For this response, we were asked to read chapter 5 from "Great American City" as well as the NYT article: The Death and Life of Chicago. These two sources provide very different frames of reference for the same issue of "poverty traps". After reading the material, I've come to realize that there's more than one way to approach the problem, and no single approach will successfully fix it all.
In Chapter 5 of "Great American City," Sampson never really subscribes to a specific approach for facing the issue. Rather, Sampson explores the various dynamics of "poverty traps" and carefully outlines the variables associated with these traps. Sampson states that although change is definitely occurring, "inequality is stubbornly persistent". With the data provided, it is clear to see that, for the most part, small changes are insignificant in long run. Sampson argues that often times, a greater power (such as government) is needed to make a lasting difference in these poverty trapped communities. It was with this mindset that I dug into the NYT article, The Death and Life of Chicago.
Like some of my classmates, I too felt a sense of frustration as I read about J.R. and his noble activism in Chicago. Here we read about an individual who rises up to the challenges he sees within his community. Instead of analyzing data and theorizing about possible solutions, J.R. faces these problems head on. I'm impressed with the progress he's been making on a local scale. However, if we assume the data Sampson presents with his research is correct, then it's only a matter of time before this progress J.R is making in the community reverts back to what it once was.
It is frustrating to know that all of the hard work done by these people could be in vain. Yet, I don't believe that it is all in vain, even if these areas remain in poverty. The article mentions how these projects are getting the people in these communities involved. In other words, the Anti-Eviction Campaign is building collective efficacy within these communities. People are starting to take pride and ownership in their neighborhoods... now if only they had a way to keep the ball rolling. As stated in the article, companies like Citibank are starting to take notice, and this leaves me hopeful.
After reading these articles, I feel like a grassroots movement such as the Anti-Eviction Campaign is the right way to get things started. Get the communities passionately involved with the work, then slowly begin to integrate assistance from larger entities such as government to help support the progress being made.
Alright, now lets move on to the most "blighted neighborhood" I've ever known...
I'm not sure if this will qualify, but the most blighted neighborhood I've ever known is not found in the US, rather in the Philippines. A few years ago I spent a few months in a the city of Tarlac, located on the main island of the Philippines, north of Manila. This city was by far the most blighted city I've ever visited. I'd have to say a major factor to this was the general state of poverty around the city. Another key factor seemed to be the disorganized, corrupt political groups managing the city. Interestingly enough, despite the prevalent poverty, this city also contained the most interconnected networks of people that I've ever seen. Based on what I observed during my visit, I think that solving the poverty traps of this city would definitely require an organized approach on a larger governmental scale. That being said, the people of the neighborhoods would definitely need to be engaged in the rebuilding process for a permanent change to be achieved.
Developing a collective efficacy within communities is essential to developing a lasting change. Without it, what's to stop these neighborhoods from falling back into the "poverty traps" we've discussed?
