Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Steele, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 38, No. 1, 81-103 (2001)
DOI: 10.1080/00420980123221
© 2001 Urban Studies Journal Limited

Housing Allowances in the US under Section 8 and in Other Countries: A Canadian Perspective

Marion Steele

Department of Economics, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada, NIG 2W1, msteelel{at}uoguelph.ca

Housing allowances are provided in the US by the federal government under Section 8 of the 1974 Housing and Community Development Act. This paper compares the design of Section 8 certificates and vouchers with that of Canadian housing allowances and with aspects of design in many other developed nations. Distinguishing elements of Section 8 are discussed: its minimum standards condition, its use of a three-way contract in which both the government housing agency and the tenant pays a private landlord, its availability to only a limited number of eligibles, the absence of a percentage-of-rent element in its formulas and the low required contribution of its recipients. It is argued on the basis of an array of diverse evidence that these characteristics lead to perverse housing consumption effects, stigma, rent inflation and unnecessary restrictions on recipient choice. The paper also addresses the standard objections to dropping the minimum standards condition and to incorporating a percentage-of-rent element in the formula.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?