2016
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2777563
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inclusion Imagined: Fair Housing as Metropolitan Equity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 17 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, recent research by the Rutgers Center on Law, Inequality and Metropolitan Equity (CLiME) provides evidence of the increasing vulnerability for Newark residents. According to the CLiME Displacement Risk Indicators Matrix, an assessment tool based on vulnerability (stress indicators on households, rent burden, poverty rate), market dynamics (rising rents, decreased affordability, poverty, new construction), and population, Newark is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis, with the highest rate of renters in the nation, declining rates of homeownership, and a majority of residents facing rent burden or mortgage burden (Troutt 2017). The report cites supply factors that reduced the numbers of affordable units and discouraged private and nonprofit development of affordable housing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, recent research by the Rutgers Center on Law, Inequality and Metropolitan Equity (CLiME) provides evidence of the increasing vulnerability for Newark residents. According to the CLiME Displacement Risk Indicators Matrix, an assessment tool based on vulnerability (stress indicators on households, rent burden, poverty rate), market dynamics (rising rents, decreased affordability, poverty, new construction), and population, Newark is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis, with the highest rate of renters in the nation, declining rates of homeownership, and a majority of residents facing rent burden or mortgage burden (Troutt 2017). The report cites supply factors that reduced the numbers of affordable units and discouraged private and nonprofit development of affordable housing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%