The Rural Lens
“The rural poor are, in many ways, invisible. They don’t beg for change. They don’t congregate in downtown cores. They rarely line up at homeless shelters because, with few exceptions, there are none. They rarely go to the local employment insurance office because the local employment insurance office is not so local anymore. They rarely complain about their plight because that is just not the way things are done in rural Canada” (Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, 2006, p.v).
Non-metro area (NMA) communities have been categorized a multitude of ways including by status of population growth/density, demographics, proximity to larger centres, and industry/economic base, all of which influence housing dynamics. Rural Southwestern Ontario geographies often leave towns tightly bound by prime agricultural land adding restrictions to development, and the increased cost of rural municipal infrastructure adds an additional price burden.
Although the body of housing industry documentation can be overwhelming, urban centres garner much of the attention based on sheer scale, while little focus has been put on the non-metro perspective. Housing is an intensely local issue, nuances of local need and community influences are significant to understand when evaluating context and solutions. Of the non-metro academic work completed, case studies have highlighted the need for local capacity and leadership to develop enabling environments and place based approaches to non-metro housing needs under what is a complex policy system, however the focus has typically been on the outcome not on what those specific capacities and needed enabling conditions were.
Less populated geographies can be significantly influenced by regional dynamics or single industry decisions, which can leave Councils reacting to imminent pressures rather than planning for a sustainable supply of affordable housing. Challenges with obtaining consistent localized data and comparable data sets down to the granular level of rural communities adds difficulty for housing assessment and planning.
Gentrification is usually reviewed from an urban context however the COVID pandemic has heightened the impacts of gentrification on non-metro communities with an influx of urban residents arriving with higher economic capital, the desire for more space and the newly found encourager of remote work, all in turn elevating housing prices and exacerbating the challenges of meeting local affordability needs and infrastructure investment. Gentrification pressures and lack of local social support services also pushes vulnerable sectors to larger rural centres, putting pressure on these central non-metro hubs from both ends of the spectrum. Due to distances to services, there is a requirement for a mode of transportation, of which public transit has been void in rural areas. Seniors do not have a breadth of downsizing or smaller home tenure options and struggle to maintain the oversized older homes in which they live, giving little option to age in place in their community.
Morris et al (2020) states that "NMA communities, expecting to see large parts of their workforce retiring in the next decade, are concerned with retaining their youth, attracting a new workforce, and enabling their retirees to age-in-place. The current NMA housing stock ticks none of those boxes. It is old, not energy efficient, in need of major repairs, lacks modern amenities and design, and is not accessible or adaptable for those wanting to age-in-place. Ignoring housing issues in non-metropolitan Canada will have serious consequences, including decreased economic potential and increased cost of public services.” Morris proceeds to suggest that NMAs “do not have housing that is suitable and safe for older residents and they do not have housing that is attractive to younger residents. This is a formula for community decline.” Morris summarizes with a clear statement that “the economic sustainability and community wellbeing of non-metropolitan Canada is at risk because the state of housing has become a key constraint on economic and community development.”
Rural areas often have a monolithic landscape of large aged detached single family dwellings, reducing household sizes, and little supply of rental housing. This homogeneic palate of housing form and tenure leads to an increased level of NIMBYism as there has not been significant exposure to positive forms of densification. Residential tenure is focused on home ownership, imposing significant barriers for low income households to save for a down payment, and new affordable construction is rare. There is a mismatch between supply and need.
As our Country is reliant on immigration so too will the non-metro communities be required to welcome newcomers to sustain their economies. Research has shown the significance of housing for initial immigrant settlement, whether they are moving to rural areas directly from their home country or as a secondary move within Canada, on social connection, community integration, and in turn desire to stay. For smaller communities to entice newcomers they must embrace diversity and become welcoming, part of that is having appropriate housing available.
NMA Housing & Homelessness Reports show the drastic rise in housing prices have created a rapidly divergent trend with incomes, creating challenges for not just low but also moderate income households. In Stratford, Perth County and St. Marys (City of Stratford, 2020) up to the 40th income percentile cannot afford any market level rent for any type of dwelling, and you must be in the 70th income percentile or higher to afford a two bedroom unit, if you can find one.
NMA employers are desperate for staff and recognize the significant influence attainable housing stock plays as a contributing factor to the local labour shortage. Rural economic vitality will be influenced by the ability to provide needed housing stock.
A review of stakeholder feedback throughout my research highlighted the following experiences and perceptions of non-metro areas when it comes to housing:
We have a dominant single family dwelling portfolio, a monolithic landscape of large aging homes, and we’re conservative, skeptical, and even sometimes combative with diversity and density options;
·We have a desire to protect agricultural lands, which means we will have to densify within our villages, towns, and urban boundaries – up, back, beside, or inside;
We are not great with change;
We have over housed seniors with minimal downsizing options;
We have limited rental housing supply and it is often stigmatized;
Everybody knows everybody, these interconnections can be very helpful as well as a hindrance;
We have an added social perception where we think everyone should work hard and be able to buy a house and take care of themselves;
We are in dire need of workforce, and everyone we have is working;
Gentrification has come upon us, those moving out from the more urban areas are aiding the rising cost of housing, but we need and want new residents;
We have limited depth or breadth of resources, infrastructure, services, and capacity;
We have not yet made housing a significant priority that we view our choices, actions, or decisions through the lens of how does this help or hinder someone having a place to call home, and that they actually deserve one as much as we do; and
We have strong social connections, community allegiance, and can be nimble, responsive, innovative, and action oriented.
City of Stratford Social Services Department. (2020). Stratford, Perth County, and St. Marys Housing and Homelessness Plan 5 Year Update 2020-2024.
Morris, M., Good, J., & Halseth, G. (2020). Building Foundations for the Future: Housing, community development, and economic opportunity in non-metropolitan Canada. Community Development Institute at the University of Northern British Columbia.