DECEPTIVE CONSENSUS ON REDLINING - DEFINITIONS DO MATTER

The redlining debate is at a crossroads. Either it can move from the apparently negative definitions of redlining in terms of discrimination, undue weight given to location, and “numbers games,” to focus on strategies for reinvestment in older neighborhoods and public-private partnerships to stimulate mortgage lending; or it can pursue its original thrust to its logical conclusion, and ask whether even thoroughly rational economic criteria are an adequate base for determining real estate investment policies if social needs are to be adequately met. The wide divergence in definitions of redlining in general use highlight the alternatives. All, at bottom, permit location to be evaluated economically, in the appraisal process if not in the loan approval process, except for the as yet rarely used social needs definition. A variety of ways are available to implement such a social needs definition, but all are likely to produce conflicts of interest much greater than the consensus-oriented reinvestment discussion. Which road the redlining debate will take remains to be seen. © 1979 The American Planning Association.