SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs

PAI 786 – Urban Policy
Professor Yinger
Spring 2016

Professor Yinger
451 Eggers Hall
Phone: 315-443-9062
Email: joyinger@.syr.edu
https://joyinger.expressions.syr.edu/

Class Location:     111 Maxwell

Class Time:          MW 12:45-2:05

Office Hours:        11:00-12:00 Monday and Wednesday or by appointment

Course Overview and Requirements

Many of the most severe social problems in the United States are concentrated in cities — and are different because of that concentration.  This course explores recent evidence about urban problems, develops analytical tools for understanding the causes and consequences of these problems, and discusses alternative policy responses.  The course concentrates on urban problems and policies involving housing or labor markets.  Simple microeconomic tools are used to analyze many urban problems, but the readings and lectures also will bring in work from other disciplines.  The principal emphasis of the course will be on the use of scholarly evidence to inform decisions about urban policy.

The class covers the following Six topics:      

1. Conceptual Tools: Housing Markets and Neighborhood Change
2. Housing Problems and Housing Policy
3. Discrimination, Segregation, and Racial Transition
4. Urban Poverty and Welfare Programs
5. Urban Employment and Economic Development Programs
6. Urban Crime

Time & Place

The Class will meet in 111 Maxwell on Monday and Wednesdays from 12:45-2:05.

Class Format

Class sessions will consist of a mix of lectures, case discussions, and student presentations. Student participation is encouraged in all classes, and, as discussed below, required in some.

This class will make extensive use of the internet.  All of the cases and other class material are available through the professor’s web site, and all other required readings are or will be available through various internet sites, as indicated on the reading list below.  In addition, students are encouraged to read The New York Times on the web (http://www.nytimes.com).  The first few articles you read each month are free and The Times contains a wealth of information about urban policy. Other potentially useful sites include:

The Brookings Institution (http://www.brookings.org)

Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (http://www.ffiec.gov)

Institute for Research on Poverty (http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/irp)

Joint Center for Poverty Research (http://www.jcpr.org)

Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (http://www.mdrc.org)

Mathematica Policy Research (http://www.mathematica-mpr.com)

National Fair Housing Advocate (http://www.fairhousing.com)

Program on Poverty and Social Welfare Policy, University of Michigan
(http://npc.umich.edu/publications/)

The Rand Corporation (http://www.rand.org)

The Urban Institute (http://www.urban.org/)

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/)

U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov)

U.S. Conference of Mayors (http://www.usmayors.org/uscm/home.asp)

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (http://www.hud.gov)

National Poverty Center (http://www.npc.umich.edu)

Prerequisite

Although this is not an economics course, it draws on the research of economists (among others) and is therefore designed for students with previous exposure to microeconomic analysis.  Some background in statistics and regression analysis is also desirable, but not required.  Any student who has taken ECN 601 or PPA 723 with a grade of B or better may take this course.  Other students must receive the instructor’s permission in order to enroll.

Assignments

All students are required to (1) participate in case discussions, (2) prepare a professional memo based on one of the cases, (3) keep a journal of urban policy issues with a focus on a particular urban area, and (4) participate in an urban policy summit.  As explained below, the journal serves as a type of on‑going take-home exam.  Students are required to work together for the first and fourth assignments.  Students also may discuss the other two assignments with each other, but each student should work alone in preparing the written material for these assignments.  Students are expected to meet the highest standards of intellectual integrity in all the material they submit to the professor.

(1) As listed on the following class schedule, there are four case discussions in the class. Each student must play a lead role in one of these case discussions.  The class web page (on the professor’s web site) includes a form that allows each student to indicate the case on which he or she would like to play a lead role. This form should be downloaded, filled out, and turned in to the professor on or before February 8.  Students will be assigned to cases on a first‑come, first‑served basis.  The final assignments will be available on the class web page by February 10 (with the first case to take place February 17).  Guidelines for each case discussion, including suggestions for students who are playing the lead role, also will be discussed in class or available on the class web page the week before each discussion takes place. Students who do not have a lead role for a particular case are still expected to attend and participate in the class discussion.

(2) The second requirement is to prepare a short (2-page) professional memorandum to an imaginary decision maker.  This memo must be based on one of the four case studies.  Instructions for the memos, tips for professional writing, and examples of the professor’s professional memos (op-ed pieces) can be found on the professor’s web site.  A student may select any of the four possible memos, but a memo must be turned in at the beginning of the class during which it is discussed.  Late memos will not be accepted.  Plan ahead!  These memos will be graded on presentation as well as on substance.  Although only one memo is required, a student may submit two memos; his or her grade will be based on the best one.

(3) The third requirement is to keep a journal on the urban policy issues that arise in a particular urban area. This requirement has several parts.
First, each student must select an urban area.

Second, the journal must ultimately contain three entries of one or two pages each (plus supporting graphs or tables, if any).  The first entry for all journals is a description of the economic and social structure of the student’s urban area.  All the information needed for this description can be found at the U.S. Census Bureau web site, http://www.census.gov, although students may also use other sources if they wish.

In addition, this description should include some reference to the principles of household residential location that are developed in the first part of the class.

Third, the journal must contain at least two entries on a substantive policy topic.  The entries must cover at least two of the following four sections of the class:  (1) housing problems and housing policy; (2) discrimination, segregation, racial transition; (3) urban poverty and welfare programs; and (4) urban employment and economic development programs. One entry must come from categories (1) and (2) and one must come from categories (3) and (4).  For example, a journal could contain one entry on housing problems and one on urban poverty, but it cannot just contain two entries on urban poverty.  Each entry should address one urban policy topic.  This issue could be one covered in the class or one the student has read about in one of the readings, in The New York Times, or in some other newspaper.  Each student is responsible for identifying the policy issues for his or her journal.

The most important feature of each entry is its analysis.  Each entry should (a) state a problem in urban policy that confronts public decision makers, (b) discuss the types of behavior by households, businesses, or governments that are relevant for understanding this problem, (c) discuss some evidence about this behavior or about policy effectiveness, and (d) present an analysis of various solutions to the problem, with a recommendation about the best policy approach.  In effect, each entry should be treated as the answer to a question on a take-home exam, except, of course, that the question, as well as the answer, is provided by the student.

Secondary features of each entry include presentation and links to the student’s urban area. Entries do not need to be as formally structured as the professional memos, but presentation will receive some weight in the grading process.  Students also should link each essay to their urban area.  However, students are not expected to obtain information about actual policy debates in their area; instead, they are just supposed to illustrate key elements of their analysis using information on their city from the census web site or some other relatively accessible source.  For example, a student writing an essay on urban poverty and welfare could discuss the poverty rate in the central city of his or her urban area.

Fourth, each student must submit his or her journal to the professor on two occasions: March 9 and April 11.  Late journals will be downgraded. When the journal is handed in on March 9, it must contain the first entry described above (on economic and social structure), along with one substantive entry on housing policy or discrimination and segregation (following the above guidelines). When the journal is handed in on April 11, it must contain one additional substantive entry. (Entries from March 9 need not be handed in again on April 11, but students may keep all the entries together if they wish.)

Finally, students may submit a third substantive entry.  Their grade will be based on the best two.  Extra substantive entries, that is, those submitted in addition to the required two, can come from any section of the class.  A student who submitted a housing policy entry on March 9, for example, may submit another housing policy entry on April 11, so long as he or she also submits another entry from a different section of the class, as defined earlier.

Although student journals play no formal role in the class sessions, students are encouraged to bring relevant information about their city (or any other large city, for that matter) into the class discussions.

(4) The fourth assignment is to participate in an urban policy summit.  This summit, which will be held during the last three class sessions, provides teams of students with the opportunity to study an urban policy topic of their choosing and to present their analysis and recommendations to the rest of the class.
The specific requirements for the urban policy summit are as follows:

First, each student will join a team of 3-5 students, and each team will be assigned a topic in urban policy.  Each team will then study this topic, devise policy recommendations, and prepare a report to present to the polity summit.

The procedure for assigning students to topics is similar to the one used for the case discussions.  The class web page provides a list of possible topics combined with a topic preference form.  Each student must fill out a form to indicate which topic(s) on this list he or she prefers.  This form must be downloaded, filled out, and turned in to the professor on or before February 24.

The professor will try to match students with their preferred topics, but in the case of popular topics, students will be assigned to topics on a first-come, first-served basis.  Students may design topics of their own, but all topics are subject to the professor’s approval.  Students who wish to work on a topic that is not on the professor’s list are strongly urged to (a) discuss the topic with the professor before they fill out the form and (b) find other students who would like to work on the topic with them.  The final assignments will be available on the class web page before Spring break.

Second, each team has two principal responsibilities.  (a) It must decide how to organize its presentation at the urban policy session.  It can, for example, present a united front, with all team members backing a single recommendation or set of recommendations, or it can split into factions, with various sub-teams each presenting recommendations of their own.  Each team can present as many recommendations as it wants, so long as each recommendation falls within the broad topic it is assigned.  (Students should recognize, however, that the time available for presentation is fixed, so that presenting more recommendations means less time, and less depth per recommendation.)  (b) It must submit to the professor a final report or reports on its topic, each containing at least one recommendation, by 5:00 on Monday, May 9.  Note that this deadline falls within the exam period.  Students should plan ahead to avoid conflicts with their exams in other classes! Unless specifically authorized by the professor, late reports will receive a severe grade penalty.  As a rough guideline, each report should be about three pages long.

The proposals (and memos) will be graded largely on the quality of the analysis on which the proposal is based.  As in the case of their journal entries, students should state the problem, identify the relevant type of behavior by households, businesses, and governments, and discuss the evidence on each type of behavior.  A terrific proposal that is not backed up by good analysis will not receive a good grade.  The readings for the course provide many examples of the type of analysis that can help to back up a proposal.  Additional material can be found in Housing Policy Debate, Cityscape, The Journal of Policy Analysis and Management and other professional journals.  The final memos will also be graded on presentation, following the same guidelines as the case‑based memos.

Each team (or sub-team) is encouraged to set up an appointment with the professor before their summit session (or to send a draft to the professor via e-mail) to obtain feedback on the appropriateness of its proposals and of its supporting material.

These assignments are designed for masters students.  Any PhD students in the class should consult the professor to design alternative assignments that are appropriate for his or her course of study.  Any student requiring special arrangements because of a disability should see the professor during office hours.

Grades

The following weights will be used to determine each student’s final grade in the course:

Case Discussion – 1/6

Memo:  – 1/6

Journal – 1/3

Urban Summit – 1/3

A student’s grade in the case discussions will be based primarily on the case for which he or she plays a lead role.  However, exceptionally helpful (or counterproductive) contributions in other case discussions also could influence a student’s grade.

One‑third of a student’s grade on the urban policy summit will be based primarily on the quality of his or her oral presentations and comments during their summit session.  This grading scheme implies that each team (or sub-team) should organize its presentation so that every member of the team gets a chance to present something.  Students who remain silent throughout the special session will not receive a passing mark on this portion of their project grade.  Comments made during other summit sessions also could influence this grade, although they will not be given as much weight.  The other two‑thirds of a student’s grade will be based on the quality of the proposal‑based memoranda submitted to the professor with the student’s name on them.  In other words, each student will receive an individual grade for participation in the special session and a grade on the written material that can be either individual (if the student turns in a sole‑authored memorandum) or group (if the student turns in a co‑authored memorandum) or some combination of the two (if both sole‑authored and co‑authored proposals and memoranda are submitted).  In this context, a group grade means that every member of the group receives the same grade.  A student is only required to turn in one memorandum for the class project, but is allowed to turn in more than one.  Although students will receive credit for additional submissions, the grading scheme will emphasize the quality of submissions more than the quantity.

A typical final grade distribution for this class will have a median grade near the A-/B+ boundary, few straight A’s, and no B-‘s (at least for students who complete all the course requirements).

CLASS SCHEDULE 

WEEK 1    January 20

1. Introduction to the class.

WEEK 2    January 25-27

1. Evaluating Social Programs
2. Housing Concepts, Household Bids

WEEK 3    February 1-3

1. Household Sorting and Neighborhood Amenities
2. Neighborhood Change

WEEK 4    February  8-10

1. Overview of Housing Markets
2. Housing Problems and Federal Housing Programs

WEEK 5    February  15-17

1. Homelessness
2. CASE # 1: Federal Housing Policy

WEEK 6    February  22-24

1. A. Race and Ethnicity, Prejudice and Discrimination
2. Housing Discrimination and its Causes

WEEK 7    February  29 – March 2

1. Segregation: Measurement, Causes, and Consequences
2. Predatory Lending

WEEK 8    March  7-9

1. Mortgage Discrimination and Redlining
2. CASE #2: Promoting Neighborhood Diversity

WEEK 9    March 14-16

1. Spring Break!

WEEK 10    March 21-23

1. Poverty: Concepts, Facts, and Myths
2. Concentrated Poverty: Causes and Consequences

WEEK 11   March 28-30

1.  Welfare Programs and Principles of Welfare Policy
2. The New World of Welfare Policy

WEEK 12   April 4-6

1. CASE #3:  Federal Welfare Reform
2. Urban Labor Markets

WEEK 13   April11-13

1. Human Capital and Urban Economic Development
2. Financial Capital and Urban Economic Development

WEEK 14   April 18-20

1. CASE #4:  Urban Economic Development
2. Urban Crime

WEEK 15   April 25-27

1. URBAN POLICY SUMMIT,  DAY 1
2. URBAN POLICY SUMMIT,  DAY 2

WEEK 16   May 2

1. URBAN POLICY SUMMIT,  DAY 3

READING LIST

There is not a textbook for the class.  All required readings are available through  the class blackboard page. Unless otherwise indicated, readings are required. The assignments and cases are or will be provided on the class blackboard page (and sometimes on the class web page as well).  Optional readings, some of which are available on the internet, are offered as suggestions for further reading to students who want to learn more about a particular topic for a journal entry (or for any other reason!).

** For readings in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management (JPAM) follow these steps to open or download the articles.

Students may also find helpful supplemental reading in the following books: 

J.H. Carr and Nandinee Kutty, editors. 2008.       Segregation:     The Rising Cost for America.       New York:       Routledge. Abbreviated Carr-Kutty

S.H. Danziger and Robert H. Haveman, editors. 2001.  Understanding Poverty. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Abbreviated UP.

J. Sass Rubin, editor. 2007. Financing Low-Income Communities. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Abbreviated FLIC.

R.K. Green and Stephen Malpezzi. 2003. A Primer on U.S. Housing Markets and Housing Policy. Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. Abbreviated Primer.

J. Yinger. 1995. Closed Doors, Opportunities Lost by. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Abbreviated CDOL.

A. O’Sullivan.  2012. Urban Economics, 8th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin,  Abbreviated O’Sullivan.

A.J. Auerbach, David Card, and John M. Quigley, editors. 2006. Public Policy and the Income Distribution. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Abbreviated PPID.

HUD at 50: Creating Pathways to Opportunity. US Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of Policy Development and Research. October, 2015. Available on the class blackboard page.

Topic 0:  Introduction

1. Introduction to the class (January 20)

U.S. Census Bureau, “Geographic Terms and Concepts.” (Skim) http://www.census.gov/geo/www/reference.html.

2. Evaluating Social Programs (January 25)

R. Hollister, “Measuring the Impact of Community Development Financial Institutions’ Activities.” Chapter 9 in FLIC. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: Government Accounting Office. 2009. “Program Evaluation: A Variety of Rigorous Methods Can Help Identify Effective Interventions.” November. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/300/298907.pdf

Optional: Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2008 and 2009. “Point/Counterpoint”  on the role of random assignment in social policy research, 27 (2), pp. 401-415 and 28 (1), pp. 164-181.

Topic 1: Conceptual Tools:  Housing Markets and Neighborhood Change 

1. Housing Concepts, Household Bids (January 27)

“Class Notes on Housing Market Analysis,”  Parts 0 and I.  Class Notes and Diagrams to Accompany Notes on Housing Markets

Optional: O’Sullivan, Chapter 6, “Urban Land Rent.” Available on the class blackboard page.

2. Household Sorting and Neighborhood Amenities (February 1)

“Class Notes on Housing Market Analysis,” Part II.  Class Notes and Diagrams to Accompany Notes on Housing Markets

Notes on “How to Write About Bid Functions and Sorting“

Optional: O’Sullivan, Chapter 8, “Neighborhood Choice.” Available on the class blackboard page.

3. Neighborhood Change (February 3)

*J. Henry, 2014. “There Goes the Neighborhood,” The New York Times, The Opinion Pages; ROOM for DEBATE, April 13.  http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/04/13/the-pros-and-cons-of-gentrification  (Also read Debaters responses)

“Class Notes on Housing Market Analysis,” Part III.  Class Notes and Diagrams to Accompany Notes on Housing Markets

J. Yinger, “Housing Discrimination and Residential Segregation as Causes of Poverty,” in UP, pages 359-364 only (section on “Basic Housing Market Analysis” provides a brief review of the above material). Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: I. Gould Ellen and K.M. O’Regan, 2011. “How Low-Income Neighborhoods Change: Entry, Exit, and Enhancement.”       Regional Science and Urban Economics 41 (1) (March), pp. 89-97. Available on the class blackboard page.

Topic 2: Housing Problems and Housing Policy (February 8)

1. Overview of Urban Housing Markets and Housing Problems

J. Blumgart, 2016. “Tickets Out of Poverty?” The American Prospect, Winter. Available at: http://prospect.org/article/tickets-out-poverty-0

Primer, Chapter 1 (“Introduction”) and 2 (“The Market for Housing Services”).  (Read this material selectively; you may skim over the technical details.)  Available on the class blackboard page.

R. Khalek, 2014. “DC’s Poorest Residents Fight Displacement by Gentrification,” January 31. TRUTH-OUT.ORG. Available on the class blackboard page.

B. Mock, 2016. “Can Baltimore Pull Off Its $700 Million Makeover Without Displacing Residents?” The Atlantic, CityLab, February 12. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2016/02/baltimore-development-without-displacement/462387/?utm_source=atlfb

M. Davey, 2014. “A Picture of Detroit Ruin, Street by Forlorn Street,”  The New York Times, February 17. Available on the class blackboard page.

P. Krugman, 2015. “Inequality and the City,” The New York Times, November 30.

Optional: O’Sullivan, Chapter 14, “Why Is Housing Different?” Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: S.S. Rosenthal, 2016. “Are Private Markets and Filtering a Viable Source of Low-Income Housing? Estimates from a ‘Repeat Income’ Model,”  American Economic Review (February). Available on the class blackboard page.

2. Housing Problems and Federal Housing Programs (February 10)

Federal Housing Assistance for Low-Income Households, 2015. Congressional Budget Office (September). Available on the class blackboard page.

M.K. Hollar, 2014. “Understanding Whom the LIHTC Program Serves: Tenants in LIHTC Units as of December 31, 2012,” US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, (December). Available on the class blackboard page.

B.L. Steffen, G.R. Carter, M. Martin, D. Pelletiere, D.A. Vandenbroucke, Y.D. Yao, 2015. “Worse Case Housing Needs: 2015 Report to Congress,” US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, (April). Available on the class blackboard page.

E.M. Glaeser, 2011. “Rethinking the Federal Bias Toward Homeownership.” Cityscape, 13 (2) pp. 5-37. Available on the class blackboard page.

Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. 2011. “Rental Market Stresses: Impact of the Great Recession on Affordability and Multifamily Lending.” July. Available on the class blackboard page.

R.K. Green, 2011. “Thoughts on Rental Housing and Rental Housing Assistance.” Cityscape, 13 (2): 39-56. Available on the class blackboard page.

D. DePasquale, 2011. “Rental Housing: Current Market Conditions and the Role of Federal Policy.” Cityscape, 13 (2) pp. 57-70. Available on the class blackboard page.

J.M. Quigley, 2011.     “Rental Housing Assistance.” Cityscape, 13 (2) pp. 47-158. Available on the class blackboard page.

C. Corley, 2013.“In Chicago, Public Housing Experiment Enters New Phase,” NPR, June 24.

Housing Choice Voucher Program: Streamlining the Portability. Process, Department Of Housing And Urban Development: 24 CFR Part 982; [Docket No.FR-5453-F-02,RIN 2577-AC86, AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD. ACTION: Final rule. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: S. Kawitzky, F. Freiberg, D.L. Houk, and S. Hankins, 2013. “Choice Constrained, Segregation Maintained: Using Federal Tax Credits to Provide Affordable Housing,” Fair Housing Justice Center, August. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: Deven Carlson, Robert Haveman, Thomas Kaplan, and Barbara Wolfe, 2011. “The Benefits and Costs of the Section 8 Housing Subsidy Program: A Framework and Estimates of First-Year Effects.”  Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 30 (2), pp. 233-255.

Optional: M.D. Eriksen and S.S. Rosenthal,       2010.  “Crowd out effects of place-based subsidized rental housing: New evidence from the LIHTC program,”  Journal of Public Economics, December, pp. 953–966.

Optional: Cityscape. 2010. “Symposium on HOPE VI,”  12 (1).

Optional: Cityscape. 2008. “Symposium on Policy Issues in Public and Assisted Housing,” 10 (1).

Optional: Cityscape. 2011. “Symposium on Rental Housing Policy in the United States,” 13 (2). (Articles not already cited.)

Optional:  O’Sullivan, Chapter 15, “Housing Policy.” Available on the class blackboard page.

3. Homelessness (February 15)

M. Desmond, 2016. “Forced Out,” The New Yorker, February 8 & 15 Issue. Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/08/forced-out

Taylor, 2015. “Homelessness in America: A Slow Decline,” Conversable Economist, December 4.

The Editorial Board, 2015. “Finally, Urgency on New York’s Homeless,” The New York Times, December 23.

M.G. Peters (Commissioner), 2015. New York City Department of Investigation: Probe of Department of Homeless Services’ Shelter for Families with Children Finds Serious Deficiencies.  March.

S. Carrier, 2015. “Room for Improvement,” Mother Jones, (March/April).

The Editorial Board, 2013. “Battling Homelessness in New York City,”” December 13. Available on the class blackboard page.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community Planning and Development. 2011. “The 2011 Point-in-Time Estimates of Homelessness: Supplement to the Annual Homeless Assessment Report.” December.

U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, 2010. “Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness.” Available on the class blackboard page.

M.R. Burt, J. Hedderson, J.M. Zweig, M.J. Ortiz, L.Y. Aron, and S.M. Johnson, 2004. “Strategies for Reducing Chronic Street Homelessness,“ The Urban Institute. Available at: http://www.urban.org/publications/1000775.html

D. Bornstein, 2014. “How to Help Homeless Families,” The New York Times – Opinionator, Fixes, January. Available on the class blackboard page.

C. Hannagan, 2014. “Auburn Housing Authority plans $6 million complex to house homeless families,” The Post-Standard, February 13. Available on the class blackboard page.

C. Welch and T. Escobedo, 2011. “A safe place to drink, or just giving up? CNN, May 11. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: The National Alliance to End Homelessness,       Homelessness Research Institute. 2012.  “The State of Homelessness in America 2012.” January. Available at: http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/4361

4. Case #1 Federal Housing Policy  (February 17)

Topic 3: Discrimination, Segregation, and Racial Transition

1. Race and Ethnicity, Prejudice and Discrimination (February 22)

J. Howard, 2016. “What Scientists Mean When They Say ‘Race’ is Not Genetic,” The Huffington Post, February 9.  Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-is-not-biological_us_56b8db83e4b04f9b57da89ed

K.R. Humes, N.A. Jones, and R.R. Ramirez, 2011. “Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin: 2010,”  2010 Census Briefs, March. Available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf.

S. M. Tilghman, 2010. “The Meaning of Race in the Post-Genome Era.”       The Baldwin Lecture, Princeton University. Available on the class blackboard page.

W. Saletan, 2008. “Unfinished Race: Race, Genes and the Future of Medicine,” Slate, August 27.

Morrison Institute for Population and Resource Studies, “Human Genome Diversity Project:  Frequently Asked Questions,”  Number 6, “Do Different Human Groups Have Significantly Different DNA?” and Number 7, “Are Ethnic Groups Genetically Definable?”  http://hsblogs.stanford.edu/morrison/2011/03/10/human-genome-diversity-project-frequently-asked-questions/

S. Roberts, 2012.  “Segregation Curtailed in U.S. Cities, Study Finds.” The New York Times, January 30. Available on the class blackboard page.

N. Wade, 2014. “Tracing Ancestry, Researchers Produce a Genetic Atlas of Human Mixing Event,” The New York Times, February 13. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional:  CDOL, chapter 1 (“Race and Ethnicity, Prejudice and Discrimination”).

Optional:  T. C. Bergstrom, R.J. Garratt, and D. Sheehan-Connor, 2009.       “One Chance in a Million: Altruism and the Bon Barrow Registry.”  American Economic Review, September, pp. 1309-1334.

2. Housing Discrimination and its Causes (February 24)

P. Kiel, 2015. “Debt and the Racial Wealth Gap,” The New York Times, December 31.

J. Yinger, “Housing Discrimination and Residential Segregation as Causes of Poverty,” in UP, section titled “The Role of Current Discrimination,” pages 372-376. Available on the class blackboard page.

M. Austin Turner, et al., Housing Discrimination against Racial and Ethnic Minorities 2012, The Urban Institute, June 2013. Available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/fairhsg/hsg_discrimination_2012.html *Read Executive Summary only.

The Editorial Board, 2015. “How Segregation Destroys Black Wealth,” The New York Times, September 15.

J. Hirschfeld Davis, and B. Appelbaum, 2015.”Obama Unveils Stricter Rules Against Segregation In Housing,” The New York Times, July 8.

F. Wagman Roisman, 2015. The Power of the Supreme Court’s Decision in the Fair Housing Act Case, TDHCA v. ICP. Poverty and Race, 24 (4) (July/August).

R. Kaysen, 2014. “Racial Discrimination in Renting?” New York Times, Real Estate section, February 14. Available on the class blackboard page.

P. Kieldec, 2015. “Debt and the Racial Wealth Gap,” The New York Times, December 31.

Optional: Andrew Hanson and Zackary Hawley.       2011. “Do Landlords Discriminate in the Rental Housing Market? Evidence from an Internet Field Experiment in U.S. Cities.” Journal of Urban Economics 70 (2-3) (September-November), pp. 99–114. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: S.L. Ross and M. Austin Turner, 2005.  “Housing Discrimination in Metropolitan America: Explaining Changes between 1989 and 2000,” Social Problems, 52 (2): 152-180. Available through e-journals at the SU library.

Optional: S.J. Oh, and J. Yinger, 2015.“What Have We learned from Paired Testing in Housing Markets?” Cityscape, 17 (3).

Optional:  J. Yinger. “Sustaining the Fair Housing Act.”  Cityscape, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1998.   http://www.huduser.org/periodicals/cityscpe/vol4num3/yinger.pdf.  (Note: This issue of Cityscape contains many other articles on fair housing policy.)

Optional:  CDOL, chapters 3 (“Discrimination in Housing”), 4 (“Racial and Ethnic Steering”), 6 (“The Direct Cost of Current Discrimination”), and 9 (“The Causes of Discrimination”).

Optional: GB. White. 2015.“Black Americans Would Have Been Better Off Renting Than Buying,” The Atlantic, October 11.

3. Segregation: Measurement, Causes, Consequences (February 29)

D.S. Massey, and J. Tannen, 2015. “A Research Note on Trends in Black Hypersegregation,”  Demography, 52:1025–1034.  Available on the class blackboard page.

“Notes on Segregation Indexes“

E. Glaeser and J. Vigdor, 2012. “The End of the Segregated Century: Racial Separation in America’s Neighborhoods, 1890-2010,” The Manhattan Institute, Civic Report No. 66, January.

I. Gould Ellen. 2008. “Continuing Isolation: Segregation in America Today,”  Chapter 8 in Carr-Kutty, pp. 261-278. Available on the class blackboard page.

J. Yinger, “Housing Discrimination and Residential Segregation as Causes
of Poverty,” in UP, section on “Housing Discrimination, Segregation, and Poverty,” pages 369-391. Available on the class blackboard page.

Helping Public Housing Residents Find and Keep Jobs: A Guide for Practitioners Based on the Jobs-Plus Demonstration, Susan Blank Donna Wharton-Fields December 2008. Available at: http://www.mdrc.org/publication/helping-public-housing-residents-find-and-keep-jobs

Mapping Segregation. 2015. The New York Times, July 8. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/08/us/census-race-map.html

Optional:  M. Austin Turner.       2008. “Residential Segregation and Employment Opportunity,”  Chapter 5 in Carr-Kutty, pp. 151-196.  Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional:  D.S. Massey.       2008.  “Origins of Economic Disparities: The Historical Role of Housing Segregation.” Chapter 2 in Carr-Kutty, pp. 39-80.  Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional:  CDOL, chapters 7 (“The Impact of Housing Discrimination on Housing Quality, Racial Segregation, and Neighborhood Change”), 10 (“The History of Fair Housing and Fair Lending Policy”), and 11 (“Public Policy to Combat Discrimination:  A Comprehensive Approach”).

4. Predatory Lending (March 2)

B. Applebaum, 2015. “How Mortgage Fraud Made the Financial Crisis Worse,” The New York Times, February12.

The Editorial Board, 2015. “New York City Policing, by the Numbers,” The New York Times, December 28.

Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, “Mortgage Rules at a Glance,” Available at: http://www.consumerfinance.gov/mortgage-rules-at-a-glance/ (Skim)

K.C. Engel and P.A. McCoy. 2008.  “From Credit Denial to Predatory Lending:   The Challenge of Sustaining Minority Homeownership.” Chapter 3 in Carr-Kutty, pp. 81-123. Available on the class blackboard page.

G. Morgenson, 2014. Credit Suisse Documents Point to Mortgage Lapses,The New York Times, March 9. Available on the class blackboard page.

J. DeParle. 2012. “Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs.” The New York Times, January 4. Available on the class blackboard page.

J. Silver-Greenberg and Michael Corkery, 2014. Loan Complaints by Homeowners Rise Once More, The New York Times, February 18. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. 2010. “Report to Congress on the Root Causes of the Foreclosure Crisis.” January.

Optional: U.S. General Accounting Office.       2004. “Federal and State Agencies Face Challenges in Combating Predatory Lending,” Report GAO-04-280, January.       Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04280.pdf

Optional: A. Haughwout, D. Lee, J. Tracy, and W. van der Klaauw.       2011. “Flip This House”: Investor Speculation and the Housing Bubble.” Liberty Street Economics Blog, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, December 5.       http://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2011/12/flip-this-house-investor-speculation-and-the-housing-bubble.html

5. Mortgage Discrimination and Redlining (March 7)

Fair Lending Report of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, April 2015. Available on the class blackboard page.

R.L. Swarns, 2015. “Biased Lending Evolves, and Blacks Face Trouble Getting Mortgages,” The New York Times, October 30.

S.L. Ross, and J. Yinger, “Looking the Other Way:  A Critique of the Fair Lending Enforcement System and a Plan to Fix It”  Policy Brief No. 24/2002. Center for Policy Research, Syracuse Universiy.

R. Grenoble, 2015. “Bank Accused of Racist Lending Practices Settles Suit with New York State,” The Huffington Post, September 11.

Optional:  Margery Austin Turner, Fred Freiberg, Erin Godfrey, Carla Herbig, Diane K. Levy, and Robin R. Smith.       2002.  “All Other Things Being Equal: A Paired Testing Study of Mortgage Lending Institutions.”       The Urban Institute, April. Available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/hsgfin/aotbe.html

L. Prevost, 2014. Race Gap on Conventional Loans. The New York Times, January 30. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional:  Stephen Ross and John Yinger, The Color of Credit:  Mortgage Discrimination, Research Methodology, and Fair Lending Enforcement, Cambridge, MA:  MIT Press, 2002, especially chapters 1, 2, 9, and 10.

6. Case #2 on Neighborhood Integration – Promoting Integration (March 9)

C. Gordy, 2015. “Did the Famous Desegregation of Yonkers Actually Work?” ProPublica Podcast, September 8.

T.B Edsall, 2015. “Where Should a Poor Family Live?” The New York Times, August 5.

Optional: The New York Times, Two Views on Integration in Westchester County.

Topic 4: Urban Poverty and Welfare Programs

1. Poverty Concepts, Facts and Myths (March 21)

A. Deaton, 2014. “Letter from America: It’s a big country and how to measure it,” The Royal Economic Society, No. 167, October.

Labor Force Participation, Taxes, and the Nation’s Social Welfare System, Statement of Eugene Steuerle, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform United States House of Representatives, February 14, 2014. Available on the class blackboard page.

M. Cancian, and A. Levinson, 2006. “Labor Supply Effects of the Earned Income Tax Credit: Evidence from Wisconsin’s Supplemental Benefit for Families with Three Children,” National Tax Journal, (December): 781-800.  Available on the class blackboard page.

A. Bishaw.   2013. “Examining the Effect of Off-Campus College Students on Poverty Rates,” U. S. Census Bureau, Social, Economic & Housing Statistics Division, Poverty Statistics Branch, SEHSD 2013-17, 5/1/2013. Available on the class blackboard page.

S.H. Danziger, 2013. “The Mismeasure of Poverty,” The New York Times, September 17. Available on the class blackboard page.

S. Greenhouse, 2014.  “Low-Wage Workers Are Finding Poverty Harder to Escape,” The New York Times (Economy), March 16. Available on the class blackboard page.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States:2012.”  Available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p60-245.pdf  (Skip the parts on health insurance)

C. Wimer, L. Fox, I. Garfinkel, N. Kaushal, and J. Waldfogel. 2013. “Trends in Poverty with an Anchored Supplemental Poverty Measure,”” Working Paper, December 5. Available on the class blackboard page.

M.R. Rank, 2013.  “Poverty in America Is Mainstream,” The New York Times, November 2. Available on the class blackboard page.

For more information on poverty see: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, “The War on Poverty at 50.”   Available at: http://www.cbpp.org/

Optional: R. Rothstein, 2014. “The Urban Poor Shall Inherit Poverty,” The American Prospect, January 7. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: J.X. Sullivan, L. Turner, and S. Danziger, 2008. “The Relationship Between Income and Material Hardship,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, (Winter): 63-8.

Optional: T.M. Smeeding, 2006. “Government Programs and Social Outcomes: Comparisons of the United States with Other Rich Nations,” Chapter 4, in Public Policy and the Income Distribution, edited by A. J. Auerbach, D. Card and J. M. Quigley, New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: Emmanuel Saez, 2006. “Income and Wealth Concentration in a Historical and International Perspective.” Chapter 5. in Public Policy and the Income Distribution, edited by A. J. Auerbach, D. Card and J. M. Quigley, New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Available on the class blackboard page.

2. Concentrated Poverty: Causes and Consequences (March 23)

J. Wolfers, “Growing up in a Bad Neighborhood does More Harm Than We Thought,” The New York Times, Economic View, March 25, 2016.

A. Semuels, 2015. “How to Decimate a City,” The Atlantic, November 20.

G. Galster, and P. Sharkey, “Spatial Foundations of Inequality: An Empirical Overview and Conceptual Model,” Draft of Chapter 1 in the Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, Forthcoming Special Issue on the Spatial Foundations of Inequality. Available on the class blackboard page.

P.A. Jargowsky, 2013. “Concentration of Poverty in the New Millennium: Changes in the Prevalence, Composition,and Location of High-Poverty Neighborhoods,” The Century Foundation. Available on the class blackboard page.

R.J. Sampson,  2013. “Division Street, U.S.A.,” The New York Times, October 26.  Available on the class blackboard page.

D.T. Lichter, D. Parisi, and M.C. Taquino. 2011. “The Geography of Exclusion: Race, Segregation, and Concentrated Poverty,”  National Poverty Center Working Paper Series #11-16, May. Available on the class blackboard page.

M. Austin Turner, J. Comey, D. Kuehn, and A. Nichols with K. Franks and D. Price. 2011. “Helping Poor Families Gain and Sustain Access to High-Opportunity Neighborhoods.” The Urban Institute, October. Available on the class blackboard page.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. 2011. “Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration Program Final Impacts Evaluation, Summary.” November. Available on the class blackboard page. (For the full report, see: http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/pubasst/MTOFHD.html.

J. Yinger, “Housing Discrimination and Residential Segregation as Causes Poverty,” in UP, pages 364-369 only. Available on the class blackboard page.

S. Poplin, 2008. New Findings on the Benefits and Limitations of Assisted Housing Mobility. The Urban Institute, Document date: April 09, 2008, Released online: April 14, 2008. Available at: http://www.urban.org/publications/901160.html.  Also available on the class blackboard page.

For poverty maps, see: Mapping Poverty in America.” The New York Times,  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/01/05/poverty-map/?ref=us.

Optional: M.A. Stoll and K.L. Covington. 2010. “Explaining Racial/Ethnic Gaps In Spatial Mismatch: The Primacy of Racial Segregation,”  National Poverty Center Working Paper Series #10-02, February. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: E. Kneebone, C. Nadeau, and A. Berube. 2011. “The Re-Emergence of Concentrated Poverty: Metropolitan Trends.” Metropolitan Opportunity Series, The Brookings Institution, November. Available on the class blackboard page.

3. Welfare Programs and Principles of Welfare Policy (March 28)

The Basics of SNAP Food Assistance, 2015. IRP, No. 6, November.

SNAP Trends and Antipoverty Impacts, 2015. IRP, No. 7, November.

SNAP and the Low-Income Safety Net, 2015. IRP, No. 9, November.

E. Porter, 2015. “The Myth of Welfare’s Corrupting Influence on the Poor,” The New York Times, October 20.

j. Rothstein, 2015. “The Earned Income Tax Credit,” Washington Center for Equitable Growth, December. Available on the class blackboard page.

R.K. Caputo, 2011. “TANF and EITC: A Literature Review. In U.S. Social Welfare Reform, International Series on Consumer Science (Springer), Part 1, pp. 81-103. Available on the class blackboard page.

B.D. Meyer and J.X. Sullivan, 2012. “Winning the War: Poverty from the Great Society to the Great Recession,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Fall, pp. 133-200.  Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: L. Tiehen, D. Jolliffe, and T. Smeeding, “The Effect of SNAP on Poverty.” IRP Discussion Paper No. 1415-13. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: E. Porter, 2013. “In the War on Poverty, a Dogged Adversary,” The New York Times, December 17.  Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: A. Lowrey, 2014. “50 Years Later, War on Poverty Is a Mixed Bag,” The New York Times, January 4.  Available on the class blackboard page.

4. The New World of Welfare Policy (March 30)

M. Cancian and S. Danziger. 2009. “Changing Poverty and Changing Antipoverty Policies,”  National Poverty Center Working Paper Series #09-06, March. Available on the class blackboard page.

E. Porter, 2015. “The Republican Party’s Strategy to Ignore Poverty,” The New York Times, October 27.

Y. Ben‐Shalom, Robert Moffitt, and John Karl Scholz, 2011. “An Assessment of the Effectiveness of Anti‐Poverty Programs in the United States,”  National Poverty Center Working Paper Series #11-19, June. Available on the class blackboard page.

N. Folbre. 2011. “Welfare Reform Revisited.” The New York Times, Economix: Explaining the Science of Everyday Life, December 12. Available on the class blackboard page.

R. Moffitt, 2014, “The Great Recession and the Social Safety Net,” Johns Hopkins University, January 30. Available on the class blackboard page.

5. Case #3  Revising TANF (April 4)

Topic 5: Urban Employment and Economic Development

1. Urban Labor Markets (April 6)

H. Shierholz.   2014. Six Years From Its Beginning, The Great Recession’s Shadow Looms Over The Labor Market, Economic Policy Institute, Issue Brief #374, January 9. Available on the class blackboard page.

R.F. Ferguson, “Community Revitalization, Jobs and the Well-being of the Inner-City Poor,” in UP, pp. 417-443. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: S. Raphael, 2006. “The Socioeconomic Status of Black Males: The Increasing Importance of Incarceration,” Chapter 8. in Public Policy and the Income Distribution, edited by A. J. Auerbach, D. Card and J. M. Quigley, New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional:  W.A. Darity, Jr., and Patrick L. Mason, “Evidence on Discrimination in Employment:  Codes of Color, Codes of Gender,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, (Spring 1998): 63-90.  Available through http://www.jstor.org/browse?config=jstor#Economics

2. Human Capital Programs to Promote Economic Development (April 11)

D. Card, J. Kluve, and A. Weber, 2015. “What Works?  A Meta-Analysis of Recent Active Labor Market Program Evaluations,” NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 21431. (July). Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: D. Bloom. 2010. “Transitional Jobs: Background, Program Models, and Evaluation Evidence,” MDRC, February. Available at: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/transitional_jobs_background_fr.pdf.

Optional: L.A. Karoly, “Investing in the Future:  Reducing Poverty Through Human Capital Investments,” in UP, pp. 314-356. Available on the class blackboard page.

3. Financial Capital Programs to Promote Economic Development (April 13)

*L. D’Andrea Tyson, and J. Greenblatt, 2014. “Equal Opportunity and Social Innovation: Obama’s Policy Agenda,” The New York Times, April 14. Available on the class blackboard page.

M.D. Abravanel, N.M. Pindus, and B. Theodos, 2011. “What Makes for a Smart Community or Economic Development Subsidy? A Program Evaluation Perspective,” In Smart Subsidies for Community Development (The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and The Aspen Institute) pp. 104-121. Available on the class blackboard page. (The rest of this book is available at: http://www.bostonfed.org/commdev/smart-subsidy/.)

L. Servon, “Making U.S. Microenterprise Work: Recommendations for Policy Makers in the Field,” Chapter 4 in FLIC. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: S. Dewan, 2013. “Microcredit for Americans,” The New York Times, October 28. Available on the class blackboard page.

Optional: J. Sass Rubin. “Financing Organizations with Debt and Equity:       The Role of Community Development Loan and Venture Capital Funds,” Chapter 5 in FLIC.

Optional: M. E. Williams. “The Un-Banks: The Community Development Impact Role of Alternative Depository Institutions,”       Chapter 6 in FLIC.

Optional: D. Schneider, and P. Tufano. “New Savings from Old Innovations:       Asset Building for the Less Affluent,” Chapter 2 in FLIC.

Optional: J.M. Hogarth, J. Kolodinsky, and M. A. Hilgert, “Financial Education and Community Economic Development,” Chapter 3 in FLIC.

4. Case #4 Urban Economic Development (April 18)

Financing Healthy Food  by Judson Murchie.

5. Urban Crime (April 20)

Read one of the following:

1. Housing and Crime

A.M. Santiago, E.L. Lee, J. L. Lucero, and R. Wiersma, “How Living in the ‘Hood Affects Risky Behaviors Among Latino and African American Youth,” Draft Chapter 8 in the Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, Forthcoming Special Issue on the Spatial Foundations of Inequality. Available on the class blackboard page.

J. Wolpaw Reyes. 2007. “Environmental Policy as Social Policy? The Impact of Childhood Lead Exposure on Crime,”  The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy Contributions 7 (1), Article 51. Available on the class blackboard page.

K. Ihlanfeldt and T. Mayock. 2010. “Panel data estimates of the effects of different types of crime on housing prices,” Regional Science and Urban Economics 40, pp. 161-172.  Available on the class blackboard page.

1. Employment and Crime

O’Sullivan, Chapter 13, “Crime.”

D. Pager, B. Western, and N. Sugie. 2009. “Sequencing Disadvantage: Barriers to Employment Facing Young Black and White Men with Criminal Records,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, May, pp. 195-213. Available on the class blackboard page.

S. Machin, and O. Marie, 2014. “Lessons from the Economics of Crime,” CEPR’s Policy Portal, January 30.

S.S. Rosenthal, and A. Ross. 2010. “Violent crime, entrepreneurship, and cities,” Journal of Urban Economics 67, pp. 135-149. Available on the class blackboard page.

April 25-27

1. Urban Policy Summit, Day 1
2. Urban Policy Summit, Day 2

May 2

1. Urban Policy Summit,  Day 3