Category Archives: Sociology

Religion in the American suburbs: numerous religious buildings and buildings used by religious groups

Posted on by

Imagine a stereotypical suburban downtown in the United States. It has two story brick buildings with storefronts on the first floor. There are some offices and places to eat. A few people walk around while cars drive past parked vehicles. There may be train tracks and a station marking the ability to commute to the big city. Not far from such a streetscape are often church buildings of various denominations and traditions.

Photo by Jatuphon Buraphon on Pexels.com

Not all suburbs have downtowns. Many of the postwar suburbs are agglomerations of subdivisions, commercial areas, and industrial parks. But, religious buildings are there too. Go to a major intersection involving a highway; is there a megachurch nearby? Are there congregations meeting in former big box stores and in strip malls? There may not be an obvious walkable center to these suburbs but there are still plenty of congregations.

Religious buildings dot the suburban landscape. They may not be the most desirable land use with congregations not paying property taxes for their property and the opportunity costs of how valuable land might instead by used. Neighbors and local leaders may object to constructing a new religious building or a religious group altering an existing building. However, numerous residents attend these congregations. A number of these congregations and buildings are fixtures and centers in their communities. These congregations host services and can provide services to and space for the community.

These buildings range in size and architecture. Some of this depends on religious traditions. Some traditions have a particular approach to a building. Other traditions have more flexibility. People of faith in the suburbs may meet in a traditional-looking church – even as a member of a faith that is not Christian – or in a school, a movie theater, a mall, an office building, or a home. These approaches might be guided by financial resources or by concerns that certain styles may inhibit people from joining their community.

Thus, the American suburbs can include large Hindu temples, mosques and Islamic community centers, megachurches, and traditional religious buildings large and small. They can meet in old and new structures. They can move between locations as their congregations grows or shrinks, acquires resources or has difficulty finding resources.

Religion in the American suburbs: a diverse religious landscape

Posted on by

In the postwar era, Will Herberg described American religion as primarily involving Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. The same was assumed to be true in the suburbs. With suburban populations growing, Protestants, Catholics, and Jews moved in and added to existing congregations and founded many new ones.

Photo by Zac Frith on Pexels.com

These groups also had to adjust to suburban life. Practicing faith in the suburban context looked different than in urban neighborhoods or rural areas. Critics within these traditions suggested the suburban version of their faith had serious deficiencies. Supporters of the suburban faith highlighted new possibilities and energy.

With changes to the population in the United States, including changes prompted by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the suburban religious landscape changed. Today, there are still plenty of Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish congregations in the suburbs but they are located near the congregations of Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Orthodox, Sikh, and other religious traditions. Increasing racial, ethnic, and class diversity in the suburbs goes alongside religious change. The complex suburbia of today includes a complex religious landscape.

Add to that the growing number of residents of the United States who do not identify with a religious tradition or faith. The suburban landscape may include religious activity throughout the week but it also is full of residents with no religious affiliation or other understandings of religion and spirituality.

This is easy to see in many suburban areas. Pick a populous county outside a major city – whether Washington, D.C. or New York City or Chicago or Los Angeles – and you can find religious and non-religious activity all over the place. The suburban landscape may be dominated by single-family homes and roads but there are plenty of congregations in a variety of traditions. It is visible when driving down major roads. You can see it in county-level counts of religious congregations.

This means any quick description of suburban religion is hard to do given the number of practices, beliefs, and belonging present in American communities. One way to see this diverse religious landscape is in the religious buildings of the suburbs – this is the subject of the next post.

Religion in the American suburbs: a unique context with a particular history

Posted on by

Both religion in the United States and the American suburbs are unique phenomena. Put them together over multiple time periods and you have a particular combination with varied expressions across contexts.

Photo by Chris F on Pexels.com

From the beginning of the American suburbs, congregations gathered and individuals practiced religious faith. By the decades after World War Two, when postwar suburban life centered on single-family homes and driving took off, American religious activity may have peaked. The growing number of suburbanites worshiped in suburban congregations old and new as suburban communities expanded.

The American suburbs continued to grow even as religious activity subsided. The 1960s were the first time more Americans lived in suburbs than either in cities or rural areas. By 2000, a majority of Americans lived in suburbs. The changes in American religion at the end of the twentieth century and the start of the next century, such as a emergence of evangelicalism and the increase in those claiming no religious affiliation, interacted with suburban life.

The following posts will detail some of the specific features of suburban religion. Before getting to those traits, I want to highlight three broader patterns in these intertwined phenomena:

  1. The rise of suburbs and their populations paired with the relatively decline in urban populations contributed to a perception that suburbs are more religious and cities are more secular. Reality is more complex than this as American cities and urban neighborhood can contain lots of religious activity and diversity while suburban areas might not be.
  2. Both religion and suburbia influenced each other. It is not just a one-way street where growing sprawl changed religious patterns. Did changing religious patterns also legitimate and support sprawl? Could the American suburbs have occurred as they did without support of religious groups and adherents?
  3. The religious landscape in the suburbs is not flat or always trending in one direction. It is varied and dynamic with forces internal and external to religion and place shaping patterns.

The next post will detail the diverse religious landscape now found in the American suburbs.

The Rust Belt as potential “climate refuge”

Posted on by

If climate change prompts people to move, could the Rust Belt provide good places to live?

Photo by Miguel u00c1. Padriu00f1u00e1n on Pexels.com

Gibbons, who now works at the climate consulting firm Farallon Strategies, sees Michigan’s future in the Californians unsettled by wildfire. Those people are going to move somewhere. And so they should be persuaded to come to Michigan, she says, before they move to places like Phoenix or Austin. The Great Lakes region should market itself as a climate refuge, she thinks, and then build an economy that makes use of its attributes: the value of its water, its land, its relative survivability. In her vision, small northern cities, invigorated by growing populations, somehow manage to blossom into bigger, greener, cleaner ones.

“There’s no future in which many, many people don’t head here,” Gibbons told me. The only question is whether “we don’t just end up being surprised by it.” And so Gibbons wants to see the Great Lakes states recruit people from around the country, as they did during the Great Migration. Back then, recruiters spread across the South to convince Black people there that opportunity awaited them in the factories of the North: That’s what helped make Ypsilanti.

Internal migration has shaped the United States before, such as in the Great Migration cited here and the move of many West in different waves. But, has decades of decline in an entire region been reversed by internal migration?

Later in the article we read that some residents would not be thrilled with the idea of lots of outsiders moving in. I wonder how this might play out. Take a city like Detroit. Once one of the most populous American cities, the city lost hundreds of thousands of residents. The city’s status has dropped precipitously. Lots of people moving in could change things but don’t Americans tend to see population growth as a sign of health and vitality?

One last thought: would Rust Belt communities be willing to offer climate-related incentives to further entice people to move? A number of American communities already offer incentives. Imagine a “green moving package” that provides some assistance in finding affordable housing and work with limited climate impact.

We need solutions to continued low turnout – less than 20% – in Illinois elections

Posted on by

The primary elections earlier this week in Illinois excited few voters:

Photo by Tara Winstead on Pexels.com

Though thousands of properly postmarked mail-in ballots are still being tallied through April 2, state election officials believe it will be hard to crack 20%.

Unofficial results from the 20 most populated voting jurisdictions in Illinois — which represent more than 81% of all voters in the state — show less than 17% voter turnout combined.

Turnout tallies in the suburbs remain below 20% as well, with Lake County currently showing only 11.7% of registered voters cast a ballot.

Why so few voters?

“Most of the races were completely uncontested, with just one contested county board race on the Democratic side,” said Lake County Clerk Anthony Vega. “That lack of motivation could have resulted in voters not coming out.”

With that lack of choice, combined with the fact that Democratic President Joe Biden and former Republican President Donald Trump had all but secured their nominations ahead of Tuesday’s vote, low turnout was inevitable, experts said.

These are plausible reasons. Yet, I have heard little about significant solutions. Such options could come from multiple angles: local officials, voters, advocacy groups, the state government, employers, civic organizations, etc. Illinois may face serious problems in numerous areas but this strikes me as one that affects numerous others and is foundational for the supposed American system of government.

The one feature of this I think about is the ways that the suburbs grew, in part, because Americans like being closer to local government. Compared to big cities, states, and the federal government, a suburban resident can more easily interact with local officials and local government activity. But, if people do not even want to vote for those local measures – and there is a suggestion in this article that local referendums might have pushed voter turnout up a few percentage points – then this interest in or connection to local government may be severed.

A Japanese experimental city to test self-driving vehicles and other new tech

Posted on by

A new community being built by Toyota offers opportunities to test self-driving cars:

Photo by Shane Aldendorff on Pexels.com

First announced in 2021, Toyota has been hard at work constructing their Woven City just miles away from Mount Fuji on the island of Honshū, with the first of 2,000 anticipated residents now expected to move in before the end of the year. 

News of the project’s imminent completion comes not long after photos were shared of progress being made on Saudi Arabia’s behemoth ‘mirror city’ project The Line, though they’re hardly the only megacities currently under construction around the world. 

Marketed as a ‘mass human experiment’, Woven City will provide a ‘living laboratory’ for Toyota to test prototypes of their renewable and energy-efficient self-driving vehicles, dubbed ‘E-palettes’.

The car manufacturer expects to gather data from the use of these driverless cars, guided by sensors in lights, buildings and roads across the city…

Woven City is also expected to feature ‘smart homes’ running almost entirely on hydrogen, reducing emissions so that the futuristic habitation, with its whopping price tag of £7.8 billion, will be as sustainable and eco-friendly as possible.

Imagine a future email that reads like this: “You are invited to live in a new brand-new community built and owned by [megacorporation name]. You have an exciting opportunity to be part of a new community featuring all sorts of innovative technologies. In exchange for a reduced rent, you will participate in testing numerous new technologies that have the potential to improve the world and our profits (wait they would not say this second part). All your experiences outside of your residence are subject to use by the company.”

How many people would take this opportunity? Given that people so freely give up their information for social media, wouldn’t an enticement of cheaper housing prove attractive? And you get to try out new technology? It may be a company town – but it is one with benefits (at least, according to the company).

It would also be interesting to see what would need to change in terms of local governments and zoning to make such a community possible.

What if a significant portion of residents and leaders want to provide lots of public money for stadiums?

Posted on by

Plenty of professional sports teams owners have been in the news recently asking for public money to fund sports stadiums. I am against such funding (see examples here and here) as the benefits tend to primarily go to the owners.

Photo by Robert Hernandez Villalta on Pexels.com

But, what if plenty of people want to give this money to teams for stadiums? What if they value sports? What if they see this as a good use of public resources?

Those who argue against stadiums may pitch it another way. Here is an example looking at the recent request by the Kansas City Chiefs for public money. How is the Chiefs’ owner thinking about the fans?

The Chiefs are hoping, it seems, that voters are either very dumb or very scared.

This is an easy story to go with: the wealthy team owner is threatening the people. Out of fear or not knowing the full situation (the team has limited options, the money tends to enrich owners, etc.), residents and leaders will go along with it. If fear can be reduced or ignorance limited, people would oppose these proposals.

Is there another possibility? Some people like the Chiefs, think they are good for the community, and want to give them public money. They hear the opposing point of view and disagree with it. They would rather spend public money this way. Americans tend to like sports and spectacles.

In many ways, this is not just about sports and wealthy owners. These are civic questions about the public good, how money should be spent, and how we collectively make these decisions. People with all sorts of perspectives will try to persuade each other. And the fate of future sports stadiums and communities depends on these processes.

Are falling housing and rent prices good or bad for a community?

Posted on by

The cost of housing in Austin, Texas has recently fallen. Is this good or bad in the long run for the city? Some details on the falling prices:

Photo by Jeswin Thomas on Pexels.com

Home prices and apartment rents in Austin, Texas, have fallen more than anywhere else in the country, after a period of overbuilding and a slowdown in job and population growth. 

That marks a sharp reversal from previous years when Austin’s real-estate market was sizzling. The city attracted waves of remote workers on six-figure tech salaries. Others arrived after companies such as Tesla and Oracle moved offices there, taking advantage of lower taxes and less business regulation. Austin’s economy grew at nearly double the national rate, and it became the country’s 10th-largest city. 

Now, it is contending with a glut of luxury apartment buildings. Landlords are offering weeks of free rent and other concessions to fill empty units. More single-family homes are selling at a loss. Empty office space is also piling up downtown, and hundreds of Google employees who were meant to occupy an entire 35-story office tower built almost two years ago still have no move-in date. 

On one hand, falling prices are good news for residents. Housing is more affordable. People have more options. Getting in to better housing can mean better day-to-day experiences plus the opportunity to develop wealth.

On the other hand, falling prices mean less demand for development. This could mean slower population growth. Status is tied to population and interest actors have in snatching up properties. Tax revenues will be lower than they could be if property values do not shoot up.

Many American communities experience this tension. Property owners want values to go up. They do not necessarily want to pay higher taxes with these rising values but they will be happy when they sell the properties. More people want housing at reasonable prices. But, relatively few people want to live in places known for low housing values or people may not want to live in places where property values do not go up.

Who suburban leaders say affordable housing is for – another example

Posted on by

Federal money will help in constructing a new affordable housing apartment building in suburban Glen Ellyn. Who might live there?

Photo by Bidvine on Pexels.com

Chicago-based nonprofit Full Circle Communities is seeking to build an apartment complex with up to 42 units. The developer would set aside no less than 30% of the units as permanent supportive housing for people with disabilities under the terms of an agreement to purchase a portion of the village-owned property.

U.S. Rep. Delia Ramirez requested federal dollars for demolition and site remediation work to make room for the proposed affordable housing project. Ramirez, whose 3rd Congressional District runs from Chicago’s Northwest Side into DuPage County, announced the funding at a news conference with Glen Ellyn Village President Mark Senak and other elected officials last week.

Affordable housing allows “senior members of our communities to stay close to their families so that grandparents can see their grandchildren,” Senak said, echoing remarks he made at a village board meeting last month.

“It gives adults with developmental disabilities the opportunity to remain in the community where they went to school, where they grew up, where their families live, where their friends live, and where many of them work,” Senak said.

This follows a common pattern among west suburban leaders in recent years. Affordable housing is for (1) seniors who want to stay in their community and (2) adults with developmental disabilities who want to stay in their community. These are indeed groups with housing needs.

Would more communities be open to affordable housing for people who do not have much money? The two examples above suggest affordable housing is for people already in the community who want to stay. Is there interest in housing for workers with lower wages?

My study of suburbs suggests that in wealthier suburban areas there is less interest in affordable housing that is open to any residents who might qualify. Americans generally do not like the idea of government money for public housing, with some exceptions. This is probably even more true in suburbs where a primary focus is on single-family housing.

25% of Parisian residents live in public housing; hard to imagine this in the United States

Posted on by

A sizable portion of Paris residents live in public housing:

Photo by Chris Molloy on Pexels.com

This summer, when the French capital welcomes upward of 15 million visitors for the Olympic Games, it will showcase a city engineered by government policies to achieve mixité sociale — residents from a broad cross-section of society. One quarter of all Paris residents now live in public housing, up from 13 percent in the late 1990s. The mixité sociale policy, promoted most forcefully by left-wing political parties, notably the French Communist Party, targets the economic segregation seen in many world cities.

“Our guiding philosophy is that those who produce the riches of the city must have the right to live in it,” said Ian Brossat, a communist senator who served for a decade as City Hall’s head of housing. Teachers, sanitation workers, nurses, college students, bakers and butchers are among those who benefit from the program.

Making the philosophy a reality is increasingly hard — the wait list for public housing in Paris is more than six years long. “I won’t say this is easy and that we have solved the problem,” Mr. Brossat said…

City Hall has a direct hand in the types of businesses that take root and survive in Paris because it is the landlord, through its real estate subsidiaries, of 19 percent of the city’s shops. Nicolas Bonnet-Oulaldj, the city counselor who oversees the city’s commercial landholdings, said his office is constantly studying neighborhoods to maintain a balance of essential shops and limit the number of chains, which can usually pay higher rent.

Three related reasons come to mind for why this would not happen in an American city, even with significant needs for housing:

  1. A supposed free market approach to housing. Americans prioritize policies and programs for single-family homes, not denser urban housing with subsidized rents. Why should public housing take up valuable real estate that would go for much higher prices on the open market?
  2. Many Americans think public housing has already failed in the United States. The story might go like this: the limited project that began in the first few decades of the twentieth century led to disastrous high-rise public housing projects in big cities and a subsequent retreat from public housing (shifting to providing housing vouchers).
  3. Less interest in centralized planning and government control. Would Americans want the government choosing housing and business opportunities in major cities? You mean Paris is not organically developed?

Overall, American cities pursue market approaches to social issues.