The Housing Supply Debate: Evaluating the Evidence
Let s rely on science, not ideology and propaganda, when planning solutions to urban unaffordability. Look for credible evidence in the peer-reviewed publications referenced here.
Todd Litman | May 13, 2021, 9am PDT Share
Few issues cause more blood to boil than debates about the causes and solutions to housing unaffordability. On this issue, many people lead with their opinions followed by whatever evidence they can muster. The results can get ugly, particularly for those of us who prefer information to be credible.
In response, Mr. Abel sent links to
In my view, these articles present a narrow perspective and lack critical analysis, thus raising an epistemological question: How should we evaluate research quality in the field of planning and urban development?
The Left-NIMBY canon
We’re all familiar by now with Right-NIMBYs conservatives who block transit and housing development in order to keep poor people and minorities out of their quiet white-flight suburban neighborhoods. These are still the most common kind, given that Republicans tend to value low-density communities while Democrats tend to value denser, more walkable places. But liberals can be NIMBYs as well, as any resident of a deep-blue state or city well knows.
But leftists can be NIMBYs as well (and remember, leftists and liberals are generally different people). In various cities, concerns over gentrification, environmental preservation, and profits for private developers have hardened into a sort of Left-NIMBY Canon a standardized, off-the-shelf package of beliefs, attitudes, and arguments that are easy to deploy in opposition to nearly any proposed housing or transit project.