This book investigates the efforts of homeowners to maintain and improve their dwellings. Their behavior, it has found, depends on economic variables as well as the sociological structure of their neighborhoods. Residential satisfaction, expectations of the neighborhood, and mobility plans were taken into account.

Multivariate statistical analyses of models were conducted using household data from Minneapolis and Wooster, Ohio. Three important findings emerged. First, homeowners' sense of solidarity with their neighbors is as significant in determining their efforts at home upkeep as are their income or age. Second, the optimism of homeowners toward increases in property values results in behavior opposite to that produced by optimism about neighborhood quality of life. This implies that different kinds of predictable gaming behavior occur among homeowners, depending on the neighborhoods in which they live. Third, both short-term and extremely long-term plans to move prove damaging to home upkeep.

The results of this study form the basis for a better understanding of such residential phenomena as class succession, racial transition, and gentrification. Galster's findings will also be valuable for analyzing policies that attempt to encourage neighborhood reinvestment.

Drawing on economics, sociology, geography, and psychology, Galster delivers a clear-sighted explanation of what neighborhoods are, how they come to be—and what they should be.

Urban theorists have tried for decades to define exactly what a neighborhood is. But behind that daunting existential question lies a much murkier problem: never mind how you define them—how do you make neighborhoods productive and fair for their residents? In Making Our Neighborhoods, Making Our Selves, George C. Galster delves deep into the question of whether American neighborhoods are as efficient and equitable as they could be—socially, financially, and emotionally—and, if not, what we can do to change that. Galster aims to redefine the relationship between places and people, promoting specific policies that reduce inequalities in housing markets and beyond.

This powerful new theoretical approach to analyzing urban housing problems and the policies designed to rectify them will be a vital resource for urban planners, developers, policymakers, and economists. The search for the roots of serious urban housing problems such as homelessness, abandonment, rent burdens, slums, and gentrification has traditionally focused on the poorest sector of the housing market. The findings set forth in this volume show that the roots of such problems lie in the relationships among different parts of the market—not solely within the lower-quality portion—though that is where problems are most dramatically manifested and housing reforms are myopically focused.

The authors propose a new understanding of the market structure characterized by a closely interrelated array of quality submarkets. Their comprehensive models ground a unified theory that accounts for demand by both renters and owner occupants, supply by owners of existing dwellings, changes in the stock of housing due to conversions and new construction, and interactions across submarkets.

From school and residential segregation to increased pollution and aggressive policing in low-income neighborhoods, socioeconomic inequality is organized and reinforced through space and place. In this issue of RSF, editors George Galster and Patrick Sharkey and contributors present a new conceptual model for understanding space as one of the  foundations of inequality. They bring together empirical research on neighborhoods, schools, and communities to demonstrate the extent to which people’s environments influence their life chances.
 
Articles in this issue explore the scale and dimensions of spatial inequality. Sean Reardon and coauthors develop a novel method of describing the joint distribution of race and income among neighborhoods. They demonstrate how blacks and Hispanics at all income levels typically live in substantially poorer neighborhoods than whites and Asians of the same income. Ann Owens investigates the relationship between residential segregation and school boundaries and finds that because parents often decide where to live based on school districts, school-age children live in more segregated neighborhoods than adults on the whole. John Hipp and Charis Kubrin examine how changes in the racial, ethnic, and economic composition of the areas that surround a given neighborhood affect it, and find that when inequality rises in a neighborhood’s surrounding areas, crime tends to increase in that neighborhood.
 
Other contributors study how space serves to maintain or reproduce inequalities. Anna Maria Santiago and coauthors find that neighborhood conditions—including racial and socioeconomic makeup and levels of violent crime—affect the chances that black and Latino youths will engage in risky behaviors, such as running away and using marijuana. For instance, low-income African American youths who live in neighborhoods inhabited by higher status residents are less likely to run away from home. Christopher Browning and coauthors examine the extent to which people of different socioeconomic status share space in their day-to-day lives, including working, shopping, and spending leisure time. They find that families of higher socioeconomic status are less likely to share common spaces with neighbors of any class, in part because they have more choice and control over where they go.
 
As the articles in this issue show, space is a core dimension of social stratification and is fundamental to understanding social and economic inequality.