EconStor >
University of California (UC) >
UC Berkeley, Institute of Urban and Regional Development (IURD) >
Working Papers, IURD, UC Berkeley >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/59405
  

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSwanstrom, Todden_US
dc.contributor.authorChapple, Karenen_US
dc.contributor.authorImmergluck, Danen_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-09-22en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-22T14:12:18Z-
dc.date.available2012-06-22T14:12:18Z-
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/59405-
dc.description.abstractBased on approximately fifty interviews, along with analysis of data and newspaper coverage, this report compares local responses to surging foreclosures in three pairs of regions with similar housing markets and foreclosure-related challenges (St. Louis/Cleveland, East Bay/Riverside, and Chicago/Atlanta). The authors examine the choices made by leaders and organizations both to prevent foreclosures and to reduce their negative spillovers (neighborhood stabilization). Resilience is defined as the ability to alter organizational routines, garner additional resources, and collaborate within and between the public, private, and nonprofit sectors to address the foreclosure challenge. The research shows that resilience in the face of foreclosures varied significantly across and within metropolitan areas. The most resilient metropolitan areas had strong housing nonprofits and a history of collaboration between the public, private, and nonprofit sectors. Many suburban areas have been hit hard by the foreclosure crisis, but they often lack the rich array of housing nonprofits and public sector planning capacity that is often present in central cities. The greatest obstacles to local resilience are the rigid and inflexible policies of lenders and loan servicers. The report concludes that resilience requires both horizontal” relations of trust and collaboration with regions and vertical” policies by higher level actors to support and empower local collaborations. Even the most resilient metropolitan areas cannot adequately address the crisis on their own. Federal and state policies can expand (or contract) the opportunity space” for local resilience. State laws, for instance, that lengthen short foreclosures processes give local actors more opportunity to prevent foreclosures and keep families in their homes or apartments. Local actors need the right kinds of policies by higher level actors to support metropolitan resilience. Likewise, state and federal policies will not be effective if local actors lack the capacity to organize responses that are adapted to local conditions. The authors conclude that state and federal policymakers need to address the problem of uneven capacity to respond to foreclosures both across and within metro areas.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherUniv. of California, Inst. of Urban and Regional Development Berkeley, Califen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesWorking Paper, Institute of Urban and Regional Development 2009,05en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.titleRegional resilience in the face of foreclosures: Evidence from six metropolitan areasen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn609262416en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen_US
Appears in Collections:Working Papers, IURD, UC Berkeley

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
609262416.pdf3.43 MBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Show simple item record
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.