Urban Homelessness Policy in OECD Nations

C. Willison, Amanda I. Mauri
{"title":"Urban Homelessness Policy in OECD Nations","authors":"C. Willison, Amanda I. Mauri","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190632366.013.319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Homelessness is a public health challenge for modern governments. Homelessness emerged as a formal policy problem for rich nations in the mid- to late 20th century as nations developed stable economies and democracies, including housing and job markets, and social welfare mechanisms to protect citizens from disenfranchisement. In early 21st-century Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) nations, homelessness arises most often among at-risk or vulnerable populations, such as historically marginalized groups and/or persons with constrained access to welfare state mechanisms, such as immigrants or refugees. Thus, homelessness in OECD nations is very different from informal housing or mass poverty in poor nations and/or non-democratic regimes.\n Homelessness affects individual and population health, requiring complex policy solutions across multiple domains of health, as well as intergovernmental coordination. Policy responses to homelessness vary across OECD nations in their approach and efficacy. There are four key factors influencing how OECD nations respond to homelessness: (a) the strength and inclusivity of the welfare state; (b) degrees of decentralization in homeless policy governance; (c) the strength, capacity, and inclusivity of the health and behavioral healthcare systems; and (d) the role of federated structures in health and welfare state policy. Overall, nations with weaker welfare states and health/behavioral healthcare systems face greater risks of homelessness. The inclusivity of these systems also shapes who may be eligible for protection or experience homelessness. Local governments, especially those in large metropolitan areas, are the frontline providers of homelessness services. Yet local governments are constrained at both ends: Policies designed, delivered, and funded at larger units of government—such as welfare state provisions—influence many of the determinants of homelessness, such as housing, and the resources available to subnational actors to combat homelessness. Local actors are also constrained by the degree of decentralization. Devolution of homelessness policy to smaller units of government or even solely to nongovernmental actors, through federated mechanisms or decentralization, may create barriers to locally tailored solutions by perpetuating disparities across jurisdictions and/or constraining authority and resources necessary to design or deliver homeless policy.","PeriodicalId":342682,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Global Public Health","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190632366.013.319","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Homelessness is a public health challenge for modern governments. Homelessness emerged as a formal policy problem for rich nations in the mid- to late 20th century as nations developed stable economies and democracies, including housing and job markets, and social welfare mechanisms to protect citizens from disenfranchisement. In early 21st-century Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) nations, homelessness arises most often among at-risk or vulnerable populations, such as historically marginalized groups and/or persons with constrained access to welfare state mechanisms, such as immigrants or refugees. Thus, homelessness in OECD nations is very different from informal housing or mass poverty in poor nations and/or non-democratic regimes. Homelessness affects individual and population health, requiring complex policy solutions across multiple domains of health, as well as intergovernmental coordination. Policy responses to homelessness vary across OECD nations in their approach and efficacy. There are four key factors influencing how OECD nations respond to homelessness: (a) the strength and inclusivity of the welfare state; (b) degrees of decentralization in homeless policy governance; (c) the strength, capacity, and inclusivity of the health and behavioral healthcare systems; and (d) the role of federated structures in health and welfare state policy. Overall, nations with weaker welfare states and health/behavioral healthcare systems face greater risks of homelessness. The inclusivity of these systems also shapes who may be eligible for protection or experience homelessness. Local governments, especially those in large metropolitan areas, are the frontline providers of homelessness services. Yet local governments are constrained at both ends: Policies designed, delivered, and funded at larger units of government—such as welfare state provisions—influence many of the determinants of homelessness, such as housing, and the resources available to subnational actors to combat homelessness. Local actors are also constrained by the degree of decentralization. Devolution of homelessness policy to smaller units of government or even solely to nongovernmental actors, through federated mechanisms or decentralization, may create barriers to locally tailored solutions by perpetuating disparities across jurisdictions and/or constraining authority and resources necessary to design or deliver homeless policy.
经合组织国家的城市无家可归政策
无家可归是现代政府面临的公共卫生挑战。20世纪中后期,随着发达国家发展出稳定的经济和民主制度,包括住房和就业市场,以及保护公民不被剥夺公民权的社会福利机制,无家可归成为富裕国家的一个正式政策问题。在21世纪初的经济合作与发展组织(OECD)国家,无家可归者最常出现在风险或弱势群体中,如历史上被边缘化的群体和/或难以获得福利国家机制的人,如移民或难民。因此,经合组织国家的无家可归与贫穷国家和/或非民主政权的非正规住房或大规模贫困非常不同。无家可归影响个人和人口健康,需要在多个卫生领域采取复杂的政策解决办法,并需要政府间协调。经合组织国家对无家可归问题的政策反应在方法和效果上各不相同。影响经合组织国家如何应对无家可归问题的关键因素有四个:(a)福利国家的实力和包容性;(b)无家可归者政策治理的分散化程度;(c)健康和行为卫生保健系统的实力、能力和包容性;(d)联邦结构在健康和福利国家政策中的作用。总体而言,福利国家和健康/行为医疗保健系统较弱的国家面临更大的无家可归风险。这些制度的包容性也决定了谁可能有资格获得保护或无家可归。地方政府,特别是大城市地区的地方政府,是无家可归者服务的第一线提供者。然而,地方政府在两个方面都受到限制:在更大的政府单位设计、实施和资助的政策,如福利国家的规定,影响着许多无家可归的决定因素,如住房,以及地方行动者应对无家可归的可用资源。地方行动者也受到权力下放程度的限制。通过联邦机制或权力下放,将无家可归政策下放给较小的政府单位,甚至只下放给非政府行为体,可能会造成障碍,因为这会使各辖区之间的差异永续存在,并/或限制设计或实施无家可归政策所需的权力和资源,从而无法找到适合当地情况的解决办法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信