The first phase of our research involved identifying which neighborhoods in Austin have a concentration of residents who are the most vulnerable to displacement in the face of rising housing costs. For this analysis, we used a short list of indicators to identify residents who, according to research, are the least able to absorb rising housing costs and whose housing choices are especially limited in the wake of displacement. In this section we discuss how we arrived at these indicators.
Social vulnerability refers to the differing ability of members of particular socio-demographic groups to withstand threats to their livelihoods, security, and social, economic, and political networks. Measures of social vulnerability attempt to integrate a set of characteristics of people and places that make them especially likely to be harmed by shocks such as natural disasters or redevelopment and rising housing prices. Similarly, housing researchers have also studied how certain socioeconomic characteristics are intertwined with housing instability.
As described in the next section, to reflect the compounding nature of these markers of vulnerability, we looked for areas where there is strong overlap between these markers. It is important to keep in mind that these indicators cannot really be divorced from each other—poverty overlaps with education, people of color are more likely to be renters than white residents, etc. We discuss the indicators separately here to explain how each impacts vulnerability to displacement, based on existing research.
Income
Poverty lies at the center of research on social vulnerability and on housing insecurity. Households with incomes that are low when compared to the regional median—particularly those whose incomes fall below the poverty line—are particularly sensitive to rising housing costs. They are also less able to find affordable options if forced to move. Those living in poverty have more debt and fewer assets than the non-poor. This leaves them with little to fall back on when faced with rising rents, often resulting in eviction. Living in a poor neighborhood compounds their vulnerability. Although wealth (how many assets a household has at a given moment) is not exactly the same thing as income (how much a household earns within a given period of time), they are highly correlated. Data on income from the U.S. Census is widely available, whereas wealth is much harder to track, and so we rely on income in our analysis.
Race and ethnicity
Non-Hispanic Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans tend to have fewer resources to draw upon in case of nancial shocks than whites. Structural racism in employment and segregation of housing markets result have contributed to great disparities in wealth between these groups and whites. A 2009 Pew Research Center study found the median wealth of white households to be 20 times that of Black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households: the typical Black household had $5,677 in wealth and the typical Hispanic household had $6,325, while the typical White household had $113,149 in wealth. Many households of color (35% of African American and 31% of Hispanic households) had either zero assets or a negative net worth, while only 15% of white households did. This wealth gap was exacerbated by the mortgage crisis and credit crunch that began in around 2007. Hispanic homeowners were particularly hard hit: Between 2005 and 2009, Hispanic homeowners saw a 4 percent drop in homeownership and lost, on average, half of the equity in their homes. A 2015 study concluded that discriminatory lending practices during the financial crisis will likely widen the black-white wealth gap for the next generation.
The spatial concentration of people of color in low-income communities can have compounding effects on wealth disparities. In addition to the wealth inequities noted above, linked to publicly- shaped segregated housing markets, neighborhood location can also deepen these inequities through unequal access to high performing public schools.
Despite the overturning of legally-sanctioned racial segregation in the mid-twentieth century, low- income residents of color living in predominantly non-white neighborhoods are extra vulnerable to displacement. First, the value of their neighborhoods has been depressed by past discriminatory actions, making them lucrative sites for residential investment associated with gentrification and displacement. Second, they continue to face barriers to living in more affluent, historically white neighborhoods. Once displaced, their housing choices remain limited.
Education
Households headed by workers without a college degree are less likely to be employed and more likely to be employed in jobs paying low wages or offering seasonal employment, making them particularly vulnerable to displacement from rising housing costs. Displacement of households without college degrees to areas outside of the city can exacerbate income disparities. Recent research finds that, as the poor move to the suburbs, they are likely to live in “job-poor” suburbs, in part because of exclusionary development patterns in more job-rich suburban areas.
Household composition (families with children and seniors)
The types of households present in a neighborhood can also relate to the likelihood of displacement. The presence of large numbers of elderly households or households with children, under certain circumstances, can be markers of vulnerability. On their own, however, they are not consistent predictors. For example, an elderly household can be high income with considerable assets (less vulnerable), or poor with few assets (more vulnerable). For elderly households, researchers find that being elderly, absent other markers of vulnerability (low-income, no bachelor’s degree, etc.) does not result in a significant increase in vulnerability from rising housing costs compared to non-elderly households. While we did not use the presence of elderly households to identify vulnerable neighborhoods, we did map the location of elderly households in Austin, which is available on the interactive mapping website we created, at https://sites.utexas.edu/gentrificationproject. This information is also referenced in our discussion of options for low-income homeowners.
The relationship between the presence of children and vulnerability also rests heavily on the income and housing tenure of the household. We found the strongest evidence for such a relationship for poor households with children. Matthew Desmond’s Milwaukee study of renters facing eviction found that poor families with children were more likely to face eviction than households without children, even taking into account the details of their cases and situations. Once displaced, households with multiple children also face considerable difficulties finding housing that can accommodate them. While the Fair Housing Act includes protections for families with children, the limited enforcement and the paucity of larger rental units undermines its effectiveness. Federal assistance for families with children is also at its lowest level in close to twenty years, further undermining options for these families.
Housing status
Urban Institute fellow Rolf Pendall and his coauthors use the phrase “precarious housing” to describe the types of housing that make residents particularly vulnerable to displacement. They examine (1) the physical conditions associated with housing (overcrowding, poor maintenance, or conditions due to age or housing type and construction quality) and (2) the ongoing ability of a household to remain in their home or to bene t in any way from rising home values. The researchers found that renters as a group are the most vulnerable to displacement from their homes. For example, as rental property owners decide to upgrade their units, convert them to condominiums, or replace mobile home parks with more pro table land uses, their renters will be displaced. Homeowners may also be forced to sell due to rising property taxes or the cost of repairs—but as a group they are much less vulnerable to displacement than renters. And homeowners may also be able to capture some of the rising value of their homes to help them stay or relocate, depending on how early in the process of change they are forced to sell.
Putting the indicators together
Through the overlap of these five indicators, we see that certain groups of people are more vulnerable to displacement from rising housing costs than others. Generally, the evidence is strongest for the compounding effect of being African-American or Hispanic on other dimensions of vulnerability to displacement. For example, African-Americans are more likely to have other characteristics that increase their vulnerability, such as living in poverty or being renters. Hispanics are also more likely to be renters, or have lower levels of education, or both.
Change Over Time
Identifying neighborhoods with high concentrations of vulnerable persons is only the starting point. Understanding whether displacement from gentrification is occurring, and identifying likely points of intervention, requires looking for signs of vulnerable residents actually leaving neighborhoods while less vulnerable residents move in, and also looking for signs of changes in the housing market both inside the neighborhood and nearby. Based on our earlier discussion of gentrification and displacement, in our research we looked for vulnerable neighborhoods where, over time, (1) residents’ incomes have been increasing at a greater rate than the metro area; (2) the percentage of residents of color has been declining compared to the metro area; (3) the percentage of residents with bachelor’s degrees has been increasing at a rate greater than the metro area; and (4) the homeownership rate has gone up faster than the metro area. All of these changes are considered markers of gentrification—of a neighborhood transforming through the loss of its vulnerable residents and influx of wealthier persons. To then identify whether these changes are connected to a particular stage of gentrification, we looked for signs of rising property values in the neighborhood and adjacent areas.
One word of caution on analyzing demographic changes is in order: When we measure change over time, we are effectively taking two snapshots of a neighborhood at different times and comparing them. Census data, which we rely upon in this study, does not allow us to actually track who has moved into or out of a neighborhood, let alone where they have come from or where they have gone. For example, if a neighborhood has a median household income that has increased by 50 percent in inflation-adjusted terms over 10 years, it is impossible to know from that statistic alone whether new, high-income residents have replaced low-income residents, or whether the low-income residents have simply managed to greatly boost their earning power. That is why we examine demographic change as a combination of factors: For instance, if a given neighborhood has recently experienced a sharp increase in the percentage of white, college-educated, and high- income residents, we can infer that a new group of more advantaged people has moved in.