IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pri/cheawb/7.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bullets Don’t Got No Name: Consequences of Fear in the Ghetto

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey R. Kling

    (Princeton University and NBER)

  • Jeffrey B. Liebman

    (Harvard University and NBER)

  • Lawrence F. Katz

    (Harvard University and NBER)

Abstract

To understand the impact of high-poverty neighborhoods on families, we collected data from participants at the Boston site of HUD's Moving To Opportunity (MTO) demonstration. MTO randomly assigned housing vouchers to applicants living in high-poverty public housing projects. The vouchers allowed families to move to private apartments, typically in lower poverty neighborhoods. This paper reports the results of our qualitative fieldwork which included observation of the operation of MTO in Boston and in-depth interviews with participants. This qualitative work had a profound impact on our MTO research. First, it caused us to refocus our quantitative data collection on a substantially different set of outcomes, primarily in the domains of safety and health. In our subsequent quantitative work, we found the largest program effects in the domains suggested by the qualitative interviews. Second, our qualitative work led us to develop an overall conceptual framework for thinking about the impacts of high-poverty neighborhoods on families and the ways in which moves to lower poverty neighborhoods might affect these families. We observed that fear of random violence appears to cause parents in ghetto families to focus a substantial portion of their daily routine on keeping their children safe. In later quantitative research, we confirmed that parental monitoring intensity was reduced among families offered housing vouchers. We further hypothesized that the need to live life on the watch may have broad implications for the future prospects of these families -- including potential impacts on children's development and on the mothers' ability to engage in activities that would lead them to become economically self-sufficient, although sufficient data to assess this hypothesis are not yet available. Third, our fieldwork gave us a deeper understanding of the institutional details of the MTO program. This understanding has helped us to make judgements concerning the external validity of our MTO findings, and has prevented us from making some significant errors in interpreting our quantitative results. Fourth, by listening to MTO families talk about their lives, we learned a series of lessons that have important implications for housing policy. For many of the things we learned, it is hard to imagine any other data collection strategy that would have led us to these insights.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey R. Kling & Jeffrey B. Liebman & Lawrence F. Katz, 2001. "Bullets Don’t Got No Name: Consequences of Fear in the Ghetto," Working Papers 274, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Health and Wellbeing..
  • Handle: RePEc:pri:cheawb:7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://drive.google.com/a/princeton.edu/file/d/0BwjFN4HbBrDBQjRnRXNNMl9zSmc/view
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Suzanne Bellue, 2024. "Why Don’t Poor Families Move? A Spatial Equilibrium Analysis of Parental Decisions with Social Learning," Working Papers 2024-07, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    2. Jeffrey R. Kling & Jeffrey B. Liebman & Lawrence F. Katz & Lisa Sanbonmatsu, 2004. "Moving to Opportuntiy and Tranquility: Neighborhood Effects on Adult Economic Self-sufficiency and Health from a Randomized Housing Voucher Experiment," Working Papers 247, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Health and Wellbeing..

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pri:cheawb:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bobray Bordelon (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/chprius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.