September 2nd, 2024

The Labyrinthine Rules That Created a Housing Crisis

Land-use regulations in the U.S. contribute to the housing crisis by enforcing outdated preferences and allowing few individuals to influence development. A shift to state-level management is suggested for better accountability.

Read original articleLink Icon
The Labyrinthine Rules That Created a Housing Crisis

The article discusses the complex and often restrictive land-use regulations in the United States that contribute to the ongoing housing crisis. It highlights how zoning ordinances, initially designed to ensure health and safety, have evolved into a convoluted system that enforces outdated aesthetic and moral preferences, often rooted in racial segregation. This decentralized approach to land governance has led to a situation where a small number of individuals can significantly influence housing development, creating barriers for homeowners and developers alike. The narrative illustrates the challenges faced by individuals seeking to build additional housing units, such as accessory dwelling units, which often become mired in bureaucratic red tape and local opposition. The author argues that the focus on individual villains, like NIMBYs (Not In My Backyard), distracts from the systemic issues at play. To address the housing crisis effectively, the article suggests that land-use politics should be managed at the state level, where broader public engagement and accountability can occur, rather than at the hyperlocal level where decision-making is often opaque and unrepresentative. Ultimately, the article calls for a reevaluation of how land-use regulations are determined to foster a more equitable and responsive democratic process.

- Land-use regulations in the U.S. are complex and often restrictive, contributing to the housing crisis.

- Zoning laws have evolved to enforce outdated preferences, often rooted in racial segregation.

- Local governance allows a small number of individuals to significantly influence housing development.

- The focus on individual opponents distracts from systemic issues in land-use politics.

- A shift to state-level management of land-use decisions could enhance public engagement and accountability.

Link Icon 2 comments
By @avidiax - 6 months
By @avidiax - 6 months
I have wondered whether the people that commute through an area regularly ought not to have a sort of "commuter's voting rights". This would allow them to vote against NIMBY-ist policies that are forcing them to commute in the first place.

This is a little different than what the article alludes to, which is perhaps a nationalized zoning policy (similar to Japan).