Panel Discussion: Expropriation, Threats of Expropriation and Developmental Policy

This panel discussion is a conversation about the place of expropriation in international law

Poverty and Service Delivery in Suburban America Framing Paper

In the United States today, contrary to popular belief, living in the suburbs is not synonymous with living the American dream. An unprecedented number of people in the suburbs are living on household incomes of less than $20,000, many on much less. Increasingly, individuals and their families need to rely on services and public benefits to meet their basic needs (Kneebone & Berube, 2013). Over the past 30 years, poverty in the suburbs has grown due to multiple factors, including job decentralization, shifts in the location of affordable and subsidized housing, and the relocation to the suburbs of lower income immigrants and minorities (Covington, Freeman, & Stoll, 2011; Frey, 2011a). The rate of growth in suburban poverty has been particularly high in the past decade, outpacing growth in both urban and rural areas. During the Great Recession (2007-2009), high rates of unemployment and underemployment and the home foreclosure crisis brought the number of people living in poverty in the suburbs to an all-time high. Today, suburban areas are home to about 40 percent of all poor people in the country, an increase from 25 percent in 1980. Furthermore, in the 100 largest metropolitan areas, more people are living in poverty in the suburbs than in urban areas (Frey, 2011b). Suburbs are now facing a range of challenges traditionally associated with cities, such as high rates of unemployment and underemployment, lower educational attainment, food insecurity, and lack of access to health care. The increase in the suburban poverty rate is straining social service providers and local governments at a time when resources are shrinking (Allard & Roth, 2010). The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) seeks to better understand poverty and service delivery in suburban America, including how the dynamics of suburban poverty may differ from those in rural and urban communities and whether service models may need to be tailored to meet these differences. To that end, ASPE commissioned this framing paper to review and synthesize existing research, analyze the characteristics and service needs of those living in poverty in the suburbs, and identify information and research needed to more fully understand and guide efforts to address suburban poverty. To prepare this review, we used three types of information sources: existing literature, both published and unpublished; a select number of key informant interviews; and two sources of extant U.S. Census Bureau household survey data: the Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey (CPS), which provides an annual count of the number of people living below 100 percent of the federal poverty level from 1959 to 2011, and the 2009-2011 American Community Survey (ACS) Weighted 3-Year Restricted-Use Files, a household survey of a nationally representative sample of individuals. These data provide information about all suburbs, including but not limited to, the 100 largest metropolitan areas (see Appendix 1). This paper will serve to frame the discussion during the Poverty and Service Delivery in Suburban America Roundtable, to be convened in 2014. The roundtable will bring together researchers, policy 5 experts, practitioners, and federal staff to discuss the issues raised in this paper and gaps in the research, formulate new research questions, consider the implications of the research for service delivery and public benefits, and assess opportunities for HHS and broader federal engagement

Poverty and Service Delivery in Suburban America Framing Paper

In the United States today, contrary to popular belief, living in the suburbs is not synonymous with living the American dream. An unprecedented number of people in the suburbs are living on household incomes of less than $20,000, many on much less. Increasingly, individuals and their families need to rely on services and public benefits to meet their basic needs (Kneebone & Berube, 2013). Over the past 30 years, poverty in the suburbs has grown due to multiple factors, including job decentralization, shifts in the location of affordable and subsidized housing, and the relocation to the suburbs of lower income immigrants and minorities (Covington, Freeman, & Stoll, 2011; Frey, 2011a). The rate of growth in suburban poverty has been particularly high in the past decade, outpacing growth in both urban and rural areas. During the Great Recession (2007-2009), high rates of unemployment and underemployment and the home foreclosure crisis brought the number of people living in poverty in the suburbs to an all-time high. Today, suburban areas are home to about 40 percent of all poor people in the country, an increase from 25 percent in 1980. Furthermore, in the 100 largest metropolitan areas, more people are living in poverty in the suburbs than in urban areas (Frey, 2011b). Suburbs are now facing a range of challenges traditionally associated with cities, such as high rates of unemployment and underemployment, lower educational attainment, food insecurity, and lack of access to health care. The increase in the suburban poverty rate is straining social service providers and local governments at a time when resources are shrinking (Allard & Roth, 2010). The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) seeks to better understand poverty and service delivery in suburban America, including how the dynamics of suburban poverty may differ from those in rural and urban communities and whether service models may need to be tailored to meet these differences. To that end, ASPE commissioned this framing paper to review and synthesize existing research, analyze the characteristics and service needs of those living in poverty in the suburbs, and identify information and research needed to more fully understand and guide efforts to address suburban poverty. To prepare this review, we used three types of information sources: existing literature, both published and unpublished; a select number of key informant interviews; and two sources of extant U.S. Census Bureau household survey data: the Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey (CPS), which provides an annual count of the number of people living below 100 percent of the federal poverty level from 1959 to 2011, and the 2009-2011 American Community Survey (ACS) Weighted 3-Year Restricted-Use Files, a household survey of a nationally representative sample of individuals. These data provide information about all suburbs, including but not limited to, the 100 largest metropolitan areas (see Appendix 1). This paper will serve to frame the discussion during the Poverty and Service Delivery in Suburban America Roundtable, to be convened in 2014. The roundtable will bring together researchers, policy 5 experts, practitioners, and federal staff to discuss the issues raised in this paper and gaps in the research, formulate new research questions, consider the implications of the research for service delivery and public benefits, and assess opportunities for HHS and broader federal engagement

Generation and Characterization of the Anp32e-Deficient Mouse

Background: Accumulated literature suggests that the acidic nuclear phosphoprotein 32 kilodalton (Anp32) proteins control multiple cellular activities through different molecular mechanisms. Like other Anp32 family members, Anp32e (a.k.a. Cpd1, PhapIII) has been conserved throughout vertebrate evolution, suggesting that it has an important function in organismal survival. Principal Findings: Here, we demonstrate that the Anp32e gene can be deleted in mice without any apparent effect on their wellbeing. No defects in thymocyte apoptosis in response to various stresses, fibroblast growth, gross behaviour, physical ability, or pathogenesis were defined. Furthermore, combined deletion of Anp32a and Anp32e also resulted in a viable and apparently healthy mouse. Significance: These results provide evidence that significant functional redundancy exists among Anp32 family members

Modeling bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics

Current models of human dynamics, used from risk assessment to communications, assume that human actions are randomly distributed in time and thus well approximated by Poisson processes. We provide direct evidence that for five human activity patterns the timing of individual human actions follow non-Poisson statistics, characterized by bursts of rapidly occurring events separated by long periods of inactivity. We show that the bursty nature of human behavior is a consequence of a decision based queuing process: when individuals execute tasks based on some perceived priority, the timing of the tasks will be heavy tailed, most tasks being rapidly executed, while a few experiencing very long waiting times. We discuss two queueing models that capture human activity. The first model assumes that there are no limitations on the number of tasks an individual can hadle at any time, predicting that the waiting time of the individual tasks follow a heavy tailed distribution with exponent alpha=3/2. The second model imposes limitations on the queue length, resulting in alpha=1. We provide empirical evidence supporting the relevance of these two models to human activity patterns. Finally, we discuss possible extension of the proposed queueing models and outline some future challenges in exploring the statistical mechanisms of human dynamics.Comment: RevTex, 19 pages, 8 figure