'When the Black Bourgeoisie Meets the Truly Disadvantaged': Intra-Racial Politics of Class and Residential Choice in Prince George's County, MD
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Urban centers throughout the country are experiencing rapid transformation as affluent residents migrate from other areas or return from the suburbs. In the District of Columbia, the energy of urban renewal is palpable, with the sites and sounds of demolition and construction on almost every street. The landscape is not the only thing transforming in the capital once dubbed “Chocolate City”; the racial and socioeconomic composition has rapidly shifted as well. According to the New York Times, since 2000 Washington’s white population jumped by 31 percent, while the black population declined by 11 percent. In 2011, the first American city to have an African American majority lost its status after over half a century.Given the almost certain prospects for greater tax base to fill city coffers, local officials often appear eager to meet the demands of gentrifiers — frequently at the expense of long-time residents. With land being among the most in-demand commodities, Washington’s housing authority (DCHA), for example, has demolished over one thousand public housing units in the past decade. Modeled after the federal Hope VI program, the city’s New Communities Initiative targets public housing properties that are considered distressed and demolishes them with the promise of quick renovation and redevelopment into mixed-income communities. In all cases, public housing units are not replaced at an equal rate and often only one-third of residents are able to return. Because only a fraction of public housing residents can return after redevelopment, initiatives for mixed-income housing developments are supplemented with residential mobility programs. Bolstered by evidence from Chicago’s Gautreaux program and HUD’s Moving to Opportunity demonstration, housing authorities contend that blending different economic groups provides economic, political, and social benefits for the poor. Residents are therefore offered housing choice vouchers and encouraged to seek out homes in low-poverty communities. Among the target destinations are neighborhoods largely comprised of black middle and working class residents. For Washington, DC residents, Prince George’s County, MD (PG County) has been an early target for the displaced.This research explores social and political impacts of urban gentrification and class tensions within the black community. It relies on U.S. Census tract data and a multi-neighborhood sample of black middle class residents of PG County to examine resident attitudes and responses to the influx of low-income and public housing residents in their communities. Drawing on three levels of vantage points (individual residents, county public housing authorities, and national policy regulators), this study explores how race and class shape residential decisions and their impact on mixed-income community initiatives. Using nested logit modeling, this analysis demonstrates the strength of the relationship between class position and three forms of residential choice: exit, voice, and loyalty. The analysis also considers the effect of several moderators that impact the strength of the relationship (gender, family status, political affiliation, and length of time in community). Findings have implications for ongoing debates on the declining significance of race/increasing significance of class, social benefits of mixed-income communities, and the effects of urban gentrification on suburban neighborhoods.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,038 | 0,013 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».