住房政策辩论特刊《让美国继续住下去》简介

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Housing Policy Debate Pub Date : 2022-10-18 DOI:10.1080/10511482.2022.2127557
M. Cunningham, S. Batko
{"title":"住房政策辩论特刊《让美国继续住下去》简介","authors":"M. Cunningham, S. Batko","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2022.2127557","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Keeping America housed is growing more difficult. For at least four decades, the United States has suffered an increasingly acute affordable housing crisis for lower-income people, who have endured untenable and unstable living conditions. The number of people experiencing homelessness has hovered around half a million on any given night, and the number of people living unsheltered is increasing (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 2021). Many millions more live on the edge of homelessness, struggling with rent burden, low-quality housing, overcrowding, and the constant threat of eviction (Alvarez & Steffen, 2021; Gromis et al., 2022). The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the problem of housing insecurity, with unprecedented levels of unemployment that rendered millions of tenants unable to pay their rent, leaving them at risk of eviction and adding more to the rolls of the homeless. As more fortunate people hunkered down in their homes to avoid spreading the virus, thousands of vulnerable people found themselves forced to sleep in tents and on the streets, offering policymakers a graphic reminder of the significant housing precarity in our major cities. This special issue examines the challenge of keeping America housed and highlights a few approaches that emerged during the pandemic. The issue includes seven articles, starting with a description of the vast homeless emergency response system and efforts made during COVID-19 to enhance shelter capacity through the use of hotels. It then turns to homelessness prevention and the challenges with targeting these efforts. Recent years brought not only the pandemic but also a long overdue moment of racial reckoning. In response to the rallying call to end structural racism embedded in our systems, this issue concludes by examining how race plays a role in homelessness. The primary response when someone becomes homeless in the U.S. is emergency shelter, a temporary bed to sleep at night. People often think of shelter as a band-aid—the minimum we should do. Indeed, shelter can often be life-saving, protecting people from literally sleeping on the street. There is, however, a misconception that emergency shelter costs substantially less than providing housing, when studies show that providing shelter can be expensive (Spellman et al., 2010). In addition to being costly, emergency shelter is not a solution to homelessness, as it doesn’t provide a permanent place to live. Unfortunately, instead of a lean infrastructure set up to respond to emergencies and get people back into housing, crisis response has become a permanent part of our safety net, and a large one at that. As Culhane and An (2021) demonstrate in their study, the shelter “system” is a complex and sprawling industry. Yet—as the authors of this study point out—despite this investment, the need for shelter exceeds the number of beds available, and more than 200,000 live unsheltered on a given night (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 2021). They estimate the annual cost of providing universal shelter would be $12.6 billion but caution policymakers to evaluate this number against the cost of permanent housing in the form of housing vouchers. The pandemic helped illuminate the public health need to bring people in off the streets and highlighted the challenges of preventing the transmission of the virus while providing temporary shelter in congregate settings. The unprecedented widespread use of hotels as emergency","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":"32 1","pages":"819 - 822"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction to Keeping America Housed, a Special Edition of Housing Policy Debate\",\"authors\":\"M. Cunningham, S. Batko\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10511482.2022.2127557\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Keeping America housed is growing more difficult. For at least four decades, the United States has suffered an increasingly acute affordable housing crisis for lower-income people, who have endured untenable and unstable living conditions. The number of people experiencing homelessness has hovered around half a million on any given night, and the number of people living unsheltered is increasing (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 2021). Many millions more live on the edge of homelessness, struggling with rent burden, low-quality housing, overcrowding, and the constant threat of eviction (Alvarez & Steffen, 2021; Gromis et al., 2022). The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the problem of housing insecurity, with unprecedented levels of unemployment that rendered millions of tenants unable to pay their rent, leaving them at risk of eviction and adding more to the rolls of the homeless. As more fortunate people hunkered down in their homes to avoid spreading the virus, thousands of vulnerable people found themselves forced to sleep in tents and on the streets, offering policymakers a graphic reminder of the significant housing precarity in our major cities. This special issue examines the challenge of keeping America housed and highlights a few approaches that emerged during the pandemic. The issue includes seven articles, starting with a description of the vast homeless emergency response system and efforts made during COVID-19 to enhance shelter capacity through the use of hotels. It then turns to homelessness prevention and the challenges with targeting these efforts. Recent years brought not only the pandemic but also a long overdue moment of racial reckoning. In response to the rallying call to end structural racism embedded in our systems, this issue concludes by examining how race plays a role in homelessness. The primary response when someone becomes homeless in the U.S. is emergency shelter, a temporary bed to sleep at night. People often think of shelter as a band-aid—the minimum we should do. Indeed, shelter can often be life-saving, protecting people from literally sleeping on the street. There is, however, a misconception that emergency shelter costs substantially less than providing housing, when studies show that providing shelter can be expensive (Spellman et al., 2010). In addition to being costly, emergency shelter is not a solution to homelessness, as it doesn’t provide a permanent place to live. Unfortunately, instead of a lean infrastructure set up to respond to emergencies and get people back into housing, crisis response has become a permanent part of our safety net, and a large one at that. As Culhane and An (2021) demonstrate in their study, the shelter “system” is a complex and sprawling industry. Yet—as the authors of this study point out—despite this investment, the need for shelter exceeds the number of beds available, and more than 200,000 live unsheltered on a given night (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 2021). They estimate the annual cost of providing universal shelter would be $12.6 billion but caution policymakers to evaluate this number against the cost of permanent housing in the form of housing vouchers. The pandemic helped illuminate the public health need to bring people in off the streets and highlighted the challenges of preventing the transmission of the virus while providing temporary shelter in congregate settings. The unprecedented widespread use of hotels as emergency\",\"PeriodicalId\":47744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Housing Policy Debate\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"819 - 822\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Housing Policy Debate\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2022.2127557\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Housing Policy Debate","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2022.2127557","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

保持美国的住房越来越困难。至少四十年来,美国遭受了越来越严重的低收入人群负担得起的住房危机,他们忍受着难以维持和不稳定的生活条件。在任何一个夜晚,无家可归的人数都徘徊在50万左右,而且无遮蔽生活的人数正在增加(美国住房和城市发展部,2021)。还有数百万人生活在无家可归的边缘,与房租负担、低质量住房、过度拥挤和不断的驱逐威胁作斗争(Alvarez和Steffen,2021;Gromis等人,2022)。新冠肺炎疫情加剧了住房不安全问题,失业率达到前所未有的水平,导致数百万租户无法支付房租,使他们面临被驱逐的风险,并增加了无家可归者的人数。当更多幸运的人躲在家里避免病毒传播时,成千上万的弱势群体发现自己被迫睡在帐篷里和街上,这给政策制定者提供了一个图形提醒,提醒他们我们大城市的住房严重不稳定。本期特刊探讨了保持美国住房的挑战,并重点介绍了疫情期间出现的一些方法。本期包括七篇文章,首先介绍了庞大的无家可归者应急响应系统,以及在新冠肺炎期间通过使用酒店提高收容所容量所做的努力。然后,它转向无家可归的预防和针对这些努力的挑战。近年来,不仅带来了新冠疫情,也带来了早该到来的种族清算时刻。为了响应结束植根于我们制度中的结构性种族主义的号召,本期通过研究种族如何在无家可归中发挥作用来结束。在美国,当有人无家可归时,主要的反应是紧急避难所,一张晚上睡觉的临时床。人们通常认为庇护所是一种创可贴,这是我们应该做的最低限度的事情。事实上,庇护所通常可以拯救生命,保护人们不露宿街头。然而,当研究表明提供住所可能很昂贵时,有一种误解认为紧急住所的成本远低于提供住房的成本(Spellman等人,2010)。除了成本高昂之外,紧急避难所并不能解决无家可归的问题,因为它不能提供永久的居住场所。不幸的是,危机应对已经成为我们安全网的一个永久组成部分,而不是为应对紧急情况和让人们重返住房而建立的精简基础设施。正如Culhane和An(2021)在他们的研究中所证明的那样,庇护所“系统”是一个复杂而庞大的行业。然而,正如这项研究的作者所指出的那样,尽管有这项投资,但对住房的需求超过了可用的床位数量,在某个晚上有超过20万人没有住房(美国住房和城市发展部,2021)。他们估计,提供普遍住房的年度成本将为126亿美元,但提醒政策制定者将这一数字与住房券形式的永久住房成本进行比较。这场疫情有助于阐明让人们远离街头的公共卫生需求,并突出了在聚集环境中提供临时住所的同时防止病毒传播的挑战。酒店作为紧急情况的空前广泛使用
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
Introduction to Keeping America Housed, a Special Edition of Housing Policy Debate
Keeping America housed is growing more difficult. For at least four decades, the United States has suffered an increasingly acute affordable housing crisis for lower-income people, who have endured untenable and unstable living conditions. The number of people experiencing homelessness has hovered around half a million on any given night, and the number of people living unsheltered is increasing (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 2021). Many millions more live on the edge of homelessness, struggling with rent burden, low-quality housing, overcrowding, and the constant threat of eviction (Alvarez & Steffen, 2021; Gromis et al., 2022). The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the problem of housing insecurity, with unprecedented levels of unemployment that rendered millions of tenants unable to pay their rent, leaving them at risk of eviction and adding more to the rolls of the homeless. As more fortunate people hunkered down in their homes to avoid spreading the virus, thousands of vulnerable people found themselves forced to sleep in tents and on the streets, offering policymakers a graphic reminder of the significant housing precarity in our major cities. This special issue examines the challenge of keeping America housed and highlights a few approaches that emerged during the pandemic. The issue includes seven articles, starting with a description of the vast homeless emergency response system and efforts made during COVID-19 to enhance shelter capacity through the use of hotels. It then turns to homelessness prevention and the challenges with targeting these efforts. Recent years brought not only the pandemic but also a long overdue moment of racial reckoning. In response to the rallying call to end structural racism embedded in our systems, this issue concludes by examining how race plays a role in homelessness. The primary response when someone becomes homeless in the U.S. is emergency shelter, a temporary bed to sleep at night. People often think of shelter as a band-aid—the minimum we should do. Indeed, shelter can often be life-saving, protecting people from literally sleeping on the street. There is, however, a misconception that emergency shelter costs substantially less than providing housing, when studies show that providing shelter can be expensive (Spellman et al., 2010). In addition to being costly, emergency shelter is not a solution to homelessness, as it doesn’t provide a permanent place to live. Unfortunately, instead of a lean infrastructure set up to respond to emergencies and get people back into housing, crisis response has become a permanent part of our safety net, and a large one at that. As Culhane and An (2021) demonstrate in their study, the shelter “system” is a complex and sprawling industry. Yet—as the authors of this study point out—despite this investment, the need for shelter exceeds the number of beds available, and more than 200,000 live unsheltered on a given night (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 2021). They estimate the annual cost of providing universal shelter would be $12.6 billion but caution policymakers to evaluate this number against the cost of permanent housing in the form of housing vouchers. The pandemic helped illuminate the public health need to bring people in off the streets and highlighted the challenges of preventing the transmission of the virus while providing temporary shelter in congregate settings. The unprecedented widespread use of hotels as emergency
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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
17.20%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Housing Policy Debate provides a venue for original research on U.S. housing policy. Subjects include affordable housing policy, fair housing policy, land use regulations influencing housing affordability, metropolitan development trends, and linkages among housing policy and energy, environmental, and transportation policy. Housing Policy Debate is published quarterly. Most issues feature a Forum section and an Articles section. The Forum, which highlights a current debate, features a central article and responding comments that represent a range of perspectives. All articles in the Forum and Articles sections undergo a double-blind peer review process.
期刊最新文献
Retraction: The Effect of Rent Control Status on Eviction Filing Rates: Causal Evidence from San Francisco The Effect of Rent Control Status on Eviction Filing Rates: Causal Evidence From San Francisco Game of Homes: Carrots, Sticks, and the Puzzle of Housing Vacancies “This Voicemail Box Is Full”: Landlord Perceptions of Communication Issues as a Key Challenge to Participating in the Housing Choice Voucher Program “Especially Being Homeless, They Just Think You’re Infected with COVID or Something”: A Qualitative Exploration of the COVID-19 Pandemic’s Impact on People Experiencing Homelessness With a History of Injection Drug Use in Baltimore, Maryland
×
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