Emergency Homeless Shelters: Helpful or Harmful?

Canadian winters can be ruthless. With temperatures feeling like -30°C, the best thing to do is stay inside and try to stay warm. But while we wear our thick coats, turn our seat warmers on in the car, and sleep in the comfort of our blanket-covered beds, there are many Londoners who rely on emergency homeless shelters in order to avoid freezing to death on the streets. 

This past holiday season saw London homeless shelters at 100% occupancy rates, leaving many to rely on whatever emergency overflow space and crash beds were available.

The demand and need for emergency shelters, especially in the winter, is evident. According to the City of London (2018), adult emergency shelters are seeing an increase in occupancy rates and the average length of time being spent in these shelters is increasing.The number of families using emergency shelters is increasing as well. In fact, the analysis of London emergency shelters between 2011 and 2017 showed that occupancy rates for family emergency shelters increased from 100% to 165% occupancy, demonstrating high demand and overcrowding (City of London, 2018). London is in desperate need of emergency homeless shelters to protect our citizens—adults, children, and families alike—from the harsh Canadian winter conditions.

However, fear of increasing crime rates associated with shelters in the area may prevent community members and leaders from wanting to bring fellow Londoners out from the cold. While some research suggests that emergency shelters have the potential to reduce crime in the community, other studies have found that emergency shelters may be associated with an increase in crime rates.

To address these contradictory results, Faraji, Ridgeway, and Wu (2018) analyzed yearly data on crime rates in Vancouver in relation to the timing in which emergency shelters were opened in the city.

Results indicated that there is in fact a relationship between the opening of shelters and crime rates within the proximate area of the shelter. A shelter opening in the community is related to a significant increase in property crime in the surrounding area of the shelter. However, there seemed to be decreased rates of commercial breaking and entering when a shelter opened as well. This suggests that by opening a shelter, homeless individuals no longer need to break in to local businesses to seek shelter.

Based on these results, emergency homeless shelters may be both helpful and harmful to the community. On the one hand, opening emergency shelters provides protection from the harsh weather; results in less homeless individuals sleeping on the streets and in front of businesses; and is related to a decrease in businesses and commercial properties being broken in to. On the other hand, these shelters may have the potential to foster crimes like vandalism and property destruction in the immediate area of the shelter. The property damage related to homeless shelters may overshadow the benefits of emergency shelters for some individuals in the community, but there are ways in which such crime is avoidable.

According to Faraji, Ridgeway, and Wu (2018), the increases in crime only occurred within a 400m radius of the shelters. Within a 100m radius of a shelter, crime rates seemed to be the worst. As the distance from the shelters increased, there was a rapid decrease in crime rates, indicating that it is only within the immediate vicinity of the shelter that shelter-related crime occurs.  Therefore, Faraji, Ridgeway, and Wu (2018) suggest that in order to keep homeless individuals safe and out of the cold, while also combating the possible increases in crime, the city should:

• Use greater security or police intervention to minimize the associated crime in the immediate area of the shelter.

• Address the link between crime and mental health disorders within the homeless population.

• Place new shelters approximately 400m away from any residential or commercial areas to remove the opportunity for property destruction.

Potential crime rates may deter Londoners from supporting the creation of emergency homeless shelters, but research indicates that there are ways in which we can buffer such crime. Furthermore, regardless of the potential risks associated with implementing emergency shelters, we cannot deny shelter and protection to those in need. There are adults, youth, and entire families who are living on the street or are forced out of their homes for reasons ranging from financial crises to domestic violence. So, even if these emergency shelters do bring crime with them, the extra precautions we may have to take to avoid the effects of crime are worth the effort. The safety and overall lives of our citizens should be of the utmost importance. 

A few broken windows and spray-painted walls can be easily fixed, but lives lost due to extreme cold cannot be replaced.

References:

Faraji, S., Ridgeway, G., & Wu, Y. (2018). Effect of emergency winter homeless shelters on property crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology, doi:10.1007/s11292-017-9320-4

City of London. (2018). London’s emergency shelters progress report: 2011-2017. Retrieved from https://www.london.ca/residents/homeless-prevention/Documents/180124031-COL-Emergency-Shelter-Progress-Report-2011-2017-EMAIL-WEB.pdf