111
Although national censuses are important
sources of data in indicators for the SDGs, it is
at the local or community level where the implementation of SDGs could have the most impact.
It is important to keep in mind the issues around
the adoption and implementation of SDGs at the
community level. Local jurisdictions in the
United States are notable for enjoying great
autonomy in decision-making, adoption, and
implementation of policies, as long as these do
not contradict state or federal laws or statutes.
This autonomy becomes an issue in the adoption
of SDGs. Unless SDGs are part of the vision of
a community, the implementation of such goals
at the community level will be difficult. In addition to these issues of governance and implementation, as this section will show,
conceptualization of inadequate housing is fundamental in any effort to collect data in such
indicators.
Currently, the only source of data regarding
quality of housing in the United States that is
considered for SDG purposes is that collected by
the American Housing Survey. Nonetheless, as
this section will also show, the data is limited to
specific geographic areas and has been recently
criticized for not properly measuring inadequate
housing and therefore undercounting the presence of inadequate housing nationwide.
Measurements of inadequate housing are constrained both by their conceptualization and the
availability of indicators on housing quality. The
literature shows three general approaches that
studies have used to provide indicators of quality
of housing: (1) studies that traditionally relied on
the use of official data from the US Census first
and the American Housing Survey later, (2) studies that have undertaken their own housing quality assessments, and (3) studies that have come
up with strategies by using alternative or local
indicators related to housing quality. These
approaches are not mutually exclusive; on the
contrary, some studies have combined indicators
from two or three different sources. In general,
the literature attests to the changing nature of the
concept and how this in turn obscures the apparent progress in addressing inadequate housing in
the United States.
Following is a brief review of the most notable
cases using the previously mentioned approaches
or a combination of them. Special attention is
given to the most recent literature with a focus on
the use of alternative indicators or secondary
data, specifically, the use of indicators contained
in administrative records of tax assessments.
These last strategies have emerged as a response
to the time and cost limitations of performing traditional housing assessments and the lack of official data for some areas, especially at the
neighborhood level.
Although early efforts to collect data to identify inadequate housing in the United States can
be traced to 1892, it was not until 1936 when the
first nationwide effort took place with a survey of
housing conditions as a Works Progress
Administration (WPA) project. This survey
served as a prototype for the first census of housing in 1940 (Simonson 1981). Between then and
the 1960s, the US Census collected information
on housing quality. As a result of some inconsistencies in the way data was collected, the Bureau
dropped
4
its indicators of housing quality for the
1970 Census (Sutermeister 1969).
The fluid and problematic nature of what is
considered inadequate housing has been evident
since early studies examining the data collected
in quality of housing surveys. For instance, in a
report presented to the National Commission on
Urban Problems, Kristof (1968) questioned the
validity of the current criteria of housing needs,
in particular the concept of substandard housing
as defined by the US Census Bureau. Similarly,
Weicher (1980), when verifying progress in
addressing inadequate housing between 1940 and
1970 using the census data, also observed that
this apparent improvement is obscured by the
problem of defining and measuring the overall
physical condition of the units.
Based on this experience with the US Census,
by 1973, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the US Census Bureau
joined efforts and started conducting the
American Housing Survey (AHS), which, among
other indicators, collects data on about 30 differ4 Although some data still was collected.
9 Helping the Neighborhood: Creating a Sustainability Indicator of Substandard Housing
Although national censuses are important
sources of data in indicators for the SDGs, it is
at the local or community level where the implementation of SDGs could have the most impact.
It is important to keep in mind the issues around
the adoption and implementation of SDGs at the
community level. Local jurisdictions in the
United States are notable for enjoying great
autonomy in decision-making, adoption, and
implementation of policies, as long as these do
not contradict state or federal laws or statutes.
This autonomy becomes an issue in the adoption
of SDGs. Unless SDGs are part of the vision of
a community, the implementation of such goals
at the community level will be difficult. In addition to these issues of governance and implementation, as this section will show,
conceptualization of inadequate housing is fundamental in any effort to collect data in such
indicators.
Currently, the only source of data regarding
quality of housing in the United States that is
considered for SDG purposes is that collected by
the American Housing Survey. Nonetheless, as
this section will also show, the data is limited to
specific geographic areas and has been recently
criticized for not properly measuring inadequate
housing and therefore undercounting the presence of inadequate housing nationwide.
Measurements of inadequate housing are constrained both by their conceptualization and the
availability of indicators on housing quality. The
literature shows three general approaches that
studies have used to provide indicators of quality
of housing: (1) studies that traditionally relied on
the use of official data from the US Census first
and the American Housing Survey later, (2) studies that have undertaken their own housing quality assessments, and (3) studies that have come
up with strategies by using alternative or local
indicators related to housing quality. These
approaches are not mutually exclusive; on the
contrary, some studies have combined indicators
from two or three different sources. In general,
the literature attests to the changing nature of the
concept and how this in turn obscures the apparent progress in addressing inadequate housing in
the United States.
Following is a brief review of the most notable
cases using the previously mentioned approaches
or a combination of them. Special attention is
given to the most recent literature with a focus on
the use of alternative indicators or secondary
data, specifically, the use of indicators contained
in administrative records of tax assessments.
These last strategies have emerged as a response
to the time and cost limitations of performing traditional housing assessments and the lack of official data for some areas, especially at the
neighborhood level.
Although early efforts to collect data to identify inadequate housing in the United States can
be traced to 1892, it was not until 1936 when the
first nationwide effort took place with a survey of
housing conditions as a Works Progress
Administration (WPA) project. This survey
served as a prototype for the first census of housing in 1940 (Simonson 1981). Between then and
the 1960s, the US Census collected information
on housing quality. As a result of some inconsistencies in the way data was collected, the Bureau
dropped
4
its indicators of housing quality for the
1970 Census (Sutermeister 1969).
The fluid and problematic nature of what is
considered inadequate housing has been evident
since early studies examining the data collected
in quality of housing surveys. For instance, in a
report presented to the National Commission on
Urban Problems, Kristof (1968) questioned the
validity of the current criteria of housing needs,
in particular the concept of substandard housing
as defined by the US Census Bureau. Similarly,
Weicher (1980), when verifying progress in
addressing inadequate housing between 1940 and
1970 using the census data, also observed that
this apparent improvement is obscured by the
problem of defining and measuring the overall
physical condition of the units.
Based on this experience with the US Census,
by 1973, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the US Census Bureau
joined efforts and started conducting the
American Housing Survey (AHS), which, among
other indicators, collects data on about 30 differ4 Although some data still was collected.
9 Helping the Neighborhood: Creating a Sustainability Indicator of Substandard Housing