The Human Cost of Eviction: How Eviction Exacerbates Social Inequality

Simone Reid

Introduction

Eviction is driven by and exacerbates current and historic inequality in the United States. Even controlling for demographic factors such as income and home value, neighborhood racial composition continues to be the single biggest predictor of neighborhood eviction rates. This is representative of a compounding effect of systemic racial discrimination and class based oppression in the United States. Despite programs aimed at addressing eviction, policy has yet to address its root causes. In this post, I review the current eviction research that demonstrates eviction as a method through which socioeconomic, racial, and gendered inequality is exacerbated.

This synthesis connects historic policy and urban planning practices which have culminated in prevailing racial discrimination, outcomes for families of color that reflect stories of displacement, segregation, and gentrification, the public costs of eviction, and the policy work attempting to address eviction. I discuss the systemic racism embedded in the housing market. This research suggests that the roots are in systemic, rather than individual failures, and therefore the solutions must look beyond just the individual. Rather, addressing the root causes of eviction will require engagement with larger inequalities in the housing market and indicting the market itself. In the midst of the pandemic, providing aid to families should center people, not markets, through the provision of direct rental assistance as a starting point for substantive change.

Discriminatory Measures

Though discrimination is technically against the law, formal barriers in place such as the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA) do not offer substantial protection for vulnerable people. Roesch-Knapp writes in his review of Evicted that numerous factors present a higher risk for eviction such as race, gender, sexuality, and the presence of children. “A subsequent study found that with each successive child, the odds of eviction increased” (Roesch-Knapp, 846). Gendered differences in interpersonal relations lead to women being evicted for a lack of directness. Landlords might even request sexual favors under the threat of eviction (847-848). Eviction represents a compounding effect of systemic racial oppression in the US, being disproportionately Black female. The burden for securing housing and rent for Black families is placed on mothers as incarceration renders Black fathers absent or otherwise unable to contribute. Black men are disproportionately incarcerated, which can impact both employment and housing following release. Across genders, the availability of employment and housing is made especially difficult with racial discrimination, a record of evictions, and criminal convictions (850-851).

Race as a Risk Factor for Eviction

Many other studies produced findings that demonstrate the significance of race in eviction. Researchers in Atlanta found that investor purchase leads to evictions which facilitate gentrification which is linked with demographic change over time: “Neighborhoods where investors purchased properties have 166 fewer Black residents and 109 more White residents over a 6-year period than adjacent neighborhoods without such purchases” (Raymond, Miller, McKinney, and Braun, 1). Over a six year frame, real estate activity was a strong indicator of displacement pressure for existing residents. This eventually led to shifts in the racial composition of a neighborhood. Investors used eviction to displace current residents and eventually spark demographic change in an area over time. Evictions were associated with race in this study, with Black residents more at risk for displacement. The rise of property values due to investor purchase and development increased the odds of eviction spikes leading to a decline in Black population and increase in Whites.

A similar situation occurred in Los Angeles, where property values have risen steadily due to development planning. In LA, the median rent increased twice as fast as median income from 2009-2018. This has rendered greater than 30% of LA residents cost burdened, meaning that they dedicate more than 50% of their income to housing expenses. In the same way that gentrification operates in Atlanta, new housing construction and rising property values, combined with limited provision of affordable housing led to the displacement of existing residents. This displacement occurs in a landscape where eviction and poverty are dispersed spatially and concentrated in specific neighborhoods. Nelson et al investigated the relationship between neighborhood location, demographics, and type of eviction, specifically evaluating the classic kind of court-based evictions or Ellis Act evictions carried out in order to develop the existing property for profit. Spatial autocorrelation describes the extent to which values of a variable are clustered spatially (8). Nelson et al. found the spatial autocorrelation of eviction to be highest by ethnicity and education level (12).

This work emphasizes the connections between geography, housing policy, and segregation in the US. Court-based evictions are concentrated in specific areas, especially those with high Black populations. Similar to the research produced by RVA Eviction Lab directors Drs. Howell and Teresa, landlords have the market power to select tenants, representing a segmented housing market. Nelson et al. termed this phenomenon as “reverse selection.” It relies on the great power imbalance between tenants and landlords.

In Richmond, the segmented housing market is created and maintained by eviction. Eviction is a way that landlords control the market to manufacture scarcity for profit. Thus, depending on geographic location and ownership, housing submarkets are defined to relegate tenants into poor quality housing depending on their demographics and socioeconomic level. Large property owners and corporations are largely responsible for using eviction as a tool to control the market. It was found that the top 10 most frequently evicting owners own 9% of all property in Richmond. This group was responsible for 25% of all evictions in 2018 (11). Housing segmentation allows the most undesirable housing to remain on the market for the use of poor tenants.

Desmond’s Evicted similarly notes this, as many tenants in Milwaukee were forced into substandard housing due to inexpensiveness and landlord intimidation. In the segmented housing market, a record of evictions can send a tenant spiraling into poorer and poorer quality housing, thus the threat of eviction is a way of controlling the market. The researchers found that neighborhoods with the highest eviction rates had the poorest quality housing. These same neighborhoods were majority Black or Latinx, where eviction rates are 2-3x the median eviction rate (11%) in Richmond (Teresa and Howell, 6).

Addressing Eviction: Costs and Barriers

Despite efforts to combat housing insecurity, these issues persist. Much is reliant upon city housing policy. In Richmond, 1 in 10 renters are evicted annually. Filing for eviction is relatively simple for landlords who must only pay $58 to file and “nonpayment, regardless of the reason, yields a judgement in favor of the landlord” (Teresa and Howell, 16). This is an example of how landlords are favored by housing policy in Virginia. In Salt Lake County, Utah, efforts to address housing instability among poor renters fell flat. The introduction of market oriented solutions have proven to be ineffective at mitigating homelessness. The Rapid Rehousing Program (RRHP) offers short term housing by connecting renters with landlords, providing moving and rental assistance for 3-6 months on average. This fails to prioritize the stability of renters, who are often unable to pay rent after they lose assistance. 10-50% of renters using this program become homeless again and 50% of families returned to emergency assistance at least once (García and Kim, 2). There is also a long waitlist and income requirements that renders the program inaccessible to many people in need. The researchers determined that RRHP must be reformed to benefit families more consistently.

In the “post-”COVID age, providing rental assistance is especially crucial to avoid disaster for disadvantaged people in the US. The pandemic created financial distress most people were unprepared for. In November 2020, 1 in 4 renters had no or slight confidence in their ability to pay rent (Threet, Aurand, Pish, Allen, and Carroll, 3). Without sufficient financial assistance from the federal government, the eviction protections granted through the CDC for tenants who lost income due to COVID-19 became the only form of protection for tenants during this difficult time. Still, the moratorium ends on July 31, 2021, and tenants will have to answer for unpaid rent.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition calculated the economic cost of evictions for cities dealing with the fallout. The value reflects the cost of emergency shelter, inpatient medical care, emergency medical care, foster care, and juvenile delinquency which may become necessary for many households following an eviction. These were included due to research that suggested eviction can put people at health risk due to stress and other factors, especially during the pandemic, where they might be at higher risk for infection while receiving emergency shelter. Prior research also suggested that housing instability endangers the wellbeing of children and these evicted children are more likely to be arrested than their peers (Threet et al., 4-6). Eviction can even lead to death: Ma’Khia Bryant, a 16 year old Black girl, was murdered by police while in the foster care system following the eviction of her household.

The cost of eviction is high in both a myriad of social problems and human life, as well as economically, with the total cost reaching the billions. Research concludes that eviction moratoriums are simply not enough to protect renters who will still be struck with back rent and late fees; emergency rental assistance is necessary. Researchers from Portland State University repeated the study for Oregon and calculated the cost of mass evictions to be up to $3.3 billion, which is far greater than the $378 million owed in back rent (Bates, Zapata, Greene, and Knowlton, 1). In Oregon, 35% of renters are behind on rent, and this number rises to 56% for renters of color. This exemplifies the point that housing is a racialized issue.

The forthcoming Cost of Evictions report by the RVA Eviction Lab reproduced these studies using 2018 data for the city of Richmond, where the total cost would fall between $49,723,716 and $127,581,651. The Cost of Evictions recalls the framework of neoliberalism which demands directing state funds toward defense and away from social services. The situation of inadequate housing is similar: preventing evictions would be cheaper than responding to the myriad of social issues sparked by eviction, but substantive social services are undervalued.

Conclusion

Eviction is a problem that manages to exacerbate and perpetuate a wide range of interconnecting societal ills. Research has found that it contributes to wider issues of gentrification, segregation, and social dysfunction. It is a part of a well oiled system of racial, gendered, and class-based oppression in the United States. As the CDC Eviction Moratorium comes to an end on July 31st, it’s abundantly clear that housing policy must be substantially addressed for the benefit of people.

Simone Reid is a 3rd year sociology major and creative writing minor at the University of Richmond completing a summer internship at the RVA Eviction Lab. Her academic interests include social inequality, including systemic racism, housing, and incarceration.