How Location Efficient Is LIHTC? Measuring and Explaining State-Level Achievement

A growing recognition that the cost of transportation should be included in calculations of housing affordability has led to efforts to promote location efficiency (LE) in affordable housing policy. Because the program is responsible for most new affordable housing in the United States, the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program has the potential to be a link between housing affordability and LE. This research analyzes the extent to which LIHTC units built between 2007 and 2011 were in location-efficient places. Ordinary least squares regression analysis was used to test the role of market, policy, developer, and urban form factors in determining state-level LIHTC LE. We find that for the nation as a whole, from a quarter to half of LIHTC units added during this period were in location-efficient places, depending on the LE criteria applied. State-by-state comparisons showed wide variation in both our absolute measures of LIHTC LE and our relative measures of LIHTC LE compared with overall housing in each state. State policy and nonprofit developers were associated with higher LIHTC LE and had a positive effect on a state’s ability to outperform its underlying urban form.     

Moving to Location Affordability? Housing Choice Vouchers and Residential Relocation in the Portland,Oregon, Region

Abstract

Location affordability measures a household’s combined cost of housing and transportation. Low-income households have the most to gain from housing with lower transportation costs. This research analyzes whether Housing Choice Voucher Program households—participants in a program designed to provide low-income households with a greater degree of housing choice—are able to choose housing that lowers their transportation costs in a metropolitan region with a compact, vital urban core. A mixed-methods approach is used to investigate the differences in location affordability and efficiency among 2,026 voucher recipients who moved within the Portland, Oregon, region during 2012–2013. Location mattered to movers, but in some unexpected ways. Urban movers relocated to less location efficient areas, whereas suburban movers’ location efficiency remained stable. In tight housing markets, voucher holders may be edged out of location-efficient neighborhoods and thus incur increased transportation costs.