The Spatial Concentration of Subsidized Housing - Poverty & Race ...

TABLE 2.1Literature Review SummaryConcentrated PovertyConcentrated SubsidizedHousingHousing Policy Changesin 1990’sPublic HousingOther Site-BasedLIHTC• Negative neighborhood effects of poverty concentration (Ellen andTurner, 1997; Sampson, Morenoff and Gannon-Rowley, 2002;Deitz, 2002)• Unexpected decrease in concentrated poverty from 1990-2000 (Ellen& O’Regan, 2008; Jargowsky, 2005; Kingsley & Pettit, 2003)• Negative effects of more units in vulnerable neighborhoods suggestspossible threshold effects (Santiago et al 2001, Galster et al 1999)• High density site-based housing increased poverty rate in subsequentdecade (Rosenthal 2008)• Scale of subsidized housing impacts property values (Lee 2008, Lyonsand Loveridge 1993)• Change in housing and poverty deconcentration policies in the 1990’s- Vouchers, MTO, HOPE VI, LIHTC (Dawkins, 2007; Ellen &O’Regan, 2008)• Concentrates by poverty and race• Most but not all studies find negative impacts• HOPE VI could lead to possible changes• Concentrates less than Public Housing• Different program types result in differential impacts• Relatively fewer studies of other site-based subsidized housing• Concentrates less than Public Housing.• QCT’s concentrate in higher poverty areas in central cities• Better design and mixed income leads to lower impactsVouchersComprehensive• Concentrates less than Public Housing• Tends to cluster in affordable neighborhoods due to rents• Lack of impact studies• Few mobility programs reduces likelihood of change• Lack of recent comprehensive concentration studies. Most recent isNewman and Schnare, 1997• Lack of impact studies that take into account multiple subsidy types40