Exploring Human Mobilities in the COVID-19 Era in Urban and Rural Canada

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, human mobility has been transformed across multiple geographic scales. Even prior to the formal declaration of the pandemic, governments had moved to close borders and restrict population mobility. Although detailed data have not yet been collected, there is evidence that COVID-19 has dramatically impacted long-term (as opposed to daily) mobility and migration behaviors. Drawing on examples from Canada, the chapter explores the impacts of COVID-19 on mobility, including reductions in international migration, shifts in inter-regional migration, and evidence of increased local mobilities as individuals (at least those able to) work remotely and relocate from cities to smaller communities. Other examples will be drawn from rental and eviction data. The chapter will conclude with a discussion of the emergent research questions and areas that researchers can explore further. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

Protecting the Most Vulnerable: Policy Response and Eviction Filing Patterns During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic crisis exposed the U.S. rental housing market to extraordinary stress. Policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels established eviction moratoria and a number of additional direct and indirect renter-supportive measures in a bid to prevent a surge in evictions and associated public health risks. This article assesses the net efficacy of these interventions, analyzing changes in eviction filing patterns in 2020–2021 in thirty-one cities across the country. We find that eviction filings were dramatically reduced over this period. The largest reductions were in places that previously experienced highest eviction filing rates, particularly majority-Black and low-income neighborhoods. Although these changes did not ameliorate racial, gender, and income inequalities in relative risk of eviction, they did significantly reduce rates across the board, resulting in especially large absolute gains in previously high-risk communities.

Tenants Who Delayed Rent Payments During 2020–2021 Eviction Moratoria: Spending Patterns and Associations with Psychiatric Characteristics

This study examined spending behaviors of U.S. tenants who reported delaying rent payments during federal eviction moratoria in 2020-2021, enacted in response to the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A national sample of 772 middle and low-income tenants who reported delaying rent payments because of the eviction moratoria were assessed from May 2020 to October 2020. Among tenants who delayed paying rent, most rent money was spent on groceries (11-19%), utilities (9-14%), substance use (8-10%), and debt (7%) across two time periods;the remaining rent money was spent on other expenses including recreation and medical care. Sociodemographic and psychiatric characteristics together only explained 2-3% of the variance in spending in major expense categories suggesting the broad impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Together, these findings provide insight into spending behaviors of tenants during a time of great financial and psychological distress. © This work was authored as part of the Contributor's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 USC. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under US Law.

"Housing Is a Human Right”: Moms for Housing's Black Feminist Politics of Shelter

In the midst of the global SARS-CoV-2 epidemiological crisis unfolds another contagion: the eviction epidemic. This essay attends to the work of Moms for Housing, an organization of formerly homeless and marginally housed Black mothers in Oakland, California who have organized to confront dispossession, real-estate speculation, and the privatization of housing. Using Black feminist and queer of color intellectual frameworks as ciphers through which to interpret and properly attribute weight to the organization's activism, the essay argues that Moms for Housing not only offers potential flightlines toward a post-property future—one in which housing is positioned as a basic human right—but also a generative critique of the home as a site of racialized and gendered subject formation. Indeed, through their work, the reconception of kinship formation and territorial formation are understood to be mutually constitutive, abolitionist projects.

Experiences with Eviction, House Foreclosure, and Homelessness Among COVID-19 Infected Adults and Their Relation to Mental Health in a Large U.S. City.

This study examined experiences with eviction, house foreclosures, and homelessness in a large U.S. city sample of adults with Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). A total of 3595 adults with COVID-19 participated in an assessment of health and well-being after completing contact tracing activities. The sample had a 5.7% lifetime prevalence of eviction, 3.7% lifetime prevalence of house foreclosure, and 8.2% lifetime prevalence of homelessness. Relative importance analyses revealed drug use was the most important variable associated with any lifetime eviction, lifetime house foreclosure, lifetime homelessness, and being currently at-risk of eviction or recently evicted. Loneliness was also relatively strongly associated with any lifetime eviction or homelessness, while socioeconomic characteristics were the most importance variables associated with late mortgage payments in the past month. Treatment for addiction problems may be important for in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and adults with histories of housing instability may be particularly at risk.

Longer trips to court cause evictions.

Studying ∼200,000 evictions filed against ∼300,000 Philadelphians from 2005 to 2021, we focus on the role of transit to court in preventing tenants from asserting their rights. In this period, nearly 40% of tenants facing eviction were ordered to leave their residences because they did not show up to contest cases against them and received a default judgment. Controlling for a variety of potential confounds at the tenant and landlord level, we find that residents of private tenancies with longer transit travel time to the courthouse were more likely to default. A 1-h increase in estimated travel time increases the probability of default by between 3.8% and 8.6% points across different model specifications. The effect holds after adjusting for direct distance to the court, unobserved landlord characteristics, and even baseline weekend travel time. However, it is absent in public housing evictions, where timing rules are significantly laxer, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, when tenants had the opportunity to be present virtually. We estimate that had all tenants been equally able to get to the court in 10 min, there would have been 4,000 to 9,000 fewer default evictions over the sample period. We replicate this commuting effect in another dataset of over 800,000 evictions from Harris County, Texas. These results open up a new way to study the physical determinants of access to justice, illustrating that the location and accessibility of a courthouse can affect individual case outcomes. We suggest that increased use of video technology in court may reduce barriers to justice.

Chapter 9 - Reframing health, environment, and housing

Three traditional frameworks in health, environment, and housing were reformed because of the new healthy housing experience. Lead poisoning, asthma, mold-induced illness, and other housing-related diseases and injuries were typically classified as “noncommunicable,” because they were associated with behavior, environmental (including housing), and genetic or physiological factors. Yet deficiencies in homes transmitted (“communicated”) certain health problems. “Communicable” diseases are those mainly originating in organisms and transmitted to humans as illnesses. Most health investments went to combatting these communicable diseases. Historically, this framework left housing and health divided, even though early housing codes in the late 1800s were driven largely by communicable disease prevention (cholera, typhoid, and tuberculosis). The successful control of these diseases included better medical treatments and control of organisms, but also changes in housing such as better ventilation, reduced crowding, and improved drinking water supply. The emergence of lead paint poisoning in the mid-1900s, Title X in 1992, and the healthy housing movement in 2000 all demonstrated both the failure of the communicable/noncommunicable framework and the promise of a new one. Most recently, the Covid-19 pandemic led to integrated medical (vaccine) and housing interventions (temporarily ending housing evictions). Social determinants of health (which included housing) increasingly replaced the antiquated communicable disease framework. Similarly, the traditional environmental framework of the “shared commons” and “polluters pay” that underpinned environmental regulations failed in the case of healthy housing, because houses were not traditionally considered to be part of those commons and there were no clear housing polluters. This led to fragmentation. Each municipality developed its own housing code (unlike nationwide environmental and public health standards and laws) and those codes often explicitly refused to address healthy housing hazards. Each housing owner had to pay the remediation cost, and many could not afford them, or chose to ignore them, or did not recognize them at all, with disastrous consequences. Pollution standards were developed for outdoor air and workplaces because they were “shared” spaces that could be measured with scientifically validated methods, but no such standards were developed for housing conditions. Yet the California and Rhode Island lead paint legal cases created a new precedent, in which the cost of lead paint remediation was borne not solely by the public or the homeowners, but instead by the industries that created the pollution and disease in the home. A third traditional framework held that the main purpose of housing policy and programs was to build individual wealth and social stability, but not health or environmental quality, because the latter were neither “communicable diseases” nor “shared commons.” The 2008 financial crisis that originated in housing showed this framework failed and the rising cost of housing also led to health and environmental problems. There was new evidence that higher housing costs resulted in avoided healthcare and environmental degradation. The housing market failed to include health investments in the price of housing, making healthy housing interventions unlike any other housing improvement, a clear market failure. Owners did not make health investments in housing because the owner could not recoup the investment upon sale, even though there were large savings to health, environmental, and other sectors. These three disconnects in health, environmental, and housing frameworks led to widespread social problems and large disparities by race, ethnicity, and income. A new social determinant framework emerged showing that housing, health, and environment could no longer remain confined to different worlds, implemented by different professions with their own specialized training, with their own terminology, studied by different arts of the academy, with differing workforces, policies, programs, and financing systems, with different citizen advocacy groups, with differing philanthropic initiatives, and with budgets far too small and disjointed to meet the need. This new consensus resulted in major reforms in housing, health, and environment, emergence of new environmental justice, health and housing citizen movements, new research agendas, record government appropriations, and larger private sector investment in healthy homes and lead paint remediation.

Characteristics of Tenants Who Delayed Rent Payments during Eviction Moratoria in 2020.

This study examined the characteristics of US tenants who reported delaying rent payments during the eviction moratoria in 2020 in respond to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A nationally representative sample of 3393 US tenants was assessed from May to June 2020 during a period that eviction moratoria were issued across the country. In the total sample, 22.9% of US tenants reported they delayed paying rent because of the eviction moratoria. Tenants who delayed paying rent were nearly 7 times as likely to be at risk of eviction, more than 3 times as likely to endorse recent suicidal ideation, and 1.6 times as likely to report recent illicit drug use compared to tenants who did not delay paying rent. These findings highlight the health and social needs of tenants in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The risk of eviction and the mental health outcomes among the US adults.

Although past studies establish a link between residential instability and poor mental health, studies investigating the association between perceived risk of eviction and mental health with nationally representative data are largely lacking. This study examines the association between self-reported risk of eviction and anxiety, depression, and prescription medication use for mental or emotional health reasons. This is a retrospective observational study using the repeated-cross sectional data (n = 14548; unweighted) using the US Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey from July 2021 to March 2022. Survey respondents aged 18 years and above who lived in rented residences and were not caught up with the rent payments at the time of the survey were included in the analysis. The descriptive summary shows a higher prevalence of depression (59.33 % vs 37.01 %), anxiety (67.01 % vs 43.28 %), and prescription medication use (26.57 % vs 23.68 %) among the respondents who are likely to face eviction in the next two months compared to the reference group not at the risk of eviction. When adjusted for demographic characteristics, family context, and socioeconomic setting, the odds of depression, anxiety, and prescription medication use in the at-risk eviction group were significantly higher than in the reference group. Specifically, odds ratios (ORs) [95 % CI] for depression, anxiety, and prescription medication use are 2.366 [2.364, 2.369], 2.650 [2.648, 2.653], and 1.172 [1.171, 1.174], respectively. These results suggest that the perceived risk of eviction is associated with elevated mental health problems. Addressing the housing crisis may help decrease the mental health burden among rented households.

A database of US state policies to mitigate COVID-19 and its economic consequences.

BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 first appeared in the United States (US) in January 2020, US states have pursued a wide range of policies to mitigate the spread of the virus and its economic ramifications. Without unified federal guidance, states have been the front lines of the policy response. MAIN TEXT: We created the COVID-19 US State Policy (CUSP) database ( https://statepolicies.com/ ) to document the dates and components of economic relief and public health measures issued at the state level in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Documented interventions included school and business closures, face mask mandates, directives on vaccine eligibility, eviction moratoria, and expanded unemployment insurance benefits. By providing continually updated information, CUSP was designed to inform rapid-response, policy-relevant research in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and has been widely used to investigate the impact of state policies on population health and health equity. This paper introduces the CUSP database and highlights how it is already informing the COVID-19 pandemic response in the US. CONCLUSION: CUSP is the most comprehensive publicly available policy database of health, social, and economic policies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. CUSP documents widespread variation in state policy decisions and implementation dates across the US and serves as a freely available and valuable resource to policymakers and researchers.

Race, power, and policy: understanding state anti-eviction policies during COVID-19

In the United States, striking racial disparities in COVID-19 infection and mortality rates were one of the core patterns of the virus. These racial disproportionalities were a result of structural factors-laws, rules, and practices embedded in economic, social, and political systems. Public policy is central among such structural features. Policies distribute advantages, disadvantages, benefits, and burdens in ways that generate, reinforce, or redress racial inequities. Crucially, public policy is a function of power relations, so understanding policy decisions requires attentiveness to power. This paper asseses statistical associations between racial power and state anti-eviction policies. Charting the timing of state policy responses between March 2020 and June 2021, I examine correlations between response times and racial power as reflected in state populations, voting constituencies, legislatures, and social movement activities. Ultimately, I do not find any significant associations. The null results underscore the complexities and difficulties of studying race, power, and public policy with theoretical nuance and empirical care. While the findings leave us with much to learn about how racial power operates, the conceptualization and theorizing offered in the paper, instructively underscore the value of centering racial power in analyses of public policy.

Forecasting Evictions to Determine Areas at High Risk of Housing Insecurity

The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to an escalating housing crisis in the United States. After the onset of pandemic-related lockdowns in March of 2020, eviction morato-riums were swiftly enacted, enabling millions of tenants in rental residences to remain in their homes while unemployment surged and families lacked the resources to pay rent. With the majority of these moratoriums scheduled to lift by the end of 2021, many tenants will face imminent eviction. This paper outlines the development of a multivariable, time-series regression model that can be used to forecast eviction rates as a function of changing economic conditions in a given geographical area and time period. When the model is applied to New Jersey in the current time period, the results reveal a buildup of evictions, which upon the lifting of the eviction moratorium will significantly intensify the existing housing insecurity crisis. © 2021 IEEE.

Unlawful Occupiers, Eviction and the National State of Disaster: Considering South Africa's Emergency Legislation and Jurisprudence During COVID-19

This article analyses how emergency regulations protected persons living in urban poverty, particularly unlawful occupiers, from eviction during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa. It is set against the socio-economic and environmental effects of unlawful occupiers being forced onto the streets through evictions. It examines the judicial interpretation and application of the COVID-19 regulations on the prohibition of the eviction of unlawful occupiers, together with remedies for compensation for demolished dwellings. Ultimately, the article shows that the regulatory and judicial responses to the pandemic were pro-poor and sought to protect human dignity, the right to life, and the right to an environment that is not detrimental to human health and well-being. The responses safeguarded access to housing at a time when many vulnerable people could have been rendered homeless by eviction and the demolition of their dwellings.

Evictions and tenant-landlord relationships during the 2020-2021 eviction moratorium in the US.

This study provisionally examined the effects of the US eviction moratorium instituted in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Three waves of data collected May 2020-April 2021 from a nationally representative sample of middle- and low-income US tenants (n = 3393 in Wave 1, n = 1311 in Wave 2, and 814 in Wave 3) were analyzed. Across three waves, 4.3% of tenants reported experiencing an eviction during the moratorium and 6%-23% of tenants reported delaying paying rent because of the moratorium. Multivariable analyses found that tenants who delayed paying their rent, were female, or had a history of mental illness or substance use disorder were more likely to report the eviction moratorium had a negative effect on their landlord relationship. COVID-19 infection was not predictive of eviction but tenants with a history of homelessness were more than nine times as likely to report an eviction than those without such a history. Together, these findings suggest the eviction moratorium may have had some unintended consequences on rent payments and tenant-landlord relationships that need to be considered with the end of the federal eviction moratorium.

Expected and possible unexpected consequences of ending the eviction moratorium.

The U.S. Supreme Court ended the federal moratorium on evictions that was in effect from May 2020-August 2021 during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The end of an unprecedented national eviction moratorium has public health implications for housing, health, and homelessness. Accumulation of eviction filings, unpaid rent, tenant moral hazards, deteriorated tenant-landlord relationships, and increased transmission of COVID-19 and rates of homelessness are possible consequences that need to be prepared for as the federal eviction moratorium has ended. Innovative approaches and solutions can be taken that build upon existing knowledge and infrastructure for rental assistance, legal aid, and homeless prevention.

Expiring Eviction Moratoriums and COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated economic crisis have placed millions of US households at risk of eviction. Evictions may accelerate COVID-19 transmission by decreasing individuals' ability to socially distance. We leveraged variation in the expiration of eviction moratoriums in US states to test for associations between evictions and COVID-19 incidence and mortality. The study included 44 US states that instituted eviction moratoriums, followed from March 13 to September 3, 2020. We modeled associations using a difference-in-difference approach with an event-study specification. Negative binomial regression models of cases and deaths included fixed effects for state and week and controlled for time-varying indicators of testing, stay-at-home orders, school closures, and mask mandates. COVID-19 incidence and mortality increased steadily in states after eviction moratoriums expired, and expiration was associated with a doubling of COVID-19 incidence (incidence rate ratio = 2.1; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1, 3.9) and a 5-fold increase in COVID-19 mortality (mortality rate ratio = 5.4; CI: 3.1, 9.3) 16 weeks after moratoriums lapsed. These results imply an estimated 433,700 excess cases (CI: 365,200, 502,200) and 10,700 excess deaths (CI: 8,900, 12,500) nationally by September 3, 2020. The expiration of eviction moratoriums was associated with increased COVID-19 incidence and mortality, supporting the public-health rationale for eviction prevention to limit COVID-19 cases and deaths.

Eviction, Health Inequity, and the Spread of COVID-19: Housing Policy as a Primary Pandemic Mitigation Strategy.

The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated catastrophic job loss, unprecedented unemployment rates, and severe economic hardship in renter households. As a result, housing precarity and the risk of eviction increased and worsened during the pandemic, especially among people of color and low-income populations. This paper considers the implications of this eviction crisis for health and health inequity, and the need for eviction prevention policies during the pandemic. Eviction and housing displacement are particularly threatening to individual and public health during a pandemic. Eviction is likely to increase COVID-19 infection rates because it results in overcrowded living environments, doubling up, transiency, limited access to healthcare, and a decreased ability to comply with pandemic mitigation strategies (e.g., social distancing, self-quarantine, and hygiene practices). Indeed, recent studies suggest that eviction may increase the spread of COVID-19 and that the absence or lifting of eviction moratoria may be associated with an increased rate of COVID-19 infection and death. Eviction is also a driver of health inequity as historic trends, and recent data demonstrate that people of color are more likely to face eviction and associated comorbidities. Black people have had less confidence in their ability to pay rent and are dying at 2.1 times the rate of non-Hispanic Whites. Indigenous Americans and Hispanic/Latinx people face an infection rate almost 3 times the rate of non-Hispanic whites. Disproportionate rates of both COVID-19 and eviction in communities of color compound negative health effects make eviction prevention a critical intervention to address racial health inequity. In light of the undisputed connection between eviction and health outcomes, eviction prevention, through moratoria and other supportive measures, is a key component of pandemic control strategies to mitigate COVID-19 spread and death.