A ‘Property‐Owning Democracy’ or ‘Generation Rent’?

‘A property owning democracy’ has been at the centre of Conservative Party social policy since Noel Skelton coined the phrase in 1924. The idea has been underpinned by contrasting the independent, hygienic, suburban homeowner with the urban, managed, flat‐dwelling, high‐density council tenant. No Conservative‐led government has left office with a homeownership rate lower than when it came to power and the right to buy has enabled this growth to be maintained. However, in 2005, homeownership started to decline and this drop has continued into the Coalition government's term of office with more households now exiting owner‐occupation into the private landlord sector than entering owner‐occupation from private renting. The ‘reinvigorating’ the right to buy is an attempt put a ‘property owning democracy’ back on track but, should it fail, the Conservative Party may turn to more radical policies such as sale on vacant possession of ‘high value’ local authority and housing association houses.     

A different lens: administrative perspectives on portability in Illinois' Housing Choice Voucher Program

Over the last decade, the Housing Choice Voucher Program has grown to become the USA's primary strategy for providing safe, decent, and affordable housing. Annually serving more than 2 million low-income households, the program is designed to help low-income households afford private market rental housing. The program also allows for the “portability” of vouchers nationally between housing authority jurisdictions. Both features aim to mitigate the effects of concentrated poverty. Research on the Moving to Opportunity Program and the Gautreaux consent decree have produced data confirming that residential mobility can at times lead to positive opportunities for assisted households. This past research has been conducted on specific programs occurring outside of the general Housing Choice Voucher Program framework and has focused on household-level outcomes, paying little attention to the ways in which program administration may affect outcomes for voucher households. This article aims to understand voucher portability from the perspective of housing authority executive directors and program administrators, in order to better understand how program administration impacts the types of household outcomes observed in prior research. The results reveal that housing authority administrative practices and inter-housing authority relationships play a significant role in shaping the types of outcomes realized by porting voucher households. These findings suggest several changes to program administrative design and policy that may improve support for voucher households as they make portability moves.     

The convergence of nonequity housing models in Canada: Changes to housing policy since 1990

Abstract

This study examines the impact of housing policy convergence on the nonequity housing system in Ontario, Canada. Ontario has four distinct nonequity housing models— public, nonprofit cooperative, municipal nonprofit, and private nonprofit. This article argues that since 1990, housing policy in Canada, and particularly in Ontario, has become increasingly influenced by the neoconservative agenda of downsizing and decentralization of government functions found in the United States.

The findings reveal that changes to housing policy have caused the convergence of nonequity housing models in the areas of management and administration. Drawing on the present findings and on an experimental project in tenant management, this article argues that the trend toward convergence will continue and will likely result in one nonequity housing model in Canada. This pattern is interpreted in light of the neoconservative agenda of both countries that emphasizes private sector solutions to housing low‐income families.     

Discrimination in urban credit markets: What we don't know and why we don't know it

Abstract

Research on discrimination in housing credit has focused primarily on the outcomes of a complex process in which many parties play a role. The lender— or prospective lender—is only one party in the process that results in decisions by individuals and households to buy homes and finance their purchases. To focus solely on lenders would make it difficult to measure the nature and extent of discrimination and its effects on housing outcomes.

After discussing limitations of housing credit discrimination research, the author suggests two relatively underexplored areas: studying housing search behavior and auditing lenders to assess their treatment of prospective borrowers before the stage at which written loan applications are submitted. Both suggested avenues of research might better address three public policy questions for which our knowledge is incomplete: Is there discrimination? Where does it occur in the home‐buying process? What are the effects of discrimination on household behavior?     

Philanthropy and the housing crisis: The dilemmas of private charity and public policy

Abstract

American philanthropy has historically sought to address the nation's housing crisis, especially among the poor. This article compares private philanthropy's response to the housing crisis in two important eras of economic transformation: the period between the Civil War and World War I (the Progressive Era), when the United States was undergoing large‐scale urbanization and industrialization, and the period from the 1980s through today, when the United States became integrated in a global economy and confronted the shock of deindustrialization, widening economic disparities, and deepening urban decay.

Following the historical review, the article focuses briefly on the current housing crisis and the dilemmas that private foundations and nonprofit organizations face in trying to develop a coherent strategy to address the problem. It closes with a proposal for a partnership between private foundations and housing organizations that can address the need to change both public opinion and public policy toward housing.     

Affordable Rental Housing Development in the U.S. For-Profit Sector: Implications of a Case Study of McCormack Baron Salazar

The question of how to build decent housing that is affordable to lower income households has challenged policymakers in the United States for decades. In response, the federal government has developed a variety of partnership approaches that involve private for-profit developers. Although these entities are currently the major producers of affordable housing in the United States, they have received relatively little attention from the academic and policy communities. This inquiry is aimed at filing a small portion of this gap by presenting a qualitative case study of one of the country’s leading for-profit developers that has a longstanding commitment to affordable housing, McCormack Baron Salazar. Using a modified version of the quadruple bottom line framework as the starting point, this exploration discusses the complexity and challenges facing the affordable housing sector and offers programmatic and policy recommendations that are applicable to both for-profit and nonprofit developers. In view of the results of the 2016 presidential election, and the likely continued retreat by the federal government from supporting affordable housing, the need to better understand, and form productive working alliances and collaborations with, private for-profit affordable housing developers is more compelling than ever.     

The challenges facing public housing authorities in a brave new world

Abstract

Public housing authorities (PHAs) are entering a brave new world. Major proposed changes to the public housing program will force PHAs to compete with private sector providers for tenants. To succeed, they will have to act more like entrepreneurial market participants: to change their management practices, the types of tenants they house, and the kinds of developments they operate, and to attract private capital for the development and operation of public‐private public housing ventures.

PHAs must confront the challenges of transformation while pursuing four mutually conflicting goals: housing the neediest, achieving diversity of tenantry, cross‐subsidizing by attracting unsubsidized tenants, and attracting private capital. Success, or even survival, may require sacrificing one or more of these goals. Whether PHAs can increase housing production to such an extent that they can provide sufficient housing for the neediest while fulfilling the other goals as well remains unclear.     

Mitigating apprehension about section 8 vouchers: The positive role of housing specialists in search and placement

Abstract

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has found that Section 8 voucher recipients are often unable to secure apartments outside of high‐poverty areas in tight urban rental markets. However, intensive housing placement services greatly improve the success and mobility of voucher holders. Drawing on ethnographic research in the housing placement department of a private, nonprofit community‐based organization, I first describe how fundamental problems in implementing the public subsidy program in a tight private rental market generate apprehension among landlords and voucher recipients that can prevent the successful use of vouchers. Second, I demonstrate how housing placement specialists can dispel and overcome this apprehension through a variety of tactics that require extensive soft skills and a deep commitment to the mission of housing poor families.

These findings provide support for the increased use of housing placement services to improve success and mobility rates for Section 8 vouchers.     

The post‐Stalinist present and the Australian past

Abstract

Since 1979, housing reforms in China have been seen as successive state efforts to improve urban governance. The idea is that the state has all along failed to deliver housing efficiently and equitably through the work units and that it is believed that only through the recommodification of housing could the housing problem be ultimately resolved. The housing monetarization policy (HMP) was thus launched in 1998 to replace the long-standing in-kind housing subsidy under the old welfare housing system. The policy aims at providing workers with cash subsidies as part of their wage package to enable them to buy or rent their homes from the market. The purpose of this paper is to explain the implications of the HMP through a neoliberal urbanization perspective. Through the case study of Guiyang, it is argued that while the HMP is successful in improving certain historical housing inequalities, it does not primarily aim at eradicating housing inequalities. HMP has in fact led to more rather than less horizontal inequities. In addition, it is argued here that a market housing system is leading towards increasing urban poverty, greater social polarization and spatial segregation. To improve governance, China needs to keep neoliberal urbanization in check and pay serious attention to its adverse consequences during economic transformation.     

Madhya Pradesh Housing & Infrastructure Development Board: affordable housing via public–private partnership mode

The Madhya Pradesh Housing & Infrastructure Development Board (MPHIDB) is a state‐owned entity in Madhya Pradesh State of India with the mandate of providing housing for citizens, particularly for those in the low‐income segment. MPHIDB has been constructing houses on its own using the traditional engineering and procurement contract (EPC) model. In July 2015, it was exploring the possibility of creating affordable housing units via public–private partnership (PPP). The advantage of involving private sector is that MPHIDB can tap into creative energy and construction efficiency of the private sector and deliver the best results within the given set of time and resource constraints. The proposed structure of PPP is that the private partner will be given a portion of land in lieu of the affordable housing units that it will build and transfer to MPHIDB. However, there are trade‐offs involved in doing the project in PPP mode instead of EPC mode. The main advantages of a government body like MPHDIB doing the project on its own are as follows: (a) It is able to better manage regulatory risks in terms of getting clearances, land acquisition, and so forth; (b) it can raise finances at lower interest rates than what is charged for private sector entities; and (c) the entire land parcel is available to construct houses, and hence it can get more housing units per unit of land. The Commissioner (CEO) of MPHIDB had to decide whether to go for PPP or EPC model, and if he opted for PPP, how should the PPP be structured?     

Creating an enabling environment for housing: Recent reforms in Mexico

Abstract

A recent World Bank policy statement on housing advocates the reform of government policies, institutions, and regulations to enable housing markets to work more efficiently. The policy statement identifies several instruments that governments can use to address housing market constraints, and to improve the performance of the housing sector as a whole, while paying particular attention to the needs of the poor.

In recent years, the government of Mexico has employed many of the enabling instruments described in the World Bank's housing policy statement. This article reviews the role of housing in the Mexican economy and the major reforms that the Mexican government has implemented to improve the operation of the housing market so that private lenders and home builders can play an expanded role in addressing the country's housing needs. The World Bank has supported the government's reform program, and since 1985 it has lent more than $1.2 billion to Mexico for low‐income housing projects.     

Subsidized Housing and Residential Trajectories: An Application of Matched Sequence Analysis

Scholars have long debated the relative merits of site-based, subsidized housing owned and operated by a public entity or by the private sector. This is the first study to classify long-term residential trajectories of nationally representative low-income households in the United States by their initial assisted housing status. We employ a matched sequence analysis of neighborhood poverty and racial trajectories of low-income households in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics who formed during 1988–1992. Among households carefully matched by their demographic and economic attributes, we find that those first forming households in public housing spend much longer durations over the subsequent 20 years in poorer, minority dominant neighborhoods than similar households first forming in market-rate housing do. In contrast, forming a household in private site-based subsidized housing is associated with superior neighborhood socioeconomic (but not desegregated racial composition) trajectories compared with starting in market-rate housing. Implications for housing policy are discussed.     

RTC's affordable housing program: Reconciling competing goals

Abstract

Congress gave the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) authority to sell modestly valued housing at below‐market prices and with concessionary financing to enable lower income families to become homeowners and to expedite sales. Nonprofits and public agencies seeking to buy properties for occupancy by lower income people also qualified for these favorable terms. Setting a precedent for future housing policy initiatives, Congress conditioned access to this special program on the imposition of permanent low‐income use and affordability restrictions.

This paper considers whether the RTC can reconcile its mandate to maximize preservation of affordable housing with its duty to maximize return on assets and minimize negative impacts on local markets. This issue is addressed through a comparative review of property disposition programs administered by three other federal agencies. The author concludes that the RTC's three goals can be harmonized and suggests criteria for evaluating the RTC's performance in meeting its affordable housing mandate.     

Does Urban Public Housing Diminish the Social Capital and Labor Force Activity of Its Tenants?

This paper investigates the effect of urban public housing on the social capital and labor force activity of its tenants using cross‐sectional survey data from the Multi‐City Study of Urban Inequality (MSCUI). A structural equation model of the hypothesized direct and indirect effects of public housing and neighborhood disadvantage on social capital and labor force activity is specified and fitted to these data. The modeling results suggest that urban public housing is strongly associated with neighborhood disadvantage but has little or no direct effect on either social capital or labor force activity. And while public housing may have indirect effects on social capital and labor force activity through neighborhood poverty, these indirect effects appear to be small. These findings have implications for the current emphasis in urban public housing policy on moving residents into the private housing market and reducing poverty concentration. © 2001 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.     

Government Assistance Protects Low‐Income Families from Eviction

A lack of affordable housing is a pressing issue for many low‐income American families and can lead to eviction from their homes. Housing assistance programs to address this problem include public housing and other assistance, including vouchers, through which a government agency offsets the cost of private market housing. This paper assesses whether the receipt of either category of assistance reduces the probability that a family will be evicted from their home in the subsequent six years. Because no randomized trial has assessed these effects, we use observational data and formalize the conditions under which a causal interpretation is warranted. Families living in public housing experience less eviction conditional on pre‐treatment variables. We argue that this evidence points toward a causal conclusion that assistance, particularly public housing, protects families from eviction.     

Homeownership and Wealth among Low- and Moderate-Income Households

Abstract

Although currently neither politically nor fiscally feasible, the notion that access to inexpensive, presumably high‐quality housing should be a government‐guaranteed universal right would be a terrible idea even if it were popular and affordable. The proposition fails on three counts. It isn't necessary. It doesn't make economic sense. And, most compelling, were such a policy to be implemented, its putative beneficiaries would not thank us.

Even if we should not promulgate “a right to decent, affordable housing,” we want to assure that all Americans have access to decent, affordable housing. Happily, we can count on the private housing market (coupled with rising prosperity) to serve 95 percent of the country's households. Serving the remaining 5 percent requires concerted measures to scale back onerous housing regulations that prevent the private housing sector from meeting the needs of lower‐income and untypical households.     

The Cost and Affordability Paradox of Transit-Oriented Development: A Comparison of Housing and Transportation Costs Across Transit-Oriented Development,Hybrid and Transit-Adjacent Development Station Typologies

Abstract

This study presents a comparison of housing and transportation costs (H+T) in 4,399 fixed-route transit station areas across the United States. Each station area is classified as a transit-oriented development (TOD), hybrid, or transit-adjacent development (TAD) based on walkability and housing density targets. Station areas with a Walk Score of 70 or greater and a gross housing density of 8 units per acre or more are classified as TOD. Station areas that meet just one of these criteria are classified as hybrids, and those that do not meet either of these criteria are categorized as TAD. The findings reveal a paradox that whereas TOD are more expensive places to buy and rent housing, they are more affordable than hybrids and TAD because the lower cost of transportation offsets housing costs. We argue that policies to increase the density and walkability of hybrid and TAD station areas, which account for two thirds of all station areas across the United States, should be a top priority for both housing and transportation officials.     

Preservation of existing housing: A key element in a revitalized national housing policy

Abstract

A key aspect of the continuing housing policy debate is how best to spend limited resources to aid the poor. Recently, the policy has focused on whether it is more effective to intervene on the supply side via provision of a voucher or rental certificate that enables a low‐income household to secure decent housing in the private market.

This paper argues that preserving and maintaining the affordability of the remaining stock of unsubsidized low‐cost housing will require a skillful balancing of supply‐and demand‐side interventions. Exclusive reliance on vouchers will not do the job, especially since large segments of the poor do not receive any form of housing assistance. Flexible programs to expand the purchasing power of poverty‐level households must be developed.     

The Gautreaux Legacy: What Might Mixed‐Income and Dispersal Strategies Mean for the Poorest Public Housing Tenants?

Abstract

The current transformation of public and assisted housing reflects the legacy of the Gautreaux case, which created the first mobility and scattered‐site programs. Mixed‐income and dispersal strategies now dominate federal housing policy, although their focus has shifted. Drawing on evidence from two preliminary studies of public housing transformation in Chicago, we argue that these new strategies seem to offer benefits for distressed public housing communities but also involve risks for the most vulnerable current tenants. Increased screening and/or the need to compete with private market tenants may force these families out of the assisted housing market.

Addressing the complex needs of the most troubled public housing tenants will call for a more comprehensive solution. The intent of the Gautreaux case was to increase opportunity and enhance quality of life for public housing tenants; policy makers should take steps to ensure that current programs reflect these fundamental goals.     

Current practices for procuring affordable housing: The Canadian context

Abstract

This article describes the current housing system in Canada, focusing particularly on the various mechanisms still available for providing affordable housing. Beginning with an overview of the Canadian housing system, it provides a brief history of Canadian housing policy and program initiatives instrumental in developing the inventory of affordable housing available today.

Current practices and procedures in private lending for affordable housing are highlighted. A discussion of current initiatives available to provide affordable housing follows, with a focus on the role of government, the third sector, and new partnership arrangements implemented to encourage more affordable housing. The conclusion highlights recent changes, the current state of the affordable housing sector, and the impact these changes may have on low‐ and moderate‐income households in Canada.