Preservation of Affordable Rural Rental Properties by Understanding Owners, Managers, Subsidies, and the Local Market
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21633786 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Brian Y An (0000-0002-8945-6981, Georgia Institute of Technology), Andrew Jakabovics (0000-0002-4221-3886, Policy Development, Enterprise Community Partners), Anthony W Orlando (0000-0003-3397-5368, College of Business Administration, California State Polytechnic University Pomona), Seva Rodnyansky (0000-0002-7321-7572, Urban and Environmental Policy Institute, Occidental College, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 787-810 |
| Publication date | 2025-09-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Housing Policy Debate (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1051-1482 • E-ISSN: 2152-050X |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/10511482.2025.2531878 |
| OpenAlex | W4414016743 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 27 |
Rural affordable housing preservation is a pressing policy issue due to subsidy expiration, aging properties, encroaching exurban growth, increasing property management challenges, and ownership succession uncertainties. Little research has been done on how ownership characteristics influence preservation outcomes. This study extends the literature on ownership type and scale impacts to the rural affordable housing field, by exploring multifamily properties financed through the USDA Rural Development’s Section 515 program. These properties are a critical source of affordable rental housing in many rural communities. This paper estimates the impact of five key factors on program exit: property characteristics, owner and manager typology and scale, history of additional subsidies, market concentration, and local market conditions. Results suggest that profit-motivated owners are the most likely to exit the program, especially those using non-scaled up property management companies, and holding properties without any other current or previous subsidies. Properties in counties with higher unemployment and military employment share were also more likely to exit. This work sheds light on rural rental markets and what drives ongoing affordability program participation
Affordable housing · Business · Economic growth · Economics · Market economy · Public economics · Rental housing · Renting · Subsidized housing · Subsidy · Agricultural Economics and Policy · Housing Market and Economics
Gentrifying Atlanta
Challenges for Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Projects at Year 15 and Beyond in a Weak Housing Market
Who Owns America? A Methodology for Identifying Landlords’ Ownership Scale and the Implications for Targeted Code Enforcement
Private Investment and Public Housing
The Social and Institutional Contexts Underlying Landlords’ Eviction Practices
Exploring the cost burden of rural rental housing
Year 15 and the Preservation of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Projects
The rural housing crisis
Safety net? The use of vouchers when a place-based rental subsidy ends
Neighbourhoods, local networks and the non-linear path of the expiration and preservation of federal rental subsidies
Why Do Management Practices Differ across Firms and Countries
The Organization of Neglect
Differential Access in Mortgage Credit
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |