 |  |  |
|
PSYCHE
Psychology & Cognition |
MEDICA
Health & Fitness |
NUTRI
Diet & Nutrition |
SOCIO
Society & Culture |
POLITICO
Politics & Economy |
ENVIRO
Earth & Climate Change |
| SITE INDEX |
|
Autism & Neurodevelop-
mental Disorders:
Causative Factors, Early Detection, and Interventions |
| Vitamin D Theory of Autism |
Caffeine:
Facts, Amounts, Clinical Studies and Resources |
Child Care Cookbook:
Day Care Recipes You
Can Use At Home |
Cognitive Mapping:
Definitions, Examples, and Resources |
Irrefutable Evidence:
The Importance of Vitamin D in the Prevention of Illness and Death |
Linguaphile:
New Words and Phrases |
Medicinal Mushrooms:
Treating Illness and Maintaining Health with Fungi |
Nordic Walking: Overview
Origin, Health Facts,
Technique, Gear |
Pollution in People:
Toxic and Hormone-Disrupting Chemicals in Plastics and Everyday Products |
ProPublica:
Investigative Journalism in
the Public Interest |
Tools, Gear & Gadgets:
Health & Fitness, Work & Play |
What Fish Are Safe To Eat?
Selected Lists and Resources | | |
|
 | |  | |
|
|
|
Homelessness: Definitions, Strategies & Solutions
Ideas and Approaches |
SOCIO > HOMELESSNESS: DEFINITIONS, STRATEGIES & SOLUTIONS
|
Selected definitions, strategies and solutions applied to research, resolution and prevention of homelessness. This page presents a collection of useful excerpts and links for ready reference - from Europe, the United States and Canada.
On this page...
Ottawa (December 8, 2009) – A major Senate report tabled today is declaring that Canada’s system for lifting people out of poverty is substantially broken and must be overhauled.
"We began this study by focusing on the most vulnerable city-dwellers in the country, those whose lives are marginalized by poverty, housing challenges and homelessness." stated Senator
Art Eggleton, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on Cities. "As our research evolved, so too did our frustration and concern
as we repeatedly heard accounts of policies and programs only making living in poverty more manageable – which essentially entraps people."
The recommendations in the report, In From the Margins: A Call to Action on Poverty, Housing and Homelessness, are the summation of a two-year cross-country study. Committee members heard
testimony from more than 170 witnesses, including people living in poverty, several of them homeless, as well as universities, think tanks, provincial and local governments and community
organizations.
 |
Based on the findings of this extensive study, the Committee’s first and fundamental recommendation is that Canada and all provinces and territories adopt the goal of lifting
people out of poverty. Included among the vast range of measures recommended by the Committee to realize this core goal are the coordination of a nationwide federal-provincial
initiative on early childhood education; the development of a national housing and homelessness strategy; and the creation of a basic income floor for all Canadians who are severely disabled.
The Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB) is an existing government program that the report highlights as bearing real promise because it gives people the pure incentive to get a job. To
strengthen the WITB’s capacity to help Canada’s poor, the report recommends that the federal government commit to a schedule of long-term planned increases to bring recipients to the
Low Income Cut-off line – as opposed to managing in poverty.
"According to 2007 numbers from Statistics Canada, we spend $150 billion dollars each year in federal and provincial transfer payments to individuals, excluding education and health
care costs. So how is it that there are still millions of Canadians weighed down by poverty?" asked Senator Hugh Segal, Deputy Chair of the Subcommittee. "The Committee’s recommendations
demonstrate the crucial difference between spending, and spending wisely. By breaking the cycle of poverty once and for all, we will be investing in human empowerment – which will drive
the health and prosperity of our cities and yield benefits for all of us." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Definitions
The starting point in any discussion of "homelessness" involves our definition of the term. If we frame our discussion in the narrowest sense,
we run the risk of failing to appreciate the true scope of the problem and devising piecemeal solutions which may prove both ineffective and inefficient.
As Lyne Casavant (1999) correctly observes in DEFINITION OF HOMELESSNESS:
The Search for a Definition of Homelessness
The definition of homelessness is at the centre of some major policy considerations. Clearly, any definition has a direct
influence on quantitative evaluations of the number of people affected by the phenomenon and consequently on the scope of
the resources that ought to be devoted to it. For example, the use of relatively broad definitions tends to increase the
number of those deemed to be homeless and implies the need for a reassessment of the criteria for access to decent housing,
low-cost housing construction policies, and the funding of the services directed to this population. [...]
Methodological Issues
[...] All definitions present some difficulties in terms of their application, posing substantial challenges to research in,
for example, the choice of the environment for data collection, evaluation of the representative sample, the extent to
which the results can be generalized, and comparison of results. Though most researchers in Canada adopt the definition
used by the United Nations [see Articles 22 and 25, appended below], it is hard to use from the methodological standpoint.
How, in fact, can one locate the people living in dwellings that do not meet the basic UN criteria? Given these difficulties,
most of the empirical research in Canada relies on the first part of the UN definition — that is, homelessness as meaning
literally without shelter. The research methods are therefore focused on the services directed to the homeless. So the
definition is cited in terms of theory, but in practice is used only in part. In Canada, however, it is acknowledged that
these methods make it impossible to have the full picture of the situation, whose gravity is therefore underestimated. [...]
Summary
In summary, two issues must be kept in mind when reviewing studies of homelessness. The definition of that term favoured by the
researchers and the method they employ to identify the homeless must both be clear. It is important to remember that the
term "homelessness" can refer to various situations — people living with friends, women staying for a short period in shelters
for abused women, and prisoners are all sometimes put into this category. It is necessary, therefore, to be aware that, unless
they are seen in context, the research findings are meaningless. |
 | |  |
|
Article 22.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization,
through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each
State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 25.
- (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family,
including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event
of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
- (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock,
shall enjoy the same social protection.
|
|
 | |  | |
An overarching definition such as that employed by the The Homeless Hub: Canadian Homelessness Research Library (York University)
provides a sense of the complexities involved:
Homelessness is an extreme form of poverty characterized by the instability of housing and the inadequacy of income,
health care supports and social supports. This definition includes people who are absolutely homeless (those living
on the streets, sometimes referred to as "rough sleepers"); shelter dwellers (people staying temporarily in emergency
shelters or hostels); the "hidden homeless" (people staying temporarily with friends or family), and others who are
described as under housed or "at risk" of homelessness.
On the other hand, narrowly framed definitions — e.g., the homeless are "those using emergency shelters and those sleeping in the street"* — are not useful
except in the sense that they afford us the opportunity to limit our impression of the problem and therefore make less encompassing our efforts to
apprehend and resolve the many issues that contribute to it. If the problem isn't perceived as quite so serious, our moral obligation to provide redress seems less imperative.
|
|
|
The Definition of Homelessness
Determining who to be included in a definition of the homeless is a divisive task. It is generally agreed that homelessness
is a social problem in need of a remedy. Consequently, disagreement about the appropriate remedy often manifests as disagreement
about terminology. Who we define as homeless tends to determine who will be the recipient of funding, resources, and services
that are provided to deal with the problem. The definition will also tend to influence the demographic methods available to
count or survey the homeless, and will influence the final tally. These numbers in turn tend to affect the allocations of
scarce resources. So disagreement about funding, resources, and services leads to disagreements about definition. [...]
Rather than selecting a final empirical definition of homelessness, we can proceed with a provisional and abstract definition
of a homeless person as a person who is without reasonable access to adequate accommodation. Such a definition would include
circumstances of individuals who are considered by reasonably compassionate people to be homeless, including:
- Persons who reside in places that are not intended as, or are unfit for human habitation, including cars, abandoned
buildings, bus or train stations, under bridges, in garbage or recycling dumpsters, parks, or other places lacking
basic amenities.
- Persons sharing housing at the whim of other persons on an interim or emergency basis.
- Persons whose primary nighttime place of abode is a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed
to provide temporary living accommodations, including shelters for victims of domestic violence, welfare hotels, congregate
shelters, and transitional housing.
Quibbling over details of definitions is neither necessary nor desirable. Defining the homeless as persons without reasonable access to adequate
accommodation facilitates discourse on the issues without constricting normative aspects of the discussion. We can proceed without further refinements
on the terms 'access', 'adequate', or 'accommodation'.
Engaging With The Causes Of Homelessness
The causes of homelessness are complex and multiple; more than simply a lack of purchasing power, homelessness cannot be
reduced to poverty. Homelessness is tied to various social ills, including substance abuse, domestic
violence (including violence against elders, spouses, and children), shortages of affordable urban housing, high
unemployment rates including frictional and seasonal unemployment, racial discrimination and discrimination against
the poor, and untreated or inadequately treated mental illness.
The causes of homelessness plainly give rise to special issues of social policy at the intersection of the fields of economics,
medicine, urban planning, child and family protection, welfare reform, and so on. The formulation of opinion on these issues
demand insight into the specialized fields in which they emerge. More vexing is the reality that these issues often intersect
in troublesome ways to deny the neophyte a simple uncomplicated remedy. [...]
The causes of homelessness are indeed "complex and multiple", but a clear purpose is served in the assertion that "more than
simply a lack of purchasing power, homeless cannot be reduced to poverty". The author of this document elsewhere indicates concern
that "[t]hese complex issues of causation are to be approached with caution for fear of expanding beyond [the Association's] range
of opinion and contracting our sphere of credibility". While it is possible to interpret the causes of homelessness in terms
of "various social ills", it is increasingly evident that the lack of a national affordable housing strategy, adequate levels of
minimum wage and social support are fundamental contributory elements. Homelessness is an escalating problem in Canada —
one that involves people in greater numbers than we can identify and successfully integrate through restricted or skewed
frames of reference. [...] |
|
While definitions used in other countries or unions may be predicated of different sociopolitical conditions and perspectives than present in Canada, it is useful to
review these constructs in our efforts to better appreciate the limitations in our own perceptual frameworks. To that end, the following passages in this section are cited for purposes of review.
In particular, see the European Typology on Homelessness and housing exclusion, applied among member states in the European Union. |
|
|
Abstract
On the base of an analysis of the definitions of homelessness currently in use, first a change of the notion
"homelessness" to "houselessness" is proposed. Houseless persons are then defined as those sleeping rough or
using public or private shelters. To better understand the causes of houselessness, its environment is involved
in this classification under the notion of inadequate shelter. This comprises the following non-exclusive categories:
risk of houselessness, concealed houselessness and substandard housing situations. This classification has the advantage
to be adaptable to regional and national differences, while at the same time providing a global basis for data collection
and comparison. |
|
|
|
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 119 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 11302
§ 11302. General definition of homeless individual
- (a) In general
For purposes of this chapter, the term "homeless" or "homeless individual or homeless person"1 includes—
- (1) an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and
adequate nighttime residence; and
- (2) an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is—
- (A) a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide
temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);
- (B) an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to
be institutionalized; or
- (C) a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping
accommodation for human beings.
- (b) Income eligibility
- (1) In general
A homeless individual shall be eligible for assistance under any program provided by this chapter, only if the individual complies
with the income eligibility requirements otherwise applicable to such program.
- (2) Exception
Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a homeless individual shall be eligible for assistance under title I of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 [29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.].
- (c) Exclusion
For purposes of this chapter, the term "homeless" or "homeless individual" does not include any individual imprisoned
or otherwise detained pursuant to an Act of the Congress or a State law.
|
|
|
European Typology on Homelessness and housing exclusion
FEANTSA has developed a European Typology of Homelessness and housing exclusion
(ETHOS) as a means of improving understanding and measurement
of homelessness in Europe, and to provide a common "language" for transnational exchanges on homelessness. This typology was launched in 2005 and is used for different purposes - as
a framework for debate, for data collection purposes, for policy purposes, monitoring purposes, and in the media.
It is important to note that this typology is an open exercise which makes abstraction of existing legal definitions in the EU members states. ETHOS is a "home"-based
definition that uses the physical, social and legal domains to create a broad typology of homelessness and housing exclusion. ETHOS classifies homeless people according
to their living situation:
- rooflessness (without a shelter of any kind, sleeping rough)
- houselessness (with a place to sleep but temporary in institutions or shelter)
- living in insecure housing (threatened with severe exclusion due to insecure tenancies,
eviction, domestic violence)
- living in inadequate housing (in caravans on illegal campsites, in unfit housing, in
extreme overcrowding).
Homelessness is perceived and tackled differently according to the country. ETHOS was developed through a review of existing definitions of homelessness and the realities of
homelessness which service providers are faced with on a daily basis. ETHOS categories therefore attempt to cover all living situations which amount to forms of homelessness
across Europe. Different target groups (children, women, men, older people from different ethnic or immigrant populations and with different disabilities/difficulties) can
come under one or more of these categories. ETHOS was slightly revised between 2005 and 2007 to reflect emerging realities and to improve the labelling.
The ETHOS approach confirms that homelessness is a process (rather than a static phenomenon) that affects many vulnerable households at different points in their lives. The 2005
Review of Statistics on Homelessness in Europe of the European Observatory on Homelessness states that "Policies to address homelessness include three main elements prevention,
accommodation and support. Prevention policies imply an understanding of both the causes of homelessness and the pathways into homelessness. Accommodation provision involves
elements of emergency or temporary accommodation and transitional accommodation as well as permanent housing (with or without support). Increasingly policies to address homelessness
recognise the need for support as well as housing and that support is needed for people who are homeless, have been homeless or may become homeless. This understanding of the policy
basis indicates the need for an understanding of the process of homelessness and housing deprivation as well as the profiles of homeless people. ETHOS has been developed using this
pathways approach."
|
Strategies and Solutions in the United States
Real Solutions
Real solutions to homelessness must be permanent, not short-term crisis responses. They must address the shortage of affordable
housing, the inadequate incomes to meet the most basic needs, and the need for treatment for people suffering from disabilities.
Long term solutions must:
- Ensure Affordable Housing
Provide subsidies to make existing housing affordable; create additional affordable housing through rehabilitation and new
construction.
- Ensure Adequate Income
Ensure that working men and women earn enough to meet basic needs, including housing; ensure that those able to work have access
to jobs and job training; ensure that those not able to work are provided assistance adequate to meet basic needs, including housing.
- Ensure Social Services
Ensure access to social services, including health care, child care, mental health care and substance abuse treatment.
- Prohibit Discrimination
Prohibit laws that discriminate against homeless people, including laws that specifically target them or activities they must
engage in because they are homeless.
Real solutions should also prevent people from becoming homeless. New policies that address the underlying structural
causes of homelessness must coincide with specific prevention policies to stem the rising tide of homelessness.
Increasingly, homelessness affects not only the very poor, but also working and middle class Americans. Middle class families
are increasingly unable to buy, or even rent, their own homes. Middle class workers are facing rising unemployment coupled
with declining assistance from "safety net" programs.
Real solutions integrate homeless people into society and promote self-sufficiency. For example, policies that produce
affordable housing through employing homeless people strengthen the economy while helping to end homelessness.
Polls consistently reveal that the majority of the American public supports ending homelessness. According to the polls,
the majority of the public understands the underlying causes of homelessness and would pay additional taxes to fund increased aid.
Housing is a basic human right. Upholding it in the U.S. means ending homelessness. |
| | |
|
United States Interagency Council on Homelessness
EXCERPT
Congress established the Interagency Council on Homelessness in 1987 with the passage of
the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act. The Council is responsible for providing Federal leadership for activities to assist
homeless families and individuals.
The major activities of the Council include:
- planning and coordinating the Federal government's activities and programs to assist
homeless people, and making or recommending policy changes to improve such
assistance;
- monitoring and evaluating assistance to homeless persons provided by all levels of
government and the private sector;
- ensuring that technical assistance is provided to help community and other organizations
effectively assist homeless persons; and
- disseminating information on Federal resources available to assist the
homeless population.
National Alliance to End Homelessness
- Chattanooga's Efforts in Housing Chronically Homeless People
04/13/06, Podcasts (mp3s)
Experts discussed how Chattanooga is using a grant from HUD, HHS, and the VA to provided scattered
site housing with assertive community treatment teams.
- Hospital Discharge: How Partnership Can End Homelessness
05/11/06, Podcasts (mp3s)
Experts discussed how housing and services for homeless individuals benefit homeless individuals as well as
the health care industry's bottom-line.
- The Public Health System and Ending Chronic Homelessness
07/13/04, Podcasts (mp3s)
Experts described outcomes from a program that provides permanent housing and on-site services for
homeless adults that have concurrent mental health, substance use, and chronic medical conditions.
- Breaking the Cycle of Chronic Homelessness
08/15/04, Podcasts (mp3s)
Experts discuss outcomes from California's AB 2034 program.
- Homelessness Encampments
10/11/07, Podcasts (mp3s)
This edition of the Leadership to End Homelessness Audio Conference focused on outreach to and elimination of homelessness encampments.
- New York City's Project Renewal: Housing First for People with Addictions
02/08/07, Podcasts (mp3s)
This edition of the Leadership to End Homelessness Audio Conference featured a
housing first program that provides housing and support for chronically homeless individuals with substance use disorders.
A Homeless Initiative That Works...
Home Again - A 10-year plan to end homelessness in Portland and Multnomah County
Making the homeless system work better
To move from the institutionalization of homelessness, the institutions that
serve homelessness must change.
Rather than shuffling homeless people from service to service and back to
the street, the aim of all government agencies, nonprofits, and institutions in
the homeless system must be to first get homeless people into permanent
housing.
This 10-year plan is built on three principles:
- Focus on the most chronically homeless populations.
- Streamline access to existing services in order to prevent and reduce
other homelessness.
- Concentrate resources on programs that offer measurable results.
These principles emphasize a "housing first" methodology for ending chronic
homelessness and focus on shortening the length of homelessness experienced
by anyone in our community.
Focusing on housing first, however, does not mean that housing is the only
service offered. For many this housing will come in the form of permanent
supportive housing, which offers social and clinical services to residents
depending upon their level of need. These needs include medical care, mental
health services, rent assistance, or other kinds of support. Research has
shown that addressing other life issues in the context of permanent housing
is the best way to affect permanent change in the lives of homeless people, be
they chronically homeless adults or homeless families... [Read more]
Resources
Toolkit for Developing and Operating Supportive Housing
Corporation for Supportive Housing
Laying a New Foundation: Changing the Systems that Create and Sustain Supportive Housing
Debbie Greiff, Tony Proscio and Carol Wilkins, Corporation for Supportive Housing (July 2003) |
|
| | | |
Strategies and Solutions in Canada
GOVERNMENT OF CANADA
Homelessness Partnering Strategy
PROVINCIAL LINKS
|
| | |
|
Summary
[...] homelessness in the early 21st century encompasses issues and
trends that weave throughout Canadian society:
- Poverty is a common factor in new homelessness. The development of a large
income and wage gap continues to threaten "at risk" Canadians, even during
a time of strong wealth creation. The diversification of poverty and homelessness
in Canada has resulted in a major demographic shift in homeless
Canadians from the single male clients that once dominated homeless shelters.
Women, children, students, immigrants, the mentally ill and the formerly
middle class are all part of the homeless population of most Canadian cities.
- Lack of national leadership has confused both public and private response
to issue, resulting in propensity toward short-term crisis management over
long-term strategic investment. Until recently, for example, the bulk of
federal funding has been applied to crisis management – homeless shelters
– not systemic reforms or strategic solutions. The result is a national
patchwork of programs and standards, some of which do little except to
manage homelessness and its causes. The federal government has positioned
itself as a publicly-funded philanthropist that gives money but is
not ultimately responsible for outcomes, standards or long-term solutions.
- The $4.5 to $6 billion annual cost of homelessness in Canada, as estimated
by this report, is systemic: the expense of warehousing the homeless over
the past decade has spilled over into emergency services, community organizations,
non-profits, the criminal justice system – all have incurred extra
expense in responding to unprecedented growth in homelessness. Extra cost
associated with homelessness have largely been hidden within the budgets
of public and private service providers, and therefore the cumulative cost
of Canada’s homeless and "at risk" populations remains unknown. Why
the total cost of homelessness in Canada remains officially undetermined,
along with a current estimate of the number of homeless people in Canada,
and inter-governmental strategy on housing affordability and homelessness,
underlines the aforementioned deficit in leadership and policy.
- Consequent strain on stakeholder organizations – NGOs, non-profits, agencies,
public health providers – has diminished the effectiveness of independent
innovators on homelessness and poverty, often due to government
pullback, resulting in organizational fatigue and less effective civil society
response on critical issues.
The provincial and federal government response to homelessness over the last
decade has been conflicted, sometimes bordering on outright neglect. In practical
terms, absenteeism on housing and homelessness has exacerbated efforts to
reduce poverty in Canada.
Canada can no longer afford high incidence of homelessness. A paradigm
shift is required, not unlike the evolution in Canadian social policy from
the 1930s to the 1960s.
Why? Because, left unattended, the crisis will become worse for many of
those currently homeless, thereby creating a deeper and more entrenched underclass.
And if neglected, housing insecurity will continue to spread across Canada,
fueling the relatively new phenomena of suburban homelessness, accelerating urban
decay, and, in the face of record-setting housing prices, eroding the economic
well-being of millions of Canadians.
If neglected, housing insecurity will continue
to spread across Canada, fueling the relatively
new phenomena of suburban homelessness,
accelerating urban decay, and, in the face
of record-setting housing prices, ensure the
general economic erosion of millions of
Canadians. |
|
| | | |
| | |
|
What is the solution?
All homeless people have one thing in common - a lack of housing. Though we can debate what has caused the dramatic increase
in the number of people without housing, access to housing is still the first step in dealing with the problem.
There are three components to the solution:
- all homeless Canadians require adequate, affordable housing;
- all need enough money to live on (job, job training, adequate social assistance or pension); and
- some need support services (for health, mental health, addictions, or simply to help recover from a
long period of being houseless).
The causes of the problem are indeed complex, the solution is not. Housing, income and, for some, support services are
required. The services required depends upon the person involved. These can include housing support services, job
training, education, substance abuse treatment, physical and mental health care, counselling, and assistance in job search.
The problem is rooted in the failure of Canada, its provinces and municipalities, to address its poverty and affordable
housing problems.
Many social problems are lumped together under the label "homelessness." Although homelessness may not be only a housing
problem, it is always a housing problem. The gap between the cost of adequate housing and the income available to pay
for it is too large for many individuals and families Without stable and adequate housing, nothing else is likely to work.
If there were enough rental apartments that lower income people could afford and/or if the incomes of poor people (from
jobs or social assistance) were high enough, we would not have very many unhoused people in Canada. Whatever other
problems people without housing face, adequate, stable and affordable housing is a prerequisite to solving them. Once
people have housing, the rest of their life can improve. Adequate housing is a necessary, though not always a sufficient,
solution to the problem.
We must move beyond providing more emergency shelter beds, more sleeping bags, and more drop-in centres. Everyone needs a
private adequate place of their own. The problem cannot be solved until people without housing have settled into a stable
and adequate place to live. They can then devote more time to addressing other problems they face and society can better
target the non-housing forms of assistance some may require so as help them remain in their housing and become productive
members of society.
Prevention is also a key part of the solution. Each metropolitan area is slightly different in terms of how the local housing,
employment and real estate markets work, and the nature of the municipal and provincial services and regulations. How and why
people become unhoused can be identified and a range of preventative measures can be instituted to prevent further dehousing.
People who need to move back into the housing market, but who can only do so with help, must be given the opportunity to
receive the support they need.
We must have a national strategy to address and prevent the problem of any Canadians finding themselves without a place
to live. We must also have local strategies which complement and implement the national strategy.
The national and local strategies must address a range of issues including: preventative measures; rental housing market
options; social housing options; adequate social assistance benefits; job training and employment options; effective
prevention of discrimination in the housing and job markets; specialized services for people with mental illness, chemical
dependencies and other personal problems; and adequate settlement services for newcomers (immigrants, refugees and migrants).
In short, change needs to be made in the processes, national and local, which lead to dehousing and which make rehousing
difficult. Without such change, there is no long-term prevention and there is no solution.
Though there are no quick and easy solutions, effective progress can be made in numerous specific ways. As these are
implemented the number of people losing their housing and the numbers requiring rehousing will decline.
Raising the Roof is dedicated to working with and encouraging involvement from governments, businesses, community
and faith groups, service providers and homeless people to work on both developing the overall strategies and implementing
the specific solutions that will help end homelessness in Canada... [Read full essay] |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
|
A NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY
The time is now
In November 1998, the mayors of Canada's largest cities passed a resolution
declaring homelessness a national disaster. Last year, the federal government
took encouraging first steps to help. Yet homelessness is only the most visible
symptom of a larger crisis - the acute and growing shortage of quality,
affordable housing in Canada. For every homeless person visible on the street,
up to four families are at risk of losing the roof over their heads.
Because of the immediate need, FCM urges swift action, along with the
development of a long-term solution involving a partnership of all orders of
government and industry.
FCM asks no single order of government or group to make this commitment
alone, yet someone must take the lead.
Why Canada Needs a National Affordable Housing Strategy
Rental Housing Production Is Not Keeping up with Demand
CMHC estimates Canada will need 45,000 new rental units each year for the
next 10 years just to keep up with current demand; at least half of these will
have to be affordable units. At the same time, construction of new rental units
has plummeted from 25,000 to fewer than 8,400 per year in the last decade.
Demolition and conversion eats away at the affordable rental stock, while many
affordable houses crumble.
The Result is Tight Rental Markets and High Rents
A lack of rental housing development has decreased vacancy rates in most
Canadian cities. In October 1999, 11 of 18 of Canada's large urban centres had
vacancy rates below 3 per cent, the level considered necessary for a competitive
rental market.
Declining vacancy rates and increased demand is driving up rents. Ten of
Canada's 15 major metropolitan areas saw private apartment rents increase by at
least 20 per cent between 1989 and 1999. Some areas saw increases of up to 42
per cent.
Household Incomes Are Not Keeping Up
Compared to these huge rent increases, household income growth has been
stagnant. Between 1989 and 1998, total real household income increased by only
2.7 per cent. Singles and single-parent families, two groups traditionally
associated with low incomes and high housing need, saw their real incomes
decline.
This Means Many Canadians Are In Need
In 1996, CMHC found 1.7 million Canadian households to be in what is called
"core need." One in five households spent more than 50 per cent of their income
on housing. The majority of these are households of aboriginals, senior
citizens, and families with children. Better economic conditions in the late
1990s have reduced the number of households on welfare. However, rent increases
continue to outpace income gains for both assisted households and the working
poor.
For the real people represented by the statistics, it is not only a housing
problem, it affects their health, productivity and well-being, as families find
it increasingly hard to find money for food, clothing, medicine and other basic
necessities.
FCM's Goal - To Cut the Affordable Housing Crisis By Half Over The
Next Decade - How?
This can be accomplished by:
- Creating 20,000 new or acquired affordable units each year, for 10 years;
- Rehabilitating 10,000 affordable units a year, for 10 years; and
- Providing income or rental assistance to make units affordable for 40,000
incremental households per year, for 10 years.
A Role for All Who Wish To Act
The core proposal, for a flexible capital grants program, invites the
participation of all orders of government. However, it can also stand alone with
federal, municipal and private/non-profit partnership, where provinces or
territories do not wish to participate.
Immediate Action and Long-term Plans
A comprehensive response involving all orders of government, builders,
developers, lenders and non-profit housing organizations, will significantly
address immediate needs and provide the basis for a sustainable, long-term
solution.
A Three-part Strategy
1) A 10-Year Flexible Federal Capital Grant Program
Grants would be provided to support local initiatives to produce affordable
units. Grants, along with municipal contributions and cost reductions, would
reduce the financing required for projects, reducing costs and rents for
low-income tenants.
Proposals would be developed at the local level, to fit the needs of
different communities in differing circumstances. Local responses would include
new development, acquisition and rehabilitation to preserve and expand existing
affordable rental stock, and grants to facilitate assisted home ownership
initiatives for low- and moderate-income families, where this is the local need.
Priority would be assigned to proposals bringing significant resources to the
table.
2) Measures To Attract New Investment
The following relatively simple measures would begin to encourage a long-term
response to future needs by the private sector and non-profit developers, in
partnership with government:
- Tax measures: These would include an offset of the Goods and Services Tax
on new rental housing development, allowing rental investors to qualify for the
small-business deduction, restoration of CCA pooling to encourage capital
reinvestment in new properties and the creation of Labour Sponsored Investment
Funds.
- Means to strengthen CMHC's role: These would include customized mortgage
underwriting for non-profit developers; reduced-cost CMHC mortgage insurance;
affordable housing goals for CMHC's mortgage-backed securities business; use of
CMHC profits to fund the federal component of the national housing strategy; and
policy changes to allow equity in existing social housing to be leveraged.
3) Provincial/Territorial Shelter and Rental Assistance Initiatives
Provinces and territories are targeted for these initiatives as they are
already active in income assistance programs. However, where provinces prefer to
participate in a capital investment initiative that option would be encouraged.
Provincial and territorial governments are asked to enhance income support
programs and provide rental assistance to include the working poor, by:
-Enacting shelter allowances, including initiatives to address inadequate
levels of shelter support within existing welfare programs; and
-Providing rent supplements stacked onto units receiving capital grants, to
lower the level of grant required to produce affordable housing. [...] |
|
| | | | | |
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
HousAll Systems Corporation is a Canadian company headquartered in Ottawa, Ontario and dedicated to providing the world with a better form of temporary and transitional, all season
shelter, because it makes a difference, to those in need.
Originally conceived as a replacement for tents in the Relief Market, the HousAll Shelter System is so functional, and the advanced materials used, so flexible, that it is equally at home
in the commercial marketplace, industry, the military, tourism, recreation and even your backyard.
|
|
|
Based in Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Twelve Cubed makes 10-square foot and 12-Square foot micro houses for a simple an affordable lifestyle. Also known as Modular Homes,
Prefab Houses, and of course, Cube Homes, our Micro Houses can be placed on your existing residential lot and used as a guest house, a rental, or even a studio. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moving on up to a deluxe container in the sky
Edmonton companies say stacked shipping containers cut down on construction, land costs.
|
|
Devised by Urban Space Management, Container City™ is an innovative modular system that creates affordable accommodation for
a range of uses. Containers are an extremely flexible method of construction, being both modular in shape, extremely strong
structurally and readily available. Container Cities offer an alternative solution to traditional space provision. They are ideal
for office and workspace, live-work and key-worker housing. |
Container Architecture - shipping container house design and construction in New Zealand
New Zealand pioneers in shipping container house design and construction, Addis Containers offer architecturally designed
contemporary houses to suit your site and lifestyle. |
containerbay
There is growing interest in the use of shipping containers as the basis for habitable structures. These "icons of
globalization" are relatively inexpensive, structurally sound and in abundant supply. Although, in raw form, containers
are dark windowless boxes (which might place them at odds with some of the tenets of modernist design...) they can be
highly customizable modular elements of a larger structure. fabprefab - modernist prefab dwellings |
Shipping containers find new life as homes
Inexpensive and abundant, they’re turning into affordable housing
|
A-Just Housing Corp
A-Just Housing Corp is developing prefabricated architecture using steel ISO containers as a raw material and building block.
This building block system creates several different possible configurations ranging from 306 to 918 square-foot living spaces,
which we have named LUTEs (Living Units To Enjoy). |
Global Peace Containers
At Global Peace Containers, our mission is to renew shipping containers into sustainable and affordable schools, health clinics,
community centers and housing. GPC's goal to contribute to global peace two-fold; by providing education assistance through the
construction of new schools and community centers in areas of need, and to improve the economic conditions of such communities with
shelter and medical facilities. Using recycled shipping containers allows GPC to build quickly at half the cost. By using containers
as construction material, we can keep debris out of landfills thus increasing the sustainability of forests and the greening of our
planet. |
Converting Shipping Containers for Housing
Steel shipping containers, often seen as rusting hulks stacked high upon the decks of cargo ships or in ports, are being
converted into homes and building blocks.
|
Finishing a Container-Built Home (BV0226)
Strong, Affordable Storm-Ready Housing Project. BobVila.com |
Culpe-concept: Affordable Housing - Modified Steel Containers as a Frame of a Small Townhouse
Using containers as a supporting frame of a small building is cost-effective and the elements can be assembled in a short period
of time. The efficiency of the actual building process is the main reason for using prefabricated elements (either space element or
constructive element) as a construction. |
|
Affordable Portable Alternative Housing & Energy Systems - Hawaii |
 LOT-EK talks about shipping container architecture
Architects Ada Tolla and Giuseppe Lignano (Lot-ek) talk about their work transforming shipping containers into livable homes at the Postopolis event in NYC.
Shipping Container Homes by Container City
A clip from History Channel's "Modern Marvels" about London's Container City - a project which utilises end of life shipping containers into habitable accomodation.
Shipping Containers Recycled as Homes
Architects are designing modern homes from the millions of excess shipping containers that are piling up at the port of LA due to the US trade deficit with China. By using the steel shipping containers as building material, homes can save
50% of construction costs, while reducing the waste and blight caused by trying to store them.
zigloo domestique 5:00 report - shipping container house
News of a house made of 20 foot long shipping containers in Victoria, BC, Canada.
container house complete
zigloo domestique container house in Victoria BC is completed and it is A SUCCESS!!! | |
|
| | | |
|
