A Multiscalar Approach for Measuring Neighborhood Poverty and its Implications for Siting Outcomes of Affordable Housing in Ohio, USA

Keywords: Affordable Housing, Privatization, Multiscalar Approach
Session Type: Virtual Paper Abstract
Day: Monday
Session Start / End Time: 2/28/2022 09:40 AM (Eastern Time (US & Canada)) - 2/28/2022 11:00 AM (Eastern Time (US & Canada))
Room: Virtual 3

Abstract

Due to the widespread failed image of public housing, affordable housing policy created new goals and adopted new strategies, while moving away from public housing construction in 1970s. So, the goal of deconcentrating poverty emerged at the time of privatization of affordable housing policy and became one of the main research subjects in affordable housing policy. However, the extant studies on these siting outcomes of subsidized housing programs provide a partial picture of neighborhood contexts of low-income households for two reasons. First, there is a measurement issue. The previous studies use fixed geographic areas –mostly, census tracts—to measure neighborhood quality, which can lead to modifiable areal unit problems. Second, unfortunately, most low-income households who are eligible for housing subsidies cannot receive the subsidies due to public funding limitations. Without any subsidies, most of them rely on housing in the private market. Recently, scholars have started to address the siting outcomes of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) and show that NOAHs appear in the distressed neighborhoods through filtering processes, which differs from the siting mechanisms of assisted housing. Given this complexity, this study addresses how affordable housing units are distributed over neighborhoods while considering neighborhood contexts that extend beyond census block groups. So, this study will create poverty-multiscalar classifications for neighborhoods in Ohio, USA, by utilizing a multiscalar approach. Further, using multivariate models, this study examines how the siting outcomes of affordable housing differ by its subsidy status and for assisted housing units by its development periods—before privatization vs. after privation.