Alt, Martha, “Does Access to Jobs Affect Employment Rates and Incomes of Inner-City Residents?” Earth Island Institute/Urban Habitat Program, December 1991.
Alt attempts to find a middle-ground in the controversy over the effect spatial mismatch has on unemployment and poverty. She argues for seperating out variables such as education, job training, and racial discrimination (after evaluating them) as well as for the inclusion of research on all transit modes to correctly isolate on worker mobility. She then discusses the type and length of commutes and the shortcomings of mass transit in relation to the location of employment opportunities. She also mentions the theory of a mutual causality between employment and educative characteristics and proximity to job opportunities.

Gallardo, Cecilia “Spatial Mismatch Vs. Location Efficiency,” Term Paper for Urban Planning 269, Professor Scott Bernstein, UCLA Department of Urban Planning, 20 March 1995.
This paper begins by explaining spatial mismatch theory and its economic and social impacts--namely that job growth is occuring in areas lacking in affordable housing. Gellardo posits that this "third wave" of suburbanization has created social costs ("costs of sprawl") that are generally unsustainable. She offers a possible remedy through the utilization of location efficiency measures in planning community expansion. Two techniques discussed are: "Transit Oriented Design "(TOD), which clusters mixed-use communities around mass transit stations; and Location Efficient Mortgages (LEM), which are designed to both capture the value of living in higher-density, transit focused areas and encourage settlement there. Gellardo concludes by calling for further research in the Los Angeles region to determine optimal uses of location efficiency strategies.

Kain, John F. “The Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis: Three Decades Later,” Housing Policy Debate, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp. 371-459.
Kain, the creator of the “spatial mismatch hypothesis,” looks back at three decades of debate over his original ideas. He painstakingly analyzes nearly every significant study on spatial mismatch and makes a strong case for supporting his theory. He contends that whereas many critics had strong arguments in the early decades of the theory, new data are demonstrating that the theory is valid.