Creating a Housing System that Works for Survivors of Gender-Based Violence 

When we talk about housing, we often think in terms of a “continuum”—from homelessness to transitional housing, to renting, and finally to home ownership. The underlying assumption is that home ownership represents the pinnacle of housing stability. 

Figure 1: The Housing Continuum  

But as many frontline workers and survivors of gender-based violence know, this assumption simply doesn’t hold. Market housing doesn’t protect families from violence, financial hardship, or loss. In fact, many survivors of gender-based violence cycle between hidden homelessness (e.g., staying with family or friends), transitional housing, and returning to the very homes they fled—because there are too few affordable, safe alternatives. 

In Canada, 94.5% of all housing is supplied by the private market, leaving only 5.5% as community, co-op, or non-profit housing. This imbalance is not an accident—it’s the outcome of deliberate policy choices that prioritize profit over people. 

If we want to create a system that truly works for families, especially survivors, we need to fundamentally reimagine what housing success looks like. Instead of idolizing ownership, we should be investing in safe, stable, and affordable community housing—in both existing communities and new ones where people can rebuild their lives. 

Learning from Other Models: Vienna’s Approach 

To see what a healthier housing system could look like, let’s turn to Vienna, Austria. The Vienna metro region has about the same number of households as Metro Vancouver—roughly one million—but the similarities end there. 

• 43% of Vienna’s housing is owned or operated by the city or non-profit providers. 
• 78% of residents rent, compared to only 38% in Metro Vancouver. 
• Most housing is apartment-style, allowing for higher density and more efficient land use. 

This mix doesn’t just create affordability for those in social housing—it benefits everyone. Research shows that competition from Vienna’s non-profit and subsidized sector helps lower market rents by 5–20%. 

Vienna’s approach isn’t perfect, and even it faces supply challenges. But its strong community housing sector means it can enact change much more effectively than Metro Vancouver. The lesson here is clear: when governments invest meaningfully in non-profit and affordable housing, it creates affordability for everyone. 

The National Housing Strategy Act: A Framework for Change 

Canada took a significant step in 2019 with the passage of the National Housing Strategy Act (NHSA), which officially recognized housing as a human right. The Act calls on the federal government to: 

• Recognize housing’s importance to human dignity and community well-being 
• Work toward the progressive realization of the right to housing 
• Improve housing outcomes for people in Canada 

The Act also established three key components: 

1. The National Housing Council: A body of experts tasked with identifying policy improvements and advancing the NHS. 
2. The National Housing Strategy (NHS): A long-term vision for improving housing outcomes and providing participatory processes. 
3. The Federal Housing Advocate: A public-facing role responsible for monitoring progress, receiving submissions, and investigating systemic housing issues. 

Together, these bodies are designed to make the federal government accountable to Canadians who believe their right to housing is being violated. When the Federal Housing Advocate identifies systemic issues, they can request a review by the National Housing Council—whose recommendations must receive a formal response from the responsible ministry. 

This accountability chain is critical, but it’s only as effective as the political will behind it. 

Where the System Still Fails 

Despite progress, Canada’s housing system continues to fail those in greatest need—particularly survivors of gender-based violence, Indigenous families, and households with disabilities. We’ve also failed to meet many of the targets set out in the 2017 National Housing Strategy. A careful review of the June 2025 Progress on the National Housing Strategy Report  find that much of the reported progress is in the form of commitments, which reflect claims submitted by the provinces and territories through their action plans to reach targets as part of bi-lateral funding agreements. While commitments are important, they don’t reflect the actual number of units that have been built or repaired.  

Table 1: Progress on 2017 National Housing Strategy Progress 

The parliamentary budget office’s review of federal spending on housing affordability brings the stark discrepancy of targets versus reality into focus. The National Hosing Strategy set out to remove 530,000 households from housing need, however, from an estimated 1.7 million people in housing need in 2017, that number has grown. Even more sobering, the PBO projects that an additional 926,000 households will be in core housing need by 2027 (see figure 2).  

Figure 2: Number of Households in Core Housing Need by Tenure and Presence of Mortgage    

Furthermore, as of 2017, it was estimated the 25,000 Canadians were experiencing chronic homelessness. The National Housing Strategy set out to halve chronic homelessness by 2027. As of 2025, many Canadians continue to struggle with homelessness. 2024 point-in-time counts estimate that 60,000 people experienced homelessness in 74 communities across Canada. Investments were also targeted specifically at women, girls and their families with the goal of building or repairing 7,000 shelter spaces for survivors of gender-based violence. As of the 2025 progress report, 655 shelter spaces for survivors of gender-based violence had been repaired or renewed, with commitments of an additional 1,513. The number of women and children in shelters also continues to grow. In 2017, 5,765 women and children slept in shelters because it was not safe to sleep at home; by 2023, 7,581 women and children were in residential facilities for victims of abuse—a 31.5% increase. 

Recent data from a First Call report revealed that 79% of households where both parent and child have a disability have experienced homelessness. Among Indigenous respondents, 72% had similar experiences. These numbers are staggering—and they underscore that the right to housing remains unrealized for too many. 

Figure 3: Experiences of Homelessness Among Households with Dependents 

Moving Forward: Re-engineering the System 

The National Housing Strategy Act provides a legal and moral framework — but laws alone won’t fix the system. To truly realize the right to housing, we must re-engineer the housing system itself: mapping the pathways people take, identifying where they get stuck, and removing the barriers that keep them in cycles of instability. 

This requires coordination across all levels of government: 

• Federal: increase the Canadian Housing Benefit and invest in long-term affordability. While Build Canada Homes is just getting off the ground, it has potential and may be a turning point for affordable housing.  
• Provincial: In British Columbia there’s a need to reduce the barriers to affordable housing for women and gender-diverse people fleeing violence. This includes consulting with the sector to identify alternatives to national occupancy standards (NOS) for the allocation of social affordable housing and review priority placement programs to ensure they meet the needs of families in real time. Legal mechanisms can also be strengthened to support the right to housing. Updating Section 10(1) of BC’s Human Rights Code to protect against the discrimination of households with dependents under 19 years of age could help protect families from being locked out of the rental market. Residential tenancy acts can also include proportionality provisions to ensure that evictions are a last resort.  
• Municipal and Indigenous governments: Local governments can adopt family friendly targets that are paired with a fast-track for affordable housing like in Victoria, British Columbia. This helps non-profit developments that align with the city’s official community plan to avoid delays, and the costs associated with delays. Local governments can also introduce rental registries that allow them to track rental housing costs, building infractions, and monitor discrimination. Rental registries can also be a resource for landlords and tenants to get information about their rights and responsibilities.  

A human rights-based approach to housing isn’t just about shelter—it’s about dignity, security, and the ability to rebuild one’s life. 

Final Thoughts 

Housing is more than a commodity. It’s a foundation for safety, community, and justice. If we want to end gender-based violence and build a more equitable society, we must commit to a future where everyone has a real choice: to live safely, stably, and with dignity, wherever they call home. 

Learn more about BC Society of Transition Houses on their website or read more about our research on our Re-evaluating National Occupancy Standards project here. 

The Balanced Supply of Housing is a SSHRC-CMHC funded, community-based research project at UBC that focuses on land use and housing financialization across Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal.