The Effects on Consumption Patterns of Replacing Housing Programs with Cash Grants

This paper estimates how replacing low-income housing programs with equally costly cash grants would change the consumption patterns of recipients. Based on American Housing Survey data and evidence on the cost-effectiveness of different types of assistance, the results suggest that housing voucher...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Housing policy debate Jg. 35; H. 5; S. 829 - 846
Hauptverfasser: Early, Dirk W., Olsen, Edgar O.
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Abingdon Routledge 03.09.2025
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Schlagworte:
Affordable housing
Consumption
Consumption patterns
Cost analysis
Cost effectiveness
Costs
Grants
Households
Housing
Housing authorities
Housing costs
Housing policy
housing subsidies
housing vouchers
Lessors
Low income groups
Low-income housing programs
project-based housing assistance
Public housing
Residential patterns
Social services
tenant-based housing assistance
Tenants
Vouchers
ISSN:1051-1482, 2152-050X
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This paper estimates how replacing low-income housing programs with equally costly cash grants would change the consumption patterns of recipients. Based on American Housing Survey data and evidence on the cost-effectiveness of different types of assistance, the results suggest that housing voucher recipients consumed 15% more housing services and 12% fewer other goods than they would have consumed had they received equally costly cash grants. Occupants of subsidized projects lived in housing about as good as they would have chosen with cash grants but consumed substantially fewer other goods. Owing to their cost inefficiencies, programs of project-based housing assistance have led to less consumption of both goods than would result from cash grants for substantial fractions of their participants. Approximately two thirds of public housing tenants and more than a third of recipients of other forms of project-based housing assistance occupy worse housing and consume fewer other goods than they would with equally costly cash grants. These findings make a strong case for the use of cash assistance rather than project-based housing assistance to help low-income households and question whether voucher's modest improvement in housing conditions compared with cash grants justifies its extra administrative costs and the burden it places on households to find a landlord willing to accept a voucher.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1051-1482
2152-050X
DOI:10.1080/10511482.2024.2442415