Does fido have a foot in the door? Social housing companion animal policies and policy decision-making in a Canadian city

Abstract

ABSTRACT Living with a companion animal (CA or “pet”) often has a positive impact on quality of life and well-being. Research also highlights potential benefits of CA relationships for populations accessing social housing, which commonly includes individuals with a low income, disabilities, those at risk of homelessness, and seniors. However, it appears that CA policies in social housing organizations can present a barrier to accessing housing that allows tenants to live with CAs. There is a significant shortfall in the literature specific to CA policies in social housing. Our aim is to describe CA policies in one jurisdiction, Edmonton, Canada, and to examine decision-making processes and the sources of information used to inform those decisions within social housing organizations. We found that half of the social housing organizations do not allow cats or dogs. The organizations in our study appear to prioritize four factors when making decisions about CA policies: 1) the organization’s mission and vision; 2) the population served; 3) financial or resource constraints; and 4) the experiences and beliefs of individuals within the organization. Priority research questions are identified to address the need for evidence-informed decision making in the complex area of social housing and quality of life.