Reflections on how we can shift the conversation on housing to better reflect what communities are experiencing

By Robin Hughes, CEO of the Housing Partnership Network

We talk about “affordable housing” as if it’s a shared concept, but our members know it isn’t.

They’re navigating that reality every day. In conversations with community members, local officials, media, and partners, they’re often working through very different assumptions about what housing should look like and who it serves, without a shared understanding of the term itself. Over time, that disconnect shapes what gets built, what gets blocked, and how long it takes to make progress.

This lack of understanding of what “affordable housing” actually means may seem at odds with the kitchen table conversations many Americans are having about housing costs, the bipartisan dialogue heard about housing in elections at all levels of government, and the media’s focus on the housing and homelessness crises affecting urban, rural, and suburban communities alike. “Rents are too high.” “Homeownership is out of reach.” “I can’t live near where I work.” And yet, despite this widespread concern, public understanding of how affordable housing can address these challenges remains limited.

To better understand what’s driving this disconnect, HPN partnered with researchers at the University of Florida’s Center for Public Interest Communications (CPIC) to take a closer look at what the general public understands—or misunderstands, as is often the case—about affordable housing. We surveyed people across the country, as well as housing developers and advocates, to identify where perceptions break down and how those gaps make it harder to establish a shared narrative about the challenges communities are facing¹.

One of the first things I noticed in the responses is that there is no commonly understood definition of affordable housing. Yes, people see that homes are too expensive; 71.4 percent of people surveyed reported that affordability has worsened compared to a few years ago, and more than 44 percent know someone struggling to find a place they can afford. But beyond that, the definition starts to shift depending on who you ask.

Bias related to race and class continues to shape how people think about housing. Our research confirmed a long-standing bias against renters in many communities despite the fact that 46 million households rent their homes, and rental housing plays a critical role in local economies. We also heard questions about how nonprofit housing organizations are viewed and whether bias affects how their voices are heard.

But affordable housing on its own is still an abstract idea. People interpret it through their own experiences and assumptions, which can make it harder to garner shared support for building needed housing in their communities.

Our research partners characterized the view of housing as a “wicked problem.” It’s an academic term used for challenges that are deeply complex and interconnected. That’s exactly what HPN members see every day.

This lack of clarity goes beyond semantics and gets at how we make the realities of housing more visible and easier to understand. When housing markets stagnate or communities don’t have enough homes people can afford, the impact shows up in who can stay, who has to leave, who gets left behind, and how a community functions over time.

Sharing impact

Data is helpful in this, but it’s people who really tell the story. Teachers can’t afford to live near the schools where they work. Construction workers can’t live near job sites. First responders are priced out of the communities they serve. These are everyday signposts for how housing shapes the quality of life for families and communities.

We need to be talking about affordability more broadly and not just as an asset class. The median age of a first-time homebuyer is now over 40 because younger people can’t afford to buy. There are only 35 affordable homes for every 100 very low-income families looking to rent nationwide. At the same time, many older adults find themselves stuck as costs rise and their homes become harder to manage.

All of these realities point to the same underlying issue. The solutions may differ, but when housing no longer aligns with the people who live and work in a community, the effects show up everywhere.

Our research also reinforced the value of local voices. They often carry more weight than national data or expert perspectives. We see that across our network: HPN members are in a strong position to lead these conversations with community groups, media, business owners, and policymakers, especially when they ground them in local impact.

What we can do differently

Toward that end, a few things in the research stand out:

• Speak less about units, projects, and housing as a catchall. These are conversations about people’s homes—their bedrock—whether that means an apartment, condo, townhome or single-family structure. While the technical distinctions may matter a great deal when crafting specific land-use regulations or federal housing policies, they matter very little for the stories of “home” that help people understand what is happening in their communities.

• Second, data is most effective when it’s grounded in real experience. A LIHTC development isn’t just serving households at a certain percentage of AMI. It’s serving daycare providers, grocery store clerks, warehouse workers, and first responders. Those connections make the issue more tangible.

• And finally, there’s an opportunity to be clearer about the broader impact. Housing development and preservation don’t just address need; they shape how local economies function. They influence jobs, spending, local businesses, and the strength of a community in ways that people understand when they’re made clear.

We’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what this means. For me, it doesn’t change why we do this work. Our focus on people with the most urgent housing needs remains at the center. But this research is a reminder that we can be more effective when those realities are part of a broader conversation about how housing affects entire communities.

The message doesn’t have to be complicated: when we unlock housing, we unlock economic opportunity. That’s the simple truth, and there are thousands of local stories that help illustrate it.

You’ll be hearing more from HPN in the coming months, along with tools to support our members in leading these conversations in their own communities. We know this is long-term work. Shifting how people understand and talk about housing doesn’t happen overnight, and much of that progress happens through the steady, local efforts our members are already leading. In the meantime, I’d welcome your perspective on what’s working and where you’re seeing challenges.

---

Robin Hughes is the chief executive officer of the Housing Partnership Network, whose affiliates include the Housing Partnership Fund, Housing Partnership Ventures, the Housing Partnership Insurance Exchange, Framework Homeownership®, and the Charter School Financing Partnership. Highly regarded as an industry leader with 35 years of experience in affordable housing and community development, she possesses deep expertise in advancing public policy at the local, state, and federal levels.

1. The full report is available here