4.2 Article

Housing Stability, Evictions, and Subsidized Rental Properties: Evidence From Metro Atlanta, Georgia

期刊

HOUSING POLICY DEBATE
卷 31, 期 3-5, 页码 411-424

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2020.1798487

关键词

eviction; affordability; low-income housing; multifamily; displacement

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that subsidized multifamily properties for seniors have significantly lower eviction rates than market-rate properties, while there is no significant difference in eviction rates between subsidized and market-rate properties for nonseniors. Economic characteristics of tenants may play a role in the relatively high eviction rates of the nonsenior affordable properties.
Evictions cause substantial harm to lower income families. Housing subsidy might be expected to reduce eviction rates and provide greater stability. However, little research has examined the eviction rates of subsidized, affordable rental properties. We examine eviction filings for multifamily rental buildings in five-county metropolitan Atlanta, using a data set of eviction filings, property characteristics, and ownership information. We find that senior, subsidized multifamily properties have substantially lower eviction rates than market-rate properties do. A senior, subsidized multifamily rental building is expected to have an annual eviction rate that is 10.7 percentage points below that of a nonsenior, market-rate property; this result is significant (p< .01) and compares with a mean eviction filing rate of 16.3% (16.3 evictions per 100 rental units). On the other hand, a nonsenior subsidized building is expected to have an eviction rate that is 1.4 percentage points lower than a nonsenior market-rate building; this result is not statistically significant. We do not have data on the economic characteristics of tenants, and that may account for some of the relatively high eviction rates of the nonsenior-affordable properties. We discuss the implications of these findings for research and housing policy and practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据