Community Involvement of Renters

Homeowners appear to be more involved in their communities than renters. 

Civic engagement involves participation in civic organizations or processes (Manturuk et al. 2012). It can include goal-oriented activities such as joining a neighborhood organization or participating in local politics, as well as social activities like having frequent conversations with neighbors or organizing social events.

Homeowners are more likely to join civic, service or neighborhood groups, but renters and homeowners are similar in their likelihood of participation in sports, religious groups, or other groups. (McCabe 2013). Community engagement increases after renters become homeowners (Manturuk et al. 2012).  Homeowners may also be more willing to intervene against disorder, and homeownership among low income households reduced perceived neighborhood crime and disorder  (Lindbald et al 2013).

Political participation is more common among homeowners. Becoming a homeowner is estimated to increase the likelihood of voting in a general election by 10-19%, and homeowners are especially likely to turnout to vote when zoning issues are on the ballot (Hall & Yoder 2022). Homeowners are more likely to participate in city council meetings and donate to political candidates (Yoder 2020).  Urban political officeholders are 30 percentage points more likely to be homeowners than the city residents (Einstein et al. 2022).

Renters who stayed in their homes for four years were more likely than homeowners to have regular conversations with their neighbors, perhaps because they live in denser dwellings (Manturuk et al. 2012). Another study found homeowners and renters are equally likely to participate in social activities (socializing, eating and drinking, playing sports) with neighbors, but that renters spent more time socializing than homeowners did (Pfeiffer & Morris 2017).

Financial interest and longer neighborhood tenure may lead to community involvement.

 There are several reasons why homeownership may increase community involvement (Manturuk et al. 2012, McCabe 2013).

• Financial Self-interest. A home is often a homeowner’s largest asset, and its value partially depends on the neighborhood quality. Preserving the value of their investment may motivate homeowners to participate more extensively in their community.
• Residential tenure and mobility. Homeowners move less frequently than renters, so they may have more time to develop social ties and attachment to the neighborhood. In 2021, 23% of renters moved compared to 8% of homeowners (Figure 1. Frost 2023).
• A home as a bundle of interests. The purchase of a home also involves access to neighborhood amenities such as parks. While both renters and homeowners may use and value these, homeowners may have a greater interest in them, due to their longer expected tenure in the neighborhood.

Figure 1. Share of renters and homeowners who moved in the last year. Renters move less frequently than homeowners. Moving is when respondents reported being in a different house from one year prior. Data from US Census Bureau, American Community Survey.   Figure taken from Frost (2023).

Policies at all levels of government impact homeownership and tenure.  

There is limited research evaluating the direct impact of policies on community involvement. Many policies encourage homeownership. Federal policies that encourage or subsidize homeownership are largely focused on housing finance. Examples include: the mortgage interest tax deduction, mortgage insurance through the Federal Housing Administration, and the United States Department of Agriculture rural homeownership programs and the Vetrans Administration’s loan guarantees (Congressional Research Service 2019).

State policies regulating the rental market may impact renter mobility. Policies on late fees, non-retaliation by landlords, and allowing renters to repair health or safety violations in the home are associated with decreased mobility rates (Hatch 2021).

Local government may more explicitly encourage community engagement. Portland, OR, has had a formal system of neighborhood associations since the 1970s (De Morris & Leistner 2009).  In the mid-2000s, the mayor initiated a review of this system, following population growth and demographic changes in the city.  Recommendations for increasing community involvement included leadership training and increasing small grants for neighborhood associations (Community Connect 2008).

References

Community Connect (2008) A city for all of us more voices, better solutions. Community Connect final report. Community Connect. https://www.portland.gov/sites/default/files/2022/city-of-portland-community-connect-final-report-2008-003_0.pdf

Congressional Research Service (2019) Overview of federal housing assistance programs and policy. Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL34591

De Morris A, Leistner P (2009) From neighborhood association system to participatory democracy: Broadening and deepening public involvement in Portland, Oregon. National Civic Review, 47-55. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ncr.252

Dietz R, Haurin D (2003) The social and private micro-level consequences of homeownership. Journal of Urban Economics, 53(3): 401-450. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094119003000809

Einstein K, Ornstein J, Palmer M (2022) Who represents the renters? Housing Policy Debate, 33(6): 1554-1568. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10511482.2022.2109710

Frost R (2023) Did more people move during the pandemic? Joint Center for Housing Studies. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/research-areas/research-briefs/did-more-people-move-during-pandemic

Hall A, Yoder J (2022) Does homeownership influence political behavior? Evidence from administrative data. The Journal of Politics, 84(1): 351-366. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/714932?journalCode=jop

Hatch M (2021) Voluntary, forced, and induced renter mobility: the influence of state policies. Journal of Housing Economics, (51):1-12. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1051137720300267

Lindbald M, Manturuk K, Quercia R (2013) Sense of community and informal social control among lower income households: The role of homeownership and collective efficacy in reducing subjective neighborhood crime and disorder. American Journal of Community Psychology, 51(1): 123-139. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1007/s10464-012-9507-9

Manturuk K, Lindblad M, Quercia R (2012) Homeownership and civic engagement in low-income urban neighborhoods: A longitudinal analysis. Urban Affairs Review, 48(5): 731-760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087412441772

McCabe B (2013) Are homeowners better citizens? Homeownership and community participation in the United States. Social Forces, 91(3): 929-954. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sos185

Pfeiffer D, Morris E (2017) Are homeowners better neighbors during housing booms? Understanding civic and social engagement by tenure during the housing market cycle. Cityscape,19(2): 215-238. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/cityscpe/vol19num2/ch16.pdf

Yoder J (2020) Does property ownership lead to participation in local politics? Evidence from property records and meeting minutes. American Political Science Review, 114(4): 1213-1229. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055420000556