Response to the City of Vancouver’s proposed approach to regulating short-term rentals

Below are the written remarks I gave today at city hall – actually a slightly longer version because I crossed out a few things just before speaking in order to fit the time limit.

Here is the staff report to which these remarks respond.

You may also wish to see my related comments in response to an October 4 story in Metro News, in which Airbnb proponents suggest a more flexible approach to regulation than restricting eligibility for licences to principal residences. Airbnb’s representative, Alex Dagg, confirmed today at city hall that the company does want to see STRs allowed in secondary suites and laneway housing.

October 5, 2016

I support the approach to regulating short-term rentals, or STRs, outlined in staff’s report. I’m speaking as someone who recently defended my master’s thesis in urban studies, in which I investigated the nature and extent of Airbnb listings in Vancouver. I looked at Airbnb’s growth, where listings were located, how much they cost and the type of listings. I also looked at the implications of this data in light of the local rental housing context and the city’s housing policy goals, concluding that the unchecked growth of Airbnb is an obstacle to the city reaching its housing goals, which include the protection of existing rental stock and ensuring that people of all incomes and ages can afford to live here. Having immersed myself in this topic for almost three years, I can probably appreciate the complexity of staff’s task more than most. I think they’ve done a very good job and thank them for their work.

Most broadly, I appreciate what I see as a framework that prioritizes the protection of existing and potential rental housing. I understand the importance of tourism to our local economy and the desire to balance the protection of housing with other interests, such homeowners wanting to earn money from STRs and the benefits of having options for tourists. Staff have struck a good balance between these interests for now and I especially endorse the proposal to limit STR licences to principal residences, so that investment condos, secondary suites and laneway houses can’t be used full-time for tourist purposes. I also believe that limiting licences to principal residences is important if council wants to increase support for further diversification or densification of the housing stock. While I favour more diverse and dense options myself, I think it’s reasonable and predictable that people who are less supportive of that direction will resist it more if they don’t see the city taking proactive steps to ensure our existing housing supply is used for its intended purpose, especially when the need for that housing is so great. I also support this approach based on its simplicity and believe it will be easier to explain, administer and enforce than adopting models that involve caps on the number of nights rented or limits on the licences granted by neighbourhood or dwelling type. However, enforcing STR rules has proven challenging in most jurisdictions, not least because of a lack of actual, rather than just rhetorical, cooperation from the platforms. But that is certainly not a reason to move forward or to lower reasonable expectations. I suggest you move ahead, understanding that rules and strategies may need to be adjusted based on how conditions change on the ground, including how cooperative STR operators and the platforms turn out to be.

I commend staff for including a requirement to display the licence number in the online listing itself and hope you will make it a separate offence to omit or fake that number. I also agree with the proposal to commit resources to monitoring through a third-party service that can match listings with addresses.

 I do, however, worry that this approach seems to allow for people to use individual bedrooms for STR purposes on a full-time basis, as long as a principal resident also lives in the dwelling. It seems we could have a person who lives in a two or three-bedroom apartment, or even a five-bedroom house, and rents out all but one bedroom for STR purposes on a full-time basis. When we have so many people, including but not only young people, whose wages don’t allow them to rent a self-contained studio or one-bedroom for less than 30% of their gross pay, I see that as a problem. For some, the only affordable option is shared housing. This concern also pertains to the need for family housing. We know we have a shortage of units with two or more bedrooms. Airbnb makes it possible and lucrative for some to fill those scarce larger units with tourists instead of families with children. Is that a practice we want city policy to allow? I recognize this “spare” (or private, in Airbnb terms) rooms issue is complicated for a variety of reasons, but I think it’s at least worth flagging for future consideration.

The report also limit discussion of non-compliance penalties to the STR operators or hosts, excluding the platforms. Perhaps that discussion is yet to come. I suggest that effective and fair regulation would require the platforms, which are after all earning money from non-compliant listings, to share the burden of compliance and also be liable to penalties.

An argument I’ve heard against limiting STRs and that we may hear today is one where one property owners say they could not afford their house, or run their business, or have the quality of life they want without renting out their basement suite, investment condo or laneway home on Airbnb. My response is that if someone can’t afford their housing without doing something that breaks city bylaws and has so many negative impacts on others, including those whose housing security is more precarious than their own, their decision to purchase that housing in the first place was probably unwise. Similarly, many of us could have an easier or better quality of life if we chose to earn extra money in ways that were illegal or socially damaging. I don’t believe city policy should implicitly endorse people buying more housing than their own incomes and long-term rental revenue allow for. Finally, in a broader sense, it’s worth remembering at this point that the revenue stream Airbnb provides is overwhelmingly available only to homeowners, since provincial law says tenants must have their landlord’s consent to sublet and, understandably, many landlords are unwilling to give that. So, by allowing part-time use of dwellings as STRs you will help homeowners afford their housing and I’m sure many will be glad for that. But you will not be helping the vast majority of renters afford their housing – and census and NHS data shows they are much more in need of that help. I argue that one of Airbnb’s broad effects is to undermine tenants by providing property owners with a cash-flow solution that is more lucrative and flexible than renting to long-term residents. In so doing, I believe it contributes to housing inequality and further commodifies housing. In light of this, it’s urgent that council take steps to limit and hopefully reverse the growth of STRs in Vancouver. I urge you to move forward with doing so.

A response to “Vancouver renters fight for the right to Airbnb”

Here is my response to a news story published in Metro News today about tenants who sublet part of their rented house on Airbnb, were threatened with eviction, and then moved and bought a condo in False Creek. It illustrates several points that I think are important in the debate about Airbnb’s benefits, so I wanted to respond. I plan to make separate, though somewhat similar remarks, in support of the city’s proposed new approach to regulating short-term rentals tomorrow in person at city hall. Here is a link to the staff report containing those recommendations.

While not the focus of my letter, I do think that tenants who give “the finger” to a landlord’s very reasonable and legal request to stop subletting on Airbnb are doing a disservice to their fellow tenants.

Also, it’s possible that the points raised in this article regarding flexibility are a preview of Airbnb’s response strategy. If so, that would be consistent with how I’ve seen Airbnb respond to proposed STR regulations elsewhere, which is to essentially say, “Yes, please regulate us. We’re all in favour of fair and sensible regulations.” However, when it comes time for those regulations to actually be implemented, Airbnb starts changing its tune, to the effect of, “Of course, we’re all in favour of sensible and fair regulations, it’s just that these particular regulations aren’t quite fair and reasonable enough for our liking. Especially parts X and Y.” And it’s usually parts X and Y that are essential to protecting housing from conversion to full-time STR units or actually enforcing the rules Airbnb claims to support.

If it is going to advocate for more flexibility, rather than strictly precluding housing units that are not primary residences from eligibility for an STR licence, I’m quite interested to hear what Airbnb’s alternative regulatory proposals are. I’m also very interested in its response to the proposed requirement to display a permit number in online listings – an idea it has resisted elsewhere.


Dear Mayor and Council,

In advance of your consideration tomorrow of the staff report on a proposed new approach for regulating short-term rentals, I would like to draw your attention to a story in the news today that I think may be used to argue for a different and looser approach to this issue than the one staff has recommended. I would also like to outline what I see as the flaws in those arguments.

The linked story in Metro News describes a situation in which a two-income couple with three children rented an entire large house in Kitsilano for $4,200. They said they could only afford the rent by subletting out a separate basement suite in that house on Airbnb for an average of $2,000 per month, a rate that is considerably higher than the long-term going rate for a one-bedroom basement suite in that area. When new owners later bought the house, they told the couple to stop subletting the separate suite on Airbnb, which the couple refused to do, though they subsequently agreed to move and then bought a condo in False Creek.

As I understand it, if properly enforced and with due attention to the requirement for proof of primary residence, staff’s proposed rules would prevent this type of situation from occurring, or at least offer an avenue of recourse when such situations come to light. That is very good and is part of why I support the proposed approach. However, in the story one of the tenants in question seems to be suggesting that their situation provides an example of why the rules should be more flexible. He says: “Do we want a hard and fast rule? Is that what we want, for there to be no exceptions?” He then goes on to argue that Airbnb is good for the neighbourhood because it allows “tourists, new immigrants and older people visiting new grandchildren a place to stay right within Kitsilano, which has few hotels.”

The latter quote illustrates an idea that I often see implied regarding the benefits of Airbnb – an idea I’m opposed to and consider detrimental to tenants. Certainly, I agree that if a housing unit would be otherwise be vacant while someone is away on holiday, it is likely to bring extra business and vibrancy to a neighbourhood if a tourist is able to stay there during the vacant period. But that is not the situation here – the situation in this example is one where Airbnb proponents seem to be arguing (as per their own circumstances) that it is better to have “tourists, new immigrants and older people visiting new grandchildren” staying in the self-contained basement suite than it would be to have renters living there. I don’t see how this is accurate in an economic sense, but more importantly, I find it offensive, as it suggests that tourists are a greater benefit to communities than actual residents who happen to be renters. I see this idea as diametrically opposed to Vancouver’s housing and healthy city goals. It is also not the reason the city legalized secondary suites, a policy change that was partly justified based on the need for more affordable rental housing.

Further, given the occupations of the couple in question (inventor and designer), I would not be surprised to hear Airbnb proponents argue for having looser regulations so that people like these (people in the arts or other creative occupations) can earn extra income by renting out entire suites they don’t live in. This argument was implied in one of Airbnb’s recent Vancouver advertisements  profiling a filmmaker, who it turns out also rents out an entire unit that is not his principal residence. While I understand that many arts workers have a very hard time living in Vancouver due to low earnings in that sector and the high cost of housing and studio space, I don’t think allowing those in the arts who are in a position to own or rent more housing than they need to use that surplus housing for full-time STR purposes is a good solution to that problem. People with low incomes, including many in the arts, are more likely to be renters and the best way to help them afford to stay in Vancouver is to require that housing be used to house residents, not for tourist accommodation.

This news story also illustrates how Airbnb provides a mechanism for those who are better off to benefit at the expense of those who have less – less income and less housing security. Those who are better off in terms of housing are vastly more likely to be homeowners, but in some cases, such as this one, they can include renters too. Although I am a tenant, I don’t endorse other tenants taking housing out of the rental market to benefit themselves – because other renters need that housing. While I agree with the staff proposal to allow renters to be eligible for the new STR licences if they have the consent of their landlord, I suggest that only a small minority of renters (who will tend to be better off) will be able to obtain that permission.

The proponents in this story also argue for looser regulations because Airbnb allows visiting grandparents to stay close to their families in neighbourhoods, rather than in downtown hotels. Relatives have been finding ways to visit their families in cities long before the popularity of urban short-term rentals exploded, which was shortly after Airbnb was founded in 2008. I agree that the popularity of Airbnb indicates that many visitors would prefer to stay in neighbourhoods rather than in downtown cores, where hotels are typically found. I also see how short-term rentals may suit families better than conventional hotel suites. I hope the hotel industry will respond to these market signals and submit applications to the city that will meet this need, and that the city will view them favourably. However, given Vancouver’s chronically low vacancy rate, I don’t think the desire for visiting relatives to stay closer to families should be prioritized over the urgent need for more year-round rental housing. Also, under staff’s proposed rules, family-friendly entire units will still be available for short-term rental, it’s just that it’s likely there will be a significantly smaller number of them, because they will only be principal residences, not units dedicated to full-time STR.

I also take issue with the proponent’s use of immigrants to justify turning housing into tourist accommodation. Many immigrants have few resources when they first arrive in Canada and can’t afford to buy homes. That means they need rental housing and, like other tenants, probably can’t afford to pay the much higher nightly rates typical of short-term rentals. It’s true that some STR operators offer the option to rent by the month instead of by the night, but when that’s the case I’ve observed that those longer-term rates tend to be slightly discounted over what it would cost to rent the unit at the nightly rate for 30 days. That tends to be much higher than regular monthly long-term rates found for rental units on Craigslist.

As in many other cases I’ve seen, the proponents in this story seem to be arguing for looser regulations based on the quality-of-life benefits that operating an STR provides them with, regardless of the negative impact that has on others in this low-vacancy climate. While I agree with allowing entire homes or spare rooms to be rented on an occasional basis, I do not agree that the staff’s proposed approach should be more flexible, so that entire units can be devoted to full-time STR purposes, as is suggested in this story.

Finally, when considering the arguments for the benefits of short-term rentals, I urge you to be skeptical of claims, such as are often made by Airbnb or its proponents, that renting out a separate non-principal residence on Airbnb is the “only way” a given household can afford to live in Vancouver. Proponents arguing for a non-restrictive approach to STR regulation are advocating for a significant policy change that is likely to have far-reaching negative impacts on tenants, and typically that policy change is one that would directly benefit them financially. Yet they do not provide actual, verifiable evidence to support such hardship claims. I’ve noticed that those claims often falter under scrutiny or requests for proof.



Responses to Airbnb’s report on Vancouver listings

Yesterday (July 7), Airbnb released some long-awaited numbers on its Vancouver listings and “hosts.” Various people, including me, have called for Airbnb to provide these Vancouver numbers since last June at least, but despite the promises of greater transparency contained in its November 2015 “community compact,” the pattern is for Airbnb to not provide this type of data unless under considerable public pressure or threat of regulations that could limit or reverse its growth, as is now the case in Vancouver.

So here are some quick responses to what I see as some of the most salient points included and missing from Airbnb’s report.

What’s missing

The big question Airbnb won’t answer

There is arguably one question that everyone wants to know about Airbnb’s impact on Vancouver’s rental market and that is this: How many entire, self-contained units of housing (i.e. apartments, suites, houses, laneway houses) are being used exclusively as short-term rentals (STRs) through Airbnb? That is, how many self-contained housing units might be available for tenants if not for Airbnb and similar platforms providing an alternative means for property owners to earn income from residential properties? Airbnb could easily provide its own straightforward answer this reasonable question based on its booking data but it has chosen not to. Why?

Airbnb states in its report that “We are committed to being transparent with our data and information with cities to help them understand the home sharing activity in their city.”

It could follow through on this commitment by answering the question above and also by ceasing to cloud the issues by referring to renting and subletting as “home-sharing.”

I think a reasonable estimate of how many entire units of housing are dedicated to full-time STR use is just over 1,000 (1,022). This is based on the December 2015 Vancouver data Murray Cox has provided and posted on his site InsideAirbnb. Cox has set criteria for “recently and frequently rented” and “highly available.” If you go to his site and select “only entire units” and also check those other boxes, this is the number you’ll arrive at. Cox has provided his definitions and explanations of how he collected his data in the “About,” “Behind” and “Get the data” sections of his website.

Total listings

Airbnb has not said how many total listings currently exist. Again, it could easily do this, so the question is, why doesn’t it?

It has provided figures for “total booked listings” (and the different room types) for 2015 and going back to 2013, which is helpful, but why doesn’t it say how many total listings there are as of – say, July 1, 2016? This is a basic figure it would be useful for policy-makers to know – how many units of housing (of all room types) are currently listed on Airbnb.

Airbnb could still make a distinction between total listings and “active listings” and provide its definition of that term in order to distinguish “active” from new or dormant listings, but it chooses not to.

Neighbourhood data

Airbnb has provided totals for the city as a whole only, which does not shed any light on the areas of the city that are most affected by Airbnb. My data shows that the neighbourhoods that consistently have the most Airbnb listings (Downtown, the West End, Kitsilano, Mount Pleasant, Fairview, and Grandview-Woodland) are also the areas of the city where most of the city’s rental units (and by extension, renters) are (see page 32 in this city report). Much of those areas are either zoned for multi-family housing and so have large supplies of purpose-built apartments,  or have a good supply of rented condominiums and/or secondary suites, the latter two of which housing types have been become increasingly important sources of rental housing during the past 30 or so years, when very little new purpose-built rental housing has been built. The overlap between the areas of the city that have the most Airbnb listings and the areas where most renters live is concerning given how many renters struggle to afford rent and how Airbnb’s business model provides a financial incentive to rent to tourists instead of tenants.

Comparison of the number of Airbnb units to total dwellings in the City of Vancouver

Airbnb’s report states that, “It is worth noting that, despite the year-over-year growth in listings that have been booked, only 4,400 entire home listings were booked in Vancouver in 2015 – which represents about a percent and a half of the total housing units in Vancouver.” This comparison is likely meant to allay worries about the impact that Airbnb is having on Vancouver’s rental housing supply.

What Airbnb overlooks and does not mention in this comparison is that all housing units (264,570) in Vancouver are not part of the rental market – in fact only just over half of them (136,135) were as of the 2011 National Household Survey. Further, the types of housing that are most likely to be used for tourist purposes through Airbnb are rented condos, secondary suites and rented houses (including laneway houses) and these make up a still smaller number of dwellings, at about 64,000 units according to various city sources (see here, for example). It seems more relevant to compare the number of entire units listed on Airbnb to these figures, rather than the entire stock of housing, about half of which is not available to tenants at all. Given that the city’s latest monthly vacancy rate was 0.6% for purpose-built apartments, and that the region-wide vacancy rate for rented condominiums was only slightly higher, at 0.9% (as of late 2015, according to CMHC), the number of entire units listed on Airbnb merits concern.

How hosts use the money they earn through Airbnb

Airbnb typically responds to criticisms of its negative housing impacts with references to how it helps the “urban middle class” afford their housing. In every city report that Airbnb puts out, it therefore includes a statistic on what percentage of hosts are using their Airbnb earnings to help “stay in their homes.” In Vancouver, Airbnb states that 53% of hosts “report being able to afford to stay in their homes because of the money they earned through Airbnb.”

But what Airbnb does not tell us is 53% percent of how many hosts? Is that 53 percent of all Vancouver hosts – or if not, how many did they actually survey and what was the response rate? This is typical of Airbnb in that when it releases figures, it often does not provide the information readers need to evaluate the quality and validity of the data: Where’s the whole number here? If the percentage is based on a sample, what was the size of that sample? Was it random or self-selected? Who conducted the survey? Was it Airbnb? If so, might that have had some effect on how respondents answered? It is well-known that Airbnb advocates for itself using the narrative that its “hosts” use their Airbnb income to pay for their own housing costs – people that earn money through Airbnb may be reluctant to diverge from that narrative. And obviously, with such a survey, there would be no verification of whether hosts actually do use their Airbnb income to pay their mortgage or rent instead of using it for any number of other purposes.

It is also notable that Airbnb makes no distinction between homeowners and renters when reporting this figure. Due to provisions in the Residential Tenancy Act prohibiting tenants from subletting without their landlords’ permission, it is unlikely that tenants are the main beneficiaries of the earning opportunities Airbnb provides, even though it is actually tenants who are most stretched to pay their housing costs. According to the 2011 National Household Survey, 48% of Vancouver homeowners have no mortgage at all. Meanwhile, 46 percent of renters (but only 29% of homeowners) are paying more than 30% of their gross household income on shelter costs (which is how CMHC defines unaffordable housing). So, Airbnb may be helping some people afford their housing, but not the ones who are most in need of that help. And by providing a financial incentive (through higher nightly rates) to rent housing to tourists on a short-term basis rather than to tenants on a long-term basis, Airbnb actually makes things much worse for tenants, except perhaps for those lucky few who have landlords willing to let them sublet through Airbnb. Tenants who rent out their units without their landlords’ written permission risk eviction.

Airbnb also states that, “The vast majority of Airbnb hosts first choose to share their space to pay the bills. Nearly three-quarters of Vancouver hosts report choosing to host on Airbnb because they want to earn additional income.” I’m puzzled by the juxtaposition of those statements. The motivations of “paying bills” and “wanting additional income” are not equivalent. Also, “paying bills” is so vague as to be meaningless. The category of “bills” includes everything from mortgage, rent, utilities and groceries to credit card bills amassed through dining out, going on vacation or making luxury purchases.

Other points

Listing growth

Based on the “total booked listings” figures Airbnb has provided, those listings have grown from 1,800 in 2013 to 6,400 in 2015 – an increase of 255%. This is rapid growth, but not surprising. Based on my data collection (including Murray Cox’s December 2015 data), I found that total listings in the City of Vancouver grew from 2,900 at the end of November 2014 to 4,278 as of December 3, 2015 – a 63% increase. This is lower than the increase in total booked listings Airbnb reports between 2014 and 2015 (86%), suggesting that my figures are conservative (though they are not comparing the same thing since Airbnb hasn’t released total listings for a particular date).

Room type percentages

I note as well that Airbnb’s figures on the percentage breakdown of room types is consistent with the preliminary listing data I collected and published here in June 2015, as well as with the data provided by Murray Cox of InsideAirbnb. Over the three dates I analyzed in 2014-2015, I found that the majority of listings (about 70%) were for entire units, with another approximately 28% made up of private rooms and a fraction (about 2%) made up of shared rooms. Airbnb’s figures for 2015 are 69, 28, and 3 percent, respectively.

Frequency of bookings

Airbnb’s report state states that “the vast majority of listings – more than 80% – are shared for fewer than 180 days per year.”

I find this very interesting. Airbnb is saying that 20% of its listings are rented (“shared,” in their terms) more than 180 days – six months – out of the year. It says the listings that are rented more than six months of the year are a variety of types, but it doesn’t provide a breakdown of those. Airbnb also states that 4,400 of its total 6,400 “total booked listings” in 2015 were entire units. If 20% of those entire units were booked for more than six months, that would mean 880 entire units.

It also seems to me that given the nightly rates charged for Airbnb listings, it would be quite possible for a property owner to make the same amount of money through renting a unit for less than six months on Airbnb than they could make by renting to a tenant at average market rents for the whole year. The property owner could choose to rent through Airbnb for four or five months and leave the unit vacant the rest of the time, thereby entirely avoiding having to deal with tenants or fulfilling the various responsibilities of landlords under the Residential Tenancy Act, which does not cover vacation rentals. Therefore, the six-month threshhold Airbnb has chosen to highlight does not necessarily capture the entire picture when it comes to how its business model encourages the use of housing for tourists rather than tenants. 

Airbnb’s response to Vancouver’s rental housing shortage

In its November 2015 “community compact,” Airbnb acknowledges widespread concerns over its impact on cities with housing shortages and promises to work with those cities to ensure that it doesn’t make those shortages worse. However, when asked whether Airbnb is having an impact on rents by a Globe and Mail reporter, Airbnb spokesperson Max Pomeranc said, “If you’re renting your own home, and you’re doing this a few times a month or a few times a year, it’s hard for me to imagine how you’re having that kind of an impact.” This on the same day that Vancity Credit Union released a report saying that due to the high cost of rent in relation to renters’ incomes and low vacancy rates, “Renting is no longer a viable alternative to owning for many working households in Metro Vancouver.” Airbnb’s response to questions over its impact on Vancouver’s severe rental housing shortage does not instill confidence that it will follow through with steps to ensure it doesn’t worsen our abysmally low rental vacancy rates.

Further, Airbnb could easily and instantly remove listings posted by hosts/operators who have more than one entire-unit listing – meaning that that one of those listings is not a primary residence – but it chooses not to.

Other benefits claimed

Airbnb’s report states that “neighbourhood businesses are benefitting from an influx of visitor spending.” This may be true to the extent that if someone goes away and leaves their primary residence vacant while they’re away, there is no one living in that space and spending money locally during that time. In this scenario, renting the space to a tourist would induce more spending, though not necessarily more than if the tourist had stayed in a regular hotel. However, this benefit does not exist when someone chooses to devote a unit of housing to full-time STR use instead of renting to a tenant. Tenants spend money in their neighbourhoods too and ultimately, residents who live in and contribute to their communities in all sorts of tangible and intangible ways bring much greater benefits than temporary visitors.

Updated: Media coverage of Airbnb research

About time I updated the list of the media coverage of my Airbnb research that was prompted by my blog post of June 20, 2015: Airbnb listings in Vancouver: How many? What type? Where?

There are nearly 60 items in this list, most of which involved actual interviews and include quotes from me. In a few cases the items below have only references or links, not quotes. I lost track of the dates of a couple other radio interviews, unfortunately.

Below the list, I’ve also linked some mentions in blogs (not strictly news media) and local government or nonprofit reports, as well as a few public speaking items.

Homestretch of the thesis-writing now, fingers crossed.

Date Item
June 23, 2015 Councillors ask if 3,500 Airbnb listings are eating into Vancouver’s supply of rental housing in The Georgia Straight, by Travis Lupick.
June 23, 2015 Does Airbnb hurt Vancouver’s rental stock? SFU student mines data in Metro Vancouver, by Emily Jackson. (front page in print, June 24)
June 24, 2015 Increasing use of AirBnB may be cutting into Vancouver’s rental stock, Global News, Nadia Stewart, Justin McElroy
June 24, 2015 Is Airbnb eroding Vancouver’s rental market? at 8:20 p.m. on Global BC1.
June 24, 2015 CBC Radio Victoria, On the Island at 7:15 a.m.
June 26, 2015 Is Airbnb inflating Vancouver’s housing crisis? In The Globe and Mail, by Kerry Gold
July 3, 2015 World Cup 2015: Vancouver hotels are charging anything they want and there’s barely an Airbnb bed left in the city in The Georgia Straight, by Travis Lupick
July 3, 2015 KRPI Radio live with Jasbir Romana at 10:40 a.m.
July 9, 2015 Vancouver keeps an eye on Airbnb as company snaps up rental properties in The Vancouver Sun by Joanne Lee-Young. (A5 in print)
July 12, 2015 The Jill Bennett Show on CKNW. Live at 7:50 a.m.
July 12, 2015 Vancouver eyeballs Airbnb as rental properties snapped up in the Victoria Times-Colonist, revised version of Joanne Lee-Young’s Vancouver Sun story
July 16, 2015, Strata councils aim to contain short-term rental services like Airbnb, in The Vancouver Sun, by Joanne Lee-Young. (background)
July 16, 2015 The Simi Sara Show on CKNW, with guest host Michael Smyth. Live at 12:35 p.m.
July 25, 2015 Does Airbnb make it harder to find an apartment? On Day 6 on CBC Radio (national), by producer Acey Rowe
September 1, 2015 Tourism Vancouver pushing to extend hotel tax to Airbnb on CTV News by Jon Woodward
September 2, 2015 Tourism Vancouver considering extending hotel tax to Airbnb suitesin The Globe and Mail, by Sunny Dhillon
November 25, 2015 ‘This is not what the city’s housing is meant for’: Airbnb and Vancouver’s rental housing crisis in The Province, by Wendy McLellan
November 27, 2015 Not a business model our industry is embracing: Airbnbs crunch on Vancouver rental housing drawing calls for government regulation in The Province by Wendy McLellan
December 9, 2015 Airbnb could be taking 2,400 units out of Vancouver housing stock, study finds in The Georgia Straight, by Travis Lupick
December 11, 2015 Airbnb rentals growing in Vancouver, study reveals in Metro Vancouver, by Emily Jackson
December 2, 2015 Thousands of Vancouverites to sublet apartments over Christmas period in Vancouver Magazine
December 14, 2015 Airbnb and short-term rentals in Vancouver on the rise on Global by Tanja Beja
December 14, 2015 Guest on BC Almanac on CBC Radio BC. I was the only guest on this hour-long call-in program.
December 15, 2015 Is Airbnb taking too many homes off the rental market? on News1130
February 12, 2016 Regulate Uber, not Airbnb: survey on Global News, by Nadia Stewart
February 26, 2016 Is Airbnb butchering Vancouver’s rental market? in Vancouver Magazine by Jenni Elliott
March 2, 2016 Vancouver Airbnb listings increase as rental vacancies fall below 1 per cent on The Current, National CBBC Radio
March 9, 2016 Airbnb wreaks havoc on Vancouver rental scene in The Vancouver Courier, by Allen Garr
March 15, 2016 Airbnb puts squeeze on renters, affordable housing, environment in The Vancouver Courier, by Allen Garr
March 25, 2016 Airbnb’s popularity has North American cities on edgeIn The Vancouver Sun, by Bethany Lindsay
March 29, 2016 Airbnb’s popularity takes Vancouver by surprisein the Victoria Times Colonist, by Bethany Lindsay
March 30, 2016 Vancouver to investigate Airbnb’s impact on rental housing in Metro Vancouver, by Emily Jackson
March 30, 2016 Vancouver urged to clamp down on Airbnb as low-cost housing dwindles in The Globe and Mail, by Frances Bula
March 30, 2016 Airbnb private rooms not a threat to Vancouver housing market, say hosts in The Thunderbird, by Eva Uguen-Csenge
April 2016 Reno-viction, 11-minute Capilano film student documentary by Jonathan McLean
April 4, 2016 Rental housing is for residents, says Vancouver councillor eyeing Airbnb rules CTV News online, by Laura Kane (CP)
April 4, 2016 News 1130, radio news interview with Simon Druker
April 5, 2016 B.C. politicians dealing with competing interests in Airbnb debate in The Globe and Mail, by Frances Bula
April 5, 2016 Global BC1 Morning News (live) with Sonia Sunger
April 5, 2016 The Lynda Steele Show, CKNW at 4:45 p.m.
April 5, 2016 On the Coast, CBC Radio at 5:15 p.m.
April 6, 2016 How many Tri-City residents are on Airbnb? In The Tricity News, by Gary McKenna
April 11, 2016 City of Vancouver wades into heated short-term rental debate in The Vancouver Courier, by James Smith
April 20, 2016 Airbnb shows an easy fix for problematic listings, but will it use it in Vancouver? in The Georgia Straight, by Travis Lupick
May 10, 2016 Stressed Cities Try to Rein in Accommodation ‘Sharing’ Sites Like Airbnb in The Tyee, by Alexander Villegas
June 1, 2016 Is the City of Vancouver about to crack down on Airbnb?, in Vancouver Magazine by Max Fawcett
June 6, 2016 Vancouver’s top Airbnb earners are commercial hosts, by Frances Bula in The Globe and Mail
June 7, 2016 Latest study of Airbnb listings for Vancouver finds majority are operating as commercial businesses, by Travis Lupick in The Georgia Straight

Research cited in blogs and publications (aside from news media)

Other public speaking

  • November 25, 2015: Presentation at the Pacific Housing Research Network Symposium, Housing Justice Panel (BC Nonprofit Housing Association Conference)
  • May 10, 2016 Tofino Town Hall on short-term rentals
  • May 11, 2016 Ucluelet Chamber of Commerce stakeholder meeting

Sources for Tofino & Ucluelet presentations, May 2016

Here are the promised links for information mentioned in my recent presentations at Tofino’s town hall on short-term rentals and the Ucluelet Chamber of Commerce meeting.

Note that for sake of time and brevity, I’ve sometimes just provided one source for the info, although there are often multiple sources. These links are provided for verification purposes and also as a starting place for future research for those who are interested. I have not included links to the descriptive statistics on Vancouver listings, because I have not yet published them, but some similar, preliminary data is in another blog post, here.

Slide 2: Worldwide growth in listings.

See these figures in my online spreadsheet with sources and dates.

For discussion of Airbnb’s projected profitability and future IPO prospects, see here:

The secret math of Airbnb’s $24-billion valuation

Here’s how Airbnb justifies its eye-popping $24 billion valuation

Sharing economy firms like Uber and Airbnb are burning cash at a phenomenal rate – but it’s ok

Slide 3: Examples of poor compliance rates in cities that have set up permit schemes

23% compliance in San Francisco, as of April 2016, even though Airbnb had considerable input into the drafting of the regulations and the rules have been in effect for about 2 years now.

10% compliance rate in Portland, as of the city’s February 2015 deadline

Also, City of Portland fines HomeAway in short-term rental crackdown

Slide 4: Concerns about loss of long-term housing

Spokesperson  Nick Papas: “We are a company founded on the belief that housing should be more accessible, more affordable, and more available.” And later in the same blog post…”Airbnb allows long time residents to stay in their homes by earning just a little extra money to help make ends meet.”

Similar statements…

Affordable housing is in the roots of our company.”

“Prop. F proponents say we are anti-affordable housing,” Chesky said. “It’s pretty weird because our founding story was to allow people to stay in their homes.”

The issue with all these statements is that Airbnb does not seem to understand (or chooses to ignore) how its business model affects different groups of people differently, i.e. owners and renters. So the questions to ask of all these statements are, for whom and at what cost?

Assignment and subletting provision of the Residential Tenancy Act (sec 34.1) states that tenants must have landlord’s written permission to sublet. The nonprofit group TRAC is an excellent free resource to refer tenants to, in case a landlord is trying to evict them in order to convert a unit to short-term rental.

Jurisdictions where regulations have been passed at least in part in response to concerns about Airbnb’s negative effects on the availability of rental and other affordable housing for residents.

—Los Angeles: Text of draft short-term rental ordinance, proposed by councillor Mike Bonin (April 2015). Also, the planning department’s guide to the proposed new ordinance.

—New York City

Statement by New York City Senator Liz Krueger to New York City Council, regarding city’s plan to increase fines for operating illegal hotels.

Illegal Hotel Complaints Up 62 Percent as City Council Grills Airbnb


—San Francisco: Recently proposed legislation.  Media coverage of proposed legislation

—Santa MonicaMayor Kevin McKeown (now a councillor): “When a landlord or other property owner takes a unit off the housing market and uses it for vacation rental, there is no permanent resident on the site, we’ve lost that part of the fabric of our community.”

This story discusses how the City of Santa Monica believes the number of illegal STRs has fallen from 1,762 to 966 as a result of its enforcement efforts.

—Amsterdam: “The presence of short stay residents in the city must not be at the expense of the quality of life in neighbourhoods, nor may it impact the availability of affordable subsidised apartments.” See also here.

—Barcelona See also here.

—Berlin: Planning minister Andreas Geisel: “We want to forbid apartments being taken from the rental market to make more profit.” The linked story discusses how short-term rental units in Berlin decreased by about 50% (to 6,700) in advance of an announced crackdown and an increase in fines to 100,000 euros.


Slide 5: Other tourism-oriented communities who have recently had to revisit their existing short-term rental regulations.—

—Aspen & other members of Colorado Association of Ski Towns




Slide 12: Common requirements in STR regulations.

The list was based on research I did for two blog posts, here and here.

Slide 14: Recommended resources

Local Governments and the Sharing Economy Report by One Earth (2015)

Airbnb, Rising Rent and the Housing Crisis in Los Angelesby Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (2015)

Airbnb in the City a report by the Attorney General of New York, Eric Schneiderman (2014). The report is based on data the AG subpoenaed from Airbnb. This is the only case I know of where Airbnb has provided listing and booking data to a government agency. by Murray Cox has downloadable listings data for 30 cities around the world, including Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

Tom Slee, sharing economy critic, collector of Airbnb listings data and author of “What’s Mine is Yours

Analysis of the impact of short-term rentals on housing, by the San Francisco Office of the Budget & Legislative Analyst (2015). Also see a 2016 follow-up report by the same office.

Also, not mentioned in the presentation, but some other recent stories and resources that may be of particular interest to people in Tofino and Ucluelet…

This Hawaii news re: attempts to rent out campsites on Airbnb.

The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry, by Georgios Zervas, Davide Proserpio and John W. Byers (January 22, 2014). Deals only with Texas hotels, but interesting.

CBRE Hotels Report: The Sharing Economy Checks In: An Analysis of Airbnb in the United States…Implications On Traditional Hotel Development And Market Performance Going Forward

And…some stories that illustrate why it’s good to be skeptical of listing info released by Airbnb – another reason why collecting your own data is a good idea.

Airbnb admits that it purged 1,500 unflattering New York listings right before data release.

Airbnb purged more than 1,000 New York listings to rig survey – report

Airbnb purged listings to create a rosier portrait, report says

Airbnb’s purged listings are already coming back


Media coverage of Airbnb data post

Here’s a summary of the media coverage of my June 20 post: Airbnb listings in Vancouver: How many? What type? Where?

Also, on June 22, Gordon Price featured the post on his much-read city blog, Price Tags and City Councillor Geoff Meggs posted an item on his own blog.


June 23, The Georgia Straight: Councillors ask if 3,500 Airbnb listings are eating into Vancouver’s supply of rental housing, by Travis Lupick. In print, this appeared on page 53-ish, as the Straight’s real estate column.

June 23, Metro: Does Airbnb hurt Vancouver’s rental stock? SFU student mines data, by Emily Jackson. In print, this was on Metro’s front page – June 24.

June 24, CBC Radio Victoria, “On the Island” morning program. No link, but it was in the 7:15 slot.

June 24, Global news at 6: Increasing use of Airbnb may be cutting into Vancouver’s rental stock

June 24, Global, BC1: Is Airbnb eroding Vancouver’s rental market?. This was live at about 8:20.

June 26, The Globe and Mail: Is Airbnb inflating Vancouver’s housing crisis? by Kerry Gold July 3, KRPI Radio live at about 10:40 a.m with Jasbir Romana. No link.

July 3, The Georgia Straight: World Cup 2015: Vancouver hotels are charging anything they want and there’s barely an Airbnb bed left in the city, by Travis Lupick

July 9, 2015, The Vancouver Sun, Vancouver keeps an eye on Airbnb as company snaps up rental properties, by Joanne Lee-Young. In print, on page A5,

July 10. July 12, 2015, The Jill Bennett Show on CKNW. Live at 7:50 a.m.

July 12, 2015, The Victoria Times-Colonist, Vancouver eyeballs Airbnb as rental properties snapped up, revised version of Joanne Lee-Young’s Vancouver Sun story.

July 16, 2015, The Vancouver Sun, Strata councils aim to contain short-term rental services like Airbnb, by Joanne Lee-Young. This was a follow-up to the previous story, but focusing on the issues for strata councils and condos. My info used as background in the accompanying video.

July 16, 2015, The Simi Sara Show on CKNW, with guest host Michael Smyth. Live at 12:35 p.m.

July 25, 2015, Day 6 on CBC Radio: Does Airbnb make it harder to find an apartment? by producer Acey Rowe.

Airbnb listings in Vancouver: How many? What type? Where?

Note: This post is really far too long (i.e. about 10,000 words, total) for the blog format, so here’s a pdf version with a table of contents but without active links or the data tables, which are only online. Airbnb listings in Vancouver_blog post

And if you’d like to skip to the tables, here’s a link to thoseOr skip to the maps.

Other major sections
Airbnb listings in Vancouver and Metro Vancouver
How the growth of short-term rentals relates to City of Vancouver regulations, policies and goals
Should the City change its approach?


As part of my urban studies master’s thesis research on Airbnb and rental housing in Vancouver, I’ve collected and analyzed some quantitative data on the number, type and distribution of Airbnb listings in this city (and to a lesser extent, for Metro Vancouver). This data hasn’t been publicly available before and I think it’s relevant to various ongoing discussions about housing supply and affordability in Vancouver so I’m posting it (and some comments on it) now, rather than waiting until several months from now when (fingers crossed) I will have completed and defended my thesis.

I note that there have been repeated calls in the last few months (and long before then, too) for more research to be produced and data to be tracked on various aspects of Vancouver’s housing situation. I strongly agree that more data is needed. I haven’t heard anyone specifically calling for data on how many Airbnb listings there are in Vancouver, but I think this information is relevant (a piece of the puzzle, even if a small one) and should be considered when trying to understand the dynamics of housing in Vancouver – and the challenges that tenants face, in particular.

As I’ve explained elsewhere, I set this blog up so that I would have a container and outlet for my thesis research, as well as a place to post thoughts and resources related to Airbnb and housing, but not necessarily to my main research question/s. It bears repeating that what I post here is not my actual thesis, and while I like to think I have high academic standards, I am not necessarily holding myself to thesis standards when I post here – because this is meant to be a less formal vehicle. No one else has reviewed this material and any errors are solely my own. Although I’ve already spent dozens of hours analyzing and reviewing the data I’m providing here, it’s possible that further analysis and review will reveal errors and that my results will change before I commit them to posterity in my thesis. I’d be grateful if anyone who finds errors would bring them to my attention.

I have been researching this topic, at least informally (see my article in The Tyee here), for 1.5 years now and so have formed some opinions during that time. However, my research is ongoing and so my position formation is ongoing too. What I say here is not necessarily my final word on the matter and there are many questions to which I’m still seeking answers. I’ve found the topic of Airbnb and its effect on housing to be very complex and multi-faceted.

A note on terms

I’m using Airbnb’s terms in some cases here, though striving to avoid others that I consider to be too freighted. Airbnb refers to “listings” and I have used that term as well. It means a property that’s posted on Airbnb. It could be an entire house or apartment, a private room or a shared room. It may be available for booking or not.

Airbnb uses the term “host” to refer to people who post properties on its site. I try not to use that term, instead preferring “operator” or “STR operator.” The reason I avoid the host term is that I think it implies a level of hospitality, generosity and familiarity that does not apply to all Airbnb listings, given the monetized nature of the booking transaction and the fact that many “hosts” and their “guests” never meet because all interaction is carried out online or by phone.

STR is an abbreviation I use to refer to short-term rentals. While I am only dealing with Airbnb here, I use the STR term in acknowledgment of the fact that Airbnb is not the only STR platform.

Data collection: precedents, method and limitations

While Airbnb generally doesn’t provide specific information about the amount, type or distribution of its listings in any given community, a few people and organizations have already collected (i.e. scraped) listing data from its website for various cities and analyzed it, which I’ve found useful and has helped guide my own inquiries. The first such analysis I found was on New York City Airbnb listings, published by Skift, an online travel industry magazine, in February 2014. The San Francisco Chronicle published a similar analysis for San Francisco in June 2014. Both those organizations hired Connotate, a company that extracts data from the web, to collect their data. Similar work done by researchers (and code writers) Tom Slee and Murray Cox (for a variety of cities) has also been very helpful.

My process

I obtained this data from Airbnb’s website using code written by someone who works as a web application developer. All the information I’ve obtained (and then cleaned, sorted and analyzed) was (or is) already available on Airbnb’s website and viewable by anyone with web access.

The datasets I’ve collected have included listings for several communities outside Metro Vancouver (Gibsons, Sechelt and Friday Harbor, for example), so part of preparing the data for analysis has been to strip out those listings. In a few cases, the data contained obvious errors, which I’ve corrected after checking the information on Airbnb or by its latitude and longitude coordinates. For example, one listing had “Walnut Grove” in the city column and “Langley” in the neighbourhood column. Several Richmond listings had the city as “Vancouver/Richmond” which I also changed after checking their location.

I’ve kept track of all the data-cleaning steps and decisions I made for the January 1 dataset and have applied those same steps (with some refinements) to the June 1 dataset (and the November 29 dataset to a much more limited extent).

While I haven’t used Tom Slee’s code to collect data, I think his explanation of how his own code works is helpful for background purposes: Airbnb data collection methods and usefulness.


Unlike others who have collected and analyzed Airbnb listing data, I am not a software developer, and so don’t understand how the code I’m using works the way others who have that knowledge and training do – to understate things. To mitigate these disadvantages and check the accuracy of my data, I conducted various manual searches of Airbnb’s website (for private rooms in the West End, for example) while the code was running to see if both methods would return the same results. I’ve done this for two June datasets and found the results of both methods to be consistent with each other. I also have datasets for several dates, which means that anomalies are more likely to be detected than if I were relying on a single one.

Also, the only other publicly available data on Vancouver Airbnb listings that I’m aware of is in this map published by Tom Slee on April 25, 2015. It shows 3,783 Vancouver listings, but based on the map, that figure includes various other Metro cities, such as Burnaby and Richmond (though not Surrey). That puts his results in the same ballpark as mine. Also, media accounts, such as this one, have said there are about 3,000 Airbnb listings in Vancouver. That’s very general, but again, in the same ballpark as my data (for November 29, 2014 and January 1, 2015).

Finally, I will point out that when asked to comment on the New York City (and Portland) data published by Murray Cox, Airbnb has said, “We do not comment on public scrapes of our information, because, like here, these scrapes use inaccurate information to make misleading assumptions about our community.” In other cases, Airbnb has referred to Tom Slee’s data as “flawed,” but has not been more specific.

My response is that while I agree with the San Francisco Office of the Budget and Legislative Analyst that “webscrapes are subject to limitations,” and understand that the listing data I’ve collected may not be as accurate as what Airbnb could provide for the same dates, I think that given the extent and severity of Vancouver’s affordable housing shortages, the rapid growth of Airbnb since it was founded (some figures on that here) and the concerns over Airbnb’s effects on housing supply in many other cities, it’s important and useful to have some publicly available data on the number and nature of Airbnb listings in Vancouver. I hope that I can improve upon whatever flaws are in the data I’ve posted here in the future, or that others will.

In terms of the credibility of data collected or created in this way, I note that data collected by Tom Slee and/or Murray Cox has been relied upon in the recent (May 2015) report on the impact of short-term rentals (STRs) on San Francisco housing by the San Francisco Office of the Budget and Legislative Analyst and in a March 2015 report on STRs in Los Angeles by the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy. Before using scraped data for its report, the San Francisco Office of the Budget and Legislative Analyst asked Airbnb to provide it with anonymized booking and listing data, but the company did not respond.

Airbnb listings in Vancouver and Metro Vancouver

Unless stated otherwise, data is for June 1. Most of this information is for Vancouver because that’s the focus of my thesis, but there are some Metro Vancouver figures too.

Total listings

  • The number of Airbnb listings in the City of Vancouver increased by 17% from January 1, 2015, to June 1, 2015 (five months).
    • 2,978 to 3,473, for an increase of 495.
  • The number of Airbnb listings in Metro Vancouver increased by 19% in that same period.
    • 3,888 to 4,628, for an increase of 740.
  • Three-quarters of all Airbnb listings in Metro Vancouver are in the City of Vancouver.
    • 77% as of January 1 and 75% as of June 1.


  • Vancouver totals include UBC because Airbnb counts Point Grey and UBC as one neighbourhood.
  • Metro Vancouver totals do not include Abbotsford because those listings were not captured.
  • There is no distinction in the data between the city and township of Langley.
  • There is some vagueness in the data when it comes to North Vancouver because all those listings have “North Vancouver” as the city and some of them have that as the neighbourhood too. Others have “District of North Vancouver” (or West Vancouver) as the neighbourhood (Airbnb neighbourhoods are discussed further below). Since the City of Vancouver is my focus, I haven’t tried to sort this North Vancouver information out yet.

For a complete list of totals by city, see Table 1.

Note that I also have data for prior to January 1, but so far I’ve focused my analysis on the January 1 and June 1 datasets. That’s why I haven’t included figures for earlier dates above: I can’t make a complete set of comparisons with the earlier data at this point, though perhaps will take that on later.

The earliest data I have is for November 29, 2014.

  • Total listings for the City of Vancouver for that date were 2,901.
    • 2,901 to 3,473 = an increase of 572 listings (20%) over six months
  • Total listings for Metro Vancouver for that date were 3,813.
    • 3,813 to 4,628 = an increase of 815 listings (21%) over six months


I’ve created two maps that show the distribution of listings across Metro Vancouver, colour-coded by room type.

The locations shown on these maps are approximate, not exact. The main purpose of these maps is to show the general distribution and concentration of listings across the city and region, and the room types.

Vancouver listings by Airbnb neighbourhood

As the maps show, Airbnb listings are concentrated in Downtown, the West End and other areas close to the core.

  • Downtown had 648 listings (19% of the Vancouver total).
  • The West End had 474 listings (14% of total).
  • Kitsilano had 380 listings (11% of total).
  • Mount Pleasant had 317 (9% of total).
  • Grandview-Woodland had 218 (6% of total).

See Table 2 for a complete list of totals by Airbnb neighbourhood.

Limitations of the Airbnb neighbourhood data

When looking at and calculating where Airbnb listings are in the city, it’s important to know that Airbnb divides the city into 26 neighbourhoods, while the City of Vancouver has designated 22 of what it calls “local areas” for planning purposes (shaded blue in Table 2). This means that the City, or residents, might differ from Airbnb when it comes to identifying the neighbourhood where any given listing is located.

When a person lists a space on Airbnb, they must provide the address, but are not given the option to specify the neighbourhood. Instead, this field is automatically filled in by Airbnb based on the address. This is probably a good thing, in that it stops people from presenting a space as being in a more popular area than it may actually be, as is commonly seen in real estate marketing. Airbnb states that, “Neighborhood boundaries are based on extensive research with locals and city experts. Since neighborhoods evolve over time, we are continuously updating our maps to increase their accuracy.”

That’s interesting and good to know, but Airbnb doesn’t provide an actual map of its own neighbourhood boundaries, so it’s still difficult to determine the degree to which those correspond to or differ from the city’s. The city makes its local area boundaries available as part of its open data catalogue (and I’ve made use of those for my own listings maps, linked above), so it’s possible that Airbnb has integrated the city’s boundaries into its own maps. However, I have noted key differences between the city’s local areas and Airbnb’s neighbourhood boundaries. Here are some of those:

  • Airbnb’s totals for Point Grey include UBC, which is outside the city’s jurisdiction.
  • Airbnb has both a Commercial Drive neighbourhood and a Grandview-Woodland neighbourhood. In my calculations, I’ve combined the totals for those two areas because residents tend to use the terms somewhat interchangeably.
  • Sunset is one of the city’s local planning areas, but it is not an Airbnb neighbourhood. Airbnb seems to designate most of the listings in this area as Fraserview. Other Airbnb Fraserview listings are in the local area the city calls Victoria-Fraserview.
  • Also, the data says Strathcona had fewer than 30 listings in both January and June, however the maps shows several listings in the area bounded by Campbell, Gore, Prior and East Hastings that are identified as Downtown Eastside. The number of listings in Strathcona is therefore probably more than what the numbers indicate (and the number of DTES listings correspondingly fewer, depending on whether you include Strathcona in the DTES or not).
  • Airbnb also states that, “If your listing’s neighborhood is a subset of a larger neighborhood, or if two neighborhoods overlap, your listing will show in search results for both neighborhoods.” This probably explains why manual searches of the site often turn up 1,000+ Downtown listings (the maximum number of results the site allows), while results returned for that area by the script I used are in the 500 – 700 range (for January and June).

Missing neighbourhood data

Also, it seems that Airbnb’s automatic neighbourhood assignment function doesn’t always work, or perhaps I just wasn’t able to collect that info, because there are 341 Vancouver listings with no assigned neighbourhood in my January 1 dataset. Those show up as “NN” on the map. There was also some missing neighbourhood data in my June 1 dataset, but for a much smaller number of listings (17). For thesis purposes, I will probably look up each of those listings by their latitude and longitude coordinates or their Room ID (for those still listed) and assign them to neighbourhoods manually, based on the city’s local area boundaries. This is not a perfect fix and is also time-consuming, so I’ve put it off for now. In the meantime, the missing neighbourhood data for those 341 January 1 listings (11% of total) makes it difficult to accurately assess the listing growth for each neighbourhood. For example, there were 482 Downtown listings as of January 1 and 648 as of June 1, a 34% increase. Meanwhile, listings in the city as a whole only increased by 17% during that period. It’s very possible that the Downtown had more of a surge in listings than the rest of the city, but it’s also likely that some of those 341 January listings with no assigned neighbourhood were actually Downtown and that they were identified that way in June – meaning there was less listing growth there than the figures indicate.

Room types in the City of Vancouver and Metro Vancouver

  • 71% of all Vancouver Airbnb listings were for “entire homes/apts” (this includes condos).
    • 66% in Metro Vancouver
  • 27% were for private rooms.
    • 32% in Metro Vancouver
  • 2% were for shared rooms.
    • 2% in Metro Vancouver

Table 3: Room types

Table 4: Room types by neighbourhood, January vs June

I’ve also looked at these proportions of entire unit (“entire home/apt.”) listings in relation to other cities. Vancouver’s (and Metro Vancouver’s) percentage is higher than some others where data has been recently collected.

Why this matters

My main reasons for wanting to collect and analyze this data are curiosity and concern about how the rapid recent growth in short-term rentals is affecting the supply of rental housing available to Vancouver residents (as well as influencing the broader housing market), so room type is a key piece of information.

A person can list three types of spaces on Airbnb:

  • A shared room, where the guest sleeps on a couch in the living room or perhaps on a cot or bunk bed in a bedroom with others
  • A private room, where the guest has their own sleeping space but shares access to kitchen and/or bathroom
  • An entire home/apt., where the guest has complete and sole access to the whole unit during the booking period

People who offer this last type of space may be doing so because they’re going away temporarily and so don’t need to actively use the space for that period, or they may be willing to move out for a few days in return for the extra cash earned from the booking. As with renting out shared rooms, neither of these activities removes housing from the stock available to residents because a resident is already living in the space and continues to do so when the booking is complete.

However, if a person (whether that person owns the unit or is renting it themselves) decides to dedicate an entire unit exclusively to STR use, that does have the potential to remove housing from the stock available to local residents. (In the vast majority of cases that would likely mean removing it from the rental housing stock, though it’s also possible that a unit dedicated to STR use might otherwise be available for sale, too.) It’s not accurate to say that all units that are dedicated to STR use are being taken out of the rental stock because some of them have perhaps never been part of it, and/or those who own them are unwilling to have a tenant and so would leave the unit vacant if they could not rent it out short-term. That triggers questions of whether we have a problem with vacant homes, and if so how to deal with it, which are outside my scope. But for the purposes of getting a handle on the impact that Airbnb is having on the supply of housing available to tenants, a key baseline figure to know is how many “entire home/apts.” are listed. As mentioned above, in Vancouver, those room types make up a high proportion of listings: 71% or 2,481 as of June 1.

Taking that baseline number of entire home/apts. and then determining how many of them are dedicated to STR use, as opposed to only being used that way occasionally, is a challenge. It’s clear that there’s a significant financial incentive for doing so. I won’t go into those calculations here because I’ve done so elsewhere, but if you look at average rents (such as provided by CMHC) versus Airbnb rates (data on that below) for a roughly equivalent unit, it’s clear that someone who’s willing to invest some time in becoming a savvy and available Airbnb “host” can make two to three times as much by renting a property on a short-term basis to tourists than is possible by renting long-term to someone who actually lives and works here. But that’s not to say that everyone who can do that is doing so. There are ways of at least estimating how much a property is being used as an Airbnb listing (some have used the number of reviews – more on that below), but I have not attempted that at this point, so can’t comment.

Private rooms are important to consider too. While I’ve focused a lot on entire units, in a city like Vancouver where housing costs are high and incomes are not, private rooms make up an important part of the affordable housing supply. For many (including, but not limited to, students, newly arrived immigrants, and long-time residents of all ages who work in retail or other service industry jobs), a private room with a shared kitchen and/or bathroom may be as far as the budget stretches. A quick search of Craigslist shows many people hoping to find such shared accommodation in the $500 to $700 range. Meanwhile on Airbnb, many private rooms are being offered to tourists for $50 to $80 per night or more, depending on the neighbourhood. There were 922 private rooms listed on Airbnb as of June 1 (1,463 in Metro Vancouver). There appear to be some entire houses dedicated to this purpose.

STR operators with more than one listing

  • As of June, there were 2,640 STR operators (people or companies – called “hosts” by Airbnb) in the City of Vancouver.
  • 86% of those had only one listing.
  • 14% (381 people or companies) had more than one listing.
    • Collectively, operators with more than one listing controlled 1,215 listings (35% of 3,473 listings).
  • Of the 381 operators with multiple listings
    • 65% (234) had two.
    • 19% (73) had three.
    • 6% (21) had four.
    • 5% (19) had five.
    • 3% (11) had six.
  • The remaining 6% of operators with multiple listings each had 7 or more listings each. Some operators with multiple listings may be companies that manage Airbnb listings on behalf of others.
  • 1 person had 29 listings and 1 person had 18.

Table 5: Number of listings per operator (Vancouver)

Why this matters

This data sheds some light on how many housing units may be dedicated to STR use and so unavailable to residents.

Collectively, the 381 STR operators who had more than one listing (as of June 1) controlled 1,215 units. Each of those operators can have only one primary residence, so as a baseline, it’s possible to say that the other 834 units (1,215-381) are not needed by any of those operators as a primary residence. It’s then possible that if those units were not being used as STRs, they could be available (though we can’t assume that they would be, necessarily) for Vancouver residents.

On one hand, this number (834) is an overestimate of the units that are unavailable to residents due to being listed on Airbnb, because some of those multiple listings (about 80) are controlled by businesses that may never make those units available to residents. Also, an unknown number of the multiple listings may be used as STRs only part-time and lived in by residents at others. Also, the multiple listings include private rooms, so an STR operator who owns a house and rents out two spare rooms on a regular basis, plus sometimes his or her own room, plus sometimes the whole house, will show up as having four listings when in fact the maximum number of rooms that could be available to other residents if they were not being used as STRs is two.

On the other hand the 834 figure is an underestimate because although the vast majority of STR operators have only one listing, that one listing could be a unit that is dedicated to STR use and not a primary residence. It’s also possible that some operators with multiple listings are not using any of those listings as a primary residence.

And there are grey areas. When looking at listings and operator profiles, it’s not unusual to find listings by hosts who live outside Metro Vancouver (as in the Fraser Valley or Sunshine Coast) and who state that they use the unit only for occasional recreational or business trips to Vancouver, renting it out on Airbnb the rest of the time. Some state quite plainly that renting out the unit on Airbnb is what makes it possible for them to afford the luxury of such an arrangement.

Number of listings with two or more bedrooms

  • 68% (2,357) of listings had one bedroom.
  • 25% (862) had two or more bedrooms.
  • 7% of listings did not have this information.
    • These could be shared rooms, bachelors or studios, or other types of listings with missing information.

Table 6: Number of bedrooms, Vancouver

Table 7: 2+ bedroom listings by selected neighbourhoods, June 1

Why this matters

I decided to count the number of two or more bedroom units specifically because I was aware of the concern about the lack of family-appropriate (size-wise) housing in the city. The city published a report on that problem just last week. It said

  • there are 8,000 families in the city living in one-bedroom or studio apartments (page 11).
  • less than 17% (9,473) of the city’s market rental stock was two or three-bedroom units (in 2013, page 20).

As mentioned elsewhere, I haven’t tried to determine how many of those Airbnb listings with two or more bedrooms are dedicated to STR use. But I did look at where they are. Like the rest of Airbnb listings, they’re concentrated in areas close to the core that are also very desirable for residents because they have good access to parks, public transit and other amenities. There were 180 Airbnb listings with two or more bedrooms Downtown as of June 1 and 131 in Kitsilano.


  • 48% of listings had two or fewer reviews.
  • 28% (983) had zero reviews.
  • 29% had 10 or more reviews.
  • 5% (184) had 50 or more reviews.
  • The listing with the most reviews in June was a private room with a bath in Yaletown that had 282 reviews. This same listing also attracted the most reviews in January.

Table 8: Reviews per listing

The number of reviews is often used as an indicator of the booking or occupancy rate, but there isn’t a consensus on what multiple of review to use to estimate that. Airbnb sends reminders to guests (and hosts), encouraging them to write a review within 14 days of their stay, but guests are free to ignore those reminders.

So, having zero reviews doesn’t mean Airbnb guests have never stayed in that listing, though that could be the case and having zero reviews is a reasonable indication that a listing has been infrequently booked. It may also indicate that the listing is new. In September 2012, co-founder Brian Chesky said that 72% of guests leave reviews for hosts. More recently Chip Conley, Airbnb’s global head of hospitality, said 78% of guests and hosts review each other. Meanwhile, some Airbnb operators who blog or comment on various forums say their own review rates are considerably lower, despite their efforts to garner feedback. I’m assuming that the percentage of guests who leave reviews varies by city, room type and guest demographics, among other factors.

Also, in the May 2015 report on STRs, published by San Francisco’s Office of the Budget and Legislative Analyst, the office looked at the number of bookings in the New York State Attorney General’s 2014 report on Airbnb in New York City (which was based on subpoenaed information collected between January 1, 2010 and June 2, 2014) and compared that to data scraped by researcher Murray Cox for the same period. In doing so, the office determined that only 30.5% of NYC bookings had visible reviews. The office then used both these review rates (72% and 30.5%) to construct high-impact and low-impact estimates of Airbnb’s effect on San Francisco’s housing supply (see pages 49-50 of the report’s appendix for a more detailed discussion of methods).

Nightly Rates

The average nightly rate as of January 1 for all areas (in Vancouver) was

  • $120 for all room types.
  • $142 for entire home/apts.
  • $72 for private rooms.
  • $47 for shared rooms.

Table 9: Nightly rates, January 1, Vancouver

I was unable to collect nightly rate information for June 1 and so am reporting it for January 1. I have rate data for other dates, but haven’t analyzed it yet.

I definitely found some nightly rate information that seemed anomalous or incorrect, but I have not gone through the dataset specifically looking to identify or correct what appear to be incorrect rates. The averages may therefore be skewed, which is why I chose to also report the mode/s (the most frequently appearing value/s) for these categories. Another thing about these averages is that they are for all listings in each category, including those with zero reviews. One reason a listing could have zero reviews is because it hasn’t been booked or booked only a few times, and that in turn might be because the nightly rate is unrealistically high.

It would be more interesting to have the neighbourhood rate breakdowns for room types, but I need more time to calculate those.

How the growth of short-term rentals relates to City of Vancouver regulations, policies and goals

I see a number of City of Vancouver regulations, goals and strategies that seem to be undermined or contravened (or at least have the potential to be) by the existing level and unchecked growth of Airbnb listings in Vancouver. There may also be another set of policies and goals (related to tourism and/or economic development) that are enhanced by having as much Airbnb activity as we do, so those should be considered too (though will not be by me here now).

Zoning and Development Bylaw

In terms of rules and policies that are undermined, the main one is the city’s zoning bylaw, under which it is a contravention “to use or permit to be used any dwelling unit for a period of less than one month unless such unit forms part of a hotel or is used for bed and breakfast accommodation.” This wording is in section 10.21.6. As I understand it (and I stand to be corrected), this means that all Airbnb listings in Vancouver, except those listed by licensed bed-and-breakfasts operators and hotels, are in contravention of the bylaw, and that this is true whether the unit in question is a single family dwelling; an apartment for which the tenant has the landlord’s permission to sublet through Airbnb, which I think is quite rare in any case; or in a condominium building where the strata has bylaws allowing short-term rentals.

Some would say that while this zoning provision may be a rule, it’s a bad rule and people should be allowed to do what they want with their own properties. There’s a lot to unpack and respond to in those sorts of statements – more than I can deal with here. Briefly, though, homeowners are usually quite concerned with protecting the resale value of their own properties – sometimes even to the exclusion of other priorities and values – and typically maintaining the resale value of residential properties depends very much on people collectively following the rules, including zoning rules.

Also, those who want to change the rule would need to make a case for that change, and in a city where residents with a wide range of income levels are so challenged to find affordable housing (and have been for more than a decade now in this last round) and the rental vacancy rate continues to hover under one percent, I find it hard to imagine a persuasive argument for changing the rules in a way that would make it easier for people to make more money by renting housing units to tourists than they can by renting to residents.

Protection of Rental Housing

I’ve already touched on the city’s report on the need for more family-size housing units (which is part of its Healthiest City Strategy) but more generally, the city has a several policies and programs aimed at protecting and increasing the market rental housing stock. The ones aimed at protecting existing rental housing include the rate of change guidelines that were expanded in 2007 (which require anyone who proposes to demolish rental housing units in a building of six or more units in designated areas to replace each of those units or contribute an equivalent amount) and the recent creation of an online rental standards database. I’ve attended several city presentations in which the protection of existing rental housing is noted as a top priority when it comes to affordable housing and that priority is included in Vancouver’s Housing and Homelessness Strategy 2012-21 (see page 6). These are all good and appropriate steps given that, for a variety of reasons, there has been very little purpose-built rental housing built in the city since the 1970s. The existing stock is aging and not being replaced at a rate that meets demand. (This has begun to turn around in the last few years, but there is still a massive gap to fill).

Greenest City 2020 Action Plan

The Greenest City 2020 Action Plan calls for more than 50% of city trips to be made by foot, bicycle and public transit (and this goal was recently achieved). Another of the plan’s transportation goals is to reduce the average distance driven by residents by 20% from 2007 levels (see page 29 for both goals). As mentioned, the areas with the highest percentage of Airbnb listings in the city are those in or close to the core (Downtown, West End, Kitsilano, Mount Pleasant and Grandview). Residents who live in those areas arguably have the best opportunities to live close to work, make the majority of their trips by foot, bicycle or transit, and maybe even give up their cars. If housing units in those areas are being converted to STRs and rented to tourists at higher rates than residents can afford, this may undermine the achievement of the city’s sustainable transportation goals. It’s no doubt very pleasant for the tourists to be able to stay in these appealing neighbourhoods and walk to all the amenities they offer – I too try to stay in walkable areas when I visit other cities so I understand the attraction. But if there’s a choice to be made between supporting the people who actually live here to make sustainable choices (and allowing them to benefit from the quality of life and reduced transportation costs those core areas offer) and supporting tourists to do the same, shouldn’t city policy (and actions) lean in favour of residents? The city’s zoning bylaw already does that by prohibiting short-term rentals, but it’s being routinely flouted.

A recent Metro Vancouver report that looks at both housing and transportation issues is the Housing and Transportation Cost Burden Study. Instead of viewing housing costs in isolation, it looks at housing and transportation costs together, because both costs are unavoidable and because trying to reduce one (housing) by moving to cheaper areas further away from the core usually increases the other (transportation). The report shows that while the City of Vancouver is generally the most expensive when housing costs are viewed in isolation, it is actually more affordable than suburban areas when the two costs are calculated together. This was true in all areas for renter households and in most areas for owner households (see pages 14 and 15). Again, this indicates that by allowing unchecked growth of Airbnb and other STR rentals in core areas, the City and Metro Vancouver may be undermining their own affordable housing and sustainable transportation goals.

This is one of the many areas where the impacts of Airbnb are complex, because obviously the city (and Metro Vancouver) would like to support sustainable transportation choices by tourists too. Also, the city considers tourism jobs to be green jobs – and some people are clearly using Airbnb as a job.

Healthiest City Strategy

Things get more murky here….certainly many Airbnb operators will argue that their hosting activities and the new and interesting people they meet that way bring them substantial quality of life and mental health benefits and make them feel more socially connected. I don’t doubt that, but I also wonder whether those benefits for the operators (and their guests) come at the cost of substantial drawbacks for other city residents. And I also wonder whether the other residents who are forced to deal with the effects may be less well off to start with than the STR operators. Property owners, for example, are in the best legal and regulatory position to list units on Airbnb because tenants who do so risk eviction (unless they’re in the minority of those whose landlords will grant their permission to sublet on Airbnb).

In terms of specific goals in this strategy, two of them are to increase Vancouver residents’ sense of belonging by 10% and their sense of safety by 10%. Not withstanding Airbnb’s “belong anywhere” slogan it’s hard to see how increasing numbers of high-turnover short-term visitors staying in Vancouver’s condos, apartments and houses helps either of these or will reduce social isolation. Keep in mind that in order to stay under the radar and keep the peace, operators renting out entire condos and apartments often advise their guests not to interact with the neighbours. The operator and the guest may get to know each other, particularly if the guest is staying in a private room while the operator is present, but these arrangements are now in the minority. There’s always a chance that a resident and an STR guest will have a chance encounter in the hall and strike up a lifelong friendship, but the odds of forming enduring social connections seem much better between people who are planning to stay for the long-term.

Should the city change its approach?

Given the above policies and Airbnb’s potential to undermine them, the number of Airbnb listings (and particularly the number of entire home/apt. listings and operators with multiple listings), and the severity of the city’s housing shortages, I believe a more proactive approach by the city to this issue is justified. And in a broader sense, I think a more active approach is warranted on the grounds of stopping, or at least moderating, the further commodification (and financialization) of housing in Vancouver. I took note of a recent statement by Vancouver planning director Brian Jackson. It was on a different issue (land assembly in anticipation of upzoning), but I think it applies equally well here: “It treats housing as a commodity as opposed to a place where people live. We want to discourage that.”


Before providing some thoughts on what the city might do, I’d like to deal with some of the arguments against attempting to curb the growth of STRs and taking a more active enforcement approach.

The number of listings is too small/minor factor

One of these arguments is that despite the number of Airbnb listings (as well as STRs on other platforms) and their rapid recent growth, the overall number is just too small to have a noticeable negative impact on the amount of housing available to tenants or to significantly increase rents. Responding to critics on these points, Airbnb hired Kenneth Rosen (of the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley) to study the question of whether “home-sharing” was contributing to increasing rents in San Francisco, and more recently another academic (Thomas Davidoff, an assistant professor at UBC’s Sauder School of Business) to look at the effect on rents in a variety of other U.S. cities

In the 2013 report on San Francisco by the Rosen Consulting Group, the authors wrote that

The impact of Airbnb and other online marketplaces on trends in urban housing markets are minimal, though admittedly are difficult to quantify. However, we believe that the local apartment market tightened significantly because of job creation and the improving economy combined with positive demographic conditions…Furthermore, the short-term rental marketplace is small relative to the size of the region’s housing stock and cannot realistically impact regional housing trends.

This report has numerous shortcomings. For one thing, despite having access to Airbnb data, nowhere does the report state how many Airbnb listings there actually were in San Francisco at any given date. It instead says that “At any given time, there were thousands of individual listings available on Airbnb.” (page 4). Rosen is somewhat more specific in a blog post on the topic (where he refers to “a couple of thousand”), but still, not exactly precise. The most precise figure the report gives is when it states that Airbnb booking activity peaked in 2012 in August at 1,576 bookings. It notes that at that peak level, this works out to bookings in 0.4% of San Francisco’s 378,000 homes. While it’s useful to have that booking information, given Airbnb’s rapid growth, the 2012 figure was likely quite out of date by the time the report was published in 2013. Also, since that entire housing stock is not available to tenants, for the sake of perspective it would be useful to also compare the bookings and/or listings to the rental stock and/or the number of units available to tenants at any given time, as indicated by the vacancy rate.

One could make the same argument that Rosen does about the number of Airbnb listings in Vancouver compared to the overall housing stock, i.e. that there are too few to make a difference. According to Statistics Canada’s 2011 National Household Survey, there were 264,570 occupied private dwellings in the City of Vancouver. The 3,473 Airbnb listings (not bookings as Rosen refers to, because I don’t have that info) in the City of Vancouver (as of June 1, 2015) make up only 1.3% of that total housing stock (which has also increased since 2011). However, the picture starts to shift when you look at that number in relation to dwellings occupied by renter households. That figure is 136,135, though it’s likely an undercount, due to the NHS’ 24.5% nonresponse rate in Vancouver, and the difficulties of enumerating secondary suites and tenants as opposed to owners. The number of Airbnb listings as of June 1 is 2.6% of that stock. I’m not arguing here that most Airbnb listings are in rented dwellings (in fact I think the opposite is more likely) but I do think it’s important to consider the number of Airbnb listings in relation to the stock of housing available to tenants. Given that the City of Vancouver had an overall 0.5% rental vacancy rate (according to CMHC’s Fall 2014 report), a rough estimate of the number of available rental units when this vacancy rate is in effect would be in the range of 680. This would not account for rental units built since 2011, but I am trying to get a ballpark sense here of how the number of Airbnb units might impact the rental vacancy rate. It seems that if even 10% of the 3,473 June 1 Airbnb listings might otherwise be available to tenants, that would have an impact on the vacancy rate. Given the number of operators with multiple listings (381) and the number of units they held as of June 1 (1,215), this 10% estimate seems quite conservative.

Overall, the Rosen report seems to argue that it is San Francisco’s low vacancy rate that is contributing to increasing rents, rather than Airbnb, meanwhile dismissing the idea that Airbnb could be contributing to that low vacancy rate. The unstated but implied jist is that since there are so many other reasons for increasing rents, there is no justification for trying to curb STRs as a means of slowing that trend. It’s not exactly surprising that a study commissioned by Airbnb would reach those conclusions.

Similarly, Davidoff’s study found that Airbnb was responsible for an increase of only $6 per month on a New York City one-bedroom apartment and an average increase of $19 per month in San Francisco. This is predicated on “Airbnb’s estimates” that 80 to 90% of its listings are posted by “residents sharing the home in which they live.” The actual study doesn’t seem to be publicly available, but there is a story on it in the Wall St. Journal, in which Davidoff is paraphrased and quoted. According to the story, Davidoff said that even putting aside Airbnb’s estimates, if all Airbnb listings were assumed to be used solely as STRs, the increases would still be “modest” (meaning $24 per month in NYC and a $76 per month in San Francisco).

What the focus on rent increases doesn’t address, however, is Airbnb’s effect on vacancy rates. Many tenants may be able manage an increase of $6 or even $24 per month, but can they find an apartment in the first place? In the article Davidoff acknowledges this, noting that criticisms of Airbnb go beyond its effect on rents and concern how it may be affecting who can continue to live in the neighbourhoods where Airbnb is most popular. “It’s not an affordability issue. It’s a luxury neighborhood issue or a bohemian neighborhood issue,” Davidoff states.

I hope Vancouver city council will not adopt the idea that the areas that have the most Airbnb listings are “luxury” neighbourhoods and those who control properties in those areas should be free to rent them out to tourists at higher rates than residents can afford (or are allowed under B.C.’s Residential Tenancy Act, which doesn’t cover short-term rentals). If they do, the limited affordable rental housing that’s still available to tenants in the West End, Kitsilano, Fairview, Mount Pleasant and Grandview-Woodland will shrink further than it already has and current residents will have to move to less central areas (where they will likely have to make more trips by car).

It’s true that Airbnb is only one of many factors that are contributing to the squeeze on Vancouver’s tenants and that this pressure has been underway for some time, prior to Airbnb’s existence. As of 2011, tenants made up 51% of the city’s population – an often-repeated statistic. But that percentage is lower than the 58% it was in 1986 (see page 27 of the city ‘s Grandview-Woodland Housing Backgrounder, found here) and in 2001, when tenants made up 56% of the city’s population (See Statistics Canada or the city’s own census-based local area profiles for that figure). Tenants make up a smaller percentage of the population even in areas where residents have historically found affordable housing. Grandview-Woodland was 73% tenants in 1986 but only 66% in 2006 (see the backgrounder referenced above). The proportion of tenants in that neighbourhood is not available from the city for 2011, due to the switch from the mandatory long-form census to the voluntary National Household Survey.

Unknown number of listings dedicated to STR use

It is also true that just knowing the number of Airbnb listings or even the number of entire home/apt. listings, does not tell us how much housing is being diverted from the supply that would otherwise be available to residents. That is a difficult thing to determine because 1) It is challenging to assess which listings are being used exclusively as STRs and which are primary residences that are being used as STRs on an occasional basis. The number of reviews and calendar availability do provide some grounds for estimation, however. I will take another approach to estimating this ratio for a subset of Vancouver listings in my thesis, but am still working out the details of that method. 2) Even if it were possible to ask all the people who have listed entire units or private rooms that are dedicated to STR use whether those units were previously rented to tenants or would be rented to tenants if the STR option were not available, there are a variety of reasons why people might not respond honestly.

However, the fact that complete information is not currently available (due to Airbnb’s unwillingness to share that information, ironically) and that Airbnb is not the primary or only factor putting the squeeze on tenants, doesn’t mean the city should continue with the status quo approach. I would argue the opposite: The lack of easily available information should spur the city to investigate. And, since Vancouver was already in an affordable housing crisis before Airbnb came on the scene in 2008, the City should take all actions within its power to prevent the situation from worsening. The severity of Vancouver’s affordable housing shortages means action is required on a number of fronts simultaneously, and the regulation of STRs is an area where the City has the power to act on its own, not requiring information, permission or cooperation from senior levels of government.

Airbnb makes housing more affordable and accessible

Finally, Airbnb typically responds to criticisms of its impacts on the housing market with claims that it actually makes housing more affordable and accessible. I urge the City to view such claims skeptically and to ask two critical questions: For whom and at what cost?

This is because in order to make money to offset your housing costs through Airbnb, you must first have some housing to “share,” so if you’re homeless or precariously housed – i.e. if you’re one of those most in need of affordable, accessible housing – don’t count on Airbnb helping you out with this.

And for tenants, the benefits are dubious. Tenants require the permission of their landlord to sublet and any who do so without that permission are risking eviction, as Landlord BC recently warned. Given the legal responsibilities of landlords to provide for the “quiet enjoyment” and safety of all their tenants, it seems unlikely that many landlords will be willing to delegate their screening processes to their tenants. This means that only a tiny minority of tenants are likely to gain the permission of their landlords to rent their spaces on Airbnb, while the rest will never have access to that source of income to offset their housing costs and will instead have to cope with a pool of units that is dwindling, thanks in part to the incentives to rent short-term that Airbnb provides. Even if a landlord doesn’t evict a tenant who rents her or his space on Airbnb without permission, the landlord would certainly be less inclined to provide a reference, and it would be imprudent for tenants in this tight rental market to risk that. Given these circumstances, I don’t see how the claim that Airbnb makes housing more affordable and accessible for the majority of tenants can stand.

Meanwhile, homeowners, the group of residents who are arguably already best off in Vancouver’s extreme and unusual housing market, are legally well-positioned to benefit from Airbnb, and it probably does make housing more affordable and accessible to them. Airbnb and others argue that “sharing” (i.e. renting) one’s home helps homeowners afford their mortgages or even keep their homes when threatened with foreclosure. Since we didn’t have a foreclosure crisis in Vancouver, that argument doesn’t really apply here, but there certainly is much public debate and concern over the indebtedness of homeowners and Vancouverites in general, and the city’s housing costs (especially in relation to incomes) are a major factor in that indebtedness. For those who are stretching to afford their current mortgage or who are hoping to use Airbnb to afford something they otherwise couldn’t, Airbnb may indeed make housing more accessible, but again the question is – at whose expense?

If a property owner can’t afford to pay their mortgage based on their own income and/or the rent from a long-term tenant and therefore decides to rent out that unit on Airbnb instead, then perhaps that property was not a wise purchase in the first place. Why should tenants (many of whom can’t afford to own under any circumstances) be deprived of already scarce housing options because someone (perhaps during a time when mortgage lending requirements were quite a bit looser than they are today) bought more house than they could afford? And why should the city allow and foster that rule-breaking and inequity by continuing with its current complaint-based approach to enforcement? There will of course be exceptions….people who have been affected by sudden job loss or health problems. No one could blame a person in those situations for maximizing all possible income sources. But exceptions are just that.

Also when the owner of a detached house rents out that property on Airbnb, they are breaking the zoning bylaw just like everyone else, but due to the detached structure, are less likely to be noticed and complained about than those who live in apartments and condos. And even if someone does complain, the only consequence the owners are likely to face as it currently stands is a letter from the city asking them to stop. Those who rent out condo units are more likely to be detected and complained about, depending on the rules of their strata association, but even still, the consequences they’re likely to face from their strata or the city are much less severe than tenants are subject to.

Given these differing benefits, rules and potential consequences, it seems to me at this point that the net effect of Airbnb in Vancouver is to further enrich those who are already housing-advantaged and to worsen the situation of those who aren’t. Is this path – one of increasing housing inequality – one the city wants to sanction? I hope not.


How to effectively and fairly regulate short-term rentals is a question many cities are currently grappling with, or have recently dealt with. For a while, I was trying to keep track of how many cities have recently changed or brought in new STR regulations, (see here and here) but that’s a full-time job or two in itself. I estimate at least 60 in North America and Europe. The good news is that since many cities have already completed or begun this process, there are many models to follow (and some to avoid).

As I mentioned at the outset, my research is ongoing, so the formation of my ideas on this topic are ongoing too, but here are a few current thoughts.

Be proactive

Airbnb listings have grown rapidly in Vancouver since the company launched its website in 2008. Affordable housing shortages have arguably worsened too, but for the most part, the city has continued with its status quo, complaint-based enforcement approach to STRs. This may be due to a lack of resources, which are of course limited. And the city has many housing priorities to juggle. Still, I think that given current circumstances (number of listings, number of entire homes listings, number of STR operators who have multiple listings, etc.) a more active approach is warranted. More active enforcement will require staff time and resources, which costs money – but so does building brand new housing from scratch to replace whatever Airbnb activity is removing from the existing supply. A more active approach is also justified based on the city’s stated priority of preserving existing rental housing stock. In addition to stepping up enforcement efforts, a more proactive approach might involve creating some kind of permit system allowing limited use of primary residences as STRs.

Obtain data

It will be difficult for the city to act effectively without access to accurate data on the types of metrics I’ve reported on here, as well as others. I suggest the city ask Airbnb to supply it with anonymized booking and listing data, such as the San Francisco Office of the Budget and Legislative Analyst recently requested. Airbnb did not respond to that request and I wouldn’t expect it to respond any differently to Vancouver, but it’s still worth asking. If Airbnb doesn’t provide the data the city needs to properly understand the land use, housing, economic, safety and security impacts the company is contributing to, then the city might want to consider either getting that data via subpoena (as Malibu did, though I’m not sure of the outcome) or obtaining scraped data, as San Francisco has done.

The city might also want to be aware that taking the friendly and collaborative approach to the regulation of Airbnb, as San Francisco and Portland did, will not necessarily result in Airbnb sharing its data with the city, or in regulations that are more effective or enforceable.

Airbnb was actively involved in drafting San Francisco’s new regulations (which are now being revised) and it ended up passing rules that set STR permit fees at $50 for two years – a level that staff said does not come close to covering administration costs. Also, despite San Francisco’s cooperation with Airbnb, the company was still unwilling to share the data the city needs to enforce the rules that Airbnb helped write. As a result, staff said the 90-day limit on STR rentals when the owner is not present was unenforceable. Regarding the current situation in San Francisco supervisor David Campos put it this way at a late April public meeting:

“I believe that home sharing and short-term rentals have a place in San Francisco but what doesn’t have a place in San Francisco is the idea that a corporation can write a law, then ignore the very law that it wrote, and then refuse to provide the very basic information that is needed to enforce that law.”

Similarly Portland’s cooperation has not prompted Airbnb to share the data the city has asked for, as noted by city commissioner Nick Fish in a December 2014 exchange with Airbnb’s David Owen: “You want to have your cake and eat it too. We have an obligation to go after folks who are not following the law. The only way we can do that is [if] we know where they live, and you’re claiming that’s confidential and somehow an erosion of your privacy rights.”

Airbnb can justify its refusal to share its data with the cities it operates in on the grounds that it’s proprietary, but it’s also true that Airbnb is (or was) facilitating transactions that contravene local government bylaws in many of these same places, so I think cities have a strong case for demanding the information. Also, Airbnb’s whole business model is predicated on the idea that it’s good to share what you own. Why is sharing good for everyone else, but not for Airbnb?

Distinguish between listings that are primary residences and those that aren’t

As I argued earlier, people who occasionally rent out their own primary residences when they go away are having little to no impact on the city’s supply of housing, since the unit is already occupied by a resident and continues to be so after the booking. This type of listing is arguably beneficial because it makes use of space that would otherwise be vacant. There may still be negative effects (noise and security concerns) on neighbours, but I am mainly concerned with housing supply and affordability impacts. Airbnb claims that this type of occasional renting of a primary residence represents the vast majority of bookings on its site, but it never supplies anything more than its assertions to back that up. It’s also unclear how reliable Airbnb’s information is. If these claims are based on surveys of its own operators (or “hosts”), those operators may be motivated to comply with the frame Airbnb consistently advances, for fear of repercussions. In any case, even a cursory review of Airbnb listings will turn up many examples of listings with indications that they are not primary residences. In some cases these indications are very clear: The operator may actually state that he or she lives close by, but not in the available unit. Regardless of how the percentage of listings breaks down in terms of those devoted to STR use versus those used that way occasionally, the city should keep this distinction in mind. Given the housing situation in Vancouver, I find it hard to imagine justifications for changing the rules to allow property owners to use housing units exclusively as STRs.

Consider capping STR permits by geographic area

Many cities have tried to limit the impacts of STRs by creating a permit system and capping the number of nights a permit holder can rent their space for per year, either with or without the operator present. As noted above, this appears to be very difficult to enforce, especially in the absence of access to Airbnb’s booking data.

A more effective approach to permits, especially when it comes to protecting affordable housing, may be to cap the number the city will allow by a geographic area (neighbourhood, building or census tract). Amsterdam, Austin, Texas and Nashville, Tennessee all use variations of this approach.

Set enforcement priorities

Given the number of listings and limited resources, if the city decides to take a more proactive approach to enforcement, it may want to set priorities in line with its various policy goals. To protect existing rental stock, it might want to focus on operators with multiple listings, for example. It could focus on listings with the most reviews or on neighbourhoods with the lowest rental vacancy rates. If family housing is a priority, it could focus enforcement on two-bedroom units that are being dedicated to STR use.

Be prepared for a pro-Airbnb PR campaign

Any large city that takes steps towards tightening or defining the rules on STRs should count on Airbnb marshalling its local “hosts” and fans to lobby councillors and pack the public meetings – recent hearings in New York City and San Francisco (complete with stickers) prove that. Local governments should also expect to be visited by professional lobbyists. Airbnb reportedly spent more than $47,000 lobbying the City of Portland in 2014, the year Portland became Airbnb’s first official “shared city.” The last reported valuation of Airbnb put it at $20 billion, so it has ample resources to spend on lobbying campaigns.

Other resources

If it hasn’t already, the City may wish to review a 2015 draft report on STRs by the Sustainable Economies Law Center, as it covers a variety of regulatory issues and has a section on “Regulating the Housing Supply for the Common Good.” I don’t agree with everything this report recommends, but still think it’s a useful resource.

Taking action is within the city’s jurisdiction

To conclude, the city’s housing shortages (of social housing, affordable market rental and affordable ownership options) and the intense public concern over these issues mean that any factors or phenomenon that might affect local housing supply or affordability are worthy of investigation and response, as far as the city’s powers and budget allows. Many of the factors that have created these shortages – and that might mitigate them – are complex and largely beyond the city’s jurisdiction and influence: interest rates, and federal policies on housing, taxes and immigration being some of the key ones. The city does, however, have the ability to influence and respond to the proliferation of STRs and it doesn’t need permission from other levels of government do that.