The other two respondents have carefully articulated many objections to David Imbroscio's essay, responding to its arguments on its own terms. Rather than another point-by-point response, I offer a counternarrative that looks toward the future. In my view, ending exclusionary zoning (EZ) is an important element in a campaign to avoid some of the suffering low-income people in the United States will experience as the global climate emergency becomes increasingly acute, the national population ages, and the entrenched power of right-wing libertarians sustains inequality. Parochial actions like EZ will further complicate responses to these challenges. My response argues that for these reasons, Imbroscio's essay is neither ethical nor logical.
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.
Recent work in planning and political science has shown the dura bility of liberal hopes for •progressive cities• (Clave! 1986, Clave! and Wiewel 1991, Deleon 1992, Goldsmith and Blakely 1992). In Chicago, New York, and San Francisco, long-dominant •pro-growth coalitions• have fallen to alternative coalitions who tried to ensure that more resources reached or remained in the hands of "the community" (Mollenkopf 1983 and 1993, Elkin 1987, Stone 1989, Deleon 1992, Clave! and Wiewel 1991). In practice, this diversion of resources tended to mean more power for resident-controlled neighborhood groups (Castells 1983), more resources for non-profit economic and housing development corporations (Mier and Moe 1991), more oppor tunities for public participation in local decision-making (Keating and Krumholz 1991 ), and constraints on large-scale real estate developers (Deleon 1992).
Analyse der 1982 in Nikaragua eingeleiteten Versuche, den öffentlichen Sektor zu dezentralisieren, die Effizienz des Staatsapparates zu verbessern und die Institutionen auf lokaler Ebene politisch und administrativ zu stärken. Im Vergleich mit anderen lateinamerikanischen Ländern hat das nikaraguanische Regionalisierungsprogramm gute Fortschritte gemacht
Why do we see persistence, recurrence, and new emergence of concentrated poverty in U.S. cities? In this article, we explore an understudied connection: whether an important part of the built environment—a series of attributes that constitute precarious housing—constitutes a durable substrate on which concentrated poverty predictably emerges and recurs and if so, how this might vary across the United States. Poverty grew fastest between 2000 and 2005–2009 in tracts that began the decade with high levels of rented one- to four-family housing, multifamily housing, housing between 20 and 25 years old, and households paying over 30% of their income for housing costs. In addition, poverty grew fastest in tracts with high percentages of black or Hispanic households in 2000.
In this paper, we review literature that explains and extends the meaning of resilience across several fields: ecology, psychology, economics, disaster studies, geography, political science and archeology. For metropolitan regions, the review suggests that we must proceed with caution and precision if we choose to make resilience a guiding metaphor for planning and policy, as well as for understanding regional dynamics. Across these fields, there are several common themes that may or may not apply to all aspects of metropolitan economic, social, political, and environmental dynamics. The next part of the paper ties together these themes across the literatures; at the end of the paper, we return to pose some of the implications of the resilience metaphor for metropolitan regions. First, most analysis that employs the resilience metaphor presumes that the phenomenon of interest exhibits at least one equilibrium; the majority of the research begins, in fact, from the possibility of multiple equilibria, and explains how and why those equilibria become unstable. When we say that a person, society, ecosystem, or city is resilient, we generally mean that in the face of shock or stress, it either returns to normal" (i.e., equilibrium) rapidly afterward or at the least does not easily get pushed into a new normal" (i.e., an alternative equilibrium). Recent studies, however, have begun to move past the equilibrium view, shifting their focus from resting points to processes of adaptation. Second, and related to the first point, analysis using the resilience metaphor generally takes a systems perspective. Some factors internal to the system, and some external to it, tend to strengthen it; othersagain, both internal and externalcan place it under stress. Some literatures (e.g., psychology, disaster studies) tend to focus more on internal resources that strengthen the system under study and exogenous stresses that threaten it. A key idea arising from ecological studies, panarchy," helps overcome some of the determinism of such systems perspectives as functionalism in sociology; whereas other systems views tend to portray individual actions and interactions as pre-determined outcomes of larger structural forces, the panarchy view leads observers to expect interaction between structure and agents. Third, most, but not all, of the literatures tend to adopt at least partially the view that observed equilibria are path-dependent, that is, they are a consequence of cumulative decisions, often over a long time period, that shift a system from having a very open future to having increasingly predictable (or locked in") paths. The interest in path dependency is particularly high in fields that attempt to understand multiple equilibria and the persistence of sub-optimal ones; in any multi-equilibrium world, any of a number of sometimes apparently random events or actions can lead a system toward a particular equilibrium. Finally, work that uses resilience as a metaphor tends to take a long view, whether of individuals (e.g., personality in the transition from a stressed childhood to functional or dysfunctional adulthood) or of cities (e.g., long-term recovery after a disaster). This long perspective tends to reinforce the first three points. Over the long run, an observer will often observe or impute one or more periods of stability amidst change at some level of function for the phenomenon of interest, reinforcing the belief in equilibrium. This is even truer if the analyst's attention is shaped by the resilience metaphor in ways that encourage her to look for equilibria. As a practical matter, furthermore, the analyst must bound the phenomenon of study (city, ecosystem, person) in ways that encourage her to view that phenomenon as having a persistent internal logic; that is, the phenomenon isn't just a social or political process or a series of unconnected events but is, rather, a system.
