Housing inequality

A systematic scoping review

Datos Bibliográficos

ID11655102
AutoresLaura James (0000-0001-8226-7945, The University of Adelaide, autor de correspondencia), Lyrian Daniel (0000-0001-9549-8515, The University of Adelaide), Rebecca Bentley (0000-0003-3334-7353, The University of Melbourne), Emma Baker (0000-0002-9390-0491, The University of Adelaide)
Año2022
Volumen39
Número5
Páginas1264-1285
Fecha de publicación2022-09-12
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaHousing Studies (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0267-3037 • E-ISSN: 1466-1810
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/02673037.2022.2119211
OpenAlexW4295241408
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas28
Referencias citadas134

Housing inequality is far more than a housing matter. To discover how housing inequality has been used across disciplines, and how this may inform future housing research, we performed a systematic scoping review. We found that housing inequality provides multiple understandings as well as a variety of uses, for example, as a measurement tool, a conceptual device, or as subject matter. To draw together useful lessons from this conceptually diverse body of work, we identify four principle uses of ‘housing inequality’ in the literature – an outcome, an experience, a product, and a construct. These four framings offer a level of conceptual clarity for thinking about, and researching, the different expressions of housing inequality. It contributes to housing research by providing an approach for taking into account the multiple and complex roles of housing, and its distribution and impacts across society

Economics · Inequality · Public economics · Social inequality · Sociology · Homelessness and Social Issues · Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism · Mathematics · Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies