Using a nationwide online survey (N = 534), we investigate how individual-level characteristics and past actions are related to support of affordable housing at the neighborhood level. Several demographic characteristics, past actions, federal government trust, personal exposure, racism (symbolic racism scale), and affect (emotional connotation) are found to be significant predictors of support. We provide evidence for racism and affect being mediating factors acting in series to shape support of affordable housing. In addition to racism, individuals’ affect can potentially help explain the shift from support of hypothetical scenarios to opposition of real affordable housing development proposals and warrants continued study.
AglerRobertBoeckPaul De. 2017. “On the Interpretation and Use of Mediation: Multiple Perspectives on Mediation Analysis.”Frontiers in Psychology8 (November): 1984. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01984.
BarrettLisa FeldmanBliss-MoreauEliza. 2009. “Affect as a Psychological Primitive.”Advances in Experimental Social Psychology41:167–218. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00404-8.
5.
BeldenNancyShashatyAndreZippererJohn. 2004. “What We Know about Public Attitudes on Affordable Housing: A Review of Existing Public Opinion Research.” The Campaign for Affordable Housing. http://www.tcah.org/pdf/Public_Attitudes.pdf.
6.
BentleyRebeccaBakerEmmaRonaldRichardReevesAaronSmithSusan J.SimonsKoenMasonKate. 2022. “Housing Affordability and Mental Health: An Analysis of Generational Change.”Housing Studies37 (10): 1842–57. doi:10.1080/02673037.2022.2108380.
7.
BottinoClement J.FleeglerEric W.CoxJoanne E.RhodesErinn T.2019. “The Relationship Between Housing Instability and Poor Diet Quality among Urban Families.”Academic Pediatrics19 (8): 891–98. doi:10.1016/j.acap.2019.04.004.
8.
BrattRachel G.2002. “Housing and Family Well-Being.”Housing Studies17 (1): 13–26. doi:10.1080/02673030120105857.
9.
BrumbaughAnne M.GrierSonya A.2013. “Agents of Change: A Scale to Identify Diversity Seekers.”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing32 (Suppl. 1): 144–55. doi:10.1509/jppm.12.035.
10.
BurninghamKate. 2000. “Using the Language of NIMBY: A Topic for Research, Not an Activity for Researchers.”Local Environment5 (1): 55–67. doi:10.1080/135498300113264.
11.
CarnemollaPhillippaSkinnerVivienne. 2021. “Outcomes Associated with Providing Secure, Stable, and Permanent Housing for People Who Have Been Homeless: An International Scoping Review.”Journal of Planning Literature36 (4): 508–25. doi:10.1177/08854122211012911.
12.
ClingermayerJames C.2004. “Heresthetics and Happenstance: Intentional and Unintentional Exclusionary Impacts of the Zoning Decision-Making Process.”Urban Studies41 (2): 377–88. doi:10.1080/0042098032000165307.
13.
CloreGerald L.HuntsingerJeffrey R.2007. “How Emotions Inform Judgment and Regulate Thought.”Trends in Cognitive Sciences11 (9): 393–99. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.08.005.
14.
DearMichael. 1992. “Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome.”Journal of the American Planning Association58 (3): 288. doi:10.1080/01944369208975808.
15.
EinsteinKatherine LevineGlickDavidPuigLuisa GodinezPalmerMaxwell. 2022. “Still Muted: The Limited Participatory Democracy of Zoom Public Meetings.”Urban Affairs Review59: 1279–91. doi:10.1177/10780874211070494.
16.
EinsteinKatherine LevinePalmerMaxwellGlickDavid M.2019. “Who Participates in Local Government? Evidence from Meeting Minutes.”Perspectives on Politics17 (1): 28–46. doi:10.1017/S153759271800213X.
17.
FenelonAndrewMaynePatrickSimonAlan E.RossenLauren M.HelmsVeronicaLloydPatriciaSperlingJonSteffenBarry L.2017. “Housing Assistance Programs and Adult Health in the United States.”American Journal of Public Health107 (4): 571–78. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303649.
FishkinJames S.2011. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199604432.001.0001.
20.
ForsythAnnNichollsGretchenRayeBarbara. 2010. “Higher Density and Affordable Housing: Lessons from the Corridor Housing Initiative.”Journal of Urban Design15 (2): 269–84. doi:10.1080/13574801003638079.
21.
GoetzEdward G.2008. “Words Matter: The Importance of Issue Framing and the Case of Affordable Housing.”Journal of the American Planning Association74 (2): 222–29. doi:10.1080/01944360802010251.
22.
GoetzEdward G.WilliamsRashad A.DamianoAnthony. 2020. “Whiteness and Urban Planning.”Journal of the American Planning Association86 (2): 142–56. doi:10.1080/01944363.2019.1693907.
23.
HallAndrew B.YoderJesse. 2022. “Does Homeownership Influence Political Behavior? Evidence from Administrative Data.”The Journal of Politics84 (1): 351–66. doi:10.1086/714932.
HenryP. J.SearsD. O.2002. “The Symbolic Racism 2000 Scale.”Political Psychology23:253–83. doi:10.1111/0162-895X.00281.
27.
IzardCarroll E.2009. “Emotion Theory and Research: Highlights, Unanswered Questions, and Emerging Issues.”Annual Review of Psychology60:1–25. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163539.
28.
Jenkins MoralesMeghanRobertStephanie A.2022. “Housing Cost Burden and Health Decline Among Low- and Moderate-Income Older Renters.”The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences77 (4): 815–26. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbab184.
29.
JiangBoqian. 2018. “Homeownership and Voter Turnout in U.S. Local Elections.”Journal of Housing Economics41 (September): 168–83. doi:10.1016/j.jhe.2018.06.006.
30.
KahnMatthew E.2011. “Do Liberal Cities Limit New Housing Development? Evidence from California.”Journal of Urban Economics69 (2): 223–28. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2010.10.001.
31.
KaufmanChelsea N.2021. “Where Are the Values Voters? Ideological Constraint and Stability among Rural, Suburban, and Urban Populations in the United States.”Journal of Rural Studies88 (December): 169–80. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.10.019.
LeeYeonhwaKempPeter A.ReinaVincent J.2022. “Drivers of Housing (un)affordability in the Advanced Economies: A Review and New Evidence.”Housing Studies37 (10): 1739–52. doi:10.1080/02673037.2022.2123623.
34.
LernerJennifer S.LiYeValdesoloPiercarloKassamKarim S.2015. “Emotion and Decision Making.”Annual Review of Psychology66 (January): 799–823. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043.
35.
LewisPaul G.BaldassareMark. 2010. “The Complexity of Public Attitudes toward Compact Development.”Journal of the American Planning Association76 (2): 219–37. doi:10.1080/01944361003646471.
36.
MacKinnonDavid P.FairchildAmanda J.FritzMatthew S.2007. “Mediation Analysis.”Annual Review of Psychology58:593–614. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542.
37.
ManvilleMichael. 2012. “People, Race and Place: American Support for Person- and Place-Based Urban Policy, 1973–2008.”Urban Studies49 (14): 3101–19. doi:10.1177/0042098011432556.
38.
ManvilleMichael. 2021. “Liberals and Housing: A Study in Ambivalence.”Housing Policy Debate33:844–64. doi:10.1080/10511482.2021.1931933.
39.
ManvilleMichaelMonkkonenPaavo. 2021. “Unwanted Housing: Localism and Politics of Housing Development.” Journal of Planning Education and Research. Published electronically March 25. doi:10.1177/0739456X21997903.
40.
MarbleWilliamNallClayton. 2021. “Where Self-Interest Trumps Ideology: Liberal Homeowners and Local Opposition to Housing Development.”The Journal of Politics83 (4): 1747–63. doi:10.1086/711717.
MatheisMikeSorens.Jason2022. “Framing Affordable Housing: An Experimental Test of Changing Attitudes.”Housing Studies. Published electronically August 1. doi:10.1080/02673037.2022.2101630.
43.
McclymontKatieO’HarePaul. 2008. “‘We’re Not NIMBYs!’ Contrasting Local Protest Groups with Idealised Conceptions of Sustainable Communities.”Local Environment13 (4): 321–35. doi:10.1080/13549830701803273.
44.
McNeeGeorginaPojaniDorina. 2021. “NIMBYism as a Barrier to Housing and Social Mix in San Francisco.”Journal of Housing and the Built Environment37: 553–73. doi:10.1007/s10901-021-09857-6.
45.
MotleyCarol M.PerryVanessa Gail. 2013. “Living on the Other Side of the Tracks: An Investigation of Public Housing Stereotypes.”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing32 (Suppl. 1): 48–58. doi:10.1509/jppm.12.029.
46.
MuellerElizabeth J.TigheJ. Rosie. 2007. “Making the Case for Affordable Housing: Connecting Housing with Health and Education Outcomes.”Journal of Planning Literature21 (4): 371–85. doi:10.1177/0885412207299653.
47.
MuellerJohannesLuHangxinChirkinArtemKleinBernhardSchmittGerhard. 2018. “Citizen Design Science: A Strategy for Crowd-Creative Urban Design.”Cities72 (February): 181–88. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.018.
National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2022. “The Gap: A Shortage of Affordable Homes.” National Low Income Housing Coalition. https://nlihc.org/gap.
50.
NguyenMai ThiBasoloVictoriaTiwariAbhishek. 2013. “Opposition to Affordable Housing in the USA: Debate Framing and the Responses of Local Actors.”Housing, Theory and Society30 (2): 107–30. doi:10.1080/14036096.2012.667833.
51.
O’GradyTom. 2020. “NIMBYism as Place-Protective Action: The Politics of Housebuilding..” doi:10.31235/osf.io/d6pzy.
52.
OlingerJillCapatostoKellyMcKayMary Ana. 2017. “Challenging Race as Risk: How Implicit Bias Undermines Housing Opportunity in America—and What We Can Do about It.” Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity. http://clevelandnp.org/implicit-bias-housing.pdf.
53.
OrtizSelena E.JohannesBobbie L.2018. “Building the Case for Housing Policy: Understanding Public Beliefs about Housing Affordability as a Key Social Determinant of Health.”SSM–Population Health6 (December): 63–71. doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2018.08.008.
Pearson-MerkowitzShannaLangCorey. 2020. “Smart Growth at the Ballot Box: Understanding Voting on Affordable Housing and Land Management Referendums.”Urban Affairs Review56 (6): 1848–75. doi:10.1177/1078087419861430.
56.
PendallRolf. 1999. “Opposition to Housing: NIMBY and Beyond.”Urban Affairs Review35 (1): 112–36. doi:10.1177/10780879922184310.
57.
PendallRolf. 2000. “Local Land Use Regulation and the Chain of Exclusion.”Journal of the American Planning Association66 (2): 125–42. doi:10.1080/01944360008976094.
58.
Pollack, Craig Evan, Beth Ann Griffin, and Julia Lynch. 2010. “Housing Affordability and Health among Homeowners and Renters.”American Journal of Preventive Medicine39 (6): 515–21. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2010.08.002.
59.
RocklageMatthew D.LuttrellAndrew. 2021. “Attitudes Based on Feelings: Fixed or Fleeting?”Psychological Science32 (3): 364–80. doi:10.1177/0956797620965532.
SandbergLindaRönnblomMalin. 2016. “Planning the New City-Emotional Reaction and Positions.”Emotion, Space and Society 21 (November): 50–57. doi:10.1016/j.emospa.2016.10.005.
62.
ScallyCorianne PaytonTigheJ. Rosie. 2015. “Democracy in Action? NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting.”Housing Studies30 (5): 749–69. doi:10.1080/02673037.2015.1013093.
SchivelyCarissa. 2007. “Understanding the NIMBY and LULU Phenomena: Reassessing Our Knowledge Base and Informing Future Research.”Journal of Planning Literature21 (3): 255–66. doi:10.1177/0885412206295845.
SilvaMeghan R.KleinertWhitney L.SheppardA. VictoriaCantrellKathryn A.Freeman-CoppadgeDarren J.TsoyElenaRobertsTangelaPearrowMelissa2017. “The Relationship Between Food Security, Housing Stability, and School Performance Among College Students in an Urban University.”Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice19 (3): 284–99. doi:10.1177/1521025115621918.
67.
SkredeJoarAndersenBengt. 2022. “The Emotional Element of Urban Densification.”Local Environment27 (2): 251–63. doi:10.1080/13549839.2022.2034769.
68.
StacyChristina PlerhoplesSchillingJosephGourevitchRuthLowyJacobMeixellBradyThorntonRachel L. J. 2019. “Bridging the Housing and Health Policy Divide: Lessons in Community Development from Memphis and Baltimore.”Housing Policy Debate29 (3): 403–20. doi:10.1080/10511482.2018.1539858.
69.
TarmanChristopherSearsDavid O.2005. “The Conceptualization and Measurement of Symbolic Racism.”The Journal of Politics67 (3): 731–61. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00337.x.
70.
TigheJ. Rosie. 2010. “Public Opinion and Affordable Housing: A Review of the Literature.”Journal of Planning Literature25 (1): 3–17. doi:10.1177/0885412210379974.
71.
TigheJ. Rosie. 2012. “How Race and Class Stereotyping Shapes Attitudes toward Affordable Housing.”Housing Studies27 (7): 962–83. doi:10.1080/02673037.2012.725831.
TrounstineJessica. 2020. “The Geography of Inequality: How Land Use Regulation Produces Segregation.”The American Political Science Review114 (2): 443–55. doi:10.1017/S0003055419000844.
WalkerRebecca H.DericksonKate D.2022. “Mapping Prejudice: The Limits and Opportunities of Data for Anti-Racist Planning.”Journal of the American Planning Association89: 459–71. doi:10.1080/01944363.2022.2112743.
76.
WensaasKristina EbbingPettersenIda NilstadSmørdalOle. 2020. “The Case Study ‘Framtidsbilder Trondheim Sentrum 2050’: A Collaborative Case Study of Participation between the 3C Project and Trondheim Municipality’s Planning Office.” Norconsult. https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/2641285.
77.
WhittemoreAndrew H.BenDorTodd K.2019a. “Opposition to Housing Development in a Suburban US County: Characteristics, Origins, and Consequences.”Land Use Policy88 (November): 104158. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104158.
78.
WhittemoreAndrew H.BenDorTodd K.2019b. “Reassessing NIMBY: The Demographics, Politics, and Geography of Opposition to High-Density Residential Infill.”Journal of Urban Affairs41 (4): 423–42. doi:10.1080/07352166.2018.1484255.
79.
WilliamsRashad Akeem.2020. “From Racial to Reparative Planning: Confronting the White Side of Planning.”Journal of Planning Education and Research. Published electronically August 5.doi:10.1177/0739456X20946416.
YoderJesse. 2020. “Does Property Ownership Lead to Participation in Local Politics? Evidence from Property Records and Meeting Minutes.”The American Political Science Review114 (4): 1213–29. doi:10.1017/S0003055420000556.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
