Latest news with #AEI
Indian Express
6 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
World Bank claims a drastic reduction in inequality in India. There is more to the story
Written by Deepanshu Mohan A recent World Bank report has claimed a drastic reduction in inequality in India between 2011 and 2022. However, it misses a fundamental conceptual and measurable distinction between income surveys and consumption surveys. This distinction is critical, as an income-based Gini index is typically higher — reflecting greater inequality — whereas a consumption-based Gini is lower, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where such surveys are more common. Beyond these methodological issues, normative concerns around how inequality is conceptualised and measured also deserve deeper scrutiny — something the World Bank report fails to elucidate. In addition to the World Bank study, the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) released the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) National Indicator Framework Progress Report 2025, which tracks India's performance across 17 SDGs using 284 indicators. While this report is a valuable tool for aligning India's metrics with global targets, it primarily emphasises administrative progress and aggregate outcomes — overlooking disparities at the ground level in access, affordability, and inclusion. These dimensions are critical to measuring and understanding relative poverty and inequality. This is where the Access (In)Equality Index (AEI) 2025, developed annually by the Centre for New Economic Studies (CNES), offers a vital complement to the current debate on inequality assessment. Grounded in the context and patterns of economic development in low- and middle-income countries, the AEI draws on official data sources and reorganises indicators through a disaggregated, intersectional lens using the 4A framework: Availability, Affordability, Approachability, and Appropriateness. These are then assessed across five measurable pillars: Access to Basic Amenities, Access to Healthcare, Access to Education, Access to Socio-Economic Security, and Access to Legal Recourse. Take, for example, the Basic Amenities pillar. The AEI correlates with SDG-NIF indicators drawn from SDGs 1, 6, 7, and 11—including SDG 6.1.1 (proportion of households with piped water supply), 6.2.1 (households with improved sanitation/toilet facilities), 7.1.1 (households using clean cooking fuel or electricity), and 11.1.1 (access to affordable, safe housing under schemes like PMAY-U). The SDG-NIF Progress Report 2025 presents some encouraging trends. Piped water coverage, for instance, rose from 21.33% in 2019–20 to 80.22% in 2024–25. Access to clean cooking fuel reportedly exceeded 100% coverage in some years, indicating strong programmatic reach. Similarly, over 97% of schools had separate toilets for girls by 2023–24. However, the AEI ranks states not only on the presence of infrastructure but also on its functionality, usability, and inclusivity. Goa, for instance, scores highest in the Basic Amenities pillar (0.97), while Jharkhand (0.31), Bihar (0.38), and Odisha (0.39) lag significantly behind. Although the SDG-NIF reports progress in bringing water 'within premises,' the AEI shows that only 25% of states have piped water coverage exceeding 50%. This implies that in most states, households still fetch water from outside their homes—a burden that falls disproportionately on women. In healthcare, the AEI aligns with SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being, referencing indicators like institutional delivery rates (SDG 3.1.2), immunisation coverage (SDG 3.b.1), out-of-pocket expenditure on health (SDG 3.8.2), and the doctor-to-population ratio. Yet, the AEI provides a more nuanced view by disaggregating access by geography and affordability. While Goa (93%) and Tamil Nadu (89.9%) report high levels of adequate antenatal care, Nagaland reports just 20.7%—highlighting critical gaps in maternal healthcare in the Northeast and other hilly regions. In terms of socio-economic security, both the SDG-NIF and AEI engage with indicators from SDGs 1 (No Poverty), 5 (Gender Equality), 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and 10 (Reduced Inequalities). National-level data shows steady progress: the labour force participation rate (LFPR) among individuals aged 15–59 increased from 61.6% in 2022–23 to 64.3% in 2023–24. Banking outlets per 100,000 population rose from 59.9 in 2015–16 to a peak of 267.5 in 2021–22, before stabilising at 144.3 in 2023–24. ATM expansion has been more modest, growing from 16.5 to 18.5 in the same period. The AEI contextualises these outcomes by exposing disparities in access to employment, financial infrastructure, and income equity. Andhra Pradesh leads in the socio-economic security pillar with a score of 0.70, followed by Goa (0.60), while Bihar (0.18), Assam, and Manipur (around 0.21 each) perform the worst. Notably, all five southern states feature among the top eight performers, whereas many northeastern states consistently rank at the bottom—reflecting the role of policy focus and institutional strength. In education, both SDG-NIF and AEI monitor indicators aligned with SDG 4: Quality Education. While SDG-NIF time-series data shows improvement, the AEI reveals large disparities in actual access and quality. The proportion of secondary and higher secondary schools with internet access increased from 46.3% in 2015–16 to 78.5% in 2023–24. However, AEI data shows that in over half of Indian states, less than 50% of schools have functional computers, and only 25% of states surpass 75% coverage. In terms of digital readiness, only Kerala and Gujarat exceed 60% school-level internet coverage. The Access to Legal Recourse pillar, aligned with SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions, assesses the functionality and inclusiveness of judicial systems. The SDG-NIF paints a modest picture: courts per lakh population increased from 1.82 in 2016 to 1.93 in 2024, and judges from 1.33 to 1.55 in the same period — suggesting incremental capacity building. The AEI adds an equity lens by incorporating gender-disaggregated data on representation in legal institutions. Sikkim leads with 33.3% of judges being women — an encouraging sign. By contrast, states such as Bihar, Uttarakhand, Manipur, Meghalaya, and Tripura report 0% women judges, underscoring persistent gender exclusion. Moreover, the SDG-NIF records that 1.2% of women aged 18–29 reported experiencing sexual violence before the age of 18 (2019–21), a figure likely understated due to underreporting and cultural stigma. The writer is Professor of Economics and Dean, IDEAS, Office of Interdisciplinary Studies; Director, Centre for New Economics Studies, OP Jindal Global University; and currently Visiting Professor at the London School of Economics and Visiting Research Fellow, University of Oxford. Ankur Singh and Aditi Desai, Research Analysts at CNES, contributed to this column
Yahoo
15-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
For the first time in 50 years, the U.S. will likely experience negative net migration, shrinking the U.S. workforce—and economic growth by extension
The U.S. may see more than 500,000 people emigrate from the country as a result of President Donald Trump's aggressive deportation campaign, according to a recent report from the American Enterprise Institute. With foreign-born workers making up a disproportional amount of the American workforce, shrinking immigration could result in a hit to U.S. labor growth and consumer spending. These factors could lead to an up to 0.4% hit to U.S. GDP growth. President Donald Trump's efforts to deport millions of immigrants could likely result in a hit to the U.S. labor force that would shrink the country's gross domestic product, new data shows. A working paper published this month from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative economics policy center, found the Trump administration's immigration policy will likely result in a negative net migration in 2025—something the U.S. has not experienced in decades—that would shrink labor participation and 'put significant downward pressure on growth in the labor force and employment.' Net migration in 2025 will likely be between 525,000 individuals leaving the U.S. and 115,000 migrants entering the country, but will likely be negative, according to the report. With fewer immigrants in the country available to work, combined with a decrease in consumer spending—immigrants had $299 billion in spending power in 2023 and paid $167 billion in rent—U.S. GDP growth may shrink by between 0.3% and 0.4%. U.S. real GDP is about $23.5 trillion, which means the economic tradeoff of the deportations is roughly between $70.5 billion to $94 billion in lost economic output annually. The drag on what would usually be 2.8% annual growth would indicate a slowing in economic expansion as employers not only hire fewer people to fill fewer roles, but consumers spend less in an economically uncertain environment. 'Our workforce is disproportionately made up of immigrants relative to their share of the population, and because of that we…really can't sustain a high level of job growth with the U.S.-born population alone, because there just aren't enough bodies, essentially, to do that,' report co-author Tara Watson, a Brookings Institute economist and professor of economics at Williams College, told Fortune. The foreign-born U.S. labor force—which made up 19.2% of the total labor force as of 2024—has shrunk by 735,000 people since January, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. But the departure of foreign-born workers in the U.S. now follows an immigration surge during the Biden administration, which helped create a swell of economic growth. The Congressional Budget Office projected the increase in migrants would boost the U.S. nominal GDP by $8.9 trillion between 2024 to 2034. Meanwhile, the U.S.-born workforce is shrinking as many age out and retire. Wendy Edelberg, Watson's co-author and a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, called the projected loss of immigrant workers 'startling' and sees more trouble on the horizon. The U.S. has seen a surge in work permit applications in the first half of 2025, suggesting to Edelberg that many immigrants—out of concern for Trump's immigration policy—rushed to secure employment ahead of a crackdown, contributing to a healthy labor market and a 147,000 boost to payroll enrollment in June. But 'we're not going to ride that wave forever,' Edelberg told Fortune. She and Watson projected a shrinking labor force would result in payment enrollment growth of only 30,000 to 40,000 per month in the second half of the year. This number would be healthy and not indicative of a recession because it will simply indicate a much lower ceiling for labor force growth, Edelberg said. If weak immigration continues into 2027, Edelberg predicted that the jobs figure could turn negative. Immigration has been the cornerstone of the Trump administration's policy agenda, with the president on day one of his second term vowing to crack down on undocumented migrants to the U.S. Trump's Big Beautiful Bill injected $45 billion into the Department of Homeland Security to expand deportation facilities and gives Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) more than $11 billion annually to increase its workforce of deportation officers. The White House called AEI's report on the negative economic impacts of mass deportations 'baseless fear-mongering in defense of illegal immigration,' claiming that 10% of young adults in the U.S. are neither employed, in higher education, or seeking vocational training. 'There is no shortage of American minds and hands to grow our labor force,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told Fortune in a statement. 'President Trump's mass deportation campaign means higher wages and more opportunity for American workers.' Unlike Trump's first term, in which he oversaw a more modest curtailing of immigration, the president has ramped up deportations after a sluggish start to his second administration, with Watson and Edelberg projecting the removal of about 300,000 immigrants in 2025 alone. Beyond the nearly 67,000 immigrants the Trump administration has detained in fiscal 2025 and more than 71,000 deported, according to ICE data, others have self-deported or left voluntarily out of growing concern over hostile policies as part of the out-migration, according to AEI's study. Watson warned net migration could be even lower in 2026, as the administration likely refuses to renew temporary work visas and foreign-born students snub American universities in favor of higher education opportunities elsewhere. 'The environment is going to make people like students reluctant to come study here,' Watson said. 'Temporary workers may be questioning whether this is the right place for them to come to work.' Businesses are seeing the early consequences of weakened immigration, with farm workers refusing to show up to work out of fear of ICE raids, Bloomberg reported. Nursing homes are similarly struggling to attract a workforce as the Trump administration revokes some immigrants' legal status and slows the immigration process for documented migrants. 'We feel completely beat up right now,' Deke Cateau, CEO of Atlanta-based nursing home operator A.G. Rhodes, which has one-third of its staff made up of immigrants, told the Associated Press. 'The pipeline is getting smaller and smaller.' Beyond concern about a shrinking GDP, Apollo chief economist Torsten Sløk warned that if the U.S. were to deport 3,000 undocumented immigrants per day for a year, the country's labor force would drop by 1 million people. Workplaces with high rates of immigrant employment could subsequently see an increase in wages as they struggle to attract workers. 'Lowering the labor force by 1 million will reduce the participation rate by 0.4 percentage points, which will lower the unemployment rate, lower job growth, and increase wage inflation, particularly in the sectors where unauthorized immigrants work—namely construction, agriculture, and leisure and hospitality,' Sløk said in a Saturday blog post. 'In short, deportations are a stagflationary impulse to the economy, resulting in lower employment growth and higher wage inflation,' he continued. While some parts of the U.S. could experience stagflationary environments, stagflation could be tempered in areas with large immigrant populations as their spending power wanes and demand for industries like housing construction decreases, Edelberg said. Watson posited that besides GDP, shrinking immigration will most heavily be felt in Social Security. Undocumented immigrants paid $25.7 billion in Social Security taxes in 2022, according to a 2024 analysis by the left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. 'There's a very tight correlation between how many people are coming into the country and the degree to which we can sustain Social Security at its current levels going forward,' she said. More broadly, the economic ramifications of Trump's mass deportation campaign are only one part of the policy's impact, Edelberg said, the other half being the palpable changes in the feeling within American cities spurred by ICE raids and the mobilization of the National Guard to accelerate deportations. 'The broad macroeconomic events are going to be pretty modest,' she said. 'In terms of how we're affected by this immigration policy, I think they will be dwarfed by how we engage with this policy, just in the images and in our communities.' This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Fox News
12-07-2025
- Business
- Fox News
Extra: DOGE and the Challenges of Actually Cutting the Deficit
Elon Musk's embrace of President Trump and his campaign marked a pivotal moment in the 2024 presidential election. Musk was eventually appointed to head the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), where he was tasked with cutting federal spending and reducing the national debt. DOGE moved quickly and decisively, triggering lawsuits and further enraging Trump's critics. Although Musk has since left the Trump administration and experienced a very public fallout with President Trump, DOGE continues to operate and make an impact. Matthew Continetti, Director of Domestic Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, joined FOX News Rundown host Jessica Rosenthal to discuss DOGE, highlighting where it was effective in cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, and where it fell short of the expectations set by Musk and the administration. Continetti, who is featured in FOX Nation's new documentary 'DOGE vs. DC,' also weighs in on the public spat between Musk and the President, as well as the challenges politicians face when addressing America's debt seriously. We often have to cut interviews short during the week, but we thought you might like to hear the full interview. Today on Fox News Rundown Extra, we will share our entire interview with AEI's Matthew Continetti on the legacy of DOGE. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
Buzz Feed
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Buzz Feed
Experts Say Conservative Men Are Identifying As Moderates On Dating Apps
Hot Topic 🔥 Full coverage and conversation on Politics Back in January, the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative public policy think tank, released a survey that determined 52% of single heterosexual women are less likely to date a Donald Trump supporter — with only 36% of single heterosexual men saying voting for Trump would be a dealbreaker. And in the lead-up to Inauguration Day, Hily, a dating app with over 35 million worldwide users, released its own politics and dating study. After surveying 5,000 Gen Z and millennial Americans, Hily determined that 1 in 3 American women would decline a date over political differences. Similar to the AEI survey, Hily's study determined that only 1 in 10 American men would decline a date for the same reason. These results could very well explain the suspicious trend of heterosexual men misrepresenting their political leanings on dating apps: Specifically, they put 'moderate' on their profiles or act vague about their politics to increase their chances of matching with women who deliberately put 'no conservatives' in their own profiles. These so-called 'moderates' connect with liberal women, only for them to discover that their matches voted for Donald Trump in the last election (a dealbreaker for many). So why are people lying about their politics on dating apps in the first place? And how can daters spot the red flags behind these vague profiles before everyone's emotions take over? Here's what relationship experts have to say about this very 2025 dating problem. How 'Moderate' Became A Red Flag Ella,* a Los Angeles resident, said she's had nothing but frustration with 'moderates' on the apps. As she told HuffPost, Ella noticed that her 'large number of matches' with guys listed as 'moderate' on their Hinge dating profiles has grown significantly in recent months. But she now swipes left on all 'moderates': This is because more than once, after 'days and days of texting,' it turns out that these guys are 'really far-right, anti-feminist, etc,' she said. Ella's theory is that conservative men might need to lie about their political views – or else they won't get any dates in a liberal city like LA. Amanda*, creator of the ' Dating Is Dead ' Instagram account, recently ended a two-year relationship with a man who also listed 'moderate' on his profile. 'I think that he was conservative more than moderate,' she said. 'I feel like I was catfished in that sense.' She said her now-ex-boyfriend began to show his true colors during the first 100 days of the second Trump administration: 'He was becoming more and more indoctrinated to the hard right.' Now, Amanda is questioning whether her ex's far-right attitude was there all along and she was 'just so blinded by love' — or if 'he was hiding who he was.' Since ending that relationship, Amanda said she is far more cautious around men who put 'moderate' in their dating profiles: 'I try and bring it up more gently than I did in the beginning,' she said, 'because there's a lot of dancing around who we voted for, so now I ask immediately.' This approach may result in some abbreviated dates, but it could also mean dodging a major bullet before you've even finished drinks: 'I actually went on a date the other night that lasted seven minutes,' Amanda said. Her date, after admitting that he voted for Donald Trump, brushed off her concerns about the president's second administration, claiming that 'nothing in America is really going to change,' which was all Amanda needed to know about this guy's values. Bolster Your Dating Boundaries From the chipping away of reproductive freedom to the U.S. government's pronatalist campaign, women's rights are under attack in 2025. So discovering that the 'moderate' guy you've matched with might actually be looking for a tradwife can be unsettling, to say the least. 'For a lot of women — especially women of color, queer women, women with trauma histories — conservative beliefs don't just feel like a difference of opinion,' said Cheryl Groskopf, an LA-based anxiety, trauma and attachment therapist. 'They feel like a threat. And if you've ever been dismissed, gaslit or harmed by someone who hides behind 'traditional values,' then this kind of dishonesty can feel like a violation (because it is).' 'It's also just draining to constantly have to explain yourself,' continued Groskopf. 'Think of the energy it takes to spend the first 30 minutes of a first date defending your humanity.' Amanda knows this sentiment well. She recounted how the seven-minute-date guy disregarded her concerns about women's bodily autonomy by pointing out that she lives in a blue state like New York. 'I was like, but it's not about me,' she said. 'It's about the girl in Mississippi or Texas who was, God forbid, sexually assaulted at 13 or who needs a D&C. [Men] have the same rights across all 50 states, and I don't. It is not really up for discussion. A gun has more rights than I do.' Bottom line? 'Women need these boundaries to protect their energy, their bodies and their sense of safety,' Groskopf said. 'They can absolutely name up-front what they need to feel safe.' Why Are Men Misrepresenting Themselves On The Apps? The numbers don't lie: If 52% of single women are less likely to date a Trump supporter, then it makes sense that some of those Trump supporters are attempting to game the system. 'It may be because they are trying to appeal to a broader range of women, and want to select answers that they perceive will get them past the initial screening,' observes Marisa T. Cohen, PhD, LMFT, a relationship expert with Hily. (Cohen also provided the data from Hily's pre-Inauguration Day survey.) 'They also may perceive that they are being inaccurately judged as a result of their political views, so they are trying to present themselves in a way that they think will allow them to match with more people,' she added. But these political mismatches sometimes occur simply because some people 'may judge their own views inaccurately,' Cohen said. 'They may think they are progressive compared to other people they are associated with, but don't necessarily hold progressive views.' Groskopf also points to a 'real-time cultural shift': Women are now asking questions like, 'Does this person feel emotionally safe to me?' Amanda echoes that, reiterating her need to know a man's political beliefs before getting involved. 'I would not feel safe in a room with a bunch of conservative men at this point,' she told HuffPost. While Groskopf doesn't believe all men are 'trying to maliciously deceive' their potential dates, she also observes that they're not all being honest and authentic, either. 'Many of them have just never had to think about how their political beliefs affect someone else's sense of emotional or physical safety,' Groskopf said. 'They weren't taught to connect their values to safety, or to see 'moderate' as vague instead of neutral. But what he's missing is that for a lot of women, that kind of vagueness is the red flag.' Trust Yourself — And Your Values If a person's political views are a dealbreaker for you, then it's imperative to tackle vague, 'moderate' profiles with a clear strategy: That starts with establishing your values, Cohen said. 'Additionally, going beyond surface-level questions to get to know a person and their worldview is important.' That being said, Cohen advises skepticism if a potential date 'consistently fails to expand on their own views.' For the sake of your emotional safety, Groskopf recommends asking simple questions like: 'What does 'moderate' mean to you?' 'How do your values show up in your day-to-day?' 'Where do you land on things that matter to me — like therapy, mental health, women's rights?' 'The way he responds will tell you a lot,' Groskopf said. 'Does he get curious? Defensive? Does he minimize your question? Does he give a clear answer or just talk in circles and try to sound chill? If he can't meet that moment with honesty, clarity, or even basic self-awareness — that is the red flag.' Groskopf also cautions against continued obscurity: 'If he says things like 'I'm pretty middle of the road' or 'I just don't like extremes' — but can't tell you what he does believe or values,' then that's a red flag too. Watch out for defensiveness or mockery as well: 'If he gets weird or low-key annoyed when you ask a totally normal question about values — or makes fun of people who care about things like social issues or emotional growth — that's your sign,' Groskopf said. 'A guy who's actually grounded doesn't get defensive over basic emotional curiosity.' Women deserve to know if someone they're dating voted against their interests from the get-go. If a guy you match with says 'moderate' on his profile, you are entitled to know his definition of the word before your emotions potentially take over. 'For you to tell me that you're a moderate, but it's OK to have unmarked police cars and people without badges sweeping people up in the streets? That's outrageous,' Amanda said of dubious 'moderate' men. 'Your non-negotiables are your non-negotiables,' Cohen said. 'If learning about a person's political leanings matters to you, ask!'
Newsweek
02-07-2025
- Business
- Newsweek
Map Shows States With Biggest Housing Shortages
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Despite the recent rise in inventory across the country, the U.S. is still missing millions of homes to fix the current gap between supply and demand—with Hawaii and California facing the most acute shortage, according to a new study by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) Housing Center. Some reports found that the U.S. housing market is short of 3.8 million homes; others say it needs an additional 8.2 million homes to be balanced. Researchers at AEI have assumed that the housing shortage can currently be placed somewhere in the middle of these two figures, estimating that the country needs 6 million homes to fix the existing gap. According to their analysis, roughly two million of these homes can be traced back to the Golden State and its neighbors. Hawaii And California Facing Most Acute Shortages AEI researchers calculated the severity of the inventory shortage by state, considering how the estimated six million missing homes are distributed across counties based on each area's median price-to-income ratio. This, they say, offers "a proven proxy for housing affordability." Hawaii has the most acute housing shortage in the nation, with a current housing supply of 572,042 units and an estimated 80,856 homes missing from the market—about 14.1 percent. California followed with a shortage of 1,801,207 homes over a total supply of 14,762,527 units, about 12.2 percent. The third- and fourth-highest shortages were reported in the Northeast. The District of Columbia's shortage is estimated at 8.7 percent of its current inventory of 367,125 homes, or 32,049 units. New York is missing an estimated 735,568 homes, or about 8.5 percent of the 8,631,232 units now available. Ten states—West Virginia, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio, Indiana, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Nebraska, Michigan and Missouri—had shortages of less than 1 percent. West Virginia reported the lowest shortage of homes in the country, about 0.3 percent of housing units available. A Self-Inflicted Crisis Both Hawaii and California have massively underbuilt compared to demand over the past few decades, leading to the rising unaffordability of housing in the two states, which has left even successful professionals struggling to rent or buy. In both states, restrictive zoning, burdensome permitting processes and a Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) resistance to new construction projects have stifled new developments, keeping inventory extremely tight. The AEI study found that if California and what they call its "blast zone"—10 other coastal states including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico—had kept supply levels similar to that of the rest of the country over the past decades, the nationwide housing shortage would have been nearly one-third lower. California alone is responsible for adding 1.4 million homes to the nationwide shortage, the study concluded. According to AEI researchers, this would make the Golden State "the single largest contributor to America's housing crisis." The crisis in the state has spilled over to its neighbors, researchers said. Over the past 30 years, a growing number of California residents have been moving to neighboring states, looking for more affordable housing and a cheaper cost of living, according to IRS data. Overall, the state has lost more than three million taxpayers and their dependents to the blast zone states in the past three decades. Smaller states like Nevada and Idaho, along with Oregon and Arizona, have been absorbing the majority of the residents escaping California, who have inevitably driven up home prices and exacerbated locals' affordability problems. In Nevada, the housing shortage is currently estimated at 6.6 percent; in Idaho, it is at 6 percent; in Oregon, it is at 7.2 percent; and in Arizona, it is at 5.2 percent. For the researchers, the solution to the U.S. housing shortage should start in its epicenter, California and the West. "Fixing America's housing crisis demands boosting supply in the places with the most severe shortages," they wrote in the report. "This can happen by unleashing the private sector through what we call the Housing Abundance Success Sequence: allowing smaller lot sizes in new subdivisions, enabling single-family-to-townhome conversions in expensive neighborhoods, and adding mixed-use zoning in underutilized commercial corridors—done by right, and kept short simple without micromanaging." By their estimates, these measures could close the West's housing shortage within a decade.
