隔离的“社会科学”:进步时代的“慈善”调查与新政时代的“评价”调查

IF 0.5 Q4 REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING Journal of Planning History Pub Date : 2021-04-13 DOI:10.1177/15385132211003481
Melissa Rovner
{"title":"隔离的“社会科学”:进步时代的“慈善”调查与新政时代的“评价”调查","authors":"Melissa Rovner","doi":"10.1177/15385132211003481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Between the “charitable” surveys of the Progressive Era and the “appraisal” surveys of the New Deal Era, the field of “Social Science” emerged. Although the philanthropic surveys of the Progressive Era influenced housing reform for working-class Persons of Color in urban neighborhoods, while the federal surveys of the New Deal Era influenced real estate disinvestment in those same neighborhoods, each had the effect of furthering segregation. This article considers the commonalities among the discourses, methods, and results of these two seemingly disparate ends of the survey spectrum to illuminate their respective contributions to one another and to segregation.","PeriodicalId":44738,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Planning History","volume":"20 1","pages":"326 - 337"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/15385132211003481","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The “Social Science” of Segregation: Between the “Charitable” Surveys of the Progressive Era and the “Appraisal” Surveys of the New Deal Era\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Rovner\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15385132211003481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Between the “charitable” surveys of the Progressive Era and the “appraisal” surveys of the New Deal Era, the field of “Social Science” emerged. Although the philanthropic surveys of the Progressive Era influenced housing reform for working-class Persons of Color in urban neighborhoods, while the federal surveys of the New Deal Era influenced real estate disinvestment in those same neighborhoods, each had the effect of furthering segregation. This article considers the commonalities among the discourses, methods, and results of these two seemingly disparate ends of the survey spectrum to illuminate their respective contributions to one another and to segregation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Planning History\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"326 - 337\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/15385132211003481\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Planning History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15385132211003481\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Planning History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15385132211003481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在进步时代的“慈善”调查和新政时代的“评价”调查之间,出现了“社会科学”领域。尽管进步时代的慈善调查影响了城市社区中有色人种工人阶级的住房改革,而新政时代的联邦调查影响了这些社区的房地产撤资,但每一项调查都进一步加剧了种族隔离。本文考虑了这两个看似不同的调查光谱两端的话语,方法和结果之间的共同点,以阐明他们各自对彼此和隔离的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The “Social Science” of Segregation: Between the “Charitable” Surveys of the Progressive Era and the “Appraisal” Surveys of the New Deal Era
Between the “charitable” surveys of the Progressive Era and the “appraisal” surveys of the New Deal Era, the field of “Social Science” emerged. Although the philanthropic surveys of the Progressive Era influenced housing reform for working-class Persons of Color in urban neighborhoods, while the federal surveys of the New Deal Era influenced real estate disinvestment in those same neighborhoods, each had the effect of furthering segregation. This article considers the commonalities among the discourses, methods, and results of these two seemingly disparate ends of the survey spectrum to illuminate their respective contributions to one another and to segregation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Planning History
Journal of Planning History REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Journal of Planning History publishes peer-reviewed articles, book, conference and exhibition reviews, commissioned essays, and updates on new publications on the history of city and regional planning, with particular emphasis on the Americas. JPH invites scholars and practitioners of planning to submit articles and features on the full range of topics embraced by city and regional planning history, including planning history in the Americas, transnational planning experiences, planning history pedagogy, planning history in planning practice, the intellectual roots of the planning processes, and planning history historiography.
期刊最新文献
Building a Social Contract: Modern Workers’ Houses in Early Twentieth-Century Detroit Paul Davidoff’s Life in Prospect: Building a Progressive Planning Research Agenda Through Engaged Scholarship Exposing Freeway Inequalities in the Suburbs: The Cases of Pasadena and Pacoima What Happened to Rural Community and Regional Development? The Evolution of a Planning Idea “‘A Period Favorable to Economic Imperialists’: Railroads and the Hidden History of Slum Clearance in Cleveland, 1910–1930”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1