Despite Canada’s progress in addressing homelessness through Housing First initiatives and rights-based approaches, people experiencing homelessness continue to face significant social exclusion. While “Yes in My Backyard” (YIMBY) movements have emerged as a counterforce to “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) attitudes, positioning these frameworks makes it harder to understand the broader implications of how people come to understand responses to homelessness.
Building truly inclusive communities requires us to look beyond housing supply debates toward holistic approaches that foster meaningful social belonging. By examining the interplay between NIMBYism, YIMBYism, and community resilience, we can identify more effective strategies to address homelessness and promote social inclusion.
Understanding NIMBY and YIMBY Philosophies
NIMBYism describes people’s opposition to housing developments and social services because they believe it will negatively affect local quality of life for already housed residents. More than just land-use opposition, NIMBYism stigmatizes and marginalizes already under-served people, creating cycles of displacement for people experiencing homelessness.
YIMBYism appears to be the opposite of NIMBYism, advocating for affordable housing and community diversity; however, many YIMBY campaigns and groups focus on market-based supply solutions, which is not enough to prevent and end homelessness for people with low or no income. Research has shown some YIMBY-endorsed development approaches, such as infill developments, actually increase nearby property values. Additionally, the “filtering” process that YIMBYs rely on—where new development makes older housing more affordable as wealthier residents move to newer units—may unfold over decades, leaving immediate housing needs unmet. These market-based approaches fail to address the social stigmatization and power imbalances that drive exclusionary practices.
Community Resilience: A Framework for Action
Community resilience offers a promising alternative framework that extends beyond housing debates. Resilient communities recognize the inherent dignity and value of all members, actively ensuring everyone—regardless of housing status—experiences genuine belonging and access to necessary supports.
Effective community resilience requires four key elements:
- Conscious collective awareness: Communities must develop a shared understanding of the structural and systemic root causes of homelessness rather than viewing it as an individual failure
- Sustained commitment to long-term goals: Short-term “band-aid” solutions must be replaced with dedicated, consistent efforts to address underlying inequities
- Mobilization of accessible resources: Resources must be distributed equitably with barriers to access systematically identified and removed
- Inclusive feedback mechanisms: People with lived experience of homelessness must be central to planning and evaluation processes
Research confirms housing alone is insufficient. Integration into the community, financial stability, mental well-being, and meaningful engagement are equally vital for people who have experienced homelessness to thrive.
Promising Implementation Approaches
Our study found several practical approaches to building community resilience in the context of homelessness:
- Community Programming: Creating opportunities for meaningful interaction between housed and unhoused community members significantly reduces stigma. In Edmonton, for example, a floor hockey program successfully brought diverse community members together in a non-bureaucratic environment. Similarly, shared creative activities like music programs build solidarity among participants from different backgrounds.
- Thoughtful Space Design: Shared public spaces can challenge the privatization of space and foster meaningful interaction. Creating communal areas—like gardens or recreational facilities—increases positive interactions between people from all walks of life and builds broader community support for inclusive housing initiatives.
- Balanced Housing Strategies: Communities need both market-based and social housing initiatives. Policies that prioritize truly affordable housing based on rent geared to income while creating mixed-income communities facilitate social connection rather than isolation. Housing initiatives work best when accompanied by wraparound services that support community integration.
- Participatory Governance: Including people with lived experience of homelessness in planning and policy development leads to more effective programming. This means moving beyond token consultation to meaningful involvement in decision-making processes at every level of policy development and implementation.
Conclusion
The most promising approaches to homelessness don’t simply counter NIMBY opposition with YIMBY development, but build resilient communities where housing is recognized as one element of social inclusion. This requires shifting from debates about where to build housing to conversations about how we create true belonging for everyone.
By adopting this more comprehensive approach, we move beyond the cycle of opposition and counter-opposition toward a shared vision of communities where everyone belongs. The path forward calls for recognizing housing not just as a physical shelter, but as the foundation for meaningful participation in community life.
Read the full article here: https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/ijoh/article/view/16835