Zoning out: How regulations drive homelessness
New research finds restrictive land use laws directly increase homelessness rates by 9-12%, challenging certain (and more common than it should be) claims about housing policy
New research (Homelessness and housing supply) reveals that zoning laws might be making America's homelessness problem worse than we thought (well, most people haven’t been reading the existing research).
The big picture
A comprehensive new study finds that restrictive land use regulations directly increase homelessness rates across American cities — and the connection is more complicated than just rising rents.
University of Maryland researcher Casey Dawkins analyzed data from 315 local housing assistance providers between 2015 and 2019 to examine how regulatory and geographic constraints affect adult homelessness.
The study paired point-in-time counts of homelessness with Census Bureau data and other sources
Results came from multiple random effects regression models
The research controlled for demographic, economic, and housing market variables
By the numbers
Increasing restrictiveness of local land use regulations directly boosts adult homelessness rates by 9-12%
Urban growth boundaries increase homelessness by about 12%
Geographic constraints like water bodies and steep slopes have the largest impact, increasing homelessness by 16-17%
Increasing housing supply elasticity by one standard deviation decreases homelessness by about 10%
Each standard deviation increase in shelter beds increases homelessness by approximately 37%
Three causal pathways were identified
Dawkins identified three different ways housing constraints affect homelessness:
The rent effect: Supply constraints increase housing costs, making it harder for homeless people to secure affordable housing
The eviction effect: Property owners evict tenants to upgrade units or convert rentals to condos, even before raising prices
The unobserved policy effect: Places with restrictive zoning often have other policies affecting homelessness
Between the lines
The research reveals these regulations affect different homeless populations in different ways:
Physical constraints have twice the impact on unsheltered homelessness compared to sheltered homelessness
Urban growth boundaries have six times more impact on unsheltered homelessness than on people in shelters
Regulatory stringency significantly impacts sheltered homelessness but doesn't show statistical significance for unsheltered populations
Reality check
Models that only consider the rent effect (assuming regulations only impact homelessness through higher rents) overestimate the impact of regulatory reform on reducing homelessness.
The (First) Trump administration's Council of Economic Advisers predicted eliminating restrictive regulations could reduce homelessness by up to 54%, but this study suggests more modest effects.
What else matters
Additional findings from the research:
Federal homelessness assistance funding is statistically linked to reduced sheltered homelessness
More generous state welfare benefits (TANF) produce a net reduction in homelessness
Higher minimum January temperatures are associated with higher unsheltered homelessness
Higher educational attainment is linked to lower homelessness rates, possibly through charitable giving
Areas with more single-person households have significantly higher homelessness rates
The bottom line
Housing policy affects homelessness more directly than previously understood — and addressing the crisis requires looking beyond just rental prices to consider how regulations directly impact housing stability.
On that note, findings suggest cities need better coordination between land use planners and homeless service providers, who typically operate separately:
Local land use plans should be developed cooperatively with homeless assistance organizations
Regulatory reform should be seen as complementary to other anti-homelessness strategies
In places like Sonoma County, California, which has notoriously strict zoning, the research estimates homelessness could drop by 14% if land use restrictions were removed
Interesting, but if I understand what I just read correctly, natural constraints, i.e. the underlying geography of a city, has greater power in explaining homelessness than the regulations that are featured in the title. And if those natural constraints and the regulations interact, i,.e, the regulations reflect the terrain (and experience suggests that they probably do, though not necessarily in a tidy one-to-one way) then what's actually being measured?