No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
The Impact Of Supportive Housing On Neighborhood Crime Rates
Journal of Urban Affairs
Abstract
Quantitative and qualitative methods are employed to investigate the extent to which proximity to 14 supportive housing facilities opening in Denver from 1992 to 1995 affects crime rates. The econometric specification provides pre– and post– controls for selection bias as well as a spatial autocorrelation correction. Focus groups with homeowners living near supportive housing provide richer context for interpreting the econometric results. The findings suggest that developers paying close attention to facility scale and siting can avoid negative neighborhood impacts and render their supportive housing invisible to neighbors. Implications for structuring local regulations and public education regarding supportive housing facilities follow.
... While previous studies have examined the relationships between public housing developments and neighborhood crime, few studies have focused specifically on the impacts of LIHTC developments. Furthermore, the results from previous research have been inconsistent, with some studies finding a negative impact of subsidized housing on neighborhood crime while others have found an insignificant impact (DeLone, 2008;Galster, Pettit, Santiago, & Tatian, 2002;Griffiths & Tita, 2009;. These inconsistent findings may stem from the methodological limitations of previous studies that do not take into account the direction of causality between subsidized housing and neighborhood crime. ...
... However, we analyzed impacts of LIHTC using both methods (nearest count and double count of crime incidents) and found both results to be consistent with each other. existing literature (Galster et al., 2002;Woo et al., 2015). ...
... In terms of proximity to LIHTC developments, 9.96 percent (35,415 incidents) of property crimes were within 2000 feet of LIHTC developments and 15.76 percent (3664 incidents) of violent crimes were within 2000 feet of LIHTC sites. Additionally, as the dependent variable in our analyses, we used crime rates that were standardized per 100 residents using Census 2000 population estimates for constituent census block groups (Galster et al., 2002;Santiago et al., 2003). 4 Table 1 shows the trend in crime rates per 100 persons in Austin. ...
... As we discussed above, objectors to affordable housing proposals often cite concerns about the impact that the development would have on neighbourhood quality of life and property values. There is a growing body of literature, particularly in North America, that seeks to test the extent to which these perceived impacts of affordable housing projects materialise (Goetz et al. 1996;Galster et al. 2002;Galster et al. 2003;Nguyen 2005;Ellen 2007;Ellen et al. 2007;Albright et al. 2011;Edmiston 2011) or, in some instances, are offset by positive impacts (Jason et al. 2008). ...
... However, they do point out that all of these developments were located in areas that did not have either concentrated poverty or above-average crime rates when development occurred (Santiago et al. , p.2160. However, Galster et al. (2002) found that while supportive housing facilities were not themselves identified as a major source of criminal activity, there was a marked increase in crime around the larger facilities. They suggested that this may be a result of residents themselves being victims of crime or the size of the facility making it difficult to maintain collective efficacy in the neighbourhood. ...
... In addition, evidence of the effects of affordable housing on host areas (or lack thereof) can also be used to allay community concerns about affordable housing development (Galster et al. 2002). As Press (2009) notes, however, such data should be used carefully as in 'an adversarial or highly charged meeting the [statistics from different areas] can be seen as dismissing the concerns of surrounding residents who in turn will dismiss the relevance of the findings'. ...
This research investigated the causal roots of local opposition to affordable housing projects in Australia. It shows that planning concerns can mask prejudice against low-income residents. However community opposition can be exacerbated by dismissive attitudes by government. Developers and government both have roles to better explain to the public what affordable housing is, target more receptive communities for affordable housing, allay community fears through education, and ensure planning processes are clear and fairly implemented.
... Recent research on project-based affordable housing is frequently limited to analyses of aggregated community-level data, despite a programmatic emphasis on households. These studies show disappointing results as well, often revealing continued clustering of low-income units in disadvantaged neighborhoods (McClure 2008;Oakely 2008;Van Zandt and Mhatre 2009) while struggling to prove positive spillover effects on the same (Deng 2007;Di and Murdoch 2010;Ellen et al. 2007;Funderburg and MacDonald 2010;Galster et al. 2002). Although not on scale with public housing failures, such disheartening results might be viewed as validating NIMBY concerns. ...
... Instead, affordable housing development is protested in nearly everyone's own back yard using typical NIMBY arguments: negative community outcomes are assumed as inevitable. Much community opposition revolves around fears of declining property values, increased social deviancy and crime, and increased school enrollments that overburden local public school resources (Dear 1992;Galster et al. 2002) if not racism (Briggs 2005). Opponents also express concern about negative environmental effects, review of the complementary but challenging relationship between these two housing assistance strategies, see Khadduri and Wilkins (2008). ...
... 4 Motivated to improve tenant access to opportunity-rich neighborhoods, revitalize declining communities, and equitably distribute low-income housing, scholars have attempted to disprove, circumvent and reframe core NIMBY arguments. The first strand of research evaluates hypothesized negative community outcomes -such as reduced property values, increased crime, and reduced school quality and performance (see, for example, Galster et al. 2002;Freeman and Botein 2002;Ellen et al. 2007;Di and Murdoch 2010;Nguyen 2005;Deng 2007). Sometimes framed as an evaluation of the community development benefits of affordable housing development, rather than as a response to negative NIMBY sentiments, many of these rigorous studies provide important evidence that affordable rental housing outcomes for a community can be positive, or at least not as negative as assumed (Nguyen 2005). ...
Policies and research around affordable rental housing remain stuck between the “rock” of not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) fears and the “hard place” of deconcentrating poverty goals, leading to fragmented outcome measurement in contemporary project-based affordable rental housing programs. This article compares the motivations and results of existing research focused on NIMBY concerns around place to that of programs that promote the deconcentration of poor people. We suggest reframing the argument for project-based affordable rental housing by bolstering outcome measurement on neighborhoods and developments and expanding it to include tenants. Building upon current evaluation practices of mobility studies and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, we present a comprehensive framework for evaluating outcomes of project-based rental housing developments within their local context at three relevant scales: project, household, and community. We present an array of indicators and examine data collection needs and limitations, acknowledging the political and financial obstacles to comprehensive evaluation but arguing for the need to justify expenditures and prove results to the public. We recommend that government agencies stretch beyond NIMBY arguments and deconcentration of poverty goals to be proactive in targeting, measuring, publicizing, and redressing an expanded set of outcomes through better comprehensive planning for affordable housing. Through more rigorous and comprehensive evaluation of outcomes at all scales, it may be shown that affordable housing development yields a broad range of benefits for the people housed, projects financed, and the communities where it is built.
... Studies of the effect of subsidized housing in cities such as New York, Chicago, Dallas, and Denver found no change or a slight decrease in crime after development of new public housing (Galster et al. 2002;Lens 2013b, c;Santiago et al. 2003;Woo and Joh 2015), or after an increase in neighborhood residents paying for housing with subsidies or vouchers (Aliprantis and Hartley 2015;Lens 2013bLens , 2014Zandt and Mhatre 2013). In cases where creation of subsidized housing was associated with a subsequent increase in crime, the effect was minimal. ...
... In cases where creation of subsidized housing was associated with a subsequent increase in crime, the effect was minimal. For example, one study found an increase in crime only for a subset of housing sites (Galster et al. 2002), while another found an increase in crime only for some crime types, in areas with a high density of housing voucher holders (Hendey et al. 2016). ...
Although research indicates that developing new public housing typically does not increase neighborhood crime, little is known about the impact of revitalizing existing public housing properties, also known as redevelopment. This study evaluates the effect of a multi-component physical and social redevelopment project on reports and perceptions of neighborhood crime in Seattle, Washington. We compare administrative police data with findings from a community survey to assess trends during early-to-mid redevelopment. While perceptions of safety improved over the study period, most crime-specific trends were not significantly different at the redevelopment site relative to comparison sites where no redevelopment occurred. Results suggest that this project did not have obvious adverse effects on crime rates. Although this redevelopment may have had a positive effect on perceptions of crime and safety in the short-term, it may take longer to realize beneficial effects on actual experiences or reports of crime.
... Another fear often expressed by higher income communities when faced with building affordable units is the potential increase in crime. Residents worry that these developments will attract criminals from other neighborhoods, that tenants themselves (particularly if they are low income) may commit crimes in the surrounding neighborhood, or that simply the influx of so many new residents will lead to breakdowns in community organization and represent more potential victims, creating a space for increased crime in the community (Dear, 1992;Freeman & Botein, 2002;Galster, Pettit, Santiago, & Tatian, 2002;Lens, 2013a). The large body of research examining relationships between crime and public housing suggests that the concentration of disadvantage of large developments, rather than their physical design, likely contributes to small crime increases in surrounding neighborhoods (Lens, 2013a). ...
... negative public perception of public housing to double down on management. Unfortunately, the limited resources public housing agencies have long faced for maintenance have fed, in part, into the sweepingly negative perception of public housing that exists today (Goetz, 2013). 30. We did not review the small body of studies considering supportive Galster et. al, 2002;Gaslter, Tatian & Pettit, 2004). 31. Jill Khadduri (2004) stressed the importance of examining occupancy patterns in LIHTC projects to understand their neighborhood impacts because of the range of tenant incomes possible in the LIHTC program. Whereas tax credit developments can be home to many households with incomes close to the upper e ...
Ever-scarce affordable housing production resources, in addition to their primary function of providing housing for those in need, are increasingly enlisted for the dual goals of strengthening distressed communities and increasing access to higher opportunity neighborhoods. Information on spillovers can inform investment decisions over time and across communities. We leverage recent, high-quality research on neighborhood effects of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) production, synthesizing evidence according to neighborhood context. We also summarize the evidence on project features moderating impacts of publicly subsidized, place-based rental housing, in general. We conclude that context matters. Producing LIHTC housing in distressed neighborhoods positively impacts the surrounding neighborhood—in terms of modest property value gains and increased safety. By contrast, higher opportunity neighborhoods experience small property value reductions, and no impacts on crime. Big questions remain, however, about impact heterogeneity—via tenant mix, property design, and ongoing property management, as examples—with the scarcity of systematic data representing one of the field’s largest constraints.
... The most prevalent reasons for this opposition were anticipated loss of property values (64 percent), and a potential increase in crime (61 percent). Other motivations behind NIMBY include worries about possible increases in disorder and traffic (Galster et al. 2002). ...
... In contrast to public opposition and perception, research has shown that if negative impacts do occur, it is most likely because community-based facilities are forced into already densely populated areas or poor neighborhoods, providing more victims, opportunities for crime, and an overall inability for the community to maintain a level of control and stability over its neighborhood (Galster et al. 2002;Goetz, Lam, and Heitlinger 1996). ...
This report, “Taking Stock: Housing, Homelessness, and Prisoner Reentry,” examines how those who have spent time in prison or jail fare in securing safe and affordable housing following their release and discusses housing programming and practice designed to assist them. Every prisoner facing discharge from a correctional
institution must answer this question: “Where will I sleep tonight?” For many returning prisoners, the family home provides an answer to that question. But reunions with families are not always possible—or are only temporary—sometimes due to the dictates of criminal justice or housing policies, or sometimes due to family
dynamics. For those who cannot return to the homes of families or friends, the question of housing becomes considerably more complex. For some, the final answer to the question “Where will I sleep tonight?” is a homeless shelter or the street. Many are finding that the difficulties in securing affordable and appropriate housing complicate the reentry process, further reducing already limited chances for successful community reintegration.
The report is the culmination and synthesis of three tasks designed to inform the state of knowledge around housing, homelessness, and prisoner reentry: (1) a descriptive report on the barriers and challenges facing returning prisoners, as well as potential opportunities for serving or supporting the housing-related needs of
returning prisoners, (2) a scan of promising housing and other housing-related service programs for returning prisoners and ex-offenders, and (3) a roundtable discussion by experts in the field held in Washington, D.C., on October 30, 2003. The goal of the roundtable was to bring together prominent practitioners, researchers, and community leaders to identify the most pressing housing issues and the most promising strategies for resolving these issues. The report and scan of practice were developed to serve as background materials to help frame the discussion, already underway in many communities, about the extent of the housing
challenges faced by returning prisoners. The roundtable participants were provided a copy of the draft report and scan of practice. After the roundtable, the report was revised to include a synthesis of the roundtable discussion.
Our ultimate aim is to sharpen the nation’s thinking on the issue of housing and prisoner reintegration, and to foster policy innovations that will improve outcomes for individuals, families, and communities. In this executive summary, we provide brief background information on the issues surrounding housing and prisoner reentry to lay the foundation for a presentation of the highlights from the day-long roundtable discussion.
... Attempts within established and cohesive communities to subsidize forms of affordable housing for ex-offenders are often met with hostility. Generally, the community attitude may be sympathetic to the struggles of this population, but services are not supported because of the "Not-In-My-Back-Yard" (NIMBY) syndrome (Scally and Newman 2003;Rasmussen 1992;Galster et al. 2002). Motivated by fears of heightened crime rates, property value erosion, unsightly facilities and increased noise, many community groups rally to limit the location of treatment centres or transitional houses (Scally and Newman 2003;Galster et al. 2002). ...
... Generally, the community attitude may be sympathetic to the struggles of this population, but services are not supported because of the "Not-In-My-Back-Yard" (NIMBY) syndrome (Scally and Newman 2003;Rasmussen 1992;Galster et al. 2002). Motivated by fears of heightened crime rates, property value erosion, unsightly facilities and increased noise, many community groups rally to limit the location of treatment centres or transitional houses (Scally and Newman 2003;Galster et al. 2002). These challenges are further exacerbated by the discriminatory practices of landlords when exoffenders attempt to secure private housing. ...
... Studies of opposition to supportive housing (not housing mobility programs) indicate that receiving neighborhoods cite fear of declining property values and crime as their two main objections to these facilities (National Law Center 1997). Galster and his colleagues (2002) find some validity to these claims—large supportive housing facilities were associated with a moderate upswing in crime reports. However, Galster and colleagues (2002) also conclude that the supportive housing residents were not the cause of the increase but were more likely to be victims of it. ...
... Galster and his colleagues (2002) find some validity to these claims—large supportive housing facilities were associated with a moderate upswing in crime reports. However, Galster and colleagues (2002) also conclude that the supportive housing residents were not the cause of the increase but were more likely to be victims of it. Ludwig, Duncan, and Hirschfield (2001) examine outcomes from the MTO program to find that the relocation of families from high-to low-poverty neighborhoods reduces juvenile violent crime by about 30 to 50 percent, but may increase property-crime arrests. ...
Tenant-based housing assistance is designed to provide access for low-income households to a wider range of housing options, de-concentrating poverty and reducing the exposure of these households to negative conditions. Yet an observed coincidence of crime and subsidized households indicates that something is going wrong. Either households are constrained in their choices and are settling in high-crime neighborhoods, or these households bring crime with them, using vouchers to penetrate otherwise low-crime neighborhoods. We use longitudinal data from Dallas to assess whether changes in the number of Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) households are related to changes in crime, not just whether HCV households are present in high-crime neighborhoods. The evidence supports the hypothesis that observed relationships between crime and HCV households result from a lack of units that accept vouchers in areas that have lower levels of crime. The hypothesis that voucher holders are the cause of increases in neighborhood crime is not supported.
... As a result, mobile home communities could provide refuge for criminals who commit offenses in surrounding areas. Roncek et al. (1981) made a similar argument about public housing structures, which have been found to affect crime in surrounding areas (see Galster et al. 2002, McNulty and Holloway 2000). Given the physical design and structural disadvantage of mobile home communities, as well as the effect they may have on adjacent housing values, it is possible that areas near these communities may be experiencing problems with criminal activity. ...
... In a sense, the negative sentiment toward mobile home communities is not unlike similar feelings toward the placement of public housing projects, or other housing options geared specifically for the poor (see Ireland et al. 2003). Although a significant body of research (e.g., McNulty and Holloway 2000, Galster et al. 2002) has found that crime does spillover around public housing structures, the results of the current study found minimal evidence of those same spillover effects around mobile home communities. We argue that this difference is partially due to the divergent type of undesirable area in which these respective communities are situated. ...
Mobile home communities are viewed negatively, as non-residents and municipalities often see them as being a source of declining property values and escalating rates of crime and other social maladies in surrounding areas. Despite the prevalence of such beliefs, empirical tests of their veracity have been rare. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the presence of mobile home communities significantly affects violent and property crime in surrounding blocks. Using official reports of crime and Census data from Omaha, Nebraska, results of bivariate and multivariate analyses showed minimal evidence that crime spills over around mobile home communities. The implications of these findings for researchers as well as cities, towns, and other municipalities considering the development of mobile home communities are also explored.
... Unfortunately, it is a common problem that whatever you do in the world of supportive housing . . . . the community where that lies can be a problem (Stakeholder A) Because the early plan was not designed for previously incarcerated individuals, some stakeholders noted the public's fear that the program would not have any restrictions or safety protocols. Several stakeholders voiced that the public may fear that these individuals could be "criminals" and expressed concern that the presence of the homes would lead to These fears have long been part of the many challenges of implementing social programs in small tight-knit communities, even though research indicates that well-designed housing programs do not necessarily have negative impacts on neighborhoods (Galster et al., 2002). Following public pushback, Village of Hope stakeholders reached out to local initiatives to inquire about other locations they could implement the program within the city limits of Bridgeton. ...
... Sociological research has shown that some low-income housing developments can concentrate poverty which can then operate as a contextual level neighborhood characteristic that increases victimization risk to violent crime (DeLuca, Garboden, and Rosenblatt 2013;Kucheva 2013). Research has shown a positive relationship between the location of government subsidized housing in cities and crime hot spots (Galster et al. 2002;McNulty and Holloway 2000;Roncek, Bell, and Francik 1981;Suresh and Vito 2009). Opportunities for involvement in gang violence and drug sales, among other kinds of offending, are more readily available to youth who reside in low-income housing developments than to those who live elsewhere (Popkin et al. 2000;Venkatesh 2000). ...
... 5-6). These variables are sometimes used as control variables, as in Gleaser and Tobio (2012), or as in Galster, Pettit, Santiago, and Tatian's (2002) investigation of housing structures and crime, or Haurin and Rosenthal's (2007) analysis of racial variations in household ownership, the demographic variables constitute the core of the analysis. Kolko (2007) neighbourhood dynamics and refers to models explaining "how even small differences in demographics characteristics can have large effects on subsequent changes" (Kolko, 2007, p. 6). ...
This paper begins by investigating the occurrence of gentrification in Istanbul during the period of 2008 and 2017, through the application of dynamic system/difference generalized method of moments estimation techniques. Our findings reveal that gentrification seems to have taken hold with the processes of urban regeneration that began in 2012. Additional associations between such parameters as housing price/rent growth, demographic changes, enterprise growth, and political administration (that is, whether the district is overseen by the opposition party or not) are tested through the use of REIDIN sales and rent indices, along with Turkish Statistical Institute data sets for 25 districts in Istanbul and 19 city‐center districts. The results demonstrate that gentrification is closely related to demographics/age and political administration. Overall, while house price/rent growth and enterprise growth are not observed to have an impact on gentrification, the findings of this study reveal that the association between housing prices and gentrification is positive only in those districts governed by the opposition party. The study thus raises questions about the relationship between political attitudes and gentrification in Turkey.
... Griffiths and Tita (2009) suggest that "public housing developments are hot beds of violence involving predominantly local residents," with little coming into or out of the general area of the development and associated neighborhood (474). Galster et al. (2002) conclude that the crime occurs not because of a significant criminal element within the subsidized housing, but because the larger-scale housing provides a "pool of potential victims" and/or makes it "difficult for the neighborhood to maintain collective efficacy" (311). 4 This finding conflicts to some degree with Griffiths and Tita (2009), of course. ...
... Factors that have a strong influence on criminal behavior include neighborhood characteristics (e.g., poverty, collective efficacy) of the individual [23,27], housing tenure [2], and concentration of public housing [8]. For substance use, other factors exist such as homelessness [20], transient lifestyle [5,28], undesirable community characteristics [24], and availability of drugs in the residential area [29]. ...
Residential mobility and type of housing contributes to an individual’s likelihood and frequency of drug/alcohol use and committing criminal offenses. Little research has focused on the influence of housing status on the use of drugs and criminal behavior. The present study examines how residential mobility (transitions in housing) and recent housing stability (prior 30 days) correlates with self-reported criminal activity and drug/alcohol use among a sample of 504 addicted, treatment-seeking opioid users with a history of criminal justice involvement. Findings suggest that those with a greater number of housing transitions were considerably less likely to self-report criminal activity and criminal involvement was highest among those who were chronically homeless. Residential mobility was unassociated with days of drug and alcohol use; however, residing in regulated housing (halfway houses and homeless shelters) was associated with a decreased frequency of substance use. The finding that residing at sober-living housing facilities with regulations governing behavior (regulated housing) was associated with a lower likelihood of illicit substance use may suggest that regulated housing settings may influence behavior. Further research in this area should explore how social networks and other related variables moderate the effects of housing type and mobility on crime and substance use.
... In another study in the same community, the authors find a higher incidence of assaults in low-income public housing (2007). Galster et al. (2002) find that a higher incidence of crime was associated with the development of large (> 53 units) assisted housing developments in Denver, but not for smaller developments. The authors conclude that the crime impact occurs not because of a significant criminal element within the subsidized housing, but because the larger-scale housing provides a "pool of potential victims" and/or makes it "difficult for the neighborhood to maintain collective efficacy" (311). ...
This article evaluates the incidence of crime in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods in Kansas City, Mo. using unique data on the physical condition of lots and their improvements at the parcel level. The purpose of the article is to better understand the effect of neighborhood characteristics on the incidence of crime. Specifically, the hypothesis that underlies this article is that crime incidents occur in clusters, and that those clusters are, at least in part, a function of the physical conditions of properties that may make crime more or less likely to occur.
Results show that the number of property offenses on a block with an average property condition score would be about 93 percent of the number of offenses on an identical block with a property condition score one-point less (on a five-point scale). The analysis finds little relationship between property conditions and offenses against persons. Results on other factors often associated with higher numbers of property crime offenses reveal interesting and important relationships with offenses that also may be affected by efforts to revitalize and stabilize neighborhoods.
... Housing researchers have committed considerable time and money to study the evidence supporting or refuting claims by those opposing subsidized housing-including both project-based housing and vouchers. For the most part, the research demonstrates that well-managed housing that fits the scale of the neighborhood seldom produces negative impacts (Freeman and Botein 2002;Galster et al. 2002;Schaffer and Saraf 2003;Werwath 2004). Santiago, Galster, and Tatian (2001) specifically find that scattered-site housing (e.g., the type of housing where individual landlords accept vouchers) largely has a positive effect on neighboring property values. ...
The Housing Choice Voucher program was designed with two main goals in mind: to eliminate concentrations of poverty and the social problems it causes; and to provide poor households with greater access to higher-opportunity neighborhoods. However, research suggests that voucher holders would like to move to higher-opportunity neighborhoods, but often are unable to do so. One of the most prominent reasons for this is that, in most cities and states, local law allows landlords to discriminate against potential tenants on the grounds of their “source of income.” This paper reviews the literature on discrimination of voucher recipients and the potential for SOI anti-discrimination laws to mitigate some of these negative outcomes.
... Housing researchers have committed considerable time and money to study the evidence supporting or refuting claims by those opposing subsidized housing -including both project-based housing and vouchers. For the most part, the research demonstrates that well-managed housing that fits the scale of the neighborhood seldom produces negative impacts (Freeman 2002;Galster et al. 2002;Nguyen 2005;Schaffer and Saraf 2003;Werwath 2004) Santiago et al (2001), specifically finds that scattered-site housing (e.g. housing where landlords accept vouchers) largely has a positive effect on neighboring property values. ...
I was asked by plaintiffs’ counsel in the case Jones, et al. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America, Case No. 5:13-cv-02390-LHK PSG (U.S. District Court N. D. Cal.), to perform two tasks:
1. To explain the state of social science research and findings regarding attitudes, prejudices, stereotypes and discrimination towards subsidized housing; and,
2. To apply that social science research to certain alleged practices by Travelers and statements by Travelers' employees regarding Section 8 and subsidized housing and to opine whether those practices and statements are consistent with the social science research and findings regarding attitudes, prejudices, stereotypes and discrimination
... quality of design, density, height, etc.) and the neighbourhood effects, such as property value decline, traffic volumes, parking and crime, are raised. While there has been significant attention to understanding and responding to the concerns related to the physical character of affordable housing and neighbourhood effects (Anonymous, 1993, Dear 1992, Fischel 2001, Freeman 2003, Galster, Pettit, Santiago & Tatian 2002, Lundquist-Clampet 2004, National Low-Income Housing Coalition 2001, Nguyen 2005, Pendall 1999, Santiago, Galster & Pettit 2003, and for a review, see Shively 2007), there has been far less attention paid to how the social construction of affordable housing tenants frame the debate and can alter or deter the development of affordable housing. ...
This article investigates the framing of affordable housing by opponents and responses to this framing by local housing actors in the USA. We use a social construction approach to explore how conceptualizations of race/ethnicity, class and immigration shape opponents views and cast affordable housing tenants as deviant and undeserving, making them undesirable neighbours. Our study finds that affordable housing opposition and the process of framing results in: changes to development designs and siting decisions based on least resistance, rather than sound planning and decision-making, thereby directing affordable housing projects to particular jurisdictions, new development areas or concentrated poor neighbourhoods.
... The first two responses focus on NIMBY attitudes. The first type of response challenges the assumptions of negative spillover effects of project-based rental housing development, such as decreasing property values and school performance, and increasing crime rates (Deng 2009;Di and Murdoch 2010;Ellen et al. 2007;Funderburg and MacDonald 2010;Galster et al. 2002). The second type attempts to rebrand affordable rental housing as well-designed, high-quality workforce or life cycle housing for a more deserving population (Goetz 2008). ...
This research investigates the nuances of local not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) attitudes and actions, asking why some communities support publicly assisted affordable rental housing development, while others do not. Six case studies within New York State explore local acceptance and avoidance of affordable rental housing development through the low-income housing tax credit program. Findings inform future marketing, planning, and programming toencourage local participation in affordable rental housing development. More research is needed on the contextualized nature of NIMBY, how NIMBYattitudes and actions can be effectively reduced, and whether this increases the supply of affordable rental housing.
... 44 Limited research regarding location has focused on how PSH affects property values (they increase) 45 and crime rates (they do not change). 46 Public health researchers have identified the mechanisms by which community characteristics influence health. The built environment, which is understood to encompass a range of physical and social elements that constitute the structure of a community, has been a focus. ...
Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is an intervention to address long-term homelessness. Evidence has resulted in a shift in US policy toward using PSH rather than shelters and transitional housing.
Despite recognizing that individuals transitioning from homelessness to PSH experience a high burden of disease and health disparities, public health research has not considered whether and how PSH improves physical health outcomes.
Based on diverse areas of research, we argue that in addition to improved access to quality health care, social determinants of health (including housing itself, neighborhood characteristics, and built environment) affect health outcomes. We identify implications for practice and research, and conclude that federal and local efforts to end long-term homelessness can interact with concurrent efforts to build healthy communities.
... Other motivations behind NIMBY include fear of increased levels of crime, noise, and traffic. Although communities focus on the negative aspects of transitional and supportive housing, research shows that if negative impacts do occur, it is most likely because these facilities are forced into alreadytroubled areas, providing more potential victims to criminals already active in the area (Galster et al. 2002;Goetz et al. 1996). ...
... The early housing situation may, however, be a crucial determinant of current and future outcomes for the individual child. For instance, a considerable body of New Zealand and international research across different disciplines shows that educational, health, and anti-social outcomes may each be affected by the child's personal housing circumstances (Green & White 1997;Crampton et al. 2000;Glaeser & Sacerdote 2000;McNicholas et al. 2000;Galster et al. 2002;Haurin et al. 2002;Howden-Chapman & Carroll 2004). These outcomes may also be affected by community characteristics in which that housing is located, with externalities stemming from the quality of other houses in the neighbourhood (Furstenberg & Hughes 1995;Levanthal & Brooks-Gunn 2000;Durlauf 2004). ...
We discuss the pivotal role that housing plays for both social and economic outcomes. All people need to be housed, and housing circumstances help determine social outcomes, especially for vulnerable groups. We outline an analytical framework that treats housing as a dynamic system, incorporating the life‐cycles of both individuals/households and houses. Each is long‐lived; decisions impact on housing for decades. This approach is relevant to the development of housing research and housing policy. We illustrate the issues with reference to the relationship between rental yields and measures of deprivation across New Zealand. The surprising nature of this relationship has consequences regarding potential poverty traps and wealth disparities. While highlighting an important housing market issue, any policy response to this issue is complicated by the need to take account of the life‐cycles of both individuals and of houses, and by the long‐lasting impacts of decisions.
... The most common reasons for this opposition were anticipated loss of property values (64 percent) and a potential increase in crime (61 percent). Other motivations behind NIMBY include worries about possible increases in disorder and traffic (Galster et al. 2002). A panel of experts at a 2003 roundtable discussion on prisoner reentry and housing concluded that NIMBY opposition was one of the most intractable housing-related barriers facing returning prisoners today (Roman and Travis 2004). ...
This year, over 630,000 prisoners will be released from state and federal prisons across the country—more than four times as many as were released in 1980. In this article, we examine the scope of the prisoner reentry issue—what is known about the intersection of housing, homelessness, and reentry and about the barriers returning prisoners face in securing safe and affordable housing.Although the housing challenges are formidable, progress is being made on numerous fronts. We seek to frame the dynamics of the reentry housing discussion by highlighting the promising strategies that are emerging. These strategies, taken to scale, could help create a very different national policy on prisoner reentry. Ultimately, effective reentry strategies have the potential not only to reduce re‐arrest and increase public safety, but also to reduce homelessness.
... In another study in the same community, the authors find a higher incidence of assaults in low-income public housing (2007). Galster et al. (2002) find that a higher incidence of crime was associated with the development of large (> 53 units) assisted housing developments in Denver, but not for smaller developments. The authors conclude that the crime impact occurs not because of a significant criminal element within the subsidized housing, but because the larger-scale housing provides a "pool of potential victims" and/or makes it "difficult for the neighborhood to maintain collective efficacy" (311). ...
Public housing has long been a contentious issue for cities and regions. While there is a great need for affordable housing in many communities, neighbors of low-income housing developments fret about neighborhood decay. This paper evaluates the notion that low-income housing developments damage the communities in which they are placed. The focus is on the evaluation of low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) financed developments, and the neighborhood indicator of interest is the physical condition of nearby properties. The results of the empirical analysis suggest that proximity to LIHTC developments generally has a positive impact on neighborhood property conditions. However, extended analysis that separates LIHTC developments by type and size suggests that only small new construction developments and large rehab developments impact neighborhood property conditions. Further analysis reveals that when the model does not control for crime, the effect of proximity to LIHTC developments on property conditions is negative.
... These attractors-forces that lead to clients grouping together to improve likelihood of success-fit within a complexity approach and lead to a desirable and emergent group behavior (Johnson, 2002;Wolf-Branigin, 2006). Similar attempts with other at-risk populations have included persons with developmental disabilities and physical disabilities and housing patterns for persons with low to moderate incomes (Galster, Pettit, Santiago, & Tatain, 2002;Wolf-Branigin, LeRoy, & Miller, 2001). These studies focused on principles of self-organization and attractors as related to temporal and spatial autocorrelation. ...
This study investigates successful completion at a faith-based organization providing residential substance abuse treatment services. Method: The authors apply a complex systems paradigm using a single moderator variable. The participants are primarily African Americans and most have current criminal justice involvement. Probabilities of treatment program completion for participants active in spiritual activities versus similar participants not involved in these activities are calculated. Results: Participation in the spirituality component appears to provide a valuable attractor to treatment completion. Conclusions: In the past decade, evaluation methods have included the greater use of probabilistic approaches, most notably Bayesian inference. Findings suggest that this model, as applied to the complexities of a faith-based organization, is useful for understanding treatment completion.
... Similarly,Galster, et al. (2002) have conducted the most methodologically rigorous study of the impact that supportive housing has on crime in the surrounding neighborhood. They find that for the sample of all 14 developments studied, the opening of supportive housing was not associated with statistically significant increases in reported crime, but that larger developments are associated with significant increases in crime within a 1,000-foot radius of the housing. ...
Communities across New York City and around the nation commonly oppose proposals to open supportive housing in their neighborhoods because of fear that the housing will decrease the quality of life in the neighborhood, and lead to reductions in property values. This study aims to give supportive housing providers and local government officials the objective, credible information they need to guide policy decisions and to respond to opponents' fears and arguments. Using a difference-in-difference regression model to isolate the effect of supportive housing from more general macro and micro market trends and neighborhood variations, this paper examines the impact that almost 14,000 units of supportive housing created in New York City over the past twenty five years have had on their host neighborhoods over time. In a preliminary analysis, we find little evidence that supportive housing facilities diminish the value of surrounding properties. We find evidence that prices of properties surrounding supportive housing facilities are lower than comparable properties in the same neighborhood prior to the opening of the facility, and that this gap tends to narrow following the opening of a facility. Specifically, the preliminary analysis suggests that modestly-sized supportive housing developments (which are typical in New York City) may have small, positive impacts on neighboring property values, though these positive impacts decline as project size increases. Very large facilities may have negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.
... In response to concerns voiced by neighbors about property values, crime, safety, and traffic, housing researchers have committed considerable time and money to study the evidence supporting or refuting claims by those opposing the development of affordable housing nearby. For the most part, the research demonstrates that well-managed housing that fits the scale of the neighborhood seldom produces the negative impacts mentioned above (Freeman 2002; Galster et al. 2002; Nguyen 2005; Schaffer and Saraf 2003; Werwath 2004). Despite this evidence, neighborhood opposition continues to be a major barrier to the successful development of affordable housing. ...
Public support for planning programs and initiatives are an important component of its success but opposition can be a powerful impediment. When siting unwanted land uses such as affordable housing, neighborhood opposition can be a particularly effective barrier. Understanding the factors that influence opposition is a necessary precursor to successful planning initiatives. This review discusses how attitudes toward affordable housing are likely shaped by factors that influence other social policy attitudes— particularly ideology and stereotyping. The author concludes with recommendations and methods that planners can use to manage public opposition and influence attitudes toward affordable housing.
One of the main barriers faced by proposed affordable housing developments is local public opposition. Consequently, this exploratory study seeks: 1) to determine the U.S. public's current top-of-mind perceptions of affordable housing, and 2) to understand which of these perceptions are related to self-reported support for affordable housing in one's own neighborhood. We employ a mixed-methods approach, administering a nation-wide online survey (N = 534) of close- and open-ended questions. While no majority understood definition emerged, through our discursive analysis and natural language process (NLP) topic modeling we uncover common and persisting perceptions of current affordable housing buildings as federally supported apartments that are run-down and in undesirable neighborhoods. Narratives about residents are limited, though when prompted participants have a clear perceived racial profile of residents. Using a conditional inference regression tree (CI-Tree) and NLP language feature associations, we also find that perceptions focused on government involvement, subsidies, and unsafe neighborhoods are significant predictors of lower support for proposed developments. Alternatively, mentioning the financial aspects of affordable housing is significantly associated with higher support. These findings demonstrate the potential of machine learning methods in uncovering pathways to support affordable housing and can be leveraged for effective framing of proposed developments.
Studies on the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program have found that whereas LIHTC buildings are more likely to be placed in regions with higher crime incidence, the construction of a unit has either a negative or a neutral impact on crime. Few studies, however, account for the substantial variation in building type and building characteristics that exist within the LIHTC program. This article focuses on a subset of 462 buildings in Ohio to analyze how building type and building characteristics may influence violent crime exposure at the time of placement and over time. We find both initial crime exposure and change in crime over time varied by building type and characteristics. General occupancy buildings were placed in areas with significantly higher crime rates than in the locations where senior buildings were placed. Regional density and unit concentration were significantly associated with crime at placement and over time. Scattered-site buildings were most highly associated with higher crime exposure at placement and with crime increases over time. We use these findings to provide recommendations for researchers and state policymakers as they construct Qualified Allocation Plans.
In 2016, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser’s administration unveiled a plan to close the DC General homeless shelter and replace it with eight smaller sites throughout the city. Almost immediately, some residents located near the proposed shelter sites expressed disapproval, citing concerns over safety and decreasing property values. We can interpret such reservations as perceived negative externalities of shelters. This paper first takes those claims at face value and finds mixed evidence of whether the proposed DC shelters would produce negative externalities for neighborhoods. The paper then explores other economic rationale for neighborhood opposition to the plan—risk-averse behavior on the part of homeowners. The paper concludes with a proposal for home equity insurance that could potentially balance homeowners’ risk aversion and vested interests in neighborhood outcomes.
Keynote speaker: Dr. Claudia Coulton, Ph.D., Lillian F. Harris Professor and Co-Director of the Center on Urban Poverty and Social Change, Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio - "Community in Social Work Research"
Transitional housing facilities for released prison inmates have existed in the United States since the early 1800s and are a promising strategy to aid offender reintegration. One recurring obstacle to the successful implementation and sustainability of these facilities is public resistance. Unfortunately, very little is known regarding what influences public support or opposition specifically for offender-based transitional housing. The current study examines how support for transitional housing centers may vary among residents of a Midwestern state based on the proximity of the facility and the types of offenders living there. The study also examines a range of possible influences on support, including community factors, family-related considerations, correctional and political views, and demographic variables. The most consistent influence on acceptance of transitional housing centers was general support for helping offenders during reentry. Other variables with more limited effects were an emphasis on services and programming over monitoring and surveillance during reentry, having a close family member imprisoned, age, and education level. Implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.
Problem, research strategy, and findings: Local residents often oppose place-based affordable housing on the grounds that such housing will increase crime and decrease property values. New York City has actually used affordable housing investment as a neighborhood revitalization tool, leading to a positive impact on neighborhood property values. Households in distressed neighborhoods consistently cite crime as a problem, but we know little about the impact of housing investments on crime. Using a unique set of point-specific data on affordable housing and crime locations between 2002 and 2008 in New York City, I estimate a set of regression models to identify the effect that affordable housing investments have on crime on the block where they are situated. I find little evidence that affordable housing investments either reduce or increase crime on New York City blocks, suggesting there are limits to the revitalization effects of these subsidies and that crime fears about subsidized housing are unwarranted. Takeaway for practice: Cities with tight rental markets such as New York should continue to invest in affordable housing construction. However, these cities need to find ways to expand housing options in higher-income, less-distressed neighborhoods, or they risk exacerbating concentrated poverty and further subjecting low-income households to unsafe living environments.
Community-based participatory research is an enabling and empowering practice that is based in principles that overlap with those of mental health recovery. Using a participatory approach, an advocacy group called the Dream Team, whose members have mental health issues and live in supportive housing, planned and conducted a study of the neighbourhood impact of two supportive housing buildings in Toronto. The study found that tenants do not harm neighbourhood property values and crime rates, and that they do make important contributions to the strength of their neighbourhoods. This article demonstrates the strength of a self-directed collective of individuals who are prepared to challenge stigma and discrimination, and documents their use of participatory action research as a proactive strategy to contribute their knowledge to discussions that shape the communities, services, and politics that involve them.
This article examines community planning and communications approaches used by mental health housing organizations in the siting process for community-based psychiatric housing. Drawing on interviews with housing administrators in 7 states, it assesses variations in the approach, content, timing, and modes of agency communications with community leaders, neighbors, and local citizens, and the association of these communications methods with initial and longer-term community responses to the site. The study provides evidence to inform practice for the development of community approaches to the siting of psychiatric housing.
This study looks at characteristics of rental gated communities in the United States from a national
perspective and based on a case study of four Southwestern Counties, Riverside County and San
Bernardino County in California, Maricopa County in Arizona, and Clark County, Nevada. Tenure
differences between owned and rental gated communities are compared. The study also debates
who actually benefits from rental gated communities and what that effect that has upon the
community. This analysis is done by assessing whether minorities experience higher housing
opportunities in rental gated communities newer, fast growing areas as the study area. Descriptive
statistics of rental gated community characteristics are presented and neighborhood diversity indices
are analyzed. The study finds that rental gated communities are much like their owned gated
community counterparts and that new housing markets do not present better housing opportunities
(at the neighborhood level)for minorities, particularly those neighborhoods with more rental gated
properties present. Policy implications are discussed.
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/27915
Transition to hybrid petrol/electric vehicles (HEVs) is one means among many of reducing carbon emissions pursuant to the New Zealand emissions reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol. The potential financial incentive value of an emissions charge was evaluated by comparing purchase and running costs of an HEV with an equivalent petrol‐fuelled car. Had a carbon tax of 655.50 annually for an HEV. When compared with a $7000 purchase price differential in favour of petrol‐fuelled vehicles, it can be concluded the proposed carbon tax would not have provided a sufficient incentive to bring about any significant change in the distribution of HEVs across the market. Shifting the norm to a higher proportion of fuel‐efficient cars will therefore require other incentives and/or policy mechanisms. We explore alternative policy options for bringing about such a shift, including the option of a tradable vehicle emission permit system.
The current literature on gated communities characterizes residents as fearful, wealthy, white homeowners. Thus, researchers using recent American Housing Survey (AHS) data were surprised to find that many residents of gated communities live in apartments and that residents of walled or fenced communities were actually more likely to be renters than owners.
This article uses the AHS to explore the characteristics of residents of rental gated communities (the other half). Factors leading to the growth of gated communities in general and gated apartments in particular are considered. Owned and rental gated communities are compared as a first step in defining the differences between these kinds of tenure, and existing research on subsidized gated housing is updated using descriptive and trend data. The housing opportunities and restraints that rental gated communities create for minorities are analyzed, and policy implications for the growth of rental gated communities are discussed.
Siting of mental health service facilities has often been subject to public opposition and political struggles. These processes have produced a landscape of mental health provision that is powerfully uneven and concentrated in economically and socially depressed areas. We argue that understanding this landscape requires an examination of the political processes that shape such siting decisions. Although health geographers (most importantly Dear and Wolch) have periodically engaged with politics, the important role of informal development politics in producing landscapes of health remains insufficiently examined. We introduce the case of residential social service facility (“group home”) siting in central Massachusetts to explore the political dynamics of the production of health. Siting of group homes in Massachusetts is governed by a legal framework that provides social service agencies with legal protection and autonomy from local governments as they make siting choices. This exemption from local zoning ordinances often shifts local politics from formal to informal channels, leading to the application of many forms of soft influence over siting decisions. A comprehensive geographic analysis of mental health should include the social and political processes of siting.
One of the unintended consequences of decades-long public housing policy has been to concentrate the poor within communities that are at the extreme end of economic disadvantage. More than in other types of disadvantaged communities, living in public housing can sharply circumscribe the social world of its residents and isolate them from people and social institutions in surrounding areas. This study draws on the concepts of social isolation from urban sociology and offending "awareness space" from environmental criminology to explain why violence rates are dramatically higher in public housing compared to otherwise disadvantaged nonpublic housing neighborhoods and, moreover, whether residents or outsiders are responsible for the violence. Using homicide data for the Southeast Policing Area of Los Angeles (1980 through 1999), and relating the location of homicides within and outside of public housing to the places of residence of both victims and offenders, our research reveals that public housing developments are hotbeds of violence involving predominantly local residents. There is no evidence that public housing serves as either a magnet for violence by drawing in nonlocal offenders, or a generator of violence in surrounding neighborhoods. We conclude that this social isolation from the larger community can both escalate violence between residents inside public housing, but also limit their offending awareness space, such that the violence is contained from spreading beyond the development.
The subject author indexes list all articles and comments published in the 2002 issues of the included journals. The subject index is arranged alphabetically by author within eighty-six subject categories. Articles are listed in only one category, so readers are advised to examine the listings in categories related to their primary interests. The subjects are listed in Tables 1 through 4, following the list of journals.
In this paper, an assessment is made of the extent to which proximity to 38 dispersed public housing sites opening in Denver during 1992-95 affected post-development levels and trends in neighbourhood crime rates. A new econometric specification incorporating pre- and post-controls for selection bias as well as spatial autocorrelation was employed to test for statistical relationships between the development of dispersed public housing sites and subsequent increases in various types of crime. The findings suggest that proximity to dispersed public housing was not associated with any post-development increase in reported crime of any type.
Community is widely acknowledged as a fundamental aspect of social work practice and this formulation distinguishes social work from other professions. Because of this longstanding tradition, the field needs to make a greater investment in producing scientific knowledge to enable community change and to incorporate community context into practice. This type of research faces numerous challenges related to the complexity of community interventions, the lack of well-developed community measures, the difficulty of implementing experimental designs and the spatial dynamics of communities. However, there are recent substantive and methodological developments that should make it possible to advance research on community as agent, target and context for social work practice.
Sober living homes for people attempting to maintain abstinence from alcohol and drugs can act as a buffer against the high rates of substance misuse that are endemic to many urban environments. Sober living homes and other group homes for people with disabilities have faced persistent opposition from neighbourhood associations, which raises the question of stigma. This article describes the responses of sober living home residents and operators to the threat of stigma across a diverse set of neighbourhoods. Ten focus groups were conducted with 68 residents and operators of 35 sober living homes in Los Angeles County, California, between January 2009 and March 2010. Results showed that few residents reported experiences of blatant stigmatisation by neighbours; however, they were well aware of the stereotypes that could be ascribed to them. Despite this potential stigma, residents developed valued identities as helpers in their communities, providing advice to neighbours whose family or friends had substance use problems, and organising community service activities to improve the appearance of their neighbourhoods. With their attention to local context, sober living home residents and operators challenge the personal tragedy approach of much traditional advocacy on health-related stigma.
The development of affordable housing often involves a contentious siting process. Proposed housing developments frequently trigger concern among neighbors and community groups about potential negative impacts on neighborhood quality of life and property values. Advocates, developers, and researchers have long suspected that some of these concerns stem from racial or class prejudice, yet, to date, these assumptions lack empirical evidence. My research seeks to examine the roles that perceptions of race and class play in shaping opinions that underlie public opposition to affordable housing. Such opposition often earns the label "Not in my Backyard" (NIMBY). The application of a mixed-methods approach helps determine why the public opposes the development of affordable housing in their neighborhoods and towns. The focus group and survey results provide a rich understanding of the underlying attitudes that trigger opposition to affordable housing when proposed nearby. This study demonstrates that stereotypes and perceptions of the poor and minorities are particularly strong determinants of affordable housing opposition. This research improves our understanding of public attitudes toward affordable housing attitudes, leading to a more focused and effective policies and plans for the siting of affordable housing. The results provide advocates, planners, developers, and researchers with a more accurate portrayal of affordable housing opposition, thereby allowing the response to be shaped in a more appropriate manner.
We analyzed impacts on single-fam- institutional settings. As part of the nationily home prices of eleven, small-scale supportive wide “deinstitutionalization” movement housing facilities announced in Denver during beginning in the 1970s, chronically men- 1989–1995.Using a difference in differences econo- tally ill, developmentally and physically dis- metric specification, we found that these facilities abled, non-violent produced a positive impact on house prices within offenders, recovering 1,001 to 2,000 feet.We attributed this effect to coun- substance abusers, and frail elderly inditervailing externalities (building rehabilitation vs. viduals have increasingly been domiciled resident behaviors) that vary in their spatial extent. in small-scale facilities located in residen- Supportive housing facilities were systematically tial neighborhoods. This “normalization” sited in neighborhoods with declining relative of residential environment, coupled with prices compared to elsewhere in the census tract. on-site and on-call specialized care, is seen This location bias led a conventional econometric as therapeutic bymany policy makers (New- specification to erroneously estimate a negative property value impact from supportive housing.
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.
Proposed changes to community land use frequently give rise to protracted disputes. Cognitive psychology, communication, and decision-making research suggests that frames, which filter people's perception of a problem, can affect conflict processes and outcomes. This paper argues that frames may significantly influence public participation in decisions to change a community's physical space. The kinds of frames likely to be found in such conflicts are examined using the example of a landfill dispute. Recommendations for identifying frames and responding to them are proposed for practitioners intervening in physical change conflicts.
The number of inpatients in US public mental hospitals declined from 559,000 in 1955 to approximately 110,000 at present. Reductions resulted from release or transfer of long-term inpatients and from entrance barriers to new admissions. The timing and pace of deinstitutionalization substantially varied by state, but three quarters of the national reduction followed the expansion of welfare programs in the middle 1960s. The establishment of community care alternatives was highly inadequate, leaving many severely and persistently mentally ill people without essential services. Problems of care were exacerbated by the contraction of welfare programs in the 1980s, which resulted in serious neglect and homelessness. Plagued by underfinancing and fragmentation of care, new strategies in developing mental health care systems include capitation, case-management approaches, and the development of strong local mental health authorities.
The phenomenon of resistance to the establishment of group homes for mentally ill adults is well-documented. The extent to which such homes, once established, do or do not create problems for communities is less clear. The current study examined the impressions of residents of a group home neighborhood one year or more after the establishment of the home. Forty-one residents of group home neighborhoods and thirty-nine residents of control (non-home) neighborhoods responded to a survey about their impressions of how a group home had affected or (for controls) would affect their neighborhoods. More than one fourth of the group home neighbors did not even know that they were living near a home. Those who did know tended to report a negligible impact of the group homes on things such as property values, neighborhood crime, resident safety, and distressing incidents in the community. Most of these residents also indicated that they were satisfied with the group home in their neighborhoods. The actual experience of group home neighbors was far more favorable than what residents of the control neighborhood anticipated, despite lack of differences in demographic characteristics or overall attitudes toward community care of mentally ill persons. Results support the view that the feared consequences of group home establishment in residential neighborhoods do not occur and that such homes may gain reasonable acceptance after they are established.
The belief that public housing projects are a breeding ground for crime has been responsible for much opposition to public housing in the United States. There is no evidence to support this belief. Our study of Cleveland's 4,000 residential city blocks shows that proximity to public housing projects for families has a small, but statistically significant, effect on the incidence of violent crime. Yet adjacency to public housing is one of the least important predictors of violent crime once the socio-economic and housing characteristics of the adjacent blocks are taken into account. Furthermore, blocks in the vicinity of public housing, but not adjacent to it, do not have significantly higher incidence of violent or property crimes. Our study suggests that public housing projects should be smaller and less concentrated in the center of cities.
The authors examine the locational patterns of three subsidized housing programs—conventional project-based, section 8 assisted rental, and shelter plus care supported housing for the severely mentally ill and homeless—in Phoenix, Arizona. They demonstrate that these programs are reinforcing the existing concentrations of the three types of subsidized housing in some Phoenix neighborhoods. The findings for Phoenix suggest that voucher and certificate policies designed to deconcentrate the poor are not achieving some of their major objectives. Indeed, the policies pursued by different providers of subsidized housing may cumulatively lead to increasing concentrations of all such housing in tracts that are already compromised by concentrations of the urban poor.
Although public housing in the United States is often portrayed as crime ridden, little information from official statistics is available to support this impression. Furthermore, only a handful of criminologists have done empirical research on crime in public housing, and this research has tended to focus on large public housing authorities (PHAs) in big cities. Furnishing the reader with an array of facts about public housing (e.g., roughly 90% of PHAs have fewer than 500 units), this article makes the case that criminologists are woefully uninformed about the nature of the public housing universe and its crime problems.
Little empirical research has been conducted on violence against women in public housing settings. This two-city study looks at rates of aggravated assault against public housing residents, both on and off public housing property, in an effort to probe possible links between this setting and the risk of falling victim to personal violence. In both cities it was found that Black female residents of public housing were at much higher risk of aggravated assault compared with Black and White women living elsewhere in the same jurisdiction. However, the geographic pattern for aggravated assaults for Black female public housing residents differed markedly in the two cities studied. Using situational crime prevention as the point of departure, the authors ascribe the differences in victimization patterns to the different architectural design and geographic dispersion of the respective cities' public housing developments. One city's developments offer less privacy and accessibility, thus discouraging would-be assailants.
Data were obtained from police on the incidence of crime in multiblock areas containing ten public housing developments in the city of St. Louis. The data covered eight FBI index crimes, and were obtained for seven years, 1971 through 1977. Crime rates per 100,000 population were computed. Seven of the public housing developments were large (over 500 units). There was a mix of lowrise and highrise developments, and conventionally and tenant-managed developments. The data indicate that the crime rates per 1000,000 population in and near the public housing developments are not significantly higher than in the city as a whole, nor are they higher than would be expected based on citywide relationships of crime to demographic and locational predictors. While there is more variation in the incidence of crimes in smaller developments than in larger ones, there is no evidence to support the belief that crime rates are, overall, higher than average in either type of development. It is also not possible from these data to identify any relationship between tenant management and crime rates, though other research has indicated that tenants feel safer in tenant-managed projects.
Since the Fair Housing Act of 1988, younger chronically mentally ill and substance abuse residents have been admitted to subsidized senior housing. This policy's main purpose was to furnish housing for younger homeless individuals and to improve rental income streams for senior facilities. The policy was also meant to promote age integration, improve social engagement, and enhance informal support in these developments. Younger persons with chronic mental illness and substance abuse histories have proven to be incompatible neighbors, diminishing the quality of life for seniors and creating management problems for facility staff.
A Decatur, Illinois, case study covered three years of mixing younger individuals into a public housing facility for frail seniors. After the younger persons were admitted, quality of life diminished and management became difficult. Results indicate that careful tenant screening and sensitive and extended management are vital for any chance of successful age integration in subsidized housing.
A textbook providing explanations of many modern spatial data analysis methods. The text and illustrative case studies are complemented by a custom statistical analysis package and case-study datasets. The software (INFO-MAP) will run on IBM-PC compatibles running DOS. The contents are organised into the following categories: spatial data analysis including the use of computers; the analysis of point patterns; the analysis of spatially continuous data; the analysis of area data; the analysis of spatial interaction data. The authors examine formal statistical modelling and informal, exploratory techniques, relating them to the analysis of real data; explain the underlying statistical methodology and provide a structure for further learning and exploration through reading lists and computer exercises using the software and data provided. -M.Dean
Community opposition is an increasingly common response to the siting of controversial human service facilities. This paper explores the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) syndrome by presenting an analysis of the first national survey of attitudes toward controversial human services conducted in the United Scares. The analysis focuses on the volatility and synergy of attitude change, the degree of regionalization of rejecting and accepting attitudes, the differences between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan responses, and the perceived exclusionary nature of suburban respondents. The results indicate that the dynamics of community opposition consist of client, community, and facility variations significantly influenced by regional context and the spatial location of respondents
Whether new housing is government assisted or market rate, it can face opposition from established residents. Some observers contend that such opposition arises from "not in my backyard" (NIMBY) sentiments. The author uses research on controversies in the residential development approvals process in the San Francisco Bay Area to develop insights on whether this characterization is justified. He finds that people give many reasons for their opposition to new houses; some are related to their effects on people next door. Quantitative analysis suggests that projects generating NIMBY protests are distinct from projects that generate other kinds of protests, especially those against growth more generally
The issue of public responses to technological risks has attracted attention from social and behavioral scientists, and also from policy spokespersons. Three main viewpoints can be discerned: the public as ignorant/irrational, selfish, and prudent. These three perspectives are different in their implications for policy as well as for empirical research, and it has often been easier to see the influence of policy preferences on the existing research literature than to see the influence of empirical research on policy debates. The ignorance/irrationality perspective, once widely held (particularly by policy spokespersons), has repeatedly failed to be supported by empirical research. The selfishness and prudence perspectives both change the focus from blaming the citizen opponents of technology to attempting to understand the differences between citizens and specialists, albeit using different explanations. We argue that a more fruitful approach may be to focus on understanding the broader system that creates such conflicts in the first place, and to seek greater balance in the frames of reference used in discussions.
This study tests the hypothesis that the acquisition of existing property by the public housing authority and its subsequent rehabilitation and occupancy by subsidized tenants significantly reduced the property values of surrounding single-family homes in Denver during the 1990s. This assessment examined pre- and post-occupancy sales, while controlling for the idiosyncratic neighborhood, local public service, and zoning characteristics of the areas in order to identify which sorts of neighborhoods, if any, experienced declining property values as a result of proximity to dispersed housing tenants. The analyses revealed that proximity to a subsidized housing site generally had an independent, positive effect on single-family home sales prices. The most notable exception to this pattern occurred in neighborhoods more than 20 percent of whose residents were black. Proximity to dispersed public housing sites in these neighborhoods resulted in slower growth in home sales prices in an other-wise booming housing market and suggest a threshold within “vulnerable” neighborhoods whereby any potential gains associated with rehabilitating existing units are offset by the increased concentration of poor residents. © 2001 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.
The majority of studies examining the impact of group homes on neighborhood property values have found that group homes do not adversely effect property values. In our study of seven group homes neighborhoods in DuPage County, Illinois, we find that properties which are proximate to group homes experience a decline in value following the announcement of a group home's pending establishment. In our analysis, observations across time and space are incorporated into a format that is similar to an event study. Our model is the first in this literature to accommodate different price levels and appreciation rates across neighborhoods.
The research investigates the effects of dwellings occupied exclusively by severely mentally disabled (SMD) tenants on sales prices of nearby homes. Hedonic price models are estimated for an exhaustive sample of single-family home sales from 1989 to first quarter 1992 in Newark and Mt. Vernon, OH. Proximity within two blocks of rehabilitated dwellings occupied by SMD had no significant relationship with sales prices. Prices of homes proximate to two small, newly constructed apartment complexes were 40% lower after the complexes opened, although those near three other similar apartment complexes were not.
Highlighting resource inequality, social processes, and spatial interdependence, this study combines structural characteristics from the 1990 census with a survey of 8,872 Chicago residents in 1995 to predict homicide variations in 1996–1998 across 343 neighborhoods. Spatial proximity to homicide is strongly related to increased homicide rates, adjusting for internal neighborhood characteristics and prior homicide. Concentrated disadvantage and low collective efficacy—defined as the linkage of social control and cohesion—also independently predict increased homicide. Local organizations, voluntary associations, and friend/kinship networks appear to be important only insofar as they promote the collective efficacy of residents in achieving social control and cohesion. Spatial dynamics coupled with neighborhood inequalities in social and economic capacity are therefore consequential for explaining urban violence.
Panel data models have become increasingly popular among applied researchers due to their heightened capacity for capturing the complexity of human behavior as compared to cross-sectional or time series data models. As a consequence, richer panel data sets also have become increasingly available. This 2003 second edition is a substantial revision of the highly successful first edition of 1986. Advances in panel data research are presented in a rigorous and accessible manner and are carefully integrated with the older material. The thorough discussion of theory and the judicious use of empirical examples make this book useful to graduate students and advanced researchers in economics, business, sociology, political science, etc. Other specific revisions include the introduction of the notion of strict exogeneity with estimators presented in a generalized method of moments framework, the notion of incidental parameters, more intuitive explanations of pairwise trimming, and discussion of sample selection dynamic panel models.
This paper estimates the life-cycle costs of housing for persons with mental illness using 5-year and 30-year holding periods and discount rates of 3.5, 5.75, and 8.0%. Life-cycle costs are between 5 and 7% higher in buildings occupied only by mentally ill tenants compared to buildings with no mentally ill tenants. However, the economies of scale in maintenance and repair that exist in buildings occupied by the non-mentally ill are not observed in buildings with mentally ill tenants. Additionally, buildings located in lower-quality neighborhoods have lower life-cycle costs when the tenants are mentally ill, just the reverse of the case for the general population.
Previous studies of human service facility spillovers on residential property values have been inconclusive, and have failed to take into account the effects of racial segmentation of housing markets. Likewise, studies of racial discrimination in urban housing markets and price differentials between white and nonwhite areas of the city have failed to consider the impacts of service facilities on prices. This study develops an hedonic price model of housing services in a racially segmented housing market, which considers a variety of human service facilities and their spillover effects. Model results for Oakland, California in 1976 indicate that facilities significantly affect housing prices both positively and negatively, and that these effects vary by racial submarket. Implications of these findings for the interpretation of past discrimination studies, facility impact studies, and social policy are considered.
Includes bibliographical references, index
Community opposition to the establishment of a small-scale mental health facility is often intense. One frequently voiced fear is that the estabishment of a facility will cause property values in its vicinity to decline. This paper examines empirical evidence of the impact on property values in the neighborhood of 12 mental health centers in Philadelphia. It is concluded that such facilities have an indeterminate effect on property values in their vicinity, contary to popular opinion.
This paper reports the results of a study of community acceptance of housing for the mentally ill in Maryland. The findings indicate that community opposition is less likely to occur (1) when establishing apartmental living arrangements rather than group homes, (2) in less organized neighborhoods, (3) where other housing for specialized populations has not been previously developed, and (4) by using a "low profile" strategy which avoids informing community members in advance of start-up.
A sample of 43 community residences was studied in order to examine the correlates of community opposition. Residence that conducted public education were significantly more likely to encounter opposition than were residences that did not. The point in the development of the residence at which the community became aware of the existence of the facility was also found to be related to the extent of opposition encountered. Implications for policy and practice were discussed.
Neighbors often presume that group homes (GHs) have negative effects on their neighborhoods, but it is rather unclear how often GHs actually have adverse effects. Neighbors of GHs and a matched set of people who did not live near GH were interviewed. Neighbors of GHs were asked about their experiences with the specific GH near them, while "non-neighbors" were asked similar questions about their expectations of what it would be like to live near a GH. For both negative (e.g., noise, traffic) and positive effects (e.g., leaning about disabilities) of GHs, non-neighbors expected GHs would have a much greater impact on them than what was actually reported by neighbors. This research supports prior findings that expectations of negative effects are much greater than what is actually experienced by neighbors. It also suggests that GH operators might wish to capitalize on the positive expectations that may be over-shadowed by the more commonly voiced negative expectations.
As we move to managed care, the nature and role of case management is in flux and undetermined. Based on the outcome research, this paper seeks to identify the common elements of effective case management practice to guide its development under the new financing schema.
Real estate has historically employed statistical tools designed for independent observations while simultaneously noting the violation of these assumptions in the form of clustering of same sign residuals by neighborhood, along roads, and near facilities such as airports. Spatial statistics takes these dependencies into account to provide more realistic inference (OLS has biased standard errors), better prediction, and more efficient parameter estimation. This article provides an overview of the field and directs readers to the relevant literature and software. Copyright 1998 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Concern over high crime rates and deteriorating inner-city neighborhoods has reawakened interest in Defensible Space, architect Oscar Newman's groundbreaking physical design approach to crime prevention. Creating Defensible Space, written by Newman and recently published by HUD's Office of Policy Development and Research, draws on Newman's experience carrying out and analyzing Defensible Space projects since the early 1970s. This publication provides an expert review of the Defensible Space concept and three step-by-step case studies to help communities redesign neighborhoods for greater safety.
000 feet range they were 60 to 75% higher than in other areas These results strongly con Interactive spatial data analysis The effect of group homes for the mentally ill on residential property values
- T Gatrell
** [0.04] [0.09] [0.06] 2,000 feet range they were 60 to 75% higher than in other areas. These results strongly con-Bailey, T., & Gatrell, A. (1995). Interactive spatial data analysis. Harlow, England: Longman Scientific and Technical. Boydell, K., Trainor, J., & Pierri, A. (1989). The effect of group homes for the mentally ill on residential property values. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 40, 957–958.
Does community housing reduce neighbor-hood property values? Paper presented at AREUEA Annual Meeting Life-cycle costs of housing for the men-tally ill
- B Hargreaves
- J Callanan
- G Maskell
- J Harkness
- S Newman
- G Galster
- J Reschovsky
Hargreaves, B., Callanan, J., & Maskell, G. (1998, January). Does community housing reduce neighbor-hood property values? Paper presented at AREUEA Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. Harkness, J., Newman, S., Galster, G., & Reschovsky, J. (1997). Life-cycle costs of housing for the men-tally ill. Journal of Housing Economics, 6, 223–247.
Drugs and crime in public housing: A three city analysis
- T Dunworth
- A Saiger
Dunworth, T., & Saiger, A. (1993). Drugs and crime in public housing: A three city analysis. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
The impact of supportive housing on ser-vices use for homeless persons with mental illness in New York City. Paper presented at the Asso-ciation of Public Policy Analysis and Management conference Neighborhood inequality, collective effi-cacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence
- S Metraux
- D P Culhane
- T Hadley
- Seattle
- J D Morenoff
- R J Sampson
- S W Raudenbush
Metraux, S., Culhane, D. P., & Hadley, T. (2000, November). The impact of supportive housing on ser-vices use for homeless persons with mental illness in New York City. Paper presented at the Asso-ciation of Public Policy Analysis and Management conference, Seattle. Morenoff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality, collective effi-cacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology, 39(3), 517–559.
Group homes for the mentally retarded: An investigation of neighborhood property value impacts
- J Wolpert
Wolpert, J. (1978). Group homes for the mentally retarded: An investigation of neighborhood property
value impacts. Albany, NY: NY State Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities.
An overview of judicial enforcement of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Florida Mental Health Institute
- J Petrila
Petrila, J. (1994). An overview of judicial enforcement of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. Florida Mental Health Institute, University of South Florida Web Site. Available: http:// www.fmhi.usf.edu/institute/pubs/articles/fairjpp.html [October 13, 1999].