Across Canada, renters are increasingly struggling to find affordable housing and to remain in their homes. Eviction rates in Canada are shockingly high, with 7% of Canadian households reporting that they have been evicted at some point in their lives. Many people who are evicted from their homes may not find another place to live, and every year more than 235,000 people in Canada experience homelessness. This does not capture the experiences of hidden homelessness like individuals couch surfing or living in overcrowded conditions with their family and friends.  

The human right to housing is an important framework for opposing unnecessary evictions and preventing the growing experiences of homelessness. Under Canada’s National Housing Strategy Act (NHSA) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Canada is obligated to respect, protect, and fulfill the right to housing. The obligation to respect the right to housing prohibits Canadian government bodies, such as residential tenancies tribunals in different provinces, from evicting households from their homes, except when an eviction is necessary as a last resort. 

Specifically, eviction is only permitted under international human rights law if all the following are true: 

  • The eviction must have a legitimate objective. 
  • Eviction must be necessary to achieve the objective, and there must be no reasonable alternative.  
  • The consequences of eviction must be proportionate to the objective.

This is because international law recognizes that, like other human rights, adequate housing is fundamental to human dignity. It can only be restricted in circumstances where the restriction is justified in a free and democratic society.   

Unfortunately, all too often Canadian tribunals order evictions in violation of these basic principles. For example: 

  • Households that owe rent can be evicted with no consideration of whether the eviction is necessary.  In many cases, households would have been able to repay their arrears on a repayment plan, if given the chance. 
  • Households can be evicted with no consideration of whether the eviction is proportionate.  Evictions can be ordered for minor and even trivial reasons, even where the impact on the household losing their home will be severe. 
  • In many provinces, households can be evicted simply because their lease is up, even if the eviction will serve no purpose whatsoever.

To further complicate the matter, Canada’s eviction laws vary wildly between provinces. Some provincial laws allow tribunal adjudicators to consider the circumstances and decide whether eviction would be fair, so that it would at least be possible for the tribunal to respect the right to housing. Other provincial laws give adjudicators no choice but to order evictions, making it impossible for them to respect the right to housing. These varying laws have created uneven protections for renters across the country, leaving many vulnerable to losing their homes without the chance to present their circumstances and the devastating impact that an eviction may have on their lives.  


How do we solve this issue?

To ensure that renters in Canada have a fair chance to live in their homes and contribute meaningfully to their communities and the economy, we need a shift in our approach to eviction. To meet Canada’s obligation to respect the right to housing, we recommend that each province and territory must: 

  • Amend its residential tenancies laws to provide that eviction can only be ordered if it serves a legitimate objective, is necessary to achieve that objective, and is proportionate to the objective. 
  • Train tribunal adjudicators to respect the right to housing in their decisions. 
  • Ensure that tenants have access to eviction alternatives, such as rent banks to help pay their rent rather than losing their home if they were unable to pay their rent in full. 
  • Ensure that tenants have full, fair access to legal advice and to tribunal proceedings so that tribunals have all the information before them to determine whether an eviction is truly necessary. 

Evictions can be devastating for those who experience them. In too many instances, evictions can lead to experiences of homelessness. It is our duty as a democratic society to protect everyone, irrespective of their income or circumstances, to live with dignity and in secure homes.  

This informational pamphlet details the responsibilities of federal, provincial, territorial and municipal governments in Canada to work toward the progressive realization of the right to housing.


Highlights include:

  • How the right to housing applies to all governments in Canada.
  • Holding all governments accountable to their international human rights commitments.
  • Using the National Housing Strategy Act as a model for implementing the right to housing within provincial, territorial and municipal governments.
  • Using federal spending power to ensure national co-ordination and coherence to implement the right to housing.
  • Encouraging inter-governmental collaboration and co-operation and through UN human rights mechanisms.
  • Recommendations for all governments to uphold the right to housing

This pamphlet was produced by the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR) and the National Right to Housing Network (NRHN).


This informational pamphlet outlines how governments can use the planning and development tools at their disposal to ensure that the right to adequate housing is realized. It also outlines key actions that governments should take to develop new approaches to planning and zoning to promote inclusive, vibrant communities that ensure adequate housing for all, and how individuals can engage in this process as well.



This pamphlet was produced by the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR) and the National Right to Housing Network (NRHN).


This informational pamphlet examines the issue of renovations and upgrading that lead to evictions from rental housing, which denies people their right to security of tenure – a key component of the right to housing. We outline how “renovictions” are playing out across Canada, and how advancing the right to housing can help to address these issues.



This pamphlet was produced by the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR) and the National Right to Housing Network (NRHN).


The Government of Canada’s National Housing Strategy (NHS) commits to address the housing needs of the most vulnerable, promote community building and encourage partnerships to advance the right to housing. How will this be done?

This pamphlet examines the extent to which governmental budgeting and resource allocation is contributing to meeting the goals the federal government has set out in the NHS, as well as its commitments to implement the right to housing as outlined in the National Housing Strategy Act (NHSA).


Highlights include:

  • A breakdown of federal funding commitments and provincial contributions that have been made to implement the NHS
  • An assessment of critical shortcomings and gaps in investments needed to meet the government’s right to housing commitments
  • Actions needed to secure the right to housing through NHS funding mechanisms

This pamphlet was produced by the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights (CCHR) and the National Right to Housing Network (NRHN).


A picture of apartments overlooking trees

What is Inclusionary Zoning?

Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) is a planning tool used by municipal governments to encourage or mandate developers who intend to build new dwellings, to “set aside” a portion of these units for affordable use. Such units may be allocated for sale or lease at affordable rates. Developers may also have the option of building the affordable units in other locations within a city, or they may be able to pay cash in lieu of actually developing the units. Municipal governments may offer incentives such as further relaxations on building height or “density bonusing” to generate more investments from developers in affordable housing. 

Rationale for adopting an Inclusionary Zoning policy

The rationale for adopting the policy partly stems from a general failure among many local governments to effectively leverage the dynamics of the market to create affordable housing options for low - and moderate-income people. For instance, in Toronto out of the 230,000 new housing units that were constructed or slated for development over the last five years, only 2% offered rents at or below market rates. Most of the new buildings are condominiums or detached homes. Housing options available for those living on fixed incomes like seniors or for people making a living off precarious employment like many young adults, are negligible.    

Local planning and infrastructure investment decisions have created conditions to promote private development activity in major cities across Canada, but not enough affordable housing has emerged out of this process. Specifically, zoning amendments such as density relaxations and encouragement of mixed -use development signal greater economic activity, in turn promoting speculative behaviour in land markets. Prospective investors and developers make projections about potential development revenues generated based on the policy changes and related market and operational variables, in practice materializing into inflated investments in land. To maximize profit margins, new housing built on these lands are priced at rates that are targeted towards higher income earners. 

The strategy is thus investor driven - one that endeavours to increase returns at exponential rates. The housing needs of households in the low- and moderate-income range are effectively overlooked, leading to a form of market failure that warrants some form of government intervention. Indeed, public policy appears to have created conditions for the development industry to reap windfall profits without many conditions in place to capture a meaningful portion of the proceeds for the greater needs of the public. 

IZ closes part of this gap. By requiring or negotiating with developers to provide affordable housing options either directly or through cash in lieu, evidence from most jurisdictions that have experimented with the policy shows that affordable options can be created over time with varying levels of success. Plus, it is likely that the restrictive orientation of the IZ policy tool has a dampening effect on the skyrocketing prices of land in many cities. 

Limitations and criticisms of Inclusionary Zoning 

Opponents of the policy tend to point to the policy’s cost prohibitive design. This, they suggest, leads to rising house prices, the burdens of which are carried by prospective homeowners, or supply could be constricted at a city-wide level. However, the theoretical basis and evidence to support such claims are fragile.

Firstly, property buyers tend to be sensitive to dramatic price shifts, so developers are left with little room to pass on high costs to these groups without risking losing market share. To the extent that there may be some increase in house prices in select cases, the role of IZ in this increase is minimal. In areas such as the Washington-Baltimore region, where the effects of the policy on supply have been studied, there appears to be no evidence of any negative effects after the introduction of the IZ policy. 

While IZ clearly demonstrates potential, it can only work in cities with hot property markets, ones which are experiencing population and economic growth. If house prices are not escalating rapidly enough, then developers do not have the room to internalize the costs of the policy and generate sufficient returns. In fact, within cities, some neighbourhoods might be experiencing faster growth than others, implying the need for a differentiated approach to applying the policy. 

Further, IZ primarily benefits moderate-income earners. A private developer can only do so much in creating affordable housing options. To sustain the arrangement, the prospective homeowner or renter must be earning a reasonable income generated from employment. This helps cover costs of rent or mortgage as well as maintenance and repairs over time.  Its potential of helping meet the needs of this group is significant. Persistent shortfalls in affordable housing options can increase the risk of labour shortages on account of pricing out such households who then seek out cheaper options in other jurisdictions. 

However, households in lower income categories such as newcomers and single-parent families have limited mobility options given that economic opportunities and social and physical infrastructure tend to be concentrated in larger cities. Neglecting such groups threatens the very economic dynamism and social fabric of large metropolises. A creative IZ policy that includes provisions for more stringent affordability requirements in some areas along with additional supports may hold some potential in covering a wider spectrum of income groups including households living in more precarious economic conditions.  

Experiences of other jurisdictions with Inclusionary Zoning 

Several European countries have experimented with various forms of IZ over the years. The United States, given its long history with implementing the policy, and comparable federal structure to Canada is noteworthy. IZ started emerging in the 1970s in American urban policy as federal housing programs started to wind down.   

Today, there are over 500 IZ programs in about half of the country’s states, with jurisdictions ranging from large cities such as Chicago to smaller communities like Telluride, Colorado. The majority of initiatives is concentrated in California, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Key facts include:  

  • Program beneficiaries are rarely from very low-income households; instead target groups are in the low to moderate income categories.  
  • Policies are either mandatory or voluntary, with some evidence pointing to greater efficacy of mandatory programs on housing outcomes.  
  • Set aside rates for affordable housing usually ranges between 10 and 20%, rarely exceeding this limit.  
  • In big cities such as San Francisco and New York, the policy is restricted to rezoned areas.  
  • Developers can avail of alternative options in lieu of constructing affordable units on site, including paying cash and constructing homes off-site.  
  • The period of affordability also varies; shorter term arrangements run the risk of conversion to market rate housing as is evidenced in the depletion of affordable housing stock in jurisdictions such as Chicago.  

The extent to which IZ can generate a significant number of affordable housing stock is contingent on the calibration of the policy, the permutations and combinations of which are determined by local context. 

Montreal and Vancouver were the first Canadian cities to start experimenting with voluntary forms of inclusionary zoning. As provinces empower municipalities to adopt the policies, more are considering following suit. Notably, Toronto has proposed a mandatory program that will last for 99 years. Such actions point to an increasing recognition amongst municipal governments across Canada that value capture tools are a critical way to address the growing housing crisis in the country.

The Montreal Principles on the meaning and application of economic, social and cultural rights for women is the first international legal document of its kind. This plain language guide explains the Montreal Principles in a series of fact sheets that focus on key elements of the Principles.

Download the guide

English Download
Français Download
Español Download

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

Get the latest updates about the right to housing in Canada