Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • Study explores media coverage of pipeline controversies December 14, 2018
    Supporters of fossil fuel infrastructure projects position themselves as friends of working people, framing climate action as antithetical to the more immediately pressing need to protect oil and gas workers’ livelihoods. And as the latest report from the CCPA-BC and Corporate Mapping Project confirms, this framing has become dominant across the media landscape. Focusing on pipeline […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Study highlights ‘uncomfortable truth’ about racism in the job market December 12, 2018
    "Racialized workers in Ontario are significantly more likely to be concentrated in low-wage jobs and face persistent unemployment and earnings gaps compared to white employees — pointing to the “uncomfortable truth” about racism in the job market, according to a new study." Read the Toronto Star's coverage of our updated colour-coded labour market report, released […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Uploading the subway will not help Toronto commuters December 12, 2018
    The Ontario government is planning to upload Toronto’s subway, claiming it will allow for the rapid expansion of better public transit across the GTHA, but that’s highly doubtful. Why? Because Minister of Transportation Jeff Yurek’s emphasis on public-private partnerships and a market-driven approach suggests privatization is the cornerstone of the province’s plan. Will dismembering the […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • 2018 State of the Inner City Report: Green Light Go...Improving Transportation Equity December 7, 2018
    Getting to doctors appointments, going to school, to work, attending social engagments, picking up groceries and even going to the beach should all affordable and accessible.  Check out Ellen Smirl's reserach on transportation equity in Winnipeg in this year's State of the Inner City Report!
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Inclusionary housing in a slow-growth city like Winnipeg December 3, 2018
    In Winnipeg, there is a need for more affordable housing, as 21 percent of households (64,065 households) are living in unaffordable housing--according to CMHC's definition of spending more than 30 percent of income on shelter.  This report examines to case studies in two American cities and how their experience could help shape an Inclusionary Housing […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

Tuition Increases by Stealth

On Tuesday night, Peterborough City Council approved a plan for a for-profit corporation to own and operate a new student residence at Trent University.  I’m concerned that this may signal a new trend at Canadian universities; about a year ago, I blogged about a similar plan at the University of Toronto.

I am not opposed to private sector actors being hired to build student housing (or any other kind of housing, for that matter).  Indeed, even when social housing is built, roughly 95 percent of the capital costs go to the private sector to pay engineers, land surveyors, lawyers, labourers and others.  But as I argue in a 2007 policy paper, over the long term, rent increases significantly more when housing is owned and operated by a private entity as opposed to a not-for-profit entity.  This in turn results in increases in rent for other tenants living in the same geographical area.

Thus, when a private entity owns and operates student housing, the cost of rent at some point (especially 10 or 20 years down the road) could easily be $100 more per month than if a not-for-profit entity owned and operated the housing.  For a student living in the housing for a full year, this amounts, in effect, to a $1,200/year tuition increase.  What’s more, these rent increases create upward pressure on rent for tenants throughout the jurisdiction (probably less pressure in municipalities where students make up a small proportion of tenants, and more pressure in municipalities where students make up a larger proportion of tenants…such as in a “university town”).

When senior levels of government and universities allow for-profit entities to own and operate student housing, I believe they do two things.  First, they increase the cost of living for students living in said housing.  Second (and less directly), they increase the cost of living for other students (and other tenants) living near that housing.

I think senior levels of government should work with universities to ensure that for-profit corporations never own and operate student housing.  They should also ensure that student housing owned and operated by universities operates on a revenue-neutral basis (i.e. universities should not use the student housing as a source of revenue to fund other activities).

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Travis Fast
Time: August 4, 2011, 7:45 am

“Second (and less directly), they increase the cost of living for other students living near that housing.”

That is a feature not a bug. University administrations are increasingly in bed with the local land-developers sometimes they serve directly on the BOG.

Comment from Phil Robinson
Time: August 4, 2011, 9:56 am

Well put Nick. Currently many (if not most) universities are using student housing as a revenue generating activity and are hence behaving like private for-profit corporations.

Comment from Donald Hughes
Time: August 4, 2011, 7:33 pm

If you argue that non-profit housing can deliver the same housing for much cheaper, why even have a dominant private sector in housing at all? As in, couldn’t the rental market be largely converted to non-profit housing over time, making this particular issue of secondary consequence?

Comment from Travis Fast
Time: August 4, 2011, 8:05 pm

“If you argue that non-profit housing can deliver the same housing for much cheaper, why even have a dominant private sector in housing at all? As in, couldn’t the rental market be largely converted to non-profit housing over time, making this particular issue of secondary consequence?”

Good point!

Comment from boris
Time: August 4, 2011, 9:19 pm

The U of Alberta last year built some brand new townhouse style student residences, a portion of which are grad residences. They charged ~$900/month for a bachelor in the grad buildings. When I checked in the mid-year, they still had vacancies, I suspect because that cost is simply unaffordable to most graduate students, even those that are funded. If rents in that private student housing are too high, they might actually find themselves with an excess of vacancies because students will avoid it, especially when there’s cheaper places to be had in the city.

Write a comment





Related articles