Reconsidering the real estate state

In response to Wilson and Wyly's paper, I argue that urban planners, policymakers, and theorists need an alternative understanding of “the real estate state.” This approach involves recovering the productive capabilities of publicly owned property. Starting with the fact that governments often are the largest property owners in a city, I argue that urban planning has shied away from its mandate to manage real estate for the public's benefit. Urban theory, education, and practice that shun real estate finance furthers inequality. To combat this, scholars and practitioners need to place the state and its vast real estate portfolio at the center of critical analysis and bold civic policies.