Airbnb Open Homes: Who Belongs?
Tags: Airbnb, Technology, Homeless, Refugees

Note: this article was written before the recent announcement of Airbnb.org, a non-profit that incorporates the Open Homes initiative.

via Airbnb.org

The words Airbnb and Global Refugee Response Manager flashed across my inbox. I would have never imagined those two words in the same sentence. Airbnb, established in San Francisco in 2008, has grown globally as a “trusted community marketplace for people to list, discover, and book unique accommodations around the world.” There are over 5.6 million active listings worldwide, with 800 million guest arrivals, and as of October 2020, over $110 billion has been earned by 4 million hosts on the platform. It’s an app that I, along with friends and family, have used numerous times when traveling to different countries and cities. So how do refugees, individuals fleeing from various forms of persecution, come to be a part of this online marketplace?



The answer is Airbnb’s Open Homes initiative, officially launched in 2017, which has a mission to “connect people with a free place to stay in times of need.” Open Homes partners with various non-profit organizations including Mercy Corps, the International Rescue Committee, and the Bone Marrow & Cancer Foundation to connect their clients with places to stay. Hosts on the platform sign-up to include their listing as a part of the initiative. There are currently three types of eligibility for the program: disaster relief, medical stays, and refugee/asylee housing. In the case of disaster relief, people impacted by a disaster, including relief workers, can apply for emergency housing. However, in order to be eligible, guests are required to provide proof of address or employment during the application process. For medical stays and refugee housing, guests must be referred by a nonprofit partner. Refugee and asylee guests must be legally recognized as such by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and/or have begun the process of seeking asylum. While this initiative has good intentions to provide free access to housing, the ethical concern comes into the fairness of this initiative. Who is creating the standards for individuals who are qualified and “worthy” of having access to Open Homes? What happens to the many individuals who are most marginalized in our society, particularly during natural disasters, without any proof of an address or a job? What happens to individuals who aren’t connected to non-profits, and are in need of housing? What about the many internally displaced persons worldwide, who are without a legally recognized status? It seems that Airbnb has created a stratification system of who belongs in their program.

The Open Homes initiative is one aspect of Airbnb’s intentional social impact efforts, yet the company has had many other unintended impacts. A recent study showed that in New York City, Airbnb “has increased annual rent for the median tenant by $380, and over $700 in some neighborhoods” (Bach, 2019). This “Airbnb effect,” is evident in housing markets worldwide, in taking long-term housing stock off the market and consequently driving up house prices and rents (Barker, 2020; van Doorn, 2020). It has caused cities from San Francisco to Barcelona, to create regulations surrounding short-term rentals and implement tourism taxes on the platform to offset the economic costs of Airbnb’s presence.

The platform is also not created in a way to facilitate and uphold Airbnb Community Standards which emphasize “fairness” and a stance against discriminatory behavior. For one, hosts are allowed to reject guests that they are not comfortable with, without needing to explain why. In one case, Reed Kennedy, a Black tech entrepreneur and investor, reached out to Airbnb suspecting discrimination, as he was being repeatedly rejected on Airbnb (Luca & Bazerman, 2020). Hosts were not seeing anything more than his profile, which includes a name and picture. An Airbnb representative informed Reed that he could increase his chances of getting a room by including references on his profile, who could vouch for him (Luca & Bazerman, 2020). This is not Reed’s experience alone, as studies have shown there is discrimination against Black guests along with, “ documented discrimination on Airbnb against same-sex couples, against guests with Arabic-sounding names, and against guests with disabilities” (Luca & Bazerman, 2020).

It is evident that Airbnb is employing the “New Jim Code,” which Ruha Benjamin defines as “the employment of new technologies that reflect and reproduce existing inequities but that are promoted and perceived as more objective or progressive than the discriminatory systems of a previous era” (Benjamin, 2019, p. 19). Airbnb’s stratification of eligibility for Open Homes, and the pervasive discrimination on the platform, mirrors the stratification of “worthiness” and exclusion that exists in many social service programs and our greater society at large. Taking into consideration the many effects Airbnb has on local communities and economic markets, would it even be ethical for Open Homes to continue their initiative and to expand their eligibility to include everyday individuals experiencing houselessness? Just last year Airbnb announced a partnership with San Jose State University, and a non-profit, the Bill Wilson Center, to help house students experiencing houselessness (Deruy, 2019). This is yet another example of prioritizing certain individuals, who need a free place to stay, over others. In this case, with the condition of those pursuing an education.

In thinking more deeply about Open Homes, I took to my real and virtual friends on Instagram, to ask them their thoughts. In poll results, 87% respondents said they have used Airbnb, yet 93% of respondents had not heard of Open Homes before. Additionally, 88% said that there should be an expansion of eligibility for Open Homes to include everyday individuals who experience houselessness. While the idea seems beneficial, some raised the point that a company like Airbnb, which creates housing crises, should not be facilitating this process, rather it is the role of governments. Others noted that Airbnb’s growing influence in the sphere and collaboration with government entities surrounding Open Homes initiatives, would increase Airbnb’s influence and sway city regulations in Airbnb’s favor.

I’ll leave you with words of Ruha Benjamin, who writes “the public must hold accountable the very platforms and programmers that legally and often invisibly facilitate the New Jim Code” (Benjamin, 2019, p. 54). It will take collective effort to hold Airbnb accountable, even as it pursues to create a positive social impact. Who is with me?