Residential tenants keeping pets: equality impact assessment

Key Findings - Tenants

We have considered the available evidence in relation to each of the protected characteristics to inform our assessment. We recognise that the data available does not provide a complete picture of the experiences of those with protected characteristics. However, the EQIA has allowed the opportunity to consider the impact of this measure for these groups as fully as possible.

The rented sector is home to around 959,000 households, 618,000 of which live in the social rented sector and 341,000 in the PRS^[12].

Analysis of responses to the New Deal for Tenants consultation^[13] on greater rights to keep pets found, the most frequently-made point for both private and social rented sectors was that, to achieve ‘tenure blind’ housing outcomes and enshrine tenants’ rights to housing, tenants should have the right to keep pets in their home.

Findings in a recent review of the barriers, benefits, and challenge of pets in the PRS^[14] indicates that pet ownership can provide various advantages, both for individuals who are renting privately and the wider community. These benefits include positive effects on health and well-being^[15], as well as the promotion of social connection and a sense of community, described by Wood et al^[16] as the ‘social lubricant effect’.

A 2024 evidence review^[17] looking at pets in the PRS found international evidence to suggest that additional barriers and costs associated with keeping a pet in the PRS were not evenly distributed, with low income households (Canada), certain racial groups (the US), people trying to escape domestic abuse (Canada), and people trying to escape homelessness (Australia) were the most severely impacted. The review also stated that, in relation to UK housing law,

“without robust legislation to prevent a landlord from including a ‘no pets’ covenant in a tenancy agreement, Rook (2018) argues that people on low incomes (or those unable to afford their own home) with pets remain subject to the whim of the property owner which specifically implicates class”.

In addition, RentBetter research^[18] suggests that tenant awareness of the Tribunal system is low and can be intimidating, particularly for low income tenants. Targeted awareness raising and support should therefore be considered in implementation of the measures to address these findings.

Age

According to the Scottish Surveys Core Questions 2022^[19], 25.5% of those living in the PRS are 16-24, 35.3% are 25-34, 15.5% are 35-44, 10% are 45-54, 6.8% are aged 55-64, and 6.9% are 65 and above. In the social sector, 11.8% are 16-24, 18.4% are 25-34, 16.3% are 35-44, 15.8% are 45-54, 17% are aged 55-64, and 20.8% are 65 and above.

Studies have found older pet owners benefit from better physical health than non-pet-owners^[20]. Owning a pet can also have positive benefits for social lives, with pet owners being more likely than non-pet owners to get to know people in their areas and build support networks^[21].

Young Adults

Scottish Government data on Poverty and Income Inequality in Scotland^[22] shows that in the last 15 years, the youngest households (household heads aged 16-24) have been consistently more likely to be in relative poverty compared to older households. In the period 2020-23, 39% of people in households with household heads aged 16-24 were in relative poverty after housing. In comparison, the age groups 25-34, 35-44, 45-54 and 55-64 all had lower poverty rates between 17% and 23%. There is evidence from previous studies to suggest that in some cases the high proportions of younger people in the PRS may in part be because residents in this age group are unable to afford to access other tenures of housing such as home ownership^[23].

In a recent survey of Scottish private renters^[24] focussing on low income households, almost one-fifth of those surveyed (19%) had experienced difficulty finding a landlord or letting agent that would allow them to keep pets. An evidence review from the same study, published in 2022, suggested that pets may enhance wellbeing and failure to be allowed to keep pets can impact on residents’ ability to make their rental property ‘a home’.

Evidence indicates that a disproportionately low supply of rental housing in several different countries, whether aimed at older adults or not, is welcoming of pets^[25]. Older adults in particular report encountering an implicit expectation that their pet is dispensable when seeking appropriate and affordable housing in which to grow older^[26]. Indeed, international and UK-based evidence suggests that moving, rental or housing issues can be among the most common reasons for pet relinquishments to shelters^[27].

In Scotland families with children^[28] make up 22% of the PRS^[29]. Research regarding the perceptions of pets within the family has suggested that many individuals, especially children, view pets as family members^[30].

Although the evidence base is not conclusive, there is emerging evidence to suggest that that facilitating engagement between pets and children, and encouraging children to take part in caring for pets may have positive outcomes for children in terms of better quality of life and wellbeing^[31]. A 2017 survey study^[32] undertaken with 1,217 primary-aged children in Scotland found that children were strongly attached to their pets, and the study concluded that pet ownership and attachment had the potential to lead to outcomes for children including reduced aggression, better well-being, increased prosocial/humane behaviours, and better quality of life.

A recent evidence review looking at pets ownership in the PRS^[33] found that “younger tenants with dogs, found they were ‘stuck in a cycle of rental insecurity’, both ‘settling’ (paying more for lower quality housing, in less desirable locations) and ‘staying put’ (worrying about their tenancy security, neighbourhood safety, and trying to save money for future home ownership)”.

The measures will have a positive effect on all ages, allowing tenants to keep pets can make a positive difference to how people feel about their home contributing to their health and wellbeing. Evidence also suggest there will be a positive impact in relation to fostering good relations among and between different age groups as pet owners are more likely than non-pet owners to get to know people in their areas.

Disability

According to the Scottish Surveys Core Questions 2022^[34], the proportion of adults in social rented properties who have limiting long-term physical or mental health conditions was higher than those in all other tenure types (46% in the social rented sector compared to 15.9% of those who own their home with a mortgage). The proportion of adults in the PRS who have a limiting long-term physical or mental health condition was 23.2%.

Research has demonstrated that having pets have distinct advantages for physical and emotional well-being, including a reduction in minor health problems and increased physical exercise, increased social interaction and a sense of community, and better mental health outcomes^[35].

According to a recent review of evidence around keeping pets in the PRS:

“Research has demonstrated that having pets has distinct advantages for physical and emotional well-being, including a reduction in minor health problems and increased physical exercise (Serpell, 1991), increased social interaction and a sense of community (Wood et al, 2007), and better mental health outcomes (Atherton et al., 2022). Furthermore, a study identified that having a pet or companion animal could act as a buffer against the negative impact of social loss on psychological health (Carr et al, 2020). A recent study found that pets can have a positive impact on their autistic owners, offering social benefits that alleviate feelings of loneliness, and integrating them into the community to cultivate a positive social identity (Atherton et al, 2022)^[36].”

An emerging (although not yet conclusive) evidence base suggests that pets may have beneficial impacts for those experiencing poor mental health^[37]. A mixed methods survey study from the University of the West of Scotland in 2021^[38] explored the role of pets in reducing or exacerbating mental health symptoms and wellbeing for 119 participants. The study found that, while keeping pets can also cause stress and negative feelings in some circumstances, benefits included a reduction in poor mental health symptoms such as anxiety and panic attacks; reduction in risk behaviours; an increase in social connections, motivation and capacity for pleasure, and a reduction in loneliness.

While there is evidence to suggest the measures will have a positive effect on people with a disability, to advance equality of opportunity any guidance on the new rights or existing legislation should use accessible straightforward language, explanations, concepts and include images as well as text.

Sex (including pregnancy and maternity)

Experiences of renting can have a gendered dimension. According to the Scottish Core Questions 2022^[39], an estimated 50.2% of those in the PRS are women. Women earn less on average than men^[40], are less likely to be paid the Living Wage^[41] and are more likely to not be working due to looking after children or home^[42]. This may lead to women having a lower independent income. Whilst there may be income pooling within a couple with a high-income and low-income earner, there will be an unequal reliance on the sharing of income to maintain their standard of living^[43].

The Wealth in Scotland^[44] report also shows that women are less likely to own property than men^[45], and lone parents (of whom 92% in Scotland are women) and working aged women with no children are the least likely groups to own any property.

The 2022 CaCHE/Joseph Rowntree Foundation^[46] survey of 1,012 private renters in Scotland found that a higher proportion of women reported worry about affording other essentials in comparison to male renters^[47].

Whilst a precise gender breakdown is not available for other household types on Housing Benefit or for households receiving the housing element of Universal Credit, the available data suggests that it is likely that women in Scotland are overall more likely to be in receipt of Housing Benefit or the housing element of Universal Credit than men^[48].

Over recent years, evidence shows that households with children under one are at a heightened risk of poverty, and that families with a new child are more likely to enter poverty, even when controlling for other factors^[49]. Evidence from a recent focus report on poverty and households with babies^[50] suggests that new mothers found Universal Credit payments helped to relieve housing costs by covering their rent. However most of the interviewees were in social housing and it was suggested that private rented accommodation is unaffordable. Many within the study mentioned that having a baby prompted a change in housing; often moving out of pre-pregnancy housing to avoid overcrowding. While rental costs were not a prominent concern, mothers highlighted the challenges of securing homes which suit their family's needs.

The measures will have a positive effect on both sexes, however, particularly so for women and children who experience domestic abuse. Stakeholder engagement highlighted families experiencing domestic abuse have had to leave situations and the accommodation they go to then do not accept pets, this can have effect on the family especially the children who are attached to the pet.

Gender reassignment

Data around the prevalence and experiences of trans people in the Scottish private rental sector are limited. We do not have reliable estimates for the number of trans or non-binary people in Scotland at present, including those living specifically within the PRS. However, as the next section will detail, there is evidence that other members of the LGBTI community are more likely to live in the PRS and within urban areas in Scotland.

A 2018 report by Stonewall^[51] reported one in four trans respondents (25%) were discriminated against when looking for a house or flat to rent or buy in the last year. The same proportion had also experienced homelessness at some point in their lives, while one in five non-binary respondents (20%) had experienced discrimination while looking for a new home.

Reported findings from a 2022 UK study of housing discrimination^[52] by Generation Rent and LGBTI homelessness organisation “akt” found that 43% of LGBTI respondents reported that they had been forced to live in unsuitable accommodation, compared with 29% of non-LGBTI participants. Insecurity and accessibility to affordable homes in the private rental market was raised as also an issue. However, limited information about the study or its underlying data were available so it is unclear as to how robust or representative these findings are.

In a published response to the recent consultation on A Human Rights Bill for Scotland^[53], the Equality Network cited (yet unpublished) data from a survey undertaken by Scottish Trans which ran from March–June 2023 and surveyed 575 trans and non-binary people from across Scotland about their experiences of housing and the cost-of-living, among other topics. The findings report experiences of discrimination by private landlords, housing insecurity, and in the case of trans respondents, the cost of living crisis causing respondents to have to make choices between necessities and gender affirming purchases. Detail of survey results and methodology were not yet available for assessment at the time of drafting so it is not possible to comment on the robustness of these findings.

The consultation response also expressed that trans people may experience an additional layer of difficulty when seeking benefits via the Department of Work and Pensions due to administrative issues arising from either not having a GRC (gender recognition card), or due to issues caused by current and previous details such as names no longer matching on the system. According to the UK Government’s national LGBT Survey Report^[54] (2018), only 12% of the trans men and trans women respondents who had either started or finished transitioning had obtained a GRC.

While we are unaware of any relevant and existing evidence, at this time, on gender reassignment in relation to the measures, they are likely to have a positive effect on all tenants including those with protected characteristics. Allowing tenants to keep pets can make a positive difference to how people feel about their home contributing to their health and wellbeing.

Sexual orientation

We are unaware of any relevant and existing evidence, at this time, specifically on sexual orientation in relation to tenants who have or are likely to request to keep a pet.

The available evidence^[55] suggests that more cis lesbian, gay and bisexual people privately rent: people living in the PRS are more likely to identify as either ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual or other’ (LGB) than the population as a whole: 6.9% compared to 2.9%.

A 2021 report by the Scottish Government on inclusivity in rural areas^[56] which drew on multiple data sources found that there is a higher prevalence of lesbian, gay, bisexual or ‘other’ people in urban areas, which may partially reflect experiences of LGBTI people of having moved to a different area due to their experiences as LGBTI.

Poverty and income inequality analysis data suggests the poverty rate has been consistently higher for LGBTI adults compared to straight/heterosexual adults. In the period 2020-2023 it is estimated that 25% of those identifying as LGB+ were in relative poverty after housing costs, compared to 19% of straight adults^[57]. However, it should be noted that the analysis flags that there were too few LGB+ identifying adults in poverty in the sample to produce a robust estimate of their population and measurement uncertainty is quite wide for this group.

The measures will have a positive impact on all tenants including those with protected characteristics. Allowing tenants to keep pets can make a positive difference to how people feel about their home contributing to their health and wellbeing.

Race

Recent data from the Scottish Surveys Core Questions 2022^[58] indicate that just over half (52.3%) of adult respondents in the PRS recorded their ethnicity as ‘White: Scottish’, lower than all other tenures, and 16.5% recorded their ethnicity as White: British, and 2.5% as White: Polish. 6.8% recorded their ethnicity as White 'Other'^[59] and 15.6% recorded their ethnicity as Asian^[60], figures which are both higher than other tenures. All other ethnic groups make up 6.1% of the PRS^[61].

In the social rented sector, the Scottish Surveys Core Questions 2022^[62] indicate that the majority (79.6%) of adult respondents in the social rented sector recorded their ethnicity as ‘White: Scottish’, and 7.3% recorded their ethnicity as White: British, and 1.9% as White: Polish. 2.2 % recorded their ethnicity as White 'Other'^[63] and 3.2% recorded their ethnicity as Asian^[64]. All other ethnic groups make up 5.7% of the social rented sector^[65].

A Scottish Government analytical paper^[66] drawing together evidence about cost of living found that:

“[m]inority ethnic groups are significantly more likely to live in larger households^[67], to be unpaid carers and live in private rented accommodation. Minority ethnic households are also more likely to have deeper levels of poverty^[68] and so a greater proportion of their income is likely to be spent on essentials which are subject to inflation.”

As noted in a 2020 report of the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights^[69], within Scotland, black and minority ethnic (“BME”) groups are demographically younger than white ethnic groups. According to the 2011 Census, those identifying as white are most likely to be aged 45-59, whereas as BME groups are largely younger in profile (most likely to be aged 25-34) – with the exception of Caribbean or Black where it is 35-44^[70]. However, although there is evidence to suggest that younger people in Scotland may find themselves in the PRS due to a lack of other options (often referred to as the ‘generation rent’ phenomena)^[71], there is a lack of evidence about how this applies to BME communities in Scotland.

A Scottish Government evidence review of the housing needs of minority ethnic groups^[72] sought to uncover trends in housing for minority ethnic groups. The review found that multiple trends in housing for minority ethnic groups were present across the literature including those identified above. People from minority ethnic groups were more likely to be living in relative poverty after housing costs than people from the white Scottish/British group which is still the case^[73], and some ethnic groups such as ‘African’, ‘White: Polish’ and the ‘Other ethnic’ group, were much more likely to be living in some of the most deprived areas in Scotland.

The review also notes that it remains a partial view and that gaps in the data exist, given that the available evidence on the demographic and geographic profile of the population is often dated or limited in terms of sample size, and that this restricts the insight offered by the available evidence.

Research undertaken as part of the RentBetter Project in 2020^[74] found that, of the small proportion of non-white minority ethnic PRS tenants in Scotland sampled, just over a third found it difficult to find a place to rent, compared to one-fifth of all tenants in the sample. For non-white minority ethnic tenants, this difficulty in finding a place to rent was more commonly attributed to affordability or being on benefits than for other tenants^[75]. This research also found that found that tenants from non-white minority ethnic groups were still less likely to feel confident in challenging their landlord and dealing with disputes compared to their white counterparts.

The 2021 Scottish Government evidence review^[76] noted that some families may choose to live in the PRS due to fear of discrimination or lack of culturally appropriate accommodation within the social sector, however:

“[s]ome studies presented a more complex view of over-representation in the PRS, where minority ethnic families chose to rent privately for the greater flexibility and choice it offered compared to other tenures, suggesting a more positive image of the sector (Netto & Abazie 2012; Strachan & Donoghue 2009). For some participants, the sector was seen as an attractive alternative to the social rented sector in terms of greater choice of properties and more attractive neighbourhoods for families (Netto & Abazie 2012), allowing them to live nearer to places of worship and other amenities such as halal shops and cultural centres (Netto et al. 2011).”

A 2023 report by Netto et al on work carried out by researchers at the Urban Institute^[77] at Heriot Watt University in partnership with Shelter Scotland and Cemvo Scotland aimed to improve this gap in evidence^[78]. This was based on a systematic evidence review, an online survey with social landlords and interviews with a small sample of 30 minority ethnic (“ME”) and 10 white Scottish participants on low and middle incomes from urban and rural locations with a range of ages, household compositions, tenure and employment statuses.

Findings from this report included indications that, compared to white Scottish interviewees, a different set of drivers motivated ME interviewees to seek new housing, including changes to or difficulty in securing employment, fear of and experience of racial harassment including intergenerational impacts, poor housing conditions and lack of space. The report also found that the majority (95%) of ME interviewees found their current housing unaffordable. Affordability issues led to ME interviewees living in the PRS to seek social housing. However, the 2022 Scottish Household Survey^[79] reported similar rates of difficulties in paying the mortgage or rent when comparing households where the person with the highest income was either white or minority ethnic.

International evidence presented as part of research into the barriers, benefits, and challenge of pets in the PRS^[80] demonstrates how certain groups and populations experience further disadvantage. Specifically, low-income groups, African-American pet owners, and individuals trying to escape domestic violence and homelessness were among those most severely impacted.

Evidence has also identified language barriers^[81] and lack of awareness of and confidence to act on rights^[82] as particular issues for minority ethnic groups. While it is anticipated that the measures will have a positive effect, to advance equality of opportunity in the implementation of these measures any guidance on the new rights or existing legislation should use a range of appropriate, accessible and inclusive means and methods, including internet and social media by maximising understanding of changes.

Religion or belief

According to the Scottish Surveys Core Questions 2022^[83], the most common religious designation across all housing tenures is ‘no religion’. People who live in the PRS and social rented sector are more likely to identify as being 'Muslim' or ‘other religion’^[84] compared to those who own their homes outright and those who own their homes with a mortgage.

In the period 2018-2023, Muslim adults and adults identifying as ‘other religion’ were more likely to be in relative poverty (61% and 31% respectively) than adults overall (19%) and adults belonging to the Church of Scotland (16%), after housing costs were taken into account^[85].

While we are unaware of any relevant and existing evidence, at this time, on religion or belief in relation to tenants who have or are likely to request to keep a pet, the measures will have a positive impact on all tenants including those with protected characteristics, making a positive difference to how people feel about their home contributing to their health and wellbeing.