Elsevier

Social Science & Medicine

Volume 59, Issue 11, December 2004, Pages 2271-2284
Social Science & Medicine

Short-term effects of moving from public housing in poor to middle-class neighborhoods on low-income, minority adults’ outcomes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.03.020Get rights and content

Abstract

This study reports results from a quasi-experimental residential mobility study in Yonkers, NY, in which low-income minority families residing in public and private housing in high-poverty neighborhoods were randomly assigned via lottery to relocate to publicly funded attached rowhouses in seven middle-class neighborhoods. One hundred seventy-three Black and Latino families who moved and 142 demographically similar families who remained in the original high-poverty neighborhoods were interviewed approximately 2 years after movers relocated; no baseline data were available. Multiple regression analyses controlling for individual- and family-level background characteristics revealed that adults who moved to low-poverty neighborhoods were less likely to be exposed to violence and disorder, experience health problems, abuse alcohol, receive cash assistance, and were more likely to report satisfaction with neighborhood resources, experience higher housing quality, and be employed, when compared with adults who remained in high-poverty neighborhoods. Adults who moved to low-poverty neighborhoods were less likely than those who stayed in high-poverty neighborhoods to socialize informally with neighbors. No program effects were found on adults’ symptoms of depression and anxiety. These early program effects inform housing policy initiatives for low-income families.

Introduction

The study of neighborhood influences on poor individuals’ well-being has become increasingly popular among researchers and policy makers in recent years. Since the 1970s, the occurrence of a number of demographic shifts including changes in labor force participation, residential patterns, and family composition, as well as the segregation of public housing and decline of industrialization contributed to the growth of urban areas concentrated with poor, primarily minority, residents (Hernandez, 1993; Massey & Denton, 1993; Wilson (1987), Wilson (1996)). An emergent literature linking neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics such as percentage of residents living in poverty, racial/ethnic heterogeneity, and unemployment rates to various adult outcomes has been growing in the last decade.

These non-experimental, correlational studies have documented associations between neighborhood structural disadvantage and a host of adverse outcomes for residents. Residence in an economically disadvantaged neighborhood is associated with adults’ exposure to violence (Buka, Stichick, Birdthistle, & Earls, 2001; Chiricos, McEntire, & Gertz, 2001; Grisso et al., 1999; Sampson & Raudenbush, 1999; Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997) and poor quality housing (Evans & Kantrowitz, 2002). In addition, adults in poor neighborhoods are more likely to experience physical health problems such as coronary disease and other long-term illnesses (Cubbin, LeClere, & Smith, 2000; Diez Roux et al., 2001; Goldsmith, Holzer, & Manderscheid, 1998; Kahlmeier, Schindler, Grize, & Braun-Fahrlander, 2001; Kobetz, Daniel, & Earp, 2003; Malmstrom, Johansson, & Sundquist, 2001; Pickett & Pearl, 2001, for a review; Ross, 2000; Ross & Mirowsky, 2001; Ross, Reynolds, & Geis, 2000; Whitley, Gunnell, Dorling, & Smith, 1999) as well as mental health problems such as schizophrenia, depression, and substance use (Boardman, Finch, Ellison, Williams, & Jackson, 2001; Goldsmith et al., 1998; Ross, 2000; Ross et al., 2000) than adults in non-poor neighborhoods. Although the evidence is scant, neighborhood disadvantage is also associated with unfavorable economic circumstances for residents including low levels of labor force activity and high levels of welfare participation (Devine, Gray, Rubin, & Taghavi, 2002; Reingold, Van Ryzin, & Ronda, 2001). Non-experimental studies are limited, however, because individuals are able to choose their neighborhoods of residence, to some extent (Diez Roux et al., 2001; Jencks & Mayer, 1990; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000; Sampson, Morenoff, & Gannon-Rowley, 2002; Tienda, 1991).

As a complement to the non-experimental literature, several experimental and quasi-experimental studies have been conducted in the last two decades in the context of housing programs targeting the deconcentration and/or desegregation of public housing (Anderson et al., 2003; Goetz, 2003). In such instances, families designated to move to more advantaged neighborhoods as part of the program were chosen in a random manner (e.g., lottery-based), with a demographically similar comparison group composed of families who were not selected to move and remained in high-poverty neighborhoods. Since random assignment of families to neighborhood type (i.e., poor or less poor) is utilized, these studies of residential mobility provide empirical evidence of neighborhood effects on children and families, freed, for the most part, from limitations due to selection bias.

The two most well-known experimental studies are the Gautreaux Program in Chicago and the Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration (MTO) in five US cities. Both programs provided families in public housing in high-poverty neighborhoods with Section 8 housing vouchers to be used in the private housing market. In Gautreaux, all families were required to move, based on housing availability (i.e., in a quasi-random manner), either to primarily middle-class, White suburbs or to low-income neighborhoods within the Chicago metropolitan area. In contrast, in MTO, only randomly selected families were given vouchers to move to low-poverty neighborhoods (<10% poor residents), while another subset of families remained in the original high-poverty neighborhoods (>40% poor residents).

Follow-up analyses of adults in Gautreaux and MTO generally reported favorable impacts across a range of health, economic, and social outcomes.1 Specifically, in both studies, adults who relocated to more affluent neighborhoods experienced less crime and violence than their counterparts who remained in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods (Katz, Kling, & Liebman, 2001; Keels, Duncan, Deluca, Mendenhall, & Rosenbaum, 2003; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2003b; Rubinowitz & Rosenbaum, 2000). In MTO, there is some evidence that adults who relocated to low-poverty neighborhoods reported superior physical and mental health than adults who remained in high-poverty neighborhoods 2–3 years following moves (Katz et al., 2001; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2003b). Gautreaux families who relocated to the more affluent suburbs were more likely to be employed compared with city movers (Rosenbaum & Popkin, 1991), while minimal economic benefits were found in MTO in the short-term (Del Conte & Kling, 2001; Katz et al., 2001; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn (2003a), Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn (2003b)). Impacts of moving on adults’ social networks were examined in both studies as well. In Gautreaux, suburban movers experienced racial harassment immediately following their moves; approximately 10 years following relocation, these effects were attenuated, and suburban families were more likely than city movers to have diverse social networks (Rosenbaum, Popkin, Kaufman, & Rusin, 1991; Rubinowitz & Rosenbaum, 2000). Early assessments of MTO families revealed that adults who moved to low-poverty neighborhoods had fewer neighborhood friends than adults who remained in high-poverty neighborhoods (Goering & Feins, 2003).

Adding to this emerging experimental literature, the present study uses data from the Yonkers Project to investigate the early impacts (2 years following relocation) of a housing desegregation program on the well-being of low-income minority adults including their perceptions of neighborhood order and safety, in addition to their physical and mental health, economic, and social outcomes. Adults who relocated to low-poverty neighborhoods are expected to experience less violence and disorder in their neighborhoods as well report superior housing quality, mental health, and economic outcomes compared with a demographically similar comparison group of adults that remained in the original, high-poverty neighborhoods. In contrast, unfavorable outcomes are expected for adults that moved to low-poverty neighborhoods in terms of their satisfaction with neighborhood resources and frequency of social contacts in comparison with adults who remained in high-poverty neighborhoods.

Hypotheses are based on the experimental and non-experimental research reviewed as well as on neighborhood-based theories. Notably, social disorganization theory posits that neighborhood disadvantage thwarts the establishment and maintenance of neighborhood formal and informal institutions including the extent of intra-neighborhood social connections and the willingness of neighbors to intervene on behalf of the community to aid in monitoring residents’ behavior (Bursik, 1988; Kornhauser, 1978; Sampson, 1992; Sampson & Groves, 1989; Sampson & Morenoff, 1997; Sampson, Morenoff, & Earls, 1999; Sampson et al., 1997; Shaw & McKay, 1942). Although this framework has been challenged in terms of its focus on deficits in disadvantaged communities rather than on what is present in successful neighborhoods (Forrest & Kearns, 2001), it does offer a potential explanation for the high incidences of violent and criminal behavior in impoverished neighborhoods, such that without sufficient collective regulation, residents are free to engage in delinquent behavior. Escape from conditions of disadvantage and disorganization, thus, may lead to less exposure to violence and disorder and, subsequently, superior physical and mental health for adults who moved to low-poverty neighborhoods compared with adults who remained in high-poverty neighborhoods (Ross, 2000; Ross & Mirowsky, 2001; Ross et al., 2000).

While escape from neighborhood disorder and violence may enhance the well-being and mental health of adults who move to middle-class neighborhoods, neighborhood relocation efforts may alter residents’ social networks, as preexisting ties may be disrupted or broken, which may unfavorably affect their mental health. Research has documented positive associations between social networks and ties and adults’ well-being (Ross & Jang, 2000; Ross et al., 2000). This possible loss of friendships and ties presents a potential downside of neighborhood relocation efforts (Fried & Gleicher, 1961). On the positive side, middle-class neighborhoods may offer low-income residents ready access to informal social networks, so-called “weak ties,” that serve as portals of information, opportunity, and resources, not found in disadvantaged neighborhoods (Briggs, 1998; Granovetter, 1973; Wellman & Wortley, 1990). Thus, while adults who move from high- to low-poverty neighborhoods are expected to experience declines in social ties, the moves may benefit residents’ employment prospects.

Thirdly, according to Wilson (1987), Wilson (1996) seminal work on the concentration of poverty in America's cities, places of employment became increasingly suburbanized during the 1970s and 1980s, thus making it difficult for inner-city residents to access jobs. According to this logic, then, adults who relocated out of impoverished urban neighborhoods should have greater employment opportunities than adults who remained in high-poverty neighborhoods. However, economic and historical factors may result in few, if any, program effects on economic outcomes. That is, the data for the present study were obtained in the early 1990s during an economic downturn in the US and prior to the 1996 welfare legislation mandating employment for current and potential welfare recipients, potentially resulting in few economic differences between families that relocated to low-poverty neighborhoods and those that remained behind in the high-poverty neighborhoods.

Section snippets

Design

In 1985, a federal court ruling mandated city-wide desegregation of public housing in Yonkers, NY due to increasing concentration of poor Black and Latino families in the Southwest quadrant of the city (United States vs. City of Yonkers, 1985). The Yonkers Project was implemented to examine differences on relevant outcomes between a sample of low-income, minority residents who moved from high- to low-poverty neighborhoods and a sample of demographically similar residents who remained in

Analysis plan

A series of multiple regression analyses were run to assess program differences between movers and stayers on their exposure to violence, neighborhood perceptions, physical and mental health, economic stability, and social contacts. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression was used for continuous outcomes and logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes. All models controlled for potentially confounding individual- and family-level background characteristics including respondent age,

Discussion

The present study examined early impacts of a court-ordered housing desegregation mandate in Yonkers, NY. Low-income Black and Latino families selected via lottery to move out of high-poverty and into middle-class neighborhoods were compared on a range of outcomes with a group of demographically similar families who remained in economically and racially segregated neighborhoods. For the most part, adults who moved from high- to low-poverty neighborhoods experienced less violence exposure,

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Ford Foundation, the National Science Foundation, the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, and the Center for Health and Well-being at Princeton University for their support. We would like to acknowledge Robert Crain, Angela Aidala, and Xavier deSouza Briggs for their previous work on the Yonkers Project, as well as Christina Borbely, Xiomara Gonzalez, Otoniel Lopez, Amy Lowenstein, and Cori Luppino for their assistance with data

References (71)

  • S.L. Buka et al.

    Youth exposure to violencePrevalence, risks, and consequences

    American Journal of Orthopsychiatry

    (2001)
  • R.J. Bursik

    Social disorganization and theories of crime and delinquencyProblems and prospects

    Criminology

    (1988)
  • T. Chiricos et al.

    Perceived racial and ethnic composition of neighborhood and perceived risk of crime

    Social Problems

    (2001)
  • J. Cohen

    Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences

    (1988)
  • C. Cubbin et al.

    Socioeconomic status and injury mortalityIndividual and neighborhood determinants

    Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

    (2000)
  • A. Del Conte et al.

    A synthesis of MTO research on self-sufficiency, safety and health, and behavior and delinquency

    Poverty Research News

    (2001)
  • D.J. Devine et al.

    Housing choice voucher location patternsImplications for participants and neighborhood welfare

    (2002)
  • A.V. Diez Roux et al.

    Neighborhood of residence and incidence of coronary heart disease

    The New England Journal of Medicine

    (2001)
  • M.S. Durkin et al.

    Low-income neighborhoods and the risk of severe pediatric injuryA small-area analysis in Northern Manhattan

    American Journal of Public Health

    (1994)
  • G.W. Evans et al.

    Socioeconomic status and healthThe potential role of environmental risk exposure

    Annual Review of Public Health

    (2002)
  • R. Forrest et al.

    Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood

    Urban Studies

    (2001)
  • M. Fried et al.

    Some sources of residential satisfaction in an urban slum

    Journal of the American Institute of Planners

    (1961)
  • Goering, J., & Feins, J. D. (Eds.) (2003). Choosing a better life? Evaluating the moving to opportunity social...
  • E.G. Goetz

    Clearing the wayDeconcentrating the poor in urban America

    (2003)
  • M. Granovetter

    The strength of weak ties

    American Journal of Sociology

    (1973)
  • J.A. Grisso et al.

    Violent injuries among women in an urban area

    The New England Journal of Medicine

    (1999)
  • D.J. Hernandez

    America's childrenResources from family, government, and the economy

    (1993)
  • C. Jencks et al.

    The social consequences of growing up in a poor neighborhood

  • S. Kahlmeier et al.

    Perceived environmental housing quality and wellbeing of movers

    Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

    (2001)
  • C. Kaplan et al.

    Temporal and social contexts of heroin-using populations

    Journal of Nervous Mental Disease

    (1987)
  • L.F. Katz et al.

    Moving to Opportunity in BostonEarly results of a randomized mobility experiment

    Quarterly Journal of Economics

    (2001)
  • I. Kawachi et al.

    Social capital and self-rated healthA contextual analysis

    American Journal of Public Health

    (1999)
  • Keels, M., Duncan, G. J., Deluca, S., Mendenhall, R., & Rosenbaum, J. (2003). Fifteen years later: Can residential...
  • R.G. Kleit

    Neighborhood relations in suburban scattered-site and clustered public housing

    Journal of Urban Affairs

    (2001)
  • R.G. Kleit

    The role of neighborhood social networks in scattered-site public housing residents’ search for jobs

    Housing Policy Debate

    (2001)
  • Cited by (115)

    • Beyond overwhelmed: A new measure of the functional impact of toxic stress on parents of young children

      2021, Children and Youth Services Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      We must also assess whether, even in the face of strong personal resources, negative functional impact of stressful forces exists nevertheless, i.e., “the fluid interaction between individual and environmental factors in determining the impact of risk,” (Gavidia-Payne et al., 2015; p. 115). Therefore, in the present study, the FITS-P was evaluated both against measures of inner, personal resources for coping with challenge such as the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC; Connor & Davidson, 2003) and the Pearlin Mastery Scale (Pearlin & Schooler, 1978), as well as several measures that take external, environmental factors more into account, such as the Safe Environment for Every Kid scale (SEEK; e.g., Dubowitz et al., 2009), and the Neighborhood Danger scale (Fauth et al., 2004). One final approach we must consider to assessing parental toxic stress is to ask parents about the existence of adverse events in their own childhoods, i.e., ACEs (Felitti et al., 1998).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text