Gated Communities and Spatial Inequality

REFERENCES

• Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2004). Fortress UK? Gated communities, the spatial revolt of the elites and time-space trajectories of segregation. Housing Studies, 19(6), 875–892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beito, D. T., Gordon, P., & Tabarrok, A. (Eds.) (2002). The voluntary city: Choice, community, and civil society. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bible, D., & Hsieh, C. (2001). Gated communities and residential property values. Appraisal Journal, 69(2), 140.
   Google Scholar
• Blakely, E. J., & Snyder, M. G. (1997). Fortress America: Gated communities in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Blandy, S., Lister, D., Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2003). Gated communities: A systematic review of the research evidence. CNR Paper 12, ESRC Center for Neighborhood Research.
   Google Scholar
• Briggs, X. (2005). The geography of opportunity: Race and housing choice in metropolitan America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Budd, K. (1996). Gated communities: Do they really stop crime? Common Ground, Sept/Oct, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Byers, M. (2003). Waiting at the gate. InJ. Lindstrom & H. Bartling (Eds.), Suburban sprawl: Culture, theory, and politics (pp. 56–71). Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Caldeira, T. (2000). City of walls: Crime, segregation and citizenship in Sao Paolo. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Catanzarite, L. (2000). Brown-collar jobs: Occupational segregation and earnings of recent-immigrant Latinos. Sociological Perspectives, 43(1), 45–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cubbins, L., & Parmer, P. (2001). Economic change and health benefits: Structural trends in employer-based health insurance. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42(1), 45–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, M. (1990). City of quartz: Excavating the future in Los Angeles. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Eamon, M. (2004). Digital divide in computer use and access among poor and non-poor youth. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 31(2), 91–112.
   Google Scholar
• Enchautegui, M. (1998). Low-skilled immigrants and the changing American labor market. Population and Development Review, 24(4), 811–824.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esping Andersen, G. (Ed.) (1996). Welfare states in transition: National adaptation in global economies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Fainstein, N., & Fainstein, S. (1988). Restructuring the city: The political economy of urban redevelopment. New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Fainstein, S., Gordon, I., & Harloe, M. (1992). Divided cities: New York and London in the contemporary world. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Fischel, W. (2000). Zoning and land use regulation. InB. Boudevijn & G. De Geest (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Volume II. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Fishman, R. (1987). Bourgeois utopias: The rise and fall of suburbia. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, T. (2005). Letter to City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning. Final EIR No. ENV-199903251-EIR, Project Title: Mountaingate Project. State Clearinghouse No. 2003071197.
   Google Scholar
• Fulton, W. (1997). The reluctant metropolis: The politics of urban growth in Los Angeles. Point Arena, CA: Soleno Press Books.
   Google Scholar
• Garza, J. (Ed.) (1983). Hispanic American: Limited housing options. InU.S. Commission on civil rights, a sheltered crisis: The state of fair housing in the eighties. Washington, DC: Civil Rights Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Gieryn, T. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Sociological Review, 26, 463–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glassner, B. (1999). The culture of fear. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Glasze, G. (2005). Some reflections on the economic and political organisation of private neighbourhoods. Housing Studies, 20(2), 221–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, T. M. (2004). Moving up by moving out? Planned developments and residential segregation in California. Urban Studies, 41(2), 441–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, D., Richard, E., & Reich, M. (1982). Segmented work, divided workers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, Jill, & Mittelsteadt, L. (2004). Types of gated communities. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31, 913–930.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guterson, D. (1992). No place like home. Harper’s Magazine, November, 35–64.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. (1973). Social justice and the city. London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Hawaii State Capitol (2006a). House Bill 1368 HD1.
   Google Scholar
• Hawaii State Capitol (2006b). Senate Bill 2097 SD1.
   Google Scholar
• Hayden, D. (2003). Building American suburbia: Green fields and urban growth, 1820-2000. New York: Pantheon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Helsley, R., & Strange, W. (1999). Gated communities and economic geography of crime. Journal of Urban Economics, 46, 80–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, J. (1992). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Judd, D. R. (1995). The rise of new walled cities. InH. Ligget & D. C. Perry (Eds.), Spatial practices (pp. 144–165). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Krivo, L. J. (1986). Home ownership differences between Hispanics and Anglos in the United States. Social Problems, 33 (4), 319–334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaCour-Little, M., & Malpezzi, S. (2001). Gated communities and property values. Available at http://www.bus.wisc.edu/realestate/culer/paper.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Lang, R. E. (2003). From virtue to value: Redefining the role of homeownership in America. Keynote Speech. University of Southern California, Annenberg School of Communication, March 31.
   Google Scholar
• Lang, R. E., & Danielson, K. A. (1997). Gated communities in America: Walling out the world? Housing Policy Debate, 8(4), 867–899.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Goix, R. (2003). Gated communities sprawl in Southern California and social segregation. Available at http://www.bristol.ac.uk/sps/cnrpapersword/gated/goix.doc
   Google Scholar
• Le Goix, R. (2004). Gated communities and municipal governance in the U.S. InG. Glasze, C. Webster, & K. Frantz (Eds.), Private cities: Global and local perspectives. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Le Goix, R. (2005a). Gated communities as predators of public resources: The outcomes of fading boundaries between private management and public authorities in southern California. InG. Glasze, C. J. Webster, & K. Frantz (Eds.), Private neighbourhoods: Global and local perspectives. London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Le Goix, R. (2005b). Gated communities: Sprawl and social segregation in southern California. Housing Studies, 20(2), 323–344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lofland, L. (1998). The public realm. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Logan, J. R., & Molotch, H. L. (1987). Urban fortunes: The political economy of place. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Logan, J. R., & Swanstrom, T. (1990). Beyond the city limits: Urban policy and economic restructuring in comparative perspective. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Low, S. (2003a). Behind the gates: Life, security, and the pursuit of happiness in fortress America. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Low, S. (2003b). Imprisoned by the walls built to keep ‘the others’ out. Los Angeles Times, 19 December 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Luymes, D. (1997). The fortification of suburbia: Investigating the rise of enclave communities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 39, 187–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madanipour, A., Cars, G., & Allen, J. (1998). Exclusion in European cities: Processes, experiences, and responses. InR. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The city reader, 3rd Ed. (pp. 181–188). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Manzi, T., & Smith-Bowers, B. (2005). Gated communities as club goods: Segregation or social cohesion? Housing Studies, 20(2), 345–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenzie, E. (1994). Privatopia: Homeowner associations and the rise of residential private government. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McKenzie, E. (2003). Common-interest housing in the communities of tomorrow. Housing Policy Debate, 14(1&2), 203–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, G. J. (1981). Cities by contract. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. H. (2005). Private neighborhoods and the transformation of local government. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, P. (1981). City limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sanchez, T., & Lang, R. (2002). Security versus status: The two worlds of gated communities. Census Note 02:02. Alexandria, VA: Metro Institute at Virginia Tech.
   Google Scholar
• Sanchez, T., Lang, R., & Dhavale, D. (2005). Security versus Status? A first look at the census’s gated community data. Journal of Housing Education and Research, 24, 281–91.
   Google Scholar
• Savage, C. (1987). Architecture of the private streets of St. Louis: The architects and the houses they designed. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.
   Google Scholar
• Seccombe, K., & Amey, C. (1995). Playing by the rules and losing: Health insurance and the working poor. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36 (2), 168–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmel, G., & Wolff, K. H. (1985). The sociology of Georg Simmel. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stainton, L. (2004). Access problems tarnish “Gold Coast.”Asbury Park Press. 5/30/2004.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan, J. (2003). Laying out an “unwelcome mat” to public beach access. Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law 18(2), 331–354.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, R. (2006). Judge OK’s high-end housing at Hokulia. Honolulu Star Bulletin. 3/15/2006.
   Google Scholar
• Tickamyer, A. (2000). Space matters! Spatial inequality in future sociology. Contemporary Sociology, 29(6), 805–813.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tienda, M., Jensen, L., & Bach, R. L. (1984). Census-based quantitative analyses of female immigrants and their labor market characteristics: An international comparison of immigration, gender and the process of occupational change in the United States, 1970-80. International Migration Review, 18(4), 1021–1044.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trilogy Resort Communities by Shea Homes. Web site, visited on: January 3, 2007: http://www.trilogylife.com/main.cfm?dir=findahome&subsec=overview&temp=communityoverview&communityid=5&WT.pn_sku=5&WT.tx_u=1&WT.tx_e=v.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Commerce (2000). Falling through the net: Toward digital inclusion. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Vesselinov, E. (2006). Members only: Gated communities and residential segregation in metropolitan U.S. Under Revise and Resubmit.
   Google Scholar
• Willson, S. (1997). Exacting public beach access: The viability of permit conditions and Florida’s state beach access laws after Dolan v. City of Tigard. Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law 12(2), 303–348.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson-Doenges, G. (2000). An explanation of sense of community and fear of crime in gated communities. Environment and Behaviour, 32(5), 597–611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar