Can Social Housing Save Vancouver? A Comparative Analysis of Housing in Vancouver and Vienna

Introduction

My paper focuses on Vancouver’s housing and renting problems, discussing the possibility of adopting social housing as a solution that worked in another global city, Vienna. While Vancouver has been characterized as a “global city” thanks to its global connectivity, welcomeness to the creative class, and friendly business climate, it has also been confronting multiple urban challenges caused by its growing population, particularly housing challenges. After examining the “global city” defining characteristics of Vancouver which attract creative class communities, my paper questions the city’s ability to retain them given housing challenges. Subsequently, I introduce another global city, Vienna’s success in solving city housing issues with social housing. Conducting a comparative analysis of statistics on Vienna’s social housing plan, Vancouver Housing Strategy (City of Vancouver, 2019), and following Secured Rental Policy (2021), I identify three limitations for Vancouver to adopt Vienna’s social housing framework fully. Finally, with a case study of a legal loophole in Vancouver’s short-term renting market, my paper suggests a more transformative and comprehensive legal reform of the housing and renting framework in Vancouver.

Keywords: Vancouver, global city, Vienna, social housing, housing and rental justice

Vancouver as a Global City

As Sassen (1991) defines, global cities are key nodes in the globalized economic system and are characterized by their role as both activity hubs and command centers for global connectivity, transnational business, and more importantly, creative class. According to the Global Power City Index (GPCI) in (The Mori Memorial Foundation, 2023), which ranks the world’s major cities based on their comprehensive power to attract people, capital, and enterprises globally, Vancouver ranks 34th globally, and second in Canada — with Toronto just ahead. Below I will discuss three main characteristics of Vancouver: its global connectivity, its climate of transnational business, and how it attracts, supports, and retains the creative class, all of which define Vancouver as a global city.

Firstly, Vancouver’s status as a global city is embodied in its global connectivity, realized by its strategic geographical location and transnational transportation network. Vancouver is situated on the southwestern coast of Canada, nestled between the Pacific Ocean and the Coast Mountains. The Port of Vancouver, Canada’s largest port and third in North America in terms of tonnage capacity, comprises 29 major marine cargo terminals while connecting to three Class 1 railways. Moreover, it uniquely offers cruise itineraries, including one-way and round-trip options, traversing the picturesque Inside Passage along British Columbia’s coastline to Alaska. The connectivity between different means of transportation enables The Port of Vancouver to provide comprehensive facilities and services to the global logistic system.

The geographical advantage of Vancouver is further utilized by its airline network. YVR, as Canada’s second-busiest and award-winning airport and a major international hub, plays a pivotal role in connecting Vancouver to global destinations and facilitating trade, tourism, and economic growth for the region. As illustrated in the Vancouver Global Trade Map (see Appendix A), travel times from Vancouver to key metropolitan centers along the West Coast of the United States are remarkably short, with flights under 3 hours. For instance, it takes just 2.25 hours to fly from Vancouver to San Francisco, 3 hours to Los Angeles, and a mere 50 minutes to Seattle. Equally impressive are the flight durations to major cities in the Midwest and East Coast, with only 4 hours to Chicago and 5 hours to New York respectively. Vancouver’s strategic positioning across the Pacific Ocean from major Asian cities further solidifies its global connectivity. With approximately 10 hours to Tokyo and 11.5 hours to other key Asian hubs such as Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong, and Seoul, flight durations to major European cities like Paris and Frankfurt are comparable. Overall, Vancouver has become a global gateway with all its international shipping ports, railyards, highways, and airports, keeping local, national, and transnational operations linked to their customers, suppliers, and resources.

Appendix A

(Fig. A-1, *Vancouver Global Trade Map*, Vancouver Economic Commission, 2015)

Besides the transnational connectivity, Vancouver has also become a hub for the “creative class” globally, as well as business locally and transnationally. As Florida (2010) defines, “creative class” refers to “people in design, education, arts, music, entertainment” “and small business too” who “create new ideas, new technology and/or creative content” (p. 7) and therefore plays a significant role in global cities’ economy. As a leading city in Canada that has been representing itself as a “cultural mosaic,” Vancouver has been building a more welcoming, supportive, and inclusive climate for the creative class. The city’s competency could be witnessed by the significant presence of three of the world’s top 10 tech companies by market capitalization: Microsoft, Amazon, and Samsung. Being one of the top choices for both startups and transnational businesses, Vancouver has been creating a welcoming business climate, particularly at various governmental levels. The Government of British Columbia has streamlined regulations and a competitive, pro-business tax system that makes it easy to get started and keep growing. For example, with the combination of provincial and federal government policies, the relocation cost for transnational businesses can be largely eased by certain financial supports.

Specifically, Mitacs, a nonprofit national research organization that supports industrial and social innovation nationally by partnering with Canadian academia, private industry, and government and matching funding. The NRC Industrial Research Assistant Program assists businesses in developing, adopting, and adapting technologies to facilitate their commercialization in the global marketplace. Meanwhile, office costs on average in Vancouver are comparably lower than those in other global cities in North America, such as New York and San Francisco (see Appendix B-2). As shown more detailedly by the map below, locating a 100-person office in Vancouver over 10 years saves $67 million over setting up the same office in San Francisco; $50 million over setting up in New York; and $45 million over setting up in Seattle. Notably, British Columbia offers stability with one of the highest credit ratings among the Canadian provinces, as well as some of the lowest electricity rates in North America, which could be an important factor to consider particularly for tech startups. Therefore, the supportive and welcoming business policies and competitive costs for business in Vancouver make many local, national, and transnational corporations call Vancouver “home.”

Appendix B

(Fig. 2-A, *Office Space Cost Comparison*, Vancouver Economic Commission, 2023)

(Fig. 2-B, *Total Office Space, Labour and Management Costs*, Vancouver Economic Commission, 2023)

Vancouver Housing Challenges

Despite the aforementioned qualities that define Vancouver as a global city, it has also been confronted with numerous contemporary urban challenges, foremost among them being the issue of renting and housing. Drawing upon empirical sources and my personal experience, I discuss the problematic status quo of housing and renting in Vancouver in the following section.

Renters have a significant presence and diversity in Vancouver’s housing market. In 2016, they made up 53% of households in Vancouver, which is a diverse group including families, singles, and roommate households. In particular, many renters belong to the creative class and tend to be more mobile, primarily because a majority of them are young and single (Florida, 2012). Though as mentioned above, Vancouver has multicultural policies and represents Canada’s “cultural mosaic” feature to attract creative classes globally, there still is a distinct class divide within the creative class. In other words, the creative class communities in Vancouver are facing great inequality and socioeconomic segregation: those who afford to be the creative class in Vancouver tend to be better-off middle-upper class, which could be straightforwardly translated into the socio-economic struggles the less well-off immigrant creative class has been navigating in Vancouver. As highlighted by Richard Florida himself, when discussing the creative class in Vancouver, even the city itself could be divided into two for those “relatively better off” creative class and those “completely sagging, increasingly impoverished immobile”:

“The problem that I see is the tremendous inequality, the tremendous economic segregation, and the sagging position of the service class. Their wages are faltering, their jobs are precarious and they’re being shunted off to the peripheral areas away from transit, away from the city core…” So my key concern is the economic divide we see between knowledge workers — some of whom are struggling, but as a group are doing relatively better — and this service group class that is falling further and further behind. And of course in Vancouver, we see two completely different cities, a city of the creative class… which is relatively better off, and the city of a completely sagging and increasingly impoverished immobile service class. That’s what I see as the big issue.” (Dembicki, 2014)

The presence of Vancouver’s creative class is marked by a notable degree of exclusivity, largely determined by individuals’ socio-economic standing. This exclusivity is vividly evident in the challenges faced by less affluent newcomers in securing accommodation within the city. Vancouver has the tightest rental market and one of the lowest vacancy rates in Canada, which over the last 30 years has averaged 0.9 percent, which is partly the result of limited new supply of rental housing in recent decades, along with the demand for rental housing from a growing population facing significant increases in the cost of home ownership (City of Vancouver, 2021). Besides, Vancouver has long been a site for housing speculation and the marginalization of vulnerable groups. At the University of British Columbia (UBC), one of North America’s largest academic institutions, students lacking guaranteed housing may find themselves on a waitlist for on-campus accommodation lasting anywhere from 2 to 3 years. Ongoing student-led initiatives, such as the housing4right movement in September 2023, underscore the pressing need for improved student housing solutions. In response to the shortage of on-campus housing, UBC has partnered with private property development firms, leading to the all-year-round construction sites dedicated to forthcoming student accommodation. However, where does the budget come from? The UBC Board of Governors has been increasing its tuition annually, particularly impacting international students who bear tuition fees up to ten times higher than their domestic counterparts. As shown in the campus-wide email notice (see Appendix C), the increased rate of tuition for international students is 2% higher than that of domestic students. Given that the previous amount of international tuition is about 10 times higher than domestic one, the fee increase could put international students in a more vulnerable position as “mine shaft canaries,” who are carried down into the mine tunnels by miners to test and die if there is any danger.

Appendix C

(R. Ng, personal communication, February 20, 2024)

In 2021, the city of Vancouver published a new Housing Vancouver Strategy in response to current housing challenges in the city, such as housing speculation, affordability, and demand-supply mismatch while projecting “10-year Housing Targets”. As suggested in the Strategy, Vancouver is not alone in facing housing challenges due to its growing population and rising housing prices as a global city (p. 5). Therefore, housing solutions that other urban realities, particularly global cities, have used or have been applying to their housing challenges could be replicable for Vancouver. I choose to discuss the applicability of housing solutions in Vienna, Austria, which shares many urban similarities with Vancouver. In the following section, I will first compare the geographical, demographical, and social similarities and differences between Vancouver and Vienna. Then I discuss the feasibility of applying Vienna’s social housing solution in Vancouver. Given the two cities’ discrepancies regarding social housing tradition and political contexts, I articulate limitations for Vancouver to simply replicate Vienna’s social housing framework. Finally, with a case study regarding the legal loophole in Vancouver’s short-term rental market, I further suggest more transformative legal reform toward solving housing challenges in Vancouver.

Urban Similarities of Vancouver and Vienna

My main reason for introducing Vienna while discussing possible solutions for the housing crisis in Vancouver stems from the similarities between the two cities. Despite being located on different continents, they share certain urban characteristics in terms of their liveability, geography, demography, and so on. Based on the Global Liveability Index released by The Economist Intelligence Unit (2023), Vienna is named the world’s most liveable city, while Vancouver ranked fifth for the second year in a row. Geographically, both cities boast stunning natural surroundings; Vancouver is renowned for its picturesque coastal setting nestled between the Pacific Ocean and the Coast Mountains, while Vienna enjoys a prime location along the banks of the Danube River amidst the rolling hills of Austria. Demographically, Vancouver and Vienna are cosmopolitan hubs with diverse populations, attracting people from various cultural backgrounds. In terms of demography, Vienna, with a population of approximately 1.9 million according to its 2021 census, maintains a population density of around 4,000 persons per square kilometer. In contrast, Vancouver, with a significantly smaller population of about 662,248 within its 115.18 square kilometer land area, boasts a higher population density of approximately 5,749.9 people per square kilometer. (Statistique Canada, 2022)

Social housing has been a success in solving housing challenges in Vienna. The notion typically includes two housing sectors: the council housing stock, which is owned and administered by the City of Vienna, and the limited-profit housing stock, which is administered and owned by limited-profit housing associations. With a long tradition of social housing provision dating back to the time of ‘Red Vienna’ in the 1920s, Vienna has been recognized as a world leader in innovative high-performance social housing solutions. As summarized by Kadi and Lilius (2022), social housing in Vienna features three characteristics: the largest share of the housing sector, a low level of privatization, and a substantial contribution to new housing production. In 2020, it accounted for some 43.3% of all units, with council housing and limited-profit housing making up 21.9% and 21.4% of the stock respectively. Despite several means of privatization that could reduce social housing stock, privatization has remained limited. Meanwhile, rather than a decline in new production, as was the norm in many other European cities, social housing has thus actually increased its significance and therefore continues to contribute significantly to new housing production in Vienna. More than 60% of the units were constructed in the limited-profit housing sector between 2012 and 2018. Together with the continued production of new units, consequently, the social housing stock has remained stable in relative terms and grown absolutely. (Kadi & Lilius, 2022; Statistik Austria, 2021)

The common urban characteristics shared by Vancouver and Vienna, coupled with successful social housing initiatives, compel an examination of the feasibility of implementing similar strategies in Vancouver. Indeed, the City of Vancouver brought up the possibility and importance of “learning from other cities around the world that are experiencing increasing housing market pressures due to global flows of money, people and jobs” in the Housing Vancouver Strategy (the Strategy from now on, City of Vancouver, 2019, p. 5). In the subsequent section, I conduct a comparative analysis of statistics of social housing (Statistik Austria, 2021), the Strategy (2019), and the Secured Rental Policy (the Rental Policy from now on, City of Vancouver, 2023). I argue three limitations for Vancouver’s adoption of Vienna’s social housing solutions both empirically and normatively, and come up with possible solutions for each. Furthermore, through a case study highlighting the housing dilemma confronted by a more vulnerable segment of the future creative class: the student community — I will advocate for more transformative legal measures, particularly addressing legal loopholes in Vancouver’s short-term rental market.

One primary obstacle that might prevent Vancouver from applying Vienna’s social housing framework is the absence of relevant historical tradition. Unlike Vienna, where a longstanding commitment to social housing has been integral to urban development since the 1920s, Vancouver lacks a comparable historical context. Therefore, Vancouver’s effort to tackle housing challenges must start with the configuration of the stakes involved. While the City of Vancouver initiated dialogues with government and non-profit housing leaders from Vienna in June 2017, as emphasized in the Strategy (2019), transitioning public focus towards prioritizing social housing for vulnerable groups requires time, corresponding measures, and efforts. Presently, Vancouver’s discourse on rental housing challenges still predominantly revolves around the tension between limited new housing supply and escalating rental demand. In the latest Rental Policy (2023), rental housing challenges are simply articulated as the tension between “limited new housing supply and growing rental demand” (p.4). Meanwhile, the issue of “affordability,” which the Strategy (2019) frames as “the top value for Vancouverities when it comes to housing” (p. 18), receives scant attention, as the 13-page Policy spends merely a half-page section articulating it. Despite implementing policies aligning with affordability concerns, the effectiveness is questionable. For instance, rental regulations stipulate discounts on average rents for residential and mixed-use buildings: “For 100% residential buildings, (the rent should be) 10% less than the average rents …; or for mixed-use buildings, 20% less than the average rents” (2023, p. 10). The Rental Policy concludes its section on affordability by reiterating that “Targeting a deeper level of affordability in a portion of the below-market rental units is encouraged where possible” (p. 10). The encouraging, non-regulative narrative, therefore, risks failing to address the pressing need for comprehensive social housing initiatives. As Florida (2012) identifies, the creative class is and will continue to be the key momentum to the global cities’ economy. Therefore, Vancouver’s future housing strategy should prioritize retaining creative classes, who are more mobile and likely to leave Vancouver for more affordable places.

Another significant barrier to implementing Vienna’s social housing model in Vancouver pertains to differing political and institutional contexts. Vienna’s success in providing social housing is underpinned by a robust political consensus and institutional framework conducive to long-term planning and investment. As suggested by Marquardt and Glaser (2023), Vienna’s approach to promoting permanent affordable housing is more successful in that it enables the city to actively pursue housing policy goals (p. 362). In contrast, Vancouver is governed by the 10-member city council, a nine-member school board, and a seven-member park board, all elected for four-year terms. While efforts to enhance affordability are commendable, the fragmented nature of governance and policy implementation in Vancouver undermines the coherence and effectiveness of housing initiatives. Moreover, the prevalence of speculation in Vancouver’s housing market exacerbates affordability issues by driving up prices and incentivizing short-term profit-seeking over long-term community welfare. The influence of vested interests, including real estate developers and speculative investors, complicates efforts to prioritize social housing over profit-driven development. As indicated in the Strategy, Vancouver has been adopting new policies, tools, and approaches to tackling homelessness, creating and retaining affordable housing, and addressing the symptoms of speculative investment such as empty homes since 2012 (p. 3). Consequently, achieving consensus on the necessity and scope of social housing interventions becomes increasingly challenging within Vancouver’s political and institutional milieu.

The third limitation to applying Vienna’s social housing framework in Vancouver lies in the existence of legal loopholes within the regulatory framework, which might allow landlords to exploit vulnerabilities in rental laws, resulting in drastic rent increases and housing instability. The issue is exemplified by the case study of Christina and Benjamin, two students at the University of British Columbia who navigate escalating rents and limited availability in Vancouver’s competitive rental market. Christina, an international student from Thailand, exemplifies this struggle, sharing a basement with another student for 1400 CAD—a relatively modest rate considering the circumstances, yet still indicative of the challenges faced. Her commute to campus takes 30 minutes by bus, highlighting the trade-offs many students make for affordable housing. Interestingly, my friend Benjamin had lived in the same apartment for nearly two years before Christina moved in. When I asked him how much he pays, it was only 900 CAD every month, which was considerably lower than Christina’s. Despite regulations stipulating a 3.5% cap on rent increases in 2024 according to the Government of British Columbia, legal loopholes persist. Christina and her roommate experienced a staggering 55.6% hike in their rent, from 900 CAD to 1400 CAD. The landlord justified the exorbitant rent hike by claiming that a relative would be staying in the basement during the summer months of 2023, for which she asked Benjamin and his roommate to move out. While this explanation served as a pretext for seeking new tenants, it also highlighted the ease with which landlords can exploit loopholes to justify rent increases beyond the bounds of regulatory oversight. (C. Zhao & B. Wang, personal communication, April 1, 2024)

Such loopholes, I argue, risk diminishing the feasibility of Vancouver’s adoption of social housing solutions akin to those in Vienna. Therefore, it is imperative to recognize the crucial role of transformative legal reforms, employing a housing justice framework in the policymaking of the Vancouver housing market. For example, the framework “secured occupancy,” proposed by Hulse & Milligan (2014), studies the “dynamics between legislation/regulation, housing market conditions, public policies and cultural norms around renting” (p. 638). A broader framework of housing and rental justice should introduce the evaluation, I contend, should be able to consider nuances and dynamics, rather than merely reiterate housing security, as seen in the Strategy (2019). While developing the new legal framework, the City should consult its citizens to integrate the consideration of complicated stakeholder interactions in the market into policymaking. Through doing so, such as addressing these loopholes, the city’s ability to provide affordable and secure housing for its residents will continue to be compromised. Thus, I specifically advocate for a thorough overhaul of existing regulations to close loopholes, fortify tenant protections, and bolster enforcement mechanisms. Understanding the urgency of addressing regulatory shortcomings to ensure housing justice, the employment of the housing justice framework, and legal reform can make Vancouver’s implementation of Vienna’s social housing feasible.

Conclusion

In conclusion, both being global cities, Vancouver and Vienna share multiple urban characteristics, which could allow the former to borrow Vienna’s social housing as a solution. Vancouver has become a global city due to its advantageous global connectivity, and friendly climate for local and transnational business, and the creative class. Vienna, on the other hand, has been the global leader in social housing provision and innovative urban housing solutions. Both cities top the list of most liveable cities worldwide while sharing similar geographies and demographics as global cities. Vienna has been the global leader in providing social housing, which the city’s housing stock is primarily composed of. While importing Vienna’s social housing framework could be a feasible solution for Vancouver’s housing challenges, similar urban characteristics don’t guarantee the success of Vancouver’s adoption. After the comparative analysis of statistics on Vienna’s social housing plan, Vancouver Housing Strategy (City of Vancouver, 2019), and following Secured Rental Policy (2021), I conclude three limitations for Vancouver to fully adopt Vienna’s social housing framework: the absence of a long tradition of social housing, less unified political and institutional contexts, and existing legal loopholes. Finally, with a case study of a legal loophole in Vancouver’s short-term renting market, my paper suggests a more transformative and comprehensive legal reform to employ the housing justice framework that considers the more nuanced dynamics of stakeholders in the Vancouver housing market.

Reference

City of Vancouver. (2023). Secured Rental Policy: Incentives for New Rental Housing.

Dembicki, G. (2014, October). Creative but Poor? Yep, the “Creative Class” Has Its Class Divide. The Tyee. https://thetyee.ca/News/2014/10/24/Creative-Class-Divided/

Florida, R. (2010, August 25). Where the Creative Class Jobs Will Be. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/08/where-the-creative-class-jobs-will-be/61468/

Florida, R. (2012). The Rise of the Creative Class (Revisited). Basic Books.

Hulse, K., & Milligan, V. (2014). Secure Occupancy: A New Framework for Analysing Security in Rental Housing. Housing Studies, 29(5), 638–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2013.873116

Institute for Urban Strategies, The Mori Memorial Foundation. (2023). Global Power City Index [dataset].

Kadi, J., & Lilius, J. (2022). The remarkable stability of social housing in Vienna and Helsinki: A multi-dimensional analysis. Housing Studies, 0(0), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2022.2135170

Marquardt, S., & Glaser, D. (2023). How Much State and How Much Market? Comparing Social Housing in Berlin and Vienna. German Politics, 32(2), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2020.1771696

Ng, R. (2024, February 20). UBC Campuswide notification about the tuition raise [Personal communication].

Sassen, S. (1991). The global city: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press.

Statistik Austria. (2021). Housing census on the stock of buildings and dwellings 2021 [dataset]. https://www.statistik.at/en/databases/statcube-statistical-database

Statistique Canada. (2022). Census Profile, 2021 Census of Population [dataset]. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2023). Global Liveability Index [dataset].

Vancouver Economic Commission. (n.d.). 7 Reasons Vancouver is a Leading City for Doing Business. Retrieved April 12, 2024, from https://vancouvereconomic.com/blog/vecs_take/7-reasons-vancouver-is-great-for-business/

Zhao, C., & Wang, B. (2024, April 1). A legal loophole? Two UBC students talking about renting escalation in Vancouver [Personal communication].