Newsletters

Gaps in Understanding 1. Housing and Health: Health Promotion vs. Do No Harm. While experts emphasize the ways in which healthy housing can promote positive health, the public assumes that housing is healthy as long as it does not cause harm and people have a place to lay their head. 2. Healthy Housing: Citizen Right vs. Consumer Good. Experts view housing as a basic right, yet the public understands it as a consumer good that some people can afford and others can't. 3. Toxins: Current Problem vs. In the Past. Experts explain that toxins like lead, asbestos, and radon constitute a signi"cant health threat for millions; the public assumes that toxins in the home are a problem of the past. 4. Dangerous Contaminants: Invisible vs. Visible. While experts highlight the dangers posed by invisible toxins such as carbon monoxide and radon, the public pays little attention to these invisible threats, focusing instead on the health threats posed by visible contaminants such as trash, dirt, and pests. 5. Causal Responsibility: Policies vs. Individuals. In explaining housing problems (quality problems, disparities, lack of affordability, etc.), experts emphasize systemic factors, such as policies that disadvantage certain populations. By contrast, the public attributes housing problems to individuals, focusing on greedy landlords and renters' and homeowners' own choices. 6. Undocumented Immigrants: Particularly Vulnerable vs. Undeserving. Experts lament undocumented immigrants' particular vulnerability to housing problems, while the public views undocumented immigrants as "lawbreakers" who have forfeited the right to quality housing and public services. 7. Housing Quality: Continuous vs. Binary. While experts view housing quality as a continuum and note the range of ways in which quality can be improved, the public typically thinks about housing quality in binary terms—one either has quality housing, or does not—which obscures the full range of ways in which housing can promote or harm health. 8. Overall Orientation: Pragmatic vs. Fatalistic. Experts are con"dent that the right policies and programs can create healthier, better housing. By contrast, the public is fatalistic about housing conditions and is highly skeptical about the potential for meaningful change. 9. Poverty and Homelessness: Cascading Effects vs. Mentalism. Experts emphasize how effects cascade, as deteriorating housing conditions, poverty, and poor health exacerbate one another. #e public, on the other hand, sees willpower as the key to "xing poverty and homelessness and doesn't recognize how individuals can lose control of their situation. "A House, a Tent, a Box": Mapping the Gaps Between Expert and Public Understanding of Healthy Housing 7

• Cover