Affordable Housing Plans in London and New York: Between Marketplace and Social Mix

Marom, Nathan; Carmon, Naomi

doi:10.1080/02673037.2014.1000832

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may also be fruitful to compare differences in the spatial relationships between affordability and walkability in larger versus smaller metropolitan areas (the three case study metros presented here were of approximately the same size class). Finally, changes in affordability in relation to neighborhood walkability over time would provide a clearer picture of walkability as an equity concern, with forces, such as financialization, neoliberalization, globalization, and gentrification, seemingly placing ever-greater pressure on urban housing markets [65][66][67].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Affordability among U.S. Urban Areas

Bereitschaft

2019

Urban Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With support and demand for walkable urban spaces on the rise, there has been growing concern among academics and practitioners of increasing exclusivity, particularly in amenity-rich areas. This study examines equity in neighborhood walkability from the perspective of housing affordability, asking whether more walkable urban neighborhoods have less affordable housing from the viewpoint of both neighborhood residents and households within the encompassing metropolitan region. While considering additional factors that may affect housing affordability, including coastal proximity, crime, rail access, housing age, housing size, and employment accessibility, the results indicate lower housing affordability primarily for renter households already living in walkable neighborhoods, but not for those looking to move to a more walkable neighborhood from within the same metropolitan area. Case studies of three large U.S. urban areas, Charlotte, NC, Pittsburgh, PA, and Portland, OR, highlight local variations in the walkability–housing affordability nexus.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Affordability among U.S. Urban Areas

Bereitschaft

2019

Urban Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many of these socially-mixed community schemes have been criticised for displacing the truly indigent (Chaskin and Joseph, 2013; Goetz, 2012). Similarly, many housing programmes have been castigated for their population target, specifically, the median or above-median income residents instead of low to moderate-income deciles (Addie, 2008; Marom and Carmon, 2015).…”

Section: Housing Assistance In a Neoliberal Agementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A notable feature of a neoliberal housing paradigm is the effort to gear affordable housing towards the middle and even upper-middle income strata as opposed to the needier population segments (Addie, 2008; Marom and Carmon, 2015). Indeed, Israel’s new affordable housing mechanisms either overtly or implicitly cater chiefly to middle-income deciles.…”

Section: The Shifting Face Of Affordable Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The face of affordable housing in a neoliberal paradigm

Friedman

Rosen

2019

Urban Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article makes borrowed use of the ‘paradigm shift’ concept to explain the development and culmination of Israel’s neoliberal housing transformation. Using a mixed-method approach based chiefly on 60 interviews conducted with key players in Israel’s housing industry, we examine how a shift in authority over housing policy promoted two central ideas that reshaped the housing arena and urban space. We explore how these themes, specifically, construing housing in-affordability as a supply issue and defining its beneficiaries as the middle class, shaped key affordable housing mechanisms. These mechanisms include increasing the supply of general housing, small-size housing units and rentals. We also identify a parallel paradigm – a shadow paradigm – alongside the reigning neoliberal paradigm that is used as an intervention mechanism in times of crisis or during windows of opportunity. We demonstrate how the shadow paradigm addresses housing needs that cannot be met within the governing paradigm, for example, through the buyer’s price programme.

show abstract

“…Both in Europe and the United States, neoliberalisation has greatly affected the governance of urban redevelopment policies (Brenner & Theodore, 2002). Due to fiscal austerity and public deficits, national governments cut down social housing subsidies and invite private developers into social housing redevelopment, which can substantially moderate the outcome of social welfare delivery as the interests of low-income residents are often marginalised for the achievement of general economic growth (Goetz, 2016;Marom & Carmon, 2015). Although some collaborative governance between governments, residents, and private developers is promoted in Western European countries such as the UK and the Netherlands, the national state often still plays a significant role in shaping and implementing the policies and redevelopment (Dodson, 2006).…”

Section: Urban Restructuring Under Market Transition In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

Shantytown redevelopment projects: State-led redevelopment of declining neighbourhoods under market transition in Shenyang, China

Kleinhans

Ham

2018

Cities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 1978, market transition in China has significantly influenced the roles of the state, the market and the residents in urban restructuring. Since 2008, the central government has initiated Shantytown Redevelopment Projects (SRPs) to improve the living conditions of low-income residents. Between 2008 and 2012, about 12.6 million households were involved in SRPs, and forced to move as their dwellings were demolished. This paper investigates how SRPs are implemented by revealing how different stakeholders interact in SRPs in the city of Shenyang, China. Through in-depth interviews with various stakeholders and analysis of policy documentation on SRPs, the paper reveals a complex interplay between different stakeholders, which is characterized by the centralization of the inception of SRPs, the decentralization of actual SRP implementation, changes in the role of market forces, and decreasing housing affordability and multiple deprivation of residents in SRP target areas. Various stakeholders have consensus on the need for improving the living conditions in deprived neighbourhoods and on boosting the housing market. However, conflicts arise due to frictions between the central and local governments regarding the implementation of SRPs. We also find evidence of an entrepreneurial paradox in the relationship between local governments and developers. Finally, a mismatch occurs between the scope of the SRP policy and residents' attempts to improve their socioeconomic situation.

show abstract

Affordable Housing Plans in London and New York: Between Marketplace and Social Mix

Cited by 34 publications

References 60 publications

Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Affordability among U.S. Urban Areas

Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Affordability among U.S. Urban Areas

The face of affordable housing in a neoliberal paradigm

Shantytown redevelopment projects: State-led redevelopment of declining neighbourhoods under market transition in Shenyang, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About