Measuring the Differentiated Impact of New Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Projects on Households’ Movements by Income Level within Urban Areas

Social mixing is one of the key objectives of the housing policy in OECD countries. The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, the largest affordable housing construction program in the US since 1986, has recently set creating mixed-income communities as one of the standards. As a project-based program, LIHTC developments are likely to influence residential mobility; however, little is known about its empirical effects. This study investigated whether new LIHTC projects are effective at attracting heterogeneous income groups to LIHTC neighborhoods, thereby contributing to creating mixed-income communities. Using unique individual-level household movement data combined with origin–destination neighborhood characteristics, we developed zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) models to analyze the LIHTC’s impact on residential mobility patterns in Franklin County, Ohio, US, from 2011 to 2015. The results suggest that the LIHTC attracts low-income households while deterring higher-income families, and therefore the program is not proved to be effective at creating mixed-income neighborhoods.

Personal attitude or experience? Which factors influence residents’ acceptance of mixed-income communities?

Although many researchers and policy makers have argued that social mixing could contribute to sustainable communities, most people still prefer to live in a homogeneous rather than a diverse community. Considering the large gap between the political need for social mixing and people’s preference, it is essential to understand residents’ perceptions and preferences regarding socially-mixed neighborhoods in order to promote sustainable community development. This study explorers residents’ willingness to accept living in mixed-income communities in Korea, with attention to various levels of income mix. This study conducted an online survey of 2,000 respondents living in seven metropolitan cities in Korea, including Seoul. The study aimed to investigate residents’ comfortability and willingness to move into different mixed-income communities. The results showed that residents with higher openness to diversity are more likely to accept mixed-income communities, but frequent interaction with low-income people reduces higher-income people’s willingness to accept mixed-income communities. As both personal attitudes and experience are important determinants of individuals’ social mix preference, a more systematic community development strategy is required to achieve successful social mixing.

The Use of Mixed-Income Housing Development to Address Poverty and Inequality, Based on Delphi Empirical Approach: A Case of South Africa

Since the dawn of democracy in 1994, the Republic of South Africa (RSA) has been trying to address the aftermath and consequences of the apartheid regime. This comprises of the socio-economic, spatial, and political challenges that have persisted over the decades. These have had far reaching repercussions in the society to the extent that 25 years later after apartheid, the country finds itself with alarming rates of poverty, social exclusion, unemployment, and inequality. Literature has revealed that there is a direct relationship between poverty and inequality as well as access to socio-economic services / opportunities. Poor access to these services perpetuates exclusivity and thus inequality and marginalisation in all form and character. The purpose of this study is to investigate how housing developments have been used in South Africa to address poverty and inequality. The aim is to understand how to plan for better and more socially and economically thriving communities through housing development, focusing specifically on aspects of development that contributes to addressing poverty and inequality. Using a Delphi three round method of Inquiry of 20 experts, perceptions from a diverse panel of experts about mixed-income housing development were uncovered. In comparison to previous housing models, the study uncovered a significant paradigm shift in housing development and what a housing intervention should achieve. Since 2004 after the introduction of the Breaking New Ground Policy (BNG), the housing development approaches, and interventions have shifted away from just providing roof over once head to providing social asset to the poor and a whole range economic opportunities. The conclusion is that housing development by virtue of location, diverse housing typologies and tenure options is now part and parcel of integrated planning and the pro poor development agenda.