Canada could use thermal infrastructure to turn wasted heat emissions into energy

James (Jim) S. Cotton, McMaster University and Caleb Duffield, McMaster University

Buildings are the third-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. In many cities, including Vancouver, Toronto and Calgary, buildings are the single highest source of emissions.

The recently launched Infrastructure for Good barometer, released by consulting firm Deloitte, suggests that Canada’s infrastructure investments already top the global list in terms of positive societal, economic and environmental benefits.

In fact, over the past 150 years, Canada has built railways, roads, clean water systems, electrical grids, pipelines and communication networks to connect and serve people across the country.

Now, there’s an opportunity to build on Canada’s impressive tradition by creating a new form of infrastructure: capturing, storing and sharing the massive amounts of heat lost from industry, electricity generation and communities, even in summer.

Natural gas precedent

Indoor heating often comes from burning fossil fuels — three-quarters of Ontario homes, for example, are heated by natural gas. Until about 1966, homes across Canada were primarily heated by wood stoves, coal boilers, oil furnaces or heaters using electricity from coal-fired power plants.

After the oil crisis of the 1970s, many of those fuels were replaced by natural gas, delivered directly to individual homes. The cost of the natural gas infrastructure, including a national network of pipelines, was amortized over more than 50 years to make the cost more practical.

Sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario. (J. Cotton), CC BY

This reliable, low-cost energy source quickly proved to be popular. The change cut heating emissions across Ontario by roughly half throughout the 1970s and 1980s, long before climate change was the concern it is today.

Now, as the need to decarbonize becomes more pressing, recent studies not only emphasize the often-overstated emissions reductions benefits from using natural gas; they also indicate that burning this fuel source is still far from net-zero.

However, there’s no reason why Canadian governments can’t invest in new infrastructure-based alternative heating solutions. This time, they could replace natural gas with an alternative, net-zero source: the wasted heat already emitted by other energy uses.

Heat capture and storage

Depending on the source temperature, technology used and system design, heat can be captured throughout the year, stored and distributed as needed. A type of infrastructure called thermal networks could capture leftover heat from factories and nuclear and gas-fired power plants.

In essence, thermal networks take excess thermal energy from industrial processes (though thermal energy can theoretically be captured from a variety of different sources), and use it as a centralized heating source for a series of insulated underground pipelines connected to multiple other buildings. These pipelines, in turn, are used to heat or cool these connected buildings.

A substantial potential to capture heat similarly exists in every neighbourhood. Heat is produced by data centres, grocery stores, laundromats, restaurants, sewage systems and even hockey arenas.

In Ontario, the amount of energy we dump in the form of heat is greater than all the natural gas we use to heat our homes.

A restaurant, for example, can produce enough heat for seven family homes. To take advantage of the wasted heat, Canada needs to build thermal networks, corridors and storage to capture and distribute heat directly to consumers.

The effort demands substantial leadership from all levels of government. Creating these systems would be expensive, but the technology does exist, and the one-time cost would pay for itself many times over.

Such systems are already working in other cold countries. Thermal networks heat half the homes in Sweden and two-thirds of homes in Denmark.

District heating pipes being laid at Gullbergs Strandgata in Gothenburg, Sweden in May 2021. (Shutterstock)

The oil crisis of the 1970s motivated both countries to find new domestic heating sources. They financed their new infrastructure over 50 years and reduced their investment risks through low-interest bonds (loaned by public banks) and generous subsidies.

These were offered to utility companies looking to expand district energy operations, and to consumers by incentivizing connections to such systems. Additionally, in Denmark, controlled consumer prices served a similar function.

At least seven American states have established thermal energy networks, with New York being the first. The state’s Utility Thermal Energy Network and Jobs Act allows public utilities to own, operate and manage thermal networks.

They can supply thermal energy, but so can private producers such as data centres, all with public oversight. Such a strategy avoids monopolies and allows gas and electric utilities to deliver services through central networks.

An opportunity for Canada

Canada has a real opportunity to learn from the experiences of Sweden, Denmark and New York. In doing so, Canada can create a beneficial and truly national heating system in the process. Beginning with federal government leadership, thermal networks could be built across Canada, tailored to the unique and individual needs, strengths and opportunities of municipalities and provinces.

Such a shift would reduce emissions and generate greater energy sovereignty for Canada. It could drive a just energy strategy that could provide employment opportunities for those displaced by the transition away from fossil fuels, while simultaneously increasing Canada’s economic independence in the process.

Thermal networks could be built using pipelines made from Canadian steel. Oil-well drillers from Alberta could dig borehole heat-storage systems. A new market for heat-recovery pumps would create good advanced-manufacturing jobs in Canada.

Funding for the infrastructure could come through public-private partnerships, with major investments from public banks and pension funds, earning a solid and secure rate of return. A regulated approach and process could permit this infrastructure cost to be amortized over decades, similar to the way past governments have financed gas, electrical and water networks.

As researchers studying the engineering and policy potential of such an opportunity, we view such actions as essential if net-zero is to be achieved in the Canadian building sector. They are also a win-win solution for incumbent industry, various levels of government and citizens across Canada alike.

Yet efforts to install robust thermal networks remain stalled by institutional inertia, the strong influence of the oil industry, limited citizen awareness of the technology’s potential and a tendency for government to view the electrification of heating as the primary solution to building decarbonization.

In this time of environmental crisis and international uncertainty, pushing past these barriers, drawing on Canada’s lengthy history of constructing infrastructure and creating this new form thermal energy infrastructure would be a safe, beneficial and conscientious way to move Canada into a more climate-friendly future.

James (Jim) S. Cotton, Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, McMaster University and Caleb Duffield, PhD Candidate in Political Science, McMaster University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How women are trapped in years of homelessness that often begin in their teens

Mary Vaccaro, McMaster University

Many women without children in their care who become homeless in Canada remain homeless for many years. Yet their experiences remain misunderstood and largely ignored because of the ways we define and measure homelessness in Canada.

I have worked in the women’s emergency shelter system in Hamilton, Ont., since 2012. I have met many women who have been navigating homelessness for years — with no permanent solution to their housing crisis. For my PhD in social work, I interviewed 21 women who had experienced homelessness for a year or longer in Hamilton. I asked them about their experiences, and through art-based activities, about their ideas for housing and support.

What I learned in the interviews, combined with existing research, highlights a hidden crisis. Within our current system resides a profound human cost that manages, instead of resolves, homelessness.

Many women who experience homelessness do so for far longer than the federal government’s definition of chronic homelessness, which is six consecutive months or 18 months over three years. Research from the United Kingdom that focuses on long-term and unresolved homelessness for women found that the ways women experience homelessness is to “go around in circles” without having their housing or support needs met.

Among the women I spoke with, more than half had been experiencing homelessness for 10 years or longer. Six of the the women said they have never had a safe place of their own to live for the entirety of their adult lives.

All of the women who participated in this project accessed the services offered by the homeless serving sector, including shelters and outreach workers, designed to resolve their homelessness. Yet none of these women were able to have their housing and support needs met.

This means their experience of homelessness has persisted for years, and even decades.

Homelessness often starts in their teens

More than half of the participants I spoke with first experienced homelessness before they turned 18. Their primary route into youth homelessness was gender-based violence. They ran away from home when they were teenaged girls to escape violence and became caught in a cycle of events that include: hospitalization, incarceration, staying in youth shelters, living in group homes and unsafe places.

The Pan-Canadian Women’s Housing and Homelessness Survey, as well as a study on Toronto youth, echo what the women I spoke with told me. Studies from the United States also confirm similar patterns — homelessness begins early in life for a majority of women, and is often followed by a chronic, chaotic churn of precarious housing and homelessness situations.

The women in my study described a frustrating and exhausting cycle of going among institutions such as hospitals, jails, emergency shelters, drop-in programs and transitional housing programs. They had all spent periods of time living outdoors, in encampments, in motels, with unsafe people and in other precarious and temporary housing arrangements. This phenomena is well-documented in existing Canadian research.

Better definitions, better data

The Canadian government defines those who have been homeless and using shelters for more than 180 days a year as experiencing “acute chronicity.”

Another term used by the federal government for individuals who have accessed shelters at least once in each of the last three years is “prolonged instability.”

People who meet one or both of these criteria are considered to have the highest housing needs in the country.

According to recent federal data, women and gender-diverse people across Canada experience slightly higher rates of acute chronicity than men (13.4 per cent for men, 15.4 per cent for women, and 13.9 per cent for gender-diverse people). But the real numbers for women are likely much higher due to under-reporting.

Research shows women remain invisible to official systems during periods of homelessness. For example, the available data relies solely on information about emergency shelter usage. It does not capture experiences of homelessness that occur outside of the shelter system.

Women are less likely than their male counterparts to access shelters and other formal supports. Instead, they rely on precarious, unsafe and temporary housing arrangements to navigate homelessness.

In Canada, there are also fewer emergency women-specific shelter beds than for men

Rethinking responses to long-term homelessness

For the women I spoke with, the official 180 days or three years that makes someone officially chronically homeless in Canada does not even begin to describe the length and complexity of their experiences of homelessness.

They described wanting to live in supportive, gender-specific housing programs that foster community and care. Highly supportive housing typically integrates health and social services and a range of other support services. This type of integrated housing does exist across Canada — examples are the Block Line Supportive Housing Program operated by YWCA Kitchener-Waterloo and the Women’s Building (Alpha House) in Calgary — but there is not enough of it.

The current measurements from the government of Canada fall short of capturing the complexity of the homeless experience for many Canadian women.

Government officials must therefore not only rethink their definitions of those in the most housing need, they must develop responsive housing solutions to meet the needs of women who have been homeless for many years.

Mary Vaccaro, Lecturer in Social Work, McMaster University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change

John_T/Shutterstock

Paul O'Hare, Manchester Metropolitan University

Climate breakdown poses immense threats to global economies, societies and ecosystems. Adapting to these impacts is urgent. But many cities and countries remain chronically unprepared in what the UN calls an “adaptation gap”.

Building climate resilience is notoriously difficult. Economic barriers limit investment in infrastructure and technology. Social inequities undermine the capacity of vulnerable populations to adapt. And inconsistent policies impede coordinated efforts across sectors and at scale.

My research looks at how cities can better cope with climate change. I have identified five ways to catalyse more effective – and ultimately more progressive – climate adaptation and resilience.

1. Don’t just ‘bounce back’ after a crisis

When wildfires, storms or floods hit, all too often governments prioritise rebuilding as rapidly as possible.

Though understandable, resilience doesn’t just entail coping with the effects of climate change. Instead of “bouncing back” to a pre-shock status, those in charge of responding need to encourage “bouncing forward”, creating places that are at less risk in the first place.

After the Christchurch earthquake in February 2011, the New Zealand authorities “built back better”, improving building codes and regulations and relocating vulnerable communities. Critics suggested reconstruction provided too much uncertainty and failed to acknowledge private property rights. But the rebuild did encourage better integration of planning policies and land use practices.

Swales and sustainable urban drainage in Gorton climate resilient park, Manchester, UK. Paul O'Hare, CC BY-NC-ND

2. Informed by risk

It can be difficult to predict what the consequences of a crisis might be. Cities are complex, interconnected places. Transboundary risks – the consequences that ripple across a place – must be taken into account.

The best climate adaptation plans recognise that vulnerability varies across places, contexts and over time. The most effective are holistic: tailored to specific locations and every aspect of society.

Assessments must also consider both climatic and non-climatic features of risk. In 2015, in the UK, a flood affected one of Lancaster’s electrical substations, causing a city-wide power failure that took several days to rectify. In this instance, as with so many others, people had to deal not just with the direct impacts of flooding, but the ‘cascading’ or knock-on impacts of infrastructure damage.

Many existing assessments have limited scope. But others do acknowledge how ageing infrastructures and pressures to develop land to accommodate ever intensifying urban populations exacerbate urban flood risk. Others too, such as the recently published Cambridge climate risk plan, detail how climate risk intersects with the range of services provided by local government.

Systems thinking – an approach to problem-solving that views problems as part of wider, interconnected systems – can be applied to identify interdependencies with other drivers of change.

Good risk assessments will, for example, take note of demographics, age profiles and the socio-economic circumstances of neighbourhoods, enabling targeted support for particularly vulnerable communities. This can help ensure communities and systems adapt to evolving challenges as climate change intensifies, and as society evolves over time.

Complex though this might be, city leaders can access advice about improving risk assessments, including from the C40 network, a global coalition of 100 mayors committed to addressing climate change.

3. Transformative action

There is no such thing as a natural disaster. The effects of disasters including floods and earthquakes are influenced by pre-existing, often chronic, social and economic conditions such as poverty or poor housing.

Progressive climate resilience looks beyond the immediacy of shocks, attending to the underlying root causes of vulnerability and inequality. This ensures that society is not only better prepared to withstand adverse events in the future, but thrives in the face of uncertainty.

Progressive climate resilience therefore demands tailored responses depending on the population and place. In Bangladesh, for instance, communities are building floating gardens to grow crops during floods. These enhance food security and provide a sustainable livelihood option in flood-prone areas.

Floating vegetable gardens in Bangladesh. Mostafijur Rahman Nasim/Shutterstock

4. Collective approaches

Effective climate resilience demands collective action. Sometimes referred to as a “whole of society” response, this entails collaboration and shared responsibility to address the multifaceted challenges posed by a changing climate.

The most effective initiatives avoid self-protection, of people, buildings and cities alike, and consider both broader and longer-term risks. For instance, developments not at significant risk should still incorporate adaptation measures including rainwater harvesting or enhanced greening to lower a city’s climate risk profile and benefit local communities, neighbouring authorities and surrounding regions.

So, progressive resilience is connected, comprehensive and inclusive. Solidarity is key, leveraging resources to address common challenges and fostering a sense of shared purpose and mutual support.

Solar panels on the surface of a reservoir not only provide a source of renewable energy but also provide shade and therefore help conserve water. Tom Wang/Shutterstock

5. Exploiting co-benefits

The most effective resilience projects exploit co-benefits – what the UN calls “multiple resilience dividends” – to leverage additional benefits across sectors and policies, reducing vulnerability to shocks while addressing other social and environmental challenges.

In northern Europe, for example, moorlands can be restored to retain water helping alleviate downstream flooding, but also to capture carbon and provide vital habitats for biodiversity.

In south-East Asia solar panels installed on reservoirs generate renewable energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while providing shade to reduce evaporation and conserve water resources during droughts.

In short, adaptation is obviously crucial for tackling climate change across the globe. But the real challenge is to deal with the impacts of climate change while simultaneously creating communities that are fairer, healthier, and better equipped to face any manner of future risks.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

---

Paul O'Hare, Lecturer in Human Geography and Urban Development, Manchester Metropolitan University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ontario Professional Planners Climate Action Guide

The Ontario Professional Planners Institute (OPPI) in partnership with the Climate Risk Institute (CRI) and the Ontario Resource Centre for Climate Adaptation (ORCCA) have announced the publication of a Climate Change Adaptation Practice Guide.

The guide aims to recognize the important role Registered Professional Planners (RPPs) play in helping Ontario adapt to climate change as well as support individual communities in building resilience against the climate threats they may face. To read the guide (68 pages) click here

Large cities such at the Waterloo region have instituted a programme of High Performance Standards that are aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The plan is to engage with industry and the community to ensure a consistent set of standards that address climiate change. To read more, click here.

Net-zero homes are touted as a solution for climate change, but they remain out of reach for most

Net-zero homes play an important role in combating climate change. (Shutterstock)

Ehsan Noroozinejad Farsangi, University of British Columbia and T.Y. Yang, University of British Columbia

Net-zero homes use natural energy sources and are designed to use less energy and, as such, are considered important in the fight against climate change. But for the average Canadian, they’re still out of reach.

Net-zero homes are important for tackling climate change. This includes both net-zero energy (NZE) homes, which produce as much energy as they use each year, and net-zero carbon (NZC) homes, which don’t release any carbon dioxide.

Released in the summer of 2024, the Canada Green Buildings Strategy outlines a bold vision to transform the country’s building sector, aiming for net-zero emissions and enhanced resilience by 2050. This is a bold step forward, but transforming the sector will require sustained collaboration across all levels of government, industry and communities.

CTV News covers the federal government’s Green Buildings Strategy.

Net-zero homes use green energy sources and efficient designs to match the amount of energy they produce with the amount they use. They use strategies like thermal shells that use less energy, high-performance components and the addition of green energy systems.

Net-zero homes also help Canada reach larger climate goals by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide it releases into the air.

Purchasing and installing these technologies can be cost-prohibitive, but in the long run, homeowners both save money on power bills and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

Those who are unable to make changes to their homes can still live in a net-zero way by buying green power or carbon offsets.

The sustainable housing market

Net-zero homes are becoming more popular in Canada. To speed up building processes and reduce costs, builders are trying out pre-fabricated and modular building techniques.

In 2024, the Canadian federal government announced a $600 million package of loans and funding to help make it easier and cheaper to build homes. This funding will support innovative technologies like pre-fabricated and modular construction, robotics, 3D-printing and mass timber to build homes faster and cheaper.

The Net Zero Council of the Canadian Home Builders’ Association has also been important in enhancing standards and practices and promoting novel approaches that cut costs while still being environmentally friendly. In doing so, CHBA drives the adoption of cheaper, environmentally friendly technologies and processes, enhancing industry standards and practices across Canada.

While CHBA collaborates with government agencies, such as Natural Resources Canada to promote innovation and elevate industry standards. Government programs typically provide funding, technical support and policy guidance, whereas CHBA focuses on training, best practices and market development for its members.

Government research programs through CanmetENERGY also work to improve technologies and give builders and planners the tools they need.

There are several reasons that owning a net-zero home has not yet become widespread. These include: high initial costs, limited awareness and education, gaps in policy and regulation and market challenges including difficulties in scaling up and integrating net-zero technologies.

Future directions

To make net-zero homes accessible to all Canadians, a multi-faceted approach is required.

Increased subsidies and incentives and expanding financial support for both builders and buyers can lower barriers to entry. The government of Canada’s 2030 Emission Reduction Plan includes $9.1 billion in new investments over the next eight years — adding to the $17 billion announced in 2021 — to support decarbonization efforts.

Enhancing public awareness and developing educational campaigns highlighting the cost savings and environmental benefits of net-zero homes are both essential approaches to raising awareness and support.

Policy reform can accelerate adoption of net-zero homes. Examples include harmonizing building codes and introducing mandatory energy efficiency standards to accelerate adoption.

Supporting continued research into technical innovation and developing cost-effective materials and renewable energy systems will drive down costs. Investment in modern methods of construction should be prioritized to accelerate the transition toward sustainable and energy-efficient building practices.

Partnerships between governments, private developers and non-profits can bring together resources and expertise to scale net-zero housing initiatives.

The Sustainable Finance Action Council recommends steps to mobilize private capital to support decarbonization and climate resilience in the Canadian economy, including in the housing sector.

Solar panels the roofs of apartment buildings in Munich, Germany. (Shutterstock)

Successful international models

Several countries have demonstrated how net-zero homes can become a reality through innovative policies, community-driven approaches and public-private partnerships:

BedZED in the United Kingdom is the country’s first eco-village project. It uses community-focused design and renewables to significantly cut carbon footprints.

The Passive House standard is a German housing policy that sets a global benchmark for ultra-low energy consumption, emphasizing airtight construction and heat recovery.

California’s ambitious Zero Net Energy policies help reduce overall carbon footprints by driving cutting-edge home construction practices.

The Net Zero Energy House (ZEH) Program in Japan encourages advanced insulation, efficient appliances and rooftop solar.

The Netherlands is a leader in innovative, large-scale retrofitting for net-zero housing, most notably through the Energiesprong program.

These international models highlight that success lies in integrating strong policy frameworks, advanced technology and collaborative practices. They demonstrate that with the right mix of government support, industry innovation and residents embracing green choices, net-zero living can become more widespread.

Housing is an important part of how to address climate change. As Canada pushes to make net-zero homes more affordable, each step forward strengthens communities, reduces greenhouse gas emissions and helps homeowners save money.

Ehsan Noroozinejad Farsangi, Visiting Senior Researcher, Smart Structures Research Group, University of British Columbia and T.Y. Yang, Professor, Structural & Earthquake Engineering, University of British Columbia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

City of Mississauga Housing Task Force Report

The City of Missisauga has a four-year action plan to get more housing built and make it more affordable. Read the comprehensive report that will guide Mississauga’s housing efforts going forward here. 

Reform development charges, taxes and fees to help lower housing costs

In Canada, 95% of new homes are built by the private sector. The task force recommends 14 actions to help balance demand and incentivize more affordable housing development.

---

Update building and design standards to boost supply and make building more affordable

Guidelines and standards should help good city-building, not hinder it. The task force recommends 7 actions that will help create efficiencies across the industry to increase supply.

---

Transform zoning to unlock more housing

Zoning reform provides certainty for developers and can help streamline the development application process. The task force recommends 5 actions that help transform Mississauga into a dynamic urban city.

---

Create sustainable program and funding for affordable housing to mobilize industry

Mobilizing the private sector can help meet the demand for affordable housing. The task force recommends 4 actions to help develop a sustainable, long-term funding program for affordable housing.

Why improving social housing could be remarkably simple (and affordable)

Nicky Shaw, University of Leeds and Simon Williams, University of Leeds

Tragedies in social housing, such as the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017 and the death of toddler Awaab Ishak due to damp living conditions in 2020, remain shocking. As a coroner commented at the time, “How in the UK in 2020 does a two-year-old child die as a result of exposure to mould?”

Since then developments like Awaab’s Law have increased landlords’ accountability for delivering decent homes. However, improvements to housing stock may appear to be happening at a snail’s pace, as shown by the tower block fire in Dagenham, east London, in 2024.

But capturing data and feedback from social housing tenants is notoriously tricky. This can be due to the range of ways tenants prefer to communicate (from digital tools to landlines, physical post and in-person) as well as limited willingness to engage with authorities. This means that tenant perspectives are frequently unheard.

As customers, if we purchase a product and something is wrong, we know we have consumer rights and can have the complaint acted upon. The social housing sector is different. It has become increasingly stigmatised, resulting in areas of social housing being associated with higher crime rates, social deprivation and inequality, mental health issues and addiction.

Consequently, social housing tenants include vulnerable people on low incomes, who often experience digital inequality and less agency and control over their home environment. They rely on social housing stock availability and on landlords for the state of repair of their home.

While tenants can of course raise concerns over quality and maintenance with their housing provider, their voice has frequently gone unheard, as exemplified by the case of Awaab’s parents. But it shouldn’t be difficult to change this.

My colleague and I share a longstanding interest in social housing service performance. We wanted to understand how technology might support improvement in the sector and help guard against issues like the ones mentioned above.

Social housing is not typically associated with high technology, due to the financial constraints typical across the public sector, combined with a sometimes limited appetite for innovation. Yet the potential opportunities to use tech to improve the tenant experience appeared bountiful. Or at least, that’s what we thought.

Our research was designed to explore how tenants’ future experiences of social housing might be improved through the application of technology. We collected data from 35 experts from global tech organisations, including Amazon Web Services, as well as organisations dealing with social housing policy, senior social housing leaders (chief executives, directors or heads of service), frontline staff and tenants.

While we weren’t surprised by the broad improvement areas identified (around property standards, service delivery, integration of technology and empowerment), we did not expect that so many of the issues could be solved with low-tech (or even no-tech) solutions.

We used the Delphi method, which is a way of getting an overall picture of the future by aggregating responses from experts in different disciplines. We asked how each expert thought the “tenant of the future” might look.

In our findings, it emerged that they believed customers (that is to say, tenants) will have higher expectations in a number of areas associated with their housing.

1. Property standards

This emphasised the need for decent homes. This means social housing organisations and landlords being more aware of the quality of their properties and, in particular, paying greater attention to insulation to help with the cost of living.

2. Human-centred services

This would emphasise the importance of a contact model where tenants can raise concerns or complaints face to face through a designated housing officer. This theme also suggested that re-evaluating the core purpose of social housing would be helpful, including the role of and contribution to the wider community.

For example, respondents suggested increasing levels of community engagement by involving tenants in decision making. This would not only increase their agency, but also help to reduce stigma and stereotypes around social housing. This is an area where low or no-tech solutions are possible. One respondent said: “Whilst digital can yield massive improvements to service delivery, it should not be a replacement for … conversations with tenants, including face-to-face engagement.”

3. Making use of technology

While we expected demands in this area to be high, suggestions were in fact surprisingly modest. Respondents suggested things like online forms or live chat functions, and the use of smart devices to reduce energy consumption, detect mould or monitor things like boilers, for example.

4. Tenant empowerment

Collecting feedback allows landlords to understand tenants’ needs and work with them to develop a more customer-centred approach to social housing.

Damp and mouldy property is one of the biggest issues in social housing. epiximages/Shutterstock

Realisation of these humble findings doesn’t feel unattainable or spectacularly unaffordable, yet history has shown us that the sector has struggled to overcome stigma and prejudice to effect change.

So what could be done? The government is moving to build new homes at speed. While this will improve availability of housing stock nationally, it won’t address issues around the quality of existing stock without substantial investment. Greater transparency around the quality of social housing is vital, alongside more robust reporting and repair processes.

While we don’t have all the answers, the importance of direct personal contact that we uncovered in our research actually feels quite heartwarming, giving the sense that tenants’ views and concerns actually matter.

Ensuring personal contact points between tenant and social housing provider should be a straightforward and affordable allocation of existing resources. This isn’t too much to ask and is definitely not rocket science.

Nicky Shaw, Senior Lecturer in Operations Management. Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds and Simon Williams, Associate Faculty, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Canada needs to invest in older rental housing, not just build new real estate properties

Grant Alexander Wilson, University of Regina

Across Canada, the demand for rental housing is intensifying. The unprecedented demand for rentals is a result of several factors, including Canada’s population growth, ongoing inflation, constraints on the existing rental stock and obstacles related to the construction of new apartment buildings.

In the middle of 2023, Canada’s population eclipsed 40 million people. Currently, the World Bank estimates the population to be 41.3 million people — with expectations to reach 44.8 million people by 2040.

The biggest driver of such population growth has been described as “migratory increases” or, more simply, immigration. As a result, the demand for housing — specifically rental housing among new Canadians — has increased and is expected to continue to grow.

Housing affordability crisis continues

For many Canadians, homeownership remains out of reach. A report from RBC found that 68 per cent of Canadian households are unable to buy a home due to inflation and wage stagnation.

Together, inflation and wage stagnation have created demand for rental housing. Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman once described inflation as “taxation without legislation.” Wage stagnation is the phenomenon that occurs when wages lag behind inflation as a result of the two not moving in lockstep.

My recent research shows that indeed, two-thirds of Canadians are in unaffordable housing situations, making the proverbial dream of homeownership unlikely — or at the very least delayed significantly.

Not surprisingly, over the last five years, homeownership rates in Canada have fallen from 68.5 per cent to 66.2 per cent and declines are projected to continue.

This downward trend underscores the growing reliance on rental housing as an alternative — but the current rental market is ill-equipped to handle the demand.

Aging rental stock

The answer to Canada’s housing crisis isn’t as simple as building new rental units. As my previous work has shown, almost half of Canada’s rental properties (1,026,020 units) were built between 1960 and 1979.

Put differently, over 80 per cent of the rental properties in Canada were constructed before the year 2000. These older units remain the backbone of the rental market, but many need to be modernized to remain viable.

While policymakers and the real estate industry have traditionally focused on the construction of new properties, equal attention should be paid to maintaining and preserving older ones as to building new ones.

The dual challenge of constructing new rental properties and preserving existing ones requires the real estate industry and governments to adopt a dual focus on both new developments and upgrading existing rental properties.

Industry’s role in addressing the crisis

To effectively plan and manage the existing and forthcoming challenges in the rental market, both the private sector and governments need to focus on making investments for the long-term.

Playing the long game will result in the greatest value creation for society and businesses. In real estate, this includes consciously and deliberately committing to innovation, such as retrofits and energy efficiency upgrades. Doing so requires the shift of thinking from fiscal years to decades.

For rental property operators, this process starts with investing in existing properties. Financialized operators — those that have sophisticated management, utilize multiple sources of capital and operate in a variety of geographies — are perhaps the best positioned to do this. They have the financial means and scale of ownership to upgrade and modernize existing rentals, ensuring they can meet the rental demands of today and tomorrow.

Financialization is a natural progression for industries as they grow in size and scope. In the context of real estate, financialized operators are large, sophisticated and often securitized, meaning assets are pooled together and turned into financial products for investors.

Beyond their financial and operational abilities, financialized operators have a broader responsibility to a diverse group of stakeholders beyond shareholders. New research has shown that financialized firms have deep environmental social and corporate governance commitments that emphasize other stakeholders such as renters and society at large.

Of course, it’s also important for the industry to invest in new property construction to help combat the intensifying demand for rentals. However, adding to the rental universe is complex, bureaucratic and often doesn’t address affordable housing solutions.

The cost-push inflation — when input costs increase the price of final goods — of materials makes new builds more appealing than affordable housing. Cost-push inflation results in higher prices. Nevertheless, “building anything helps everything” when it comes to rentals.

Government-industry collaboration

The federal government’s $1.5 billion investment to purchase existing apartment buildings to protect and maintain affordable rental units is an important step in the right direction, but it isn’t enough.

Collaboration between governments and the real estate industry is needed to make a deeper impact. While the importance of preserving existing rental properties is well understood, to date there is only one affordability program for aging and existing stock in Canada.

To make a significant impact, more programming and incentives need to be established for operators — particularly those that are financialized and well-equipped to create large-scale change.

The private and public participants need to collaborate to enact and engage in initiatives that reduce costs and prioritize affordable rental housing and the preservation of existing rental stock for Canada’s long-term interests and sustainability.

Grant Alexander Wilson, Associate Professor, Hill and Levene Schools of Business, University of Regina

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How our public spaces can be safer and more welcoming for children

As urban spaces have developed, our perceptions of what is safe for children have changed. (Google Street View/Anahita Shadkam), CC BY

Anahita Shadkam, Toronto Metropolitan University

A Georgia mother was recently arrested for reckless endangerment after her 10-year-old son was seen walking outside alone. The warrant for her arrest claimed she “willingly and knowingly” endangered her son’s safety.

The boy had walked less than one mile into town to visit the local dollar store. Despite the boy’s evident ability to navigate public spaces independently, a passerby perceived his presence on the street as alarming and called the police.

This incident illustrates the damaging effects of “safetyism,” a societal anxiety that wrongly assumes children should not be out on their own. Such perceptions not only curtail children’s independence but also perpetuate unnecessary interventions that undermine the ability of parents to make decisions for their own family.

A focus on safetyism ignores the absence of child-friendly infrastructure in many of our towns and cities. For example, many suburban neighbourhoods in North America lack sidewalks and other pedestrian infrastructure. In the Georgia incident, the road the boy walked along did not have a sidewalk, meaning he had to walk on the shoulder. This lack of space exacerbates fears of children being in public spaces alone.

How did we reach a point where parents now risk arrest if their children are seen outside alone?

Rise of safetyism

My research focuses on how public spaces can be better designed for children. As societies change, their understanding of childhood changes. The way children were treated 50 years ago differs from what they are experiencing now. Likewise, perceptions of what is safe to do and what is not have also changed over time.

Spontaneous outdoor play is a vital way for children to explore, grow and understand their environment. Yet, urban and suburban design often stifles this natural inclination. These environments usually confine children’s play to parks and playgrounds while leaving broader public spaces off-limits.

Historically, attitudes toward children in public spaces have been shaped by industrialization, rapid urbanization and the growth of suburbs. Early playgrounds emerged during the child-saving movement of the 1980s, aiming to protect children from street dangers.

Spontaneous outdoor play is a vital way for children to explore, grow and understand their environment. (Shutterstock)

However, these heavily supervised, segregated spaces reflected societal biases, dividing children by race, gender and class. Activities prepared boys for leadership, girls for motherhood, and marginalized children for labour.

Architects and planners like Aldo van Eyck have challenged these restrictive notions, advocating for adventure playgrounds and child-friendly urban spaces. Their work emphasizes unstructured play that promotes children’s agency.

Despite these efforts, the rise of safetyism in recent decades has eroded children’s independence. Fears of busy traffic and stranger dangers have led caregivers to limit children’s exposure to the outdoors. This “bubble-wrapped generation,” as education professor Karen Malone describes, experiences childhood within narrowly defined boundaries, chauffeured between organized activities.

This overprotection deprives children of opportunities to develop resilience. Car-dependence also contributes to the very risks it seeks to prevent. For instance, traffic congestion caused by parental drop-offs near schools increases accident risks. Meanwhile, children shielded from navigating public spaces may lack the skills to handle unexpected situations, such as how to seek help when lost.

The Georgia incident starkly illustrates how societal attitudes perpetuate these cycles. The passerby’s decision to involve the police reflects a broader societal discomfort with children’s presence in public spaces. Addressing this issue requires both cultural and infrastructural change.

Improving walkability is a great way to make public spaces more child-friendly. (Shutterstock)

Child-friendly cities

It is time for a new child-saving movement. Cities like Barcelona and Copenhagen offer inspiring examples of child-friendly design that challenge these anxieties. The walkability of these cities contributes to children’s overall skill development.

Integrating playful elements along walkable pathways further advances opportunities to explore and develop a sense of safety and belonging. These opportunities normalize children being in public spaces, countering the harmful perceptions that fuel safetyism.

Implementing traffic-calming measures is another way to foster safer pedestrian movements around the neighbourhood. Among these measures are lowering speed limits around the residential buildings, adding more intersections with signals and mid-block crosswalks especially along the longer and curved streets.

Walkability can also be improved by implementing soft edges along pathways. As opposed to hard physical boundaries such as fences, incorporating soft edges, such as green buffers ensure the safety of children and pedestrians while still enabling them to freely navigate space and engage in playful activities.

Moreover, the creation of intergenerational public spaces must be prioritized over creating age-specific spaces, such as the common fenced playgrounds. First, being in these spaces encourages a sense of shared responsibility, thus improving children’s agency. Second, they foster a sense of community among all, which eventually improves parental perceptions of safety. Third, intergenerational spaces allow caregivers to socialize while children play. This opportunity is an important time-out for the caregivers, while still being able to supervise their kids.

Children’s well-being is a barometer for the health of our societies and cities. To create inclusive, sustainable communities, we must challenge the restrictive boundaries that confine children’s experiences and see their independence as a threat. By designing child-friendly public spaces we can nurture future generations who are better equipped to navigate our world.

Anahita Shadkam, Sessional Instructor, School of Urban and Regional Planning,, Toronto Metropolitan University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.