C1.3 Housing Security
Material Security. Can the system provide material necessities reliably and universally?
Pass threshold
≥88% housing stability over 5-year periods, housing costs ≤30% of disposable income at 80% of regional median household disposable income
Clause by clause:
- ≥88% housing stability over 5-year periods
- housing costs ≤30% of disposable income at 80% of regional median household disposable income
What it asks
≥88% housing stability resistant to market volatility, with housing affordable to households at 80% of the regional median disposable income.
Why it matters
Housing represents the largest expense (30-50% of income) and primary wealth-building mechanism. Systems failing to address housing commodification cannot claim comprehensive security. Stability means maintaining housing over 5+ years without involuntary displacement.
How it is measured
Housing stability rate = percentage of participants maintaining stable housing over 5-year periods without involuntary displacement from foreclosure, eviction, or inability to afford rent increases. Affordability: housing costs (rent or mortgage payments plus utilities) no more than 30% of disposable income for a household at 80% of the regional median household disposable income, from the OECD Affordable Housing Database, EU-SILC or national household surveys; for a design, projected on the same measure.
Indicators
household panel surveys for displacement; OECD Affordable Housing Database; EU-SILC; national household surveys.
Benchmark
Community Land Trusts achieve 10x lower foreclosure rates than conventional mortgages (0.46% vs 3.26% during 2008-2010 crisis).
How scores are anchored
1.0, pass
Structural decommodification or strong regulatory stabilization with a documented or clearly-designed stability rate at or above threshold. Centrally Planned Socialism (1.0): "Universal housing provision through state allocation... homelessness essentially eliminated."
0.5, partial
Partial protection or a real but incomplete mechanism — e.g., some cooperative/social housing alongside a still-dominant market allocation. Universal Basic Income (0.5): "Stable income improves housing security... but without housing policy, landlords can capture UBI through rent increases."
0.0, structural failure
Pure market allocation with no stabilizing mechanism. Libertarian Minarchism (0.0): "Pure market allocation with no stabilization... homelessness treated as individual failing rather than systemic outcome."
v2.0 (Session 45): this criterion's Pass Threshold was restated (K6, R2; NEEC_Criteria_v2_s45.md). The band texts and examples were written against Paper v1.4's threshold: they describe, and the threshold above governs (protocol 2.3(g)). Examples are re-estimated in the rescoring pass.
Normative roots
From N1 (Human Flourishing) + N3 (Coercion Minimization).
How the systems score
1.0, pass
0.5, partial
CCO-PTF-CIP-SZH, Participatory Economics, Integral, Degrowth Economics, Nordic Social Democracy, Market Socialism, Georgism / LVT, Ostrom Commons, Islamic Finance, State Capitalism / Singapore, Universal Basic Income, Universal Basic Services, MMT + Job Guarantee, Status Quo Market Capitalism, State Capitalism / China, Fully Automated Luxury Communism, Stakeholder Capitalism, State Capitalism / Qatar, Doughnut Economics
0.0, structural failure
Sovereign Wealth Fund Statism, Mutual Credit / LETS, Libertarian Minarchism
Sources
Definition: Paper Section 6; restated in v2.0 (NEEC_Criteria_v2_s45.md, Appendix V). Anchors: Paper Appendix H.7.