This study investigates voter decision-making on two smart-growth components: land preservation and affordable housing. We seek to understand how voters make concurrent decisions about unpaired smart-growth components at the ballot box. Previous studies of smart growth, affordable housing, and environmental preservation have focused primarily on describing the attitudes and traits of voters on these policies, utilize aggregate voting outcomes, or are case studies of single towns in which there is a fairly homogenous group of residents either supporting or opposing the policy. We draw on a unique data set to investigate the different covariates of attitudes for environmental preservation and affordable housing: an exit poll of voters in the 2016 Rhode Island General Election on bond referendums for environmental preservation and affordable housing. We find that the coalition for smart growth that includes both land preservation and affordable housing is undermined by views of minorities and the poor as undeserving.
AltonjiMatthewLangCoreyPuggioniGavino. 2016. “Can Urban Areas Help Sustain the Preservation of Open Space? Evidence from Statewide Referenda.” Ecological Economics130:82–91.
2.
BengstonDavid N.FletcherJennifer O.NelsonKristen C. 2004. “Public Policies for Managing Urban Growth and Protecting Open Space: Policy Instruments and Lessons Learned in the United States.” Landscape and Urban Planning69 (2–3): 271–86.
3.
BestSamuel J.KruegerBrian S. 2012. Exit Polls: Surveying the American Electorate, 1972-2010. Los Angeles: CQ Press.
4.
BowlerShaunDonovanTodd. 2004. “Measuring the Effect of Direct Democracy on State Policy: Not All Initiatives Are Created Equal.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly4 (3): 345–63.
5.
CerveroRobertDuncanMichael. 2006. “Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs-Housing Balance or Retail-Housing Mixing?” Journal of the American Planning Association72 (4): 475–90.
6.
CramerKatherine J.2016. The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
7.
DearMichael. 1992. “Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome.” Journal of the American Planning Association58 (3): 288–300.
8.
DownsAnthony. 2004. Growth Management and Affordable Housing: Do They Conflict?Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
9.
DownsAnthony. 2005. “Smart Growth: Why We Discuss It More than We Do It.” Journal of the American Planning Association71 (4): 367–78.
10.
DyckJoshua J.2006. “Dissociated Choices in Direct Democracy: Preferences, Policy Responsiveness and Trust in Ballot Initiative Elections.” (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park).
11.
DyckJoshua J.LascherEdward L. 2009. “Direct Democracy and Political Efficacy Reconsidered.” Political Behavior31 (3): 401–27.
12.
EwingReidHamidiShimaGraceJames B.WeiYehua Dennis. 2016. “Does Urban Sprawl Hold down Upward Mobility?” Landscape and Urban Planning148:80–88.
FischelWilliam A.2017. “The Rise of the Homevoters: How the Growth Machine Was Subverted by OPEC and Earth Day.” In Evidence and Innovation in Housing Law and Policy, edited by FennellLee AnneKeysBenjamin J., 13–37. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
15.
FriedenBernard J.1979. “The New Regulation Comes to Suburbia.” The Public Interest55:15–27.
16.
GeogheganJacqueline. 2002. “The Value of Open Spaces in Residential Land Use.” Land Use Policy19 (1): 91–98.
17.
GeogheganJacquelineLynchLoriBucholtzShawn. 2003. “Capitalization of Open Spaces into Housing Values and the Residential Property Tax Revenue Impacts of Agricultural Easement Programs.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review32 (1): 33–45.
18.
GerberElisabeth R.PhillipsJustin H. 2003. “Development Ballot Measures, Interest Group Endorsements, and the Political Geography of Growth Preferences.” American Journal of Political Science47 (4): 625–39.
19.
GetsingerLizaPoseyLilyMacDonaldGrahamLeopoldJoshAbazajianKatya. 2017. The Housing Affordability Gap for Extremely Low-Income Renters In 2014. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
20.
GilensMartin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
21.
GlaeserEdward L.GyourkoJoseph. 2003. “The Impact of Building Restrictions on Housing Affordability.” Economic Policy Review9 (2): 21-39.
22.
GottliebRobert. 2005. Forcing the Spring: The Transformation of the American Environmental Movement. Washington, DC: Island Press.
23.
HandySusanSallisJames F.WeberDeanneMaibachEdHollanderMarla. 2008. “Is Support for Traditionally Designed Communities Growing? Evidence from Two National Surveys.” Journal of the American Planning Association74 (2): 209–21.
IrwinElena G.2002. “The Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values.” Land Economics78 (4): 465–80.
26.
IrwinElena G.BockstaelNancy E. 2004. “Land Use Externalities, Open Space Preservation, and Urban Sprawl.” Regional Science and Urban Economics34 (6): 705–25.
27.
JohnstonRobert J.SwallowStephen K.TyrrellTimothy J.BauerDana Marie. 2003. “Rural Amenity Values and Length of Residency.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics85 (4): 1000–15.
28.
KatzMichael B.1989. The Undeserving Poor: From the War on Poverty to the War on Welfare. Vol. 60. New York: Pantheon Books.
KlingRobOlinSpencer C.PosterMark. 1995. Postsuburban California: The Transformation of Orange County since World War II. London: Univ. of California Press.
31.
KoebelC. TheodoreLangRobert E.DanielsenKaren A. 2004. Community Acceptance of Affordable Housing. Washington, DC: National Association of Realtors.
32.
KotchenMatthew J.PowersShawn M. 2006. “Explaining the Appearance and Success of Voter Referenda for Open-Space Conservation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management52 (1): 373–90.
LacyDeanNiouEmerson M. S. 2004. “A Theory of Economic Sanctions and Issue Linkage: The Roles of Preferences, Information, and Threats.” The Journal of Politics66 (1): 25–42.
35.
LandVote. 2019. The Trust for Public Land. Accessed June 21, 2019. www.landvote.org.
36.
LangCorey. 2018. “Assessing the Efficiency of Local Open Space Provision.” Journal of Public Economics158:12–24.
37.
LensMichael C.MonkkonenPaavo. 2016. “Do Strict Land Use Regulations Make Metropolitan Areas More Segregated by Income?” Journal of the American Planning Association82 (1): 6–21.
38.
LewisPaul G.BaldassareMark. 2010. “The Complexity of Public Attitudes Toward Compact Development: Survey Evidence from Five States.” Journal of the American Planning Association76 (2): 219–37.
39.
LowryWilliam R.2018. “The Exceptionalism of the Open Space Issue in American Politics.” Social Science Quarterly99 (4): 1363–76.
40.
LowryWilliam R.KrummenacherW. Scott. 2016. “Coalitions and Conservation: Conditional Impacts of Coalitions on Ballot Measures for Open Space.” Review of Policy Research34 (3): 357–77.
41.
LuttikJoke. 2000. “The Value of Trees, Water and Open Space as Reflected by House Prices in The Netherlands.” Landscape and Urban Planning48 (3–4): 161–67.
42.
MasseyDouglas S.DentonNancy A. 1993. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
43.
McCauleyStephen M.MurphyJames T. 2013. “Smart Growth and the Scalar Politics of Land Management in The Greater Boston Region, USA.” Environment and Planning A45 (12): 2852–67.
44.
MohamedRayman. 2008. “Who Would Pay for Rural Open Space Preservation and Inner-City Redevelopment? Identifying Support for Policies That Can Contribute to Regional Land Use Governance.” Urban Studies45 (13): 2783–2803.
45.
NelsonArthur C.PendallRolfDawkinsCasey J.KnaapGerrit J. 2002. “The Link Between Growth Management and Housing Affordability: The Academic Evidence.” In Growth Management and Affordable Housing: Do They Conflict, edited by, DownsAnthony, 117–58. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
46.
OrfieldMyron. 2002. American Metropolitics: The New Suburban Reality. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
47.
PendallRolf. 2000. “Local Land Use Regulation and the Chain of Exclusion.” Journal of the American Planning Association66 (2): 125–42.
48.
PhelpsNicholas A.WoodAndrew M. 2011. “The New Post-Suburban Politics?” Urban Studies48 (120: 2591–2610.
49.
PhelpsNicholas A.WoodAndrew M.VallerDavid C. 2010. “A Postsuburban World? An Outline of a Research Agenda.” Environment and Planning A42 (2): 366–83.
50.
PikettyThomasSaezEmmanuel. 2003. “Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics118 (1): 1–41.
51.
PrendergastPatrickPearson-MerkowitzShannaLangCorey. 2019. “The Individual Determinants of Support for Open Space Bond Referendums.” Land Use Policy82:258–68.
52.
PulidoLaura. 2000. “Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilege and Urban Development in Southern California.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers90 (1): 12–40.
53.
RomeAdam. 2001. The Bulldozer in the Countryside: Suburban Sprawl and the Rise of American Environmentalism. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
54.
RomeroFrancineLiserioAdrian. 2002. “Saving Open Spaces: Determinants of 1998 and 1999 ‘Antisprawl’ Ballot Measures.” Social Science Quarterly83 (1): 341–52.
55.
RothsteinRichard. 2017. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. New York, New York: Liveright Publishing.
56.
RothwellJonathan T.MasseyDouglas S. 2010. “Density Zoning and Class Segregation in US Metropolitan Areas.” Social Science Quarterly91 (5): 1123–43.
57.
SanderHeather A.PolaskyStephen. 2009. “The Value of Views and Open Space: Estimates from A Hedonic Pricing Model for Ramsey County, Minnesota, USA.” Land Use Policy26 (3): 837–45.
58.
ScallyCorianne Payton. 2013. “The nuances of NIMBY: Context and Perceptions of Affordable Rental Housing Development.” Urban Affairs Review49 (5): 718–47.
59.
SchmidtStephanPaulsenKurt. 2009. “Is Open-Space Preservation A Form of Exclusionary Zoning? The Evolution of Municipal Open-Space Policies In New Jersey.” Urban Affairs Review45 (1): 92–118.
60.
SchneiderAnneIngramHelen. 1993. “Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy.” American Political Science Review87 (2): 334–47.
61.
SquiresGregory D.KubrinCharis E. 2005. “Privileged Places: Race, Uneven Development and the Geography of Opportunity in Urban America.” Urban Studies42 (1): 47–68.
SwallowStephen K.McGonagleMichael P. 2006. “Public Funding of Environmental Amenities: Contingent Choices Using New Taxes or Existing Revenues for Coastal Land Conservation.” Land Economics82 (1): 56–67.
64.
TianGuangEwingReidGreeneWilliam. 2015. “Desire for Smart Growth: A Survey of Residential Preferences in the Salt Lake Region of Utah.” Housing Policy Debate25 (3): 446–62.
65.
TigheJ. Rosie. 2010. “Public Opinion and Affordable Housing: A Review of the Literature.” Journal of Planning Literature25 (1): 3–17.
66.
TigheJ. Rosie. 2012. “How Race and Class Stereotyping Shapes Attitudes Toward Affordable Housing.” Housing Studies27 (7): 962–83.
67.
ValeLawrence J.2002. Reclaiming Public Housing: A Half Century of Struggle in Three Public Neighborhoods. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
68.
WassmerRobert W.LascherEdward L.Jr.2006. “Who Supports Local Growth and Regional Planning to Deal with Its Consequences?” Urban Affairs Review41 (5): 621–45.
69.
WilsonWilliam Julius. 2006. The Geography of Opportunity: Race and Housing Choice in Metropolitan America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
70.
WiltonRobert D.2002. “Colouring Special Needs: Locating Whiteness in NIMBY Conflicts.” Social & Cultural Geography3 (3): 303–21.
71.
YorkAbigail M.FeiockRichard C.SteinackerAnnette. 2013. “Dimensions of Economic Development and Growth Management Policy Choices.” State and Local Government Review45 (2): 86–97.
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.
