About “Just Housing Just Transitions”
Practitioners should jump into the public marketplace of ideas, to shape future programs and policies.
“Just Housing, Just Transitions” is intended for practitioners who want to contribute their ideas and opinions to a lively public discussion about housing and climate action.
Housing and climate change are inextricably linked. Every residential building project has a beneficial or detrimental impact on greenhouse gas emissions, which disproportionately affect low-income and marginalized people. As practitioners, we must make climate justice a priority in housing decisions and include housing in the scope of climate actions.
Further, we are at a critical moment in US history for both housing policy and climate policy. Our domestic climate agenda is the most ambitious it’s ever been, thanks to state and local leadership and to the youth organizing that led to the Green New Deal, yet national climate action has regressed under the Trump administration.
At the same time, we arguably have never emerged from the housing crisis of 2008; according to the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, there were 6 million more cost-burdened renters (those paying more than a third of their gross income on housing) in 2018 than in 2001. Worse, a steadily increasing percentage of middle-income households became cost-burdened during this period. We now face the prospect of a Covid-19-fueled housing crisis, with an estimated 30–40 million Americans at risk of eviction.
It is essential that we move from talk to action and incorporate climate action and climate justice into our projects. While there is no single correct approach to achieving this, it is our hope that by sharing ideas and examples, we will begin to learn which alternatives are the most likely to succeed.
Practitioners are often focused on the doing. We often don’t consider it in our wheelhouse to write for ourselves. Yet it is imperative that practitioners jump into the public marketplace of ideas: our experience and our thoughts are valuable in shaping future programs and policies, and the fastest way to get them out for discussion is to just do it!
Content Guidelines
Topic should touch both housing and climate change.
Co-authorship is encouraged. At least one author must be a practitioner in housing, city planning, energy efficiency, etc.
Not everyone is a polished writer, and that’s okay! Just put a clear argument on down and our review process will help you fine-tune.
If you are speaking for an organization, please make that explicit. Otherwise, we’ll assume you’re writing as yourself, not on behalf of others.
Obviously, don’t disclose proprietary or confidential information, and don’t break any laws.
What happens before publication?
Editorial review: Editors will first check the submission against the content guidelines. Then, we will provide feedback, if needed, with the aim of improving the clarity of your argument.
Peer review: All submissions will be peer-reviewed prior to publication, whenever possible by another practitioner with experience relevant to the topic. Peer reviewers may remain anonymous, at their request.
Once we have your final thumbs up, we hit “publish.”
Information for Peer Reviewers
Hello! Thank you for your service as a peer reviewer. We need you and we love you.
Here’s how to get started.
Peer review request will come from an editor via email. The email will contain a link to a draft article and a proposed deadline. Please plan to provide your feedback in the indicated timeframe.
Please use the “leave a note” feature to add your comments. The notes will be visible to both the author and the editors.We haven’t figured out Substack. Pls send email.When you have completed your review and added all the comments you wish, please indicate that via a note on the story or an email to the editor.Peer reviews may be attributed to you, or anonymous. If you wish to provide an anonymous peer review, please discuss with the editor(s) BEFORE leaving your notes on the story.
If in the course of your review, you are inspired to propose a response to be published in dialog (i.e. the two stories will be published with reciprocal links), please let us know!
Some Questions to Guide Your Review
Keep in mind that the purpose of the peer review is to improve the submitted story.
Is the author’s argument clear? First and foremost, we are writing to engage in dialog with each other in our community of practice; however, the issues at hand are important for non-practitioners to be able to understand. Clear argumentation serves both audiences.
Are there any factual errors? These pieces generally won’t be the result of years of academic research. If you see something factually wrong, please note it.
Are there other examples or case studies that support or refute the author’s argument that should be considered and incorporated?