The Influence of Discrimination and Social Capital on Housing Instability

Background and Purpose: Most studies of housing instability focus on poverty, employment, and capacity to generate social capital among low-income women. Socioeconomic status, unemployment, and underemployment create social capital deficits but provide an incomplete explanation of the relationship between social capital and housing instability. Some research suggests that gender and racial inequality in the labor force impact an individual’s ability to generate social capital due to lower wages and occupational attainment. Gender and racial discrimination also decrease housing stability among racial minorities and female-led households due to discriminatory housing practices and affordable housing shortages. This study examines the influence of discrimination and social capital on the risk for housing instability.  

Methods: This cross-sectional study collected data using an online survey of African Americans age 18 or older who resided in the Atlanta Metropolitan area (N=691). Social capital was evaluated using the Position Generator and discrimination was measured using the Everyday Discrimination Scale. Differences by discrimination were evaluated using independent samples t-tests. Stepwise logistic regression was used to examine the effects of public assistance, income, discrimination, and social capital on housing stability.

Results: Logistic regression identified significant predictors of housing instability. Predictors were sequentially introduced into stepwise logistic regression models, controlling for known predictors: public assistance and income. The best-fit model included social capital and discrimination, and was statistically significant, χ² (4) = 55.530, p < .001, Nagelkerke R²=. 122. All four variables in the model were statistically significant: social capital (p=. 007), discrimination (p=. 048), public assistance (p<. 001), and income (p=. 003). For each one-unit increase in social capital, the odds of reporting housing instability decreased by 3% (Exp (B)=. 97). For each unit increase in discrimination, odds of reporting housing instability increased by 3% (Exp (B)=1.03). An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare social capital indices among individuals who reported discrimination. There was a statistically significant difference in social capital (M=55.20, SD=7.68), among those who had experienced discrimination and those who had not (M=56.90, SD 8.82), t (590)=2.211, p=. 027.

Conclusions and Implications: Housing instability has been linked to increased morbidity, age-adjusted mortality, and decreased life expectancy. Understanding that discrimination may increase risk for housing instability may have a broad impact and could assist social workers and policy makers in identifying target populations for homelessness prevention interventions and funding. Findings from this study suggest lower social capital and higher discrimination are associated with increased odds for housing instability. Individuals who report higher discrimination report less social capital yet more network connections than individuals who report less or no discrimination. Differential access to human capital due to discrimination may impact the quality of social capital minorities are able to access. These findings support the idea that quantity of social relationships may not be as valuable as the increased social leverage particular types of relationships provide. The relationship between social capital and housing instability indicates social capital development may be a strategy for homelessness prevention. More research is needed to explore development of social capital as a housing intervention.