Developing mixed–income communities has drawn increased attention from sociologists and other researchers in recent years, generating sharp debates over equitable access, the nature of community, and the role of policy. Debates over social relations and social influence in mixed–income communities have often overlooked what formal institutions—as opposed to race, class, and other predictors of informal neighboring—contribute to social life. This study uses ethnographic fieldwork, document analysis, and semistructured interviews in a mixed–income housing community in Boston to examine the forces shaping relationships within and across social boundaries. the results show how formal structuring of the community dissuaded interaction among neighbors. Buttressed by macrostructural forces, the private management company that ran the development discouraged interaction through rules, social signaling, and explicit communication.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllportG. 1954, 1979. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.
2.
AndersonE.1990. Streetwise: Race, Class, and Change in an Urban Community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
ArcuryT. A., and QuandtS. A.1999. “Participant Recruitment for Qualitative Research: A Site–Based Approach to Community Research in Complex Societies,” Human Organization58(2), 128–133.
4.
BauerC.1951. Social Questions in Housing and Community Planning. Journal of Social Issues7(1 & 2), 1–34.
5.
BearmanP. S.2005. Doormen. Fieldwork Encounters and Discoveries. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6.
BeckerF. W., DluhyM. J., and TopinkaJ. P.2001. “Choosing the Rowers: Are Private Managers of Public Housing More Successful than Public ManagersThe American Review of Public Administration31, 181–200.
7.
BlakelyE. J., and SnyderM. G.1997. Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington, DC; Cambridge, MA: Brookings Institution Press; Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
8.
Boston Housing Authority. 2005. Maverick Landing Memo.
9.
BriggsX. de S. 1997. “Moving Up versus Moving Out: Researching and Interpreting Neighborhood Effects in Housing Mobility Programs,” Housing Policy Debate8(1), 195–294.
10.
BriggsX. de S. 1998. “Brown Kids in White Suburbs: Housing Mobility and the Many Faces of Social Capital,” Housing Policy Debate9(1), 177–221.
11.
BriggsX. de S. 2007. ““Some of My Best Friends are …”: Interracial Friendships, Class, and Segregation in America,” City & Community6(4), 263–290.
12.
BurtR. S.1992. Structural Holes: the Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
ChaskinR. J.1997. Perspectives on Neighborhood and Community: A Review of the Literature. Social Service Review4, 521–547.
14.
CisnerosH., United States Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, and Urban Institute. 1995. Defensible Space: Deterring Crime and Building Community. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development.
15.
Congress for the New Urbanism and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2000. Principles for Inner City Neighborhood Design: Creating Communities of Opportunity.
FernandezR. M., and HarrisD.1992. Social Isolation and the Underclass. In Drugs, Crime, and Social Isolation: Barriers to Urban Opportunity, eds. HarrellA. V. and PetersonG. E., pp. 257–293. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
18.
FischerC. S.1982. To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19.
FlemingR., BaumJ., and SingerJ. E.1985. Social Support and the Physical Environment. In Social Support and Health, eds. CohenS. E. and SymeS. L., pp. 327–345. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
20.
FormW. H.1951. Stratification in Low and Middle Income Housing Areas. Journal of Social Issues7(1), 109–131.
21.
GansH. J.1962. The Urban Villagers; Group and Class in the Life of Italian–Americans. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
22.
GranovetterM. S.1973. “Strength of Weak Ties,” American Journal of Sociology78(6), 1360–1380.
23.
HartD. K.1984. “The Virtuous Citizen, the Honorable Bureaucrat, and “Public” Administration,” Public Administration Review44(Special Issue: Citizenship and Public Administration), 111–120.
24.
HirschmanA. O.1970. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty; Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
JohnsonM. G.1997. Harbor point and future public housing redevelopment: Insight into the minds of residents.
26.
JosephM. L.2006. “Is Mixed–Income Housing an Antidote to Urban PovertyHousing Policy Debate17(2), 209–234.
27.
JosephM. L.2008. Early Resident Experiences at a New Mixed–income Development in Chicago. Journal of Urban Affairs30(3), 229–257.
28.
KhadduriJ.2001. Deconcentration: What Do We Mean? What Do We WantCityscape5(2), 69–84.
29.
KleitR. G.2005. “HOPE VI New Communities: Neighborhood Relationships in Mixed–Income Housing,” Environment and Planning A37(8), 1413–1441.
30.
LeventhalT., and Brooks–GunnJ.2000. “The Neighborhoods They Live in: the Effects of Neighborhood Residence on Child and Adolescent Outcomes,” Psychological Bulletin126(2), 309–337.
31.
LipskyM.1980. Street–Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Publications of Russell Sage Foundation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
32.
McPhersonM., Smith–LovinL., and CookJ. M.2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks,” Annual Review of Sociology27(1), 415–444.
33.
MerryS. E.1981. Urban Danger: Life in a Neighborhood of Strangers. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
34.
MitchellC.1969. The Concept and Use of Social Networks. In Social Networks in Urban Situations, ed. MitchellC., pp. 1–50. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
35.
MusterdS., OstendorfW., and De VosS.2003. “Neighbourhood Effects and Social Mobility: A Longitudinal Analysis,” Housing Studies18(6), 877–892.
36.
OrbellJ. M., and UnoT.1972. “A Theory of Neighborhood Problem Solving: Political Action vs. Residential Mobility,” The American Political Science Review66(2), 471–489.
37.
OvermanH. G.2002. “Neighbourhood Effects in Large and Small Neighborhoods,” 39(1), 117–130.
38.
PattilloM. E.2007. Black on the Block: the Politics of Race and Class in the City. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
39.
Pattillo–McCoyM.2000. Black Picket Fences: Privilege and Peril Among the Black Middle Class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.
PopkinS. J.2000. The Hidden War: Crime and the Tragedy of Public Housing in Chicago. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
41.
PopkinS. J., LevyD. K., HarrisL. E., ComeyJ., CunninghamM. K., and BurtonL. F.2004. “The HOPE VI Program: What about the ResidentsHousing Policy Debate-Washington, 15, 385–414.
42.
PopkinS. J., WoodleyW., Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, M. Housing, C. Center, A. E. C. Foundation, Urban Institute, United States, and JohnD.2002. HOPE VI Panel Study: Baseline Report. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
43.
PutnamR. D.1995a. “Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital,” Journal of Democracy6(1), 65–78.
44.
RosenbaumJ. E., StrohL. K., and FlynnC. A.1998. “Lake Parc Place: A Study of Mixed–Income Housing,” Housing Policy Debate-Washington, 9, 703–740.
45.
RyanW., and Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency. 1974. All in Together: An Evaluation of Mixed–Income Multi–Family Housing. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency.
46.
SampsonR. J., MorenoffJ. D., and Gannon–RowleyT.2002. “Assessing Neighborhood Effects: Social Processes and New Directions in Research,” Annual Review of Sociology28, 443–478.
47.
SampsonR. J., RaudenbushS. W., and EarlsF.1987. Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science277: 918–924.
48.
SchwartzA., BrattR. G., VidalA. C., and KeyesL. C.1996. “Nonprofit Housing Organizations and Institutional Support: the Management Challenge,” Journal of Urban Affairs18(4), 389–408.
49.
SchwartzA., and TajbakhshK.1997. “Mixed–Income Housing: Unanswered Questions,” Cityscape3(2), 71–92.
50.
SmallM. L.2004. Villa Victoria: the Transformation of Social Capital in a Boston Barrio. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51.
SomekhB., and LewinC.2005. Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52.
StraussA. L.1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
SuttlesG. D.1968. The Social Order of the Slum; Ethnicity and Territory in the Inner City. Studies of Urban Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
54.
ThompsonP.1999. Public Housing in New York City: In Housing and Community Development in New York City: Facing the Future, ed. SchillM. H., pp. 119–142. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
55.
VenkateshS. A.2000. American Project: the Rise and Fall of a Modern Ghetto. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
56.
WellmanB.1979. The Community Question: the Intimate Networks of East Yorkers. The American Journal of Sociology84(5), 1201–1231.
57.
WellmanB.1999. Networks in the Global Village: Life in Contemporary Communities. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
58.
WellmanB., and WorleyS.1990. Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. The American Journal of Sociology96(3), 558–588.
59.
WhyteW. F.1943. Street Corner Society; the Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
60.
WilsonW. J.1987. The Truly Disadvantaged: the Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61.
YinR. K.1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, 2nd ed., Vol. 5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
