Beyond revanchism? Learning from sanctioned homeless encampments in the US

To manage the growing homelessness crisis, many U.S. cities have implemented sanctioned encampments (SEs): temporary, state-designated public spaces for camping where people experiencing homelessness (PEH) can receive key services. Praised as a more compassionate response to managing homelessness, some argue that SEs can invisibilize PEH and fail to address structural causes of the crisis. In this paper, we examine how SE managers navigate contradictory logics of care and compassion. We develop a theoretical model of SE management that arrays "revanchist" vs. "post-revanchist" approaches, construct a database of 50 existing SEs in the U.S., and then place these cases within our model. SE management approaches vary across our sample and do not follow expected patterns based on the political leanings of host city. Also, most SEs were categorized as "caring but controlling" whereas only 12% were considered "caring and autonomous." These findings challenge assertions that homelessness management has moved "beyond revanchism."