Neighborhood Effects and Housing Vouchers

Davis, Morris A.; Gregory, Jesse; Hartley, Daniel; Tan, Kegon Teng Kok

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3795027

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in the “Moving to Opportunity” randomized experiment, conditioning aid on upgrading location reduced the use of housing vouchers by about a third (21 percentage points). Furthermore, while the literature using this experiment initially found that economic outcomes were not affected by an upgrade in location (Duncan et al (2013)), the most recent studies have found strong evidence that the outcomes for children that moved when young are positive (Chetty, Hendren, and Katz (2016), and Davis, Gregory, Hartley, and Tan (2021)), consistent with our emphasis on the investment dimension of location decisions rather than on the current benefits. Using tax records, Chetty and Hendren (2018) found a trade‐off between child future earnings and rents.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Location as an Asset

Bilal¹,

Rossi‐Hansberg²

2021

ECTA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The location of individuals determines their job and schooling opportunities, amenities, and housing costs. We conceptualize the location choice of individuals as a decision to invest in a “location asset.” This asset has a current cost equal to the location's rent, and a future payoff through better job and schooling opportunities. As with any asset, savers in the location asset transfer resources into the future by going to expensive locations with high future returns. In contrast, borrowers transfer resources to the present by going to cheap locations that offer few other advantages. Holdings of the location asset depend on its comparison to other assets, with the distinction that the location asset is not subject to borrowing constraints. We propose a dynamic location model and derive an agent's mobility choices after experiencing income shocks. We document the investment dimension of location and confirm the core predictions of our theory using French individual panel data from tax returns.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Location as an Asset

Bilal¹,

Rossi‐Hansberg²

2021

ECTA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the long run, the supply of housing may expand in response to increases in demand in high-opportunity areas induced by the CMTO program. These general equilibrium effects could be quantified following the methods developed in Galiani, Murphy, and Pantano (2015), Davis, Gregory, and Hartley (2018), and Davis et al (2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating Moves to Opportunity: Experimental Evidence on Barriers to Neighborhood Choice

Bergman¹,

Chetty²,

DeLuca³

et al. 2019

192

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is a strong assumption about counseling and participant preferences. In the BHMP participants often initially held preferences against eligible neighborhoods (Darrah and DeLuca (2014)), and in MTO participants did not move uniformly to eligible neighborhoods (Aliprantis and Kolliner (2015); Davis et al (2021a); Chetty et al (2020a)). 8…”

Section: Description Of Simulations and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Determines the Success of Housing Mobility Programs?

Aliprantis

Martin

Tauber

2022

Working Paper (Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies how design features influence the success of Housing Mobility Programs (HMPs) in reducing racial segregation. Targeting neighborhoods based on previous residents' outcomes does not allow for targeting race-specific outcomes, generates uncertainty when targeting income-specific outcomes, and generates bias in ranking neighborhoods' effects. Moreover, targeting opportunity bargains based on previous residents' outcomes selects tracts with large disagreements in current and previous residents' outcomes, with such disagreements predicted by sorting since 1990. HMP success is aided by the ability to port vouchers across jurisdictions, access to cars, and relaxing supply constraints, perhaps by targeting lower-ranked neighborhoods. This paper incorporates content from two previous working papers, one under the same title (WP 20-36) and the other circulated as "Neighborhood Sorting Obscures Neighborhood Effects in the Opportunity Atlas" (WP 20-37).

show abstract

Neighborhood Effects and Housing Vouchers

Cited by 4 publications

References 3 publications

Location as an Asset

Location as an Asset

Creating Moves to Opportunity: Experimental Evidence on Barriers to Neighborhood Choice

What Determines the Success of Housing Mobility Programs?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About