U. S. Housing Scholarship, Planning, and Policy Since 1968 An Introduction to the Special Issue
U. S. Housing Scholarship, Planning, and Policy Since 1968 An Introduction to the Special Issue
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/01944360701792231
复制
发表时间：
2008-01-01
影响因子：
5.6
通讯作者：
Galster, George C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Galster, George C.
问题：自1968年以来，住房奖学金、规划和政策的主题是如何演变的，它们如何影响当前的奖学金？目的：本导言探讨了住房问题在过去40年中的变化，为这一关于住房未来的特刊提供了一个全面的背景。方法：我回顾了二手资料，并利用它们来综合塑造住房政策和这一特刊的重要主题。结果和结论：和40年前一样，增加自有住房仍然是主要的住房目标，但最近抵押贷款融资的创新似乎使其更接近这一目标，但可能适得其反。学者、政策和规划专业人士如何看待低收入家庭的住房问题，已经从简单的住房数量和质量不足演变为更复杂的问题：缺乏负担能力和无家可归，现有方案协调不足，住房成为经济机会的障碍。尽管目前联邦漠不关心，但自1968年以来，法律的基础设施和执法能力的改善减少了，但没有消除住房歧视。联邦资金减少了对公共和后来的私人租赁住房供应方倡议的资助，联邦资金现在支持需求方倡议，少量的公共住房，并赠款支持日益重要和自治的州、地方和非营利部门的努力。这期特刊中的文章建议规划者和决策者系统地评估建筑物促进和保护人类健康的程度。它们鼓励住房建设方面的创新，以及住宅区的年龄和经济多样性。在现有的社区，可能受到集中取消抵押品赎回权或蔓延枯萎病的威胁，作者在这个问题上鼓励刺激社区再投资贷款和防止取消抵押品赎回权。他们还主张改进各级政府日益多样化的方案的设计和协调。他们的建议建立在40年的住房奖学金和政策的历史上，我在这里总结。
Problem: How have the main themes of housing scholarship, planning, and policy evolved since 1968, and how do they inform current scholarship?Purpose: This introduction explores how housing issues have changed over the last 40 years, to provide a holistic context for this special issue on the future(s) of housing.Methods: I review secondary sources, and draw on them to synthesize the important themes that shape housing policy and this special issue.Results and conclusions: Increasing owner-occupied housing is still the primary housing goal, as it was 40 years ago, but recent innovations in mortgage finance that appeared to move it nearer may have backfired. How scholars and policy and planning professionals view the housing problem for lower-income households has evolved from simple housing quantity and quality inadequacies to something more complex: lack of affordability and homelessness, inadequate coordination of existing programs, and housing as an obstacle to economic opportunity. Despite current federal indifference, improvements in legal infrastructure and enforcement capacity have reduced, but not eliminated, housing discrimination since 1968. Federal funding diminished for public and, later, private supply-side initiatives in rental housing, and federal funds now support demand-side initiatives, small amounts of public housing, and grants to support increasingly important and autonomous state, local, and nonprofit sector efforts.Takeaway for practice: The articles in this special issue recommend that planners and policymakers systematically assess the degree to which buildings promote and protect human health, and that they encourage innovation in housing construction, and age and economic diversity in residential areas. In existing neighborhoods that may be threatened by concentrated foreclosures or creeping blight, the authors in this issue encourage stimulating community reinvestment lending and preventing foreclosures. They also advocate improving the design and coordination of the increasingly diverse array of programs at various levels of government. Their recommendations build on the history of 40 years of housing scholarship and policy I summarize here.