Fewer Vacants, Fewer Crimes? Impacts of Neighborhood Revitalization Policies on Crime

Abstract

The relationship between neighborhood physical environment and social disorder, particularly crime, is of critical interest to urban economists and sociologists, as well as local governments. Over the past 50 years, various policy interventions to improve physical conditions in distressed neighborhoods have also been heralded for their potential to reduce crime. Urban renewal programs in the mid-20 th century and public housing redevelopment in the 1990s both subscribed to the idea that signs of physical disorder invite social disorder. More recently, the federal Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) provided funding for local policymakers to rehabilitate or demolish foreclosed and vacant properties, in order to mitigate negative spillovers-including crime-on surrounding neighborhoods. In this paper, we investigate the impact of NSP investments on localized crime patterns in Cleveland, Chicago and Denver. Results suggest that demolition activity in Cleveland decreased burglary and theft, but do not find measurable impacts of property rehabilitation investments-although the precision of these estimates are limited by the number of rehabilitation activities.

Regulating Landlords: Unintended Consequences for Poor Tenants

“…Cleveland is an ideal setting for this study, in that it is similar to other post-industrial "rustbelt" cities (e.g., Milwaukee, Baltimore, Detroit) in its high levels of poverty, unemployment, crime, and blight in many neighborhoods (Kneebone and Holmes 2016). A growing stock of vacant and blighted homes has greatly reduced market values of homes in the region, which has allegedly fueled disorder and crime (Ford et al 2013;Spader et al 2015). However Cleveland also shows meaningful economic variation across its neighborhoods, seen by its rapidly revitalizing downtown, gentrification in nearby communities, and array of middle-class suburbs (Cleveland City Planning Commission; Ford et al 2013).…”

“…Perceived risk associated with water and nuisance costs that may be perceived as unpredictable or uncontrollable may evoke landlords' measures to conserve resources in other ways when possible, including through subpar property maintenance-with implications not only for current tenants' safety, but property values and blight of the surrounding community. In many cities, abandonment has plagued lower income communities when owners perceive properties as unprofitable, consequently deepening existing problems of blight and declining property values (Mallach 2010;Ford et al 2013;Griswold et al 2014;Spader et al 2015). Abandonment in the context of water regulations may be propelled by common city practices of attaching unpaid water bills to property tax bills, which poses obstacles to the legal transfer to third parties (e.g., private investors, non-profit developers, or land banks) who would be forced to assume these additional costs.…”