To move or not to move: Relationships to place and relocation choices in HOPE VI

This article has two purposes. First, it explores the ideas of vulnerability, precariousness, and resilience as they apply to people, housing, neighborhoods, and metropolitan areas. People might be more vulnerable to shocks or strains, we propose, if they are members of racial/ethnic minorities, recent immigrants, non-high school graduates, are children or over 75 years old, disabled, recent veterans, living in poverty, or living in single-parent households. Housing may be more precarious, we propose, when it is rented, multi-family, manufactured, crowded, or subject to overpayment. The article goes on to document the relationships between potential personal or household vulnerability and potentially precarious housing conditions. Microdata from the 2005–2007 American Community Survey suggest that an important minority of people have multiple vulnerabilities; these vulnerabilities associate with residence in precarious housing. We suggest that policy be directed toward precarious situations most likely to afflict the most vulnerable populations, especially single-parent households and immigrants.     

Comment on Langley C. Keyes et al.’s “Networks and nonprofits: Opportunities and challenges in an era of federal devolution”

Abstract

Housing markets are determined by a complex interplay of consumers and suppliers. The Keyes et al. article discusses the changing landscape for nonprofit housing providers and what recent developments in federal housing assistance policy will mean to them. But this perspective is too narrow to predict the effects of changes in federal housing policy because all housing providers are somewhat interrelated. All housing providers need to be considered, and using the terms “for‐profit” and “nonprofit” to distinguish between the two types of providers is unfortunate and misleading.

For‐profits and nonprofits are fundamentally different: They place a different emphasis on community, and nonprofits can often deliver subsidies that for‐profits cannot. In addition, the strengths and the skills needed to produce housing under somewhat different objectives have led to some specialization. Ultimately, however, determining the optimal provider or mix of providers is best left to local and state governments as federal housing assistance devolves.     

Creating an enabling environment for housing: Recent reforms in Mexico

Abstract

A recent World Bank policy statement on housing advocates the reform of government policies, institutions, and regulations to enable housing markets to work more efficiently. The policy statement identifies several instruments that governments can use to address housing market constraints, and to improve the performance of the housing sector as a whole, while paying particular attention to the needs of the poor.

In recent years, the government of Mexico has employed many of the enabling instruments described in the World Bank's housing policy statement. This article reviews the role of housing in the Mexican economy and the major reforms that the Mexican government has implemented to improve the operation of the housing market so that private lenders and home builders can play an expanded role in addressing the country's housing needs. The World Bank has supported the government's reform program, and since 1985 it has lent more than $1.2 billion to Mexico for low‐income housing projects.     

The impact of RTC dispositions on local housing and real estate markets

Abstract

This article examines the critical question of whether disposition activity of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) will disrupt local real estate markets by driving values down and encouraging additional defaults. The question is approached by identifying key characteristics of local economies and real estate markets that could be associated with adverse market responses and then examining 12 individual metropolitan areas in this context. A survey of metropolitan areas with high RTC concentrations finds varying potential for adverse impact. Detailed case studies in three metropolitan areas—Dallas, Denver, and Oklahoma City—find the potential to vary widely by property type, quality level, and geographic location. By and large, commercial markets are expected to be less affected because of (1) the already depressed condition of most markets, (2) market segmentation that would insulate investment grade submarkets, (3) capitalization of expectations about disposition, and (4) political constraints on the rate of RTC activity. However, the geographic concentration of inventory that is combined with potential tipping dynamics associated with neighborhood change could render certain affordable housing markets vulnerable to adverse market responses. Policy recommendations to mitigate such impacts are suggested.     

Why voucher and certificate users live in distressed neighborhoods

Abstract

The Section 8 voucher and certificate program potentially allows recipients to choose better neighborhoods than they might otherwise be able to afford. This article compares the location of households using Section 8 vouchers and certificates with the location of other renter households, both low‐income renters and all renters.

In 1998, Section 8 users were 75 percent as likely as other poor tenants to live in distressed neighborhoods but 150 percent more likely than all renters to live in such tracts. These national averages obscure substantial variation among metropolitan areas. Section 8 users concentrate in distressed neighborhoods when rental housing concentrates there, but they avoid distressed neighborhoods with very low rents. Concentration also hinges on race; when assisted households are mostly black and other residents are mostly white, assisted households are much more likely to live in distressed neighborhoods.     

The Gautreaux Legacy: What Might Mixed‐Income and Dispersal Strategies Mean for the Poorest Public Housing Tenants?

Abstract

The current transformation of public and assisted housing reflects the legacy of the Gautreaux case, which created the first mobility and scattered‐site programs. Mixed‐income and dispersal strategies now dominate federal housing policy, although their focus has shifted. Drawing on evidence from two preliminary studies of public housing transformation in Chicago, we argue that these new strategies seem to offer benefits for distressed public housing communities but also involve risks for the most vulnerable current tenants. Increased screening and/or the need to compete with private market tenants may force these families out of the assisted housing market.

Addressing the complex needs of the most troubled public housing tenants will call for a more comprehensive solution. The intent of the Gautreaux case was to increase opportunity and enhance quality of life for public housing tenants; policy makers should take steps to ensure that current programs reflect these fundamental goals.     

The challenges facing public housing authorities in a brave new world

Abstract

Public housing authorities (PHAs) are entering a brave new world. Major proposed changes to the public housing program will force PHAs to compete with private sector providers for tenants. To succeed, they will have to act more like entrepreneurial market participants: to change their management practices, the types of tenants they house, and the kinds of developments they operate, and to attract private capital for the development and operation of public‐private public housing ventures.

PHAs must confront the challenges of transformation while pursuing four mutually conflicting goals: housing the neediest, achieving diversity of tenantry, cross‐subsidizing by attracting unsubsidized tenants, and attracting private capital. Success, or even survival, may require sacrificing one or more of these goals. Whether PHAs can increase housing production to such an extent that they can provide sufficient housing for the neediest while fulfilling the other goals as well remains unclear.     

Comment on Roberto G. Quercia and George C. Galster's “The challenges facing public housing authorities in a brave new world”

Abstract

We find Quercia and Galster's article on reforming public housing an intriguing academic exercise that contains some key insights useful to practitioners. However, the article fails to consider several key elements in the provision of assisted housing that make their “constrained quadrilemma” much less problematic than they assume.

The article ignores the tenant‐based certificate/voucher approach to meeting the housing needs of low‐income and very low income persons and households. This is a significant oversight, in that many public housing authorities (PHAs) manage a larger portfolio of certificates than of PHA‐owned housing. If the litmus test of the success of public housing's “reinvention” is the extent to which it is able to maximize both the number of low‐income households served and their social and geographic integration, then public housing's extensive use of certificate/voucher programs demonstrates a road out of the quadrilemma.     

The impact of neighbors who use section 8 certificates on property values

Abstract

This article statistically examines the sale prices of single‐family homes surrounding Section 8 sites first occupied between 1991 and 1995 in Baltimore County. If only a few Section 8 sites were located within 500 feet, we found a strong positive impact on property values in higher‐valued, real‐appreciation, predominantly white census tracts. However, in low‐valued or moderately valued census tracts experiencing real declines in values since 1990, Section 8 sites and units located in high densities had a substantial adverse effect on prices within 2,000 feet, with the effect attenuated past 500 feet. Focus groups with homeowners revealed that the negative impact was based on the units’ imperfect correlation with badly managed and maintained properties.

We argue that policies should be devised to direct Section 8 households away from vulnerable neighborhoods, better regulate managers of Section 8 apartments, and more stringently screen and monitor Section 8 households.