Skip to main content

“Weathering” HOPE VI: The Importance of Evaluating the Population Health Impact of Public Housing Demolition and Displacement

Journal of Urban Health volume 88, pages 417–435 (2011)Cite this article

Abstract

HOPE VI has funded the demolition of public housing developments across the United States and created in their place mixed-income communities that are often inaccessible to the majority of former tenants. This recent uprooting of low-income, urban, and predominantly African American communities raises concern about the health impacts of the HOPE VI program for a population that already shoulders an enormous burden of excess morbidity and mortality. In this paper, we rely on existing literature about HOPE VI relocation to evaluate the program from the perspective of weathering—a biosocial process hypothesized by Geronimus to underlie early health deterioration and excess mortality observed among African Americans. Relying on the weathering framework, we consider the effects of HOPE VI relocation on the material context of urban poverty, autonomous institutions that are health protective, and on the broader discourse surrounding urban poverty. We conclude that relocated HOPE VI residents have experienced few improvements to the living conditions and economic realities that are likely sources of stress and illness among this population. Additionally, we find that relocated residents must contend with these material realities, without the health-protective, community-based social resources that they often rely on in public housing. Finally, we conclude that by disregarding the significance of health-protective autonomous institutions and by obscuring the structural context that gave rise to racially segregated public housing projects, the discourse surrounding HOPE VI is likely to reinforce health-demoting stereotypes of low-income urban African American communities. Given the potential for urban and housing policies to negatively affect the health of an already vulnerable population, we argue that a health-equity perspective is a critical component of future policy conversations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Newman K, Wyly E. The right to stay put, revisited: gentrification and resistance to displacement in New York City. Urban Stud. 2006; 43(1): 23–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Popkin S, Katz B, Cunningham M. A Decade of Hope VI: Research Findings and Policy Challenges. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2004.

  3. Freeman L, Braconi F. Gentrification and displacement: New York City in the 1990s. J Am Plann Assoc. 2004; 70(1): 39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fullilove M. Building momentum: an ethnographic study of inner-city redevelopment. Am J Public Health. 1999; 89(6): 840.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wallace R, Fullilove M. Collective Consciousness and Its Discontents: Institutional Distributed Cognition, Racial Policy and Public Health in the United States. New York: Springer; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fullilove M. Root Shock: How Tearing up City Neighborhoods Hurts America and What We Can Do about It. New York, NY: Balantine Books; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wallace R. A synergism of plagues: “planned shrinkage,” contagious housing destruction and AIDS in the Bronx. Environ Res. 1988; 47: 1–33.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. False HOPE: a Critical Assessment of the HOPE VI Public Housing Redevelopment Program. Oakland, CA: National Housing Law Project; 2002.

  9. Popkin S, Levy D, Harris L, Comey J, Cunningham M. HOPE VI Panel Study: Baseline Report. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Geronimus AT. To mitigate, resist, or undo: addressing structural influences on the health of urban populations. Am J Public Health. 2000; 90(6): 867.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Geronimus AT, Bound J, Waidmann TA, Colen CG, Steffick D. Inequality in life expectancy, functional status, and active life expectancy across selected black and white populations in the United States. Demography. 2001; 38(2): 227–251.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Burton LM, Bromell L. Childhood illness, family comorbidity, and cumulative disadvantage: an ethnographic treatise on low-income mothers’ health in later life. Annu Rev Gerontol Geriatr. 2010; 30: 233–265.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ruel E, Oakley D, Wilson G, Maddox R. Is public housing the cause of poor health or a safety net for the unhealthy poor? J Urban Health. 2010; 87(5): 827–838.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Manjarrez C, Popkin S, Guernsey E. Poor health: Adding Insult to Injury for HOPE VI Families. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press; July 1 2007: 5.

  15. Popkin S, Eisemann M, Cove E. How are HOPE VI families faring? Children. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Harris L, Kaye D. How are HOPE VI Families Faring? Health. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2004: 5.

  17. Geronimus AT. Understanding and eliminating racial inequalities in women’s health in the United States: the role of the weathering conceptual framework. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2001; 56(4): 133–136, 149.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Geronimus AT, Hicken M, Keene D, Bound J. “Weathering” and age patterns of allostatic load scores among blacks and whites in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2006; 96(5): 826–833.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ranney D, Wright P. Race, class and the abuse of state power: the case of public housing in Chicago. SAGE Race Relat Abstr. 2000; 25(2): 3.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Burton LM, Clark SL. Homeplace and housing in the lives of urban African Americans. In: MacLoyd V, Hill N, Dodge K, eds. African American Family Life. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2005: 166–206.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fullilove M. Root Shock: the consequences of African American dispossession. J Urban Health. 2001; 78(1): 72–80.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Greenbaum S. Social capital and deconcentration: theoretical and policy paradoxes of the HOPE VI program. North Am Dialogue. 2002; 5(1): 9–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Greenbaum S. Poverty and the willful destruction of social capital: displacement and dispossession in African American communities. Rethinking Marxism. 2008; 20(1): 42–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Keene D, Padilla M, Geronimus AT. Leaving Chicago for Iowa’s “fields of opportunity”: community dispossession, rootlessness and the quest for somewhere to “Be OK.” Hum Organ. 2010; 69(3): 275–284.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Crump J. Deconcentration by demolition: public housing policy, poverty and urban policy. Environ Plann D. 2002; 20: 581–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Geronimus AT, Thompson JP. To denigrate, ignore or disrupt: racial inequality in health and the impact of a policy induced breakdown of African American communities. Du Bois Review. 2004; 1(2): 247–279.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Newman K, Ashton P. Neoliberal urban policy and new paths of neighborhood change in the American inner city. Environ Planning. 2004; 36: 1151–1172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Buron L, Popkin S, Levy D, Harris L, Khadduri J. The HOPE VI Resident Tracking Study: a Snapshot of the Current Living Situation of Original Residents from Eight Sites. Washington, DC: Abt Associates and Urban Institute Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Clampet-Lundquist S. HOPE VI relocation: moving to new neighborhoods and building new ties. Housing Policy Debate. 2004; 15(2): 415–447.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gibson K. The relocation of the Columbia Villa community: views from residents. J Plann Educ Research. 2007; 27(1): 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Manzo L, Kleit R, Couch D. “Moving three times is like having your house on fire once”: the experience of place and impending displacement among public housing residents. Urban Stud. 2008; 45(9): 1855–1878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Clampet-Lundquist S. “Everyone had your back”: social ties, perceived safety and public housing relocation. City Community. 2010; 9(1): 87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Clampet-Lundquist S. No more ’Bois Ball: the effect of relocation from public housing on adolescents. J Adolesc Research. 2007; 22(3): 298–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Venkatesh S, Celimli I, Miller D, Murphy A, Turner B. Chicago Public Housing Transformation: a Research Report. New York, NY: Center for Urban Research and Policy, Columbia University in the City of New York; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kleit R, Manzo L. To move or not to move: relationships to place and relocation in HOPE VI. Housing Policy Debate. 2006.

  36. Clampet-Lundquist S. Moving over or moving up? Short term gains and losses for relocated HOPE VI families. Cityscape. 2004; 7(1): 57–80.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Keene DE, Padilla MB. Race, class and the stigma of place: moving to “opportunity” in Eastern Iowa. Health Place. 2010; 16(6): 1216–1223.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Venkatesh S. American Project: the Rise and Fall of a Modern Ghetto. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mullings L, Wali A. Stress and Resilience: the Social Context of Reproduction in Central Harlem. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Williams DR, Collins C. US socioeconomic and racial differences in health: patterns and explanations. Annu Rev Sociology. 1995; 21(1): 349–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Comey J. An Improved Living Environment? Housing Quality Outcomes for HOPE VI Relocatees. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bennett L, Hudspeth N, Wright P. A critical analysis of the ABLA redevelopment plan. In: Bennett L, Smith J, Wright P, eds. Where are Poor People to Live? Transforming Public Housing Communities. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe; 2006: 185–215.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Comey J. HOPE VI’d and on the Move. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Thomas Kingsley G, Johnson J, Pettit KLS. Patterns of section 8 relocation in the HOPE VI program. J Urban Aff. 2003; 25(4): 427–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Oakley D, Burchfield K. Out of the projects, still in the hood: the spatial constraints on public-housing residents’ relocation in Chicago. J Urban Aff. 2009; 31(5): 589–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. DeFillipis J, Wyly E. Running to stand still: through the looking glass with federally subsidized housing in New York City. Urban Aff Rev Thousand Oaks Calif. 2008; 43(6): 777–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Popkin S, Cove E. Safety is the Most Important Thing: How HOPE VI Helped Families. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Buron L. An Improved Living Environment? Neighborhood Outcomes for HOPE VI Relocatees. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Smith R. Housing Choice for HOPE VI Relocatees: Final Report. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Beck P. Fighting section 8 discrimination: the Fair Housing Act’s new frontier. Harv Civ Rights-Civil Lib Law Rev. 1996;31.

  51. Goetz E. Clearing the way. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Buron L, Levy D, Gallagher M. Housing Choice Vouchers: How HOPE VI Families Fared in the Private Market. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; September 2007: 3.

  53. National Low Income Housing Coalition. Housing Choice Voucher Fact Sheet. http://nlihc.org/doc/Housing-Choice-Vouchers.pdf. Accessed March 14, 2011.

  54. Buckley C. Thousands may lose rental vouchers. New York Times. April 6, 2010: NY/Region.

  55. Pattillo M. Black on the Block: the Politics of Race and Class in the City. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Winkelby M, Cubbin C, Ahn D. Low individual socioeconomic status, neighborhood socioeconomic status and adult mortality. Am J Public Health. 2006; 96(12): 2145–2153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Politzer RM, Yoon J, Shi L, Hughes RG, Regan J, Gaston MH. Inequality in America: the contribution of health centers in reducing and eliminating disparities in access to care. Med Care Res Rev. 2001; 58(2): 234–248.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Barrett R, Young I, Weaver K. Neighborhood change and distant metastasis at diagnosis of breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol. 2008; 18: 43–47.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Breast cancer screening and socioeconomic status in 35 metropolitan areas, 2000 and 2002. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005; 54(39): 981–985.

    Google Scholar 

  60. XdS B. Brown kids in white suburbs: housing mobility and the many faces of social capital. Housing Policy Debate. 1998; 9(1): 177–214.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Levy D, Kaye D. How are HOPE VI Families Faring? Income and Employment. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Cove E, Austin-Turner M, Briggs XdS, Duarte C. Can Escaping Poor Neighborhoods Increase Employment and Earnings? Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2008.

  63. Bennett L. Downtown restructuring and public housing in contemporary Chicago: fashioning a better world class-city. In: Bennett L, Smith J, Wright P, eds. Where are Poor People to Live? Transforming Public Housing Communities. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe; 2006: 282–301.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Varady DP, Walker CC. Vouchering out distressed subsidized developments: does moving lead to improvements in housing and neighborhood conditions? Housing Policy Debate. 2000; 11(1): 115–162.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Vale L. Empathological places: residents’ ambivalence toward remaining in public housing. J Plann Educ Research. 1997; 16: 159–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Stack C. Call to Home: African Americans Reclaim the Rural South. New York, NY: Basic Books; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Stack C. All our Kin. New York, NY: Basic Books; 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  68. James SA. Racial and ethnic differences in infant mortality and low-birth weight: a psychosocial critique. Ann Epidemiol. 1993; 3(2): 130–136.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Edin K, Lein L. Making Ends Meet: How Single Mothers Survive Welfare and Low-wage Work. New York, NY: Russell Sage; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Keene D, Geronimus A. Community-based support among African American public housing residents. J Urban Health. 2011; 88(1): 41–53.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Greenbaum S, Hathaway W, Rodriguez C, Spalding A, Ward B. Deconcentration and social capital: contradictions of a poverty alleviation policy. J Poverty. 2008; 12(2): 201–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Bennett L, Reed A. The new face of urban renewal: the Near North Redevelopment Initiative and the Cabrini-Green neighborhood. In: Reed A, ed. Without Justice for All: the New Liberalism and Our Retreat from Racial Equality. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; 1999: 176–192.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Wright P. Community resistance to CHA transformation: the history, evolution, struggles, and accomplishments of the Coalition to Protect Public Housing. In: Bennett L, Smith J, Wright P, eds. Where are Poor People to Live? Transforming Public Housing Communities. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe; 2006: 125–167.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Lopez L, Stack C. Social Capital and the Culture of Power: Lessons from the Field. Washington, DC: Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Wacquant L. Three pernicious premises in the study of the American Ghetto. Int J Urban Reg Res. 1997; 21(2): 341–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Steele C. Whistling Vivaldi: and Other Clues to How Stereotype Threats Affect Us. New York, NY: WW Norton; 2010.

  77. Geronimus A. Contingencies of Social Identity: a new handle for grasping racial health inequality. Mapping “Race” and Inequality: best practices for theorizing and operationalizing “Race” in Health Policy Research. Albuquerque, New Mexico; 2011.

  78. Smedley B, Stith A, Nelson A. Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Neckerman KM, Kirschenman J. Hiring strategies, racial bias, and inner-city workers. Soc Probl. 1991; 38(4): 433–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Wilson WJ. When Work Disappears: the New World of the Urban Poor. New York, NY: Vintage Books; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Marcuse P, Varaday D, Preiser W, Russell F. Mainstreaming public housing: a proposal for a comprehensive approach to housing policy. In: Varady D, Preiser W, Russell F, eds. New Directions in Urban Public Housing. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research; 1998:23–47.

  82. Turney K. Maternal depression and child health inequalities. J Health Soc Behav. 2011 (in press).

  83. Kahn R, Zuckerman B, Baucher H, Homer C, Wise P. Women’s health after pregnancy and child outcomes at age 3 years: a prospective cohort study. Am J Public Health. 2002; 92(8): 1312–1318.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Geronimus AT. Black/white differences in the relationship of maternal age to birthweight: a population-based test of the weathering hypothesis. Soc Sci Med. 1996; 42(4): 589–597.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Geronimus A. The weathering hypothesis and the health of African-American women and infants: evidence and speculations. Ethn Dis. 1992; 2(3): 207–221.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Burton LM, Whitfield K. Weathering toward poorer health in later life: comorbidity in low-income urban familes. Public Policy Aging Reports. 2003; 13(3): 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Geronimus AT, Bound J, Waidmann TA. Health inequality and population variation in fertility-timing. Soc Sci Med. 1999; 49(12): 1623–1636.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Goetz E. Forced relocation vs. voluntary mobility: the effects of dispersal programmes on households. Housing Studies. 2002; 17(1): 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Price D, Popkin S. The Health Crisis for CHA Families. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Goetz E. Better neighborhood, better outcomes?: explaining relocation outcomes in HOPE VI. Cityscape. 2010; 12(1): 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Acevedo-Garcia D, Osypuk T, Werbel R, Meara E, Cutler D, Berkman L. Does housing mobility improve health? Housing Policy Debate. 2004; 15(1): 49–98.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Kling JR, Liebman JB, Katz LF. Experimental analysis of neighborhood effects. Econometrica. 2007; 75(1): 83–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Fortson JG, Sanbonmatsu L. Child health and neighborhood conditions: results from a randomized housing voucher experiment. J Hum Resources. 2010; 45(4): 840–864.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Wallace D, Wallace R. A Plague on Your Houses: How New York Was Burned Down and National Public Health Crumbled. New York, NY: Verso; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Popkin S. Hearing before the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation and Community Development on S.829 912, HOPE VI Improvement and Reauthorization Act, 110th Congress, Session 829 (2007) (testimony of Dr. Susan Popkin, Senior Fellow, Urban Institute).

  96. Oakley D, Ruel E, Reid L. Hearing before the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation and Community Development on S.829 912, HOPE VI Improvement and Reauthorization Act, 110th Congress, Session 829 (2007) (testimony of Dr. Susan Popkin, Senior Fellow, Urban Institute).

  97. Oakley D, Ruel E, Wilson E. A choice with no options: Atlanta Public Housing Residents’ Lived Experiences in the Face of Relocation; 2008. http://urbanhealth.gsu.edu/publichousing.asp. Accessed May 15, 2011.

  98. Smith J. The Chicago Housing Authority’s plan for transformation. In: Bennett L, Smith J, Wright P, eds. Where are Poor People to Live? Transforming Public Housing Communities. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe; 2006: 93–125.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank two anonymous reviewers and the editors at the Journal of Urban Health for their insightful comments. We also gratefully acknowledge support from the National Institute of Aging (NIA) through a training grant to the Population Studies Center at the University of Michigan (T32 AG000221), support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (grant R21HD056307) and support from the Eva Mueller Scholars Fund at the University of Michigan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Michigan Population Studies Center, 426 Thompson St, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Danya E. Keene & Arline T. Geronimus

Authors
  1. Danya E. Keene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arline T. Geronimus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danya E. Keene.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Keene, D.E., Geronimus, A.T. “Weathering” HOPE VI: The Importance of Evaluating the Population Health Impact of Public Housing Demolition and Displacement. J Urban Health 88, 417–435 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-011-9582-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-011-9582-5

Keywords

  • HOPE VI
  • Weathering
  • African American
  • Health inequality