Search

Large language models, such as ChatGPT, have recently risen to prominence in producing human-like conversation and assisting with various tasks, particularly for analyzing high-dimensional textual materials. Because planning researchers and practitioners often need to evaluate planning documents that are long and complex, a first-ever possible question has emerged: Can ChatGPT evaluate plans? In this study we addressed this question by leveraging ChatGPT to evaluate the quality of plans and compare the results with those conducted by human coders. Through the evaluation of 10 climate change plans, we discovered that ChatGPT's evaluation results coincided reasonably well (with an average of 68%) with those from the traditional content analysis approach. We further scrutinized the differences by conducting a more in-depth analysis of the results from ChatGPT and manual evaluation to uncover what might have contributed to the variance in results. Our findings indicate that ChatGPT struggled to comprehend planning-specific jargon, yet it could reduce human errors by capturing details in complex planning documents. Finally, we provide insights into leveraging this cutting-edge technology in future planning research and practice. ChatGPT cannot be used to replace humans in plan quality evaluation yet. However, it is an effective tool to complement human coders to minimize human errors by identifying discrepancies and fact-checking machine-generated responses. ChatGPT generally cannot understand planning jargon, so planners wanting to use this tool should use extra caution when planning terminologies are present in their prompts. Creating effective prompts for ChatGPT is an iterative process that requires specific instructions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of U.S. housing policy on household locational outcomes has primarily been studied in the context of rental housing assistance programs, but the impact of alternative homeownership models is less fully explored. In this study, we assess residential trajectories for households that have participated in shared-equity homeownership (SEH) programs such as Community Land Trusts and Limited Equity Housing Cooperatives. We examine changes in neighborhood characteristics that occur when households enter and exit SEH units, and compare those outcomes with similar households that entered traditional homeownership or continued to rent. We find that while entering SEH is associated with decreases in neighborhood opportunity measures, exiting SEH is associated with improvements in key measures including lower concentrations of poverty. We conclude that while entering SEH may entail moving to lower-opportunity neighborhoods, participation in SEH programs increases the long-term economic and socio-spatial mobility of participating households by enabling them to access a broader array of neighborhood contexts in their subsequent move. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inclusionary housing (IH) ties the creation of affordable, below market-rate units with new development, and it is known to help address the affordable housing crisis and build inclusive communities. Yet, the absence of a national IH database limits our understanding of the prevalence, practice, and production of inclusionary housing in the U.S., and it creates barriers for further investigation and development of this affordable housing strategy. This study draws a national census of IH programs in the U.S. Through a comprehensive data collection between 2018 and 2019, a total of 1,019 local IH programs are documented in 734 local jurisdictions of 31 states and the District of Columbia. This study summarizes program design nationwide and features distinct patterns in California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey, where state laws largely impact program adoption and production. A subset of 258 programs reported producing about 110,000 inclusionary units, and 123 programs have collected close to $1.8 billion in fees for affordable housing development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores whether inclusionary housing (IH) is a mediating factor that explains the connection between gentrification and health outcomes at the city level. The research relies on new nationwide IH data from Grounded Solutions Network, data from the City Health Dashboard to measure health outcomes, and U.S. Census data to quantify the stage and scope of gentrification. Applying both descriptive methods and regression models, we find that the association between gentrification and health is mixed: the scope of recent gentrification in a city is associated with higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension, but also with better access to healthy food. The positive effect of gentrification on better access to healthy food, however, is not observed for the Black population. The presence of IH is positively associated with all three health outcome measures. In addition, the association between IH and health outcomes is stronger than, and independent from, the association between recent gentrification and health outcomes. The results support health benefits of IH programs and imply the need for proactive and race-conscious affordable housing policy interventions to foster better population health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In advocating for community housing, it is realistic to acknowledge that establishing and sustaining community housing depends significantly on the performance of "mainstream" or non-community housing suppliers. Housing and More: The Role of Community Land Trust in Disruption, Equity and Justice Introduction This essay considers the role that community land trusts (CLTs) in the United States can play in expanding social control of land and permanent affordable housing as an inclusive and deliberative democratic governing mechanism. Informed by Experience in the UK This article sets out to capture the essential characteristics of "community housing" across the devolved jurisdictions of the UK Since there is no single definition of "community housing", I start off by attempting to define what the term might mean, before looking at factors which have historically both contributed to and inhibited the development and survival of community housing in different communities in UK. In Sweden and the Netherlands, non-profit housing organizations have played a major role in the housing system, although government interventions such as right-to-buy programs (Sweden), government-mandated rent increases and taxes for affordable housing landlords (Netherlands) have diminished the role of the community housing sector in recent years. Rethinking our housing systems as a collective investment would require supporting community housing (non-profit and co-operative providers and landlords), significantly expanding our supply of community-based housing. [Extracted from the article]

The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) has been criticized for concentrating units in poor minority neighborhoods. This study analyzes the distribution of LIHTC units in San Antonio and assesses the opportunity provision in Texas’s 2016 Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP). Results indicate that since the incorporation of the opportunity provision in 2009, more tax credits have been allocated to neighborhoods with lower poverty and higher racial diversity. Maximum scoring neighborhoods in the current QAP are located in low-poverty communities that perform above average in socioeconomic conditions, but below average in accessibility and sustainable healthy environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research on the housing choice voucher (HCV) program has focused on neighbourhoods where voucher holders reside at one point of time. Little is known about mobility of voucher households during their tenure in the program. Using an administrative dataset that spans 11 years for the state of Florida, this study evaluates how often voucher households move and their mobility outcomes, measured by the change of neighbourhood poverty. Findings reveal that HCV households moved frequently beginning in the early years of program participation. Between 2007 and 2013 there was a notable decrease of voucher presence in high-poverty areas. Regression analysis further suggests that rental housing market conditions are significantly associated with mobility outcomes. White, non-Hispanic households and those with higher incomes were more likely to move to lower poverty neighbourhoods, whereas disabled and formerly homeless households moved more frequently and were not as successful in accessing lower poverty areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do residential locations of Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) households reflect tenants’ preferences for neighborhood quality? Study results come from a three-part methodology: (1) survey of voucher holders to find neighborhood preferences and other factors in the consumer decision-making model, (2) geographic information system (GIS) analysis of actual locational outcomes in terms of neighborhood opportunity and transportation accessibility, and (3) quantitative analysis of the strength of preference–outcome relationships. The results reveal that survey participants placed high priority on neighborhoods that were safe and clean, and with quality schools. Despite this, higher priority on quality housing and search barriers affected the housing choice. As such, to a large extent, the residents did not live in places that met their location preferences. The study calls for an expansion of location assessment measures in the current policy framework and the provision of more information about housing and neighborhood options to voucher recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]