An Alternative Solution to Housing Inequity: Community Land Trusts
Feb 15, 2022
Article: Interrupting Inequality Through Community Land Trusts
Authors: Jakob Kendall Schneider, Mary Clare Lennon, Susan Saegert
Date of Publication: 13 Jun 2022
DOI: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10511482.2022.2055614
Housing inequality remains a persistent problem in the U.S. housing market. This occurs along lines of wealth, with low-income households often facing high housing cost burdens and housing insecurity as rent soars above income and inflation (Joint Center for Housing Studies [JCHS], 2021; Acolin et al., 2019; Herbert, 2017; JCHS, 2020a, 2020b). Housing inequality also runs along lines of race and gender. Low-income women and people of color often pay a higher percentage of their income in rent, are more likely to experience job insecurity and face higher eviction rates, especially among those who are tenants to corporate landlords (Raymond et al., 2018; Seymour & Akers, 2021).
Access to homeownership is unequal as well; Black and Latino households are less likely to be approved for housing loans, and as a result, are more likely to rent than own at the so-called “homeownership age” (35-44) than their White counterparts (Choi, 2020; McCargo et al., 2019; Veal & Spader, 2019; JCHS, 2021, Faber, 2018.) Even when marginalized households are able to access homeownership, those consisting of low-income women and people of color are at greater risk of foreclosure, gain less equity, and are more likely to return to renting due to a lack of generational wealth and financial insecurity, as well as the racism and sexism that structures social relations and the traditional housing market. (Baker, 2014; Desmond & Gershenson, 2017; Dymski et al., 2013; Gould & Wilson, 2020; Weller, 2019; Crump et al., 2008; Lichtenstein & Weber, 2015; Wyly et al., 2012).
With these issues in mind, authors Schneider, Lennon, and Saegert chose to study an alternative to the traditional housing market that could prove more equitable and secure: community land trusts.
CLTs: A Viable Alternative?
Community land trusts, or CLTs, are a form of social housing in which an individual or family purchases a house on land owned by a community land trust, which is an often democratically governed by a board that includes CLT residents, non-residents living in the area the CLT serves, and individuals representing the public interest. CLTs have many theoretical benefits. Since home value appreciation is split between the homeowners and the CLT, CLT mortgages are a more affordable and financially predictable investment than the average mortgage (Acolin et al., 2021; Davis, 2010a; Temkin et al., 2010; Theodos et al., 2019.) Owners are able to control and modify the house through a long-term (typically 99-year), renewable lease that can be passed down to the original owners’ heirs, offering lasting security and autonomy. Unlike other mainstream forms of affordable housing, CLTs are integrated into the community, often located in areas with greater access to public transportation and employment opportunities (Wang et al., 2019).
However, how tangible these benefits are, and how they compare to market renting and owning is relatively untested. In “Interrupting Inequality Through Community Land Trusts”, the authors explore three questions that help evaluate the benefits of CLTs: What is the best way to make a house a home, to secure tenure, and guarantee predictable household finances?
Methods
To answer these questions, the authors surveyed members of City of Lakes CLT in Minneapolis, Minnesota and Proud Ground in Portland, Oregon. To create a control group of non-CLT owners and renters for comparison, they also surveyed individuals on Proud Ground’s waitlist and moderate- and low-income individuals participating in homeowner education and counseling groups hosted in housing centers in both cities. Survey responses were supplemented with administrative data. The final sample consisted of 494 individuals across these groups. While the sample was not random because each organization chose to send the survey links on behalf of the researchers, the survey sample was representative of the survey pool with respect to financial status, race, and age.
In addition to recording the participants’ status as a market renter, market homeowner, CLT owner, and demographic characteristics such as race, gender, gender of head of household, income, and housing costs, the authors used survey data to develop five measures of respondents’ financial wellbeing, housing security, residential stability (number of moves within the past five years), their sense that their house is a home, and their ability to devote time to recreation, family, and other activities. These outcome measures were specifically chosen to create a more holistic assessment of housing “success” that incorporates community and quality of life (as compared with the narrow focus on tenure that housing market-based research tends to prioritize).
To understand the relationship between CLT ownership and housing “success”, the researchers conducted two analyses. The first was a multiple regression analysis of CLT status on the various outcome measures, controlling for location, demographics, and housing costs. The authors ran separate equations to compare CLT owners with market owners and CLT owners with renters. The second analysis uses a complex technique called Augmented Inverse Probability Weighting to address possible endogeneity (a problem that occurs when a variable not included in the model is important to the outcome—a very common issue when studying housing interventions, which are almost always non-random).
Findings and Conclusions
Demographic statistics suggest that CLTs may be successful in serving the groups that are most vulnerable to housing inequality. In contrast to market owners, CLT owners in the sample were more likely to be women or belong to households headed by women and people of color—characteristics they have in common with the market renters group. Notably, however, CLT owners did not differ from either market renters or owners in terms of financial hardship at the time of their application for CLT membership.
Regarding the five outcome measures, CLT owners do not significantly differ from market owners with respect to financial hardship, housing security, and sense of home, but have better outcomes in terms of residential stability (moving fewer times) and time spent on leisure, hobbies, and with loved ones. The difference in outcomes between CLT owners and renters, however, is striking; CLT owners fare better than the market renter group for every outcome metric.
Overall, these findings highlight the untapped potential of CLTs as an alternative to market housing on the grounds that they offer housing security to those who are often excluded from it. The authors’ endorsements are balanced by an acknowledgement of the critiques of CLTs, namely that they provide a personal solution to a political and social problem, and that they limit the equity that can be gained from homeownership. However, they still advocate for the benefits that CLTs can provide, especially in comparison to the likely alternative of market renting. The authors conclude by advocating that local governments prioritize allocating affordable housing funds to CLTs based on the belief that they may offer a more sustainable and accessible form of affordable housing.
About the Authors
Jakob Kendall Schneider is a PhD candidate in environmental psychology at the Graduate Center of the City
University of New York and a research assistant at the Housing Environments Research Group. His current research
explores how community land trusts are situated in relations of property, race, and housing financialization.
Mary Clare Lennon is a professor of sociology and social welfare at the Graduate Center of the City University of
New York. Her research focuses on issues related to housing, mobility, and neighborhoods. She is currently working
with colleagues in the UK on a comparative study of childhood residential mobility and is a visiting fellow at the
Centre for Longitudinal Studies, University College London.
Susan Saegert is a professor emeritus of environmental psychology, social psychology, and geography at the
Graduate Center of the City University of New York, where she directs the Housing Environments Research Group.
Her recent research concerns homeowners’ experiences of the foreclosure crisis and their policy implications, housing and health, and democratically controlled collective ownership.
Works Cited:
Acolin, A., Goodman, L., & Wachter, S. M. (2019). Accessing homeownership with credit constraints. Housing Policy
Debate, 29(1), 108–125. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2018.1452042
Baker, A. (2014). Eroding the wealth of women: Gender and the subprime foreclosure crisis. Social Service Review,
88(1), 59–91. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1086/675391
Choi, J. H. (2020, February 21). Breaking down the Black-White homeownership gap. Urban wire. Urban Institute.
Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/breaking-down-black-white-homeownership-gap
Crump, J., Newman, K., Belsky, E. S., Ashton, P., Kaplan, D. H., Hammel, D., & Wyly, E. (2008). Cities destroyed (again)
for cash: Forum on the U.S. foreclosure crisis. Urban Geography, 29(8), 745–784. Retrieved from https://doi.org/
10.2747/0272-3638.29.8.745
2013.791401
Davis, J. E. (2010a). More than money: What is shared in shared equity homeownership? Journal of Affordable
Housing & Community Development Law, 19(3/4), 259–277. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/25782879
Davis, J. E. (2010b). Origins and evolution of the community land trust in the United States. In J. E. Davis (Ed.), The
community land trust reader (pp. 3–47). Cambridge MA: Lincoln institute of Land Policy. Retrieved from http://
communitylandtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Origins-Evolution-CLT-byJohnDavis.pdf
Desmond, M., & Gershenson, C. (2017). Who gets evicted? Assessing individual, neighborhood, and network factors.
Social Science Research, 62, 362–377. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.08.017
Dymski, G., Hernandez, J., & Mohanty, L. (2013). Race, gender, power, and the U.S. subprime mortgage and foreclos-
ure crisis: A meso analysis. Feminist Economics, 19(3), 124–151. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.
Faber, J. W. (2018). Segregation and the geography of creditworthiness: Racial inequality in a recovered mortgage
market. Housing Policy Debate, 28(2), 215–247. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2017.1341944
Gould, E., & Wilson, V. (2020). Black workers face two of the most lethal preexisting conditions for coronavirus--
Racism and economic inequality. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.epi.org/
publication/-workers-covid/
Herbert, C. E. (2017, April). Expanding access to homeownership as a means of fostering residential integration and
inclusion. What would it take for housing subsidies to overcome affordability barriers to inclusion in all neighbor-
hoods? Paper presented at A Shared Future: Fostering Communities of Inclusion in an Era of Inequality,
Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/a_shared_future_expanding_
access_to_homeownership_fostering_inclusion.pdf
Joint Center for Housing Studies. (2020a). America’s rental housing 2020. Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for Housing
Studies of Harvard University. Retrieved from https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/files/
Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2020.pdf
Joint Center for Housing Studies. (2020b). The state of the nation’s housing 2020. Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for
Housing Studies of Harvard University. Retrieved from https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/
files/Harvard_JCHS_The_State_of_the_Nations_Housing_2020_Report_Revised_120720.pdf
Joint Center for Housing Studies. (2021). The state of the nation’s housing 2021. Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for
Housing Studies of Harvard University. Retrieved from https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/
files/Harvard_JCHS_State_Nations_Housing_2021.pdf
Lichtenstein, B., & Weber, J. (2015). Women foreclosed: A gender analysis of housing loss in the U.S. Deep South.
Social & Cultural Geography, 16(1), 1–21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2014.932002
McCargo, A., Choi, J. H., & Golding, E. (2019). Building black homeownership bridges: A five-point framework for
reducing the racial homeownership gap. Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/
files/publication/100204/building_black_ownership_bridges_1.pdf
Raymond, E. L., Duckworth, R., Miller, B., Lucas, M., & Pokharel, S. (2018). From foreclosure to eviction: Housing inse-
curity in corporate-owned single-family rentals. Cityscape, 20(3), 159–188. Retrieved from https://www.huduser.
gov/portal/periodicals/cityscpe/vol20num3/ch9.pdf
Seymour, E., & Akers, J. (2021). “Our customer is America”: Housing insecurity and eviction in Las Vegas, Nevada’s
postcrisis rental markets. Housing Policy Debate, 31(3–5), 516–524. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/
10511482.2020.1822903
Veal, S., & Spader, J. (2019, July 10). Rebounds in homeownership have not reduced the gap for black homeowners.
Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. Retrieved from https://www.jchs.harvard.
edu/blog/rebounds-in-homeownership-have-not-reduced-the-gap-for-black-homeowners/
Wang, R., Cahen, C., Acolin, A., & Walter, R. J. (2019). Tracking growth and evaluating performance of shared equity
homeownership programs during housing market fluctuations (Working Paper WP19RW1). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy. Retrieved from https://www.lincolninst.edu/publications/working-papers/tracking-
growth-evaluating-performance-shared-equity-homeownershi
Temkin, K., Theodos, B., & Price, D. (2010). Balancing affordability and opportunity: An evaluation of affordable
homeownership programs with long-term affordability controls. Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/29291/412244-Balancing-Affordability-and-Opportunity-An-Evaluation-of-
Affordable-Homeownership-Programs-with-Long-term-Affordability-Controls.PDF
Theodos, B., Stacy, C. P., Braga, B., & Daniels, R. (2019). Affordable homeownership: An evaluation of the near-term
effects of shared equity programs. Housing Policy Debate, 29(6), 865–879. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/
10511482.2019.1596965