Obstacles to desegregating public housing: Lessons learned from implementing eight consent decrees

Susan J. Popkin, George C. Galster, Kenneth Temkin, Carla Herbig, Diane K. Levy and Elise K. Richer
Additional contact information
Susan J. Popkin: The Urban Institute, Washington, DC, Postal: The Urban Institute, Washington, DC
George C. Galster: College of Urban, Labor, and Metropolitan Affairs, Wayne State University, Postal: College of Urban, Labor, and Metropolitan Affairs, Wayne State University
Kenneth Temkin: Kormendi|Gardner Partners, Postal: Kormendi|Gardner Partners
Carla Herbig: Center for Law and Social Policy, Postal: Center for Law and Social Policy
Diane K. Levy: Center for Law and Social Policy, Postal: Center for Law and Social Policy
Elise K. Richer: Center for Law and Social Policy, Postal: Center for Law and Social Policy

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2003, vol. 22, issue 2, 179-199

Abstract: Between 1992 and 1996 the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) settled a number of legal cases involving housing authorities and agreed to take remedial action as part of court-enforced consent decrees entered into with plaintiffs. These housing authorities faced significant obstacles that impaired their ability to comply swiftly and fully with all of the elements in the desegregation consent decrees. The obstacles fell into two broad categories: contextual obstacles (racial composition of waiting lists and resident populations, lack of affordable rental housing, and inadequate public transportation), and capacity and coordination obstacles (conflict among implementing agencies and ineffective monitoring by HUD). Findings presented here highlight the sizable potential delay between the time a legal remedy is imposed and when plaintiffs in public housing segregation disputes realize any benefits. They also reinforce the argument that implementation problems will be legion when policies impose a significant scope of required changes on a large number of actors who must collaborate, yet are not uniformly capable or sympathetic to the goals being promoted. © 2003 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Date: 2003
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/pam.10112 Link to full text; subscription required (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:22:y:2003:i:2:p:179-199

DOI: 10.1002/pam.10112

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Policy Analysis and Management from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().