![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Little research has been devoted to uncontested human services facilities, nor to the legal frameworks siting proposals are situated in. To address these, this paper examines group-homes that operated in Jerusalem, Israel, between 2002 and 2012, identifies and explores a range of responses group-homes encounter. Results point to only low levels of opposition alongside a relatively equal distribution of group-homes across all areas of the city, including affluent neighbourhoods. Interviews with key stakeholders suggest that these results have been the outcome of a combination of inclusionary national legislation, supportive municipal attitudes and actions, and a proactive approach adopted by service-providers. Through focusing on existing group-homes we find that the characteristics of opposition depend, in part, on the stage of the group-home’s life cycle in which it occurs. Specifically, opposition occurring in the pre- and upon-siting stages resemble typical NIMBY opposition while those occurring post-siting are more place-based. These results point to the importance of examining opposition within the context of inclusionary legislation, municipal attitudes and place-based responses.
Résumé
Peu de recherche a été consacrée aux établissements de services sociaux incontestés, ni aux conditions légales dans lesquelles se situent les propositions d’installations. Afin de traiter de ces questions, cet article examine des foyers de groupes qui ont fonctionné à Jérusalem en Israël entre 2002 et 2012 et il identifie et explore une variété de réactions que rencontrent les foyers de groupe. Les résultats n’indiquent que des niveaux bas d’opposition ainsi qu’une distribution relativement équitable de foyers de groupes dans tous les quartiers de la ville, y compris les quartiers riches. Des entretiens avec des acteurs clés suggèrent que ces résultats sont le résultat d’une combinaison de législation nationale inclusive, d’actions et d’attitudes de soutien municipal et d’une approche proactive adoptée par les fournisseurs des services. En nous concentrant sur des foyers de groupes existants nous trouvons que les caractéristiques d’opposition dépendent, en partie, du stade auquel a lieu le cycle de vie du foyer de groupe. Spécifiquement, l’opposition ayant lieu aux stades du pré-emplacement ou au moment de l’emplacement ressemblent à l’opposition typique du syndrome NIMBY (phénomène du « pas dans mon arrière-cour ») tandis que celle ayant lieu après l’emplacement sont plus en rapport avec le lieu. Ces résultats montrent l’importance de l’évaluation de l’opposition dans le contexte de la législation inclusive, des attitudes municipales et des réactions fondées sur l’emplacement.
Resumen
Poco se ha dedicado a la investigación de instalaciones de servicios humanos incontestadas, ni a los marcos jurídicos en los que se sitúan las propuestas de localización. Para lidiar con los mismos, en este trabajo se examinan los hogares grupales que operaron en Jerusalén, Israel, entre 2002 y 2012, identifica y explora un rango de respuestas de encuentros en hogares grupales. Los resultados apuntan sólo a bajos niveles de oposición, junto a una distribución relativamente igualitaria de hogares grupales en todas las áreas de la ciudad, incluyendo barrios acomodados. Las entrevistas con los principales depositarios sugieren que estos resultados han sido el producto de una combinación de una legislación nacional de inclusión, actitudes y acciones municipales de apoyo y un enfoque proactivo adoptado por los proveedores de servicios. Al centrarse en los hogares grupales existentes, se encuentra que las características de la oposición dependen, en parte, de la etapa del ciclo de vida del hogar grupal en el que se produce. Específicamente, la oposición que ocurre en las etapas anterior y durante el asentamiento se asemeja a la oposición NIMBY (no en mi patio trasero) típica, mientras que las que ocurren después del asentamiento son más basadas en el lugar. Estos resultados apuntan a la importancia de examinar la oposición en el contexto de una legislación inclusiva, actitudes municipales y respuestas basadas en el lugar.
Acknowledgements
We thank the reviewers of this paper for their useful comments and suggestions. We would also like to thank Eran Feitelson for his support and constructive comments and Rachel Friedman for her thorough remarks.
Notes
1. The data refer only to the Jewish neighbourhoods in Jerusalem (also known as Israeli West Jerusalem) since the exact addresses of group-homes sited in the Palestinian neighbourhoods of Jerusalem could not be obtained. Moreover, many of the Palestinian neighbourhoods are grouped by the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics under a single statistical tract, which limits the ability to examine spatial differences among these neighbourhoods. Finally, Palestinian neighbourhoods in Jerusalem suffer from under investment and lack of basic services, and are generally forced to provide informal services to their residents. Therefore, examining group-homes in Palestinian East Jerusalem is highly noteworthy but requires a different study beyond the scope of our work.
2. These include women and children that suffered from abuse, and children that suffered from neglect. Homeless shelters were not identified.
4. Other factors that may explain where group-homes locate are land values or average house prices; areas characterized with higher land values are expected to host fewer group-homes as neighbours might be more inclined to raise opposition or because group-homes might not have the financial resources to locate there. Nevertheless, Model 1 uses average income for two major reasons. First, data on property values are not readily available, including from the Israeli Census. Second, our analyses focus on the relationships between host population characteristics and opposition. As such, average income is a common independent variable that is used in NIMBY studies to characterize host populations that tend to hold rejecting attitudes (e.g. Borinstein, Citation1992; Dear, Citation1992; Tighe, Citation2012) and might perform better than land values (Colon & Marston, Citation1999).