Does density exacerbate income segregation? Evidence from U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 1980 to 2000

Rolf Pendall, John I. Carruthers

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

A fundamental goal of many smart growth efforts is to promote greater socioeconomic equity through more compact development. In this article, we point out that the connection between the built environment and socioeconomic outcomes may be more complex than it is generally portrayed to be, particularly in light of recent trends in urban and regional development. Through an empirical analysis involving two measures of income segregation, dissimilarity and isolation, in a national data set of metropolitan areas from 1980 to 2000, we illustrate that the relationship between density and income segregation follows a quadratic function, first rising, then falling, as densities increase. Moreover, changes in density - whether increases or decreases - always increased segregation. These findings suggest that, if greater socioeconomic equity is a goal, smart growth programs need to pay as much attention to market forces and the underlying political landscape as they do to the built environment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)541-589
Number of pages49
JournalHousing Policy Debate
Volume14
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2003

Fingerprint

segregation
metropolitan area
agglomeration area
income
equity
evidence
empirical analysis
regional development
urban development
social isolation
market
trend
socioeconomics
built environment
programme

Keywords

  • Income segregation
  • Sprawl
  • Urban policy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Development
  • Urban Studies
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Does density exacerbate income segregation? Evidence from U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 1980 to 2000. / Pendall, Rolf; Carruthers, John I.

In: Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 14, No. 4, 01.01.2003, p. 541-589.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{22399551e67f4514a1173ce7def60e81,
title = "Does density exacerbate income segregation? Evidence from U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 1980 to 2000",
abstract = "A fundamental goal of many smart growth efforts is to promote greater socioeconomic equity through more compact development. In this article, we point out that the connection between the built environment and socioeconomic outcomes may be more complex than it is generally portrayed to be, particularly in light of recent trends in urban and regional development. Through an empirical analysis involving two measures of income segregation, dissimilarity and isolation, in a national data set of metropolitan areas from 1980 to 2000, we illustrate that the relationship between density and income segregation follows a quadratic function, first rising, then falling, as densities increase. Moreover, changes in density - whether increases or decreases - always increased segregation. These findings suggest that, if greater socioeconomic equity is a goal, smart growth programs need to pay as much attention to market forces and the underlying political landscape as they do to the built environment.",
keywords = "Income segregation, Sprawl, Urban policy",
author = "Rolf Pendall and Carruthers, {John I.}",
year = "2003",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10511482.2003.9521487",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "541--589",
journal = "Housing Policy Debate",
issn = "1051-1482",
publisher = "Taylor Graham Publishing",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does density exacerbate income segregation? Evidence from U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 1980 to 2000

AU - Pendall, Rolf

AU - Carruthers, John I.

PY - 2003/1/1

Y1 - 2003/1/1

N2 - A fundamental goal of many smart growth efforts is to promote greater socioeconomic equity through more compact development. In this article, we point out that the connection between the built environment and socioeconomic outcomes may be more complex than it is generally portrayed to be, particularly in light of recent trends in urban and regional development. Through an empirical analysis involving two measures of income segregation, dissimilarity and isolation, in a national data set of metropolitan areas from 1980 to 2000, we illustrate that the relationship between density and income segregation follows a quadratic function, first rising, then falling, as densities increase. Moreover, changes in density - whether increases or decreases - always increased segregation. These findings suggest that, if greater socioeconomic equity is a goal, smart growth programs need to pay as much attention to market forces and the underlying political landscape as they do to the built environment.

AB - A fundamental goal of many smart growth efforts is to promote greater socioeconomic equity through more compact development. In this article, we point out that the connection between the built environment and socioeconomic outcomes may be more complex than it is generally portrayed to be, particularly in light of recent trends in urban and regional development. Through an empirical analysis involving two measures of income segregation, dissimilarity and isolation, in a national data set of metropolitan areas from 1980 to 2000, we illustrate that the relationship between density and income segregation follows a quadratic function, first rising, then falling, as densities increase. Moreover, changes in density - whether increases or decreases - always increased segregation. These findings suggest that, if greater socioeconomic equity is a goal, smart growth programs need to pay as much attention to market forces and the underlying political landscape as they do to the built environment.

KW - Income segregation

KW - Sprawl

KW - Urban policy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=14644424944&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=14644424944&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10511482.2003.9521487

DO - 10.1080/10511482.2003.9521487

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:14644424944

VL - 14

SP - 541

EP - 589

JO - Housing Policy Debate

JF - Housing Policy Debate

SN - 1051-1482

IS - 4

ER -