“Rethinking Exclusionary Zoning” provocatively claims that the movement to eliminate exclusionary zoning is misguided, and will create a worse set of social, economic, and political conditions than those currently produced by contemporary land-use regulations. In this response, I present several challenges to this claim. First, I demonstrate that “Rethinking Exclusionary Zoning” misses the well-documented political harms wrought by exclusionary zoning. Second, I illustrate that “Rethinking Exclusionary Zoning” misidentifies the central problems and solutions proposed by scholars and policy makers comprising the so-called Anti-EZ Project. These advocates seek fair and equitable land use—not the elimination of all regulations—as part of a broader housing policy agenda to increase the supply of housing in places that need it. They do not view local land-use reform as a panacea to urban inequality.
See how this article has been cited at scite.ai
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.