Non-Housing Outcomes of
Accessible and Affordable
Housing
Presentation to NHRC November 23rd, 2015
Steve Pomeroy
Focus Consulting Inc. &
Carleton University Centre for Urban Research and
Education (CURE), Ottawa
Objective
• Update review of empirical research evidence linking
affordable adequate and stable housing to a range of
outcomes
• Previous reviews
• SHS 2009: State of knowledge (education, skill development and
employment)
• PRA 2011Measuring the Social, Economic and Environmental
Outcomes of Good housing
• Purpose was to update with empirical literature since
2009
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
Themes examined
• Health
• Family stability
• Education
• Labour market and employment
• Crime and safety
• Multiple Outcomes
3
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
4
Identify research that explicitly examines
housing
• Housing either the dependent variable; or
• One of a number of outcomes, but explicitly examined
and empirically evaluated
• Identified 235 research articles (published since 2009)
• Retained 170 that had some element of empirical analysis
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
5
Focus on intentional interventions
• Concept of “housing is complex and multi dimensional
• Sought to identify literature that was explicit about form of
housing being assessed
• Policy perspective want to assess potential impacts of purposeful
designed program and policy interventions
• E.g. what does “affordable housing entail”
• And provided empirical research evidence
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
6
Nuanced findings
• Much rhetoric and generalizes about positive benefit of
affordable and appropriate housing
• Little evidence of sound statistically reliable evidence
directly linking a housing characteristic with a positive
outcome
• Most outcomes are indirect and intermediate
• Linkages and association, but not necessarily causality
(evidence is inconclusive)
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
7
Housing one of many influences
• Other concurrent influences both mediate or reinforce
housing effects
• Neighbourhood effects especially important
• In sum, the impacts of affordable housing are often hard
to measure and to isolate from the impacts of other
significant factors
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
Conceptual framework
8
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
9
Limitations and caveats
• Focus on empirical with defined housing intervention
• Heavy bias to US literature – demonstration research
(MTO) a randomized experiment with control groups
• Focus on program outcomes – selection bias to more
disadvantaged sample (including minorities and
homeless)
• Limited empirical research on small scale community
based, non US
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
10
Findings - Health
• Area with strongest evidence base
• Dwelling condition related to molds toxins etc. as well as
to risk of accidents
• Strong evidence of health impacts and costs
• Some evidence identifies mental health and stress
associated with crowding, high costs and poor dwelling
condition
• Results vary across socio-economic groups , gender and
country
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
11
Findings- Family Stability
• Existence or absence of disruptive influences
• Stress, family breakdown, moving, homelessness
• Affordability positively associated with improved stability
• But overall residential instability yields mixed results
• Cumulative stress does impact children outcomes)
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
12
Findings - Education
• Inconclusive evidence
• Critical intervening influence of neighbourhood and
mobility (much US research via MTO etc.)
• Education attainment mainly influenced by location
(quality of schools) – different housing mechanisms can
impact, e.g. if facilitate and result in moving to different
schools
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
13
Findings – Employment and Labour
Market
• Inconclusive empirical evidence re improved employment
outcomes following affordable housing help
• Some negative outcomes due to work disincentive effects
of affordable housing program design (especially RGI
based)
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
14
Findings – Crime and safety
• Research frequent reactive – re stereotyping of assisted
housing as crime ridden
• Extensive research to try and explain and rationalize high
crime rates in/near public housing
• Some improved safety under housing mobility programs
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
15
The research challenge
• Search for conclusive evidence is challenging
• Important of other concurrent influences, especially
n’hood and family status, prior experience and sample
selection bias
• It is not surprising that most empirical research finds
that assisted tenants have lower employment and
greater poverty. It is not because they are in assisted
housing that they are poor; they are in assisted
housing because they are poor and disadvantaged.
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
16
Research Implications
• Housing alone insufficient – require ancillary pro-active
initiatives (skills training, parenting skills after school
supports etc.)
• Can we assess the impacts of purposeful supports
• Non US (and especially Canadian) research is notably
lacking,
• especially re smaller scale community based programing more
typical in Canada
Focus Consulting Inc. 2015
Thank you!
17