rational self‐interest and shared norms and trust among the managers. Agreements can ease the burdens associated with portability, but it is important for the parties to regularly assess implementation issues to ensure the agreement's continuing effectiveness. The article concludes with policy implications based on the findings from this research.     

Comment on Jill Khadduri's “should the housing voucher program become a state‐administered block grant?”

Abstract

The stated goal of the Housing Act of 1949 is “a decent home and suitable living environment for every American family.” It is time that we delivered on that commitment. Contrary to popular opinion, this does not require spending more money on housing assistance. It can be achieved without additional funds by shifting all funds from less cost‐effective methods for delivering housing assistance to choice‐based vouchers as soon as current contractual commitments permit and by gradually reducing the large subsidies to current voucher recipients. The proposal to replace the Housing Choice Voucher Program with a block grant to states can contribute to this goal by precluding the use of the block grant funds for project‐based assistance, increasing the targeting of assistance to the poorest families, and including the fraction of recipients with extremely low incomes in the formula for determining the performance rating of state programs.     

Comment on Chester Hartman and David Robinson's “evictions: The hidden housing problem"—protection or protraction?

Abstract

Since the 1960s, judges and legislatures have made it increasingly difficult for landlords to evict tenants even in those instances where tenants have breached their leases. Sometimes, the growth of tenant protections has actually harmed law‐abiding tenants by raising costs to landlords and allowing rule‐breakers to remain in their apartments. Most landlords and tenants should want a system of laws that provides for both fair and efficient eviction procedures. Tenants should be entitled to legal representation when they are threatened with eviction, but their attorneys should not use the legal system to obtain free accommodations for their clients.

In the end, efforts to improve the housing of low‐ and moderate‐income households should rely not on setting up impediments to eviction, but rather on increasing tenants’ ability to afford housing and reducing the cost of housing development and operation.     

Section 8 and Movement to Job Opportunity: Experience after Welfare Reform in Kansas City

Abstract

This research addresses the extent to which tenant‐based rental assistance, before and after welfare reform, helps households move to areas with greater opportunities for employment. It was thought that the threat of losing their welfare benefits would encourage participants in the Section 8 program to use the mobility it offers to move to neighborhoods with greater opportunities for employment.

Two samples of Section 8 program participants, one taken before welfare reform and the other taken after it was enacted, have been examined. With the strong economy after welfare reform, more Section 8 households are employed and fewer are on welfare. However, the analysis finds that, independent of welfare reform, households did not use their housing subsidy to move to areas with greater opportunities for employment. Program participants typically remained in racially concentrated areas of the central city, away from those neighborhoods with job growth or large numbers of jobs.     

Housing subsidy projects in Amdo: modernity,governmentality, and income disparity in Tibetan areas of China

This paper explores the ways in which housing projects in the northeastern Tibetan region of Amdo (Qinghai) produce governable citizens through rural reconstruction projects. Since the beginning of the “Construction of the New Socialist Countryside” project in 2005, the Chinese state has made great efforts to improve the living standards of rural populations, with a particular focus on the construction of “comfortable” and modern housing. This paper examines the housing subsidy projects that were launched in Amdo in 2009. Drawing on qualitative data, including participant observation and interviews, the paper examines the ways in which Tibetan villagers seek to achieve their versions of modernity through these projects. It analyzes how housing projects have encouraged villagers to become more avid market consumers by cultivating and increasing their desires for material improvement. In doing so, these projects have increased income disparities among households in the same village.