본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Social Mix Policy: Lessons from Experiences in United States

박미선
한국주택학회 (Korean Association For Housing Policy Studies)|2010.08|주택연구 (Housing Studies)|제18권 제3호|pp. 119-148

0

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

Social MixMTOHOPE VIInclusionary Zoning

초록

Social mix in housing has gained popularity since it has been regarded as a remedy for addressing poverty concentration and subsequent social problems. This article investigates the origin, evolution, and performance of social mix policy in the United States in order to draw implications for Korean housing policy. The author identifies three types of social mix: place‐based, people‐based, and regulations approach. These approaches are evaluated in terms of individual benefits, neighborhood outcomes, and provision of affordable housing. A people‐based approach has shown better performance to benefit individual level; a place‐based approach has contributed to an increase in neighborhood outcomes; a regulation approach has accomplished to the production of affordable housing. However, implementing a social mix policy entails several issues such as low rate of returnees, reduction of public housing, low level of social interaction, and neighborhood resistance. These problems were caused by the elimination of regulatory requirements, discrepancy between planners and residents, and lack of physical and social venues to incorporate different social groups. Investing underlying causes of unintended consequences sheds light on the importance of government role, understanding residents’ needs, and the significance of design and shared interests among residents.

Abstract

Social mix in housing has gained popularity since it has been regarded as a remedy for addressing poverty concentration and subsequent social problems. This article investigates the origin, evolution, and performance of social mix policy in the United States in order to draw implications for Korean housing policy. The author identifies three types of social mix: place‐based, people‐based, and regulations approach. These approaches are evaluated in terms of individual benefits, neighborhood outcomes, and provision of affordable housing. A people‐based approach has shown better performance to benefit individual level; a place‐based approach has contributed to an increase in neighborhood outcomes; a regulation approach has accomplished to the production of affordable housing. However, implementing a social mix policy entails several issues such as low rate of returnees, reduction of public housing, low level of social interaction, and neighborhood resistance. These problems were caused by the elimination of regulatory requirements, discrepancy between planners and residents, and lack of physical and social venues to incorporate different social groups. Investing underlying causes of unintended consequences sheds light on the importance of government role, understanding residents’ needs, and the significance of design and shared interests among residents.

참고문헌 (56)

  1. Arthurson, K., "Creating Inclusive Communities Through Balancing Social Mix: A Critical Relationship or Tenuous Link?", Urban Policy and Research, 20(3), pp.245~261 (2002)
  2. Rehousing Strategies for Residents in the Residential Environment Improvement Projects, Anyang: Korea, "Bae, S.", Korea Research Institute for Human Settlement, ~ (2005)
  3. Bandura, A., "Social Learning Theory" (1977), Prentice Hall
  4. Boyd, M., "The Durability of Gains from the Gautreaux Two Residential Mobility Program: A Quantitative Analysis of Who Stays and Who Moves from Low-poverty Neighborhoods", Housing Policy Debate, 20(1), pp.119~146 (2010)
  5. Briggs, X., "Moving Up versus Moving Out: Neighborhood Effects in Housing Mobility Programs", Housing Policy Debate, 8(1), pp.195~234 (1997)
  6. Briggs, X., "Moving to Opportunity: The Story of an American Experiment to Fight Ghetto Poverty" (2010), Oxford University Press
  7. The HOPE VI Resident Tracking Study: A Snapshot of the Current Living Situation of Original Residents from Eight Sites, "Buron, L.", The Urban Institute, ~ (2002)
  8. California Inclusionary Zoning Database, "California Coalition for Rural Housing and Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California", ~ (2007)
  9. "“Can Inclusionary Zoning”, “Can Inclusionary Zoning Be an Effective and Efficient Housing Policy?: What Does the Literature Suggest?" (2008), article under review
  10. Cole, I., "Social Mix and the ‘Balanced Community’ in British Housing Policy – A Tale of Two Epochs", GeoJournal, 51, pp.351~360 (2001)
  11. DeLuca, S., "Gautreaux Mothers and Their Children: An Update", Housing Policy Debate, 20(1), pp.7~25 (2010)
  12. Denton, N., "Segregation and Discrimination in Housing. in: A Right to Housing: Foundation for a New Social Agenda", pp.61~81 (2006), Temple University Press
  13. Ellen, G., "Does Federally Subsidized Rental Housing Depress Neighborhood Property Values?", Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(2), pp.257~280 (2007)
  14. Fischel, W., "The Homevoter Hypothesis: How Home Values Influence Local Government Taxation, School Finance, and Land-use Policy" (2001), Harvard University Press
  15. Fleissig, W., "Mixed Income Housing. in: The Encyclopedia of Housing", pp.357~359 (1998), Sage Publications
  16. Galster, G., "Supportive Housing and Neighborhood Property Value Externalities", Land Economics, 80(1), pp.33~54 (2004)
  17. Why Not in My Backyard?: Neighborhood Impacts of Deconcentrating Assisted Housing, "Galster, G.", Center for Urban Policy Research, ~ (2003)
  18. Gans, H., "People and Plans: Essays on Urban Problems and Solutions" (1968), Basic Books
  19. Granovetter, M., "The Strength of Weak Ties", American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), pp.1360~1380 (1973)
  20. Grigsby, W., "Section 8: The time for fundamental program change?", Housing Policy Debate, 15(4), pp.805~834 (2004)
  21. Ha, S-K., "Housing Regeneration and Building Sustainable Low-income Communities in Korea", Habitat International, 31, pp.116~129 (2007)
  22. Ha, S-K., "Social Housing Estates and Sustainable Community Development in South Korea", Habitat International, 32, pp.349~363 (2008)
  23. Interim Assessment of the HOPE VI Program: Cross-site Report, "Holin, M.", Abt Associates, ~ (2003)
  24. 홍종문, "국민 임대주택 입지가 주변 아파트 가격에 미치는 영향 분석", 도시설계, 7(3), pp.23~32 (2006), 한국도시설계학회
  25. Voucher Program Guidebook: Housing Choice, "HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development)", U.S, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, ~ (2001)
  26. Joseph. M., "Early Residents Experiences at a New Mixed-income Development in Chicago", Journal of Urban Affairs, 30(3), pp.229~257 (2008)
  27. Katz B., "Rethinking U.S. Rental Housing Policy: A New Blueprint for Federal, State, and Local Action. in: Revisiting Rental Housing: Policies, Programs, and Priorities" (2008), Joint Center for Housing Studies and Brookings Institution Press
  28. Katz, B., "Rethinking Local Affordable Housing Strategies: Lessons from 70 years of Policy and Practice", A discussion paper prepared by The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy and The Urban Institute (2003)
  29. Keating, D., "Revitalizing Urban Neighborhoods" (1996), University Press of Kansas
  30. Kim, J., "Impact of Social Mix Development on Social Exclusion and Housing Prices: 50-year Public Rental Housing in Seoul", 박사, pp.2008
  31. Kingsley, T., "Patterns of Section 8 relocation in the HOPE VI program", Journal of Urban Affairs, 25(4), pp.427~447 (2003)
  32. Kleit, R., "HOPE VI New Communities: Neighborhood Relationship in Mixed-income Housing", Environment and Planning A, 37(8), pp.1413~1441 (2005)
  33. Lee, C., "The Differential Impacts of Federally Assisted Housing Programs on Nearby Property Values: A Philadelphia Case Study", Housing Policy Debate, 10(1), pp.75~93 (1999)
  34. 이주림, "다가구 매입임대주택에 대한 주변지역 주민인식 및 전세가격 영향 분석", 국토계획, 43(1), pp.111~122 (2008), 대한국토·도시계획학회
  35. Mumford, L., "The Urban Prospect" (1968), Brace & World
  36. Orlebeke, C., "The Evolution of Low-income Housing Policy, 1949 to 1999", Housing Policy Debate, 11(2), pp.489~520 (2000)
  37. Orr, K., "Moving to Opportunity Interim Impacts Evaluation" (2003), U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research
  38. Popkin, S., "A Glass Half Empty? New Evidence from the HOPE VI Panel Study", Housing Policy Debate, 20(1), pp.43~63 (2010)
  39. Popkin, S., "A Decade of HOPE VI: Research Findings and Policy Challenges" (2004), The Urban Institute and The Brookings Institution
  40. Porter, D., "The Promise and Practice of Inclusionary Zoning. in: Growth Management and Affordable Housing: Do They Conflict?" (2004), Brookings Institution Press
  41. Rosenbaum, J., "Lake Parc Place: A Study of Mixed-income Housing", Housing Policy Debate, 9(4), pp.703~740 (1998)
  42. Rosenbaum, J., "Comparing Residential Mobility Programs: Design Elements, Neighborhood Placements, and Outcomes in MTO and Gautreaux", Housing Policy Debate, 20(1), pp.27~41 (2010)
  43. Rubinowitz, L., "Crossing the Class and Color Lines: From Public Housing to White Suburbia" (2000), University of Chicago Press
  44. Rusk, D., "Nine Lessons for Inclusionary Zoning", Keynote remarks to the National Inclusionary Housing Conference (2005)
  45. Saldov, M., "Social Mix. in: The Encyclopedia of Housing", pp.549~550 (1998), Sage Publications
  46. Santiago, A., "Assessing the Property Value Impacts of the Dispersed Housing Subsidy Program in Denver", Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(1), pp.65~88 (2001)
  47. Sarkissian, W., "The Idea of Social Mix in Town Planning: An Historical Review", Urban Studies, 13(3), pp.231~246 (1976)
  48. The Effects of Inclusionary Zoning on Local Housing Markets, "Schuetz, J.", New York University, Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy, ~ (2007)
  49. Schill, M., "The Spatial Bias of Federal Housing Law and Policy: Concentrated Poverty in Urban America", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 143, pp.1285~1342 (1995)
  50. Schwartz, A., "Housing Policy in the United States: An Introduction" (2006), Routledge
  51. Smith, J., "Public Housing Rransformation: Evolving National Policy. in: Where Are Poor People to Live?: Transforming Public Housing Communities" (2006), M.E. Sharpe
  52. Tegeler, P., "The Persistence of Segregation in Government Housing Program. in: The Geography of Opportunity: Race and Housing Choice in Metropolitan America" (2005), Brookings Institution Press
  53. Tunstall, R., "In the Mix: A Review of Mixed Income, Mixed Tenure and Mixed Communities" (2006), Joseph Rowntree Foundation
  54. Wilson, W., "The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy" (1987), The University of Chicago Press
  55. Woo, A., "Housing Price Impact of Rental Housing Mix", 석사, pp.2005
  56. "Public Housing Construction Trend Statistic"[URL]

관련 논문AI추천

Can the Development of Mixed Communities Transform the Prospects of Deprived Neighborhoods? Lessons from the HOPE VI Program in the U.S.경신원한국도시지리학회 · 한국도시지리학회지2017 · 제20권 제1호사회적 혼합(social mix)에 관한 쟁점과 과제: 영국, 네덜란드, 캐나다의 사례를 중심으로박준, 김규희, 오도영, 유승동한국공간환경학회 · 공간과 사회2021 · 제31권 제2호임대주택의 혼합배치가 사회통합에 긍정적 영향을 미치는가김현영, 임병준한국부동산분석학회 · 부동산학연구2011 · 제17권 제2호영국 사회주택의 사회혼합정책 연구권세연, 박환용한국주택학회 · 주택연구2009 · 제17권 제2호거주자의 사회･경제적 특성이 분양･임대 아파트의 물리적 혼합 배치유형 인식 평가에 미친 영향김주현, 안용진국토연구원 · 국토연구2018 · 제96권 공공임대주택 거주자의 주거환경평가 및 사회적 자본이 소셜믹스 인식에 미치는 영향 분석최열, 권연화국토연구원 · 국토연구2023 · 제118권

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (5건)

자산시장 관련 변수가 주택가격에 미치는 영향 -전세‑매매가격비율을 중심으로-이상준, 임덕호pp. 5-27부동산 경매시장의 아파트 낙찰가격 결정요인에 관한 연구 -버블세븐지역을 중심으로-유선종, 정가연pp. 29-50압축도시 특성요인의 사회적 지속가능성에 대한 영향분석김리영, 문태훈pp. 51-72견고한 공간계량경제모형의 추정 -층수를 고려한 3차원 공간가중행렬을 이용하여-김성우, 정건섭pp. 73-92부동산경매시장에서 매각가격은 할인되는가?민태욱, 진남영, 이용만pp. 93-117
원문 보기