Comment on James H. Carr and Michelle Mulcahy's “Twenty years of housing policy: what's new,what's changed,what's ahead?”

Housing policy in the post Great Recession (GR) era faces tremendous uncertainties, but clearly there will be more sensitivity around risk, quality, and transparency in capital markets. The post-GR domestic policy environment and economy are likely to impose several overarching constraints, including less access to world capital markets for financing housing, more restrictive assessments of risk, and increasing restraints on federal domestic spending particularly for non-entitlement programs. Carr and Mulcahy provide a substantial agenda of liberal-progressive policies that focus on the predatory and risky practices of loan originators and promote expansion of home ownership for low-income households. If we are indeed on the brink of an era of austerity, the housing policy debate will need to focus on priorities for contraction rather than expansion in housing programs, and on tenure-neutral policies rather than promoting home ownership.     

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.     

Does density exacerbate income segregation? Evidence from U.S. metropolitan areas, 1980 to 2000

Abstract

A fundamental goal of many smart growth efforts is to promote greater socioeconomic equity through more compact development. In this article, we point out that the connection between the built environment and socioeconomic outcomes may be more complex than it is generally portrayed to be, particularly in light of recent trends in urban and regional development.

Through an empirical analysis involving two measures of income segregation, dissimilarity and isolation, in a national data set of metropolitan areas from 1980 to 2000, we illustrate that the relationship between density and income segregation follows a quadratic function, first rising, then falling, as densities increase. Moreover, changes in density—whether increases or decreases—always increased segregation. These findings suggest that, if greater socioeconomic equity is a goal, smart growth programs need to pay as much attention to market forces and the underlying political landscape as they do to the built environment.     

HOPE VI relocation: Moving to new neighborhoods and building new ties

Abstract

Severely distressed public housing developments are being torn down and redeveloped through the HOPE (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) VI initiative in cities across the United States. This article examines how families from one HOPE VI site decided where to move and how they fared in building social ties with their new neighbors. Semistructured interviews from a random sample of 41 families with children were analyzed.

Families that chose to move into public housing expressed concern about the unreliability of the Section 8 program and their own ability to pay the extra utility costs involved. Those who used Section 8 vouchers to relocate had more education on average and made this choice to improve the neighborhood for their families. Over the past two years, regardless of what kind of neighborhood they moved into, families have not rebuilt the close ties most of them had in their former neighborhood.     

Costly,Regressive, and Ineffective: How Sensitive Is Public Support for the Mortgage Interest Deduction in the United States?

ABSTRACT

Although the mortgage interest deduction enjoys broad public support, critics argue that the policy disproportionately benefits wealthy households, fails to expand homeownership opportunities to households on the margins, and costs the federal government an extraordinary amount of money in foregone tax revenue. Drawing on data collected through an online experiment, this analysis tests the sensitivity of public support to these critiques. The findings reveal that support for the mortgage interest deduction declines when respondents are presented with information about the cost, effectiveness, or distribution of benefits associated with the deduction. Support among renters is more sensitive to framing effects than that among homeowners. Republicans are less sensitive to framing effects than Democrats when the deduction is framed as distributing benefits unequally, but more sensitive to these effects when the issue is framed as costly. However, all groups register their lowest level of support when told that the mortgage interest deduction is not an effective tool for expanding ownership opportunities.     

Rental Market Discrimination Against Same-Sex Couples: Evidence From a Pairwise-Matched Email Correspondence Test

ABSTRACT

I present the results of a randomized matched-pair email correspondence test of 6,490 unique property owners in 94 U.S. cities to provide a nationally representative estimate of the level of discrimination that same-sex couples experience when inquiring about rental housing. I find that same-sex male couples, especially non-White same-sex male couples, are less likely to receive a response to inquiries about rental units. I also find that same-sex Black male couples are subject to more subtle forms of discrimination than heterosexual Black couples are. I then examine whether state and local antidiscrimination laws covary with rates of housing discrimination against same-sex couples. Although my results are not causal, I find that antidiscrimination laws have an ambiguous relationship with rates of discrimination faced by same-sex couples. State-level housing protections, for example, covary positively with response rates for same-sex Black male couples, whereas local-level laws covary negatively with response rates for these couples.     

Does the Likely Demographics of Affordable Housing Justify NIMBYism?

ABSTRACT

NIMBYism (not in my backyard) decreases the amount of affordable housing construction. A possible motivator for this is an existing homeowner’s fear that proximity to affordable housing depresses property value. Using a hedonic regression analysis of the sales prices of homes in Sacramento County, California, this study finds that increases in the demographic characteristics in a census tract that are likely to increase if more affordable housing is built there lower the sales price of a home. This finding holds even after controlling for the percentages of racial/ethnic groups more likely to face discrimination. Policymakers should recognize this economic element of NIMBYism as they consider instruments to increase the amount of affordable housing built. We conclude with a suggestion for a knowingly controversial policy mechanism based upon cap and trade with the hope it will spur further debate on this issue.     

Towards cultural citizenship? Cultural rights and cultural policy in Taiwan

This article reviews existing literature on the construction of cultural citizenship, and argues that cultural citizenship expands the concept of ‘citizenship’, promotes citizens' consciousness and ensures the protection of minority rights. Since the 1990s, three cultural policies have arisen related to cultural citizenship in Taiwan: ‘Community Renaissance’, ‘Multicultural Policy’ and the ‘Announcement of Cultural Citizenship’. ‘Cultural citizenship’ has expanded the concept of citizenship in two ways. First, it has led to the consideration of the minority rights of Taiwanese indigenous peoples, the Hakkas, foreign brides and migrant workers in ‘citizenship’; and second, it has placed emphasis on ‘cultural rights’ in addition to civil rights, political rights and social rights. This article begins by exploring what approach to cultural citizenship is used in cultural policy, and what approach is suitable for practising cultural citizenship in Taiwan. I argue that minority groups practise their cultural rights with the public participation of Community Renaissance. Taiwan's case bears out Stevenson's view: a society of actively engaged citizens requires both the protection offered by rights and opportunities to participate. Finally, this article shows the challenges and contradictions of cultural citizenship in Taiwan: the loss of autonomy and the continuation of cultural inequality.     

How Large‐Scale Research Facilities Connect to Global Research

Policies for large‐scale research facilities (LSRFs) often highlight their spillovers to industrial innovation and their contribution to the external connectivity of the regional innovation system hosting them. Arguably, the particular institutional features of LSRFs are conducive for collaborative research. However, based on data on publications produced in 2006–2009 at the Neutron Science Directorate of Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee (United States), we find that internationalization of its collaborative research is restrained by coordination costs similar to those characterizing other institutional settings. Policies mandating LSRFs should consider that research prioritized on the basis of technological relevance limits the international reach of collaborations. Additionally, the propensity for international collaboration is lower for resident scientists than for those affiliated with domestic universities or government laboratories. Policies conceiving LSRFs as “knowledge attractors” therefore should consider the complementarities between research at a LSRF and in its academic context at a regional or national level.     

Hungry for Information: Public Attitudes Toward Food Nanotechnology and Labeling

What people think about food nanotechnology (nanofood) is under‐explored in the United States, especially outside of quantitative surveys. As such, we set out to examine public attitudes toward food nanotechnology in conversational, focus group settings in order to identify policy options for nanofood governance, and in particular, options for labeling. Through analysis of focus groups in six U.S. locations, we found that the vast majority of the participants wanted nanotechnology labels for all types of food products, and most were willing to pay a premium for labeling. Participants cited abilities to choose and avoid potential risk as the main purposes of nanofood labels. However, they recognized that labels alone do not provide much meaning and that information concerning food nanotechnology products needs to be sought and supplied beyond the label to enable informed choices. Additionally, willingness‐to‐use and risk–benefit perceptions varied according to the position and intended functions of the nanomaterials in food products.