Neighbourhood selection and neighbourhood matching: Choices, outcomes and social distance

In this article, we ask how well Australian households are matched to their neighbourhood social environments. We broadly replicate a previous study of matching and ask to what extent households live in communities that are similar in socio-economic status to their characteristics. And, when households move, do they relocate in such a way as to increase similarity to their neighbours? The processes are at the heart of understanding the urban structure, how it changes over time and the links to urban inequality. The article uses data on household incomes from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamic (HILDA) Survey to measure the degree of similarity between households and their neighbours. We study the variation in matching for the population as a whole, and by quintiles of median neighbourhood income. We also measure how individuals that change neighbourhoods increase their similarity to the destination neighbourhood. We find that with respect to matching there is considerable diversity in the levels of matching; and that with respect to residential change, households in general do not make major shifts to increase matching when we control for housing tenure and other household characteristics. There is a need for further replications to understand the nature of matching and the outcomes.

From shrinkage to regrowth: changes, impacts and challenges for Leipzig, ‘city of extremes'

This investigation focuses on Leipzig, one of the most prominent examples of a large city in eastern Germany that shrank during the 1990s and began growing again in the 2010s. What happened in those old, inner-city neighbourhoods especially affected by shrinkage, outmigration, abandonment and vacancy, as Leipzig's inner east and inner west were? The focus here will be on the field of housing, real estate market development and residential change; the new role of green spaces and greening strategies in a context of contested urban space; and the ‘fate' of spaces for interim uses and experimentation that had been established during the period of shrinkage. How and why did Leipzig shift from shrinkage towards new growth? What are the impacts of this change for different fields of urban development and policy? What can be learnt from Leipzig for a broader perspective?

Home Free

This book is about building credible science to address the challenge of criminal recidivism. It does so by drawing upon a unique natural experiment that presented an opportunity to witness an alternate reality. More than 625,000 individuals are released from prison in the United States each year, and roughly half of these individuals will be back in prison within just three years. A likely contributor to the churning of the same individuals in and out of prison is the fact that many released prisoners return home to the same environment with the same criminal opportunities and criminal peers that proved so detrimental to their behavior prior to incarceration. This study uses Hurricane Katrina as a natural experiment for examining the question of whether residential relocation away from an old neighborhood can lead to desistance from crime. Many prisoners released soon after Katrina could not go back to their old neighborhoods, as they normally would have done. Their neighborhoods were devastated by a once-in-a-generation storm that damaged the vast majority of housing units in New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina provided a rare opportunity to investigate what happens when individuals move not just a short distance, but to entirely different cities, counties, and social worlds. This study draws upon both quantitative and qualitative evidence to reveal where newly released prisoners resided in the wake of the Katrina, the effect of residential relocation on the likelihood of reincarceration through eight years post-release, and the mechanisms revealing why residential change is so important after release from prison.

Introduction

This introductory chapter sets out the purpose of the book, which is to analyze why criminal recidivism rates remain persistently high and to reorient the search for solutions to recidivism by focusing on the importance of place of residence. This chapter situates the study by describing the facts about mass incarceration and prisoner reentry in the United States, including the fact that half of exiting prisoners are reincarcerated within three years of prison release. Many social critics have claimed that “nothing works” to rehabilitate prisoners. However, this book argues that residential change is an overlooked solution to chronic recidivism. This chapter introduces Hurricane Katrina as a natural experiment for examining the question of whether residential relocation away from an old neighborhood can lead to desistance from crime. Katrina provided an alternate reality for examining the relationship between where people live and their behavior.

Epilogue

The Epilogue takes the policy discussion a step further, describing an experimental demonstration project that uses housing subsidies to incentivize recently released prisoners to move to new cities. This demonstration project, which is called the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment, or MOVE for short, was designed to determine if residential change, in this case induced through a real-world housing intervention, might yield the same reductions in recidivism that the moves from Hurricane Katrina produced. Thus, the book ends with a discussion of how the lessons of a unique but tragic natural experiment might be put to use to lower criminal recidivism. The Epilogue describes pilot results which suggest that residential relocation, along with stable housing, can yield significant reductions in the likelihood of criminal recidivism.

Residential Relocation as a Remedy to Recidivism

Relying upon Hurricane Katrina as a natural experiment, Chapter 4 provides quantitative evidence on the extent to which residential change lessens the likelihood of criminal recidivism during the first eight years following prison release. Analyses reveal that formerly incarcerated individuals who moved away from their old parish after release had substantially lower rates of reincarceration than those who returned to their previous parish of residence. An estimated 59 percent of parolees who returned to their home parish were reincarcerated within eight years of release. In contrast, an estimated 46 percent of parolees who moved to a new parish were reincarcerated. Findings presented in the chapter also reveal that short-distance moves are insufficient to separate someone from his or her criminal past. Moving from one metropolitan area to another can provide the type of separation from one’s past that can be crucial to desistance from crime. The chapter also considers evidence on the effects of residential change from government-funded housing mobility programs, including the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) demonstration. These programs offer important lessons about how residential mobility programs for the formerly incarcerated might be designed.

Considering Negative Cases

While the weight of the evidence presented thus far in the book suggests that residential change is an important contributor to desistance from crime, it is not always sufficient to bring about a change in behavior. Chapter 8 presents negative cases, including individuals who managed to move away from their old parishes following Hurricane Katrina, but who nevertheless still persisted in their criminal behavior, partly due to their addiction to drugs. If residential relocation has the potential to lower the likelihood of recidivism, it is important to understand under what conditions it can promote desistance from crime and under what conditions it does not appear to be sufficient. Conversely, this chapter also examines the case of an individual named Darnell who desisted from crime despite returning to the familiar setting of New Orleans, partly due to strong social bonds. Consideration of negative cases is critical for refining our understanding about the role of residential change in curtailing recidivism.

Policy Levers to Foster Residential Change and Reduce Recidivism

Chapter 9 seeks to inform public policy debates about how to reduce criminal recidivism, with a particular focus on parole and housing policies. In many states, prisoners released onto parole are legally required to return to their county of last residence, thus contributing to a return to old neighborhoods. Accordingly, this chapter argues that parole policies and practices need to be fundamentally altered. In addition, barriers to securing housing mean that many former prisoners will return to their home neighborhoods even when they do not want to because they simply have nowhere else to go. Such barriers curtail efforts at residential change and residential mobility. This chapter suggests that policies that expand stable housing opportunities for the formerly incarcerated, particularly opportunities outside of their old neighborhoods, may be a fruitful way to reduce recidivism. The chapter concludes by calling for a multipronged approach to reduce recidivism, including both mobility-based strategies and place-based interventions.